Benghazi looms large

Libya Attack hurts Obama

It seems that the attack in Libya is complicating President Obama’s reelection bid.  It appears to be a two-fer for the Romney campaign as it shows a weakness in the president’s foreign policy and is developing into a first rate scandal.

Obama’s chickens are coming home to roost

Talk about chickens coming home to roost.  Talk about the Mother ofAll Fiascos.  It's the revenge of Osama bin Laden from the bottom of the ocean, and the message is plain: al-Qaeda is very much alive, and America is a paper tiger.

The Middle East is beginning to fall apart -- Iran just sent a spy drone over Israel's sensitive defense installations, and the IDF waited hours to react; Turkey forced down a Syrian arms plane, and al-Qaeda's Al Zawahiri openly assaulted the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi in a six-hour attack, working through al-Qaeda in the Maghreb (AQIM), while the glorious Libyan friends did nothing as our ambassador was being raped and murdered.  The guards called for help, and nobody responded.  A police car fled the scene.  The other ten cop cars requested by the consulate never showed up.

Another bad sign for Obama

It appears the crowds at Romney events aresurging. 

Romney Ad Strategy

Ad purchases in the presidential race doubled or in some cases tripled last week in swing states such as Colorado, Florida, Iowa and Virginia, tracking data show. The surge is being driven by Romney and well-funded allies, who decided against running more ads earlier in the campaign in favor of a big bang at the end.

It appears after letting Obama spend 28% more on ads from the convention through September, Romney has opened his campaign wallet and is flooding the market with his ads.  And it appears to be working as the polls show him surging.

Romney now leads in Florida and New Hampshire

It appears the Democrats attack on Romney/Ryan Medicare proposal isn’t working as they lead among Florida’s over 50 population by 54-42.  I’m thinking that SCOTUS’s decision to not strike down Obamacare is turning out to be a benefit for the Republicans.  

Hispanics in Florida abandoning Obama

It appears part of the reason Romney is moving ahead in Florida is a shift in Hispanic support. 

In September Obama led among Hispanic voters 52%-43%.  In October Romney leads 46%-44%.  There are 2 million Hispanic voters in Florida so this amounts to a switch of 220,000 voters.  

Will it be a blowout?

A lot of talk has been bandied about over the so-called Bradley Effect, the theory that a number of California voters said they were going to vote for Tom Bradley — the longtime Los Angeles mayor — for governor of that state in a 1982 election because he was African-American, but really voted for his opponent who won.

This theory has been debunked and, frankly, I have no idea of its veracity. More importantly, however, I believe it is passé. Fewer than ever are interested in the color of Obama’s skin (well, maybe Al Sharpton and his claque) or — for that matter — in Mitt Romney’s religion. We have far, far more pressing issues in front of us at this moment.

For that reason, I think the number who vote for Romney/Ryan and then tell no one (at least in the short run) will be significant, so significant that this election may explode and be closer to a blowout than anyone, save a few, had expected.

Everyone says this will be a close election.  I don’t think so.  History shows us that the economy that we have will insure that Obama won’t get a second term and it won’t be close.  Romney will win by at least as much as Obama won by in 2008.

How Liberal’s think

Just for fun, I Googled the words "Selfish Republicans."  The query returned 4,240,000 hits.  They weren't pretty.  Evidently, a major GOP goal is to impose selfishness on the American people.  I learned that we favor the rich and the powerful.  Worse, we are trying to starve everyone. We are soulless, vicious, and degraded.  I had no idea we were this bad.

I know we like to keep our money away from the IRS.  I got that.  We don't like to be taxed.  We are fanatics about that.  We all know the mantra -- government bad, private sector good.  But why does that make us selfish?  Why does that make us soulless?  Why does it make us want to starve little children?  In fact, a similar simple Google search would show that red states give more to charities than blue ones.

Then, the other day, I am listening to Rush, and he says, "Liberals think taxes are charity!" -- and suddenly it all makes sense.  Liberals think that by attacking taxes, we are attacking charitable giving.  When we try to cut taxes, they see us trying to cut charity payments.  When we say, "Read my lips: no new taxes!," liberals hear "read my lips, no new charities!"  They think we are sticking it to the kids by not paying the IRS!

Inside the Liberal Mind

Mike Gallagher has recently written a new book, 50 Things Liberals Love to Hate.  This book is both humorous and informative, written by someone who has been a radio talk show host for over thirty years.  Included in his rundown are Walmart, steakhouses, McDonalds, flag pins, football, the Second Amendment, success, freeways, the military, and the Founding Fathers.  American Thinker interviewed Gallagher about this year's election and his book.

