WOLF: Shaking the Moss off the GOP

 

Massive failure … It’s not that we don’t like Big Government it’s just that we want to be our big government and run it.

And you thought Pres Lincoln had it bad. GOP thy name is failure.

Would you invest in a company with a string of failures as sweeping as the GOP establishment’s? Mitt Romney, John McCain and (It’s his turn) Bob Dole: All are products of the establishment, and all are failed candidates who opened the doors to the Obama and Clinton eras.

Even when establishment candidates do manage to win office — George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush — it’s a stretch to call their presidencies successful. The only undeniably successful Republican president of the modern era — Ronald Reagan — reached the White House by overcoming the opposition of the GOP establishment. Now the Gipper is considered to be among the greatest presidents in American history.

This pattern continues in the Senate. Today’s Republican superstars were yesterday’s GOP primary enemies: Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, Rand Paul and Marco Rubio. Now the Republican establishment hopes you’ll forget that they opposed these men just as they did Reagan.

The GOP establishment does not pick winners. Consider former Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, the establishment’s choice for senator. When primary voters chose Mr. Rubio instead, the contemptible Mr. Crist abandoned the party to run an independent campaign against Mr. Rubio and has now even become a registered Democrat. Never forget that this is the repugnant figure who the GOP insiders supported instead of Mr. Rubio.

Now Karl Rove — the consummate insider — has launched his so-called Conservative Victory Project to protect entrenched Republicans against future Marco Rubios. Imagine that: The man who pushed George W. Bush’s government explosion, including “no bureaucrat left behind” at the Department of Education, the largest expansion of Medicare in the history of the program and the TARP bank bailouts, now wants to choose your candidates.

Read more at washingtontimes.com …

Dr. Milton R. Wolf is a radiologist and a contributor to The Washington Times.

GOP Needs a Good Housecleaning on the Consultant Level

The Online Ads … Compare, see who was out front here, and who was listening to Rove.

This is scandalous. Old school thinking drove right past the opportunity of the future. Who watches TV anymore?

But everyone got a huge pile of money, right? That’s all that matters. That’s all that matters.

Karl Rove: NO CANDIDATE HAS EVER LOST With Numbers Like What Mitt Romney Has Today

Hang tough folks, it ain’t over ’till it’s over. Keep doing what you are doing, it’s working.

Karl Rove told Megyn Kelly today on America Live that no presidential candidate has ever lost an election leading with over 50 percent of likely voters in mid October.

Mitt Romney has 51 percent of likely voters today.

“The Obama campaign has pulled down all of its negative advertising. And is now running virtually all positive ads in the battleground states heralding all the success of the last four years. This is very unusual because they have been constantly beating up on Romney. In recent weeks the president’s negatives have risen and Romney particularly after this debate has moved into a lead. You saw it in the Gallup poll you talked about. Six point lead, 51-45. Yesterday it was 50-46. This is the first time that Romney has hit 50 percent in the Gallup likely voter poll and the president has never hit 50 percent in the likely voter poll. And no candidate who has led in mid-October with 50 percent or more in the likely voter poll has ever gone on to lose.“

Karl Rove told Megyn Kelly today that no presidential candidate has ever lost an election leading in mid-October by over 50 percent with likely voters.

Ohio Poll Analyst: Voter Turnout Modeling Predicts Big Ohio Trouble for Obama

Basically pollsters are using no longer correct numbers in their polls…

“Simply stated, Cuyahoga County has lost enough Democrats and independents since 2008 that, when projected across the state of Ohio, Obama’s big 2008 gains are all gone. Given how drastically voter registration has changed in Cuyahoga County since 2008, it is likely that Romney can carry the state of Ohio, which is quite contrary to what popular media polls are saying.”

That’s the analysis of Clinton Cooper at Election Insights ^[1], an Ohio firm that uses geographic information systems (GIS) and election data to illustrate the political landscape of the electorate.

