OBAMA’S CANDY-PROMPTER:  LOL.

OBAMA: POLARIZER-IN-CHIEF:  Stephen Moore at the Wall Street Journal nails it on the head, “His presidency has been polarizing because his redistributionist ideas are polarizing, and it is hard to see how things would be any different over the next four years.”

THE OBAMA DOCTRINE IS A FAILURE:   Douglas Feith & Seth Cropsey’s op-ed in the Wall Street Journal document the utter failure of the Obama Doctrine (appeasement and apology to radical Islamists) in the Middle East.

DEBATE STUPIDITY OVER “AK-47s”:  A stupid question about AK-47s during the 2d presidential debate triggered (pun intended) equally stupid answers from both candidates.  Read this great piece by Charles C.W. Cooke in NRO to find out why. 

FISH RAISED ON PIG FECES:  Yuck.  Apparently, it’s a not-uncommon practice in Vietnam and other parts of Asia to feed farm raised fish on pig or geese feces.

Another reason to buy local.

THE LANDSLIDE COMETH?  ROMNEY AHEAD IN PENNSYLVANIA:  It’s not a typo.  A Susquehanna poll conducted Oct. 11-13 (before the 2d presidential debate) has Romney up, 49 to 45.

OBAMACARE FUN FACT #5:  SMOKE & MIRRORS:  Section 8002 of Obamacare created the CLASS (Community Living Assistance Services & Supports) Program.  CLASS was supposed to be a government-sponsored, voluntary long-term care insurance program funded via payroll deductions (with subsidies for low-income enrollees).  Enrollees were required to pay into the CLASS insurance for 5 years– a “vesting” period– before they could draw any benefits.

Because of its long vesting period (during which time premiums were collected but benefits not paid out), CLASS was scored as “saving” taxpayers $80 billion– which was more than half of Obamacare’s supposed $143 billion in budgetary “savings.”

Guess what?  In October 2011, the Obama Administration admitted what most smart folks had known all along:  That the CLASS program was fiscally unsustainable and unworkable.  Only sick people with expensive long-term care needs wanted to enroll and pay its hefty premiums.  HHS Secretary Sebelius admitted, ““Despite our best analytical efforts, I do not see a viable path forward for CLASS implementation at this time.”

Epic fail.

TIDAL WAVE:  THE TENNESSEAN ENDORSES ROMNEY:  For those of you unfamiliar with the Nashville-based paper, it is the former employer of Al Gore, and a steadfast liberal paper.  Its editorial board today formally endorsed Mitt Romney for President, concluding:

The next president must be the one with the best chance to get the crushing, $16 trillion national debt under control, coupled with the more immediate need of enabling a vibrant job market.

It is because the economy is paramount that The Tennessean endorses Gov. Mitt Romney for president.

The editors conclude with advice to Romney, “Be the man who governed Massachusetts, and you’ll reunite America.”

Kudos to the Tennesseean for putting country above party.

A “SOCIAL JUSTICE THINKER” OR PUSHER– YOU DECIDE:  A doctor in Georgia who describes himself as a “social justice thinker” has taken it upon himself to prescribe high-powered ADHD drugs such  as Adderall to low-income children– who don’t actually have ADHD–to help boost their academic performance.  The Atlanta-area doctor, Dr. Michael Anderson, says “I don’t have a whole lot of choice. We’ve decided as a society that it’s too expensive to modify the kid’s environment. So we have to modify the kid.”

Yet another example of “social justice gone wild.”  Eugenics, anyone?

OUCH:  Jump now, while you still can!!!!  Wouldn’t be so funny if it weren’t so true:

UPDATE:  This great cartoon is from Nate Beeler at the Columbus Dispatch.  Thanks, Nate!

MARK LEVIN GETS IT RIGHT:  He calls out the Eeyores in the Establishment Republican ranks–such as George Will–who seem overly eager to abandon Romney at every turn.  With all respect to Mr. Will, it is an odd attitude of defeatism.

MICHELLE O. HAS NO SELF CONTROL:  As evidenced by the fact that she led the applause at the 2d presidential debate, when moderator Candy Crowley unprofessionally (and incorrectly) interrupted Romney to side with President Obama when he falsely asserted that he’d called the Benghazi attack an “act of terror” since the day after it occurred.

One of the rules of decorum in the debate was that applause was not permitted (for obvious reasons).  Can you imagine how the MSM would excoriate Ann Romney if she had done something so rude and inappropriate?

