Million-Dollar View? Try $90 Million

This is something else, at the New York Times, "Rising Tower Emerges as a Billionaires' Haven'":

One57, a 1,004-foot tower under construction in Midtown Manhattan, will soon hold the title of New York’s tallest building with residences. But without fanfare from its ultraprivate future residents, it is cementing a new title: the global billionaires’ club.

The buyers of the nine full-floor apartments near the top that have sold so far — among them two duplexes under contract for more than $90 million each — are all billionaires, Gary Barnett, the president of the Extell Development Company, the building’s developer, said this week. The other seven apartments ranged in price from $45 million to $50 million.

The billionaires’ club includes several Americans, at least two buyers from China, a Canadian, a Nigerian and a Briton, according to Mr. Barnett and brokers who have sold apartments in the building, at 157 West 57th Street. Mr. Barnett said that at least a few buyers were “significant Forbes billionaires.”

Since late last year, the “trophy” end of New York’s real estate market has been recording eye-popping sales that seem to have little basis in reality. The signed contract for the nearly-11,000-square-foot duplex on the 89th and 90th floors of One57 that sold for about $95 million topped the record sale in March of a penthouse at 15 Central Park West to a Russian billionaire’s daughter for $88 million. In June, Steve Wynn, the Las Vegas casino magnate, paid $70 million for a duplex penthouse apartment above the Ritz-Carlton.

Individual sales aside, it is the sheer concentration of wealth in One57, a $1.5 billion development, that is raising the eyebrows of some longtime market watchers.

More at that top link.

Plus, "Two Billionaire Buyers Revealed at One57."

Iran Says Israel 'Threatening' U.S. With Allegations of Iranian Nuclear Weapons

At the Washington Post:

NEW YORK — Israel is bullying the United States over the alleged threat of an Iranian nuclear weapon, using the prospect of an Israeli military attack on Iran to force the hand of its much larger ally, Iran’s president said Monday.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad dismissed the idea that Israel might attack on its own, over the objections of the United States, and said Israel is an inconsequential interloper with no rightful place in the Middle East.

“I look at it from the outside, and I see that a few occupying Zionists are threatening the government of the United States,” Ahmadinejad said during an interview with American editors and reporters.

“Is it the Zionists who must tell the United States government what to do, such as form a red line on Iran’s nuclear issues, and the United States government must make such vital decisions under the influence of the Zionists?” Ahmadinejad said, using the Iranian regime’s term for Israel. He spoke through an interpreter.

Americans should be insulted if their government takes marching orders from Israel, Ahmadinejad added.

The two-term Iranian leader spoke on the sidelines of the annual meeting of the U.N. General Assembly. The gathering this year is colored by the politics of the U.S. presidential election and by the possibility of an Israeli military strike on Iran.

The Obama administration is chafing under increasingly direct pressure from Israel to declare “red lines” in Iran’s nuclear development that would trigger a U.S. attack. President Obama, who is scheduled to address the United Nations on Tuesday, has said he would not tolerate an Iranian nuclear bomb. He has threatened a military strike if there is no other option to prevent Iran from getting a bomb, but he has not publicly set a deadline for diplomacy to run its course.

Also at Weasel Zippers, "Ahmadinejad: Zionists Control The U.S. Government…"

More at CSM, "Iran's Ahmadinejad says that Israel will be 'eliminated'."

Who Knows?

She's a vile woman.

I'm surprised she's even competitive, she's such a liar.

At Legal Insurrection, "Scott Brown launches first ad on Elizabeth Warren Cherokee claim."

The Blasphemous Michael Coren

At Blazing Cat Fur.

Pamela Geller's Anti-Jihad Ads Go Up in New York's Subways

At National Post, "Support Israel against 'the savage': Blogger's controversial anti-jihad ads hit NYC subways."

And at the clip, I guess AP couldn't find anyone who thought that Muslim beheadings of innocent civilians is savagery. The first women interviewed nails it, however. You have the right to free speech, even if some folks find that speech offensive.

