The unfolding conclusion to the IRS scandal? The Obama administration illegally used the IRS as an arm of their re-election campaign

Fri, 17 May 2013 23:14:43 +0000

Ouch! Here is what can be pieced together thus far.

The IRS began targeting Tea Party groups in 2010 prior to the congressional elections.
Democratic senators just happened to start publicly pressing the IRS to target conservative groups in 2010.
The New York Times reported that senior Treasury officials were made aware and knew of the IRS targeting conservative groups in June 2012. This of course invalidates Obama’s claim that he only found out about the IRS scandal very recently out of the newspapers.
The Times revelation also indicates a motive why Watchdog.org received a spike in website activity in January 2013. President Obama and his Administration knew of the IRS scandal as early as June 2012 and wanted to get ahead of where the investigation was going as the House had been investigating complaints by Tea Party Organizations that they were being targeted by the IRS.
The Obama Administration, Eric Holder, and former IRS commissioner Steven Miller are playing the Steve Martin defense “I forgot, I don’t know” Miller’s testimony on Capitol Hill was both hilarious yet appalling in some of his answers. Miller particularly became forgetful when he was repeatedly questioned who or whom at the IRS was responsible for the targeting of conservative groups.
Obama’s campaign co-chair attacked Mitt Romney with documents that ultimately were revealed to have been leaked directly from the IRS.
The IRS since 2011 engaged in brazenly false representations and denials of targeting Tea Party groups.

If I have left anything out, feel free to contribute in the comments on this post. In summary, this thing is very big in scope and we are in the infant stages of this. There are a lot more pieces to this puzzle still out there that I am sure we don’t know about yet. Aside from the Obama administration utilizing the IRS for political advantage in hamstringing their opposition, congressional Democrats (at least Senators) were openly advocating for this action to be taken by the IRS.

This is why big government never works. Aside from being a expensive financial cancer to a nation, there is too much corruption in government. As government increases, so does corruption and lust for more power. Our country wasn’t founded on the government holding a gun to the head of the people. It was founded on a free people holding a gun to the government’s head to keep the government honest and out of people’s lives.

(Update)The Brutal Truth about Benghazi: The White House simply let those men die

Thu, 16 May 2013 14:39:11 +0000

Looking at the recent document dump that was happening as President Obama was putting on his ruse that he was making heads roll by directing Jack Lew to get rid of IRS commissioner Steve Miller (who was leaving next month any way), I found it highly curious that the document dump of emails only dated from September 14 onward, leaving out the critical September 10-13 window. Those are the emails that will really shed light on what action/inaction the White House took in the period prior to, during, and after the attack in Benghazi. And I am pretty certain that the White House was hoping that by this action that it would create the perception that they had nothing to hide and were hoping the media and public will let this go away.

The Democrats are desperate to frame this as a witch hunt against the president and Hillary:

Reid called the (potential) primary while contextualizing the GOP’s obsession with the administration’s messaging in the aftermath of a terrorist attack on a U.S. facility in Benghazi last year.

“To keep going over this thing, day after day, on things that have been in the public record for months and months, it’s obvious that it’s an attempt to embarrass President Obama and to embarrass Hillary Clinton,” Reid said, before assessing the Democratic primary field.

No Harry, they are trying to get at the truth of what happened and why 4 Americans unnecessarily lost their lives in something that could have been prevented. Why did Hillary ignore pleading requests for defensive aid in the previous weeks/months up to and on the day of the attack? That underlined passage is quite the whopper from Harry Reid since, well, the White House doesn’t exactly have the reputation with being forthcoming in disclosing information. The problem is for Harry Reid and the rest of the Democratic machine is that if there is nothing to hide, they would have released all the emails from September 10 onward. Sometimes the truth can embarrass people. The GOP is trying to get at the truth and if the truth does embarrass Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, that is their fault, not the GOP’s.

We have seen this before when Bill Clinton had the chance to take out Obama Bin Laden in 1998 but because of being unable to determine whether this would have a positive or negative political effect following the action taken, it was better not to take any action at all. To his credit, President Obama did but only did so because taking that action and gamble could only yield a positive political effect and there was minimal chance of loss. When the time came to take action in Benghazi, which happened to be in an election year, they couldn’t determine what political impact this would have on the President and his chances of getting re-elected. Therefore, it was better not to take any action at all or they were just too lazy and indifferent. The GOP should just stay on their sober, focused course. Of course, the shrill cries coming from the Democratic party will get louder the more the GOP presses to get the rest of the communications from that critical time frame regarding Benghazi. If the investigation carries into 2014, that will be the White House’s doing, not the GOP’s.

What selfish and impotent people we have in the White House.

UPDATE: From Breitbart, Eric Holder says he won’t appoint a special counsel to investigate Benghazi. Gee, I wonder why

Is the IRS scandal an attempt to deflect attention away from Benghazi?

Mon, 13 May 2013 16:54:08 +0000

I have seen this thought starting to percolate on some conservative blogs and Michelle Bachmann has alluded to this as well:

Bachmann, a former tax attorney, told WND in an interview the IRS admission means the credibility of the 2012 election is in doubt.

Americans, she said, should be wondering whether Obamacare, which is to be enforced by the IRS, will target conservative voices opposed to President Obama with delays or denials of medical care.

But why would an administration ever confess to such a flagrant misuse of politics and power?

Bachmann, who chairs the House Tea Party caucus, said it’s the Benghazi scandal.

“There’s no doubt this was not a coincidence that they dumped this story today, a Friday dump day,” Bachmann told WND. “This is when they put their negative stories out.”

But she said the looming storm cloud called Benghazi is the “soft underbelly” of the Obama administration and likely will keep Hillary Clinton from fulfilling her dream of occupying the Oval Office.

That would make it logical to release an IRS story that, while embarrassing, also could be cubbyholed as another “conservative” dispute with the White House.

Why would Max Baucus so readily announce that the Senate Finance committee will investigate this? What I have learned with the from the political brass of the Democratic Party that they will engage in whatever tactics and strategy necessary to keep themselves from harm. Why would Chuck Todd say this? The Democratic Party and media seem awfully too willing on discussing the IRS scandal. I think this announcement by Baucus is to heal some of the damage that was done at the Benghazi hearing last week but also to hopefully to alter the news cycle and get Hillary out of it, STAT. I think the Democrats are starting to realize that the 2014 elections could be very ugly for them and are trying to salvage Hillary’s 2016 run. The simplest strategy would seem to be keeping up the pressure on both Benghazi and the IRS. Judging by Obama’s reaction to the questions on Benghazi, he really got testy. My gut tells me the Democrats fear Benghazi more than they fear the IRS scandal simply because of their actions. Obama could be seriously in trouble for the first time in his presidency while in office. It will be interesting to see how this shakes out.

Future Mortgage Meltdown 2.0: Obama hiring Clinton hands whom helped create the first mortgage meltdown

Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:00:17 +0000

You have got to be kidding me. Not again. I guess the first crisis they helped create didn’t do enough for them. Crises mean always mean more regulation.

n the 1990s, convinced that the US mortgage market was racist, the Clinton administration launched a massive campaign of social engineering.

Through government entities Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, officials encouraged extending mortgages to people with little or no credit. They targeted private banks with discrimination lawsuits if they didn’t lend to enough minorities or people with low incomes. Housing prices skyrocketed as people with no down payment or shaky salaries suddenly were able to buy homes.

Then the bubble burst.

Millions were unable to pay their subprime loans, and they took the banks down with them. The housing market — and the economy — is still recovering from the folly.

Now the Obama administration wants to do it all over again.