IT’S THE SPENDING, STUPID:  New CBO budget numbers prove the silliness of Obama’s desire to raise taxes while continuing out-of-control spending:

“[D]espite countless changes to the tax code — which included raising the top rate to 90%, then lowering it to 28%, then raising it and lowering it again — taxes as a share of GDP have rarely deviated much from that average.

So, even if all the Bush tax cuts were made permanent, federal taxes would end up slightly higher as a share of GDP than the historic average.

The CBO report also makes clear that it’s out-of-control federal spending that’s driving the deficits.

According to that report, the federal spending as a share of GDP is on track to steadily rise over the next decade and beyond, reaching 22.3% of GDP by 2022.

That’s significantly higher than the 1948-2008 average, and much higher than it’s been under previous Democratic presidents. In President Clinton’s last year in office, for example, federal spending consumed just 18.2% of GDP.

h/t to John Merline, Investor’s Business Daily.

YOU FUNDED ROBO-SQUIRRELS:  Yep.  You read that right:  Taxpayers forked over $325,000 of their hard-earned dollars to the federal government so that the National Science Foundation could give it to University of California, San Diego researchers to develop a robotic squirrel.

UPDATE (FROM GLENN): It’s San Diego State University, not UCSD. And while I respect Coburn on the budget in general, these items on science spending carry a whiff of Proxmirism that I don’t like.

WHO IS THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD?:  In a word: Sharia.  It is a group whose mission is to govern via Sharia law and legitimize it by having MB adherents elected democratically.  Ah, the Arab Spring! Democracy in bloom! Hey, I have a great idea:  Let’s get arms to the Brotherhood– oh wait, the Obama Administration’s already done that. 

Supporting democratic, intolerant regimes–such as the Morsi regime in Egypt–isn’t a good thing, folks.  It is dangerous. Hmmm….. democratic, intolerant regimes.  Sound familiar, anyone?

TAX $$$$ FOR HOLOCAUST DENIAL:  Ah, sweet progressive tolerance, promotion of  human rights, and peace– all best embodied by the U.N.  Makes a liberal/progressive feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Oh– except one little thing:  U.N.-sponsored (yes, with U.S. tax dollars) schools in Jordan–which have a whopping 2 million students enrolled–have steadfastly refused to teach the Holocaust as part of their human rights curriculum.  Why, you ask?  Because teaching the Palestinian students “about the so-called ‘Holocaust’ as part of human rights harms the Palestinian cause… and changes the students’ views regarding their main enemy, namely the Israeli occupation.”

So-called Holocaust?  Oy veh.  Yeah, the truth does tend to change one’s views.

Thank goodness we have the U.N. to keep the world at peace.

EAT MY DUST–OKAY, YUM!:  Apparently a lot of people eat dirt.  Here’s why.

ONE WAY FREE SPEECH: The progressive vision of free speech is decidedly one-way, excluding any speech that is “hate” speech, or simply politically incorrect speech.  The latest battle is taking place on college and university campuses across the country, as this report about UC-Berkeley reveals.  The one-way topic du jour?  Palestine.

I can tell you from first-hand experience as an academic that pro-Palestine speech is freely encouraged, while pro-Israel speech is far too often labeled “hate” speech and suppressed.

Progressive free speech = one way only.  Reminds me of George Orwell’s 1984:  “Don’t you see the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the language of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible because there will be no words in which to express it”

ALL I WANT FOR CHRISTMAS:  Is this Aston Martin 77.  Santa, are you listening????  I’ve been a good girl, sort of.  :)

ROVE: WHY ROMNEY WON:  Karl Rove explains why Obama may have “won” the 2d presidential debate (low expectations after a disastrous 1st debate helped), but has lost momentum–and perhaps the election.  Again:  It’s the economy, stupid.  On this topic, Obama simply has nothing to offer but the same ol’, same ol’.

GO BIG. GO OBAMA:  And don’t forget:  Free stuff!!!  My husband and I made a game out of the second presidential debate.  Every time Obama talked about something that would cost billions of dollars (virtually every sentence out of his mouth), we made cash register sounds: “Cha-ching!”  I could imagine this would make a really fun drinking game.  Try it next Monday during the 3d debate!

THE OBAMANOMICS OF GAS PRICES:  This was the dumbest comment I’ve ever heard out of anybody, anywhere, about our astronomically high gas prices.  When Romney told the second debate audience that gas prices had climbed to over $4/gallon after having been less than $2/gal when Obama was elected, Obama incoherently replied:

Well, think about what the governor — think about what the governor just said. He said when I took office, the price of gasoline was $1.80, $1.86. Why is that? Because the economy was on the verge of collapse, because we were about to go through the worst recession since the Great Depression, as a consequence of some of the same policies that Governor Romney’s now promoting. So, it’s conceivable that Governor Romney could bring down gas prices because with his policies, we might be back in that same mess.