Christina Hendricks Rocks Post-Emmys Governors Ball

Robert Stacy McCain has long pumped up Christina Hendricks as the ultimate Rule 5 babe. I just haven't posted on her that much. She sure is lovely.

See London's Daily Mail, "That's how you get over a loss: Christina Hendricks lets her hair down at Governors Ball after Mad Men Emmys snub."

'F-ck Off' and 'Have a Nice Life'

Now this is interesting, at BuzzFeed, "Hillary Clinton Aide Tells Reporter to “F**k Off” And “Have a Nice Life”."

It turns out Hillary Clinton spokesman Philippe Reines got a bit bothered by the press inquiries. Ann Althouse has an outstanding post on this, at Instapundit, "DON’T GET DISTRACTED BY FACT THAT A STATE DEPT. SPOKESMAN SAID “F*ck Off” and “Have a good life” to that BuzzFeed reporter..."

Follow that link. It's good.

The World Needs American Strength, Not Apologies

Via Bob Belvedere:

Ex-Pittsburgh Pirates Owner Kevin McClatchy Comes Out

It's hard out there for a sexual deviant.

See Towleroad, "Kevin McClatchy, Newspaper Scion And Former Pittsburgh Pirates Owner, Comes Out."

Girl Gets Swats in Texas by Male Vice Principal

The parents signed a release, but I guess they never expected a male administrator to administer the spanking.

At London's Daily Mail, "Taylor Santos Spanking: Mother's fury as Texas schoolgirl left 'bruised and blistered' after male vice principal SPANKED her for cheating."

Everything's so damned politically correct.

Boy, that would be something if we had corporal punishment at my school. We don't do that in college, of course, but I got swats when I was in 7th grade. It's not something you forget very quickly, and I'd say it's an effective form of discipline. Society's all wimped out nowadays. It's ridiculous.

Deadly Attack in Libya Was Major Blow to C.I.A. Efforts

A front-page report at today's New York Times:

WASHINGTON — The attack in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans has dealt the Central Intelligence Agency a major setback in its intelligence-gathering efforts at a time of increasing instability in the North African nation.

Among the more than two dozen American personnel evacuated from the city after the assault on the American mission and a nearby annex were about a dozen C.I.A. operatives and contractors, who played a crucial role in conducting surveillance and collecting information on an array of armed militant groups in and around the city.

“It’s a catastrophic intelligence loss,” said one American official who has served in Libya and who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the F.B.I. is still investigating the attack. “We got our eyes poked out.”

Continue reading.

On the Red Carpet at the Emmys

Hey, London's Daily Mail's got your epic photo roundup from last night's show.

Smokin' hotties.

See: "Emmys 2012: Blue belles! Sofia Vergara, Heidi Klum and Nicole Kidman lead the glamour parade at Emmy Awards."

Obama Blows Off Israel Concerns Over Iranian Nukes as Just Some 'Noise That's Out There'

More from O's f-ked up interview last night on "60 Minutes."

Jennifer Rubin reports, "Obama’s ‘60 Minutes’ wipeout." And from Ed Morrissey, "Obama: Israel’s concerns on Iran “noise” I’m going to block out." (At Memeorandum.)

First Lady Michelle Obama Speaks to Congressional Black Caucus Foundation Dinner

I would have puked all over the guests.

At Twitchy, "Disgraceful: Michelle Obama trots out race card, says ‘Voting rights is movement of our era’."

And listen at the clip. Talk about "back in chains." You'd think blacks were never unshackled in the first place. Something else. Scroll forward to about 15:00 minutes for the "movement of our era" comments. For the first time in my adult life...

Damian Lewis Shocks Emmy Awards With Dramatic Win for Showtime Drama 'Homeland'

At the Los Angeles Times, "Big winners: 'Game Change,' 'Homeland,' 'Modern Family'."

Lots of coverage over there, so surf around a bit for additional reporting.

