Former President George W. Bush made a rare appearance in Washington, D.C. today on behalf of George W. Bush
RedState Morning Briefing May 15, 2012 Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge. 1. May 6, 2012: The Day Obama Lost 2. CBS/NYT: Romney 46, Obama 43 Among Registered Voters 3. On Fairness & Moral Cases 4. In Response to Obama Attack Ad, Romney to Tackle Economy & Entitlements 5. Spouse of WI Gubernatorial Recall Candidate Breaks Rules ———————————————————————- 1. May 6, 2012: The Day Obama Lost If there is a day to finger for Barack Obama losing the Presidency in 2012, it will be Sunday, May 6, 2012. On that day, Joe Biden* went on national television and proclaimed himself in favor of gay marriage. It started a media spiral for the President. Two days after Biden spoke, North Carolina voters voted by overwhelming margins to leave marriage alone. The next day, Barack Obama went on national television to devolve back to the position he held prior to running for President. Please click here for the rest of the post. 2. CBS/NYT: Romney 46, Obama 43 Among Registered Voters In a long election season, it’s never wise to get too high or too low over any one poll. Presidential elections are won at the state level, but statewide polling is fairly sporadic at this stage of the race, so we’re stuck reading national polls a lot. But the latest poll is bad news for President Obama. We all know the major issues by now to look for with individual polls: some polls are adults, and are totally useless, because only registered voters can vote. Polls of likely voters, in turn, are vastly more accurate and less Democratic-biased than polls of registered voters, many of whom also don’t show up to vote. Most polls are also reported after weighting to achieve some guesstimate of the partisan breakdown of the general electorate among Democrats, Republicans and Independents. Even polls that don’t feature egregious hackery are an inexact science, because they rest on the pollster’s current assumptions about the D/R/I split and the ‘screen’ they use to decide who is a likely voter. If the shape of the electorate is not as projected, the poll will be wrong. Please click here for the rest of the post. 3. On Fairness & Moral Cases Another day, another socialist takes to the New York Times to denounce capitalism. With his criticism — he is a professional critic, which is a job no socialist society would really see value in except as an agenda of propaganda, but he thrives in the capitalist society he condemns — he premises it on some sort of morality. He mocks Christians for embracing capitalism with no understanding of Christianity or even a real understanding of capitalism. But his critique is filled with the usual, and totally unoriginal leftist pablum about the evils of profit motive, etc. while ignoring arms length transactions, how the free market, unlike any other economic system, has elevated so many out of poverty, etc. Along the way, we keep hearing something from these leftists, whether it be Barack Obama, Elizabeth Warren, Nancy Pelosi, or the Hollywood crowd is that the rich need to “give back” and “pay their fair share.” They’re just as happy to quote a secular philosopher as they are the Bible. Elizabeth Warren famously said that the factory owner wants us to ignore the people who built the roads or ran the phone lines, etc. She, however, wants to ignore the factory owner’s idea, success, and hiring record — providing jobs to people to build his product. But all of that misses the larger point. Please click here for the rest of the post. 4. In Response to Obama Attack Ad, Romney to Tackle Economy & Entitlements Obama has decided that he’d like to tussle with Romney in the economic playground this week, releasing an ad that has echoes of Gingrich’s SuperPAC spots but with even less factual basis. It’s cleverly named “Steel.” Please click here for the rest of the post. 5. Spouse of WI Gubernatorial Recall Candidate Breaks Rules Kris Barrett, the politically active spouse of Tom Barrett, current mayor of Milwaukee and the Democratic nominee running against Gov. Scott Walker, has been caught using her taxpayer funded e-mail account to lobby and campaign for Democratic candidates and causes. Mrs. Barrett is a public school teacher and last year she was employed by Milwaukee Public Schools, Wisconsin’s largest school district. The district has two policies that prohibit employees from using any government resources, including e-mail addresses, for political purposes. Please click here for the rest of the post.
