First Shot: Obama Proposes Retirement Account Limit In First “Wealth Tax” Salvo

And this from Obama “the Alynski agitator” who never had a legitimate job in his miserable little life … You already have enough. According to whom?

The witch-hunt against the “rich” (as defined by a random group of people) through the establishment of creeping global capital controls continues.

Bear in mind Obama’s deficits run in the multiple Trillions.

Per The Hill, “The proposal would save around $9 billion over a decade, a senior administration official said, while also bringing more fairness to the tax code.” Ah yes, “fairness.” This means that as a result of the artificial limit, the Budget will set a total cap on retirement plans of about $3 million. Anything above that, feel free to please spend on your peas instead of saving, or just invest in Bernanke’s stock market ponzi. After all, that is the only artificial indicator Obama has to point to, when “proving” his policies are working.

Bear in mind that Obama spends over a trillion dollars a year more then he is supposed to spend…. That is if he ever did a budget or did what was Constitutionally legal to do…

The Fact That Reid Still Thinks he Will Senate Majority…

That’s the laughable part here…

Five days before the election, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has ruled out trying to work with Mitt Romney should he win next week.

“Mitt Romney’s fantasy that Senate Democrats will work with him to pass his ‘severely conservative’ agenda is laughable,” Mr. Reid said in a statement on Friday, trying to puncture Mr. Romney’s closing election argument that he’ll be able to deliver on the bipartisanship President Obama promised in 2008 but has struggled to live up to.

Mr. Reid, a Nevada Democrat and a Mormon, like Mr. Romney, has become the Republican presidential nominee’s chief critic this campaign, at one point accusing him of failing to pay taxes — a charge that Mr. Romney has refuted.

Read more at washingtontimes.com …

Didn’t you already know Reid’s agenda is his agenda, and most other communist Senate members? If you didn’t this should make the case.

And then there is this shot at the I thought it was dead according to Reid, TEA PARTY — Not they aren’t Dingy and you know have admitted the obvious: It’s your running the Senate which is NOW DEAD:

The Nevadan took another lick at the GOP standard bearer on Friday.

“Mitt Romney’s fantasy that Senate Democrats will work with him to pass his ‘severely conservative’ agenda is laughable,” Reid said in a statement released by his office.

“In fact, Mitt Romney’s Tea Party agenda has already been rejected in the Senate. In the past few months, we have voted down many of the major policies that Mitt Romney has run on, from the Ryan plan to end Medicare as we know it, to the Blunt Amendment to deny women access to contraception, to more tax giveaways for millionaires and billionaires, to a draconian spending plan that would gut critical services for seniors and the most vulnerable Americans.”

Reid added: “Mitt Romney has demonstrated that he lacks the courage to stand up to the Tea Party, kowtowing to their demands time and again. There is nothing in Mitt Romney’s record to suggest he would act any differently as president. As governor of Massachusetts, he had a terrible relationship with Democrats, cordoning himself off behind a velvet rope instead of reaching out to build relationships. And in the near-decade that Mitt Romney has spent running for president, both his words and his actions have shown that pleasing the far right is more important to him than working across the aisle.”

Read more: 

Mason-Dixon: Florida’s Gone

And they are pulling out their polling unit.

The writing was on the wall when Suffolk stopped polling there, but Mason-Dixon confirmed it today: it’s over in Florida and Romney will win Florida.

An exclusive Tampa Bay Times/Bay News 9 poll of likely voters along the Interstate 4 corridor finds Romney leading Obama 51 percent to 45 percent, with 4 percent undecided.

“Romney has pretty much nailed down Florida,” said Brad Coker of Mason-Dixon Polling and Research, which conducted the poll for the Times and its media partners. “Unless something dramatically changes — an October surprise, a major gaffe — Romney’s going to win Florida.”

Which both campaigns know very well.  Good for down-ticket races.

Tea Party doing their thing in Florida.

Romney raises $111.8 million in October

Mitt Romney’s campaign announced this morning that the GOP ticket and the Republican National Committee raised $111.8 million between Oct. 1 and Oct. 17. Not the full month.

