UPDATE (Aug. 17):
Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum will be speakers at the GOP Convention. NJ Gov. Chris Christie will give the keynote speech.
Some “big tent” the GOP turns out to be.
In the 2012 GOP presidential primary elections, after Michele Bachmann, Jon Huntsman, Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, and Newt Gingrich all dropped out of the race, Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) was the last candidate that remained to compete against Mitt Romney.
Finally, on May 14, 2012, Paul also quit, but announced that his campaign would switch to a delegate accumulation strategy. On May 29, according to projected counts, Mitt Romney crossed the threshold of 1,144 delegates needed to secure the party’s nomination.
Nevertheless, Paul did win 3 states, 10.9% of or 2,049,410 popular votes, and 166 delegates. He is also the Republican candidate that has received the most campaign donations and support from actively-serving members of the U.S. military. Ron Paul has also consistently pushed for auditing the Federal Reserve.
Despite that, Paul won’t be speaking at the upcoming GOP National Convention in Tampa, Florida.
Anugrah Kumar reports for Christian Post, July 16, 2012, that according to Republican National Committee rules, a candidate must have a plurality of delegates in five states to be officially eligible for the nomination at the national convention and be granted up to 15 minutes for a nominating speech.
Paul was hoping that the Nebraska convention would give him a plurality of delegates along with delegates from Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, and Minnesota. But Paul lost it all, results on Saturday showed. Now, it’s up to Romney and convention organizers to decide whether to include Paul in the proceedings in late August.
However, Paul’s insurgent spirit remains strong. His campaign is planning on bringing as many as 500 supportive delegates to Tampa to make his presence known. Paul is planning a rally in Tampa around the convention, and his supporters have organized Ron Paul Festival, an independent event that will include live music, according to ABC News.
Paul had said his delegate count gave him “a tremendous position to grow our movement and shape the future of the GOP.” He believes in a non-interventionist foreign policy and decriminalizing drugs, and says government should not have a role in some of the conservative social causes.
Paul is also asking Romney not to select former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice amid rumors that she could be his running mate. “I don’t dictate anything to anybody, but they wouldn’t be very happy with her,” Paul said in an interview with the Fox Business Network. “She represents a foreign policy quite different than what energizes college campuses today.” ~Eowyn
In an interview with Newsmax.TV today, pollster Scott Rasmussen of Rasmussen Reports says “The conservative interest in the election was already much higher than that of moderates and liberals. It went up to really stratospheric levels right after the [Supreme Court’s Obamacare] ruling. We don’t know if that will continue or if it’s just a temporary response to the news cycle.”
The issue has really energized conservatives. What is most important is that Republicans must make the case that the unpopular Obamacare will be a further drain on America’s disappointing economic recovery since the economy still tops the list of voter concerns.
“Anything that can be tied to the economy is going to be an important part of the debate,” observed Rasmussen, founder and president of Rasmussen Reports. “If Mitt Romney and the Republicans are able to make the case that the healthcare law is one reason the economy is struggling, well that will certainly help.” The same goes for energy — and in fact all issues.
It’s the economy, stupid.
More than half of the country — 52% of American voters — believe that Obamacare should be repealed. Rasmussen said:
“That number hasn’t changed much over the past week. In fact, it hasn’t changed much over the past two years. From the day the law was passed, a majority of American voters have said we want to see it repealed. And there’s really not much that would change that. The support has been so consistent.
“The Democrats in Congress passed it despite popular opposition. They continued to believe that somehow it would get popular over time. It didn’t. This is not a question of re-litigating or re-debating the healthcare law. That is over. The question is now whether the government will respond to a majority of voters or it will continue to move on its own direction.”
He predicted that there is virtually no chance the healthcare law will survive if GOP nominee Romney wins the election. Rasmussen also predicted that even if “Obama is somehow re-elected this fall, and brings in Democrats with him to control the Senate, the law will still be in trouble. It is simply unpopular with voters and that will call for some major change.”
Even the Supreme Court’s popularity appears to have taken a hit by its handling of the Obamacare case.
The percentage of Americans who said the Supreme Court was doing good job went from 36% before the ruling to 33% after the ruling. Those who thought the court was doing a poor job went from 17% before the ruling to 28% after the ruling. Rasmussen explained: “They’re in the growing belief that the justices are pursuing their own agenda rather than being impartial and a growing belief that the court is too liberal rather than too conservative.”