What was very interesting was Gallagher’s take on Liberal’s hatred for success.  It seems particularly timely and revealing realizing the absolute hatred the left has for Mitt Romney.

The VP Debate

Biden's performance was beyond bizarre -- it was unworldly. I'm not a druggie but I don't think a bad trip on acid could have been more unsettling. The moderator, Martha Raddatz, was equally as dreadful. I had to keep rechecking the scorecard to remind myself who it was that had actually signed up to debate Ryan. 

I thought Ryan played it very well, despite what you're hearing in the mainstream media and from many on our side. Sure, Ryan could have interrupted Biden's insane ravings with the truth -- but then why bother? 

Biden enlightens the world

To hear Mr. Biden tell it, the Obama Administration now has a new red line on Iran. The mullahs can enrich as much uranium as they wish as long as they "don't have something to put it in." This isn't the red line Israel's Bibi Netanyahu had in mind during his recent speech before the United Nations. Nor are Turkey, Saudi Arabia and others looking for proof of an Iranian ICBM before they decide to go nuclear themselves. Iran becomes a regional nuclear power when it demonstrates its ability to get the bomb at almost a moment's notice, which is when it has developed enough fuel for it.

The Veep made a spirited case as well for doing nothing in Syria—no "no fly" zones, direct arms supplies to the rebels, or any U.S. political lead in an intervention. "If, in fact, it blows up and the wrong people gain control, it's going to have impact on the entire region, causing potentially regional wars," he said of Syria. News stories suggest this is happening already without any U.S. involvement, as the Syrian war pulls in Iraq, Lebanon and Turkey. 

Mr. Biden appeared to preview another Obama policy shift on Afghanistan. With a 2014 deadline to transition the security lead to the Kabul government, the discussion will shift to how large the American military footprint will be afterward—with up to 30,000 U.S. troops left behind to ensure the Taliban don't overrun Kabul again. 

But Mr. Biden said something different: "We are leaving in 2014, period, and in the process we're going to be saving over the next 10 years another $800 billion." He added that Afghan forces are ready to defend the country themselves and lead the fight in the difficult east, another piece of intelligence that's news to us.

Either these are a bunch of gaffes by the VP, or Obama needs to explain the changes in our foreign policy.  We are leaving in 2014 period made for a great sound bite, but lousy policy. 

Clint Eastwood’s perceptive speech at the RNC

Clint didn’t just predict Obama’s behavior at the first debate (an empty chair), but also mentioned Joe Biden’s performance at the VP debate.  Clint said: 

Just kind of a grin with a body behind it.

Politicizing Benghazi

'The entire reason that this has become the political topic it is is because of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan."

So said Stephanie Cutter, President Obama's deputy campaign manager, speaking on CNN about an armed attack on the 9/11 anniversary that left a U.S. Consulate a smoking ruin and killed four diplomatic staff, including the first American ambassador to be murdered in a third of a century.

To discuss this event is apparently to "politicize" it and to distract from the real issues the American people are concerned about. For example, Obama spokeswoman Jen Psaki, speaking on board Air Force One on Thursday:

"There's only one candidate in this race who is going to continue to fight for Big Bird and Elmo, and he is riding on this plane."

More blame and childish crying about the other side being “unfair.”  Obama is reduced to this.  Mark Steyn is devastating in this column.

Obamacare is Constitutional

What’s New Today

Story #1 is the story that Obamacare was found Constitutional (with just a little bit of rewriting by SCOTUS).  #2 looks at the effect of the decision to keep Obamacare.  #3 in the meantime shows the Eric Holder was found in contempt of congress with 17 Democrats joining the Republicans.  #4 talks about the cuts in defense.  #5 has three graphs demonstrating how the Dodd Frank financial reform bill evidently hurt the recovery.  #6 looks at the difference in coverage of campaign fund raising from 2008 to 2012.  #7 reviews how the courts have sided with Florida in purging its lists of illegal aliens.  

Today’s Thoughts

The surprise ruling that Obamacare is Constitutional because the  mandate is actually a tax does have a silver lining.  Tax bills cannot be filibustered in the Senate.  

In another thought in view of President Obama telling ICE not to deport a certain group of illegals, can President Romney tell the IRS not to collect this tax?  

Here’s a good question about Fast and Furious.  What was putting 2,500 untraceable guns in the hands of Mexican drug dealers was supposed to accomplish?  Could that be what the Justice Department is hiding?