Read more:
Morning Briefing for May 15, 2012
As the 2008 November election loomed, it appears that then-Senator Barack Obama was traumatized — by Sean Hannity. Author Edward Klein, whose new Obama book The Amateur is just out, has a startling piece in Sunday’s New York Post . As revealing for what it says as for who it doesn’t mention. Klein had interviewed the president’s controversial ex-pastor the Reverend Jeremiah Wright for the book. Wright claims he was offered $150,000 by an Obama supporter to silence himself during the presidential campaign. And that there was a secret meeting between Obama and Wright that took place in the parsonage of the Trinity United Church of Christ, a meeting in which Obama asked Wright to stop preaching sermons until after the November, 2008 elections. Wrote Klein in The Post, beginning with a direct quote from Wright: “Man, the media ate me alive,” Wright told me when we met in his office at Chicago’s Kwame Nkrumah Academy. “After the media went ballistic on me, I received an e-mail offering me money not to preach at all until the November presidential election.” “Who sent the e-mail?” I asked Wright. “It was from one of Barack’s closest friends.” “He offered you money?” “Not directly,” Wright said. “He sent the offer to one of the members of the church, who sent it to me.” “How much money did he offer you?” “One hundred and fifty thousand dollars,” Wright said. “Did Obama himself ever make an effort to see you?” “Yes,” Wright said. “Barack said he wanted to meet me in secret, in a secure place. And I said, ‘You’re used to coming to my home, you’ve been here countless times, so what’s wrong with coming to my home?’ So we met in the living room of the parsonage of Trinity United Church of Christ, at South Pleasant Avenue right off 95th Street, just Barack and me. I don’t know if he had a wire on him. His security was outside somewhere. “And one of the first things Barack said was, ‘I really wish you wouldn’t do any more public speaking until after the November election.’ He knew I had some speaking engagements lined up, and he said, ‘I wish you wouldn’t speak. It’s gonna hurt the campaign if you do that.’ “And what did you say?” I asked. “I said, ‘I don’t see it that way. And anyway, how am I supposed to support my family?’ And he said, ‘Well, I wish you wouldn’t speak in public. The press is gonna eat you alive. “Barack said, ‘I’m sorry you don’t see it the way I do. Do you know what your problem is?’ And I said, ‘No, what’s my problem?’ And he said, ‘You have to tell the truth.’ I said, ‘That’s a good problem to have. That’s a good problem for all preachers to have. That’s why I could never be a politician.’ “And he said, ‘It’s going to get worse if you go out there and speak. It’s really going to get worse.’ “And he was so right” Two points. An offer of hush money that appears to be connected in some fashion with an Obama donor? Is this not exactly what former North Carolina Senator John Edwards is on trial for as we speak? The use of campaign donor money as hush money for his mistress? What’s the difference, in terms of campaign finance laws, between using campaign donor money to silence a mistress and a minister? Second point. While neither Wright nor Klein mention it here…who specifically was “the media” that both Wright and Obama were so concerned about? When Obama said ” The press is gonna eat you alive” — who exactly in the press was he talking about? That’s right. It was none other than our friend Sean Hannity. The same Sean Hannity who first brought Reverend Wright to national attention through writer Erik Rush — and then brought Wright on Hannity and Colmes . Hannity was relentless in bringing Wright’s controversial sermons (like this one , Wright’s infamous “Goddamn America!” sermon) to national attention — while the mainstream media was quiet as a church mouse. Eventually ABC’s Brian Ross woke up to the controversy, but it was Hannity who took the heat — tons of it — for repeatedly exploring the potential links between Wright’s far-left Black Liberation Theology, socialism and a would-be Obama administration. Now, according to Klein, we know that Obama himself was so concerned about what was in fact Hannity’s continuous reporting on Wright that the then-Senator personally had a secret sit-down with Wright to ask his pastor to, well, shut-up. Again. Campaign donor hush money offer to Jeremiah Wright? Who else from Obama’s past did the campaign or its donor friends try and hush with big bucks? And who took it? And what is the difference between mistress hush money and minister hush money?
Read more here:
Obama’s Fear of Hannity, and Wright Hush Money
We are constantly told by the consultant class that the issue of marriage is a big loser for Republicans. If you listen to the talking points from almost every elected Republican official in recent days, you will hear them say that the whole issue is a “distraction” from the real issues. Simply put, they believe the Democrat talking points that they are on the wrong side of the issue, and desire to ignore the fight for traditional marriage altogether, lest it be an albatross around their necks. However, beyond the public show of bravado regarding gay marriage, it is actually the Democrats who are scared about the electoral consequences of their position on the issue. After all, North Carolina just became the 32 nd state to pass a marriage amendment, and it did so by a large margin (especially considering the inclusion of civil unions in the amendment). As the Hill reports , Democrats outside of dark blue states aren’t exactly jumping on the “right side of history” bandwagon: Sens. Jon Tester (Mont.) and Claire McCaskill (Mo.), the two most vulnerable Democratic senators, have declined to endorse Obama’s call for the legalization of gay marriage. Sens. Joe Manchin (W.Va.), Bob Casey (Pa.) and Bill Nelson (Fla.), Democrats who have easier races but in states that could become more competitive by November, have also backed away from Obama’s stance. They all represent states with constitutional amendments or laws banning same-sex marriage. Keep in mind that Obama won Florida, Pennsylvania, and even North Carolina. Then again, the marriage amendment passed in California during a terrible year for Republicans. It’s also revealing how the states that banned gay marriage did so with the approval of the voters, while those that legalized it did so at the behest of the politicians. Even in Maryland, the bluest of blue states, voters are on the verge of completing a successful referendum petition to strike down the law recognizing gay marriage. Proponents of gay marriage are not too confident they will succeed on the ballot in November…in Maryland. Democrats, including Obama, are clearly nervous about fully embracing a gay marriage agenda. They will trot out contrived polls