Blithely ignoring the lessons of the housing bubble, Obama has rehired many of the Clinton hands who inflated it in the first place, pursuing the same misguided policies that try to force people into homes they can’t afford in the name of “fairness.”

“The administration is launching subprime 2.0,” warns former chief Fannie Mae credit officer Edward Pinto….

….

One banking official, ex-BB&T CEO John Allison, predicts that because of these policies, “There will be another incredibly destructive crisis in our financial system in the next 10 to 15 years.”

Here are some of the usual suspects Obama has brought back and how they’re re-inflating the bubble that ravaged our economy:

Sara Pratt, John Trasvina, Shaun Donavan, Ellen Seidman, Eric Holder, Thomas Perez, Eric Halperin, and Gary Gensler.

I particularly like this incredulous tidbit about Holder:

As Reno’s deputy, Holder accused banks of racism for failing to market mortgages to poor minorities with weak credit. Fear of prosecution set off a stampede of risky inner-city lending that led, in part, to today’s record subprime foreclosures.

Now as Obama’s attorney general, Holder has sued the nation’s largest home lenders — including Bank of America, Wells Fargo and SunTrust Banks — to “reinvest” in minority communities devastated by those foreclosures. They’ve been told by the government they cannot reject loans to applicants on “public assistance,” and must set aside millions in “special financing programs” for African-American and Latino homebuyers.

In some cases, Justice has actually ordered banks to open new branches in depressed areas of Detroit and other cities. It also encouraged a Detroit bank to “apply more flexible underwriting standards” for minorities, while ordering a St. Louis bank to originate low-rate home loans for black borrowers who, according to a court document, “would ordinarily not qualify for such rates for reasons including the lack of required credit quality, income or down payment.”

I’ve seen some bewildering recipes for stupid in my lifetime, but Holder’s actions takes the cake. Using public assistance as qualifying income to finance a loan on a home?? Face, meet palm. I hope the banks simply drag out the court process with continuances, endless motions, and the like. I guess the government needs to create more crises so government can save the people from their created crises…again. They can’t let people get too self-sufficient and stop depending on government you know.

Gay marriage further proves we are a nation that no longer fears God and are no longer a nation that is under God

Fri, 22 Mar 2013 05:02:23 +0000

It would seem that America’s moral decline is now picking up in speed, exhibiting a parallel mirror to what our national debt that has been quickening as well. I don’t really find this to be a coincidence. I blame we more as apathetic, complacent, self-righteous Christians than those who engage in a rebellious lifestyle. It is not my place to condemn those that engage in that lifestyle and I certainly do not want to berate or demean them. Tolerance and compromise of sin is proving to be the undoing of our country which was once great. There are a number of reasons I believe this and I admit, it sometimes makes my head spin just how big our problems have become and how fast the country has gotten off track.

I readily admit that I have been apathetic, complacent, and self-righteous in my heart many times in my life. I have been more worried about my own problems rather than getting out there and deepening my friendships and be an example of Christ wherever I go and to anyone I meet. I along with a great many others have strayed down the path that if I just work harder, make more money, enlarge my bank account and get to “financial independence”, that my problems will go away and then I will do as I am commanded to do by my Lord. What a foolish and selfish mindset. Too many churches have fallen into the trap today of becoming Church, Inc., more worried about growing their churches and increasing their weekly collection of tithes than having a selfless, positive impact in their community. I guess you could say that the reason for where the country is today is for me to first look in the mirror and truly examine myself first.

NO, IT’S NOT OKAY ANYMORE

In previous posts, I have written that though America was founded on the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness, the test of this country to determining whether or not it will remain a free nation is if it remains a righteous and just nation under God. This country, 236 and 3/4 years ago, was given an incredible gift from God. A country, governed by the will of the people whom elect leaders to serve, enact just law that the judicial branch administers with equal justice, to live a free nation as a republic. Ever since World War II ended and our deep gratitude and love toward God for granting us an incredible victory in a war on two fronts, as the end of that war became more distant in the past, so have we become more distant from God. Permitting abortion, pornography, weak administration and enforcement of our laws, feeling more sorry about criminals condemned to die rather than the victims whom died at their hands, not taking responsibility for the choices we make if they are bad, laziness, greed, selfishness, I could go on and on. I am actually surprised that we haven’t reaped the whirlwind yet from God but, it does testify to the unfathomable depth of God’s love, grace, and mercy from executing a fierce judgment and subsequent punishment that we so richly deserve. In some respects, it is already happening. You can’t expect to abort 50 million children/taxpayers and expect no future impact on the nation’s economy and treasury in the long run. Population growth is exponential. You mess with that and the results are predictable. Too many retirees living on social security + not enough taxpayers to fund social security + corrupt past and current politicians who have raided social security to further their political careers = eventual bankruptcy of social security. This is of course just one example. I am not against abortion, gay marriage, pornography, etc. just because I think its wrong. It is because I fear God and the judgment that He can execute. Sodom, Gomorrah, Israel post King David, Egypt, Babylonia, Persia, Rome, there are plenty of examples littered throughout history that testify what happens when a nation does not obey and heed God. The book of Lamentations is a great warning and testimony that pleads for future generations not to take the path that Israel took. He will not contend with us forever and permit His grace and mercy to be taken advantage of. No, it really isn’t okay anymore. There is still time to turn and avoid a catastrophic calamity of national bankruptcy and subsequent war that would follow but we don’t have a whole lot of time. The best way I can think of to avoid this is stop thinking about my bank account, my problems, and start thinking about applying and acting the Word to my life and helping others with their problems.

POLITICIANS, WHAT A JOKE

In a way, it doesn’t surprise me. Our leaders in Washington are a mirror of whom we have become as a people. Great actors, phonies who will sell their principles and convictions down the road to be in the majority of public belief and ultimately benefit themselves, whose only concern is for themselves and their careers, loving the gravy train provided for by lobbyists and special interests. It has been hilarious to watch the stampede of prominent figures both in Washington and in business and social circles to get ahead and on the side of the majority of public opinion. I am curious, if 58% of the people of this country are for gay marriage, why have 31 or 32 states (I can’t remember the number) have passed laws by both legislators and voters defining marriage between a man and a woman? I don’t know, maybe things have really changed and this country really has sped up its path to ultimate destruction of America as we know it. This all just makes me so sad for a number of reasons. I would just like to see one Republican or Democratic figure just stand up and announce loudly that gay marriage is wrong, this is a line that shouldn’t be crossed, not caring if their political career comes to an end. Washington has such a lack of courage, selflessness, and virtue nowadays. It would be wonderful to see elected officials exhibit this again.

NEWSFLASH: YOU ARE ALREADY RICH

Even the homeless and destitute are rich because we live in a free country. We are free to speak freely, free to worship, free to work hard and enjoy the fruits of that hard work. However, with this freedom comes the responsibility to live as a righteous and just nation, under God. Being under God means to be in submission, to be obedient to Him. We are not the nation that is blessed because of what we and those for us have done. We are the nation we are today because, in the words of Governor Price Daniel of Texas, given many years ago, said:

“A South American leader and visitor who many years ago was asked why

the material progress of North Americas so far outstripped that of South America replied:

‘The people who settled North America came here seeking God.

Those who came to South America were in search of gold’ “

So simple and powerful a testimony. No matter what your lot in life is, no matter how difficult it may currently be, you can make yourself a success, America can make itself a success and great again, with a selfless, obedient, courageous, earnest heart that loves God and others, works hard, is content with the results, and has a positive, enthusiastic, yet humble attitude that never gives up. The solution to our problems is so simple. It lies in following, having faith in, and using God’s Word, not in elected leaders or man in general. It all starts with me, and starts with you.