Obama Dismisses His Administration's Historic Middle East Meltdown as Just 'Bumps in the Road'

Is this hubris? Or he's just completely aloof?

I never cease to be amazed at this president. We're in the midst of one of the greatest foreign policy disasters in recent decades and it's just a "bump in the road" to this man. Unbelievable. Or not. The nonchalance in the face of such an enormous clusterf-k is completely par for the course. What an epic presidential asshole.

See Daniel Halper at the Weekly Standard, "Obama on Recent Middle East Violence: 'Bumps in the Road'" (via Memeorandum).

"Bumps in the road." Boy, callousness comes easy to "The One."

Ann Coulter on ABC's 'This Week': 'Democrats Dropping Blacks and Moving On to Hispanics'

See: "Ann Coulter: Democrats ‘Dropping the Blacks and Moving on to the Hispanics’."

Here's the Dior 'J'Adore' Clip From Last Night's Emmy Awards, Featuring Charlize Theron

This is the full 90-second film.

I didn't see much of the awards but still caught the ad running two times during the broadcast. A striking clip.

Obama's Failed Exit From Iraq

From Michael Gordon, at the New York Times, "In U.S. Exit From Iraq, Failed Efforts and Challenges" (at Memeorandum):

The request was an unusual one, and President Obama himself made the confidential phone call to Jalal Talabani, the Iraqi president.

Marshaling his best skills at persuasion, Mr. Obama asked Mr. Talabani, a consummate political survivor, to give up his post. It was Nov. 4, 2010, and the plan was for Ayad Allawi to take Mr. Talabani’s place.

With Mr. Allawi, a secular Shiite and the leader of a bloc with broad Sunni support, the Obama administration calculated, Iraq would have a more inclusive government and would check the worrisome drift toward authoritarianism under Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki.

But Mr. Obama did not make the sale.

“They were afraid what would happen if the different groups of Iraq did not reach an agreement,” recalled Mr. Talabani, who turned down the request.

Mr. Obama has pointed to the American troop withdrawal last year as proof that he has fulfilled his promise to end the Iraq war. Winding down a conflict, however, entails far more than extracting troops.

In the case of Iraq, the American goal has been to leave a stable and representative government, avoid a power vacuum that neighboring states and terrorists could exploit and maintain sufficient influence so that Iraq would be a partner or, at a minimum, not an opponent in the Middle East.

But the Obama administration has fallen frustratingly short of some of those objectives.

The attempt by Mr. Obama and his senior aides to fashion an extraordinary power-sharing arrangement between Mr. Maliki and Mr. Allawi never materialized. Neither did an agreement that would have kept a small American force in Iraq to train the Iraqi military and patrol the country’s skies. A plan to use American civilians to train the Iraqi police has been severely cut back. The result is an Iraq that is less stable domestically and less reliable internationally than the United States had envisioned.

The story of these efforts has received little attention in a nation weary of the conflict in Iraq, and administration officials have rarely talked about them. This account is based on interviews with many of the principals, in Washington and Baghdad.

Continue reading.

And check JustOneMinute as well.

Yet another foreign policy disaster from President Clusterf-k. Will Americans even care? Probably not, if expert opinion on voter preferences is any clue. But as I argued previously, this year foreign policy is taking on an outsized importance, and history will judge this administration's failures.

I'll have more later...

Outrage After CNN Uses Journal of Ambassador Christopher Stevens as News Source

Anderson Cooper's initial mention of Ambassador Stevens' worries about al Qaeda can be seen at the link.

Some of the source material for that reporting came from the ambassador's personal journal, and there's a backlash, at the Wall Street Journal, "Family Protests CNN's Use of Slain Envoy's Journal." (Via Lonely Conservative and Memeorandum.)

But see Robert Stacy McCain, "Classic: State Department Attacks CNN for Reporting Inconvenient Facts on Libya." Read it all at the link. Robert defends CNN's reporting, as the information in the journal held "worldwide significance."

Check all the reporting at Memeorandum.