1.  Obamacare stands:  Conservatives scratch their heads

Artur Davis was the only member of the Congressional Black Caucus to oppose Obamacare in 2010. Later that year, the four-term Democrat lost a primary in Alabama for governor in part on his opposition to the law. Since then, Davis has moved to the right, and even went so far as to join the Republican party last month. The Harvard Law School graduate and former civil-rights lawyer’s reaction to the Supreme Court’s ruling is stinging. He thinks the Court gave in to elite opinion that claimed the court’s legitimacy would be hurt if Obamacare were overturned.

He wrote in Politico’s Arena:

John Roberts’ surprise defection is a policy victory for Barack Obama that is worth no votes: just as Democrats miscalculated in 2010 by assuming that the passage of the healthcare law would prove that they could get things done, they are drawing the wrong lesson today if they assume a court’s vindication of an unpopular law will somehow validate the first Obama term.  The hostility to Obamacare among independents and swing voters is based on the cold fact that precious few of them believe it has done a thing to lower their premiums or improve their coverage, and that won’t change.

But there is a larger story: this result shows the left’s continuing capacity to shape elite opinion by marginalizing positions that roughly half the country holds. Just as the left has caricatured opposition to same-sex marriage and abortion as retrograde and extreme, it just pulled off the same feat in the context of Obamacare: the case was made, and Roberts bought it, that a Court that has struck down 169 congressional statutes would somehow be dangerously activist if it added a 170th one to the mix. Its an undemocratic, disingenuous sleight of hand that the left is practicing, but it is winning: the cost is that it only widens the gap between Middle America and the elite.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/304278/former-dem-artur-davis-john-roberts-caved-elite-opinion-john-fund

This was a surprise and we shouldn’t make light of it.  It is a victory of Obama.  But the statement above shows that it isn’t an unmitigated victory. 

2.  SCOTUS’s ruling and the effect on Freedom

I know it doesn’t look like it at first glance, but it really is (a victory for limited government). When this legislative atrocity first passed, it was assumed by most people that the Commerce Clause had rendered the Ninth and Tenth Amendments dead letters, per Wockard, and that there really were no limits to federal power. A few lonely voices (particularly Randy Barnett) argued that in fact there were such limits, and that this bill exceeded them. He was scoffed at by many, but those same people were shocked when the court actually took that argument seriously a few months ago. And today, a 5-4 majority of the court, including the Chief Justice, declared that in fact those limits exist and that ObamaCare did indeed transgress them. The bill was allowed to stand only because Justice Roberts declared that it passed constitutional muster under the Congress’s ability to tax (presumably under Article I, Section 8), and that while it had been fraudulently passed (that’s why the president had to lie about it being a tax — he knew that if he admitted it, he would not only lose whatever “moderate” support he had for it, but that he would be going back on his promise not to raise taxes on the middle class), that didn’t make it unconstitutional. Here is a key phrase from his opinion: “It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.” 

The nation made a terrible political choice in 2008. It started to fix it in 2010, largely driven by this monstrosity. We have another chance in November to fix it once and for all, with a new president and Senate, and I suspect that’s going to happen. But going forward, future courts will recognize that the Commerce Clause is not a get-out-of-jail-free card for any tyrannical thing that the federal government chooses to do. If we want to continue to rein it in, an amendment of the taxing clause might be useful going forward.

http://www.transterrestrial.com/?p=43179

An interesting look at what happened today and one that is hopeful.  It is now time to repeal Obamacare 


3.  Holder held “in contempt” of Congress

The House on Thursday cited Attorney General Eric Holder for contempt of Congress in a historic vote weighted with political significance, though it does little to break the stalemate over his decision to withhold documents over the Justice Department’s actions in a botched gun-walking operation.
The 256-67 vote amounted to a political spanking for Mr. Holder and President Obama, and 17 Democrats joined with Republicans in demanding the documents be released. Most Democrats, however, walked out in protest of the vote.

It marks the first time an attorney general has been held in contempt by a chamber.

But the White House dismissed the proceedings as a sideshow, and the vote does nothing to break the impasse, though it further poisoned feelings in an already bitterly divided chamber.

“No Justice Department is above the law, and no Justice Department is above the Constitution,” said House Speaker John Boehner, Ohio Republican.

Democrats pleaded with the Republicans to slow down the proceedings, saying the oversight committee, led by Chairman Darrell Issa, California Republican, has done a shoddy job in putting together its investigation.
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas Democrat, even introduced a resolution demanding that the House reprimand Mr. Issa for partisanship and accusing him of having “engaged in a witch hunt.”