Health Care Hardball: Why Democrats in Washington and around the country are praying that GOP governors create a state run health care exchange. GOP governors should just say no.

Fri, 16 Nov 2012 03:38:10 +0000

I have been reading this Cato Institute legal research paper by Michael Cannon and it’s making me realize that the GOP governors could really make Obamacare a political liablity for the Democrats by refusing to set up a state run health exchange. It is a fascinating read and I highly recommend it. In summary, it looks like the Obama Adminstration ultimately is going to have to count on a second John Roberts rescue. Here’s why. First, from Philip Klein:

With the election over and Obama reelected, repealing the law is not going to happen over the next four years. So 30 Republican governors will have to make a decision about whether they want to help the federal government implement Obamacare, or keep the onus on the Obama administration.

One of the silver linings of the Supreme Court decision is that it gave states the ability to opt out of the Medicaid expansion. Medicaid is one of the programs that is crushing state budgets and if implemented as intended, Obamacare will add 18 million beneficiaries to the program’s rolls. Though the federal government lures states with a honey pot in the short term – covering all of the expansion through 2016, by 2020 the states will be asked to kick in 10 percent of the cost, amounting to billions of dollars of spending imposed on states nationwide each year. It would be to the long-term benefit of governors to opt of the expansion.

Separately, the health care law was designed to coerce governors into embracing exchanges on which individuals will be provided with federal subsidies to purchase insurance. If a state doesn’t establish its own exchange, the law specifies that the federal government will step in and set one up for them. Given that Republicans typically favor more state and local control, there’s a clear temptation for them to cave in, assuming that the lesser of two evils by implementing the exchanges themselves. But they should resist that temptation….

Given that governors will have no real control over the exchanges anyway, they may as well let Obama administration officials sleep in the bed they made for themselves. It’s highly doubtful that the same administration responsible for implementing the failed economic stimulus package will be able to competently operate dozens of exchanges. Republican governors should allow the feds to live with the mess they created rather than clean up for them.

Another reason Republican governors should hold off on setting up exchanges is that there’s still a pending lawsuit that could drastically affect their implementation decision. Obamacare penalizes businesses up to $2,000 per employee if they don’t provide insurance and one of their employees obtains subsidies to purchase insurance on an exchange. Yet as Cato Institute health policy scholar Michael Cannon and Jonathan Adler of Case Western Reserve University School of Law outlined this past July, the way Obamacare was drafted, the subsidies for individuals to purchase insurance apply to state-based insurance exchanges, rather than ones created at the federal level. In September, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt filed a complaint in court arguing that businesses should not be subject to the penalty if it’s a federal exchange for which subsidies shouldn’t be available (NICE!). Cannon argued to me that if this case is successful, it would force Congress to reopen Obamacare. For instance, he explained, if Illinois sets up an exchange and Missouri does not, a favorable ruling in this law suit would mean that Missouri businesses would be exempted from taxes that would be imposed on businesses in Illinois. Thus, even Democratic governors would want to see changes in the law.

Ouch. So imagine this, states who set up their own state run health care exchanges could face a stampede of businesses who uproot and move to states who didn’t set up a state health care exchange because they wouldn’t have to pay a penalty in those states. Imagine the Democratic governors in those states whom created the exchange grovelling to companies moving elsewhere to stay because the impact on tax revenue would be devastating. Obamacare has created an unfair economic competitive advantage between states. This is what happens when you rush to ram legislation, not having enough to time to think through and avoiding gaping flaws like this that causes the house of cards legislation Obamacare is to collapse. Democrats were having such difficulty getting the votes to pass this thing that if they allowed their congressmen to go home for recess to face angry constituents a second time, the law would have never passed. The brazen folly of this bill is becoming more pronounced by the day and still the public clearly doesn’t want it.

One other thing, the IRS created a rule that in essence, amends the legislation (which is actually under Congress’s jurisdiction, not theirs. The IRS doesn’t write or amend legislation, Congress does) by trying to close out this flaw by claiming that the law provided for tax credits and subsidies for federally funded exchanges. The argument the IRS gave was laughable and wouldn’t have a snowball’s chance in court under any discerning judge’s eye. From the Cato Institute paper:

After the rule was proposed, commentators and several members of Congress raised concerns about the IRS’ apparent lack of statutory authority. In response, IRS officials and representatives of both the Treasury and HHS Departments insisted such authority was in the Act, yet cited no specific provisions to that effect. A Treasury Department spokeswoman said the Department is “confident that providing tax credits to all eligible Americans, no matter where they live and whether their state runs the exchange, is consistent with the intent of the law and our ability to interpret and implement it.” On November 3, 2011, two dozen members of the House of Representatives wrote IRS commissioner Douglas H. Shulman that the proposed rule “contradicts the explicit statutory language describing individuals’ eligibility for receipt of these tax credits.” On November 29, Shulman responded:

“The statute includes language that indicates that individuals are eligible for tax credits whether they are enrolled through a State-based Exchange or a Federally-facilitated Exchange. Additionally, neither the Congressional Budget Office score nor the Joint Committee on Taxation technical explanation of the Affordable Care Act discusses excluding those enrolled through a Federally-facilitated Exchange.” (Though they don’t cite any legal provision) Also on November 29, the Department of Health and Human Services offered a similar defense: ” The proposed regulations…are clear on this point and supported by the statute. Individuals enrolled in coverage through either a State-based Exchange or a Federally facilitated Exchange may be eligible for tax credits…Additionally, neither the Congressional Budget Office score nor the Joint Committee on Taxation technical explanation discussed limiting the credit to those enrolled through a State-based Exchange.”

Neither statement identified any specific statutory provisions in support of the IRS’ authority to issue this rule or provide tax credits for non-state-established exchanges. Despite the public concerns about its lack of authority to levy taxes or offer tax credits beyond those expressly authorized by Congress, the IRS stayed the course. Late in the afternoon on Friday, May 18, 2012,86 the IRS issued a final rule adopting its proposal without significant change:

In defense of its rule, the IRS claimed that its authorization of tax credits and premium assistance was supported by legislative intent, if not the actual language of the PPACA. Specifically, the final IRS rule provided the following justification:

“Under the proposed regulations, the term Exchange has the same meaning as in 45 CFR 155.20, which provides that the term Exchange refers to a State Exchange, regional Exchange, subsidiary Exchange, and Federally-facilitated Exchange.” (Err, the IRS is really grasping for air here) Commentators disagreed on whether the language in section 36B(b)(2)(A) limits the availability of the premium tax credit only to taxpayers who enroll in qualified health plans on State Exchanges. The statutory language of section 36B and other provisions of the Affordable Care Act support the interpretation that credits are available to taxpayers who obtain coverage through a State Exchange, regional Exchange, subsidiary Exchange, and the Federally facilitated Exchange. Moreover, the relevant legislative history does not demonstrate that Congress intended to limit the premium tax credit to State Exchanges. Accordingly, the final regulations maintain the rule in the proposed regulations because it is consistent with the language, purpose, and structure of section 36B and the Affordable Care Act as a whole.”

Nowhere did the IRS claim that the language of section 36B makes tax credits available in federal Exchanges established under Section 1321, nor that the PPACA authorizes the IRS to extend tax credits to federal Exchanges, nor did the IRS claim that its interpretation is compelled by the text of the PPACA. Rather, the IRS claimed that various unidentified provisions of the law “support” its interpretation, that its rule is “consistent with” the Act, and that the “relevant legislative history” does not show otherwise.

Obama Administration: Help us Obi-Wan John Roberts, figure out a way to make this pass Constitutional muster. You’re our only hope.

But wait, there’s more! From the National Review:

States also have to decide whether to implement the law’s massive expansion of Medicaid. The correct answer to both questions remains a resounding no.