Of course, if the Republicans can screw up this opportunity, we can count on them to do just that as the GOP has a unique talent at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. ~Eowyn
“The chief justice of the United States Supreme Court, John Roberts, said [about Obamacare], ‘It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.’ Not our job…. So Obamacare is nothing more than the largest tax increase in the history of the world…. We have the biggest tax increase in the history of the world right in the middle of one of this country’s worst recessions. In fact, as the vice president said yesterday, a depression for millions of Americans.” –Rush Limbaugh, June 28, 2012
The betrayers (l to r): Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer, John Roberts, Elena Kagan, Ruth Bader Ginsburg
The Supreme Court’s narrow 5-4 ruling on Obamacare effectively puts its seal of approval on the biggest tax increase in most Americans’ lifetime.
But as The Washington Timesnotes, on the campaign trail four years ago and since taking office, none other than Obama himself has said again and again that middle-class families will not see their taxes rise “a single dime” under his presidency.
The high court’s ruling leaves in place 21 tax increases in the health care law costing more than $675 billion over the next 10 years, according to the House Ways and Means Committee. Those 21 tax increases are:
A 156% increase in the federal excise tax on tobacco
Obamacare Individual Mandate Excise Tax
Obamacare Employer Mandate Tax
Obamacare Surtax on Investment Income
Obamacare Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans
Obamacare “Haircut” for Medical Itemized Deduction from 7.5% to 10% of AGI
Obamacare Tax on Indoor Tanning Services
Obamacare elimination of tax deduction for employer-provided retirement Rx drug coverage in coordination with Medicare Part D
Obamacare Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike
Obamacare Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals
Obamacare Tax on Innovator Drug Companies
Obamacare Tax on Health Insurers
Obamacare $500,000 Annual Executive Compensation Limit for Health Insurance Executives
Obamacare Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2
Obamacare “Black liquor” tax hike
Obamacare Codification of the “economic substance doctrine”
For full details on each tax, go to Americans for Tax Reform. Twelve of the Obamacare tax hikes will affect families earning less than $250,000 per year,including a “Cadillac tax” on high-cost insurance plans, a tax on insurance providers and an excise tax on medical-device manufacturers. According to the Congressional Budget Office & Joint Committee On Taxation, at least 75% of individual mandate penalties will fall on those making less than $250,000.
In addition, medical insurance providers are not fools. They will simply pass their Obamacare tax onto the insured, which means high-, middle-, and low-income Americans. All of which, of course, is a clear violation of Obama’s pledge that he would not increases the taxes of low- and middle-income taxpayers. After the Supreme Court’s ruling yesterday, Obama gloated by twittering “Still a BFD.”
BFD is slang for “Big Fucking Deal.” A President of the United States of America tweeted “Big Fucking Deal.”
Democrat strategists also are feeling emboldened that the Supreme Court under ostensibly conservative Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. has aided Obama’s agenda. Simon Rosenberg, president of NDN, a Democratic think tank in Washington, crowed: “The late decisions by the Supreme Court this summer leaves the GOP’s agenda in tatters. Their efforts to overturn two administration efforts — immigration and health care reform — have failed. Obama comes out of this week much stronger, the Republicans weaker. His first term will now be seen as consequential, their opposition feckless.”
Hold your horses, Mr. Rosenberg. Remember what the word “hubris” means in its Greek origin. The plain fact is that most Americans do not want Obamacare.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of June 23-24shows that 54% of Likely U.S. Voters favor repeal of Obamacare, while 39% are opposed. This includes 43% who Strongly Favor repeal and 28% who are Strongly Opposed to it. Seth Masket, an associate professor of political science at the University of Denver, found in a study that 13 House Democrats lost their seats in 2010 as a result solely of voting for Obamacare.
The Supreme Court’s wrong-headed ruling already has mobilized conservatives. Already, presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney’s campaign has garnered donations of at least $4.2 million since the ruling.
Now is the time for us to redouble our efforts. What our enemies want more than anything is for us to despair and become apathetic.
John Nolte writes for Breitbart.com that the left-wing star of the low-rated cable Daily Show, Jon “I’m-not-a-liberal” Stewart, is a big hypocrite.
