Epidemic of Child Sex Abuse at Spirit Lake Sioux Indian Reservation

At the New York Times, "U.S. Is Taking Over Spirit Lake Sioux's Social Services":

SPIRIT LAKE INDIAN RESERVATION, N.D. — The man who plays Santa Claus here is a registered child sex offender and a convicted rapist. One of the brothers of the tribal chairman raped a child, and a second brother sexually abused a 12-year-old girl. They are among a number of men convicted of sex crimes against children on this remote home of the Spirit Lake Sioux tribe, which has among the highest proportion of sex offenders in the country.

Federal officials are now moving to take over the tribe’s social service programs, according to members of the tribe, government officials and documents. The action comes after years of failure by government and tribal law enforcement officials to conduct proper investigations of dozens of cases of child sexual abuse, including rape.

While members of the tribe say that sexual violence against children on the reservation is common and barely concealed, the reasons for the abuse here are poorly understood, though poverty and alcohol are thought to be factors. The crimes are rarely prosecuted, few arrests are made, and people say that because of safety fears and law enforcement’s lack of interest, they no longer report even the most sadistic violence against children. In May 2011, a 9-year-old girl and her 6-year-old brother were killed on the reservation after being raped and sodomized.

“It bothers me that it is so accepted, that it is considered so normal. It’s lawless,” said Molly McDonald, who was a tribal judge until March, handling juvenile cases.

Continue reading.

President Obama, You Invited the Muslim Brotherhood to the White House?

Sean Hannity was running this clip on his show last night, and it's devastating:

And see Daniel Greenfield, "Obama’s Muslim Brotherhood Foreign Policy."

The Surge in Afghanistan Ends With Whimper

The New York Times has the MSM angle, "Troop ‘Surge’ in Afghanistan Ends With Mixed Results."

But see the utter truth at AoSHQ, "September 17, 2012: The Day We Gave Up In Afghanistan."

Folks like Diana West, and later Pamela Geller, argued long ago that we should get out of Afghanistan. Americans weren't fighting to win but attempting to build a nation not ready for democracy. And that was during the Bush years. Under Obama there was hope that we'd finally make some progress, but it's been a half-hearted policy there from the beginning of this administration.

Here's West's analysis from the other day:

Sniping over withdrawal dates is no substitute for grown-up discussion of the utterly and completely failed COIN strategy of nation-building on the backs of the US military, of strapping leftist, Kum-bay-a theories of "world peace" to the body armor of Americans and Australians and Brits and the rest, and sending them out into the IED-mined field of jihad. Really get to the know the people, said their commanders. Take off those ballistic glasses, and protect them from everything that can hurt them, said the generals. And dump hundreds of millions of dollars down the drain while you're at it.

The defective linchpin of this "strategy" is that there exists an imaginary Islam to which Americans and other Westerners must show fealty in order to win hearts and minds of "good" Islam, thus isolating the "bad" Islam of the fighting enemy. This is a defilement of reality that requires the widespread and permanent corruption of the thought process itself. The main result of this brainwashing has been to bring, as chronicled in this space for years now, the US military under the rules of Islam in our increasingly desperate efforts to win Afghan "hearts and minds."

I'm a bit of a wild-eyed optimist on democracy promotion, frankly. But even the best intentions will be for naught if you're just going through the motions, looking toward the next presidential election. And that's what happened during the Obama years. It's been an enormous case of moral bankruptcy, but then again, that's the story of the entire record of this administration.

Hope and Change Lies With Us, Not the Government

From Mayor Mia Love (via Instapundit):

Progressives despise strong independent women like Mia Love.

Yes, they hate her with blinding rage, the freaks. They make me sick.

Evidence Shows Americans Becoming Increasingly Polarized

This is an awesome piece from Jonathan Haidt and Marc Hetherington, at the New York Times, "Look How Far We’ve Come Apart."

Check the link for the entire entry. I'm not so big on the "coming together" thesis that concludes the article, because that will inevitably lead to bigger government, but here's the last bit for a quick quote in any case:

The few months after Election Day offer us the largest window we’re likely to have in the next four years to make any of these changes. Averting the fiscal cliff — the automatic spending cuts and tax increases scheduled to take effect in 2013 if a deal isn’t reached before then — will clearly be the top priority during those months. But if our leaders manage to avert catastrophe, and even more pressingly, if they don’t, will they then turn their attention to bridging our political canyon? Or were they just blowing smoke in our eyes when they said that America is about “what can be done by us, together.” If ever there was a need for us all to “come together for the sake of our country,” our “united America,” it is now. Whatever our ideological differences, can we at least agree to push our leaders, after the election, to get their house in order?

Dan Senor Interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer

Also interviewed is Jane Harman, who used to represent the South Bay area in Congress.

Dan Senor is the Jewish neoconservative that Maureen Dowd slurred in her recent piece at the New York Times. Progressive Israel-bashers, the moral reprobates, defended Dowd, which I wrote about here, "Walter James Casper III: Jewish 'Neocons' Should 'Stop Whining' About Being Slurred as 'Puppet Masters' for Bush/Cheney War Cabal."

'Seriously, Mitt F-ked This Election Away Long Ago...'

I linked my recent PJ Media post previously, but go back and read the comments if you've got the time. Those little right-wing fever swamp trolls weren't pleased, but I especially loved the "Tokyo Rose" comparison. That one's a keeper.

But back in the real world, "DSpeicher" left this comment at my post from Wednesday on the Fox News battleground states poll:

But it's going to turn around. Any day now. You'll see. Seriously, Mitt effed this election away long ago. This election should have been a cake walk, but it's been one own goal after another. Romney's campaign has to be the most inept and poorly run campaign in the long, sad history of inept and poorly run campaigns. Romney's got a bunch of amateurs running his campaign and they are handing the election over to Obama. The whole thing is just profoundly sad. An absolute disgrace.

I'll have more, but ICYMI from yesterday, "Mitt Romney's Path to Victory is Narrowing."

Presidential Races Can Look One Way Now but Much Differently on Election Day

Okay, perhaps it's worth posting a different perspective on the race for Friday evening. If you're getting demoralized, be sure to check William Jacobson's Legal Insurrection daily. He's keeping the spirit up, with tonight's post, for example, "Finish hard, and fight through the finish line, which features this clip:

William also links to this piece at National Review, "What John McLaughlin Sees in the Polls Right Now." John McLaughlin's a Republican pollster, and this part should buck up the troops a bit:

What Obama and his allies are doing now: “The Democrats want to convince [these anti-Obama voters] falsely that Romney will lose to discourage them from voting. So they lobby the pollsters to weight their surveys to emulate the 2008 Democrat-heavy models. They are lobbying them now to affect early voting. IVR [Interactive Voice Response] polls are heavily weighted. You can weight to whatever result you want. Some polls have included sizable segments of voters who say they are ‘not enthusiastic’ to vote or non-voters to dilute Republicans. Major pollsters have samples with Republican affiliation in the 20 to 30 percent range, at such low levels not seen since the 1960s in states like Virginia, Florida, North Carolina and which then place Obama ahead. The intended effect is to suppress Republican turnout through media polling bias. We’ll see a lot more of this. Then there’s the debate between calling off a random-digit dial of phone exchanges vs. a known sample of actual registered voters. Most polls favoring Obama are random and not off the actual voter list. That’s too expensive” for some pollsters.

Plus, from Karl Rove's essay at the Wall Street Journal yesterday, "This Too Shall Pass, but What Follows Is Crucial":

It's over. Gov. Mitt Romney's statements last week about the storming of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, followed by the release this week of a video of Mr. Romney at a May fundraiser, have brought the 2012 election to an early end.

At least that is what you'd take away from some pundits. But this is a classic example of the commentariat investing moments with more meaning than they deserve.

Mr. Romney's comments about Americans who don't pay taxes were, as he admitted during a Monday press conference, "inelegant." But every campaign has its awkward moments that the media magnify. Mr. Obama had his after saying on July 13, "You didn't build that." For a while thereafter, Team Obama could do little right. Then it passed.

This moment, too, will pass for Mr. Romney. More important, the past week's events have not significantly altered the contours of the race. A month ago, Gallup had Mr. Obama at 45% and Mr. Romney at 47%. On Wednesday, Gallup reported 47% for Obama, 46% for Romney. A month ago Rasmussen said it was 45% for Mr. Obama, 43% for Mr. Romney. In its Wednesday poll, Rasmussen reported 46% for Obama, 47% for Romney.