It’s an impressive number, especially given how many months they’ve now broken the $100 million number. This period includes all three presidential debates and the VP debate, when Romney’s strong performance in the first debate especially helped bring in a flurry of donations.

The campaign still has just more than $169 million on hand as of Oct. 17, which is a big war chest for the final few weeks of the campaign and enough to really flood the airwaves with ads now through Nov. 6.

Politico: Democrats see Obama agenda release as a desperation move, too

If you recall Obama released his pathetically light on details second term agenda Monday.

Everybody knew it wasn’t serious. Even Democrats…

If you suffered whiplash after Team Obama’s sudden change in strategy after the last debate, you weren’t alone.  After waiting until almost literally the last moment to release Barack Obama’s second-term agenda, suddenly the campaign rushed out an ad and a 20-page booklet that consists of mostly full-color pictures out to the press — not coincidentally, the day after the last debate in which Obama might have been able to make its case to a national audience.

Politico reports that few are impressed with this move, not even Obama’s fellow Democrats:

Everything was going great for Barack Obama until about 9:04 on the night of Oct. 3, when Mitt Romney startled everybody by refusing to live up to his caricature as The Worst Candidate Ever.

Romney’s late-game comeback — an unexpected assertion of presidential competence in front of 67 million viewers — robbed Obama of his momentum and forced the president’s team to make a subtle yet significant change to their closing argument in the critical last two weeks of the 2012 campaign.

“Unexpected” by whom? Team Obama?  Democrats?  The media?  Mitt, who successfully turned around the collapsing Salt Lake City Olympics, and who made several fortunes as an executive in business and finance.

He has a much better resumé for presidential leadership than Obama did in 2008. And still does.

That incompetence at Team O has them scrambling for a Plan B now:

Instead, the pressure is now on Obama to prove himself — and oh so late in the game. That led his campaign on Tuesday to release a detailed, bullet-point plan for his second term — a formal agenda his team had long resisted despite appeals from the likes of Bill Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and James Carville, and an army of basic-cable liberals, who said the president needed to spend less time cutting down Romney and more time elevating himself.

“Had to do it … It’s all about earning people’s votes,” emailed a Democrat close to the campaign when the plan was unveiled hours after the third and final presidential debate in Boca Raton, Fla. …

Obama officials publicly claim the plan was in the works all along and doesn’t represent a major change. But many Democrats and observers see the Tuesday messaging switch as proof Obama leaned too heavily for too long on a negative “Hit Mitt” strategy, at the expense of a sustained push to convince skeptical voters the president deserves another four years.

Which is really not much more than a regurgitation of Obama’s first term.  Why did it take them so long to do what all incumbents normally do up front, which is to explain why they want a second term at all?

According to Politico’s Glenn Thrush, Obama didn’t see a need to do it while his campaign was making Romney “squirm” under the avalanche of personal attacks. Which failed miserably.

Small ball is now all Obama has left, and big bird.

Letterman Doesn’t Like Obama Lying Either

DAVID LETTERMAN, HOST: Here’s what upset me last night, this playing fast and loose with facts. And the President Obama cites the op-ed piece that Romney wrote about Detroit, “Let them go bankrupt, let them go bankrupt,” and last night he brings it up again. “Oh, no, Governor, you said let them go bankrupt, blah blah blah, let them go bankrupt.” And Mitt said, “No, no, check the thing, check the thing, check the thing.”

Now, I don’t care whether you’re Republican or Democrat, you want your president to be telling the truth; you want the contender to be lying. And so what we found out today or soon thereafter that, in fact, the President Obama was not telling the truth about what was excerpted from that op-ed piece. I felt discouraged.

RACHEL MADDOW: Because the “Let Detroit go bankrupt” headline you feel like was inappropriate?

LETTERMAN: Well, the fact the President is invoking it and swearing that he was right and that Romney was wrong and I thought, well, he’s the president of course he’s right. Well, it turned out no, he was taking liberties with that.