Many Democrats walked out of the contempt vote in protest, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, said the vote was a black eye for the Republicans….

http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2012/06/28/house-votes-ag-eric-holder-in-contempt/

Sometimes you have to think that Nancy Pelosi is suffering from dementia.  This is a black eye, but it is a black eye for the attorney general.


4. Defense Cuts and the Ramifications 

Colorado's wildfire has exploded into an "epic firestorm," in the words of Colorado Springs fire chief Richard Brown. Over 30,000 people have evacuated, and already hundreds of homes have been consumed. Ironically, the U.S. Air Force Academy has also been evacuated, at the very time that Colorado desperately needs more Air Force C-130s to fight the massive fire.

A C-130 fitted with the Modular Airborne FireFighting System (MAFFS) can drop 3,000 gallons of fire-retardant material in 5 seconds, and reload in just 15 minutes. This tempo is crucial to containing wildfires like the one devastating Colorado Springs. However, of a current fleet of nearly 380 C-130s, only eight can be fitted with the MAFFS—and four of them are already in the skies over Colorado. With another fire looming in the north of the state, there is no excess capacity to help protect civilian areas. That means thousands of exhausted firefighters on the ground are without enough of the crucial support they need to control the fires.

All this raises concerns about President Obama’s defense budget, which cuts 65 C-130s from the fleet over the next four years. While that will leave 318 C-130s, the demands on the fleet are not shrinking in Afghanistan or other places. Nor did the Air Force have much choice in the matter…

http://www.weeklystandard.com/print/blogs/colorados-epic-firestorm-reveals-danger-air-force-cuts_647897.html

It seems the Democrats willingness to cut defense has some other ramifications as well.

5.  How Obama’s Financial Reform Crashed the Recovery

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2012/06/3-graphs-how-obamas-financial-reform.html

The three graphs are impressive in making this point.


6.  2008 vs 2012:  Things have Changed for the Left

What a difference four years make. Around this time in 2008, Sen. Barack Obama was well on his way to shattering every campaign fundraising record on the books. Before his campaign was over, the great reformer from Chicago decided public campaign financing wasn't so great after all — and he passed it up in favor of accepting almost three-quarters of a billion dollars in contributions.

But for a handful of muted good-government voices, the entire political left celebrated Obama's fundraising as proof of his extraordinary support and mass appeal. When it was over, the president-elect outspent his political opponent, John McCain, by more than 3-to-1.

Fast forward to 2012 and Mitt Romney's first month of out-fundraising the president, notwithstanding the fact that Obama has spent more time fundraising, by a factor of two or more, than any incumbent president in history. All of a sudden, the news is awash in the left's concerns about unregulated campaign fundraising.

Twice in the past week, in fact, The New York Times editorial page singled out Republican fundraising efforts as a serious threat to our democracy.

In the more sanctimonious of its two editorials, the Times railed against Sheldon Adelson, a wealthy casino owner who gave $20 million to Newt Gingrich in his unsuccessful bid to capture the Republican nomination and now has pledged millions more for the Romney campaign effort.

Apparently blind to its own reporting that Adelson's money did virtually nothing to help Gingrich, the Times is now in a state of panic that Adelson's money could upset the balance of the fall campaign. Even worse — for the Times — the editors wrote that Adelson was “attempting to advance his personal, ideological and financial agenda, which is wildly at odds with the nation's needs.”..

http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20120628/COLUMN/120629869/1021&parentprofile=1061

It appears the NYT doesn’t have any real principles except they want the left to win and whatever helps that is what they will come out for.

7.  Court Okays Florida Purging of voter rolls

A federal judge has upheld the legality of Florida’s purge of non-citizens from voting rolls, denying the Obama administration’s request for a halt to the program, which could handicap Obama’s performance in Florida.

The Orlando Sentinel reports:

The Justice Department had asked for a restraining order, arguing that the program attempting to remove 2,600 non-citizens from the voter rolls violated federal voting law that prohibits the systemic removal of voters 90 days before an election.

U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle said that, according to his reading of the law, the 90-day provision did not apply to removing non-citizens from the rolls….

http://freebeacon.com/court-oks-removing-non-citizens-from-rolls/

Another reason Obama must be defeated. 