Presidential races can look one way now but much differently on Election Day. In mid-September 1980, President Jimmy Carter led Ronald Reagan 44% to 40% in the Gallup poll. By late October, Reagan had slumped to 39% in Gallup, while Mr. Carter had risen to 47%. Reagan won by nine points.

As for the here-and-now, one key number to watch is Mr. Obama's vote share. In the past month, there have been 83 national polls and daily tracking surveys. Mr. Obama reached 50% in just nine and his average was 47%. That is bad news for an incumbent when attitudes about the No. 1 issue—the economy—are decidedly sour.

This isn't to suggest the Romney campaign doesn't have big challenges. But both camps do.

In the two weeks before the presidential debates begin, Mr. Romney must define more clearly what he would do as president. In spelling out his five-point plan for the middle class, he'll have to deepen awareness of how each element would help families in concrete, practical ways, and offer optimism for renewed prosperity.

Mr. Romney and his team (and supporters) must also steel themselves for more brutal attacks. The Florida fundraising video will not likely be the last surprise. The Romney campaign has largely refused to respond to attacks as a waste of time and resources. But in politics, sometimes the counter punch is stronger than the punch.

There's little tolerance among Republican donors, activists and talking heads for more statements by Mr. Romney that the media can depict as gaffes. But concerns about avoiding missteps must not cause Mr. Romney to favor cautious and bland. To win, he'll need to be bold and forceful as he offers a compelling agenda of conservative reform.

Mr. Obama's challenges may be more daunting. His strategy hasn't worked. Team Obama planned to use its big financial edge to bury Mr. Romney under negative ads over the summer. From April 15 to Labor Day, they spent an estimated $215 million on TV. But this was more than offset by conservative groups (principally American Crossroads, which I helped found). While Mr. Obama drained his coffers his own negatives climbed, and Mr. Romney partially repaired his image with voters.

Mr. Obama needs a different strategy, but his team seems stubbornly focused merely on disqualifying Mitt Romney by whatever argument or means necessary. Yet as Rahm Emanuel has repeated for most of the year, Mr. Obama must, as he put it on NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sept. 2, "lay out an agenda and a clear vision of the next four years" or he'll lose.

It's not over. But I lean more toward Peggy Noonan's take than I do Karl Rove's. I expect that the debates could have a significant impact on the "countours" of the race, especially if Romney indeed goes bold as Rove suggests. But at this point dozens of post-convention polls have been finding Obama with leads ranging to a couple of points to as much as seven or eight. As much as I see him as a punk, I don't doubt Nate Silver's got skills. His post today mentioned that fully 21 polls had Obama leading. Not one survey had him behind Romney. To dismiss that kind of volume of polling as hopelessly biased and completely unreliable is not analysis, it's conspiracy theory. But William Jacobson is correct. You keep fighting until the end. The main person who needs to remember that is Mitt Romney. He's a nice guy, but nice guy's finish last. Stop being nice.

Death Toll Climbs in Pakistan Muhammad Protests

The New York Times reports, "19 Reported Dead as Pakistanis Protest Muhammad Video."

One of the Muslims interviewed at this clip says "The filmmaker should be killed." Freakin' savages.

More at Blazing Cat Fur, "Celebrate Pakistan's Day of Love ... Riot Like a Koran Crazed Mohammedan," and "The Prophet Loves Pakistanis So Much He's Killed 17 So Far."

Pamela Geller Interview with CNN's Erin Burnett

Erin Burnett parses the word "savages," comparing its use to discrimination against African Americans. I'm shaking my head as I write this.

Also at Pamela, "VIDEO: PAMELA GELLER ON CNN'S @ERINBURNETT, ABRUPTLY CUTS SEGMENT AT HAMAS-CAIR DESCRIPTION, FULL AUDIO SECRETLY RECORDED."

I'm not sure what was the problem. This video is almost 13 minutes long and features Pamela's discussion of the Council on American Islamic Relation (the Hamas front group in the U.S). It's a great interview.

Jodie Gasson Topless Pictures at Egotastic!

She's a UK glamor model, and nicely endowed.

At Egotastic!, "Thank God It’s Funbags! Jodie Gasson Topless Lingerie Striptease Will Ease You Toward Your Weekend."

Also at Make Her Famous, "Jodie Gasson."

Obama Leads Romney by 50-43 in National Journal's Heartland Institute Poll

More polling data to compare to my earlier entries, "Obama Leads Romney 52-45 In New Reason-Rupe Poll," and "Mitt Romney's Path to Victory is Narrowing."

Here's Ronald Brownstein at National Journal, "Heartland Monitor Poll: Obama Leads 50 Percent to 43 Percent":

President Obama has opened a solid lead over Mitt Romney by largely reassembling the “coalition of the ascendant” that powered the Democrat to his landmark 2008 victory, the latest Allstate/National Journal Heartland Monitor Poll has found.

The survey found Obama leading Romney by 50 percent to 43 percent among likely voters, with key groups in the president’s coalition such as minorities, young people, and upscale white women providing him support comparable to their levels in 2008.

The survey, conducted by Ed Reilly and Jeremy Ruch of FTI Communications, a communications and strategic consulting firm, surveyed 1,055 likely voters by landline and cell phone from Sept. 15-19. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. Full results from the survey, including a detailed look at Americans’ attitudes about opportunity and upward mobility, will be released in the Sept. 22 National Journal.

The Heartland Monitor’s results are in line with most other national surveys in recent days showing Obama establishing a measurable lead, including this week’s new Pew Research Center and NBC/Wall Street Journal polls. The saving grace for Republicans is that even as these surveys show Obama opening a consistent advantage, the president has not been able to push his support much past the critical 50 percent level, even after several difficult weeks for Romney that began with a poorly reviewed GOP convention. That suggests the president faces continued skepticism from many voters that could allow Romney to draw a second wind if he can stabilize his tempest-tossed campaign.

The poll found Obama benefiting from a small increase in optimism about the country’s direction. Among likely voters, 37 percent said the country was moving in the right direction. Even looking at all adults, the "right track" number now stands at 35 percent, its best showing since the April 2010 Heartland Monitor.

Obama’s approval rating in the new survey also ticked up to 50 percent, with 46 percent disapproving. That’s a slight improvement from May, when the survey of all adults found 47 percent approving and 48 percent disapproving. Among all adults, Obama’s rating improved to 49 percent approving and 45 percent disapproving, also one of his best showings since January 2010.

Those gains are critical, because as always with an incumbent president, attitudes toward Obama’s performance powerfully shape the race. Among likely voters who approve of Obama’s job performance, he leads Romney in the ballot test by 93 percent to 3 percent; those who disapprove prefer Romney by 87 percent to 5 percent.

There's still more at the link, but for the most part that sounds reasonable to me.

Especially important is Obama's 50 percent approval rating at this Heartland poll. Presidents don't win reelection when their job approval falls below 50 percent. Jay Cost highlights Obama's recent negative approval ratings as a bright spot for the GOP, "Morning Jay: Historically, Obama Isn't in Strong Shape."

And my friend Stogie discounted the earlier Wall Street Journal poll (at that link above), and he points to trends in black turnout that might depress Obama's reelection prospects, "Conservative Black Blogger: 'Why Romney Is Going To Romp Over Obama In November'."

I think that's going to be something to watch, more broadly even, keeping in mind enthusiasm levels among both parties' grassroots supporters. There's also the chance for other surprises, like new foreign policy debacles, and of course the debates could help change the dynamics. Cost at the Weekly Standard dismisses Obama's poll numbers as a lingering convention bounce that will evaporate in the weeks ahead. And that may be true. But I've yet to see a poll with Mitt Romney in the lead and that's discouraging after a while. So, I'll be keeping an eye on the battleground states and looking to Team Romney for that game changer that we've all been waiting for.

Keep checking back for your cold hard non-sugarcoated analysis.

Romney still has a chance, but the stars are going to have line up just perfectly for him. We'll see.

Chris Wallace Slams Peggy Noonan's Conservative Bona Fides

Here's the report at Politico, "Chris Wallace doubts Noonan's conservatism." (At Memeorandum.)

Yeah, what else is new? Folks might remember in 2008, in September of that year, about the same time in the election cycle, Noonan was caught on an open mic bashing John McCain's pick of Sarah Palin's as "political bullshit." PuffHo has that, "Peggy Noonan, Mike Murphy Caught On Tape Disparaging Palin Choice: "Political Bullshit," "Gimmicky"." (And the video's here.)

