TRICK OR TREAT?: Which will it be on Nov. 6th: More Obama tricks, or a real Romney treat?
Author Archive: Elizabeth Price Foley
October 28, 2012
WHY A LIBERTARIAN SUPPORTS ROMNEY: Well known libertarian law professor Brad Smith explains why he supports Mitt Romney over Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson. Smith explains:
Today’s libertarian oriented Tea Parties are middle-aged men and women who came of age with the pro-freedom rhetoric of Ronald Reagan.
Romney may not be a libertarian, yet Romney not infrequently launches wonderful verbal defenses of hard core libertarian views. I can scarcely imagine another major party presidential candidate who would take on leftist hecklers about the rights of individuals organized using the corporate form; or defend the value of being able to fire people for incompetence; worry openly about individual dependency on government; or demand that voters “take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”
So next week, this libertarian will be voting Romney. No regrets, no doubts.
This libertarian agrees whole-heartedly.
BENGHAZI-GATE: Frank Miele reminds us that the 1972 re-election of Richard Nixon was due, in part, to an elaborate cover-up of the Watergate break-in that occurred 5 months earlier, in June 1972. But eventually, Nixon’s involvement was discovered and the American people demanded justice and accountability. Says Miele:
And now here we are again, with a popular president who may very well win re-election despite the seriousness of the accusations made against him (though certainly by a much smaller margin that President Nixon did). The nation is divided and polarized, just as it was in 1972, and some people cannot bring themselves to think the worst of President Obama, no matter how damning the evidence is.
But one thing is certain. Just as Nixon could not escape the whirlwind of Watergate merely by winning an election, neither will Barack Obama avoid the judgment of history and the American people for what happened the night of Sept. 11, 2012. And as Nixon discovered to his chagrin, sometimes the sword of that judgment is terrible and swift.
Let’s hope the American people see the need for change, even if the full facts of Benghazi-gate aren’t made known until after the election.
UPDATE (FROM GLENN): Some related thoughts from Ann Althouse:
A Romney victory would give us the benefit of leaving the Benghazi scandal in the past. It will still be important to investigate, but it won’t — like the Watergate scandal, after the Nixon re-election — cripple a sitting President.
Another reason for Obama to go.
MAINSTREAM MEDIA MONKEYS: And their approach to Benghazi:
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE TIES?: An interesting op-ed in the LA Times today about what happens, constitutionally, when there is a 269-269 Electoral College tie. While liberals are quick to criticize and attempt to “get around” the Electoral College in favor of direct popular vote, the Electoral College serves extremely important interests–namely, federalism–and should not be discarded absent a constitutional amendment via Article V processes (proposal passed by 2/3 both houses of Congress, followed by ratification by 3/4 of States).
WHAT IF POWER IS OUT ON ELECTION DAY?: Hurricane Sandy is expected to make landfall tomorrow in the area between DC and NYC. Power outages are expected and may conceivably last through Election Day (Nov. 6). Given the ubiquity of computerized voting, how will this affect the election?
The only salient language I can find in the Constitution is in Art. II, sec. 1: “The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.”
Art. II thus requires a uniform day of counting the electors’ votes (but not necessarily the popular vote). It would seem Congress could (and indeed, has) enact a statute that would delay counting of electoral votes, to some day after Nov. 6.
UPDATE: Under the current Electoral Count Act, electors cast their votes on the first Monday after the second Wed. in December (Dec. 17, 2012), and of course the votes are “counted” in a joint session of Congress on Jan. 6.
ANOTHER UPDATE: From the North Shore Journal, a useful aggregation of statements from NY, NJ and VA about their plans to deal with Hurricane Sandy’s impact on Election Day. H/T to Chuck Simmins.
GAME CHANGER: DES MOINES REGISTER ENDORSES ROMNEY: The editors apparently duked it out but concluded:
The Register’s editorial board, as it should, had a vigorous debate over this endorsement. Our discussion repeatedly circled back to the nation’s single most important challenge: pulling the economy out of the doldrums, getting more Americans back in the workforce in meaningful jobs with promising futures, and getting the federal government on a track to balance the budget in a bipartisan manner that the country demands.
Which candidate could forge the compromises in Congress to achieve these goals? When the question is framed in those terms, Mitt Romney emerges the stronger candidate.
After the endorsement, a transcript of the President’s discussion with the Des Moines Register editors was released. Read it for yourself, but one word came to mind when I read it: vacuous.
ROMNEY ERASES OBAMA LEAD IN OHIO: The latest polls conducted by Ohio newspapers shows Romney surging in Ohio, erasing a previous 5-point deficit (in late September) to now be in a 49-49 tie. A good indicator of how the tie may break: The sample was D+3, and Romney leads 51-46 on the issue of the economy.
October 25, 2012
THE MYTH OF DEPRIVATION AND INJUSTICE: Kevin Hassett and Arpana Mathur of the American Enterprise Institute report on their new study of the consumption habits of Americans across the economic spectrum. Their findings are contrary to the progressive myth. Specifically, they find that consumption rates across income levels have remained relatively stable over the last several decades, and that today’s poor consume relatively more “luxury” goods– computers, air conditioning, washer/dryers, microwaves and cell phones–than in years past. They conclude:
The data suggest the following picture. Over time, Americans have constructed a vast safety net that has adequately served the poor and helped them—as well as the middle class—to maintain significant consumption growth despite the apparent stagnation of cash incomes. The notion that a society that has accomplished such a feat is rigged or fundamentally unjust is ludicrous.
Turns out America is a pretty great place, and being poor here is not only much better than being poor elsewhere, but even better than the America of the past. Put that in your progressive pipe and smoke it.