Bill Clinton: Romney's Money Advantage Could Swing Election

Maybe old Bill's trying to dampen O's momentum. You know, helping Romney helps Hillary, who might run in 2016.

Putting that aside, perhaps a Romney advertising blitz in the battleground states could tilt the scales come November. If we give credence to the conservative attacks on the polls as biased towards the Dems, then then a GOP money advantage could be decisive.

In any case, FWIW, at the Los Angeles Times, "Clinton: GOP money advantage could still swing the election":

Notice the added point about how the GOP could win if its so-called "voter suppression" efforts are successful. This later point is a big meme on the left. Elizabeth Drew draws out the full conspiracy theory at the New York Review, "Voting Wrongs" (via Memeorandum). And be sure to scroll down to the comments for a real hoot: "IT'S THE END OF DEMOCRACY, GAWD!!!"

Fox News' Chris Wallace Hammers Obama Advisor Robert Gibbs on Administration's Libya Lies (VIDEO)

If we get some media coverage with backbone over the next week or so, the administration's Libya debacle could have an impact on the presidential horse race. The White House lied on Libya. The more information that comes out the worse the administration's cover up appears.

Watch it. These people are stooges.

Newt Gingrich: Romney's Gotta Be Aggressive

Bryan Jacoutot flags this Newt Gingrich interview on CNN, "Newt offers Romney some good advice."

Mitt Romney Can Win

It seems weird for folks to have to say it, but Mitt can still win this.

Mort Zuckerman weighs in, at U.S. News, "Romney Can Still Overcome Obama's Dishonest, Divisive Campaign" (via Memeorandum):

The problem for Mitt Romney right now is that he has put his entire candidacy at risk to the point where he may not even qualify for the dismissive equation of Barack Obama that Marco Rubio formulated for the Republican faithful: "Our problem is not that he's a bad person. Our problem is that he's a bad president." Is Romney also "not a bad person, just a bad candidate"? With his "47 percent" remarks at a Republican fundraiser in May, he has given his opponent evidence to initiate a new line of attack.

Voters can forgive a candidate who stumbles in the heat of an election, trapped by "gotcha" questions from journalists, being quoted out of context in cunning TV attack commercials, and in the Twitter age, failing to appreciate that nothing that is said is secret anymore. We all know the game, and Romney has demonstrated that he is not perfect at this game.

The same can be said of President Obama. As a candidate, he ran a brilliantly smooth and targeted campaign four years ago, but even he misspoke, as they say, in what he thought was a private meeting of San Francisco liberals. When the polls suggested he wasn't appealing to rural voters, his response was to blame them for not seeing how different he was from the likes of Bill Clinton and George Bush, who had let them down. "You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them," he said. "It's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustration."

This week, Jay Carney, the White House spokesman, dismissed the condescension as something from the mythic past, not to be compared to the furor over Romney's "47 percent" remark. Yet even now, fully armored and protected by four years of 24/7 press scrutiny and an army of verbal bodyguards, the president stumbles. "You didn't build that" still rankles the millions of taxpayers who have concluded that in making their way they've not had much help from the government and a lot of hindrance.

The trouble with Romney—and for Romney—is that he has etched an unappealing sketch of himself. For independent voters, he made too many flip-flops in policy to appease the right. Indeed, he had an uncanny knack for offering an easy target for his opposition: "I like being able to fire people," "I'm also unemployed," "I'm not concerned about the very poor," and "Ann drives a couple of Cadillacs." He seems to be living in another world, referring to middle income as being in the range of "$200,000 to $250,000," when the median income is more like $50,000. By the way, after four years of Obama's economic stewardship, that figure represents a dramatic decline of 10 percent and, in fact, is a strong point to Romney's case against the administration.

Such careless remarks have made it easy for the Obama campaign to get away with a program that pits "the millionaires and billionaires" against the people. It is a dishonest, divisive campaign. It's discouraging of enterprise. It does the opposite of uniting the country to deal with the current economic crisis.

Read it all at the link.