Wallace is right: Noonan's an old-line GOP beltway hack. Unfortunately, in the case of her analysis of Mitt Romney's slide, I don't think she's far off the mark. I posted earlier on that, "'It's Time to Admit the Romney Campaign is an Incompetent One...'"

And now Noonan doubles-down on her earlier comments, at today's WSJ, "Noonan: Romney Needs a New CEO":

"Nothing is written." That was T.E. Lawrence to the Arab tribesmen in Robert Bolt's screenplay, a masterpiece, of "Lawrence of Arabia." You write no one off. Nothing is inevitable. Life is news—"What happened today?" And news is surprise—"You're kidding!"

But you have to look at the landscape and see the shape of the land. You have to see it clearly to move on it well.

So here's one tough, cool-eyed report on what is happening in the presidential race. It's from veteran Republican pollster, now corporate strategist, Steve Lombardo of Edelman public relations in Washington. Mr. Lombardo worked in the 2008 Romney campaign. He's not affiliated with any candidate. This is what he wrote Thursday morning, and what he sees is pretty much what I see.

"The pendulum has swung toward Obama." Mitt Romney has "a damaged political persona." He is running behind in key states like Ohio and Virginia and, to a lesser extent, Florida. The president is reversing the decline that began with his "You didn't build that" comment. For three weeks he's been on a roll. The wind's at his back.

How did we get here? What can turn it around? ...

Keep reading for the breakdown. I disagree with Noonan that Romney's comments on Libya, the night of the consulate attack, were worse than the 47 percent "SECRET TAPE." But that's just a quibble, frankly. It looks like Obama actually started getting a push of momentum at that time, aided by the compliant Democrat-Media-Complex, and not insignificantly. (And the press bias to the Democrats is going to be a big story coming out of 2012, by the way, and Gallup's already reporting that a majority of Americans don't trust the mainstream press, a horrible finding for democratic legitimacy, but more on that later).

The question is what to do now? Noonan argues for changes at the top, and a change of focus. Romney needs someone top-flight running his campaign and directing him to victory. Her model is James A. Baker III of the old Reagan-Bush era. But read it all at the link. It could be a whiff of nostalgia, or it could be some cold hard truth.

And with that, I'm looking forward to the debates. A lot's riding on them.

More at Memorandum.

Previous non-sugarcoating here.

Obama Leads Romney 52-45 In New Reason-Rupe Poll

Yeah, Obama's pulling out his margin, and this is at the Reason poll, which has a great track record and can hardly be slammed as hopelessly left-wing and in the tank for Obama.

I don't see an Emily Ekins video posted yet, but I'll update with that hottie when it's available.

See, "Obama Leads Romney 52-45 In New Reason-Rupe Poll; In Three-Way Race Obama Leads Romney 49-42, Johnson Gets 6 Percent":

A new national Reason-Rupe poll of likely voters finds President Barack Obama leading Republican Mitt Romney 48 percent to 43 percent in the presidential race. When undecided voters are asked which way they are leaning Obama’s lead over Romney grows to 52-45.

President Obama holds large advantages among women (53-37), African-Americans (92-2) and Hispanics (71-18). Fifty-two percent of likely voters view Obama favorably, while 45 view him unfavorably. In contrast, 49 percent of likely voters have an unfavorable view of Mitt Romney and 41 percent have a favorable view of him.

In a three-way presidential race, Obama drops to 49 percent among likely voters and Romney falls to 42 percent as the Libertarian Party’s Gary Johnson gets six percent of support. Johnson is already on the presidential ballot in 47 states.

More at the link.

Check back if you're not looking for sugarcoating.

David Horowitz on Libya Attack: 'One of the Most Disgraceful Moments in the History of the American Presidency...'

I caught this clip yesterday at Bare Naked Islam, "David Horowitz, author & editor of Frontpage Magazine, in explosive FOX News interview."

And now it's picked up at Nice Deb, "David Horowitz: Arrest of Anti-Islam FilmMaker “One of the Most Disgraceful Moments in the History of the American Presidency” (Video)":

An appalled David Horowitz, appearing on America Live with Megyn Kelly, passionately defended freedom of speech, Thursday, calling the arrest of the anti Islam movie maker, one of the “most disgraceful moments in the history of the American Presidency”, adding “if you don’t have the right of expressing your opinion, however hateful it may be, you don’t have any rights! Americans cannot defend all the other rights they have, if they don’t have free speech!”

RTWT.

BONUS: Robert Stacy McCain takes the occasion to provide a bio-background on Horowitz's ideological transformation, "VIDEO: David Horowitz Slams Obama’s Attack on Islam Film, First Amendment."

Horowitz's new book is here, "Radicals: Portraits of a Destructive Passion."

Mitt Romney's Path to Victory is Narrowing

At the clip is last night's "Hard Ball with Chris Matthews." If you're a progressive, it's the best of times. The "47 percent" line is a perpetual final nail in the coffin, and the leftists just keep hammering it in with every mention of the "SECRET VIDEO." Tacked on at the end is a discussion of that Fox News battleground states poll I flagged on Wednesday. Chris Matthews is positively giddy at the numbers, and while I don't recall watching Alex Wagner, she's completely writing off Romney's chances. John Heilemann from New York Magazine, who I respect, also comments, highlighting especially the defections by top Republicans from the Romney/Ryan camp.

Meanwhile, here's the latest from the new Wall Street Journal/NBC News/Marist battleground states poll, "Headwinds for Romney in Latest Poll Results"  (at Memeorandum):

Mitt Romney's path to victory is narrowing, new polling data suggest, presenting challenges for the Republican nominee at a moment when he is trying to rebound from a week of bad headlines by refocusing on federal spending.

President Barack Obama has opened an eight percentage-point lead in Iowa and maintains a five-point edge in Colorado and Wisconsin, according to Wall Street Journal/NBC News/Marist Poll surveys of the three presidential battlegrounds released Thursday.

The new poll results are significant in part because the Romney campaign views the three states as steppingstones to an Electoral College majority, given Mr. Romney's slippage in polls of two of the largest battlegrounds, Ohio and Virginia.

The margin of error in the polls for likely voters was plus or minus 3.1 percentage points in Colorado, 3.2 points in Wisconsin and 3.3 points in Iowa.

The new Journal surveys were taken just as video surfaced earlier this week of Mr. Romney telling donors that nearly half the country "sees themselves as victims" and is dependent on government.

Coming amid other poll data, the new results show Mr. Romney with ground to make up in a large number of states amid a shrinking pool of undecided voters. One measure of the hurdle he faces: Even if Mr. Romney were awarded all the states in which the president leads by less than three percentage points in aggregated poll results—states such as Colorado, Florida and Iowa—Mr. Obama would still win re-election based on his leads in Ohio, Virginia and smaller swing states.

The results come as public opinion is on the verge of turning into votes cast at the ballot box. So far, on-the-ground data from two early voting states, Iowa and North Carolina, are mixed for the two candidates. In North Carolina, Republicans have requested nearly 7,000 more absentee ballots than Democrats, out of nearly 50,000 requests, according to state officials.

But in Iowa, Democrats have requested roughly 100,000 ballots, compared with 16,073 ballots requested by Republicans.

"I see the early vote numbers, and I grimace a little bit," said Craig Robinson, a former political director of the Iowa Republican Party and editor of a popular blog, The Iowa Republican. "It feels like an Obama state….The president has been more accessible to voters than Romney and Ryan."

The Romney camp dismisses most of the recent polling as a "sugar high" for Mr. Obama left over from the party conventions. "Polls are going to go this way and that way," Mr. Romney's running mate, Rep. Paul Ryan, told donors during a fundraiser Thursday night in Washington. "But at the end of the day, if we do our jobs right, and we will, the country will have a really clear choice."

Among other factors, Romney supporters point to polling that shows Republicans hold a modest edge in voter enthusiasm and data that shows a large percentage of Americans still think the country is moving in the wrong direction. "We feel like we're in a very close contest," said Ed Gillespie, a senior adviser to the Romney campaign. "We feel like Romney is likely to win."

In all three of the new Journal surveys, Mr. Obama had backing from at least 50% of likely voters, suggesting that Mr. Romney will have to strip supporters from the president to win. In Iowa, Mr. Obama held 50% of the vote to 42% for Mr. Romney. Mr. Obama led his GOP rival 50% to 45% in Colorado and Wisconsin.