State-created exchanges mean higher taxes, fewer jobs, and less protection of religious freedom. States are better off defaulting to a federal exchange. The Medicaid expansion is likewise too costly and risky a proposition. Republican Governors Association chairman Bob McDonnell (R.,Va.) agrees, and has announced that Virginia will implement neither provision.

There are many arguments against creating exchanges.

First, states are under no obligation to create one.

Second, operating an Obamacare exchange would be illegal in 14 states. Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, and Virginia have enacted either statutes or constitutional amendments (or both) forbidding state employees to participate in an essential exchange function: implementing Obamacare’s individual and employer mandates.

Third, each exchange would cost its state an estimated $10 million to $100 million per year, necessitating tax increases.

Fourth, the November 16 deadline is no more real than the “deadlines” for implementing REAL ID, which have been pushed back repeatedly since 2008.

Fifth, states can always create an exchange later if they choose.

Sixth, a state-created exchange is not a state-controlled exchange. All exchanges will be controlled by Washington.

Seventh, Congress authorized no funds for federal “fallback” exchanges. So Washington may not be able to impose Exchanges on states at all.
(In other words, President Obama would have to go to John Boehner to get funding for the fall back exchanges. Somewhere John Boehner must be smiling. Heh. Now apparently, Kathleen Sebelius and the HHS are using money that was going to be appropriated to the States as an enticement to help set up state health exchanges but some states have opted out of setting up a state health exchange. Yes, it’s illegal but to keep these exchanges going, the HHS and Obama will need to get it from the House.)

Eighth, the Obama administration has yet to provide crucial information that states need before they can make an informed decision.

Ninth, creating an exchange sets state officials up to take the blame when Obamacare increases insurance premiums and denies care to the sick. State officials won’t want their names on this disastrous mess.

Tenth, creating an exchange would be assisting in the creation of a “public option” that would drive domestic health-insurance carriers out of business through unfair competition.

Eleventh, Obamacare remains unpopular. The latest Kaiser Family Foundation poll found that only 38 percent of the public supports it.

Twelfth, defaulting to a federal exchange exempts a state’s employers from the employer mandate — a tax of $2,000 per worker per year (the tax applies to companies with more than 50 employees, but for such companies that tax applies after the 30th employee, not the 50th). If all states did so, that would also exempt 18 million Americans from the individual mandate’s tax of $2,085 per family of four. Avoiding those taxes improves a state’s prospects for job creation, and protects the conscience rights of employers and individuals whom the Obama administration is forcing to purchase contraceptives coverage.

Finally, rejecting an exchange reduces the federal deficit. Obamacare offers its deficit-financed subsidies to private health insurers only through state-created exchanges. If all states declined, federal deficits would fall by roughly $700 billion over ten years.

For similar reasons, states should decline to implement Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion. The Supreme Court gave states that option. All states should exercise it.

Medicaid is rife with waste and fraud. It increases the cost of private health care and insurance, crowds out private health insurance and long-term-care insurance, and discourages enrollees from climbing the economic ladder. There is scant reliable evidence that Medicaid improves health outcomes, and no evidence that it is a cost-effective way of doing so.

My colleague Jagadeesh Gokhale estimates that expanding Medicaid will cost individual states up to $53 billion over the first ten years. That’s before an emboldened President Obama follows through on his threats to shift more Medicaid costs to states.

Neither the states nor the federal government have the money to expand Medicaid. If all states politely decline, federal deficits will shrink by another $900 billion.

Now is not the time to go wobbly. Obamacare is still harmful and still unpopular. The presidential election was hardly a referendum, as it pitted the first person to enact Obamacare against the second person to enact it. Since the election, many state officials are reaffirming their opposition to both implementing exchanges and expanding Medicaid.

If enough states do so, Congress will have no choice but to reopen Obamacare. With a GOP-controlled House, opponents will be in a much stronger position than they were when this harmful law was enacted.

Yeah, I know, it’s a lot of information. Bottom line is so long as the GOP controls the House, they can refuse to fund federal exchanges after they have been set up since Obamacare didn’t set up any annual funding for federal fallback exchanges. As I alluded to earlier, Sebelius only has the money that was appropriated to help states set up a state health care exchange. For even more hilarity, compare Senator Baucus’ contradicting statements between this article and what he actually said in the Senate Committee hearings cited in the Cato paper regarding Congressional intent on exchanges. The whole house of cards would eventually come down because Boehner simply could starve the exchanges. On top of that, the IRS Rule is likely to be struck down in court or go to the Supreme Court at worst, then there is Attorney General Scott Pruitt’s case regarding the penalty loophole regarding federal exchanges in Obamacare, then there is the Hobby Lobby case against the HHS mandate to provide for pharmaceutical means of abortion, etc.

Download and read that Cato Institute paper. President Obama and Kathleen Sebelius assumed that states would run these exchanges and foot the bill for it, though the exchanges would be run by Washington anyway. The problem is the 2009 and 2010 gubernatorial elections happened which expanded the number of governorships the GOP held. Why should states bankrupt themselves for this kind of deal? Why do you think the Obama Administration extended the deadline for states to set up the “state” health exchanges from tomorrow to now December 14? It’s not from the goodness of their own heart I can tell you that. They know if a huge number of states refuse to set up the exchanges and foot the bill, it is highly unlikely Obamacare can be implemented. The only thing left is the tax increases and then that runs into legal trouble because then you’ll see lawsuits from individuals who claim harm because they are getting unduly taxed for health care they were supposed to get. What a lovely mess. Heck, even Democratic governor Jay Nixon said Missouri won’t set up a state health exchange. Yes, this bill is that bad.

Okay, so let’s say that all the court rulings go against the GOP, what have they lost? Nothing. Federal exchanges are set up with the Feds controlling them (though they were going to be controlled by the Feds if the states set up the exchanges) and then Obama has to try to get funding from Boehner to keep them running since the legislation didn’t set up any funding for that.

VOTE!! Reminder: If the GOP shows up like they did in Ohio and elsewhere in 2004 or better, Romney will win. It’s up to us.

Tue, 06 Nov 2012 16:00:59 +0000

Ohio Update:

Larry Schweikart @LSchweikart

Almost any way I run EV numbers in OH, without counting D-R flips or indies, Romney has to make up 70k on Election Day=piece of cake

Josh Kraushaar @HotlineJosh

Overall, early vote turnout OH up 2.44% in state. Down -4.1% in Obama/Kerry counties; up 14.39% in Bush/McCain counties.

It won’t be a piece of cake if we don’t show up. Drag your conservative friends and fellow church goers to the polls across the nation, particularly Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Pennsylvania.

WE CAN DO THIS.

Make this go viral: EPA scrambling to finalize new, super costly regulation to crush the coal industry post election/prior to inauguration regardless of whom wins the presidency.

Mon, 05 Nov 2012 05:30:39 +0000

People in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Virginia. I hope you’re paying attention to this. Those who work in this industry, your livelihoods are in grave danger:

President Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency has devoted an unprecedented number of bureaucrats to finalizing new anti-coal regulations that are set to be released at the end of November, according to a source inside the EPA.

More than 50 EPA staff are now crashing to finish greenhouse gas emission standards that would essentially ban all construction of new coal-fired power plants. Never before have so many EPA resources been devoted to a single regulation. The independent and non-partisan Manhattan Institute estimates that the EPA’s greenhouse gas coal regulation will cost the U.S. economy $700 billion.

The rush is a major sign of panic by environmentalists inside the Obama administration. If Obama wins, the EPA would have another four full years to implement their anti-fossil fuel agenda. But if Romney wins, regulators will have a very narrow window to enact a select few costly regulations that would then be very hard for a President Romney to undo.