No good news for Obama

Maxine Waters: The Real Story


Queen of the poverty pimps Maxine Waters must so wish that Obama were a whole white man. Democrat or not, if Obama were white, Waters would be heaping all the blame on those frail little shoulders of his. But because Obama has been presented as "authentically black," WATERS WAS RECENTLY FORCED TO STOP SHORT OF CONDEMNING HIM. INSTEAD, SHE UNLEASHED ON THE CLOSEST WHITE ITEM SHE COULD FIND: THE TEA PARTY.

Anything to keep her ignorant followers from actually thinking about where to place the blame.

Maxine Waters has held dominion over the black people of Watts, CA for over twenty years, and Watts is worse now than it was when she began representing them. This is despite Waters' and others in the Congressional Black Caucus' $17T War on Poverty dating back to the Great Society -- the time when black pimps voted for the RACIST DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT LBJ, WHO SAID TO "GIVE THEM [UPPITY NEGROES] JUST ENOUGH TO GET BY, BUT NOT ENOUGH TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE."

TELLING THE TEA PARTY TO "GO TO HELL" WAS THE EASY APPLAUSE LINE FOR WATERS. It gave her relief, approval. She returned to her mansion, and her constituents remain high from their hit of the political crack of hatred.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/08/maxine_waters_needs_a_mirror.html

Having Maxine say on a number of occasions, she’s not afraid and then she makes some outlandish statement about someone or some group that she disagrees with.  In case she doesn’t understand this is not “speaking truth to power” rather it is “pandering to her constituents. 

Bad News in the Sunshine State for BHO

… IN THE MAGELLAN SAMPLE, DEMOCRATS HAVE A THREE-POINT EDGE AT 42/39/19, WITH INDEPENDENTS OBVIOUSLY UNDERSAMPLED. That model assumes Democrats turn out in stronger numbers in 2012 than they did in 2008, which seems highly unlikely for an incumbent with 37/57 re-elect and 40/55 favorability numbers.

If he's hoping for help with independents, he can forget it. The underrepresentation of independents in this survey probably helped Obama with these numbers rather than hurt him. His FAVORABILITY AMONG INDIES IS 35/53, WORSE THAN THE OVERALL NUMBER. Obama's job approval among indies is 37/56, just about the same as the overall number.

Even with the somewhat-friendly sampling, OBAMA LOSES ALL THREE HEAD-TO-HEAD MATCHUPS POSED BY MAGELLAN. MITT ROMNEY BEATS OBAMA BY TEN POINTS, 49/39, AND RICK PERRY BEATS HIM BY 7 AT 46/39. OBAMA ONLY GETS INTO THE 40S AGAINST MICHELE BACHMANN, who still edges him by a single point, 43/42. Romney wins an eleven-point margin among the undersampled independents (44/33) and Perry wins that category by 7 (38/31). Only Bachmann loses the independent vote 33/37 to Obama. Romney is the only Republican to win both men and women (Perry gets edged by a single point, Bachmann down 7), but ALL THREE WIN THE SENIOR VOTE - AND ALL THREE WIN HISPANIC VOTERS BY LANDSLIDE MARGINS.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/08/obamas_horrible_florida_numbers.html

With numbers like these, it will take a miracle for Obama to take Florida.

Most Voters in New Jersey say No To Obama’s Reelection

THE MAJORITY OF VOTERS IN NEW JERSEY SAY PRESIDENT OBAMA DOES NOT DESERVE A SECOND TERM, ACCORDING TO A NEW RUTGERS POLL.

Only 43 percent of New Jersey voters in the poll said Obama deserves to be reelected, while 47 PERCENT SAID HE DESERVES TO BE VOTED OUT OF OFFICE.

Those findings are a troubling sign for Obama, since New Jersey has traditionally been a stronghold for Democrats. IN AN EARLIER RUTGERS POLL TAKEN IN FEBRUARY, ONLY 39 PERCENT OF NEW JERSEY VOTERS SAID HE DID NOT DESERVE REELECTION.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/178167-poll-majority-of-nj-voters-say-obama-doesnt-deserve-reelection?utm_campaign=briefingroom&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitterfeed

Things are really looking bad when the Democrats have to worry about taking New Jersey. 

Who can beat Obama?

On tonight's edition of Hardball, fill-in-host Ron Reagan posed a question about the unelectabilty of the current crop of Republican candidates to Charlie Cook, a non recognized and non partisian political analyst for MSNBC. Cook notes that a "placebo" Republican nominee would stand an "excellent" chance at beating President Obama in the general election.

HOST:

Charlie, let me start with you. It seems to me, WHEN I LOOK AT THE REPUBLICAN FIELD, THAT NONE OF THEM ARE ACTUALLY ELECTABLE.