Not that much of a silver lining there, eh?

The line for conservatives has to be that the MSM polls are biased in favor of the Democrats and that Republican enthusiasm will translate into massive turnout for Romney on November 6. Another way to put it is that correcting for polling bias, and of course the boost for Obama from the Democrat-Media-Complex, the race is still basically a dead heat. If so, the October debates take on outsized significance. These are the chance for Romney to grab Obama by the throat and kick the African Marxist interloper to the curb. Screw timidity. This is the time to go bold and encapsulate four years of tea party, conservative grassroots frustration with all the left's lies, corruption, and political violence. Will that help? Who knows? But at least Romney can say he threw everything at the f-ker and have no regrets when it's all over.

We'll see.

Now, checking around the horn, I should give another shout out Nate Silver, who I dissed a week or so back but who now might be getting on the right side of the data. See, "Sept. 20: Obama’s Convention Bounce May Not Be Receding."

And don't be confused by Allahpundit's headline at Hot Air. He's got a roundup of the polls and he's just scratching his head, "Gallup tracker: Romney now even with Obama at 47." (Via Memeorandum.)

I'll have more. But remember, no sugarcoating.

Equality or Independence? America's Choice This November

From Robert Stacy McCain, at the American Spectator, "All joking aside, America faces a serious choice this November":

In 1776, contrary to what children are taught in school nowadays, our nation's Founding Fathers did not sign the "Declaration of Equality." No, the document to which John Hancock and the others signed their names in Philadelphia -- the vow to which they pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor -- was the Declaration of Independence. There is a world of difference between the two concepts. While I do not claim to be the equal of such eminent Harvard alumni as Kristol, Yglesias, and Obama (J.D., magna cum laude, 1991), I stubbornly refuse to surrender my independence. And I'm damned well sick and tired of hearing all these smart people on TV proclaiming that folks like me are too stupid to understand what Mitt Romney was saying in that "secret" video.

By God, Romney was right and if anyone is insulted by the plain truth, they deserve to be insulted. Ross Kaminsky is also right: The "secret" video could be just what the Romney campaign needed to spark a serious conversation about Obama's economic failure. Our national debt is now $16 trillion, the annual budget deficit has exceeded $1 trillion for each of the past four years, and 47 percent of us aren't contributing a nickel to fix that problem. A big part of the problem -- and maybe you've noticed this -- is that the economy sucks. Even if you didn't make the mistake of pursuing a journalism career, it's kind of hard to work your way up when the unemployment rate is over 8 percent, a statistic that actually understates the problem. As James Pethokoukis has explained, the broader unemployment rate, including part-time workers who want full-time jobs, is 14.6 percent, and the rate would be even higher if not for a declining rate of "workforce participation." Among the factors in this decline is the extension of unemployment payments to 99 weeks, as well as a troubling rise in the number of working-age adults claiming disability. An additional 1.7 million are now receiving Social Security disability payments, a 23 percent increase since 2007. More and more people are being paid not to work, which reduces the number of taxpayers, and the government is borrowing more money to make more payments to more people, including the increasing number (47 million) on food stamps.

This is no laughing matter...

That's less bucking up the troops than bitch slapping the progressives, but either way, Robert's an excellent writer.

RTWT at the link.

Scott Brown Hammers Elizabeth Warren on Native American Claims

At Legal Insurrection, "Warren-Brown Post-Debate Analysis":

In hindsight, focusing on releasing records was brilliant, because Warren has a major problem, she likely made or participated in causing Harvard to make false federal filings as to her Native American status using standard Harvard and EEOC definitions.

Lots more at the link.

And FWIW, at the Boston Globe, "In crucial first debate, Scott Brown challenges Warren’s Native American heritage claim."

Obama Administration Hid Existence of 'Secret Safe House' Even After Ambassador Christopher Stevens Was Killed

Guy Benson rightly calls this devastating, at Townhall, "Whoa: Devastating CBS News Benghazi Report Slams Obama Administration."

Plus, at the Wall Street Journal, "Miscues Before Libya Assault: Limited Security in Benghazi, Secrecy Over Safe House, Contributed to Tragedy":

The deadly assault on a U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya on Sept. 11 was preceded by a succession of security lapses and misjudgments, compounded by fog-of-battle decisions, that raise questions about whether the scope of the tragedy could have been contained.

U.S. officials issued alerts and ordered security precautions in neighboring Egypt ahead of protests and violence on Sept. 11, but largely overlooked the possibility of trouble at other diplomatic postings in the region.

The State Department chose to maintain only limited security in Benghazi, Libya, despite months of sporadic attacks there on U.S. and other Western missions. And while the U.S. said it would ask Libya to boost security there, it did so just once, for a one-week period in June, according to Libyan officials.

The U.S. didn't seriously consider sending in the military during the attack. It summoned rapid-response teams of Marines only after the U.S. ambassador was dead. State Department officials said they doubted the Pentagon could have mobilized a rescue force quickly enough to make a difference during the fighting. The Pentagon waited for guidance from State, which is responsible for diplomatic security, a senior military official said.

Adding a new dimension to the chain of events, the siege also engulfed what officials now describe as a secret safe house used by American officials and security personnel involved in sensitive government programs after last year's Libyan revolution.

Even when that building, also known as the "annex," came under attack, U.S. officials were reluctant to divulge its existence, and the secrecy complicated the Libyan response and the eventual American evacuation, according to Libyan security officials.

The Obama administration has defended levels of security in place. Though intelligence officials are investigating indications al Qaeda's North African affiliate had connections with militants who mounted the attack, U.S. officials say the evidence still indicates it was a spontaneous response to protests in Cairo against an anti-Islamic video. But a detailed review based on interviews with more than a dozen U.S. and Libyan officials shows months of ominous signals suggesting the need for better security, along with missed chances for delivering it.

President Barack Obama, in his re-election campaign, gets high marks from voters on national security, but has drawn Republican criticism over his handling of the anti-American protests.

After a classified briefing to lawmakers by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Thursday, Sen. Susan Collins (R., Maine) called the security "woefully inadequate, given the security-threat environment." The State Department has convened an Accountability Review Board to investigate the attack, something it is required to do after such an incident.

U.S. officials still are struggling to piece together details of the attack. For more than a week after U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens was killed, the State Department couldn't say why he was in Benghazi. On Thursday, officials said they believed he was there to attend the launch of a joint U.S.-Libyan cultural and educational program.

Mr. Stevens and Sean Smith, an information officer, were killed at the consulate, in the first wave of the attack. Former Navy SEALs Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods died later, at the sensitive safe house or annex a kilometer away. It remains unclear to U.S. and Libyan officials whether the militants knew of that facility or just followed a U.S. convoy to it after the consulate attack.

The apparent lapses extended to firefighting equipment. Rescue attempts at the main building were thwarted in part by the absence of smoke-protection masks and fire extinguishers, said Libyan guards. Senior State Department officials said these wouldn't have provided sufficient protection against the diesel-fueled inferno.

State Department officials said security for the consulate was frequently reviewed and was deemed sufficient to counter what U.S. officials considered to be the most likely threat at the time: a limited hit-and-run attack with rocket-propelled grenades or improvised explosive devices, or IEDs.

There was a string of attacks in Benghazi in the months before Sept. 11, including a June 6 IED explosion outside the consulate compound. "These types of incidents were the ones that were our principal concerns," a senior State Department official said. Based on the outcome of the June 6 attack, in which a perimeter wall was damaged but no Americans hurt, a second State Department official added: "Our security plan worked."

Current and former officials said the security choices in Benghazi reflected efforts by Mr. Stevens to maintain a low-profile security posture and show faith in Libya's new leaders, despite questions about their ability to rein in heavily armed bands of militants. Officials say Mr. Stevens personally advised against having Marines posted at the embassy in Tripoli, apparently to avoid a militarized U.S. presence.

The security plan for the consulate also reflected confidence Mr. Stevens felt in a city where he worked for months with rebels battling Moammar Gadhafi's rule. State Department officials said he didn't consult with Washington before traveling to Benghazi, located in an area that has become notorious for its volatile mix of Islamist militancy and heavy weaponry.

"This is what happens when you're relying on a government that's not in control of the whole country," said Randa Fahmy Hudome, a former U.S. official. Benghazi "was awash with weapons in the hands of various brigades who were all in combat with one another. It wasn't a secret."