Environmentalists at the EPA pulled this trick before in 2000 when the Clinton administration rushed out a finding that Mercury emissions from power plants were a growing public health threat pursuant to the Clean Air Act. That finding did not regulate power plants itself, but it did force the Bush administration to begin a lengthy regulatory process. The Obama EPA has estimated that this regulation alone will cost the U.S. economy $10.9 billion a year.

Reached for comment, Romney spokesman Ryan Williams said:

President Obama won’t tell the voters of the Virginia, Ohio, and Pennsylvania the truth about his plans to shut down the coal industry. Even after he loses on Tuesday, it appears that the President will still try to continue his efforts to kill their jobs and drive up their energy prices. Mitt Romney is committed to reversing the damage caused by the Obama Administration’s disastrous liberal agenda as soon as he takes office.

This has the smell of someone who isn’t expecting to win on Tuesday and is going to have a wrathful lame-duck grudge. I would hope that this could be undone with a new EPA director or a President Romney executive order.

The last, dying gasp of the MSM and agenda pollsters to depress GOP turnout, current and election day dirty tricks to keep in mind.

Mon, 05 Nov 2012 00:38:41 +0000

(A hat tip has to go to all the conservative blogs and conservatives in the Twittersphere for all their up to date information on the ground)

It certainly looks like the usual suspects are doing everything in their power to demoralize the GOP base. I’m seeing lots of trolls invade various conservative blogs, seeing pollsters with the exception of Rasmussen shift their party ID (projection of turnout) heavily leftward. It’s even more funny in some of the state polls. In yesterday’s Reuter’s tracking poll of key swing states yesterday. Today, the latest comes from Pew Research poll showing Obama up 3, 48-45, whom has gone from an R+5 party ID turnout a couple of months back, to D+1 last month, to D+4. The only reason as I can think of is if there was some sort of huge, cataclysmic shift in enthusiasm from the GOP to the Democrats. Think of the world just getting turned upside down on its head. Have you seen anything to indicate that? By the looks of the early voting figures and the campaign rallies recently, there isn’t even a remote hint of that happening. As Jay Cost eloquently stated:

The movement in the Pew poll over the last month has been a net of 8 points toward Obama. Essentially all due to a shift from R+5 to D+4.

A few interesting internals I found to be of interest. It states Obama is holding 95% of Democrats which seems very unlikely and that the majority of movement in the polls regionally came from the Northeast (probably to the fleeting photo op goose that Obama got in the polls this week) and the West. Obama actually lost ground in the Midwest and is still doing horribly in the South.

Even Rasmussen has been using (in my humble opinion) a conservative, worst-case projection of a three point advantage in partisan ID to the Democrats for his currently polling which looks to be 39D/36R/25. However, his Partisan ID for the month of September showed to be a 2.6 advantage toward the GOP. This suggests to Scott Rasmussen that he should use an electorate of R+2 like 35D/37R/28I. Okay, that probably is quite a bit of a wishing well. However, this partisan ID index has nailed the turnout of the electorate within 1.5 points in the last two elections. I’m not going to argue with Scott Rasmussen. He’s a professional so I’ll trust his judgment. Gallup’s projection of the turnout of the electorate stands at 35D/36R/29I for voters survey from October 1st onward. When independent voters were pushed as cited in the linked article, it became 49R-46D. The takeaway from these projections is that there has been a noticeable shift to the right with both of these established pollsters.

So what do you do if you’re in the Obama loving media and an agenda pollster? You put out polls that use a 2008 turnout model or project

that Democrats will be 40%+ of the electorate.

Actually, this shouldn’t surprise you. They have been doing it for months now. If you watched ABC’s This Week, that roundtable was really putting on the full court press to George Will to say that the election is over and Obama will win decisively. Without sounding like a conspiracy theorist, what I am seeing in the conservative blogosphere and in the MSM seems to be too many coincidental psychological tactics to depress GOP enthusiasm. The only way the agenda pollsters turnout models can come in the realm of being close is if the GOP base doesn’t show up. Keep that in mind. It’s up to us to show up en masse with enthusiasm, excitement, with our friends and neighbors, to vote Mitt Romney into the Oval Office.

BEING MINDFUL OF ELECTION DAY DIRTY TRICKS

In 2000, we saw the MSM call Florida for Gore early, though voting had not finished in the panhandle and Bush was holding a 51-47 lead in reported returns at the time the call was made. The MSM cited “bad data”. Depression of GOP vote tactic?
In 2004, we saw exit polls showing Kerry running away with it in Ohio and elsewhere by oversampling women voters. How many GOP voters stayed home when they saw or heard the news? Depression of GOP vote tactic?
In 2008, none of these tricks were necessary as it became apparent after the financial markets meltdown and McCain’s campaign suspension that McCain was going to get blown out by Obama.

In 2012, we will probably see a combination of what we saw in 2004. Media reporting exit polls that Obama is running away with it, early reported returns out of Ohio to show a huge Obama lead (The Ohio Secretary of State’s office will count all the early/pre-Election Day vote first, then they will count the Election Day vote afterwards), making statements like “Looks like we might have to make a call soon because it doesn’t look good for Romney”, saying the race is too close to call in deep red states (Not calling Georgia or South Carolina for Bush in 2004, saying it was too close, brings back fond memories), calling deep blue states quickly to show a big early EV lead on the board for Obama and create the perception that Obama is running away with it, etc. Are you getting the picture? How do you counter this?

Go vote, regardless of what the media is saying, vote STRAIGHT REPUBLICAN, and have an antacid on hand when you start to watch the election returns come in

Or in Adrian Gray’s advice: @adrian_gray First wave of exit polls in 2004: PA (Bush -19), OH (-4), FL (-4). First round in 2000: PA (+0.2), OH (+10), FL (-3). You’ve been warned.

There were some reports out of North Carolina and a few other states showing that when a voter made a touch screen selection of “Mitt Romney”, “Barack Obama” wound up being the selection and it had to be corrected. The machines had to be re-calibrated. However, there is an easy remedy for that: VOTE STRAIGHT REPUBLICAN Regardless if a GOP Senate candidate mangled an answer in an interview or debate and you didn’t like it, Obamacare cannot be overturned unless the GOP takes the Senate if Mitt Romney wins the Presidency. We need a net gain of 3 Senate seats. Voting straight Republican takes the “calibration” error away and ensures one vote closer to GOP Senate majority and a Romney presidency. If “Straight Democrat” pops up in the touch screen, STOP, wave over a GOP polling station observer who should be on site and a poll worker, show them the screen, and it will be corrected.

Other Election Day/Post-Election Day Controversy

I think we may see this in Ohio which is Democrats creating controversies like having someone who has/claims to have early voted, go to a voting station wanting to vote, the poll worker states that the voter is already on record as having voted, the voter insists on voting, gets a provisional ballot, and then the voter goes to the media yelling “VOTER SUPPRESSION!” Don’t believe me? Do a Google search, entering the keyword “Voter suppression in Ohio” and watch what comes up. Lawyers get involved, cries of outrage, disenfranchisement, etc., Florida 2000 all over again. You get the picture. The reality? It looks like the votes are just not going to be there for Obama in Ohio.

Strong Independent Voter Movement to Romney in the last 48 hours

Pat Caddell stated today on Fox News that he is seeing strong momentum toward Romney. In today’s Rasmussen national poll which is a 3 day tracking poll shows that Romney’s lead among independents has gone up from 3 on Friday, to 5 yesterday, to 9 today. Agenda pollsters are also picking this up as well, though their polls are still heavily weighted toward Democrats. Romney is on an upward trend heading into Election Day which is perfect. This is evidenced by Pennsylvania and Michigan now being tied. If Michigan and Pennsylvania are tied, Ohio should firmly be in the Romney column, at least according to the prevailing conventional wisdom. Bottom line, do your duty.