Stewart (born Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz) uses his TV show as a Super PAC platform to carry water for Obama by attacking Mitt Romney’s wealth and the extravagance of the “one-percenters.” But Stewart himself is a 1% multi-millionaire who makes more than 300 times the median American salary and owns three luxury homes that he hides under fake names!
You see, Jon Stewart doesn’t technically own those homes. Using a trick mastered by countless one-percenters, the properties were purchased by private trusts named after his pets. The super-wealthy often make big-ticket purchases through trusts in order to protect their other assets from lawsuits, diminish estate tax liability, and avoid public scrutiny.
Stewart also sometimes doesn’t pay his taxes.
The state of New York issued its first “state tax warrant” for Stewart’s failure to pay $476.03, sending the notice to the address of the KLS Professional Advisors Group, the financial firm that manages Stewart’s money. In September 2008, New York issued a second lien, this time a $3,225.63 demand to Stewart’s wife Tracy, which was sent to the address of the Stewarts’ trusts.
The Daily Caller has done some excellent reporting on this. You’ll want to read the full report.
Stewart, age 49, is worth an estimated $80 million. At his current earning rate, Stewart’s net worth will be $320 million (not including increases in property value or other assets) by the time he turns 65 — Mitt Romney’s current age. In other words, for all his attacks on Romney’s wealth, Stewart is on pace to be richer than Romney. ~Eowyn
Buzzfeed: The protesters popping up at Mitt Romney’s rallies throughout Michigan eariler this week look like run-of-the-mill grassroots liberals — they wave signs about “the 99 percent,” they chant about the Republican’s greed, and they describe themselves as a loosely organized coalition of “concerned citizens.” They’re also getting paid, two of the protesters and an Obama campaign official told BuzzFeed.
At the candidate’s afternoon stop outside a bakery in DeWitt, a group of about 15 protesters stood behind a police barricade, a few of them chanting in support of Obama. Asked why he was protesting, a man dressed in a grim reaper costume pointed a reporter to a pair of “designated representatives” standing in the shade. “I can’t talk, you gotta get one of those people over there to talk to y’all,” he said. “They’re the ones who can talk to reporters.”
Neither of the representatives agreed to give their names, but two protesters said they were getting paid to stand outside of the rally, though their wage is unclear: one said she was getting $7.25 per hour, while another man said they were being paid $17 per hour.
Meanwhile, about 50 feet away, another protest had been organized by local Democrats in conjunction with the Obama campaign. A campaign official told BuzzFeed they had nothing to do with the other group — which he said he believed they had been sent by the labor-backed “Good Jobs Now” — and confirmed that they were being paid. “I mean, it’s a free country, they can go anywhere they want, but they’re not with us,” the official said.
The protesters also made an appearance at Romney’s rally in Frankenmuth earlier in the day. There, a young man who identified himself only as Demarcus stood with a group of about five others, stopping reporters after the candidate’s speech and saying they were there “to represent the 99 percent and tell Romney to stand up for us.” He said he was from the group, “Good Jobs Now,” but did not indicate whether he was being paid.
Brittany Smith, a spokeswoman for Good Jobs Now, confirmed that they had protesters at the events, but said their “activists are NOT paid to protest. We are a statewide community advocacy group.”
The politics of heckling has been a point of frequent debate lately, with both campaigns allowing demonstrators to derail public events in recent weeks. At a press conference in Boston last month, Romney campaign aides and volunteers drowned out a press conference featuring David Axelrod. And the Romney campaign was forced to skip a scheduled stop at a WaWa gas station in Pennsylvania last Saturday after a group of protesters positioned themselves outside the location.
But while both sides enjoy a good, loud demonstration, it’s generally acknowledged that paying people to protest is a form of cheating — which explains why the Obama campaign was quick to distance themselves from the group.
By the end of Romney’s remarks, most of the “Good Jobs Now” group was standing in the shade, chatting amongst themselves and letting their signs hang to the ground. And while the Democrats aligned with the Obama campaign continued to shout at rally-goers as they filed out of the event, the other group of demonstrators made their way down the street and loaded on to a charter bus.
I guess since Rasmussen shows Mitt Romney attracting 47% of the vote, while President Obama earns 45%, Skippy’s campaign needs some loyal paid supporters.