'Talk about bad timing! Pawlenty to step down as national co-chair of Romney's stuttering campaign to take job at bank lobbying group...'

That was the headline earlier this afternoon at London's Daily Mail, for this piece, "Pawlenty to step down as national co-chair of Romney's presidential campaign to take job at bank lobbying group."

When I saw the news at the office today I didn't make the connection to the Romney campaign (forgetting Pawlenty was a top operative). But I noticed some folks around Memeorandum spewing the "sinking ship" analogy, and the New York Times reports, "Pawlenty Is Leaving Romney Campaign for Lobbying Post." (Also at Memeorandum.)

Check the links.

A man's gotta make a living, but yeah, the timing's not so great.

'Blinded by the Light'

From Tuesday morning's drive time at The Sound L.A.

6:27 - Comfortably Numb by Pink Floyd

6:34 - Every Little Thing She Does Is Magic by Police

6:38 - In The Beginning/lovely To See You by Moody Blues

6:42 - Going To California by Led Zeppelin

6:53 - Blinded By The Light by Manfred Mann

Interestingly, Bruce Springsteen wrote and originally recorded the song.

I'll Have What She's Having...

She would be Gabriella Hoffman, who's got some youthful optimism that seems lacking around these parts of late:

This president can and will be defeated at the ballot box this November. We are tired of corrupt, Chicago-esque politics. #tcot #truth
— Gabriella Hoffman (@Gabby_Hoffman) September 20, 2012

I'll have more later...

'It's Time to Admit the Romney Campaign is an Incompetent One...'

That's Peggy Noonan at yesterday's Wall Street Journal, "Time for an Intervention":

I think there is a broad and growing feeling now, among Republicans, that this thing is slipping out of Romney’s hands. Today at a speech in New York with what seemed like many conservatives and Republicans in the audience, I said more or less the above. I wondered if anyone would say, in the Q&A, “I think you’ve got it wrong, you’re too pessimistic.” No one did. A woman asked me to talk about why in a year the Republicans couldn’t lose, the Republican candidate seems to be losing.

I said pre-mortems won’t help, if you want to help the more conservative candidate, it’s a better use of your time to pitch in with ideas. There’s seven weeks to go. This isn’t over, it’s possible to make things better.

Republicans are going to have to right this thing. They have to stabilize it.

It’s time to admit the Romney campaign is an incompetent one. It’s not big, it’s not brave, it’s not thoughtfully tackling great issues...

Folks can read it all at that top link.

I published an analysis at yesterday at PJ Media, which echoed some of Noonan's points: "Is Romney Imploding?" It's straightforward analysis, although hard-right partisans will blow it off as "demoralizing" the GOP base, or whatever.

I'm still waiting for that big Romney breakthrough, like waiting all year. And the polls remain where they've been for months, with Obama enjoying slight gains in the key battleground states and in nationwide surveys. It's seven weeks to go. Lots can still happen, as Charlie Cook suggested the other day. But Romney needs something, anything, that's a game changer. I hope I'm wrong and they'll be a surge of grassroots mobilization and turnout, or something. But at this point some polls are even finding that the enthusiasm gap has basically closed.

I'll have more on this, but I'm not going to be sugarcoating things.

PREVIOUSLY: "Fox News Battleground States Poll: Obama Up in Florida, Ohio and Virginia."

Pew Research Center Poll: Obama Up by Eight in New Nationwide Survey

Pew's one of the better polling organizations. Very reputable.

Read it all at the link.

See: "Obama Ahead with Stronger Support, Better Image and Lead on Most Issues — Democrats Narrow Engagement Gap." (And the progs are creaming at Memeorandum.)

Also, from Ed Kilgore, at the Washington Monthly, "Really Bad News For Mitt From Pew."

Actually, it's been bad news for a while now, but who's keeping track, in any case?

Lukasz Wisniewski Wheelie

This is wicked:

The police claimed this guy was endangering his own life and the lives of others. He's going fast, no doubt. But the dude's got those wheelies down cold.

See: "Motorcyclist caught on police camera pulling a WHEELIE as he speeds at 103mph."

Tax the Profiteers!

At Althouse, "'Peace/Tax the Profiteers!/Free Press/Free Speech'":

A poster for Victor L. Berger, on display at the Wisconsin Historical Museum. Berger ran on the Socialist ticket.

Berger was a founder of the Socialist Party of America in 1901....

Interesting how Berger, the first Socialist Party candidate elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, pushed a platform basically identical to the Democrat attacks we're seeing on Mitt Romney in 2012.

PHOTO: From Althouse's Flickr page.

Former Guantanamo Terrorist, Released in 2007, Implicated in Libya Attack on U.S. Consulate

The administration lied about this for a week. What a joke, seriously.

At the Weekly Standard, "Ex-Gitmo Detainee Implicated in Consulate Attack."

Also at Weasel Zippers, "Report: Jihadist Who Led Benghazi Attack Was a Former Gitmo Detainee, Released By U.S. In 2007…"

Alessandra Ambrosio and Lais Ribeiro for Fabulous by Victoria's Secret

I've got a thing for Alessandra. What a sweetie.

We'll be having that Victoria's Secret Fashion Show in no time.

Sean Hannity Radio Interview with Mark Levin

It's good.

Listen at the link: "Sean Hannity Radio show interviews Mark Levin on the upcoming election."

Barack Obama on David Letterman Show

It's all bullshit, naturally. In the 2008 primaries O slammed Americans who cling to their guns and religion, which was captured on a secret camera (although not played to the hilt like Romney's 47 percent "SECRET VIDEO"):

More, at PJ Media, "Lying on Letterman: Obama Claims He Hasn’t Questioned Anyone’s Patriotism."

And Instapundit, "BUSTED: Obama Lies To Letterman, Says He Never Called Opponents Unpatriotic. Let’s go to the video..."

The video's at the link.

Fox News Battleground States Poll: Obama Up in Florida, Ohio and Virginia

It's Fox News, so will cocooning conservatives beset by epistemic closure blow this poll off as a desperately biased survey of the Obama-enabling MSM?  I wouldn't be surprised. And me? I'm tired of trying to parse the bright spots in all these recent polls showing Romney getting hammered.

From Dana Blanton, "Obama has edge over Romney in three battleground states" (via Memeorandum):

President Barack Obama has the edge over Republican Mitt Romney in three potentially decisive states in the presidential election.

Obama tops Romney by seven percentage points among likely voters in both Ohio (49-42 percent) and Virginia (50-43 percent). In Florida, the president holds a five-point edge (49-44 percent).

Obama’s lead is just outside the poll’s margin of sampling error in Ohio and Virginia, and within the margin of sampling error in Florida.

The good news for Romney is that among voters who are “extremely” interested in this year’s election, the races are much tighter. Obama is up by just two points with this group in Virginia (49-47 percent), Florida is tied (48-48 percent), and Romney is up by one point in Ohio (48-47 percent).

Independents are nearly evenly divided in each of the states, as well.

Majorities of voters are unhappy with how things are going in the country, yet in all three states more say they trust Obama than Romney to improve the economy. Likewise, in each state more voters believe the Obama administration’s policies have helped rather than hurt the economy -- albeit by slim margins: By two points in Florida, three points in Ohio and five points in Virginia.

Continue reading.

Okay, sounds like there's some bright spots in there, right? Well as I'm posting this entry CBS News is reporting the results from its new poll also showing Obama up in Virginia. See, "Wisconsin Offers Window on Hurdles Ahead for Romney":

RACINE, Wis. — To Mitt Romney, the 10 electoral votes in Wisconsin may be more essential than extra, a critical backup plan if a first-tier battleground state falls out of reach.

Seven weeks until the election, with Mr. Romney facing new questions about his ability to gain trust among voters experiencing economic hardships, his campaign is increasingly pointing to Wisconsin as a place where a statewide Republican resurgence could rub off on Mr. Romney.

But President Obama has overtaken Mr. Romney on who would do a better job handling the economy, according to a new Quinnipiac University/New York Times/CBS News poll of likely Wisconsin voters. The poll also found that Mr. Obama has a 17-point edge over Mr. Romney when voters are asked if a candidate cares about their needs and problems.

As the president makes his first campaign visit of the year to Wisconsin on Saturday, the poll found that Mr. Obama was the choice of 51 percent to 45 percent for Mr. Romney among likely voters. The six-point lead, which includes those who said they were leaning in one direction or another, marks a slight shift in Mr. Obama’s direction since Representative Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin joined the Republican ticket last month.

