Sunday, June 24, 2012

More problems for the Democrats

What’s New Today

Story #1 tells what we know so far about fast and furious.  #2 money is becoming more of a problem for the Democrats and this story tells you about it.  #3 its only June and already we are hearing the alibis coming from the left.  #4 shows that after alibis the most important thing the Democrats are doing is making things up.  #5 shows how fracking and natural gas is helping the planet and the country.  

Today’s Thoughts
Today marks the 101st golf game by our President.

The latest fund raising letter shows a presidency in panic.  For the first time in modern American history, the incumbent (that's us) will get outspent in a re-election campaign” his fund raising letter starts off with.  

From Rasmussen today:  Romney’s support includes 41% who are certain they will vote for him and seven percent (7%) who are likely to vote for him but could still change their minds. For Obama, those numbers are 35% certain and eight percent (8%) likely.

1.  Fast and Furious

The epic tragedy that is the Fast and Furious scandal plaguing President Obama’s administration rose to high drama this past week. And then, as in the script of a Shakespearean tragedy, came a revealing moment of comic relief.

First the drama.

Fast and Furious involves the murder of a U.S. agent and the deaths of hundreds of Mexicans with guns the Obama administration allowed to illegally “walk” across the border into the hands of murderous Mexican drug cartels.

Arrogant Attorney General Eric Holder, whose crew ran F&F, has been stonewalling congressional investigators for several months. Finally, on Wednesday, they called for a contempt of Congress vote against Holder, which is due this week by the full House.
That same day, President Obama hurled a claim of executive privilege into the investigation. Executive privilege both keeps F&F documents out of the hands of investigators, and pulls His Serene Presence down off his cloud of non-involvement and directly into the F&F fray.

The curtain falls on Wednesday’s dramatic scene with congressional jaws agape and smoke billowing from the impact of Obama’s Jovian thunderbolt; Holder scurries away, wiping his bloody hands with heavily redacted documents.

The curtain rises on Friday: The Fool, the Obama-Biden campaign, displays its latest handiwork — The Obama Event Registry, speaking:..

Fast, Furious, and Fool.  These words all seem to go together.  Stupidity seems to be the hallmark of the 2012 Obama Campaign.

2.  They Pack a Wallop     
For three weeks in May, Republican super-PACs took turns attacking Democratic senator Claire McCaskill in TV ads. Republicans hadn’t held their primary​—​it’s not until August 7​—​but McCaskill wound up trailing all three of the GOP candidates in polls. Now McCaskill, unnerved, is struggling to recover.

That’s what super-PACs can do. When they emerged in 2010 and worked in tandem, they were a critical force in the Republican landslide in the congressional elections. This year they’re playing an even bigger role. The size and reach of their efforts dwarf what they did two years ago.

American Crossroads (AC), the leading super-PAC founded by GOP strategists Karl Rove and Ed Gillespie, has already come to the aid of Mitt Romney, at least tangentially. It has spent $24.6 million on “presidential-level advocacy” since Romney locked up the nomination in April. “Most of the ads have been designed to frame the tax, debt, and health care issues .  .  . with the goal of shifting the policy and legislative conversation two clicks to the right,” says AC’s Jonathan Collegio.

Romney didn’t need much help. His own super-PAC, Restore Our Future, promoted him lavishly in the primaries and is likely to raise $50 million to $100 million for the general election. Meanwhile, fundraising by the Romney campaign itself has surged.

What makes the super-PACs so important are three factors. The first is their extraordinary success in fundraising, especially from big-dollar donors opposed to President Obama. Whether they’ll raise and spend $1 billion in 2012, as Politico says, is uncertain. But they’ll come close. Democratic super-PACs are far behind, embarrassingly so…

Less money is coming in to Obama and it shows.  From the constant fund raising, to begging for any type of contribution, we see how much trouble Obama is in. 

3.  Alibis or racism?

As Barack Obama's lead over Mitt Romney in the polls narrows, and his presumed fundraising advantage seems about to become a disadvantage, it's alibi time for some of his backers.

His problem, they say, is that some voters don't like him because he's black. Or, they don't like his policies because they don't like having a black president.

