Nixon erased 18 1/2 minutes of tape while Hillary deleted 30,000 emails . Who’s the crook now ?
Nixon erased 18 1/2 minutes of tape while Hillary deleted 30,000 emails . Who’s the crook now ?
” First, some raw facts. In the 2006 midterm elections, 87 percent of Jews voted for Democratic candidates for the House of Representatives. Last week, in the 2014 midterm elections, 66 percent cast ballots for Democrats. That’s a 21-point drop in eight years—and, it might seem, a major cause for celebration among the likes of the Republican Jewish Coalition and philo-Semitic political strategists everywhere.
But while Jewish support for Democrats has definitely declined over the last decade, the context is important. Poll numbers show how people are voting, but it’s more difficult to figure out what they mean for the role of Jews in American politics.
And for such a small group, that’s a big question.
Here are some of the other constituencies that make up 2 percent of the American electorate: customer-service representatives. People who participate in archery and bowhunting. AOL users. Residents of Indiana. So why all the attention?
” The importance of the Jews isn’t their votes,” said Benjamin Ginsberg, a professor of political science at Johns Hopkins University. “They account for a huge share of the activist base of the Democratic Party and account for much of the money available to Democratic candidates. If you are a Republican strategist, it seems fairly obviously that if you can shift Jewish support even a little bit away from the Democrats, it makes the Democratic Party less competitive.” “
” Most of the people the Border Patrol stopped from sneaking into the country last year were from countries other than Mexico, according to agency statistics, a shift that might have provided fodder for politicians leading up to Tuesday’s election.
But they didn’t get much of a chance. The Border Patrol’s annual statistics were posted on the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Web site for about five hours on Oct. 10, then taken down.
Now some are questioning whether that decision was an example of the Obama administration playing politics with public information.
Even before Tuesday, the administration said it was waiting until after the elections to deal with immigration reform so that any losses would not be blamed on the Democrats’ proposal. For some, removing the apprehension statistics — which both parties could use to criticize U.S. immigration laws — was a political move.
“ It worries me that they may have been taken down for purely political reasons,” said Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah). “If the information is ready, it should be made available.”
But Customs and Border Protection spokesman Christopher O’Neil said in an e-mail that the decision to remove the briefly released data had nothing to do with the midterm elections. Rather, he said, it was an effort to provide all of the agency’s statistics — and not just the Border Patrol’s — “in one concise and comprehensive package.”
He said the agency had intended to publish the data by Oct. 31. But administrative delays in gathering statistics by operational elements caused the date to be pushed back several days. Customs and Border Protection now plans to publish before Nov. 15, he wrote. The early release, he said, was due to miscommunication.”
” As President Obama spoke this evening in Wisconsin, the crowd began to file out. Here’s video that captures some folks leaving, even as Obama’s voice can be heard in the background:
Mike Lowe, a political reporter, also made the observation on Twitter. “Some people –not a lot, but some — are leaving as the President is speaking,” wrote Lowe.
Some people –not a lot, but some — are leaving as the President is speaking.pic.twitter.com/KQOp97hrQ6
— Mike Lowe (@MikeLoweReports) October 29, 2014
Obama spoke tonight at a rally for Mary Burke, the Democratic gubernatorial candidate in Wisconsin.
Attendees at a recent campaign event President Obama attended in Maryland also left early a couple weeks ago.”
Thanks to the Weekly Standard
” When writing about politics, it’s all too frequent to use terminology that often obscures more than elucidates. That’s especially true when it comes to the word “wave”—shorthand for a landslide victory for the winning party. I’ve argued before that the likelihood of 2014 being a wave election has been rising, given the president’s consistently low approval ratings and the fact that Republicans are running evenly on the generic ballot (which usually translates into a clear GOP edge) and that the right-track/wrong-track numbers are near historic lows. All these big-picture signs are ominous for the party in power.
But this week, The New York Times‘ Nate Cohn argued that the threat of a Republican wave is subsiding, thanks to red-state Senate Democrats remaining resilient and the declining risk of blue-state seats—such as those in Oregon and Virginia—flipping in a landslide. This, despite the various political forecasters and Senate models (including the NYT‘s own Upshot) showing the likelihood of a Republican takeover increasing over time, with more states emerging in play.