The findings of the poll, along with the fallout from newly exposed remarks Mr. Romney made at a fund-raiser in which he bluntly suggested that 47 percent of Americans saw themselves as victims who are dependent on the government, offer a window into the challenges confronting his campaign here and other important swing states during the final 48 days of the race.

Rob Jankowski, an independent voter who supported Mr. Obama four years ago but has been disappointed by his economic leadership and disapproves of his health care plan, is among the 3 percent of voters in the survey who say they are still undecided. He said he did not feel loyalty to Mr. Obama simply because he supported him last time, but he said Mr. Romney had not made his case.

“Obama is putting out his plans and his details and being more public on that, but with Romney it’s kind of gray,” said Mr. Jankowski, 39, speaking in a follow-up interview Tuesday afternoon here in Jefferson Park, as a cool breeze rustled the tree leaves. “I’d like to know more — educate me.”

The New York Times, in collaboration with Quinnipiac and CBS News, is tracking the presidential race with recurring polls in six states. The latest collection of surveys also included Colorado, where Mr. Romney is running nearly even with Mr. Obama, and Virginia, where Mr. Obama has a narrow advantage of four percentage points, both of which are inside the survey’s margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points for each candidate.

But for Mr. Romney, Wisconsin offers one of the best chances to fight on Mr. Obama’s terrain in the Midwest and expand the battleground map. The Romney campaign has redirected some of its money and manpower once intended for Michigan and Pennsylvania to Wisconsin, hoping to create as many paths as possible to reaching the 270 electoral votes needed to win the presidency.

I've highlighted that part on Virginia.

We'll see, but time's running short.

If it's any consolation, Rasmussen has Romney up 47/46 in its nationwide tracking poll today. So, who knows? Maybe even Fox News polls are in the tank for Obama?

One-Year Anniversary of Occupy Wall Street

The anarcho-communist assholes:

PREVIOUSLY: "The Lamest Thing You'll Read All Day."

Added: From Glenn Reynolds, "OCCUPY WALL STREET: Pushing Up Daisies, Not Pining For The Fjords."

As Arctic Ice Melts, Nations Scramble for Natural Resources Bounty

I doubt this is the kind of response that radical environmentalists were expecting with the melting of the polar ice caps.

At the New York Times, "Race Is On as Ice Melt Reveals Arctic Treasures":

NUUK, Greenland — With Arctic ice melting at record pace, the world’s superpowers are increasingly jockeying for political influence and economic position in outposts like this one, previously regarded as barren wastelands.


At stake are the Arctic’s abundant supplies of oil, gas and minerals that are, thanks to climate change, becoming newly accessible along with increasingly navigable polar shipping shortcuts. This year, China has become a far more aggressive player in this frigid field, experts say, provoking alarm among Western powers.

While the United States, Russia and several nations of the European Union have Arctic territory, China has none, and as a result, has been deploying its wealth and diplomatic clout to secure toeholds in the region.

“The Arctic has risen rapidly on China’s foreign policy agenda in the past two years,” said Linda Jakobson, East Asia program director at the Lowy Institute for International Policy in Sydney, Australia. So, she said, the Chinese are exploring “how they could get involved.”

In August, China sent its first ship across the Arctic to Europe and it is lobbying intensely for permanent observer status on the Arctic Council, the loose international body of eight Arctic nations that develops policy for the region, arguing that it is a “near Arctic state” and proclaiming that the Arctic is “the inherited wealth of all humankind,” in the words of China’s State Oceanic Administration.

More at that top link.

Amazing that it's China pushing most aggressively for Arctic development. Beijing's not too concerned about pollution, in any case, but it's interesting how this places enormous pressures on other countries not to fall too far behind in exploiting these treasures.

There's an Antarctic Treaty dating back to 1961 that regulate international relation on that continent, with codicils for the environment added in 1981. Keep your eyes peeled for an increasing multilateral push for a companion treaty arrangement for the North Pole. See, "As the Far North Melts, Calls Grow for Arctic Treaty."

James Earl Carter IV Goes Alinsky on Mitt Romney

You gotta read this report from Michael Isikoff, "How the Romney video leaked: For Carters, it was personal." I mentioned before that the "SECRET VIDEO" release was well-played, and it's more than that: it's political revenge. James Carter IV has been literally pissed off for some time that Republicans have been slamming his grandfather's "weak" foreign policy, with comparisons to the Obama administration:

"It gets under my skin -- mostly the weakness on the foreign policy stuff," Carter said. "I just think it's ridiculous. I don’t like criticism of my family."

More at the link.

And at the video, radical MSNBC host Rachel Maddow is about to explode with orgiastic delight at the news of the "SECRET VIDEO." She can barely contain her glee and literally cannot speak at a couple of points, as she tries to spew out partisan talking points. Note too how Maddow, in her explanation of events, is extremely careful to claim that she had nothing to do with the initial versions of the Romney clip posted to YouTube under her name. But given how extremely damaging the clip's turned out to be, she's positively giddy that James Carter tracked down the person responsible for the tape. The added bonus is listening to David Corn rattle on about the story. He sounds like he's pulled off a criminal enterprise, or something. No doubt the guy's got a raging woody out of sight there at the studio. And he sure wants to make a point that the host of the fundraising, millionaire investor Marc Leder, allegedly sponsored kinky hot-sex parties like a deranged hedge-fund pervert. It's all designed to make Mitt Romney look bad, really bad, and these people are reveling it it:

Meanwhile, there's simply too much commentary on this to do an adequate roundup. I'm not latching onto one of the right-wing memes that this is just another blip on the radar screen, and that Romney just needs to catch his breath and keep plugging. Check some of the links at Memeorandum for all the buzz. He has to do that, sure, but I suspect this is more of a turning point in the campaign than folks are letting on, if they even realize it. There's really one last chance for Romney to shift some momentum back in his direction, and that's the presidential debates. And the hour is late. He's been on the defense literally for months now and it was just this week that the campaign was looking for a reset. That's not happening at this point.

I'll have more in any case. I hope I'm wrong, obviously. But it's been months of folks saying that Romney was about to change the dynamics of the race, and all the supposed game-changing moments have come an gone --- the veep pick, the conventions, the so-called post-convention bounce --- and Romney's still battling to find some traction against the Democrat-Media-Complex and its extremely dirty Alinskyite politics.

Idiot Progressives Protest 'Muslim Rage' Cover at Newsweek

Actually, that cover is da bomb!

Dylan Byers compares it to Newsweek's 2001 cover story by Fareed Zakaria, "Why Do They Hate Us?" -- which I've been reminded of this last week, naturally.

But see the knee-jerk progs at Think Progress, attacking Newsweek with the phony "Islamophobic" slur, "Newsweek Publishes Islamophobic ‘Muslim Rage’ Cover In Response to Embassy Attacks."

In contrast, check "Ayaan Hirsi Ali, "The Last Gasp of Islamic Hate":

Until recently, it was completely justifiable to feel sorry for the masses in Libya because they suffered under the thumb of a cruel dictator. But now they are no longer subjects; they are citizens. They have the opportunity to elect a government and build a society of their choice. Will they follow the lead of the Egyptian people and elect a government that stands for ideals diametrically opposed to those upheld by the United States? They might. But if they do, we should not consider them stupid or infantile. We should recognize that they have made a free choice—a choice to reject freedom as the West understands it.

How should American leaders respond? What should they say and do, for example, when a spokesman for the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt’s newly elected ruling party, demands a formal apology from the United States government and urges that the “madmen” behind the Muhammad video be prosecuted, in violation of the First Amendment? If the U.S. follows the example of Europe over the last two decades, it will bend over backward to avoid further offense. And that would be a grave mistake—for the West no less than for those Muslims struggling to build a brighter future.

For a homicidal few in the Muslim world, life itself has less value than religious icons, such as the prophet or the Quran. These few are indifferent to the particular motives or arguments behind any perceived insult to their faith. They do not care about an individual’s political alignment, gender, religion, or occupation. They do not care whether the provocation comes from serious literature or a stupid movie. All that matters is the intolerable nature of the insult.

Continue reading.

The idiot progs'll slam her as "Islamphobic" as well, except that she's Muslim. The left's despicable slurs simply haven't got a chance against that moral clarity.