Three demographic groups — Jews, Blacks, and Hispanics — who went enthusiastically for Skippy in 2008 no longer get thrills up their legs for The One. The Weekly Standard reports on June 12, 2012, that Jewish support for Obama dropped 22 points in New York in just a month, according to the results of a just released poll by Siena College. The poll asks this straight forward question: “If the election for President were held today, who would you vote for if the candidates were [Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, or Don’t know]?
The poll found that:
In May 2012, 62% of Jewish New Yorkers supported Obama (vs. 32% who opposed him).
A month later, in June 2012, 51% of Jewish New Yorkers support Obama (vs. 43% who are opposed to him). 5% are undecided [– the “lukewarm” whom Jesus said He would spit from his mouth]. That means Obama’s current lead among Jewish voters is 8%.
Jewish voters in New York overwhelmingly believe that America is “headed in the wrong direction” as opposed to “the right track,” by a margin of 62% to 31%.
When asked these two questions: “Overall, would you say that you and your family are better off now than you were four years ago, about the same as you were four years ago, or worse off today than you were four years ago?,” only 13% of Jewish New Yorkers said that they are better off now under Obama, while 41% said that they are doing worse. (45% said they’re doing the same.)
Skippy is also doing “stunningly bad” among Blacks in North Carolina.
In 2008, Obama received 95% of the African-American votes in North Carolina (vs. just 5% for John McCain).
But the new PPP poll finds that if the election were held today, 76% of NC’s blacks will vote for Obama (vs. 20% for Mitt Romney!) — which is a 19% drop in black support for Skippy from 2008.
Just a month ago, in May, Obama had received 87% of the African-American vote to Romney’s 11% — which means that in one month, black support for Obama had fallen by 11%!
All of Obama’s numbers with NC’s African-Americans are sliding. His approval rating is down from 86% to 77%. Romney’s favorability, meanwhile, has doubled from 9% to 18%.
Overall, Romney has a 48% to 46% lead on Obama in North Carolina, a crucial swing state.
Jim Williams, a polling analyst at PPP, told Business Insider: “7o-something percent is obviously low. It’s not something we’ve ever seen before. It’s definitely something we’re going to monitor. [And if the results keep turning up like this, it would be] very bad news for him [Obama].”
Then there are the Hispanics.
Tony Lee reports for Breitbart, June 13, 2012, that in 2008, 67% of Hispanics voted for Obama, but many have grown disillusioned with a president who has not lived up to his promises improve the economy.
On June 12, SEIU and Priorities USA (the Super PAC affiliated with Obama) bought $4 million worth of Spanish-language ads in the key swing states of Florida, Nevada, and Colorado in what is one of the largest independent Spanish-language buys in history.
Lee notes that “Outside groups making such a large Spanish-language television buy this early in the election season to target a group that is already in Obama’s column reveals how vulnerable Obama is among Hispanic in November.”
Attention, all Ron Paul supporters.
Did you get the news?
On Wednesday, June 6, Congressman Ron Paul gave up the race when he admitted he could not be the GOP presidential nominee given his delegate count. A day later, late Thursday night, Ron Paul’s son, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), endorsed Mitt Romney for president!
Rand (l) and Ron (r) Paul
Anthony Migchels of HenryMakow.com, June 10, 2012, calls it “The Ron & Rand Paul Betrayal”.Here are excerpts:
Rand Paul endorses Mitt Romney last Friday, just days after Romney was anointed at the Bilderberg Conference, elitists who started financing Ron Paul with millions a few months ago.
The backlash among the libertarian community is intense.
Libertarian leaders all over the place are denouncing him. Adam Kokesh is clearly hurting badly here. On Prison Planet, arguably the most influential pro Paul outlet, the headlines are all about Rand Paul’s betrayal. Mike Adams still cannot believe it and wonders if Paul Jr. is getting in to demolish the system from the inside. This YouTube video asks its viewers to vote to show how they feel and 90% dislike the news. Rand Paul’s Facebook page is being inundated with messages of thousands of disgruntled supporters.
It’s so bad one wonders whether the Pauls have miscalculated. And let there be no doubt, they have been calculating. Even to an outsider like myself, who never cared for either one, it looks like the most cynical, blatant and utterly ruthless sell out ever.
In March Time Magazine quoted a Ron Paul adviser as saying, ‘If you’re talking about putting Rand on the ticket, of course that would be worth delivering our people to Romney’. (go to 3:40 for the quote).
Lew Rockwell has declared that the whole Paul campaign was never about winning. I wonder what millions of his followers (and donors) think about that?