To be fair, a lot of the disagreement stems from semantics—the definition of the word “wave.” Cohn argues that if Republicans merely sweep red-state Democratic seats and perhaps pick off a stray swing seat, it’s not a wave election—even if Republicans net seven seats on their way to the majority. To accomplish that feat, Republicans would need to oust four sitting Democratic senators. Over the last decade, Republicans have defeated only three sitting senators (Tom Daschle in South Dakota, Russ Feingold in Wisconsin, and Blanche Lincoln in Arkansas). Surely, a red-state sweep would signify the conclusion of a political shake-up in the South, where voters are so disgusted with the national Democratic Party that they’re willing to throw out senators who had previously relied on split-ticket voters to win. If a Republican takeover by picking up seven Senate seats isn’t a wave, it’s awfully close.”
” Now new evidenced has surfaced that might just be the nail in the coffin for the Obama administration.
According to House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, an explosive new email reveals that the White House was contacting YouTube owner Google to try and come up with a false narrative for the events that were in progress in Benghazi.
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa said on Thursday that the Obama White House was contacting YouTube owner Google during the Benghazi terrorist attacks, working on the false narrative even before Americans were out of harm’s way and before the intelligence community examined available evidence.
The still classified Obama State Department email, according to Issa, shows that the Obama White House rushed to settle on the false narrative of the anti-Islamic YouTube video instigating the attacks, which was completely at odds with the conclusions reached by reports from the ground.
“ The e-mail shows the White House had hurried to settle on a false narrative — one at odds with the conclusions reached by those on the ground — before Americans were even out of harm’s way or the intelligence community had made an impartial examination of available evidence,” Issa said.
Issa has called for the Obama White House to declassify the email.
According to Issa, one of the items noted in the email stated, “White House is reaching out to U-Tube [sic] to advise ramifications of the posting of the Pastor Jon video.”
Issa scolded current Secretary of State, Democrat John Kerry, for just now turning over a classified version of the email, some 20 months after the attack, while calling on the regime to release a unclassified copy.
Without a question, the White House attempted to cover up this attack to prevent the president from looking foolish during his reelection campaign. This is all the proof that should be needed at this point to solidify the call for impeaching President Obama.”
Conservative Tribune has more
” Jake Tapper of CNN’s “The Lead” had Rep. Trey Gowdy on to
talk about the Benghazi investigationtry to poke holes in any Benghazi investigation.
Tapper played video of the former deputy director of the CIA, Michael Morrell, testifying that the CIA did believe that the video could be involved. He obviously thought that this negated any need for an investigation by Trey Gowdy and the special committee and proceeded to ask Gowdy to comment on the CIA director’s comments.
Trey Gowdy has a great response. But what he says at the end should shock every American. If its truly this bad, then this investigation is going to bring a lot of people down.”
” If you ever wondered how Mitt Romney reacted to his 2012 defeat, you can see it personally in the upcoming documentary Mitt, which will be aired Netflix. The film charts Romney’s rise from 2008-2012.
Greg Whitley, who directed the film, is a close family friend who had exclusive access to Romney for six years. In Mitt, he captures the trials and tribulations experienced on the national campaign scene. It also appears to capture the difficulty candidates’ wives face, with Ann Romney being filmed saying, “I would not want to do this again. It’s just too much.” “
” Environmental causes across the country saw defeat last night as voters from Maine to Colorado rejected anti-fossil fuel policies such as hydraulic fracturing restrictions and tar sands oil import bans.
Anti-fossil groups did see some victories on Tuesday night as three cities in Colorado passed restrictions on fracking and an Ohio city also voted to limit fracking. Other environmentalist attempts to harm the fossil fuel industry across the country, however, were stymied.”
” In the 1920s, Republicans controlled all branches of the government and passed significant laws dramatically reducing immigration. However, that policy success had an unanticipated side effect. Millions of immigrants at the time were routinely going back and forth between the U.S. and their homeland. The new laws eliminated that option, and so they had to make a choice, and many opted for U.S. citizenship. In the 1930s, they became a key part of the New Deal coalition that gave political control to the Democrats for a generation. That certainly was not what the Republicans had in mind.