Walter James Casper III: Jewish 'Neocons' Should 'Stop Whining' About Being Slurred as 'Puppet Masters' for Bush/Cheney War Cabal

ICYMI, on Sunday the New York Times published Maureen Dowd's anti-Semitic screed, "Neocons Slither Back." The essay was a despicable attack on the GOP ticket reprising some of the oldest anti-Jewish slurs known to history. Dowd was widely ridiculed, and not just by the "evil" neoconservatives. The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg, a Jewish moderate who served in the IDF, hammered MoDo, "Happy New Year, Puppet Masters." Highlighting the essay's attack on Romney advisor Dan Senor as the "puppet master" mouthpiece for the GOP ticket's "Manichaean worldview," Goldberg writes:

Maureen may not know this, but she is peddling an old stereotype, that gentile leaders are dolts unable to resist the machinations and manipulations of clever and snake-like Jews...

This sinister stereotype became a major theme in the discussion of the Iraq war, when critics charged that Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith, among other Jewish neoconservatives, were actually in charge of Bush Administration foreign policy. This charge relegated George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, Stephen Hadley and the other Christians who actually set policy to the status of puppets.

Actually, Maureen does "know this," for this is hardly the first time she's attacked Jews with vicious anti-Semitic tropes. So why bother with it, if it's getting so routine? Well, I found it particularly interesting to note how many vile thugs of the left doubled down to defend the hatred. Of course, long-standing Jew-bashing troll Walter James Casper III, a.k.a. Repsac3, couldn't resist piling on the anti-Jew attacks. The vicious Repsac calls Jewish outrage at such "blood sucking" attacks as nothing more than "neocon whining." That figures, naturally, since Repsac3's on record as a huge backer of the eliminationist, anti-Semitic Occupy Wall Street movement.

The Anti-Semitic Slur Surfaces Once Again motherjones.com/kevin-drum/201… via @motherjones IOW, stop whining, neocons...
— J. Casper (@repsac3) September 17, 2012

And it's fitting that Repsac3's linking Kevin Drum, the dumbest progressive blogger this side of Matthew Yglesias. At that link, Drum spills out the stupid: "There's nothing anti-Semitic in Dowd's column..."

Actually, there is something anti-Semitic: Dan Senor, for one thing, is Jewish. Moreover, as The Future of Capitalism points outs:

...depictions of Jews as snakes or puppeteers are classical anti-Semitic images, right up there with blood-sucking. The snake image has roots in the Christian Bible; the puppet-master goes back at least to Nazi Germany, and when Glenn Beck used it to talk about George Soros, who, unlike Dan Senor, has actually been hostile to Israel, the left was all over him for it.

Right.

More of those leftist double-standards. It's only racist when the other side does it.

And it wasn't just the reprehensible Internet loser Walter James Casper III spreading the hate. Barbara O'Brien at Mahablog piled on as well, lamely attempting to justify anti-Semitic puppet master slurs because these are just the same as the "old Robert Heinlein novel about slugs from outer space that invade earth," or something. I know. She's so f-king stupid it hurts.

Anyway, I could go on like this, but again, why bother? Progressives are anti-Israel and they hate Jews, especially Walter James Casper III.

More of that at Memeorandum.

Decades After Title Fight, Pain Endures for Families of Ray Mancini and Duk-koo Kim

At the New York Times, "Families Continue to Heal 30 Years After Title Fight Between Ray Mancini and Duk-koo Kim":

As a boy, Ray Mancini would pore over his father’s scrapbook, a collection of brittle-brown newspaper clippings and sepia-toned glossies, inevitably pausing to study the photograph of his father as a young fighter, his features bloodied and swollen, the right eye clenched shut like the seam of a mussel shell.

“I didn’t win ’em all,” Lenny Mancini would tell his son. “But I never took a step back.”

The elder Mancini had been a No. 1 contender in the abundantly talented lightweight division. But his dream of a title shot ended Nov. 10, 1944, near the French town of Metz, when he was hit with shrapnel from a German mortar shell.

Four decades later, his son entered the national consciousness. Ray called himself Boom Boom, too, just like the old man. But coming out of Youngstown, Ohio, at the cusp of the 1980s, Ray also represented those felled when the steel belt turned to rust. As refracted through the lens of television, he became The Last White Ethnic, a redemptive fable produced by CBS Sports.

Mancini won the lightweight title with a first-round knockout live from Vegas, the broadcast sponsored by Michelin (“the company that pioneered the radial”), Michelob (“smooth and mellow”) and the Norelco Rototract rechargeable. That was 1982. He was only 21, but already a modern allegory, as bankable as he was adored.

Then he fought Duk-koo Kim.

Kim had hit the Korean exacta at birth: dirt-poor and dark-skinned. But the prospect of a title shot seemed to ennoble him. He became fierce for the sake of his family. At the time of the Mancini fight, his fiancée was pregnant with their son.

If only Kim had taken a step back, he might have lived to see that boy.

These days, Ray is likely to be found at a trattoria in a Santa Monica strip mall. He’ll likely be joined by one of the regulars — the playwright David Mamet; the actor Ed O’Neill, an old friend from Youngstown; or maybe Ray-Ray, now 15, the youngest of Mancini’s three children.

Occasionally, patrons pull the waiter aside and point at Ray.

“What was he in?” they ask.

“That’s Ray ‘Boom Boom’ Mancini,” the waiter says. “Lightweight champion of the world.”

“He’s the guy who killed the guy, right? The Korean?”

Continue reading.

At the video, scroll toward the end for the knock out. Kim tries to stand but the referee calls the fight. Both Kim's mother and the ref, Richard Green, later committed suicide.

Mi Pueblo Food Center's Plan to Use E-Verify Stirs Anger

At the Los Angeles Times, "Latino food chain's participation in E-Verify leaves a bad taste":

SAN JOSE — When customers enter Mi Pueblo Food Center to do their weekly shopping, the goal is to make them feel at home.

Each of the grocery chain's 21 outlets, which are scattered throughout the Bay Area, Monterey Bay region and Central Valley, is styled to emulate a distinct Mexican region. Boisterous rancheras stream from the stores' speakers. Vivid primary colors and architectural references cover the walls: the adobe church of San Juan Nuevo, Michoacan, in San Jose's flagship store; the Maya pyramid of Chichen Itza in the Salinas market.

Mi Pueblo's employees, all bilingual, wear name tags that list their hometowns.

It's a formula that helped turn the business founded more than two decades ago by an illegal immigrant from the town of Aguililla into a $300-million enterprise.

"Those of us who don't speak English, we come here because we're comfortable," Yoselina Acevedo of San Jose, a 53-year-old immigrant from Michoacan, said while shopping one recent day.

So the company's announcement late last month that it was participating in a voluntary federal program that checks the immigration status of all new hires elicited anger and confusion from workers and customers alike.

Company officials said that, although they were critical of E-Verify, they felt "tremendous pressure" from immigration officials to sign up. Community organizers have pledged to launch a shoppers' boycott Oct. 8 if Mi Pueblo founder Juvenal Chavez, who is now a legal U.S. resident, does not change his mind.

"He says he has suffered the pain of being an immigrant. I don't believe it," said Rogelio Marquez, 37, who said he was laid off from the Gilroy store after becoming active with a workers union. "We support the economy of this country. Why is this man now checking papers?"

Well, complying with the law might be a good reason, although I love the reconquista entitlement mentality.

More at that top link.

'Atlas Shrugged: Part II'

At Reason, "Atlas Shrugged Part II: Theatrical Trailer."

I think that "Going Galt" meme will pick up again if Obama's reelected.

As Criticism Mounts, Angels General Manager Stands Behind Mike Scioscia

I mentioned earlier this season that I expected Mike Scioscia would be getting canned this year, but not yet. Not yet.

See the Los Angeles Times, "Angels general manager continues to support Mike Scioscia":

Within seconds of Mike Scioscia's latest decision-gone-horribly-wrong Saturday night in Kansas City, when he pulled starter Zack Greinke in the ninth inning with a 2-0 lead and closer Ernesto Frieri gave up two home runs for a 3-2 loss, fans began spewing vitriol toward the Angels manager on Twitter. Again.

It has become a typical, predictable and somewhat tiresome pattern: key move doesn't work out, scream at television, go to keyboard, type "fire the manager!" hit send button.