Romney still has a chance. It's going to take some focus and adjustments, but he still has a chance.

The Left vs. the Liberals

From Sean Wilentz, at the New York Review:

Michael Kazin’s new book about American leftists and their impact on the nation over the last two centuries presupposes, as its subtitle suggests, that this impact has been enormous. But Kazin is a judicious scholar without bluster, a professor of history at Georgetown, and coeditor of Dissent, and his assessments are carefully measured. Kazin concedes that radical leftists have often been out of touch with prevailing values, including those of the people they wish to liberate. He concludes that American radicals have done more to change what he calls the nation’s “moral culture” than to change its politics.

And yet, even as Kazin tries to avoid romanticizing the left, his book leaves unchallenged some conventional leftist conceptions about American politics and how change happens. These conventions begin with a presumption about who controls American political life, what C. Wright Mills called the “power elite,” an interlocking directorate of wealth and bureaucracy at the top. Kazin refers to this directorate interchangeably as the “establishment” or the “governing elite.” Unless challenged by radicals, this elite, in his view, is slow to right social wrongs; but without the support of the elite’s more enlightened elements, the radicals remain in the political wilderness.

Occasionally—as with the abolition of slavery, the rise of the New Deal, and the victories of the civil rights movement—momentous changes supported by radicals have indeed come to pass. Yet Kazin argues that the liberal components of the governing elite have supported major reforms strictly in order to advance purposes of their own. Abraham Lincoln and the Republicans, he writes, embraced emancipation only halfway through the Civil War, when it became clear that doing so “could speed victory for the North” and save the Union, their true goal. Franklin D. Roosevelt endorsed labor’s rights only when he needed to court labor’s votes.

Even when they are successful, Kazin writes, the radicals—“decidedly junior partners in a coalition driven by establishment reformers”—end up shoved aside as the liberals enact their more limited programs and take all of the credit. Prophets without honor, the leftists return to the margins where they and later radicals dream new and bigger dreams until another social movement jars the establishment.

Some radical historians—most famously the late Howard Zinn—have described this pattern as a chronicle of thoroughgoing oppression. In their view, the reforms initiated by radicals have practically always turned into swindles, orchestrated by clever rulers to preserve and even reinforce their power. Kazin, who also despairs about the current state of the left, has a more positive view of liberal reformers and their reforms: the Emancipation Proclamation and the Voting Rights Act, he insists, were important political advances and not establishment ruses. But a basic pattern still holds for Kazin as it does for Zinn: radicals challenge the privileged; liberals co-opt them, claiming the glory. In effect liberals are the enemies of fundamental political change.

Most of American Dreamers consists of crisp and useful summaries of nearly four decades’ worth of historical research about American radicals and radical movements, including Kazin’s own work on the amorphous populist strain in American politics. For Kazin, the left consists of anyone who has sought to achieve, in his words, “a radically egalitarian transformation of society.” The definition embraces an enormous array of spokesmen and causes, and Kazin’s account runs from the abolitionists and workingmen radicals of the Jacksonian era through a succession of socialists, women’s suffragists, Greenwich Village bohemians, and civil rights protesters, down to today’s left-wing professoriat.

There's a lot more at the link.

If the left consists of folks looking for "a radical egalitarian transformation of society," one might think Barack Obama would fit the bill. But as the essay points out, Kazin treats Obama as a mainstream centrist Democrat.

That will be an interesting question in the years and decades ahead, the degree of Obama's left-wing radicalism. But read the whole thing. According to Wilentz's thesis, traditional anti-Communist social democrats have contributed much more toward that radical transformation that Kazin hopes to achieve than he's able to recognize. And for historians the key will be to sort out exactly what kind of Democrat this president is. He's not a neo-liberal in the Bill Clinton mold, and indeed, in ideological pedigree Obama's way more radical than President Lyndon Johnson ever was, even if he fails in achieving as lasting change as the great Texas Democrat did. But we could have four more years of this president, and as a lame duck he could tear off the mask and govern from the full-throated ideological radicalism that his upbringing and pedigree indicate. He promised a radical transformation, and he's off to a damn good start, to the detriment of liberty and traditional decency of the American political system.