Well, Dave, from those of us that analyze the media, let me just say that if you paid attention to this matter from its inception, you would have known that the President, his party, and the press that support them have been badly misrepresenting this issue for years. Lying….

Maybe more importantly, they’ve been misinforming the public on numerous things, and you’ve been a part of it.

However, one has to wonder what set Letterman off enough to bring this up?

After all, this is not the most egregious example of this White House playing fast and loose with the facts. Or is this just the first one Letterman could grasp?

Regardless of the answer, it’s nice to know the Late Show host has some veracity line in the sand that can’t be crossed no matter how much he loves a politician.

Read more: 
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/10/24/letterman-upset-and-discouraged-obama-lied-about-romney-wanting-detro#ixzz2AEJq30sB

THE 2012 DEBATES AND HOW THEY’VE MATTERED

The scene — Standing at podiums. Romney on the attack; Obama seemed disengaged

The topics — Domestic policy, including taxes, the federal budget deficit, their records

Key moment — Romney on the economy: “The president has a view very similar to the view he had when he ran four years ago, that a bigger government, spending more, taxing more, regulating more — if you will, trickle-down government — would work. That’s not the right answer for America.”

The first debate, went badly for zero…

Fact Check: Obama makes questionable claim on Romney’s auto bailout stance (Obama LIED!!!)

Obama LIED ….

In one of the most contentious exchanges of their final debate, President Obama and Mitt Romney clashed over the federal auto bailout of 2008, with the former accusing the latter of not supporting any forms of government assistance to auto companies.

“You were very clear that you would not provide government assistance to the U.S. auto companies, even if they went through bankruptcy,” Obama said, going on the offensive. “You said that they could get it in the private marketplace. That wasn’t true.”

But Romney rejected the claim — and he’s got the op-ed he wrote to back him up. “Under no circumstances would I do anything other than to help this industry get on its feet,” Romney said, “And the idea that has been suggested that I would liquidate the industry, of course not.”

In a 2008 op-ed entitled “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt,” Romney did in fact call on the government to play a role in responding to the auto crisis but in the form of federal guarantees, not loans.

“The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk,” Romney wrote in The New York Times editorial.

Read more at politics.blogs.foxnews.com …

What wouldn’t have happened according to bankruptcy law the UAW would not have been given control over GM

Mitt was 100% correct.

Obama’s Apology Man Can

Romney for President released a new television advertisement titled “Apology Tour.” After taking office in 2009, President Barack Obama went on an apology tour around the world. He even said that America had “dictated” to other nations. Last night Mitt Romney responded,

“Mr. President, America doesn’t dictate to other nations; we have freed other nations from dictators.”

Luntz Focus Group Split on Romney’s Debate Performance

A focus group of undecided voters appeared to be split over Mitt Romney’s debate performance on foreign policy Monday night, with some saying he failed to distinguish how he would do things differently from President Barack Obama and others saying he finally came across as more “humane and relatable.”

The group, appearing on Fox News’ Sean Hannity show along with Republican strategist Frank Luntz, declared Obama the overall winner of the debate when the two candidates stuck strictly to foreign policy and military issues.

But when the debate veered into economic policy as a national security issue, most in the focus group said Romney was more credible than the president.

“Mitt Romney . . . is capable of taking this country and turning it around. And once we have that, we’ll have more security. We need that security,” said one woman in the group.

“The reality of the situation is foreign policy is secondary to our dreadful economy,” a man in the group said. “And Mitt Romney has a plan to improve the economy. Obama does not.”

“It’s Obama’s Achilles heel,” added another group participant.

“Mitt Romney is aware that the economy is the major issue, so he keeps bringing it back to that because that is what appeals to most voters,” another voter agreed.

In summing up the consensus view that seemed to emerge from the group, one man said, “I think the president did well tonight. I expected him to do well, he did well on the foreign policy. But I do agree it’s not about the foreign policy in this election, it’s just about the economy.”

Asked to weigh in on how Romney came across to them in the debate, one woman voter offered this view: “Wall Street-driven. Certainly not a well-rounded leader.”

Read more at newsmax.com …