While Jerry Dipoto may not agree with what seems to be a growing number of fans clamoring for Scioscia to be canned in this season of unfulfilled expectations, the Angels general manager can empathize with such anguish and frustration.

Growing up a New York Mets fan in New Jersey, Dipoto criticized managers such as Joe Torre and Davey Johnson with as much fervor as fans are hammering Scioscia, though Dipoto didn't have the vast array of electronic media outlets at his disposal that fans have today.

Dipoto has vivid memories of his reaction to Johnson leaving Doc Gooden in to face a supposedly weak left-handed-hitting Dodgers catcher in the ninth inning of Game 4 of the 1988 National League championship series.

With one of the league's best left-handed relievers, Randy Myers, in the bullpen, the right-handed and tiring Gooden — he threw 133 pitches — gave up a score-tying, two-run homer, the Dodgers won in 12 innings to even the best-of-seven series, two games apiece, and they went on to win the series.

That Dodgers catcher who hit that series-turning home run? Scioscia, of course.

"I remember thinking, 'What are you doing?'" Dipoto, a college sophomore at the time, said of Johnson, now the Washington Nationals manager. "I certainly understand the critical nature of the fan, because I've been one all my life. You're naturally critical. The ebbs and flows of a baseball season bring that on."

Dipoto, having blown his share of saves in seven years as a big league reliever and having spent more than a decade in various front-office positions, has developed a different perspective on the moves he used to second-guess.

And now that he has the power to fire a manager whose decisions he may not like, Dipoto has a broader, more rational view of the game and how he evaluates those playing and managing it.

RTWT.

Romney Stands by '47 Percent of Americans' Comments

William Jacobson has some analysis, "About that Romney tape":

There is nothing remarkable about Romney’s comments except that because on a secret video, they appear more nefarious.

There is no doubt that this was an Obama campaign operation, and likely we will see more such tapes dribbled out a week at a time.  The team which obtained sealed divorce records of rivals certainly can plant donors at private fundraisers.

Don’t fall for pronouncements that Romney’s campaign now is over.  Such pronouncements now come weekly by a media seeking a self-fulfilling prophecy.  Whether it was the insane overreaction to Romney’s comments on Libya or the declaration that the polling showed Romney had lost, every week there will be a new meme circulated.

Yeah, well, I mocked the f-k out of it, "Newsflash! SECRET VIDEO Catches Mitt Romney Talking CAMPAIGN STRATEGY at GOP FUNDRAISER!"

That said, it was pretty well played, I must admit. The story's leading on all the major newspapers, at NYT, for example, "Romney Calls 47% of Voters Dependent in Leaked Video." And Mitt took to the airwaves in an attempt to tamp down the damage (even though his comments weren't in fact controversial).

There's absolutely nothing the Democrats won't do to win. I'm not shocked at all by this. But at this point I'll be surprised if Romney's able to eke out a victory come November. Charlie Cook gave O the edge, and now the progs are trying to put things away with the dirtiest of dirty tricks. History will record this era as one of the darkest in recent political history. Politics ain't beanbag, that's for sure. The trick is to out Alynsky these f-kers and the hour is getting late.

More at the Washington Post, "Romney stands by his remarks in leaked video" (at Memeorandum).

Barrett Brown Arrested: Crazed Ex-Anonymous Hacker Taken Into Custody After Threatening FBI Agent

On Sunday, I tipped off Robert Stacy McCain to the raid on Barrett Brown, and the former subsequently did a huge write-up on the case. See: "‘Anonymous’ Spokesman Barrett Brown Arrested After Bizarre Video Meltdown."

Long ago, Barrett made one of these videos denouncing me for one thing or another. I've forgotten. He did not threaten me, however. I actually got along with Barrett pretty well, until he went off the deep end.

Newsflash! SECRET VIDEO Catches Mitt Romney Talking CAMPAIGN STRATEGY at GOP FUNDRAISER!

It's over.

Mittens ought to concede right now. He's been found out!

See this TOP SECRET report from DAVID CORN at the crack progressive INVESTIGATIVE website Mother Jones, "SECRET VIDEO: Romney Tells Millionaire Donors What He REALLY Thinks of Obama Voters."

To protect the confidential source who provided the video, we have blurred some of the image, and we will not identify the date or location of the event, which occurred after Romney had clinched the Republican presidential nomination.

Because the Mitt mafia will be dispatched on the double to teach this spy a lesson! Never cross the Rombino crime family!

Oh brother.

It's not like progressives aren't all about "Obama Bucks," or anything. And the progressive fever swamps are all bent that Romney would actually talk strategy like this at a private fundraiser? No shit. IT'S JUST HORRIBLE that Mittens would talk about government dependents like that! I mean, it's perfectly fine for "The One's" reelection committee to create a prototypical dependency robot named "Julia" who lives cradle to grave sucking at the government's teat, but when the GOP nominee admits he'll never get the Democrats' welfare handout vote, well, THAT'S A SCANDAL!

Like I said. Time to concede. We're done. The Democrats are just too wily for us. They'll have us locked down in dependency before you know it. DOOMED!!

Added: At LONELY CONSERVATIVE!, "Who Paid $50,000 to Record Mitt Romney at a Private Fundraiser?"

Well, maybe those progs aren't that smart after all. $50,000? Somebody's been suckered and bad.

Ambassador Stevens' Photo on Front Page of 'Los Angeles Times'

I've been reading the hard-copy version of the New York Times of late, because I want to bring the paper to class to have examples for the students' writing assignments. I bring both the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times with me. I normally raise current events issues at the beginning of classes, but this last week we spent more time discussing things than usual. On Thursday I was a little surprised that the Times ran the picture of Ambassador Stevens being carried through the streets of Benghazi, or his body being dragged through the streets, depending on your perspective. I posted on that here: "Body of Ambassador Chris Stevens Dragged Through Streets of Benghazi."

So then it was pretty interesting to read the reader backlash at the Times as well, at the letters to the editor over the weekend. See, "Stevens' photo on the front page":

Reader reaction was strong to Thursday's front-page photo of a mortally wounded J. Christopher Stevens, the U.S. ambassador to Libya.

Stevens was killed Tuesday along with three other Americans in an attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya. As the article that accompanied the photo noted, he was the first U.S. ambassador killed in the line of duty since 1988.

Some readers called the photo graphic, unwarranted, inappropriate, disgraceful, gratuitous and insensitive.

"It was very distasteful and disrespectful to post the picture of Stevens, in death in such graphic detail, on the front page," Donna Shontell of Sherman Oaks said. "This plays into the hands of those responsible for these types of horrendous acts. I respect The Times for excellence in journalism, not for tabloid exploitation."

"Stevens was a dedicated, brave, and honorable man who died serving his country. He deserves our respect and gratitude," Betsy K. Emerick of Monrovia wrote. "Instead, by printing that photo, you have taken away his dignity and turned his sacrifice into an opportunity for exploitation and sensationalism."

"It seems to me a picture of the burning embassy in Benghazi would have been quite graphic enough," Virginia G. Berg of Culver City wrote. "The ambassador's family will never be able to forget the horrible pain and suffering he went through, and in my opinion they did not need to see this very graphic photograph to make it even worse."

"Your front-page photo of a dying Stevens was unwarranted and inappropriate," wrote Tim Sunderland of Rancho Cucamonga. "With freedom of the press comes a responsibility to honor the most sensitive of moments. This was one of them, and The Times failed."

David Latt of Pacific Palisades asked: "What was gained by this photograph? Was it newsworthy? We know the ambassador was attacked by a mob. We know he died. Can you imagine the added grief his family and friends felt when they viewed that photograph? And what about your readers? What was gained by attacking your readers' sensibilities?"

Editors discussed the photo at length on Wednesday. Managing Editor Marc Duvoisin explained the thinking...

More at the link.

EXTRA: "Blood Stains: Pictures From Benghazi Consulate Indicate Horror of Final Moments Before Death (PHOTOS)."

Guns Sales Surge on Prospects of Obama Reelection

Well, I hadn't thought about it that much, trying as I might to sift through all the polling data and what not, but I can see the reasoning of folks looking to arm up for the next four years. I wrote some apocalyptic blog posts when O was first elected. Glenn Beck was some inspiration, come to think of it. But living until 2016 under the Obama regime will try men's souls, so better to be armed to the teeth while riding out the radical deluge.

At the Wall Street Journal, "Gun Sales Hinge on Obama Re-Election: Cabela's, Other Retailers Prepare for Surge in Demand."