THE BITTER PILL OF OBAMACARE: Get ready to bend over unless repeal occurs.
October 24, 2012
WHOA THERE, BIG FELLA: President Obama deigned to sit down with actual reporters–from the Des Moines Register– and spout out a bunch of inconsistencies and downright fabrications. Oh yeah, and apparently he doesn’t “regret” wasting his first two years in office–during which he had a filibuster-proof Senate and control of the House–pursuing big ticket progressive pet projects like health care reform, cap and trade and union card check.
ANOTHER BRAIN DEATH MISDIAGNOSIS: A 19 year-old woman in Denmark was pronounced brain dead and her parents consented to having her organs donated. The respirator was removed. She didn’t die. She is now undergoing rehab and may make a full recovery.
Think this is a one-off? It’s not, as I explore in my book, The Law of Life & Death (Harvard 2011) [shameless plug, I know, but it’s relevant!]. As with the vegetative state, misdiagnosis is more common than the medical community admits–exactly how common is not known. There is far more about the human brain that medical science just does not presently know. For this reason, after researching my book, I am not an organ donor.
THE IMPORTANCE OF FEDERALISM: My op-ed (with David Rivkin) in the Wall Street Journal today about federalism and why it’s so important– to Americans of all political stripes. We assert:
The idea that the Constitution grants only limited and enumerated powers and leaves the remainder to the states is foreign to those who believe that the national government should or even could address voters’ every concern. But contrary to the view widely shared by the political class, Washington—in particular, Congress—does not have the power to pass any law it wants in the name of the “general welfare.”
Politicians should take heed. Voters are increasingly focused on the proper role of government in society: Witness the rise of the tea party and unease over the massive debt caused by entitlements and other government handouts. The continuing loud objection to ObamaCare’s takeover of health care shows that voters want to preserve the Constitution’s architecture of limited federal power.
Federalism isn’t about “states’ rights.” It’s about dividing power to better protect individual liberty.
October 23, 2012
AN OBAMA SECOND TERM: Will create one sure thing– just ask Julia:
THE MYTH OF THE LILLY LEDBETTER FAIR PAY ACT: This great op-ed by Victoria Toensing in the Wall Street Journal explains why the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act–which has featured so prominently in the presidential debates– is much ado about nothing (or darn close to it). Says Toensing:
Mr. Obama brags that the 2009 Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act bestowed equal-pay rights for women. The act, he has said, “is a big step toward making sure every worker,” male and female, “receives equal pay for equal work.” No, it was a teensy step. It merely changed how the statute of limitations is calculated.
“INVEST” IN EDUCATION: And it will apparently invest in you. Ever notice how often President Obama and his minions tout “investing” in education (translated: spending more $$$$). Besides the incredible return-on-investment of Robo-squirrels, it seems there’s another, quite literal, payoff: Educators and their giant PACs will thank you by contributing big money to your campaign.
Yep, the biggest contributors to Obama’s campaign– of all donors— include the University of California (#1) and Harvard University (#4). But that doesn’t mean there’s a “liberal bias” in higher education or anything. Nah– conspiracy theory.
DEMOCRAT JEWISH ASSEMBLYMAN STUMPS FOR ROMNEY: Yep, you read that right: A Brooklyn Assemblyman– and Democrat–has traveled to Florida to stump for . . . Romney. He explains his reasoning:
Israel is under the gun. Israel is the target of Iran. Israel’s existence is being threatened. And Obama doesn’t have time to meet with the Israeli PM? It’s insulting. It’s degrading. This president scares me. I’m a Democrat, but not a knee-jerk Democrat. I’m only loyal to America and the survival of Israel.
Could there be a Jewish preference cascade forming for Romney? The pack mentality is loosening among many “groups” thought to “belong” to the Democrats.
THE OBAMA PLAN: Reelect him and find out what’s really in it!
OBAMA’S (NON) “PLAN”: (1) Stay the course (more of the same); (2) and besides, everything is hunky dory and getting better each day!! [insert rainbows and unicorns here]. Listen and read for yourself. It can be summed up in one word (sound): Cha-ching!!!
TRUMP SAYS HE HAS OCTOBER SURPRISE: Donald Trump told Fox & Friends that he’ll reveal a “bombshell” on Obama tomorrow (Wed.). Hmmm……. This election season is zany– I guess because the stakes are so high.
THE JEWISH VOTE & THE BRADLEY EFFECT: Ira Sharkansky at the Jerusalem Post suggests that there may be a “Bradley effect” at play among Jewish voters in the presidential election. His definition of the Bradley effect is somewhat different, I think, than the typical one offered– namely, that voters will say they are going to vote for a non-white candidate, only to vote against the non-white candidate in the privacy of the voter booth. The implication, then, is that there is some racial animosity going on.
But what Sharkansky suggests is actually something different, methinks: That Jewish voters will publicly maintain their allegiance to President Obama, but end up voting against him this November– not because he’s black, but because of his overtly anti-Israeli actions. It’s a symptom of political correctness syndrome, a nasty, ubiquitous, and contagious disease.
In an email exchange with an American Jewish colleague, Sharkansky received this confession:
My best friends would disown me, and I would lose all credibility and professional effectiveness, if I came out of the closet as an Obama-skeptic, let alone a potential Romney voter.
Ah, sweet, sweet political correctness! Just ask black Republican congressional contender Mia love. Or actress Stacey Dash.
THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN: Brought to you by the letter “B”:
POLITICAL CORRECTNESS IN RELIGION: An intriguing blog post in the Jerusalem Post notes the Obama Administration’s unmistakeable pattern of political correctness–flowing toward Islam and away from Israel. Are Jewish voters in the U.S. noticing this, or does their liberalism trump their Judaism?