COOK:

The thing is, I THINK A PLACEBO WOULD HAVE AN EXCELLENT CHANCE OF WINNING. I think this is the Republicans race to lose. You can't nominate a placebo, you have to nominate a real person and whether who they nominate can do as well as a placebo.

http://nation.foxnews.com/president-obama/2011/08/24/charlie-cook-placebo-would-beat-obama-right-now

That response was not what the host was looking for, but his premise is one the left is comforting themselves with.  Right now Donald Duck could be BHO. 

One and Done—Obama’s Fate?

According to the latest Gallup survey, the his job approval has dropped to an all time low, with just 38 percent of the 1,500 U.S. adults surveyed saying they approve of the job he is doing as president. And this does not bode well for his prospects to win re-election in 2012.

As Gallup put it, "TEN INCUMBENT PRESIDENTS HAVE SOUGHT RE-ELECTION SINCE WORLD WAR II, AND NONE HAS WON A SECOND TERM WITH FINAL PRE-ELECTION JOB APPROVAL RATINGS BELOW 48 PERCENT. The last two presidents who lost their re-election bids—George H.W. Bush and Jimmy Carter—had job approval ratings in the 30 percent range in the fall of the election year. Thus, Obama's challenge is not only to move his rating back above 40 percent, but also to push it close to or above 50 percent."…

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2011/08/24/obamas-approval-rating-points-to-his-being-a-one-termer

He’s toast. 

Obama and the 'Competency Crisis'

The rising impatience with the leadership of President Obama was epitomized on Aug. 8 in the middle of one of the now-habitual Wall Street roller coasters. HIS SPEECH ON THE ECONOMY WAS 53 MINUTES LATE. WHAT SHOWED ON TV SCREENS WAS AN EMPTY WHITE HOUSE PODIUM, AN IMAGE SUGGESTIVE OF THE ABSENCE OF LEADERSHIP. When the president did speak, the best he could come up with was "We've always been and always will be a triple-A country." The market's response was a Bronx cheer, a drop of another 300 points.

MR. OBAMA SEEMS UNABLE TO GET A FIRM GRIP ON THE TOUGHEST ISSUE FACING HIS PRESIDENCY AND THE COUNTRY—THE ECONOMY. He now asserts he is going to "pivot" to jobs. Now we pivot to jobs? When there are already 25 million Americans who are either unemployed or cannot find full-time work? Does this president not appreciate what is going on?

Fewer Americans are working full-time today than when Mr. Obama took office. WE HAVE LOST OVER 900,000 FULL-TIME JOBS IN THE LAST FOUR MONTHS ALONE, AND LONG-TERM UNEMPLOYMENT IS AT A POST-WORLD WAR II HIGH. The public's faith in his ability to deal with the economy has plunged. As Doyle McManus of the L.A. Times put it, "Can this president persuade voters to let him keep his job when so many have lost theirs?" Even Jimmy Carter didn't plumb the depths of national dissatisfaction revealed in the stunning Gallup poll taken Aug. 11-13. The president's approval rating was only 39% with a mere 26% approving of his handling of the economy...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903327904576526611297517664.html

I think this is the main reason Obama will not win.  People don’t have any faith that this man has the leadership ability needed to solve the problems we face.  In fact, the problems which he campaigned against in 2008 have gotten worse on his watch. 

 Labor going their own way

THE GROWING RIFT BETWEEN LABOR AND THEIR DEMOCRATIC ALLIES WAS ON FULL DISPLAY THURSDAY, as AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka told reporters that labor groups are planning to scale back their involvement with the Democratic Party in advance of the 2012 elections.

GOING FORWARD, TRUMKA SAID, THE LABOR MOVEMENT WILL BUILD UP ITS OWN POLITICAL STRUCTURES AND ORGANIZATIONS RATHER THAN CONTRIBUTE TO AND DEPEND ON THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY’S POLITICAL OPERATION.

“We’re going to use a lot of our money to build structures that work for working people” Trumka said. “You’re going to see us give less money to build structures for others, and more of our money will be used to build our own structure.”

Trumka’s remarks follow the news that the AFL-CIO will set up a so-called super PAC, allowing the nation’s largest labor federation to spend unlimited amounts of money on political activity for next year’s elections and beyond. Trumka confirmed Thursday that the union is moving forward with plans to create the PAC.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/62057.html#ixzz1W3fLmniL

This is disastrous news for the Democrats.