President Obama Won't Explain Why Libya Consulate Wasn't Better Protected

President Clusterf-k, via Buzzfeed:

The Left is All About Hate

From Ron Radosh, "Why There Cannot Be a Decent Left: An Answer to Richard Landes":

Last week, I wrote a column challenging Professor Richard Landes of Boston University to respond to the critique I wrote of his own arguments against Judith Butler. In that article, I argued that well-meaning men of the Left like Prof. Landes should give up trying to tell people like Butler that the reasons for their hostility to Israel contradict the humanist values of the Left. I argued that it is a fool’s errand trying to save the Left from itself; that in today’s world, what defines being on the Left are precisely the kind of positions Landes and others disdain....

I discussed Landes’ argument with my friend David Horowitz, and he e-mailed me a thoughtful response with which I mainly concur. Horowitz writes:

The distinction he makes between a demotic Left and a revolutionary Left is fairy dust. Yes there have been and still are a handful of decent but impotent people on the Left whose political weight is non-existent. Whatever happened to the Euston Manifesto? What are the leftwing publications, organizations, recognized spokesmen who are defending Jews and Christians and even gays and women against the Islamo-Nazis? Were the same even calling them Nazis, which is what they are (and yes, the Nazis themselves were leftists)?

There is a fundamental snobbery and arrogance evident in the postures of the so-called demotic mini-Left. The leftists actually have a monopoly on all the values that we associate with human decency, equality, liberty, etc. But these values were actually instituted and made into a global force by conservatives — American conservatives who wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and created a political system to make those values real. Judith Butler doesn’t act out of good intentions. She acts out of the same emotion that motivates the Left generally, which is hate. Henry James described them all in describing the feminist heroine of his novel The Bostonians: “It was the usual things of life that filled her with silent rage, which was natural enough, inasmuch as to her vision almost everything that was usual was iniquitous. … The most secret, the most sacred hope of her nature was that she might some day … be a martyr and die for something.” Or as Marx — who is the inspiration for all leftists — put it: “Everything that exists deserves to perish.” That is the true voice of leftism. What the demotic mini-Left is about is sentimentality.andes and others disdain.

Continue reading.

Pat Condell: We Don't Give a Damn About Your Islamic Outrage

Via Linkmaster Smith:

PREVIOUSLY: "Egypt's Mohamed Morsi Dictates U.S. Foreign Policy to the Obama White House."

Egypt's Mohamed Morsi Dictates U.S. Foreign Policy to the Obama White House

They say that voters don't vote foreign policy. In presidential elections pocketbook issues dominate, and especially in a year like this. And so far, it's not clear that the Republicans have won over the electorate on the jobs crisis (so we might be stuck with another four years of this Obama-Democrat calamity). But there's a lot more on our collective plate this year, and that's the standing of the United States as the continued leader of the free world. The evidence on the Libya attack is so overwhelming now that the White House can no longer cover it up. And we know that the Obama administration's foreign policy toward the Arab world has failed, our relations with and standing in the Muslim world has literally exploded in great balls of fire before our eyes. And the kick in the teeth is still to come when Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi meeets with President Obama to lay down the law on how the United States is to deal with the Middle East. I hope Obama's been practicing his bow, because he's going to be bending low before the Muslim Brotherhood chief, deeper than any head of state to which he's kowtowed thus far. Americans need to take a good hard look at what's going down and then ask themselves if 2012 isn't one of those elections in which history shall be the final judge. Obama promised a fundamental transformation in 2008. He's kept his word and continues to deliver the goods, bringing down Uncle Sam every step of the way.

At the New York Times, "Egypt’s New Leader Spells Out Terms for U.S.-Arab Ties":

CAIRO — On the eve of his first trip to the United States as Egypt’s new Islamist president, Mohamed Morsi said the United States needed to fundamentally change its approach to the Arab world, showing greater respect for its values and helping build a Palestinian state, if it hoped to overcome decades of pent-up anger.