Today, the chattering class in D.C. is virtually unanimous in declaring that the Democrats have won the political battle over the so-called government shutdown. But it’s hard to see the overheated rhetoric of the past few weeks having a major impact on the midterm elections. Substantive issues like the economy and the president’s health-care law are far more likely to determine the outcome.
That could be a problem for Harry Reid’s team. The Democrats won the current news cycle by lashing themselves ever more tightly to the president’s health-care law.
The “morphine drip” view that the public will get hooked and vote against their own interests is wrong. In fact, implementation of the law may turn out to be the best thing politically for its opponents.”
Illustration by Eric Allie
Published on Oct 10, 2013
” Stefan Molyneux and Veronique du Rugy discuss the government shutdown, the impending collapse of the system, how the election system guarantees that the difficult decisions won’t be made, fear-mongering and the changes that are happening very quickly.
Veronique de Rugy, Ph.D., is a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University and you can read her work at Reason.com here: http://reason.com/people/veronique-de…
Freedomain Radio is 100% funded by viewers like you. Please support the show by signing up for a monthly subscription or making a one time donation at: http://www.fdrurl.com/donate
Bitcoin Address: 1Fd8RuZqJNG4v56rPD1v6rgYptwnHeJRWs
Litecoin Address: LL76SbNek3dT8bv2APZNhWgNv3nHEzAgKT
Get more from Stefan Molyneux and Freedomain Radio including books, podcasts and other info at: http://www.freedomainradio.com
Freedomain Radio Facebook: http://www.fdrurl.com/fb
Freedomain Radio Twitter: https://twitter.com/freedomainradio
Freedomain Radio Google+: http://www.fdrurl.com/google
Freedomain Radio LinkedIn: http://www.fdrurl.com/LinkedIn“
” This weekend’s announcement by the former governor of Montana, Brian Schweitzer, that he would not seek that state’s Democratic nomination for Senate represents the latest in a series of favorable developments for Republicans as they seek control of the chamber.
The G.O.P.’s task will not be easy: the party holds 46 seats in the Senate, and the number will very probably be cut to 45 after a special election in New Jersey later this year. That means that they would need to win a net of six contests from Democrats in order to control 51 seats and overcome Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s tiebreaking vote. Two years ago at this time, Republicans faced what seemed to be a promising environment and could have won the Senate by gaining a net of three seats from Democrats and winning the presidency. Instead, Mitt Romney lost to President Obama, and the G.O.P. lost a net of two Senate seats. ”
Posted by John Galt
” As an example, he cited a Washington Post article, in which reporters Zachary A. Goldfarb and Kimberly Kindy described as a “good-government group” the left-wing Democracy 21 which pressured the IRS to scrutinize Tea Party groups, without any consideration that the Tea Party groups believe they, too, are working for good government.
Taranto: “Tea Party organizations conceive of themselves as good-government groups, just as Democracy 21 does. The Post accepts the latter characterization, but not the former, unquestioningly.”
An excerpt from Taranto’s May 20 post, “A Crisis of Authority: The deeper meaning of the Obama scandals.”
….Liberal media bias is an old complaint, but the Obama presidency has given it a new and dangerous form. Never has the prevailing bias of the media been so closely aligned with the ideological aims and political interests of the party in power. The American media remain free and independent, or you would not be reading this column. But to a large extent they have functioned for the past few years as if they were under state control.
“Good-government group” is a misleading designation for another reason. As we noted last week, Democracy 21 is itself a tax-exempt 501(c)(4) corporation. In lobbying the IRS to investigate nonprofits for engaging in political activity, Democracy 21, a nonprofit, was engaging in political activity….”
” Sometimes it is better to show a scandal than to explain it. SHARE this exposure of the Benghazi cover-up!”
” Benghazi is all about President Obama.
There are three issues in the Benghazi matter. The first is whether the administration reacted properly to the growing threat to American diplomats in Libya in the months leading up to Sept. 11. The second is whether the administration reacted properly during the attack itself. And the third is whether the administration covered up its actions in the days, weeks and months after the attack.