So, you see, if you don't like Obamacare, it's not because it threatens to take away your health insurance, or to deny coverage for some treatments. It's because you don't like black people.

This sort of thing seems to be getting more frequent, or at least more open. As White House Dossier writer Keith Koffler notes, HBO host Bill Maher accused Internet tyro Matt Drudge of being animated by racism because he highlights anti-Obama stories.

MSNBC's Chris Matthews  asked former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown if House Chairman Darrell Issa's treatment of Attorney General Eric Holder was "ethnic." Brown agreed, and Matthews said some Republicans "talk down to the president and his friends."

There's an obvious problem with the racism alibi. Barack Obama has run for president before, and he won. Voters in 2008 knew he was black. Most of them voted for him. He carried 28 states and won 365 electoral votes

In fact, it would be racists to treat Obama differently than we have our white presidents.  The MSM is definitely guilty of that. 

4.  Romney shipping jobs overseas debunked

On June 21, Washington Post reporter Tom Hamburger wrote the following:

During the nearly 15 years that Romney was actively involved in running Bain, a private equity firm that he founded, it owned companies that were pioneers in the practice of shipping work from the United States to overseas call centers and factories making computer components, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

But so has … the Washington Post! Here is WaPo “fact checker” Glenn Kessler today deflating these claims which also appeared in a campaign commercial for President Obama:

Regarding the outsourcing claims, we have frowned on these before. The Obama campaign rests its case on three examples of Bain-controlled companies sending jobs overseas. But only one of the examples — involving Holson Burns Group — took place when Romney was actively managing Bain Capital.

Regarding the other claims, concerning Canadian electronics maker SMTC Manufacturing and customer service firm Modus Media, the Obama campaign tries to take advantage of a gray area in which Romney had stepped down from Bain — to manage the Salt Lake City Olympics — but had not sold his shares in the firm. We had previously given the Obama campaign Three Pinocchios for such tactics.

The Modus Media case is also not an example of shipping jobs overseas. The company closed one plant in California and transferred the jobs to North Carolina, Washington and Utah. At the same time, it opened an unrelated plant in Mexico. The Obama campaign once trumpeted the fact that we had dinged a conservative Super PAC for making the same leap in logic. …

Be prepared to hear a lot of false stories about Romney. 

5.  Fracking and falling CO2 levels

As activists in Rio and around the world mourned the failure of yet another useless summit to do anything about climate change, good news on the CO2 front was coming from the country greens love to hate: the US.

While Europe has adopted a plethora of expensive laws without any significant effect on CO2 emissions, the US is substantially reducing its emissions even as air pollution levels drop. As a CNN report puts it:  

Despite there being no real effort by Congress to address global warming and America’s longstanding reputation as an energy hog, U.S. carbon dioxide emissions are falling.
The lackluster economy has something to do with it. But it doesn’t fully explain what’s happening. Consider that even factoring in a stronger economy, forecasters see greenhouse gas emissions continuing to fall.

It’s possible the country may meet its pledge to reduce emissions 17% by 2020.

The secret isn’t laws, green activism or regulations (although these do have roles to play). Innovation is the force that is enabling the cut in US carbon emissions. Specifically, the new ways of extracting natural gas that make have driven a natural gas boom in this country and dramatically cut the cost of the cleanest hydrocarbon energy source of them all.

What’s interesting is to compare the US performance with Europe. Europe has done many of the things greens want the US to do, but despite their “virtue” and our “sin”, the US is doing better than Europe at meeting key environmental goals. As CNN puts it:

Europe, by contrast, has seen its energy-sector carbon emissions remain basically flat. This despite the fact that most of Europe operates under a market-based cap-and-trade scheme where emissions are capped at a certain level and companies get tradable credits to emit pollution.

Plus, Europe has significantly higher taxes on energy.

Ignore the greens and innovate, and you will cut carbon. Pay a lot of attention to them, spend a lot of money — and you will keep carbon emissions unchanged.

In reality the greens aren’t looking simply to cut carbon.  They are looking to destroy all carbon based fuel.  The problem is there is nothing to replace it with and keep anything like the society we have today.   

No comments:

Post a Comment