A former leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and Egypt’s first democratically elected president, Mr. Morsi sought in a 90-minute interview with The New York Times to introduce himself to the American public and to revise the terms of relations between his country and the United States after the ouster of Hosni Mubarak, an autocratic but reliable ally.

He said it was up to Washington to repair relations with the Arab world and to revitalize the alliance with Egypt, long a cornerstone of regional stability.

If Washington is asking Egypt to honor its treaty with Israel, he said, Washington should also live up to its own Camp David commitment to Palestinian self-rule. He said the United States must respect the Arab world’s history and culture, even when that conflicts with Western values.

And he dismissed criticism from the White House that he did not move fast enough to condemn protesters who recently climbed over the United States Embassy wall and burned the American flag in anger over a video that mocked the Prophet Muhammad.

“We took our time” in responding to avoid an explosive backlash, he said, but then dealt “decisively” with the small, violent element among the demonstrators.

“We can never condone this kind of violence, but we need to deal with the situation wisely,” he said, noting that the embassy employees were never in danger.

Mr. Morsi, who will travel to New York on Sunday for a meeting of the United Nations General Assembly, arrives at a delicate moment. He faces political pressure at home to prove his independence, but demands from the West for reassurance that Egypt under Islamist rule will remain a stable partner.

Mr. Morsi, 61, whose office was still adorned with nautical paintings that Mr. Mubarak left behind, said the United States should not expect Egypt to live by its rules.

“If you want to judge the performance of the Egyptian people by the standards of German or Chinese or American culture, then there is no room for judgment,” he said. “When the Egyptians decide something, probably it is not appropriate for the U.S. When the Americans decide something, this, of course, is not appropriate for Egypt.”

He suggested that Egypt would not be hostile to the West, but would not be as compliant as Mr. Mubarak either.

“Successive American administrations essentially purchased with American taxpayer money the dislike, if not the hatred, of the peoples of the region,” he said, by backing dictatorial governments over popular opposition and supporting Israel over the Palestinians.

He initially sought to meet with President Obama at the White House during his visit this week, but he received a cool reception, aides to both presidents said. Mindful of the complicated election-year politics of a visit with Egypt’s Islamist leader, Mr. Morsi dropped his request.

Well, yeah. Bowing, in the White House, before the leader of the Arab terrorist world might not have gone over too well with the American public. That's something that even the Obama-enabling media wouldn't be able to conceal.

Things are not right in the world. There has never been as much groveling in our foreign policy, and now a two-bit terrorist lackey is dictating America's foreign policy on the Middle East. It's a disgrace of epic proportions, the mother of all clusterf-ks. May Americans take notice, for the survival of the republic is in their hands.

More at Big Government, "Obama to Condemn Christian Filmmaker Before United Nations" (via Memeorandum).

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

RELATED: From the Western Center for Journalism, "Egypt’s New President Keeps Useful Idiot Obama On Short Muslim Brotherhood Leash."

IMAGE CREDIT: The Looking Spoon.

Unmasking Obama — Washington Examiner, 'The Obama You Don't Know'

I hope this gets wide coverage, "The Obama you don't know."

And Doug Ross has a summary, "Unmasking Obama: A Special Report." Also, Theo Spark has the Fox News video, "Fox News Reports Barry Soetoro's Manufactured Past."

Conservative partisans will know most of the story, as will progressive fever swamp nihilists, who've working diligently to obfuscate and suppress the truth. It was a the biggest scam and sham on this country history when the African Marxist interloper was first elected. But we know who Obama is now. If Americans elect this man again they deserve the descent to decline that he's bequeathing the country.

Say your prayers. And keep fighting against this extreme leftist abomination.

End of Summer Rule 5

September 22, the last day of summer, today.

It's hot out in the O.C., but fall is upon is and the leaves will be falling and we'll be bundling up in the evenings before you know it.