Many Republicans have been fixated on the cover-up, mostly because of the obvious falsehood of U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice’s statements in the days after the attack. But by far the most consequential issue in the Benghazi matter is what the administration did during the attack itself. In those hours, American lives were at risk, and there are real questions about whether the U.S. military did everything it could to save them. That is the issue that cuts to the heart of American concerns in the Benghazi matter.”
” Even as the White House strove last week to move beyond questions about the Benghazi attacks of Tuesday, September 11, 2012, fresh evidence emerged that senior Obama administration officials knowingly misled the country about what had happened in the days following the assaults. The Weekly Standard has obtained a timeline briefed by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence detailing the heavy substantive revisions made to the CIA’s talking points, just six weeks before the 2012 presidential election, and additional information about why the changes were made and by whom.
As intelligence officials pieced together the puzzle of events unfolding in Libya, they concluded even before the assaults had ended that al Qaeda-linked terrorists were involved. Senior administration officials, however, sought to obscure the emerging picture and downplay the significance of attacks that killed a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans. The frantic process that produced the changes to the talking points took place over a 24-hour period just one day before Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, made her now-famous appearances on the Sunday television talk shows. The discussions involved senior officials from the State Department, the National Security Council, the CIA, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the White House.”
” Hugo Chavez’s hand-picked successor, Nicolas Maduro, won a razor-thin victory in Sunday’s special presidential election but the opposition candidate refused to accept the result and demanded a full recount.
Maduro’s stunningly close victory followed an often ugly, mudslinging campaign in which the winner promised to carry on Chavez’s self-styled socialist revolution, while challenger Henrique Capriles’ main message was that Chavez put this country with the world’s largest oil reserves on the road to ruin.
Despite the ill feelings, both men sent their supporters home and urged them to refrain from violence.
Maduro, acting president since Chavez’s March 5 death, held a double-digit advantage in opinion polls just two weeks ago, but electoral officials said he got just 50.7 percent of the votes to 49.1 percent for Capriles with nearly all ballots counted.
The margin was about 234,935 votes. Turnout was 78 percent, down from just over 80 percent in the October election that Chavez won by a nearly 11-point margin over Capriles.”
” Guns will be the key issue in 2014, good news for the pro-2nd Amendment Republican Party, which has Democrats backed into a corner in an untenable position on gun control.
Universal background checks are insidious, and the legislation the Senate is considering in April will not only force even secondary gun sales to be done through the auspices of a government representative with a Federal Firearm Licence but will also ban private gun sales and create a national gun registry.
This means it will bar grandpas from passing their favorite rifle to their grandsons and will require the government to create a list of every gun owner and every gun owned in America in order to be enforceable.
Universal background check legislation has made it this deep into the legislative process for one reason only–namely, because these implications have not been explained to the American people. Republicans need to explain these dangers and force Democrats to own gun control in 2014.”
” The Catholic Church will have a pope within “a few days,” predicted Archbishop of Vienna Christoph Schoenborn, a participant in the conclave that opens Tuesday.
Schoenborn said he’s seen a spirit of camaraderie “I’ve rarely experienced” in the week before balloting begins to select a successor to Benedict XVI, who resigned last month, citing health and age, ANSA reported Monday.
“In a few days we will have the new Holy Father,” Schoenborn said.
U.S. Cardinal Timothy Dolan evaded Roman parishioners’ calls for him to succeed Benedict, telling worshipers and the rector of Our Lady of Guadalupe on Monte Mario he hoped to visit the congregation again before he returned to New York.
The 63-year-old archbishop of New York and Washington, D.C., Archbishop Donald Wuerl, 72, are the two U.S. cardinals seen as strong papal candidates. “
” Romney also took a shot at President Obama saying that it kills him that he sees what’s not doing what needs to be done. He accused the president of failing to lead and putting politics ahead of the nation, adding that the president is crisscrossing the country campaigning instead of leading.
It kills me not to be there, not to be in the White House doing what needs to be done. “I don’t see that kind of leadership happening right now. The hardest thing about losing is watching this critical moment, this golden moment slip away with politics.