Don’t lose heart when you see all these tactics taking place now and through Election Day. The only way you can let that happen to you is if you let our opponent take it away from you

The last, dying gasp of the MSM and agenda pollsters to depress GOP turnout, current and election day dirty tricks to keep in mind. By the way, strong independent voter movement to Romney in the last 48 hours.

Mon, 05 Nov 2012 00:29:01 +0000

(A hat tip has to go to all the conservative blogs and conservatives in the Twittersphere for all their up to date information on the ground)

The movement in the Pew poll over the last month has been a net of 8 points toward Obama. Essentially all due to a shift from R+5 to D+4.

So what do you do if you’re in the Obama loving media and an agenda pollster? You put out polls that use a 2008 turnout model or project

that Democrats will be 40%+ of the electorate.

BEING MINDFUL OF ELECTION DAY DIRTY TRICKS

In 2000, we saw the MSM call Florida for Gore early, though voting had not finished in the panhandle and Bush was holding a 51-47 lead in reported returns at the time the call was made. The MSM cited “bad data”. Depression of GOP vote tactic?
In 2004, we saw exit polls showing Kerry running away with it in Ohio and elsewhere by oversampling women voters. How many GOP voters stayed home when they saw or heard the news? Depression of GOP vote tactic?
In 2008, none of these tricks were necessary as it became apparent after the financial markets meltdown and McCain’s campaign suspension that McCain was going to get blown out by Obama.

Go vote, regardless of what the media is saying, vote STRAIGHT REPUBLICAN, and have an antacid on hand when you start to watch the election returns come in

Or in Adrian Gray’s advice: @adrian_gray First wave of exit polls in 2004: PA (Bush -19), OH (-4), FL (-4). First round in 2000: PA (+0.2), OH (+10), FL (-3). You’ve been warned.

Other Election Day/Post-Election Day Controversy

Strong Independent Voter Movement to Romney in the last 48 hours

Don’t lose heart when you see all these tactics taking place now and through Election Day. The only way you can let that happen to you is if you let our opponent take it away from you

The last, dying gasp of the MSM and agenda pollsters to depress GOP turnout, current and election day dirty tricks to keep in mind. By the way, strong independent voter movement to Romney in the last 48 hours.

Mon, 05 Nov 2012 00:18:56 +0000

IF THE GOP BASE TURNS OUT LIKE IT DID IN NUMBERS AS GOOD OR GREATER THAN 2004, MITT ROMNEY WINS DECISIVELY

(A hat tip has to go to all the conservative blogs and conservatives in the Twittersphere for all their up to date information on the ground)

The movement in the Pew poll over the last month has been a net of 8 points toward Obama. Essentially all due to a shift from R+5 to D+4.

So what do you do if you’re in the Obama loving media and an agenda pollster? You put out polls that use a 2008 turnout model or project

that Democrats will be 40%+ of the electorate.

BEING MINDFUL OF ELECTION DAY DIRTY TRICKS

In 2000, we saw the MSM call Florida for Gore early, though voting had not finished in the panhandle and Bush was holding a 51-47 lead in reported returns at the time the call was made. The MSM cited “bad data”. Depression of GOP vote tactic?
In 2004, we saw exit polls showing Kerry running away with it in Ohio and elsewhere by oversampling women voters. How many GOP voters stayed home when they saw or heard the news? Depression of GOP vote tactic?
In 2008, none of these tricks were necessary as it became apparent after the financial markets meltdown and McCain’s campaign suspension that McCain was going to get blown out by Obama.

Go vote, regardless of what the media is saying, vote STRAIGHT REPUBLICAN, and have an antacid on hand when you start to watch the election returns come in

Or in Adrian Gray’s advice: @adrian_gray First wave of exit polls in 2004: PA (Bush -19), OH (-4), FL (-4). First round in 2000: PA (+0.2), OH (+10), FL (-3). You’ve been warned.

Other Election Day/Post-Election Day Controversy

Strong Independent Voter Movement to Romney in the last 48 hours

Don’t lose heart when you see all these tactics taking place now and through Election Day. The only way you can let that happen to you is if you let our opponent take it away from you.

State of the race: Romney 263 Obama 223, 52 EV Toss-Up, trending prediction on toss-ups

Sat, 03 Nov 2012 18:19:04 +0000

OH, PA, NH, WI

I believe Karl Rove, Michael Barone, and Jay Cost are all sound on their predictions of a Romney win. These boys have been around politics for a long time and are as sharp and realistic as they come. The Battleground Poll Election Model indicates a Romney win. Even the Huffington Post election model predicts a Romney win. I have Iowa going Romney and Nevada going Obama as being lean states that could change. Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado and Indiana are in the bag for Romney. Some lefties may argue about Colorado but the early voting looks very strong for Romney there. So here it goes.

Ohio

The one everyone is talking about and has since the whole 2012 race started. Rasmussen currently has the presidential and Ohio Senate race tied as of today. I believe Romney will win Ohio by 2 points minimum on Election Day and believe it could be as high as 5. Here is why:

Massive GOP enthusiasm and turnout on Election Day – If there is one thing that I believe has been consistent in all the polls, it is near certain that they are all underestimating the GOP turnout in Ohio. They did so in 2004. Reports are from GOP operatives and Bush operatives are that the Romney ground operation in Ohio is significantly larger and better than Bush-Cheney 2004 which produced an R+5 electorate in Ohio against an enthusiastic Democratic base that came out for John Kerry along with independents that went solidly for Kerry as well. The evangelical vote will be out in droves like they were in 2004 by all indications. The crowd sizes the last few days also indicate that Obama will have a very hard time pulling in his voters because of the lack of enthusiasm for the ticket.
Crossover Democrats voting for Romney — Probably the most under-reported story in Ohio and Pennsylvania. Coal mining and natural gas voters in Eastern Ohio very upset with the Obama administration’s environmental regulation interference costing jobs and bankrupting coal companies alone will very likely yield a significant proportion of cross-over votes to Romney. It is apparent that this is very well the case as Eastern Ohio and Western Pennsylvania are very interlinked. With Obama pushing the panic button in Pennsylvania, it says that the race in Pennsylvania is very much in play and in danger of flipping red. If this is the case, I cannot think of any reason how Romney can lose Ohio if Pennsylvania is a narrow Obama win in the margin of 4 points or less.
No early voter pad for Obama – In 2008, Obama had about a 250,000 + vote lead going into Election Day 2008. Not anymore as Karl Rove pointed out:

Adrian Gray, who oversaw the Bush 2004 voter-contact operation and is now a policy analyst for a New York investment firm, makes the point that as of Tuesday, 530,813 Ohio Democrats had voted early or had requested or cast an absentee ballot. That’s down 181,275 from four years ago. But 448,357 Ohio Republicans had voted early or had requested or cast an absentee ballot, up 75,858 from the last presidential election.

That 257,133-vote swing almost wipes out Mr. Obama’s 2008 Ohio victory margin of 262,224. Since most observers expect Republicans to win Election Day turnout, these early vote numbers point toward a Romney victory in Ohio. They are also evidence that Scott Jennings, my former White House colleague and now Romney Ohio campaign director, was accurate when he told me that the Buckeye GOP effort is larger than the massive Bush 2004 get-out-the-vote operation.