So Obama thinks high gas prices are due to a vigorous, recovering economy that’s supposedly no longer on the “verge of collapse”?   There are so many fundamental errors in basic economics that it almost leaves one speechless.

Gas prices, like anything else, are a function of supply and demand.  A recession or depression reduces demand.  If supply stays constant, gas prices will fall.  But if the supply side of the equation is also negatively affected/reduced– as, for example, the reduction of leases and drilling on federal land, as pointed out by Romney–gas prices should rise (as they have).  The bottom line?  Gas prices should have–probably would have– fallen in our current recession, due to decreased demand.  But since the Obama Administration’s anti-carbon, anti-fossil fuel policies have taken hold, the negative impact on supply has outpaced the reduction in demand, leading to significantly higher prices.

Let’s also take Obama’s illogic straight on:  If he’s right that an improved economy = higher gas prices, then isn’t he telling us that we can never expect to see gas prices fall again (because of course we all know his policies are causing a “huge recovery”)?  That’s comforting– kind of like the statement of his Dep’t of Interior Secretary Steven Chu from Feb, 2012 that the Administration’s goal was   “somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe” (around $8/gal.).

It isn’t so much what President Obama says (though that is bad enough), it is what he doesn’t say that one has to listen very closely to hear.

OBAMACARE FUN FACT #4:  With an out-of-town trip and a editor’s deadline, it’s been a few days since I shared any Obamacare Fun Facts.  Now, I’m back at my desk, with the giant 2-volume bill on my desk, so I’m ready to start posting them again.  Here we go, fun fact #4:

$1.25 billion– yes, that’s “billion” with a “b”– for “centers of excellence for depression.”  [section 10410 of the Affordable Care Act]  These centers will engage in research and treatment of depression.

Wow– really?  $1.25 BILLION to universities and other entities to do something–treat and conduct research on depression–that they already have every incentive in the world to do? Indeed, there’s already a National Network of Depression Centers (NNDC)–consisting of 21 large institutions–that has functionally being doing this type of work since 2007.

What a boondoggle.  Makes me depressed.  Think I can get a grant?

Good to know my tax dollars aren’t being squandered in these tough economic times.

ROMNEY’S NEW ABORTION/CONTRACEPTION AD:  Are any other women out there getting sick and tired of the pandering to women on the issues of contraception and abortion?  I agree with Fox News’ Megyn Kelly.  It is insulting.  But having said that, the scare tactics of the Obama Administration–insinuating that voting for Romney = voting to stop access to contraception or abortion–are despicable and lacking in any basis in fact.  The only fight here folks is about the following:

1.  Whether the government should force all health insurers to cover contraception and abortion, thus requiring faith-based institutions or other objectors to subsidize their cost;

2.  Whether the “right to abortion” is a right protected by the U.S. Constitution, or should be left to the 50 states to decide as they wish, via the political process.  (This is what would happen in the event the Supreme Court ever overrules Roe v. Wade.  Overruling that case would not— and I repeat, NOT— “outlaw” abortion, by any stretch of the imagination.)

If you step back and think about it, Obama says “yes” to both 1 & 2, meaning he believes (in typical progressive fashion), that there is one-size-fits-all to this controversial topic, and it’s his way or the highway.  Romney’s position is the opposite, suggesting that, given the high degree of disagreement among Americans (and yes, women, too), a one-size-fits-all federal mandate isn’t the proper solution.

Romney is trying to speak to women honestly, not pander to them.  Here’s his latest ad on the issue.

AS ROMNEY BEGINS TO REACH WOMEN, YOU CAN SMELL THE LIBERALS’ DESPERATION:  The 2d presidential debate continued to show a Mitt Romney who cares about, respects and will actually help the lives of women.  According to the latest polls, his message of economic hope and prosperity is resonating, cutting into Obama’s previous advantage among women.  Latest evidence of progressive/liberal desperation as a result of the Romney surge?  A completely inane suggestion, within lamestream media types, that Romney’s comments about asking for and receiving “binders full of women” applicants for top government jobs while he was Governor is somehow sexist or out of touch.  Okay, I’m sorry, but that’s just utterly stupid, wrong, and well, desperate.

Oh, and BTW:  A Ron Suskind book documents that women in the Obama White House is run like a good ol’ boys club, with women being treated “like a piece of meat.”  And female White House workers make an average of 18% less than their male counterparts.  So much for the Lilly Ledbetter Act.  But then again, facts never seem to stand in this President’s way.