According to Rockwell, it was all about educating people on the wonders of Austrian Economics, not about winning elections. This probably explains why Paul Sr. never ran as an independent, but preferred losing primaries.
After working for years on Paul’s campaign, Rockwell is now saying one shouldn’t vote and shouldn’t be involved in partisan politics. Now, how disingenuous is that?
Read the rest of Migchels’ essay, here. ~Eowyn
Last Saturday night, a band of 10-15 “teens” attacked five people who were leaving a Red Hot Chili Peppers concert, attended by some 20,000 fans, at the Prudential Center in downtown Newark, New Jersey.
James Queally reportsfor the (Newark) Star-Ledger, May 9, 2012, that the attacks left a Pennsylvania man with a shattered eye socket and a New Providence father unconscious and bleeding in front of his 14-year-old son, according to police reports obtained by The Star-Ledger. While scrupulously avoiding to identity the racial identity of the attackers, Newark Police Director Samuel DeMaio said that “Some of the kids were laughing through the assaults.”
Demaio said authorities have surveillance video of the assaults, which shows the attackers were a band of between 10 and 15 “thugs,” who appear to be 15-year-olds. The group attacked five people in three separate incidents along Broad Street, stealing several iPhones and a wallet. None of the victims suffered life-threatening injuries, but three of the people who were harmed were teenagers.
Some of the injuries may have also been worse than described. While the police reports said two Livingston teens suffered minor injuries when they were attacked, the father of one of the boys said his son actually sustained “multiple facial fractures.” The man asked not to be identified, to protect the identity of his son.
The entire incident lasted less than two minutes, as the teens surged along the street throwing fists and feet at their victims.Although the city had assigned 23 cops to the concert arena, the attack looked so chaotic that commanding officers at the 3rd Precinct issued a “citywide alert” calling for help, according to police reports.
Despite that, Police Director Demaio insists that people “feel safe when you come to Newark. Feel safe when you come to the arena.”
Demaio also said he “may” release images or the entire video feed of the attacks later today.
Hmm. Let’s see what clues we have here:
A pack of 10-15 teens randomly attack concert goers, using their fists and feet. (Kinda reminds you of this incident in Norfolk, VA.)
The attackers rob the victims of their wallets and cell phones. (Kinda reminds you of this incident in Baltimore, MD.)
The attackers laugh as they assault the victims.
The city’s police director scrupulously avoids identifying the racial-ethnic identity of the attackers, not even ONE word of physical description.
According to the 2010 census, more than half (52.35%) of the population of Newark are Blacks, whereas 26.31% are white. Wikipedia says “The 1967 riots resulted in White flight, a significant population loss of the city’s middle class, many of them Jews, which continued from the 1970s through to the 1990s.”
Reader Dale Poneiwaz wrote this comment on MyFoxNY.com’s brief article on the attack: “If they [the attackers] were ‘white’ the headline would have read ‘Pack of roving white teens’…because it does not say that you know they’re black…”
What do you think are the chances that, if Obama or Romney “had a son,” he would “look just like” the Newark thugs?
And do you think the Red Hot Chili Peppers would hold a concert for the Newark victims, like they did on March 29 in Tampa, Florida, wearing “Ode to Trayvon” hoodies?
Red Hot Chili Peppers in Tampa, FL, March 29, 2012.
Yesterday was the official start of Obama’s re-election campaign. The chosen site was a sports stadium at Ohio State University (OSU) in Columbus.
Even before he arrived, the slavish MSM were in over drive. ABC News reported Saturday morning that the Obama 2012 campaign expected “overflow” crowds. Mark Landler ofThe New York Times was at OSU. He likened the rally to “a concert by an aging rock star” and described how “The crowd of 14,000 supporters erupted into cheers and chants of ‘Four more years!’”
Here’s the New York Times‘ photo of the OSU campaign rally:
Wow, what a jam-packed stadium! Impressive, isn’t it?
What the New York Times didn’t tell you is this:
The picture is deceptive. Only 70% of the stadium’s 20,000 seats were occupied. To make the rally appear more attended than it was, event organizers moved people from the stage’s surrounding seats to the arena’s floor to depict a better crowd to television cameras.
Luckily, Mitt Romney’s deputy press secretary Ryan Williams was in the audience at the OSU rally, and tweeted another view of the same stadium: