Thank God for our children.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Speaking tonight at the Prince William County Dinner in Virginia.
eric aka the Tygrrrr Express
Headlines with teasers listed below.
NYT- Many Big Donors to Democrats Cut Support
Many wealthy Democratic patrons, who in the past have played major roles financing outside groups to help elect the party’s candidates, are largely sitting out these crucial midterm elections.
Cleveland.com- Republicans have requested more absentee ballots than Democrats in Ohio's three largest counties
A higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats in Ohio's three largest counties have asked for absentee ballots this year -- an ominous sign for the party hoping to repel GOP forces on Election Day.
Roughly three out of 10 registered Ohio voters live in Franklin, Hamilton and Cuyahoga counties.
With early voting under way this week, Republican voters in Franklin and Hamilton counties have requested more absentee ballots than their Democratic counterparts -- hard evidence of a much different environment than 2008 when an avalanche of Democratic absentee ballot requests dwarfed Republican requests in both counties.
WSJ- McDonald's May Drop Health Plan (because of Obamacare)
McDonald's Corp. has warned federal regulators that it could drop its health insurance plan for nearly 30,000 hourly restaurant workers unless regulators waive a new requirement of the U.S. health overhaul.
HotLine On Call- Democrats Aren't Staging A Comeback
Democratic strategists have recently started experiencing a new feeling of optimism. There are indications, they say, that the party is showing the smallest signs of a turnaround, and that rumors of their electoral demise have been premature.
But instead of a comeback, Democrats are only experiencing the benefits of a base that is finally engaging. That base will help some Democratic candidates, but in total, the party still faces serious rehabilitation work with independent voters. The party's major problems are most evident in three prominent races that are slowly, but inexorably, sliding toward Republicans.
WSJ- Loyalty to Obama Costs Democrats
In their contrasting fates lie broader lessons for the coming midterms: Live by the president and you could die by the president. Democrats who have been thorns in the president's side are doing well in some of the toughest districts for their party, from Alabama to the steel belt of western Pennsylvania. But swing-district Democrats who have voted with the president in Congress are struggling, even if they're now asserting their independence.
NYT- Obama, in Iowa, Hears Barbed Questions in a Subdued Backyard
President Obama returned Wednesday to Iowa, the state that put him on the presidential map, this time fighting to keep his Democratic Party in power and confronting skeptical voters who challenged him on policies from tax cuts to health care.
Continuing his tour of American backyards, Mr. Obama received a reception that was polite and friendly, but also pointed, when he visited Sandy Clubb, the athletic director at Drake University, and her husband, Jeff, a middle school social studies teacher, in the upscale, leafy Beaverdale neighborhood here.
About 70 people awaited him in the backyard, where Mr. Obama got an earful. One woman told him that her 24-year-old son had “campaigned furiously for you and was very inspired by your message of hope,” but is now out of college and struggling to find a job.
Just a sample of the type of headlines today.
Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin lead other potential candidates in Republicans' preferences for the party's 2012 presidential nomination. Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, and Ron Paul also receive more than 5% support from Republicans nationwide.
Botom Line according to Gallup:
Generally speaking, the better-known candidates tend to fare best in early tests of support for presidential nominations. That helps explain why 2008 presidential candidates Romney and Huckabee, 2008 vice presidential nominee Palin, and former House Speaker Gingrich currently generate more support for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination than those who have not previously run for national office or held a high position in national government, such as Tim Pawlenty or Haley Barbour.
That is the sound of heads exploding across the country.
Piece at Newser points out how disliked Barack Obama is becoming and asks "What Do We Do With Barack Obama? "
How did everybody get it so wrong is a question many people seem to be asking themselves—not least of all these people slinking out of the White House.
It is not just that he has turned out to be something different. In fact, reasonably, he isn’t that different. The more powerful sense of remorse or at least sheepishness may come from people now asking themselves how and why they came to think of him as different than he was. More confounding, they may not really now be able to remember just who exactly they thought he was.
So to refocus the story: Some mass misperception put Barack Obama in the White House and now nobody knows what to do with him.
Can there be a more awkward situation?
Well said.. buyer's remorse is setting in big and no one likes to admit they got something so wrong...especially when they warned beforehand and instead let themselves be bought in by pretty words and empty promises.
Senate Democrats struck a deal Wednesday night with Republicans to keep President Obama from making recess appointments while Congress is out of town campaigning for the midterm elections.
Democratic leaders have agreed to schedule pro-forma sessions of the Senate every week over the next six weeks, a move that will prevent Obama from making emergency appointments, according to Senate sources briefed on the talks.
Read the rest.
I guess the mouse will not being playing while the cats are away this time.
Trade groups representing restaurants and retailers say low-wage employers might halt their coverage if the government doesn't loosen a requirement for "mini-med" plans, which offer limited benefits to some 1.4 million Americans.
The requirement concerns the percentage of premiums that must be spent on benefits.
While many restaurants don't offer health coverage, McDonald's provides mini-med plans for workers at 10,500 U.S. locations, most of them franchised. A single worker can pay $14 a week for a plan that caps annual benefits at $2,000, or about $32 a week to get coverage up to $10,000 a year.
Last week, a senior McDonald's official informed the Department of Health and Human Services that the restaurant chain's insurer won't meet a 2011 requirement to spend at least 80% to 85% of its premium revenue on medical care.
McDonald's, in a memo to federal officials, said "it would be economically prohibitive for our carrier to continue offering" the mini-med plan unless it got an exemption from the requirement to spend 80% to 85% of premiums on benefits. Officials said McDonald's would probably have to hit the 85% figure, which applies to larger group plans. Its insurer, BCS Insurance Group of Oak Brook Terrace, Ill., declined to comment.
More about the memo:
"Having to drop our current mini-med offering would represent a huge disruption to our 29,500 participants," said McDonald's memo, which was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. "It would deny our people this current benefit that positively impacts their lives and protects their health—and would leave many without an affordable, comparably designed alternative until 2014."
McDonalds isn't the only corporation that will be affected by this very same issue either.
Insurers say dozens of other employers could find themselves in the same situation as McDonald's. Aetna Inc., one of the largest sellers of mini-med plans, provides the plans to Home Depot Inc., Disney Worldwide Services, CVS Caremark Corp., Staples Inc. and Blockbuster Inc., among others, according to an Aetna client list obtained by the Journal. Aetna also covers AmeriCorps teaching-program sponsors, who are required by law to make health coverage available.
Aetna declined to comment; it has previously indicated that the requirement could hurt its limited benefit plans.
Read the entire piece, then H/T to The Right Scoop, see the video below where this is being discussed and word is McDonalds is denying employees are going to lose health insurance but do not deny sending the memo WSJ obtained to federal officials.
My guess is they are trying to avoid a massive panic by their employees that take advantage of their mini-med plans while they try to get government officials to provide waivers from Obamacare law.
Read about other unintended consequences of Obamacare in the related posts section, here.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Harry Reid embarrases himself again. (no, he didn't pee in his pants, I'm sure it's coming though)
But what the hay? We are getting used to it.
Jump on this link and find out just where they stand, I was a bit concerned about O'Donnell, not much, just a bit.
In Liberty, and having fun leading to November,
THIS just in over the BBC:
29 September 2010 Last updated at 14:59 ET
US imposes sanctions on Iranian officials for 'abuses'US President Barack Obama has ordered for the first time sanctions against senior Iranian officials for "sustained and severe violations of human rights".
The eight men include the head of the Revolutionary Guards, a former interior minister and the prosecutor general.
The treasury department said they would face a travel ban and asset freeze.
The alleged abuses include the killings and beatings of anti-government protesters after the disputed presidential election in June 2009.
Millions of Iranians defied official warnings and participated in mass rallies that drew the largest crowds since the Islamic Revolution in 1979.
The authorities launched a brutal crackdown, during which opposition and human rights groups accused the security forces of extra-judicial killings, rapes and torture. Thousands were held without charge.
Over the subsequent six months, at least 40 protesters were killed, although the opposition says more than 70 died. At least two people have been executed for related offences, and dozens imprisoned.
In a statement, the White House said: "As the president noted in his recent address to the United Nations General Assembly, human rights are a matter of moral and pragmatic necessity for the United States."
"The United States will always stand with those in Iran who aspire to have their voices heard. We will be a voice for those aspirations that are universal, and we continue to call upon the Iranian government to respect the rights of its people."
All of those named in the US sanctions list served in Iran's military, law enforcement and justice system around the time of the 2009 protests:...
There follows a list of those named in the sanctions, and a video clip of Secretary of State Clinton.
Check it out on the BBC here.
This declaration follows on the most recent symbol of disapproval of Iran, when the US and other nations walked out of the UN as the Iranian despot did his usual anti-Israel, anti-all- things-not-Iranian screed this past week.
My two questions are this: 1) what took you so long? and 2) what is the US actually going to do?
You KNOW I have more to say here.
For the fourth straight year, the majority of Americans say they have little or no trust in the mass media to report the news fully, accurately, and fairly. The 57% who now say this is a record high by one percentage point.
Nearly half of Americans (48%) say the media are too liberal, tying the high end of the narrow 44% to 48% range recorded over the past decade. One-third say the media are just about right while 15% say they are too conservative.
Those findings explain this sentence from Gallup perfectly:
Democrats and liberals remain far more likely than other political and ideological groups to trust the media and to perceive no bias.
Despite John Kerry's claim that voters are too uninformed, it seems Americans are watching, noticing and calling the media out on their liberal bias, hence distrusting them to report the news accurately and see them nmore as Democratic cheerleaders.
Sounds pretty informed to me.
Via Sunshine News:
In one of the most closely watched U.S. House races in the nation, Republican Daniel Webster now holds a 7-point lead over Democratic Rep. Alan Grayson in Central Florida's 8th Congressional District, according to a new Sunshine State News Poll.
Webster, a former state senator, leads the freshman congressman 43-36 in the survey of 559 likely voters conducted Sept. 25-27. TEA ("Taxed Enough Already") Party candidate Peg Dunmire drew 6 percent and NPA hopeful George Metcalfe garnered 3 percent, while 9 percent remained undecided (2 percent cited "other" and 1 percent refused to state).
Digging deeper, the numbers look even worse for Grayson as 51 percent of respondents said they had an unfavorable view of the Orlando-area congressman.
"Grayson has real problems here," said Jim Lee, president of Voter Survey Service, which conducted the poll for Sunshine State News.
"He’s even more unpopular than the president, which is not surprising given how controversial he has been with his rhetoric, overall style and TV ads."
H/T to Hot Air for pointing out how Contessa Brewer from SNBC nails Grayson to the wall over one of those misleading attack ads.
The real problem for Grayson is that, according to Open Congress, Grayson has voted along party-line (Democrat) 98 percent of the time and abstains 2 percent, and Democrats are facing a very toxic atmosphere going into the November midterms.
Perhaps avoidance of that very fact is why he has been trying to distract voters using ads like his Talinban Dan ad, despite FactCheck.org finding it was misleading and distorting the actual facts.
Rep. Grayson Lowers the Bar
The Florida Democrat manipulates video to make his opponent seem to urge wives to 'submit' to husbands. He didn't.
We thought Democratic Rep. Alan Grayson of Florida reached a low point when he falsely accused his opponent of being a draft dodger during the Vietnam War, and of not loving his country. But now Grayson has lowered the bar even further. He’s using edited video to make his rival appear to be saying the opposite of what he really said.
In a new ad, Grayson accuses his Republican opponent Daniel Webster of being a religious fanatic and dubs him "Taliban Dan." But to make his case, Grayson manipulates a video clip to make it appear Webster was commanding wives to submit to their husbands, quoting a passage in the Bible. Four times, the ad shows Webster saying wives should submit to their husbands. In fact, Webster was cautioning husbands to avoid taking that passage as their own. The unedited quote is: "Don’t pick the ones [Bible verses] that say, ‘She should submit to me.’ "
Often acts of desperation without thinking them through end up in disaster and Grayson may just learn that lesson too late.
Republicans are lucky this year, with the majority of Americans disapproving of Obama's job performance, Pelosi and Reid holding the highest unpopularity ratings of all congressional leaders and congress holding it's lowest favorability ranking, all Republicans have to do is point to Democratic incumbents actual votes and allow the connection to Obama's agenda and Reid and Pelosi to speak for itself.
Democrats cannot use their recently passed legislation as a platform to campaign on, because the majority of Americans opposed most of it before it passed and still do, so they have no other choice than to attack, lie and distort on things that have nothing to do with the actual issues.
We hear the expression "Take Our Country Back" often, but in regards to the Tea Party that expression should be "Take Our Party Back"' because that is exactly what they have done for conservative Republicans.
In the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, the findings show a pattern emerging:
In the survey, 71% of Republicans described themselves as tea-party supporters, saying they had a favorable image of the movement or hoped tea- party candidates would do well in the Nov. 2 elections.(Peter Hart is a Democratic pollster)
The poll found that tea-party supporters make up one-third of the voters most likely to cast ballots in November's midterm elections. This showed the movement "isn't a small little segment, but it is a huge part of what's driving 2010," Mr. Hart said.
The generic congressional figures, according to this poll, are 46 percent for Republicans and 43 percent for Democrats.
The enthusiasm gap is what is being considered the game changer and while African-Americans and Hispanics are a little more involved now than before, the Republicans still hold a large enthusiasm lead with two-thirds of the GOP voters saying they are intensely interested in the election, compared with about half of Democrats.
Seven in 10 adults felt the country remains in recession. And among people who said the recession had a major impact on them and their family, more said they preferred a GOP-controlled Congress to a Democratic-run Congress. One in four adults thought the economy would get worse over the next 12 months. Of that group, two-thirds were people with an affinity for the tea-party movement.
While not all Republicans or conservatives are Tea Party members or supporters, most Tea Party members are either moderately conservative or conservative in nature, no matter their party affiliation.
Further findings in the poll show:
*** 73 percent of respondents disapprove of the job Congress is doing with only 20 percent approving.
*** 59 percent of respondents think the country is on the wrong track with only 32 percent believing the country is heading in the right direction.
The Tea Party has forced the GOP to embrace fiscal responsibility once again and if given control of the House and/or the Senate in the 2010 midterm elections, the Tea Party and those that support and agree with the founding principles of the Tea Party, will hold the GOP accountable for continuing to embrace fiscal responsibility.
Flying from Phoenix to Oakland. Speaking during the day at the Citizens for Constitutional Liberty Rally in ...Sacramento and then in the evening to the San Mateo Tea Party. Taking a midnight flight from Oakland to DC.
eric aka the Tygrrrr Express
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
After the midterm elections which political handicappers give House Republicans favored odds of taking control of the House of Representatives, during the time in between the election itself and seating the newly elected, Democrats plan of slamming up to 20 bills through what is referred to as the "lame duck" session.
The Hill reports:
Democrats are considering cramming as many as 20 pieces of legislation into the lame-duck session they plan to hold after the Nov. 2 election.
The array of bills competing for floor time shows the sense of urgency among Democratic lawmakers to act before the start of the 112th Congress, when Republicans are expected to control more seats in the Senate and House.
Reportedly some of that agenda will including but not limited to; DADT (Don't Ask, Don't Tell), The DREAM Act (giving illegal immigrants up to 35 yrs of age, amnesty), and Tax issues.
Republican Senator Jim DeMint vows to stop the lame duck congress from jamming anything through that has not already been approved and not letting Democrats take advantage and abuse their power in those months after the American people vote and decide who they want running the House of Representatives.
South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint warned Monday evening that he would block all legislation that has not been cleared by his office in the final days of the pre-election session.
Bret Bernhardt, DeMint's chief of staff, said in an e-mail to GOP aides that his boss would place a hold on all legislation that has not been cleared by both parties by the end of the day Tuesday.
Any senator can place a hold to block legislation — and overcoming that would require the Senate to take time-consuming steps to invoke cloture, which would require 60 votes.
If voters do hand control of the House of Representatives to the GOP, then Democrats should not try to pass any controversial bills, allowing the will of the people to know their voices were heard and understood.
If voters do not hand control to the GOP and instead vote to leave the Democrats as the majority in the House, then DeMint should not use those specific rules to block everything but allow bills to be won or lost with up or down votes.
The voters should be the last word in whether Democrats should continue setting the agenda, and to use the time in between the election and the seating and/or handing over control to force issues against the election results, would indeed be a tremendous abuse of power and further proof that Democrats do not care what the American people, those they swore to represent, actually want.
The midterm election should be the deciding factor, that is why we have elections to begin with and both parties should respect the will of the people after November.
Tradition Values Coalition has a petition to stop the lame duck congress. (Photo credit for image above goes to them)
Flying today from Los Angeles to Phoenix to speak to the Ahwatukee Republican Women.
eric aka the Tygrrrr Express
Joe Biden And The Whining Progressives- Dems Need Independents And Moderates, They Already Have Liberals
The latest attack against Progressives by the Obama administration comes from Joe Biden who tells them to "stop whining" and start fighting against Republicans instead of the White House.
Progressive Liberals are incensed, Daily Kos just being an example given in the article:
It’s idiotic is what it is,” says Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas, one of Obama’s most pointed critics on the left. “If Democrats, with the White House and Congressional super-majorities, had delivered on what they had promised, and if people had jobs, no one would be whining. They have reaped what they sowed. They haven’t delivered on what they’ve promised — and instead of making the case as to why they would do if they are reelected, they are insulting people.
These continued attacks against the far left progressive Democratic base seem to genuinely confuse them. They truly cannot seem to grasp the reasoning behind the strategy the White House is using as evidenced by a question I see over and over again on their blogs.
An example from AmericaBlog's John Aravosis:
The thing is, I can't for the life of me understand what the White House thinks it gains by continually poking the base - the people who actually vote in mid-term elections - only five weeks before the election. Are they trying to convince the rest of Democrats - you know, the people who don't vote in mid-terms - that if they did vote, they should vote for Democrats because the people concerned about the state of the party, and the nation, are "whiners"?
A serious question for Aravosis and all other hard core progressive liberals out there: "If you vote, will you vote for a Republican in November?"
I seriously doubt any one of those Joe Biden is speaking to can honestly answer yes to that question. The answer would be more like "HELL NO, are you NUTS?"
Note to progressives- The White House knows this. So, as much as it galls you to admit, right now, this close to the November midterms, you are unimportant and here is why.
The Democratic far left progressive base is most likely to go out and vote but the base's vote alone, without elderly, without Independents and without moderates, is not a majority, is not a large a enough base to save the Democrats in the midterms.
By the numbers
According to Pew Research, Independents are the largest voting bloc with 37 percent of registered voters being independents or other non-partisans, 34 percent being Democrats and 29 percent being Republicans.
According to Gallup, June 2009, the breakdown shows 40 percent of Americans describe their political views as conservative, 35 percent as Moderate and 21 percent as liberal.
When broken down and asked if they were "very" conservative or "very" liberal, 9 percent self identified as very conservative and only 5 percent self identified as very liberal.
To measure political ideology, Gallup asks Americans to say whether their political views are very conservative, conservative, moderate, liberal, or very liberal. As has been the case each year since 1992, very few Americans define themselves at the extremes of the political spectrum. Just 9% call themselves "very conservative" and 5% "very liberal." The vast majority of self-described liberals and conservatives identify with the unmodified form of their chosen label.
Far left progressive liberals, in my opinion, are those that would self identify as "very liberal" and they make up only 5 percent of Americans.
As of October 2009 the very liberal and moderately liberal were merged in another Gallup poll and they still only garnered 20-21 percent.
Just using a progressive from FireDoglake as an example, Blue Texan explains what will and what does not appeal to the progressive liberal:
Just so we’re clear, here are a few examples of messages that don’t appeal to me at all.
“Get over it.”
Yes, I do.
And none of these phrases motivate me to want to vote, canvass, give money, phone bank, blog, you know, generally take time away from putting food on my family to pull the lever for Democrats in November.
On the other hand, these would do the trick.
“We’ll fight to add the public option to the health care bill.”
“We’re getting out of Afghanistan.”
“We are pulling the remaining 50,000 troops out of Iraq.”
“We’re going to cut the approximately $1T annual defense budget in half and use the remainder to fund US infrastructure projects, including high speed rail.”
“We will roll back the Bush/Cheney executive power grabs.”
“We will repeal DADT.”
“We will fight for marriage equality.”
“We will reform the Senate and eliminate the filibuster.”
“We will make the Fed transparent.”
“We will legalize marijuana.”
Progressives are not asking for anything they haven't stood for all along.
What Blue Texan and the other "whining" progressive liberals continue to ignore is that their goals, their main focus, what they want in totality and what they want to hear Obama and White House officials say, might get their small minority to the polls with enthusiasm, but would drive moderates and Independents, especially the growing number that consider their views right of the center, away from the voting booths.
When the White House, Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Democratic politicians slam progressives, offend them and tell them to shit down, shut up and be happy with what they have gotten, they are not really talking to progressive liberals at all, they are trying to appeal to moderates and Independents.
They are the targets right now. They are the focus. They are what is important to Barack Obama and Joe Biden and every other Democratic politician fighting for their political lives.
Don't worry progressives.. when Barack Obama starts campaigning for the 2012 Presidential election, he will start paying attention to you again and make all his pretty promises geared to rev you up.
Sad thing is, some of you will actually believe him.... again.
Just for entertainment, here is Joe Biden, compounding his insult to progressives, via video clip.
Biden makes it worse: "Quit Whining" becomes 'it's time to just buck-up here'
Maybe we can stop hearing progressives asking "why are they doing this to us?" The answer is clear, right now they need Independents and moderates far more than they need the 5 percent of far left self identified progressive liberals.
Monday, September 27, 2010
Latest polls below:
Gallup- 49 percent disapprove and 40 percent approve of Barack Obama's job performance.
Rasmussen Reports- 52 percent disapprove and 47 percent approve of Barack Obama's job performance.
CNN/Opinion Research- 54 percent disapprove and 42 percent approve of Barack Obama's job performance.
Politico/GWU/Battleground- 51 percent disapprove and 46 percent approve of Barack Obama's job performance.
Reuters/Ipsos- 50 percent disapprove and 47 percent approve of Barack Obama's job performance.
FOX News- 52 percent disapprove and 42 percent approve of Barack Obama's job performance.
McClatchy/Marist- 50 percent disapprove and 45 percent approve of Barack Obama's job performance.
eric aka the Tygrrrr Express
Yesterday I am spoke at an event with Congressmen Eric Cantor and Dana Rohrabacher.
eric aka the Tygrrrr EXPRESS
Flying back from San Antonio to Los Angeles.
eric aka the Tygrrrr Express
Another poll, released from Gallup, shows that trust in "Legislative Branch Falls to Record-Low."
Trust in the legislative branch was highest, at 71%, in May 1972, and remained generally high from that point to the mid-2000s. It then dropped to 50% in 2007, 47% in 2008, and 45% in 2009, all record lows at the time they were measured. This year's 36% legislative confidence rating marks still another record low, and is the lowest trust level in any of the three branches of government in Gallup's history.
Now, notice the part I emphasized.
Trust hit below 50 percent in 2007.
Flashback to 2006:
The 2006 United States midterm elections were held on Tuesday, November 7, 2006. All United States House of Representatives seats and one third of the United States Senate seats were contested in this election, as well as 36 state governorships, many state legislatures, four territorial legislatures and many state and local races. The election resulted in a sweeping victory for the Democratic Party which captured the House of Representatives, the Senate, and a majority of governorships and state legislatures from the Republican Party.
The facts and numbers speak for themselves.
POLITICO/George Washington University Battleground Poll reports:
More people are getting their news about the upcoming election from cable television than any other source, and from Fox News more than any other cable channel, according to a POLITICO/George Washington University Battleground Poll released Monday.
The poll found that 81 percent of those polled get their news about the midterm elections from cable channels, like Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, or their websites, compared with 71 percent from national network news channels, such as ABC, NBC or CBS, and their websites.
Among cable news channels, Fox was the clear winner, with 42 percent of respondents saying it is their main source, compared with 30 percent who cited CNN and 12 percent who rely on MSNBC.
Enough to makes heads explode on the Liberal side of the blogosphere.
NYT's The Caucus reports that Barack Obama, in an attempt to "recapture Democratic enthusiasm" from 2008, will try to go back in time to when he drew large crowds, made pretty speeches, promised his cult of followers a rose garden.
The difference between then and now is those followers actually believed Obama's campaign promises.
Hard core far left progressive Democrats believed Barack Obama would have ended all wars, Iraq and Afghanistan by now, they believed he would no longer fight court battles proclaiming "state secrets" as George Bush did, they believed he would fight and win the "public option" argument for Obamacare, they believed Gitmo would be closed by now and they believed Illegal aliens would get amnesty.
The point is they believed Obama's rhetoric in 2008.
Jump to 2010 and you have supporters expressing buyer's remorse, Velma Hart telling Obama to his face she is exhausted of defending him and his administration, Greg Smith expressing how "hopeless" he feels after all his efforts to campaign for Obama in 2008, Glenn Greenwald angry (normal state for him it seems), Susan Madrak of Crooks and Liars telling White House officials she feels like the "the girl you'll take under the bleachers but you won't be seen with in the light of day," Jane Hamsher at FireDogLake feeling belittled by Obama, hard core far left Democrats disappointed, disillusioned, feeling betrayed by Barack Obama.
Being hard core supporters, Democrats first and foremost, they may piss, moan, complain, yell, scream, whine and vent, but when all is said and done, if they show up at the voting booths in November for midterms, will cast their votes for Democrats anyway.
Independents are a whole different ballgame.
According to Pew Research, Independents are the largest voting bloc with 37% of registered voters being independents or other non-partisans, 34% being Democrats and 29% being Republicans.
Independents tipped the scales for Obama in 2008, believing his claims of working in a totally bipartisan atmosphere, believed, despite Obama's voting record and history, that he would rule from the middle, believed he would "change" the way Washington worked, believed Obama would help create jobs, make a dent in fixing the economy and would represent American views in the White House.
What they got was a President that signed into law a healthcare plan that the majority of Independents, the majority of Americans, completely opposed and objected to. A President that has allowed Government spending to drive our national deficit higher than any other president has. A President that has handed over billions upon bilions to bailouts of the Auto industry, banks, unions, etc.. A President that has driven unemployment up to 9.6 percent. A President that has broken trust with them.
According to Pew Research, Independents now "favor Republican candidates by about as large a margin as they backed Barack Obama in 2008 and congressional Democratic candidates four years ago. "
Uncharacteristically, independent voters, who typically are not highly engaged by midterm elections, are now more likely than Democrats to say they are giving a lot of thought to this one. And they are about as likely as Democrats to say they definitely will vote; during the fall of 2006, far more Democrats than independents said they definitely would vote.
The relatively high level of independent engagement this year has come among those who plan to vote Republican. Fully 64% of independents who plan to vote for the Republican in their district are giving a lot of thought to the election, compared with just 40% of independents who plan to vote for a Democrat.
Independents are disillusioned even more than Democrats.
Going into the 2010 elections
Barack Obama's approval ratings continue to hit new lows as headlines keep screaming, Congressional Democratic leaders (Pelosi and Reid) hold the highest unpopularity ratings, Obamacare aka Healthcare remains opposed by the majority of Americans despite promises that once it was passed it would become popular, unemployment is up to 9.6 percent, Obama's budget plan projects a record-breaking $1.6 trillion in the current fiscal year, and every day the news gets worse and worse.
The latest polling on enthusiasm, by a McClatchy/Marist poll, shows "Republican voters are more excited about their vote than are Democratic voters. 46% of Republican voters compared with 30% of Democrats are very enthusiastic about voting in the upcoming midterm elections. 23% of independent voters also express a high level of enthusiasm."
Barack Obama might draw a crowd on Tuesday when he holds an old-fashioned campaign rally on the campus of the University of Wisconsin, Madison, if not they can just bus people in again for the photo ops trying to show some excitement, but getting voters favoring Democrats to the booths in November, voters that are not hard core far left progressive Democrats, will not happen because Barack Obama decided to give another pretty speech or because he makes more promises.
No longer are moderates and Independents going to believe the rhetoric when their eyes, their wallet, their newspapers tell them a different story.
A new POLITICO / George Washington University Battleground Poll shows that a "significant majority" of voters are already considering voting against Obama in 2012, so does he, or Democrats think Obama can bring out voters for midterms when his own reelection prospects for 2012 are already being measured and found wanting?
The excitement of 2008 is gone, the Obama mystery has been revealed and so far, not many people on either side of the aisle or down the middle is impressed with the storyline.
That is why Barack Obama and the Democrats, will not be able to "recapture" the enthusiasm of 2008.
Republicans are excited about taking control of the House and perhaps the Senate. Independents are enthused about restoring some semblance of balance to Washington.
Question to ponder: What exactly is there for Democrats to be enthusiastic about?
It is a common cycle throughout history that when the proletariat is marginalized by the upper echelon of societal hierarchy violence will ensue. The current political and economic climate in America is giving rise to a perfect storm despair that could lead to a prime example of what psychologists call the frustration-aggression theory.
In terms of unemployment the frustration-aggression theory relates to the frustration developed when layoffs occur.
Workers who have been laid off feel there is a lack of reason for their perceived failure. In other words their actions did not justify their job loss and with no reason the lack of closure can lead to frustration. This frustration has been magnified by the lack of jobs currently in American society.
To read the rest please visit World News Heard Now
Sunday, September 26, 2010
The White House
Office of the Press SecretaryFor Immediate ReleaseSeptember 24, 2010
Presidential Proclamation--Gold Star Mother’s and Families’ Day
In a long line of heroes stretching from the greens of Lexington and Concord to the mountains of Afghanistan, selfless patriots have defended our lives and liberties with valor and honor. They have been ordinary Americans who loved their country so profoundly that they were willing to give their lives to keep it safe and free. As we pay tribute to the valiant men and women in uniform lost in battle, we also recognize the deep loss and great strength of those who share in that ultimate sacrifice: America's Gold Star Mothers and Families.
For those in our Armed Forces who gave their last full measure of devotion, their loved ones know the high cost of our hard won freedoms and security. An empty seat at the table and missed milestones leave a void that can never be filled, yet the legacy of our fallen heroes lives on in the people they loved. Their exceptional spirit of service dwells in the pride of Gold Star parents, who instilled the values that led these brave men and women to service. It grows in the hearts of their children, who know that, despite their absence, they gave their lives so others might be free. And, it echoes in the enduring love of their spouses the backbone of our military families who supported the person they cherished most in the world in serving our Nation. Though our Gold Star families have sacrificed more than most can ever imagine, they still find the courage and strength to comfort other families, support veterans, and give back to their communities.
It is from these examples of unwavering patriotism that we witness the values and ideals for which our country was founded, and for which America's sons and daughters have laid down their lives. As members of a grateful Nation, we owe a debt we can never repay, but hold this sacred obligation forever in our hearts, minds, and actions.
The Congress, by Senate Joint Resolution 115 of June 23, 1936 (49 Stat. 1895 as amended), has designated the last Sunday in September as "Gold Star Mother's Day."
NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim Sunday, September 26, 2010, as Gold Star Mother's and Families' Day. I call upon all Government officials to display the flag of the United States over Government buildings on this special day. I also encourage the American people to display the flag and hold appropriate ceremonies as a public expression of our Nation's sympathy, support, and respect for our Gold Star Mothers and Families.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-fourth day of September, in the year of our Lord two thousand ten, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fifth.
Democratic candidates across the country are opening a fierce offensive of negative advertisements against Republicans, using lawsuits, tax filings, reports from the Better Business Bureau and even divorce proceedings to try to discredit their opponents and save their Congressional majority.
Forget running on the issues that hasn't been working out so well for Democrats with all their "big win" legislation being opposed by the majority of Americans, so time to go for the throat and attack.
As they struggle to break through with economic messages, many Democrats are deploying the fruits of a yearlong investigation into the business and personal histories of Republican candidates in an effort to plant doubts about them and avoid having races become a national referendum on the performance of President Obama and his party.
Republicans, on the other hand, have a different idea and using Democrats' voting records on the issues:
“Our strongest piece of opposition research on Democrats is their voting records,” said Representative Pete Sessions of Texas, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee. “While character assassination seems to be the strategy for Democrats this year, the American people are supporting Republican candidates because they are providing an alternative.”
Negative advertising can be effective, no doubt there but will it convince every day voters that are concerned about unemployment rates, nation deficits, the economy and the Democrats recent spending sprees, to simply ignore all that?
The problem for Democratic politicians right now is their association with Obama, Reid and Pelosi.
Obama's approval numbers are tanking, Pelosi and Reid, according to polling are the two top political leaders with the highest disapproval and unfavorabilty and the GOP has a large enthusiasm lead with voters against the Democrats.
Fact is Democrats are scared to run on their record, to run a campaign listing their recent "accomplishments" because the American people are against some of their biggest so-called wins and they know it.
Grab your popcorn folks, the entertainment is about to begin.
Meet Alan West, Republican Congressional Candidate Takes On Obama And Pelosi 'Welcome To the Jungle'
H/T Shark-Tank who provides background on how low the Democrats have gone to defeat West, going as far as to fund a mailer that released Allen West’s Social Security number.
Last week the the Florida Democrat Party released Allen West’s Social Security number in an attack mailer that they financed, hoping to demoralize West into either backing off or quitting the race out right, but there’s no chance that will happen. This ploy has actually backfired on the libs, as West is now in the media spotlight and is fielding dozens of interviews because of this coward-ass play by the Democrats-earned media that is worth its weight in gold.
Ladies and gentlemen, meet Alan West.
Make sure to read Shark-Tank's related posts as well:
Allen West To Florida Democrat Party -”I Am Going To Defeat You” (VIDEO)
Florida Democratic Party’s Identity Theft of Allen West
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Democratic Senator John Kerry shows exactly why Democrats are projected to lose so big in the midterms, the mindset of Democrats.
A testy U.S. Sen. John F. Kerry yesterday blamed clueless voters with short attention spans for the uphill battle beleaguered Democrats are facing against Republicans across the nation.
“We have an electorate that doesn’t always pay that much attention to what’s going on so people are influenced by a simple slogan rather than the facts or the truth or what’s happening,” Kerry told reporters after touring the Boston Medical Center yesterday.
Democratic politicians simply refuse to understand that the American people are informed, are watching them and are unhappy with the way they have ran Washington these past years and want to replace them.
No, the Democratic mindset is that the American people are simply too stupid, too "uninformed" to really know what they are talking about, to know what they want and what they do not want.
Here is a little dose of cold hard reality for Mr. Kerry from the Associated Press Polling Director Trevor Tompson, AP Deputy Polling Director Jennifer Agiesta and AP News Survey Specialist Dennis Junius on August 31, 2010.
In nine of 15 issues examined in an Associated Press-GfK Poll this month, more Americans who expressed intense interest in a problem voiced strong opposition to Obama’s work on it, including the economy, unemployment, federal deficits and terrorism. They were about evenly split over the president’s efforts on five issues and strongly approved of his direction on just one: U.S. relationships with other countries.
In another danger sign for Democrats, most Americans extremely concerned about 10 of the issues say they will vote for the Republican candidate in their local House race. Only those highly interested in the environment lean toward the Democrats.
Democrats' biggest problem isn't voters who are uninvolved or under-informed... their biggest problem are the voters that are the most interested, more informed.
Perhaps it is John Kerry that needs to be informed of the "truth" and "facts".
The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) also known as the Kill the Jews Commitee has voted that Israel committed War Crimes against the Mavi Marmara on May 31.
A report by three United Nations appointed human rights experts Wednesday said that Israeli forces violated international law when they raided a Gaza-bound aid flotilla, killing nine activists, earlier this year.This is the same organization headed by that bastion of Liberty and Human Rights: Libya.
The UN Human Rights Council's fact-finding mission concluded that Israel's naval blockade of the Palestinian territory was unlawful because of the humanitarian crisis there, and described the military raid on the flotilla as brutal and disproportionate.
Israel has maintained that its soldiers acted in self-defense when they shot and killed eight Turkish activists and one Turkish-American aboard the Mavi Marmara on May 31. Israel Defense Forces released footage showing its troops coming under attack as they tried to board the boat.
The Human Rights Council blamed Israel prior to the investigation and it is no surprise that they condemn after, said Andy David, a spokesman for the Israeli Foreign Ministry, referring to the 47-member body's resolution in early June condemning the raid.
Yes they excel in the pursuit of human rights for all people. You can find such outstanding examples of their humanity here, here, and here.
Or listen to the words of Kristiana Venelinova Valcheva, a nurse from Bulgaria.
I am Kristiana Venelinova Valcheva, a nurse from Bulgaria. To make my identity clearer I will add a few keywords - Bulgarian medics, hostages, inquisitions, Libya, Qaddafi, death sentence, issued trice.You see that under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights every Muslim nation is allowed to torture, falsely imprison, rape and even murder any non-Muslim in their land. So it is ok for Libya or any other Islamic
If someone told me eleven years ago that these words would become my "visit card", I would laugh. Because eleven years ago my life, the lives of my husband, Dr. Zdravko Georgiev, of another four Bulgarian nurses and the Palestinian doctor Ashraf., as well as the lives of our families were cut in the middle - before and after 1999.
It all began on February 9, 1999, in Benghazi. On that day we, five Bulgarian nurses, were abducted in a gangsters' manner by the Libyan authorities. They abducted us from our homes and workplaces, threw us into a bus with our hands, eyes and mouth tied, and carried us overnight one thousand and hundred kilometers away to Tripoli 1,100 km. In Libya they call this a lawful arrest.
We did not know why this was happening and what was coming after. We did not know that we ware a part of a sinister scenario of a dictator. We did not know that what was awaiting us were eight years and a half in the hell of the Libyan prisons.
For 14 months they kept us at a school for police dogs. For 14 months we were subjected to barbaric torture, humiliation and mockery.
They stretched me at a window frame and beat me with sticks and cables. Night after night they forced us to stand on one leg with our hands raised and if anybody tried to put his second leg on the floor out of exhaustion, that one would be mercilessly beaten. They would beat us over the soles of our feet, and then make us run with our feet swollen and black of beating, blood and lymph flowing from them. They injected me with drugs, undressed me totally naked, bind me to a metal bed and then the worst started -- inquisition by electrical shock.
Representative Kevin McCarthy said it all. Well said.
If you want to read the GOP's "Pledge to America" in full, go here.
Here's as blunt a racial play as you'll see: Rep. Loretta Sanchez, speaking on Univision, warns that Republicans and "the Vietnamese and the Republicans" are trying to take away her seat, which she's used to do so much for "our community" and "give it" to a Vietnamese Republican who is both "anti-immigrant" and "anti-Hispanic"
Her challenger, Republican Assemblyman Van Tran is a Vietnamese American who characterizes Sanchez's comments as a "racial rampage." (Source)
LA Times reports Van Tran sent of a letter to Sanchez:
Tran wrote a letter to Sanchez's office asking for an apology for her comments. "With such a diverse immigrant population that call central Orange County home, you should know better than stoking the flames of racial division in our community," he wrote.
So, who is Sanchez calling "anti-immigrant"?
Van Tran's bio shows this:
Van's family first came to America in 1975, evacuated by the U.S. Army a week before the fall of Saigon.
Blunder of major proportion by Sanchez here.. perhaps she meant that Van Tran was anti "Illegal" immigrants..... if so, then good for him.
This headline from CNN stating "CNN Poll: Obama at all time low," is getting a little old by now with new polls conducted each starting to confirm what Rasmussen and other poling organizations showed months ago... Barack Obama is bleeding numbers.
CNN's Political Ticker:
President Barack Obama is contending with the lowest approval rating of his 20-month presidency, a new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll finds.
The president's approval rating now stands at 42 percent – an all time low in CNN polling and 8 points lower than where Obama was only three weeks ago. Moreover, 56 percent of all Americans think the president has fallen short of their expectations.
Obama's support vs Tea Party support:
In even worse news for congressional Democrats, likely voters say they are considerably more likely to vote for a candidate the president opposes than one he supports. On the other hand, 50 percent of voters said they would be more likely to vote for a Tea Party-backed candidate while a third of Americans said Tea Party support would dissuade their vote for a candidate.
My problem with the headline is it is never ending.. each and every time Obama's approval numbers drop, we see headlines declaring that Barack Obama has hit a new low.
Google Search says it all.
Some quick headline suggestions:
Obama hemorrhaging numbers..... Obama numbers help drive GOP tidal wave for midterms.... CNN Poll: Obama approval drops 8 percentage points in three weeks......
Friday, September 24, 2010
Humiliating to be a Democrat today for sure, especially when one Democratic lawmaker invites a comedian to testify before congress and another Democrat asks him to leave and simply submit his testimony in writing.
The Politico gives flavor to the not-so-funny comedy that embarrassed Democratic lawmakers.
He promptly returned the favor by turning Congress — specifically a Judiciary subcommittee — into his personal comedy club.
Colbert delighted in asking whether he could "submit video of my colonoscopy into the Congressional Record," talking about getting a Chilean to give him a "Brazilian" wax — a delicate-area hair-removal procedure. And he apologized to Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) for using the term "cornpacker" because it is "an offensive term for gay Iowans."
While Colbert might have killed it for his "nation" of TV followers, he bombed with political strategists and analysts in both parties.
For a Democratic majority that has had difficulty demonstrating to voters that its policies are addressing their needs, Colbert provided another day off message and, perhaps, an emblem of a party that has lost its footing as it limps toward a preelection adjournment.
David Corn, who writes for the liberal Mother Jones magazine, tweeted "Colbert is making a mockery of this hearing."
The Fix provides more one liners from Colbert.
"Maybe this bill would help," he said. "I'm not sure; like most members of Congress, I haven't read it."
Headlines are highlighting Colbert's Congressional Comedic Chaos and I am sure Democrats would prefer the whole episode be forgotten, yet I have visions of much of this being used in video coverage for Republicans campaigning against Democrats to show how much of a mockery the Democratically controlled Congress has become.
Colbert embarrasses Dems; Conyers asks comedian to leave
Colbert appearance causes mixed feelings
COLBERT ‘MADE MOCKERY’ OF CONGRESS
Colbert serious, sarcastic in hearing
Stephen Colbert cracks jokes at Capitol Hill hearing
More headlines and discussions found at Memeorandum.
The clowns are definitely running the show these days.
Senate Democrats failed to get the 60 votes need to bypass a filibuster on Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections Act aka The Disclose Act, the bill being rejected with a vote of 59 to 39.
The legislation, which passed the House in a different form earlier this year, was drafted as a response to the 5 to 4 Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. The court found that corporations had the same rights as individuals to engage in political speech and could therefore spend as much as they wanted for or against specific candidates.
Obama pointedly criticized the ruling during his State of the Union address, prompting an unusual public objection weeks later by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. The president and other White House aides have continued to focus on the decision as opening the door to abuses by corporations and had made passage of the Disclose Act a top legislative priority.
In his weekly radio address last Saturday, for example, Obama blasted Republicans for opposing the bill. "A partisan minority in Congress is hoping their defense of these special interests and the status quo will be rewarded with a flood of negative ads against their opponents," Obama said. "It's a power grab, pure and simple."
Barack Obama and Democrats did not like the court ruling, therefore they wanted to pass a bill that would negate the ruling.
From the Citizen United ruling:
"When government seeks to use its full power, including the criminal law, to command where a person may get his or her information or what distrusted source he or she may not hear, it uses censorship to control thought," the court said in a decision written by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. "This is unlawful. The First Amendment confirms the freedom to think for ourselves."
Does money "buy" elections?
Let's look at recent primaries and elections and see.
In the Delaware GOP primary Senate race, Rep. Mike Castle raised $3,243,202, spent $1,489,033 and had $2,616,912 cash on hand.
PAC contributions $1,248,341 (38%)
Individual contributions $1,936,809 (60%)
Candidate self-financing $4,800 (0%)
Other $53,252 (2%)
Christine O'Donnell raised $376,093, spent $346,145, and had $20,374 cash on hand.
PAC contributions $8,250 (2%)
Individual contributions $351,090 (93%)
Candidate self-financing $3,026 (1%)
Other $13,727 (4%)
The Tea Party sponsored and produced ads to help Christine O'Donnell and Mike Castle had the National Republican Senatorial Committee behind him.
Yet, O'Donnell won the primary.
The same happened in Alaska, outside groups did not "buy" the elections, they leveled the playing field to allow lesser known candidates a chance to remove left of center moderates and offer voters a choice.
Those were GOP primaries, used as examples simply because they were the most recent in the news... what about general elections or the upcoming midterms where it is a Democrat vs a Republican?
The Democratic National Committee out-raised its GOP counterpart, the Republican National Committee, by approximately $3 million in the month of August. The DNC raised $10.9 million last month, whereas Republicans raised $7.9 million. This gives the DNC around $13.4 million in cash on hand; the RNC has about $4.7 million cash on hand. It should be noted, however, that the DNC has $8.4 million in debt, versus the RNC's debt of $1.2 million.
As we reported yesterday, last month the DCCC out-raised the NRCC on the House side of the campaign, and the DSCC outdid the NRSC in fundraising for Senate races.
Using Nevada as an example to make the point of what I mean when I say leveling the playing field.
Nevada, Democratic incumbent Harry Reid, according to OpenSecrets.org has raised $19,198,455 and Republican challenger Sharron Angle has raised $3,548,644 (last updated on 09/24/2010)
Sharron Angle has taken a one point lead over Harry Reid when outside groups helped level the playing field with money spent, but still not totaling the overall expenditures on behalf of Harry Reid.
Fred Barnes at WSJ explains this better than I can:
Republican strategists Ed Gillespie and Karl Rove were appalled last winter as they searched out well-funded conservative groups that were preparing to support GOP congressional candidates in the 2010 midterm. They sensed there were too few of them and that a once-in-a-generation opportunity might be lost. Short of money and grass-roots activism, GOP candidates would be easy prey for lavishly funded Democratic opponents—not to mention liberal groups committed to spending hundreds of millions on attack ads.
This scenario has been averted. Conservatives and Republicans have organized an army of independent groups in a shrewd, collaborative and well-financed effort. While old standbys—the National Rifle Association, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce—are involved, they now have reinforcements. They've come close to matching overall spending by Democratic groups, thus leveling the campaign playing field and enhancing Republican chances of capturing the House, Senate, and more governorships and state legislatures in 2010.
The influence of the new coalition is already being felt. American Crossroads, a brainchild of Messrs. Gillespie and Rove, has poured $3 million into the Nevada Senate race, keeping the underfunded Republican candidate, Sharron Angle, from falling behind Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in the polls. (She led 46% to 45% in a Fox News poll last week.) In Ohio, when Republican Senate candidate Rob Portman was off the air in late July, American Crossroads stepped in with a wave of TV ads on his behalf. In August, the Chamber of Commerce took over with pro-Portman ads. A Quinnipiac poll last week pegged his lead over Democrat Lee Fisher at 55% to 35%.
Long-established conservative groups such as the pro-life Susan B. Anthony List are engaged in this midterm, but a more recent newcomer, Americans for Prosperity (AFP), is also playing a major role, perhaps a decisive one. It has targeted 60 Democratic incumbents and expects to spend $35 million to $45 million to defeat them.
"We're not some Washington, D.C. group," says AFP President Tim Phillips. With bus tours, rallies, TV spots, phone calls, door-to-door contacts and recruitment of volunteers, this group is building what he calls "an honest to goodness ground game" manned by thousands of conservative activists.
The Democratic lead in fund-raising is itself a relatively recent phenomenon. Republicans spent more in 2006, but Democrats surged ahead in 2008, spending $956 million to the Republicans' $792 million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. This includes spending by groups independent of the party or the candidate.
Democrats were simply quicker than Republicans to skirt, quite legally, the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law that took effect in 2003. That legislation barred high-dollar (or "soft money") donations to political parties. It prompted wealthy liberals, for example, to fund independent expenditures through groups such as MoveOn.org. Rich conservatives were less active until this year.
Campaign finance watchdogs and the media were never terribly concerned when liberal groups were drubbing conservatives in independent expenditures. Now they profess shock that millions are being spent to boost Republican candidates and the names of wealthy donors aren't disclosed.
In any event, four of the top five independent groups—the AFL-CIO, Service Employees International Union, Services Employees Local 1999, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee—support Democratic campaigns. The lone conservative group in the top five is the Susan B. Anthony List. Based on data released by the Federal Election Commission, however, the overall gap has narrowed: As of Sept. 18, money spent on behalf of Democratic candidates from all reported sources totaled $389,023,152, only slightly more than the $377,689,336 for Republicans.
So, is assuring that the same amount spent on campaigns between opposing candidates "buying" an election?
In November when the expected tidal wave hits Democrats it will be because the American people choose one or the other, the person spending the most money won't be the deciding factor, the popularity of a candidate or unpopularity of a candidate in the eyes of those voting will decide.
Democrats do not want a level playing field and have been determined to make an end run around the Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission by trying to control what has been determined to be free speech.
They failed, as they should have. More information, whether it be positive ads or negative, is always preferable to less and voters, are smart enough to get on the computer and do searches to verify anything they want to make an informed decision.
Elections are not bought, they are won or they are lost by the individual candidates.
If corporation leaders want to spend their profits, they have just as much right to do so without being intimidated as unions and other groups... it is free speech and the court was right to judge it as such.
Side note- For the record, the more money spent by both parties and all Independent groups on either side, should be welcome... after all, doesn't spending and spending big help the economy?
Just a thought.