The State of Texas has made this abundantly clear to the United Nations, which has decided to send monitors to observe the US Presidential election to help insure "fairness".
As noted in this article, the Texas Attorney General wrote to the UN and warned that anyone who interferes with voting in Texas will be prosecuted.
The UN representatives from North Korea and Zimbabwe stated that they would not interfere, they just wanted to observe the process to insure fairness. Perhaps they want to see what methodologies and processes they will need to suppress so that their country's dictators can continue to get 98.7% of the vote in their elections.
Thursday, October 25, 2012
Assume The Position
This cartoon says it all about where we are going if the GOP cannot repeal the Affordable Health Care Act.
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
The Stretch Run
The final debate is in the books. Who was the winner?
There are a number of views about who won, but it appears that the most widely held view is that Gov. Romney passed the "Commander-In-Chief" test. That is, he looked like a guy who was qualified to handle the foreign policy and military apparatus of the world's greatest power.
Many rabid partisans (including, to an extent, yours truly) wanted Romney to go after the President, particularly regarding the Benghazi consulate attack. Romney apparently decided to be "Presidential" and avoid the confrontation. The plan was that he should not give anyone the idea that he was a scary war-monger. Romney also tried to connect foreign policy to the economy. Many pundits seem to suggest that this was a winning strategy.
Some post debate polls seem to bear this out. While Obama was seen to have "won" the debate, those same polls showed that strong majorities saw him as being qualified to be the Commander-In-Chief. Also, big majorities said that the economy is the number one issue and they were clearly convinced that Romney has the edge in that realm.
Finally, Obama took some rather petty cheap shots at Romney. He was trying to get Romney's goat. Romney did not take the bait and the President looked small in comparison.
Based on the change in the race for the White House since debate number one, it seems pretty clear that the Romney campaign came out on top after the debate season.
There are a number of views about who won, but it appears that the most widely held view is that Gov. Romney passed the "Commander-In-Chief" test. That is, he looked like a guy who was qualified to handle the foreign policy and military apparatus of the world's greatest power.
Many rabid partisans (including, to an extent, yours truly) wanted Romney to go after the President, particularly regarding the Benghazi consulate attack. Romney apparently decided to be "Presidential" and avoid the confrontation. The plan was that he should not give anyone the idea that he was a scary war-monger. Romney also tried to connect foreign policy to the economy. Many pundits seem to suggest that this was a winning strategy.
Some post debate polls seem to bear this out. While Obama was seen to have "won" the debate, those same polls showed that strong majorities saw him as being qualified to be the Commander-In-Chief. Also, big majorities said that the economy is the number one issue and they were clearly convinced that Romney has the edge in that realm.
Finally, Obama took some rather petty cheap shots at Romney. He was trying to get Romney's goat. Romney did not take the bait and the President looked small in comparison.
Based on the change in the race for the White House since debate number one, it seems pretty clear that the Romney campaign came out on top after the debate season.
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
In The Eye Of The Beholder
Last night's debate was pretty much a draw. Instant polls gave a small advantage to the President, but the focus groups on CNN, MSNBC and Fox News all had small majorities of undecideds coming out for Romney.
The President's performance was much better than it was in the Denver debate. (It could hardly have been worse.) Romney was steady but unspectacular and he failed to hit Obama hard on a questionable statement about the Benghazi Consulate attack. The President stated that he had called the attack a terror attack the morning after the news came out. This is certainly at odds with the statement made days later by UN Ambassador Rice on several Sunday news shows and the President himself, two weeks later at the UN, where the "spontaneous demonstration" caused by an "offensive video" claims were repeated.
In fairness to Romney, he seemed poised to ask a follow up when moderator Candy Crowley jumped in and cut him off. It was a fairly blatant intervention. After she spoke up, Romney seemed flustered and did not deliver the knock-out blow. I'd say Candy pleased her fellow liberal MSM colleagues with her shielding of their man.
Frankly, I doubt that this debate changed many minds. Democrats were happy that Obama woke up and argued his points forcefully. Republican were a bit disappointed that Mitt didn't bash Obama again, but given what a big win he had the first time, a repeat was unlikely.
I still think Romney was the winner because he again showed himself to be clearly capable of taking on the job of President. I remain convinced that the polls have been close, despite Obama's dismal record, because most Americans were not sure that Romney was OK. They have seen him twice now and he doesn't have two heads or appear to eat babies. Moreover, many previously undecided voters realize that as a successful businessman, Romney has what it takes to create jobs. That's why I believe Romney will win the election.
The President's performance was much better than it was in the Denver debate. (It could hardly have been worse.) Romney was steady but unspectacular and he failed to hit Obama hard on a questionable statement about the Benghazi Consulate attack. The President stated that he had called the attack a terror attack the morning after the news came out. This is certainly at odds with the statement made days later by UN Ambassador Rice on several Sunday news shows and the President himself, two weeks later at the UN, where the "spontaneous demonstration" caused by an "offensive video" claims were repeated.
In fairness to Romney, he seemed poised to ask a follow up when moderator Candy Crowley jumped in and cut him off. It was a fairly blatant intervention. After she spoke up, Romney seemed flustered and did not deliver the knock-out blow. I'd say Candy pleased her fellow liberal MSM colleagues with her shielding of their man.
Frankly, I doubt that this debate changed many minds. Democrats were happy that Obama woke up and argued his points forcefully. Republican were a bit disappointed that Mitt didn't bash Obama again, but given what a big win he had the first time, a repeat was unlikely.
I still think Romney was the winner because he again showed himself to be clearly capable of taking on the job of President. I remain convinced that the polls have been close, despite Obama's dismal record, because most Americans were not sure that Romney was OK. They have seen him twice now and he doesn't have two heads or appear to eat babies. Moreover, many previously undecided voters realize that as a successful businessman, Romney has what it takes to create jobs. That's why I believe Romney will win the election.
Sunday, October 14, 2012
Be Careful What You Wish For
President Obama regularly claims that the American people should give him more time to fix our economy because he was handed such a gigantic economic mess. He likes to claim that he inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression.
Well, in addition to his claims making him sound like a whiner, they may be demonstrably wrong, as well.
This blog post offers an opposing view.
Moreover as Lloyd Tackitt (via Instapundit) notes, Obama asked for the job: “Obama didn’t inherit a bad economy, he applied for the job of fixing it. He literally begged to get his hands on it so he could fix it. He ran a competitive campaign to get the job of fixing it and shouted about how bad of a condition it was in. Now he twists it so that it sounds like it was something dumped on him he didn’t really want. He has gone from bragging that only he could fix it, to whining that it was worse than he expected. Why is it that no one calls him out on this? I haven’t heard even the most conservative of pundits call him on this.”
I agree. Obama asked for the chance. We gave it to him. He failed.
Next contestant!
Well, in addition to his claims making him sound like a whiner, they may be demonstrably wrong, as well.
This blog post offers an opposing view.
Moreover as Lloyd Tackitt (via Instapundit) notes, Obama asked for the job: “Obama didn’t inherit a bad economy, he applied for the job of fixing it. He literally begged to get his hands on it so he could fix it. He ran a competitive campaign to get the job of fixing it and shouted about how bad of a condition it was in. Now he twists it so that it sounds like it was something dumped on him he didn’t really want. He has gone from bragging that only he could fix it, to whining that it was worse than he expected. Why is it that no one calls him out on this? I haven’t heard even the most conservative of pundits call him on this.”
I agree. Obama asked for the chance. We gave it to him. He failed.
Next contestant!
Steyn on Benghazi and Big Bird
Mark Steyn penned this hard-hitting analysis of the Obama administration's double talk on the terror attacks that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three others at our Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
Steyn usually laces his commentary with biting humor. You will note, however, that this piece doesn't include so much of that style. Instead, you'll find that Steyn is rather disgusted with the President and his minions, who really seem to elevate Obama's re-election above all other considerations. Steyn's closing lines say it all. "'Greater love hath no man than this,' quoth the President at Chris Stevens' coffin, 'that a man lay down his life for his friends.' Smaller love hath no man than Obama's, than to lay down his 'friend' for a couple of points in Ohio."
Steyn usually laces his commentary with biting humor. You will note, however, that this piece doesn't include so much of that style. Instead, you'll find that Steyn is rather disgusted with the President and his minions, who really seem to elevate Obama's re-election above all other considerations. Steyn's closing lines say it all. "'Greater love hath no man than this,' quoth the President at Chris Stevens' coffin, 'that a man lay down his life for his friends.' Smaller love hath no man than Obama's, than to lay down his 'friend' for a couple of points in Ohio."
Friday, October 12, 2012
I Love Roast Beef
That's the answer to the question "What Is Your Dog Thinking" posed in this article by Anne Murphy Paul. At least, that's the answer in the case of my Pomeranian, Cloe.
The article is interesting and I was surprised to learn that dogs actually understand a lot more than I ever realized. Until I read this piece, I was a subscriber to the Fr. Guido Sarducci school of dog behavior. He famously said, "when a dog licca you hand, you think he like you. Actually, he just wanna the salt".
The article is interesting and I was surprised to learn that dogs actually understand a lot more than I ever realized. Until I read this piece, I was a subscriber to the Fr. Guido Sarducci school of dog behavior. He famously said, "when a dog licca you hand, you think he like you. Actually, he just wanna the salt".
Don't Mess With Texas
As many people know, Texas is one of a handful of states where the economy is booming, while California is one of too many which seem to be limping towards bankruptcy. Dallas Federal Reserve President Richard Fisher explains the difference with this story:
"The governor of California is jogging with his dog along a nature trail. A coyote jumps out and attacks the governor's dog, then bites the governor. The governor starts to intervene, but reflects upon the movie Bambi and then realizes he should stop because the coyote is only doing what is natural.
He calls animal control. Animal control captures the coyote and bills the state $200 for testing it for diseases and $500 for relocating it. He calls a veterinarian. The vet collects the dead dog and bills the state $200 for testing it for diseases. The governor goes to the hospital and spends $3,500 getting checked for diseases from the coyote and getting his bite wound bandaged.
The running trail gets shut down for six months while the California Fish and Game Department conducts a $100,000 survey to make sure the area is now free of dangerous animals. The governor spends $50,000 in state funds implementing a 'coyote awareness program' for residents of the area. The Legislature spends $2 million to study how to better treat rabies and how to permanently eradicate the disease throughout the world.
The governor's security agent is fired for not stopping the attack. The state spends $150,000 to hire and train a new agent with additional special training, re: the nature of coyotes. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) protests the coyote's relocation and files a $5 million suit against the state.
The governor of Texas is jogging with his dog along a nature trail. A coyote jumps out and tries to attack him and his dog. The governor shoots the coyote with his state-issued pistol and keeps jogging.
The governor spent 50 cents on a .380-caliber, hollow-point cartridge. Buzzards ate the dead coyote.
And that, my friends, is why California is broke and Texas is not."
In fact, this story pretty much encapsulates the choice facing Americans on Election Day. We must choose between the Statists who believe in Government solutions to all problems or Free Market advocates who believe individual and market choices should guide us.
I'm going for Texas.
I'm going for Texas.
Second Thoughts
In the previous post, I indicated my belief that Biden won the debate last night. As noted by the post-debate polling, however, it appears that a lot of people actually thought Ryan won. I initially thought that was surprising, but upon further consideration, this may bode well for the Romney-Ryan ticket.
In past years, after watching debates I often found that polling results often differed from my view of the debater's performances. At this point, I have to assume that the victor is in the eye of the beholder. That is to say, we tend to think our guy won whenever its a close call. If so, these early polls could indicate a small but clear majority of the American electorate favors Romney-Ryan.
Moreover, if this idea is correct, it really underscores how well Romney did versus Obama in the first debate. In that one, it was an almost universal verdict for Romney; only the hardest of partisans saw it differently. Also, this means that Romney has a real chance to take a choke hold on the election with a fair to good performance next week. He won't have to do as much as last time, whereas, for Obama, it may be do or die.
In past years, after watching debates I often found that polling results often differed from my view of the debater's performances. At this point, I have to assume that the victor is in the eye of the beholder. That is to say, we tend to think our guy won whenever its a close call. If so, these early polls could indicate a small but clear majority of the American electorate favors Romney-Ryan.
Moreover, if this idea is correct, it really underscores how well Romney did versus Obama in the first debate. In that one, it was an almost universal verdict for Romney; only the hardest of partisans saw it differently. Also, this means that Romney has a real chance to take a choke hold on the election with a fair to good performance next week. He won't have to do as much as last time, whereas, for Obama, it may be do or die.
Turnabout Is Fair Play
Round two goes to the Democrats.
Joe Biden was energetic, rude, forceful and condescending. Paul Ryan was polite and wonkish...some might say wimpish. Both men made policy points, but Biden dominated the debate. He had help from the moderator, who, at times, also seemed to be debating Ryan.
But Ryan can't blame anyone but himself. He let Biden walk all over him. He was too deferential in my mind and seemed fixed on making pre-planned points.
Some comment on the debate said that Biden's smirking and condescension might have played badly at home. Maybe, but for my money, Biden got the nod. It may not make too much difference, since many may have been watching baseball or football tonight. The GOP should probably hope sports won out.
UPDATE: Interesting insta-poll results. Maybe cool, calm, collected was better than I gave credit for.
CNN/ORC--Registered voters: Won debate, Ryan 48%-Biden 44% (+/-5%)....More likeable, Ryan 53%-Biden 43%
AP POLL: Won debate, Ryan 51%-Biden 43%
CNBC POLL: Won debate, Ryan 56%-Biden 36%
CBS POLL: Won debate, Biden 50%-Ryan 31%
Joe Biden was energetic, rude, forceful and condescending. Paul Ryan was polite and wonkish...some might say wimpish. Both men made policy points, but Biden dominated the debate. He had help from the moderator, who, at times, also seemed to be debating Ryan.
But Ryan can't blame anyone but himself. He let Biden walk all over him. He was too deferential in my mind and seemed fixed on making pre-planned points.
Some comment on the debate said that Biden's smirking and condescension might have played badly at home. Maybe, but for my money, Biden got the nod. It may not make too much difference, since many may have been watching baseball or football tonight. The GOP should probably hope sports won out.
UPDATE: Interesting insta-poll results. Maybe cool, calm, collected was better than I gave credit for.
CNN/ORC--Registered voters: Won debate, Ryan 48%-Biden 44% (+/-5%)....More likeable, Ryan 53%-Biden 43%
AP POLL: Won debate, Ryan 51%-Biden 43%
CNBC POLL: Won debate, Ryan 56%-Biden 36%
CBS POLL: Won debate, Biden 50%-Ryan 31%
Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Note To Romney, GOP...Don't Get Cocky
While its just about unanimous across the political spectrum that Romney cleaned the President's clock in tonight's debate, I sure hope that nobody in Romney's camp thinks the election was won tonight.
It was a great start. I'm sure that this was the first time many millions of Americans got an unfiltered look at Romney. They had to be impressed with his knowledge and demeanor. Moreover, if all they ever knew about Romney had come from the MSM or the Obama campaign, they must be perplexed that he is nothing like the heartless aristocrat they had heard about.
Still, Obama's palace guard in the media will start spinning the story in some way. Also, you may recall that in 2004, Kerry beat up George W. Bush pretty badly in their first debate. Bush did much better later. Of course, he was helped by the whipping Dick Cheney gave to John Edwards in the VP debate. Obama probably should not count on Joe Biden taking out Paul Ryan.
Romney needs to know that Obama will be out for blood next time. Surely, Obama will be far better prepared. He will challenge Romney on a number of points and Romney should expect to take shots about his "inappropriate" criticism of the embassy attacks and his 47% comments. Romney needs to repeat this steady, assertive performance a couple more times. If he can, he may well become President. If he tries to coast, he'll be an also ran.
It was a great start. I'm sure that this was the first time many millions of Americans got an unfiltered look at Romney. They had to be impressed with his knowledge and demeanor. Moreover, if all they ever knew about Romney had come from the MSM or the Obama campaign, they must be perplexed that he is nothing like the heartless aristocrat they had heard about.
Still, Obama's palace guard in the media will start spinning the story in some way. Also, you may recall that in 2004, Kerry beat up George W. Bush pretty badly in their first debate. Bush did much better later. Of course, he was helped by the whipping Dick Cheney gave to John Edwards in the VP debate. Obama probably should not count on Joe Biden taking out Paul Ryan.
Romney needs to know that Obama will be out for blood next time. Surely, Obama will be far better prepared. He will challenge Romney on a number of points and Romney should expect to take shots about his "inappropriate" criticism of the embassy attacks and his 47% comments. Romney needs to repeat this steady, assertive performance a couple more times. If he can, he may well become President. If he tries to coast, he'll be an also ran.
Romney 1---Obama 0
Debate number one went to Mitt Romney by a knockout.
I'm a partisan, but anyone who watched this had to have the same opinion. In fact, a number of liberal commentators were stunned by the President's poor showing. Chris Matthews was almost apoplectic in his view that Obama was weak tonight.
For me, the thing I noted was the vast difference in knowledge about economic matters. Romney was in command of facts and economic principles. The President had only his talking points. He clearly does not have a real grasp on economics. If the average guy watched this, there was a clear contrast in competence.
I'm a partisan, but anyone who watched this had to have the same opinion. In fact, a number of liberal commentators were stunned by the President's poor showing. Chris Matthews was almost apoplectic in his view that Obama was weak tonight.
For me, the thing I noted was the vast difference in knowledge about economic matters. Romney was in command of facts and economic principles. The President had only his talking points. He clearly does not have a real grasp on economics. If the average guy watched this, there was a clear contrast in competence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