While most pundits and media outlets are focused on the latest polls, flitting from registered voters to probable voters to undecided voters to disaffected voters to Karl Rove’s trusty whiteboard, Cooper claims the polls are inaccurate and that there’s a more scientific method for determining both voter turnout and the probable outcome of the election. In an exclusive interview with PJ Media, he said that his “simple model estimation shows that with certainty, current polling estimations in Ohio are based on outdated or ill-informed assumptions resulting in wrong conclusions.”

Cooper has been involved in local and regional government and politics for the last 10 years, serving in a policy advisory role for several government agencies and consulting firms in Ohio. He has a master’s degree in city and regional planning from The Ohio State University and 10 years of progressive experience in geographic information systems and statistical modeling. His company, based in northeast Ohio, blends geographic information systems with predictive statistical modeling to help candidates develop and implement winning campaign strategies.

PJ Media has more here

Obama’s Biggest Opponent Is the Truth

Pretty much summarizes everything I have said in the last few weeks… But it a worthwhile read:

Karl Rove has an editorial of note…

Voters expect Mitt Romney to blow the whistle in the debates.

When George Stephanopoulos asked Mitt Romney in a Sept. 14 “Good Morning America” interview what he’s learned about President Obama as a debater, the former Massachusetts governor replied, “I think he’s going to say a lot of things that aren’t accurate.”

If Mr. Obama’s debate performance mirrors his campaign, Mr. Romney’s prediction will be dead on. To get a sense of how comprehensive the president’s assault on the truth has been, consider some of his false claims in recent speeches and ads.

One Obama spot says, “To pay for huge, new tax breaks for millionaires like him, Romney would have to raise taxes on the middle class: $2,000 for a family with children.”

That claim has been thoroughly discredited, including by PolitiFact Virginia and editorials in this newspaper. Mr. Romney, unlike the president, is committed to cutting taxes for everyone, including the middle class.

Another ad says, “As a corporate raider, [Mr. Romney] shipped jobs to China and Mexico.” In response, the Washington Post editorialized, “On just about every level, this ad is misleading, unfair and untrue.” As recently as Sept. 17, Mr. Obama claimed in Ohio that Mr. Romney’s “experience has been owning companies that were called ‘pioneers’ in the business of outsourcing jobs to countries like China.” But that claim, too, is a fabrication.

There is more. An Obama ad aimed at northern Virginia women intones, “Mitt Romney opposes requiring coverage for contraception.” In fact, Mr. Romney opposes the president’s unprecedented assault on religious liberties—in this case, the federal government forcing religious institutions (like church-sponsored hospitals, schools and charities) to provide insurance coverage for contraception in violation of their fundamental moral values and, incidentally, the First Amendment.

Candidates always have disagreements, arguing over the meaning of events or evidence. But Mr. Obama has taken ordinary political differences beyond anything we’ve seen. Every day, it seems, he attempts to disqualify his opponent through deliberate and undeniable falsehoods.

This is only one side of a two-sided coin. The president can’t tell the truth about his own record either.

For example, Mr. Obama said at a Univision Town Hall on Sept. 20 that his biggest failure “is we haven’t gotten comprehensive immigration reform done.” The president then did what is second nature to him: He pinned the blame on Republicans. The problem with this excuse is that the Democrats controlled Congress by huge margins in the first two years of his presidency—and Mr. Obama never introduced an immigration bill or even provided the framework for one.

In the same interview, Mr. Obama claimed that his Justice Department’s botched “Fast and Furious” gunrunning program was “begun under the previous administration.” This time it was ABC’s Jake Tapper correcting the record, pointing out, “it was started in October 2009, nine months into the Obama presidency.”

The most troubling recent example of Mr. Obama’s serial dishonesty is his administration’s effort to deny that the attack on our consulate in Benghazi was a premeditated terrorist assault, as if the truth would somehow tarnish Mr. Obama’s foreign-policy credentials.

Voters expect politicians to stretch the truth. But when the offender is as persistent with mistruths, half-truths and no-truths as Mr. Obama is, voters expect the other candidate to blow the whistle. They want their leaders to show toughness and be competitive. Which brings us back to the coming Oct. 3 debate, to be followed by two others on Oct. 16 and 22.

During these widely watched events, Mr. Romney must call out the president. That is not so easy: Mr. Romney can’t call Mr. Obama a liar; that’s too harsh a word that would backfire. Mr. Romney must instead set the record straight in a presidential tone—firm, respectful, but not deferential. And a dash of humor is worth its weight in gold.

While Mr. Romney must point out the president’s misrepresentations, he can’t take on the role of fact-checker-in-chief. He should deal comprehensively with several of Mr. Obama’s untruths and, having done so, dismiss the rest as more of the same.

By carefully calling into question the president’s veracity, Mr. Romney will have the opportunity to provide context: Mr. Obama doesn’t shoot straight because he can’t defend his record and has no agenda for the future except the status quo, stay the course.

What exactly about the past four years do Americans like? And why would they want four more years like them? Mr. Obama knows how most Americans would answer these questions, which is why he is being so fast and loose with the truth. Mr. Romney’s job is to shine a light on this for voters.

It Was Not the FIlm

No one with a functioning brain would think it was. Anyway…

This is a great ad by American Crossroads putting in perspective Obama’s true priorities:

Our play President. Far more comfortable at playing President, than he is at being President. And the last few days have brought out the utter failure of his uninformed adolescant foreign policy. From no ammo for the guards, to no preparations for disastor on 9/11.

THe most sacred duty of our President, is not playing but protecting the lives of our citizens.

Honey, I Shrunk My Approval Ratings

Writing checks his mouth can’t cash … yet he keeps on talking.

Obama’s approval on the economy now stands at  35% … ues you read that right …35%, according to  — YouGov/Polimetrix poll

Karl Rove writes:

In what will rank as one of the all-time presidential PR disasters, we’re now well over half way through what the White House called “the summer of recovery.” And what a recovery it’s been.

Earlier this month, first-time claims for unemployment hit a nine-month high. The unemployment rate remains at 9.5% and 18.4% of workers are out of a job, can only get part-time work, or have given up looking for a job altogether. Sales of existing homes dropped 27% from June to July, hitting the lowest point since data were first collected in 1999. The Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence Index fell to 50.4 in July, continuing a slide that started in February. And the stock market is down 11% from its peak in April.

All of this has helped shatter public confidence in the president. In early May, Mr. Obama’s approval on the economy in the YouGov/Polimetrix poll was 42%. By mid-August, it was 35%—a frightening number for Democrats less than 70 days from a midterm election. According to this week’s Reuters poll, 72% are “very” worried about jobs and 67% “very concerned” about government spending.

Mr. Obama’s credibility is crumbling, and for good reason: He and his people are saying things people don’t believe. At the start of his summer of recovery road show, the president flatly asserted that last year’s massive stimulus package had “worked.” Vice President Joe Biden, not to be outdone, promised monthly job gains of up to 500,000 and insisted that the recovery’s pace “continues to increase, not decrease” as stimulus spending was “moving into its highest gear.”

It’s slightly surreal. “Who are you going to believe,” as Groucho Marx once said, “me or your own eyes?”

The administration’s claims have collided with reality in other instances as well. Mr. Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers Chair Christina Romer—speaking before the 2009 stimulus was approved—said unemployment would top out at 8% by the third quarter of 2009 and decline to less than 7% by the end of 2010. Even the White House now admits that the unemployment rate will stay at or above 9% through 2011.

The White House also frequently asserts that “between 2.3 million and 2.8 million jobs were either saved or created” by the $620 billion in stimulus money spent by June. Set aside the absurdity of the administration inventing the “saved” category and then pretending it can ascertain, with scientific precision, the number of jobs that have been “saved.” Since the stimulus passed, 2.6 million Americans have lost their jobs and 1.2 million people have given up even looking for work.

More here…

Woodward nails it in his book, when the time comes to decide Obama votes present.

Pelosi: Holder Contempt Vote ‘A Plan’ by GOP to Suppress Voter Rights

Only the genius of Pelosi can tell how the logic works here.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Thursday the vote to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt is “a plan” by Republicans not to investigate Operation Fast and Furious, but to stave off the Justice Department’s efforts to stop voter suppression.

“Contempt of Congress? Contempt of Congress?” Pelosi said during her regular press briefing. “To frivolously use that really important vehicle to undermine the person who’s assigned to stop the voter suppression in our country? I’m telling you this is connected, it is no accident, it is a decision and it is as clear as can be. It’s not only to monopolize his time, it’s to undermine his name.”

If her voice grates on your ears, just skip it … I know my mouse shrieked in horror at the sound.

The girl from stupider … Apparently there is something about the dead U.S. and Mexicans she can’t seem to get. The President cannot exercise Executive power to coverup a crime, Yes muder is a crime. As is the act of enabling it.

Wha, Wha, Wha … Senior Obama Campaign Official: “We’re Going To Be The First Incumbent Outspent”

So we all knew that Romney is raising more money than Obama, and the unions are all tapped out from defending their turf. I ask, who do you believe?

Is this spin aimed at lowering expectations so that they can pretend to be happily shocked later when they end up out raising Romney and his Super PACs after all? Or is the “first billion-dollar campaign,” as we were once told it would be, now so outgunned by anti-Obama donors that they’re honestly trying to prepare the media for the bitter disappointment to come?

It’ll be fun watching the left, whose nominee surfed to the presidency on a tidal wave of money four years ago, complain in November about Republicans buying the election.

“We are going to be the first incumbent outspent,” a senior Obama campaign official told reporters during a background briefing in Washington today. “I think that’s clear.”

The looming influence of outside groups means that “any spending advantage we might have had is erased,” another campaign adviser said.

Obama campaign officials estimate, based on public pronouncements by the groups, that more than $1.2 billion will be spent to help defeat President Obama…

The president’s campaign is on track to raise roughly what it did four years ago, but the Democratic super PAC — Priorities USA Action — has not added much firepower.

“I’m not sitting here with a billion-dollar check in my pocket,” one Obama campaign official acknowledged.

Priorities USA actually did okay last month, raising as much in May ($4 million) as it did in March and April combined. That’s the good news for O; the bad news is that Priorities now has a bit more than $4 million cash in hand compared to … $25 million for Karl Rove’s group, one of many righty Super PACs ramping up for the fall. As for Romney, according to BuzzFeed’s Zeke Miller he just raised another $6-8 million — today, at a pair of fundraisers. Oh my.

Incidentally, if it makes you feel any better about the federal deficit, Obama’s following the same basic approach on spending with his own campaign:

The $39.1 million his campaign took in was outpaced by $44.6 million it paid for television advertisements, employees, offices and other expenses, the reports show. The spending rate is a reversal from the past three months, when the campaign was taking in millions more than it was spending.

In a sign the campaign is intensifying, the $44.6 million that Obama’s re-election campaign spent in May is more than the $42.9 million he spent in the previous three months combined…

Obama has now raised $261 million for his re-election campaign. At this point in 2008, he had raised $296 million.

I wonder if there’s ever been an incumbent who raised less, at any point, in his reelection campaign than he did in his first run for the presidency yet ended up being reelected anyway. In the end, O will probably raise more this year than he did in 2008, but I’m a bit shocked to see him off his pace when he’s facing a real threat from Romney. You’d think his base would be making up the difference out of pure fear, notwithstanding their disappointment that he hasn’t fully socialized medicine or ended the Bush tax cuts yet. Stuff like this probably isn’t a good sign, huh?

Fight Time!!!

The Telegraph tells us about the War in The White House … and people talking out of school. About what you would expect from a bunch of immature know-nothings professor types like the current Obama regime.

Still talking about the Muslim terrorists despite the fact that the war is ended. But it’s not, and we know it’s not. This time it’s about the drone wars, those silent killers, no need for messy prisons, trails, details, you just bury the remains. Apparently it isn’t going well among the participants.

As another book drops … Drones: How Obama Learned to Kill, and this isn’t no ‘choom wagon picnic’.