First, thanks to Proof Positive for the linkage.

And I'm linking Bob Belvedere, even though I don't see his Saturday Rule 5 posted yet. He's got a lot of great content and worth checking out.

Plus, at The Other McCain, "OMG! @ParisHilton Gets Wrongly Tagged ‘H8R’ for Talking About Gay Sex." I posted on that as well, ICYMI, "Paris Hilton Apologizes for Slamming Homosexual Men as Disgusting Pervs Probably Infected With AIDS."

And speaking of disgusting pervs, The Daley Gator's got your O'Biden coverage, "Joe (Captain Gaffetastic) Biden On Cheerleaders: “The Stuff They Do On Hard Wood, It Blows My Mind”."

Some bona fide Rule 5 at Randy's Roundtable, "Thursday Nite Tart: Andi Muise." And at Pirate's Cove, "If All You See…is a planet killing dog, you might just be a Warmist."

More Rule 5 from our friend Odie, "I Love Blonds ~ OR ~ Rule 5 Woodsterman Style." (Very nice Rule 5 indeed!)

Also at Eye of Polyphemus, "Sonja Bennett." And from EBL, "Rule 5 Twitter Retweet."

I'll have more later.

Meanwhile, it turns out Chicago Ray's taking an indefinite retirement from blogging: "Gone Fishin' Indefinitely."

That dude's old school, been blogging for a long time. He'll be back. He's a patriot. You don't quit the fight when so much is on the line, our culture, our civilization, our decency.

Add your links in the comments to be added at the updates.

Have a great last day of summer! (Or first day of fall, but enjoy it nevertheless.)

PHOTO CREDIT: Ms. Brooke on Facebook.

Famke Janssen!

Turns out she's starring in a new movie, "Taken 2."

Ms. Janssen makes the "X-Men" films. She's so fabulous. I'm looking forward to watching her new film.

Man Jumps Into Tiger's Den at Bronx Zoo, Gets Promptly Mauled by 400-Pound Siberian Beast

Well that was smart.

The tiger chewed off his foot.

At the New York Post, "Bx. Zoo tiger mauls 'suicidal' monorail jumper."

And the New York Daily News nails it, "ZOO-ICIDE: Man mauled after leaping 17 feet into Bronx Zoo tiger den in crazed bid to kill himself."

The dude, David Villalobos, is recovering. I suspect the tigers are okay as well. Don't mess with those suckers, that's for sure.

Obama Tops Romney on Medicare

Americans see Social Security and Medicare as earned benefits, not handouts. Folks in many cases have paid decades of taxes to support the system. By the time they reach retirement they expect to cash out. So conservative proposals to shore up the system always face stiff headwinds, not because we don't need reform either. Even if reforms won't effect current retirees, folks still think changing the structure of benefits will gut the nature of the entitlement. We had a debate on this in 2005, when President Bush sought to restructure Social Security and Medicare. So it's no surprise that Romney/Ryan haven't been getting much support here. USA Today has some numbers on that, "Romney fights on Medicare but Obama retains advantage." And Paul Ryan got booed yesterday at the AARP convention:

Bowing to the Mob

From Mark Steyn, at National Review, "Government-funded film critics do grotesque damage to freedom of speech":

I see the Obama campaign has redesigned the American flag, and very attractive it is too. Replacing the 50 stars of a federal republic is the single “O” logo symbolizing the great gaping maw of spendaholic centralization. And where the stripes used to be are a handful of red daubs, eerily mimicking the bloody finger streaks left on the pillars of the U.S. consulate in Benghazi as its staff were dragged out by a mob of savages to be tortured and killed. What better symbol could one have of American foreign policy? Who says the slick hollow vapid marketing of the Obama campaign doesn’t occasionally intersect with reality?

Continue reading.

More at Director Blue.

PHOTO CREDIT: Instapundit.

Paris Hilton Apologizes for Slamming Homosexual Men as Disgusting Pervs Probably Infected With AIDS

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

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."