Independents in Ohio according to which pollster that you look at show them to be all over the place, likely because of the voter screens that the pollsters use. However, bottom line is that the GOP vote turnout will be what tips Ohio to Romney. How many Democrats cross over and regardless of how independents vote will determine if Ohio is a close Romney win or blowout. Jay Cost tweeted in the last 24 hours that Ohio turnout of the electorate historically is 0 to R+2. I don’t see that being any different this year. One final point and pass this along to all your friends. We have seen dirty media tricks in 2000 and 2004 (the early Florida call, Ohio exit polls showing Kerry running away with Ohio in 2004). I’ll get into this in a later post prior to Election Day. It comes from CAC at Ace:

When the numbers come in from Ohio, keep the razor blades away for the first two hours. The Secretary of State has announced that the early vote is going up first in reporting, and if we go by polling it will be heavily Obama. Now, if it isn’t…

The numbers are probably going to be in Obama’s favor as the early vote is counted first. Watch out for MSNBC and CNN for statements like “Looks like Ohio is going Obama and could make a call soon” which could affect the vote in Wisconsin, Colorado, Iowa, and Nevada. Keep your head down, ignore the media, go vote straight Republican.

Pennsylvania

In my opinion, a pure toss-up now with very strong momentum toward Romney. The wild card in all of this is how the collar counties around Philadelphia go to offset the Philly urban vote. Western and Central Pennsylvania are looking to go heavily toward Romney. Jay Cost provides a very good analysis:

The low-down on the Keystone State:

Broad context: PA outside of Philly County has been trending red for 20 years. It has so far been checked by Dem turnout in Philly County, but Philly County’s population has been flat. So turnout increases in the county are from turnout machines/enthusiasm alone. At some point, that could breakdown.
So assume:

(a) Total PA turnout is up 3% over 2008. Philly County comprises 11.5% of total PA electorate (similar to 2004, less than 2008).

(b) Romney wins non-Philly county 54-46. (Slightly better than Bush ’04, who won 52.5 to 47.5)

Then:

Obama MUST net 433k votes out of Philly County to win. In 2008 he netted 478k votes. In 2004 Kerry netted 410k votes. In 2000 Gore netted 350k votes.

Tweak the assumptions to lower Philly turnout, increase non-Philly turnout, increase Romney share of non-Philly. And Keystone State goes red.

That doesn’t look like that heavy of a lift. Romney being in Bucks County tomorrow with Bill Clinton frantically following on Monday making four stops in PA including Philadelphia looks like very, very real peril in Pennsylvania for the Democrats. Bottom line, I don’t know. Watch for the Susquehenna poll that comes out in the Pittsburgh Tribune Review tomorrow. If Romney is up, tied, or within 2 points of Obama, Ohio assuredly will fall Romney on Election Day.

Wisconsin

I don’t really detect any sort of momentum in either direction and Rasmussen has the race tied at 49 according to the latest poll. However, the Mayor of Denver is quite worried about the early voting in Wisconsin:

“We have not turned out the vote early,” Hancock was quoted as saying in an article about the rally that appeared in the Washington Examiner. “The suburbs and rural parts of Wisconsin — the Republican base — are voting. President Obama’s base has yet to go vote. We’ve got to get our people to go vote.”

And from Michael Barone:

Recent polling is discouraging for Republicans. But Gov. Scott Walker handily survived the recall effort in June with a great organizational push. Democrats depend heavily on margins in inner-city Milwaukee (population down) and the Madison university community. But early voting is down in university towns in other states. The Obama campaign is prepared to turn out a big student vote, but you don’t see many Obama signs on campuses. Romney.

Combine that with a native son as the VP running mate, the intangibles and visual evidence indicate Wisconsin may be a slight tick toward Romney.

New Hampshire

A polling Jekyl and Hyde. Romney is up 2 in Rasmussen. Agenda pollsters PPP and Marist show Obama up 2. Even Barone isn’t sure:

Polls are very tight here. I think superior Republican intensity will prevail. Romney.

Looks like a 51-48 to 52-47 national popular vote, 281-315 EV win for Romney, barring some unforeseen, unconventional swing toward an unpopular incumbent at the last minute. I don’t make final predictions. I leave that to the professionals!

(Update) Breaking: Obama campaign pushes the panic button in Pennsylvania

Sat, 03 Nov 2012 04:42:05 +0000

Big news.

“On Monday November 5, President Clinton will campaign in Pittsburgh and Scranton as well as hold two events in the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.”

This is OFA’s top surrogate. Four stops in Pennsylvania the day before the election.

Any questions who’s winning?

~~Romney up 4 in Pennsylvania in release of new poll tonight.~~ Susquehanna is the pollster that nailed Toomey winning his Senate victory on the nose and predicted Tom Corbett’s win within two points.

Correction: The link that I got to that poll was through Twitchy which linked to the Erie County Pennsylvania GOP office citing this poll. I thought this was odd because I had seen an article on Hot Air stating that Susquehanna would release its final poll in the Pittsburgh Tribune Review on Sunday. The pollster’s director, Jim Lee, informed that this was inaccurate and related to the poll that was released about 3 weeks go. The final poll will indeed come out on Sunday in the Pittsburgh Tribune Review which the director hinted that shows a tighter race, probably indicating a smaller Romney lead. Susquehanna has come out with its final poll of the PA Senate race today showing Bob Casey Jr. up 1, 46-45.

Interesting tweet to Jay Cost cited in that Battleground Watch post.

@jaycosttws I am in Bucks Cty and got a call from OFA looking for volunteers to help Obama in the district.Playing catch up last minute

— Mary Sue (@RubySlipperblog)

Oh my. It looks like the Obama campaign has been caught flat-footed. If Organizing For America is just starting to rustle up volunteers, it is already too late. The momentum is already beyond their control. Romney is already booked to outspend Obama on the airwaves by a 4 to 1 margin in all the PA markets, including Philadelphia, and will be doing a campaign event in Bucks County which is a crucial portion of the Philadelphia suburbs. According to ground reports in Pennsylvania, the Romney ground game and volunteers are off the charts enthusiastic and are definitely believing they will win Pennsylvania. Obama has no time to buy ad time and very little money left with the lion’s share of resources devoted to trying to hang on to Ohio. The New York Times and Ed Rendell are openly very worried about Pennsylvania. I remember a bolt out of the blue whiplash like this happening in the Coakley-Brown Massachusett’s Senate race in 2010.

State of the Race — 7 days to go: Projected EV count — Romney 261 Obama 236, 41 Toss-up

Tue, 30 Oct 2012 13:17:30 +0000

As of this morning looking at the polls and trends, here is what I have. Romney has pretty much wrapped up IN, NC, FL, and VA. The polls showing Florida and Virginia to be close are absurd with their turnout models. Colorado and New Hampshire are very close to being wrapped up as well. The trend in Ohio is very good and Governor Kasich believes that Romney will win comfortably in Ohio. The early voting numbers look absolutely catastrophic for Obama in Ohio. I would have to agree but I’m not willing to take any chances. Currently I have Ohio, Nevada, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Maine Congressional District 2 as being toss-ups though the momentum in these states is all on the Romney side.

The big problem for Obama now is not the fact that Romney is so close to clinching this, but the fact that Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Minnesota are causing the Obama campaign incredible headaches. I have these as being a slight lean to Obama right now but the momentum is with Romney in these states as well. If Romney picks off just one out of Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, or Michigan, the election is over. This is why you see the Obama campaign buying ad time in these states now because Romney is at 261 EV. It is not any coincidence why the Obama campaign and operatives had a fit about the Des Moines Register endorsing Romney for president. I loved Romney’s SuperPAC buying a $2 million dollar ad by playing in all the Pennsylvania markets, including Philadelphia. Romney, the RNC, and the GOP SuperPACs cash advantage has stretched Obama incredibly thin and they are playing this perfectly from a strategic standpoint.