and talk tough, but ultimately, they are observing the only authentic polling data – the votes at the ballot. We live in a country where most issues are split 50-50, or at best 55-45. There are few issues that have enjoyed 60-70% in the majority of states. Democrats privately understand this; Republicans refuse to take heed. That’s why so few of the prominent elected Republicans even released a press statement lauding the vote in North Carolina. To the extent that they are forced to issue a statement, they mumble some rapid boilerplate about marriage being “between a man and a woman, but let’s go back to talking about the economy.” Let’s not get into the fact that those who are eager to run away from social issues are usually just as alacritous to cave on fiscal issues. Instead of speaking with moral clarity on the issue for at least a few minutes, Republicans have scowled at reporters for daring to ask them about this issue during one of the few weeks that it has achieved prominence. RNC Chairman Reince Priebus was upset that David Gregory made him discuss the issue for an entire 8 minutes! All of these Republicans that refuse to be “distracted” with the issue, clearly feel uncomfortable discussing an issue that has won in 32 states by overwhelming margins. Call me naive, but if I were running a campaign and saw 61% oppose even civil unions in a must-win state, I would air at least one ad in that state showing Obama say “I always planned to endorse same-sex marriage before the election.” We all agree that we need to focus on the economy throughout the 2012 election; however, we must not eschew our bedrock values, especially when they are under assault by Obama. Marriage is not a distraction; it is an issue we should embrace, especially when we are swamping them at the ballot box. If we cede the ground to the left on this, it will lead to the self-fulfilling prophecy of Republican consultants – a view that, at present, is not grounded in reality. Cross-posted from The Madison Project
Originally posted here:
Gay “Marriage” is a Losing Issue…For Democrats
Remember when Barack Obama bravely came out in favor of same-sex marriage before North Carolina voted on the issue? After all, Obama carried the state in 2008. The Democratic National Convention will be held there this summer. His strongest voting bloc, black Americans, was projected to vote for the pro-traditional marriage Amendment One by a 2-1 margin . There’s good reason not to remember: there was no such profile in courage moment. North Carolina passed Amendment One with 61 percent of the vote, with the president tut-tutting about his disappointment , while aides tried furiously to walk back Vice President Joe Biden’s expressions of comfort with redefining marriage. Only the next day did Obama carefully and cautiously proclaim that he had found the missing link in his marriage evolution. Indeed, the president’s position was as subjective as possible: “At a certain point, I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married.” As George Will has quipped , “If you struck from Barack Obama’s vocabulary the first-person singular pronoun, he would fall silent.” Although he has opposed defense-of-marriage ballot initiatives throughout his presidency, even while nominally against same-sex marriage, Obama left the door open to them last week. He said that the definition of marriage should be left up to the states. Where Mario Cuomo once took a stand on abortion frequently described as “personally opposed, but,” Obama has pioneered the gay marriage stance “personally support, but.” “Given the impotence of his endorsement, it really comes down to one man sharing his personal opinion about a moral matter with the rest of nation,” writes author and commentator Timothy Stanley. “And then making a lot of money out of it.” Follow the money. The Washington Post has reported that one in six of Obama’s top campaign bundlers — the people who raise money hand over fist from the “1 percent” for the president’s reelection — is gay. The Hollywood Reporter noted that Obama’s diffidence on marriage left many rich celebrities and West Coast donors reluctant to open their wallets. Hollywood has long led on the issue of gay marriage, putting the president at odds with them on the matter. During THR and Google’s Pre-White House Correspondents’ Dinner Party, nearly every celebrity surveyed listed the legalization of gay marriage on a national level among the issues about which they care most , if not number one. In a recent op-ed for THR , Dustin Lance Black came down hard on both Democrats and Republicans for their refusal to move forward on the issue. Needless to say, that doesn’t track with the priorities of most ordinary voters on either side of the issue. But ordinary voters do not attend $40,000 per person Obama fundraising dinners at George Clooney’s house. Obama flew to join Clooney the day after he unburdened himself on gay marriage. The event was expected to bring in $15 million. Within hours of Obama’s announcement, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) unveiled a new fundraiser asking donors to “stand with the president on marriage equality.” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi signed a DCCC fundraising email announcing, “Breaking: President Obama supports marriage equality.” According to one report , Obama raised $1 million within 90 minutes of announcing his support for gay marriage. An Obama bundler told BuzzFeed, “There are more LGBT co-chairs across the country are raising more money than we’ve ever raised. And you’ll see a lot more of that now.” What we are also likely to see is an election that resembles 2004. George W. Bush was a wobbly, not-terribly popular incumbent; John Kerry was the not-especially beloved challenger from Massachusetts. The two campaigns worked very hard to win the presidency by maximizing their base voters. By coming out for gay marriage, Obama has boosted the enthusiasm of core supporters — young people, liberals, gays and lesbians — in addition to his fundraising totals. (He may have some minor concerns with black churches getting out the vote at the margins.) But he has created an equal and opposite reaction, helping Mitt Romney look more appealing to evangelical voters who haven’t been enthusiastic about the likely Republican nominee. And the HHS contraception mandate controversy may make it harder for evangelicals to believe that the government will allow them to stick to the traditional definition of marriage in their churches. In 2004, Obama chided the pundits who “like to slice and dice our country into red states and blue.” But that mishmash of red and blue, divided along social, cultural, and religious lines, may be more representative national colors come November than the rainbow.
See the rest here:
Green Is a Color in the Rainbow