Romney is on the cusp of winning this thing. It’s all about getting out the vote and going to vote now. Short diary yes, but I wanted to throw out there what I have and see what other people are thinking out there.

UNCONSCIONABLE: White House told Al-Queda group took responsibility for Benghazi attack 2 hours after it happened

Wed, 24 Oct 2012 03:11:12 +0000

(H/T Ace)

This is the most abominable act I think I have seen this present White House Administration has ever had. That is saying quite a lot. Via GretaWire:

A third email, also marked SBU and sent at 6:07 p.m. Washington time, carried the subject line: “Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack.”

The message reported: “Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli.”

Such a brazen pattern of pathological lying mixed with phony indignation deserves a condemnation from the American people of immeasurable furor.

Ohio: A realistic analysis of where the race stands — If the GOP turns out in Ohio, Romney wins handily

Tue, 23 Oct 2012 05:43:29 +0000

The consensus is that Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, and Colorado have slipped away from Barack Obama and into Mitt Romney’s column. Indiana has been long gone for Obama for quite a while. The shortest route for Romney to electoral victory would be to pick off Ohio and be done with it.

There is a very good analysis of the current state of Ohio done by someone who posts here at Redstate, or I have to assume this is the same Dave in Fla that posts here on occasion. The most recent Ohio polls with the exception of the most recent poll from Suffolk today project a 2008 turnout to twice as better than 2008 for Barack Obama (a.k.a. the most recent CBS/Quinnipiac poll to name one). Rather than get all bogged down in a sophisticated breakdown to see what is really happening in Ohio, some basic facts to keep in mind.

In 2008, there was a 4.5 advantage in turnout for Democrats.
In 2008, Obama won independents by 8 points.
In 2010, there was a 1 point advantage in turnout for the GOP.
In 2012, polls in Ohio across the board show Romney with a high single to low double digit lead among independents.
There has been an enormous shift toward the GOP in the early voting numbers compared to the 2008 early voting numbers in Ohio.

About that important #5, Democratic early voting is very much down across the board in every county in Ohio. Even in deep blue Cuyahoga county in northern Ohio, the early voting numbers are off 6% there. The GOP early voting is actually up as well across every county. However, the big falloff has been among Democratic early voting. In 2008, Democrats had a 13.88 point edge in early voting. In 2012, they have a 6.13 edge. That’s almost a 56% drop in Obama’s early voting advantage. If the early numbers can be used as a precursor to what the turnout of the electorate will be in Ohio, this is suggesting a D+2 electorate in Ohio and this looks to be the best case scenario regarding turnout for Obama. However, that enthusiasm edge and the impressive Romney ground game could push this turnout needle further right as Romney voters whom haven’t voted will turn out in force on Election Day. Remember, McCain won the Election Day vote in Ohio by 2.5 points but he got buried in the early voting. This D+2 projection of turnout would be very realistic considering what we saw in 2008 and 2010. Now back to Dave’s analysis as off today regarding Ohio which does factor in all of Romney’s independent support in Ohio. Here is what he shows using turnout models from 2004 to today. Looking at the average composite of all the recent polls documented at Real Clear Politics, here is what he came up with.

O+2.17% – Current RCP Average
R+8.92% – Average using the 2004 turnout model
O+0.51% – Average using the 2008 turnout model
R+5.72% – Average using the 2010 turnout model
R+4.99% – Average using the 2012 registration model
R+2.84% – Average using the D+3 turnout model

If the early voting numbers are any indication of the electorate of D+2 which I think they can considered to be, I believe that Romney is up probably about 3.5-4 points right now in Ohio in the worst case scenario. But, it is up to the voters on the right to show up for Romney. I have no questions in my mind that they will. The only thing preventing Democrats from going into a full blown panic is these polls that are projecting a turnout that will not be within the realm of possibility of happening this election.

Chris Christie and Scott Walker: Models of courage and strength. Rick Snyder of Michigan? An appeasing wimp

Thu, 18 Oct 2012 04:26:50 +0000

Harsh title, I get it. But Governor Snyder deserves a good kick in the butt with this post. From his limp-wristed veto of Voter ID to having the votes to push through Right to Work and collective bargaining, the governor of Michigan’s political stances have been sorely uninspiring, even depressing Republicans in the House and Senate. Now, sensing that Governor Snyder is a wimp, unions are trying to push through legislation that in essence would embed collective bargaining into the Michigan constitution and create a litigious abyss that would send Michigan to the way of California and Illinois.

The Michigan Supreme Court recently approved the placement of a proposed constitutional amendment on the November ballot. If passed by voters, the so-called Protect Our Jobs amendment would give public-employee unions a potent new tool to challenge any laws—past, present or future—that limit their benefits or collective-bargaining powers. It would also bar Michigan from becoming a right-to-work state in which mandatory union dues are not a condition of employment. The budget implications are dire.

Michigan public unions began pushing the initiative last year, shortly after Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder—facing a $2 billion fiscal hole—capped public spending on public-employee health benefits at 80% of total costs. This spring, national labor unions joined the amendment effort after failing to prevent Indiana from becoming a right-to-work state.

Bob King of the United Auto Workers said that Michigan’s initiative would “send a message” to other states tempted to follow Indiana’s example. The UAW, along with allies in the AFL-CIO and the Teamsters, poured $8 million into gathering 554,000 signatures—some 200,000 more than needed—to put Protect Our Jobs on the Michigan ballot.

The amendment says that no “existing or future laws shall abridge, impair or limit” the collective-bargaining rights of Michigan workers. That may sound innocuous, but according to Patrick Wright of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, the amendment would hand a broad mandate to unions to challenge virtually any law they don’t like.

Mercy, capital would flee out of that state faster than investors are getting out of France. Read the whole article. What I highlighted is just a small portion of an economic nightmare that will unfold and bankrupt the state of Michigan. This is what happens when you have a wimp in the executive office. People follow strength and courage. Look at what happened when Christie and Walker took the fight to the union leadership. They are balancing their budget and their approval ratings are up. Apparently Governor Snyder doesn’t have the heart for this and is doing his best impression of John McCain kumbaya. (facepalm) I have a lot of friends up in Michigan. It is a great state, lots of good, hardworking people. However, Michigan is one of the sad historical tales that when unions and socialism are at the helm, an economic graveyard always results. Phil Rahe also has an excellent breakdown on events up there and a warning for Mitt Romney of going down this aloof path should he be elected president:

The polls suggest that Mitt Romney has a shot at taking Michigan. He is behind 4.4% in the Real Clear Politics polling average. But that may be misleading. The two most recent polls – Rasmussen and the Detroit News – have him behind 7%.

I am wary of the polls this year, and I would love to know the party breakdown of these polls and of the polls taken back in 2010. But I would not be shocked if our side suffered a debacle in Michigan this year. If the ballot proposals being pushed by the left pass, if the left takes over the state supreme court, I shudder to think what will follow. This is the sort of damage that it is likely to be impossible to repair.

If my fears are realized, it will be due to the fecklessness of a single Republican – who had a chance to set things right but failed to recognize that bad management is not the chief source of Michigan’s problems and that he had to confront more fundamental problems and articulate an argument appealing to justice in defense of what he intended to do.

This fact ought to give one pause. If Mitt Romney wins in November — and I still expect him to win by a landslide — I sure hope that he does not revert to the technocratic, apolitical bipartisanship that marked his tenure as governor in Massachusetts. If he does, we may see Barack Obama back in 2016 . . . or someone worse.

Fixing things requires courage and hard decisions, some of which will cause the other side to howl and may make people upset. However, Governor Snider was elected to fix a mess and put Michigan on a path to a new direction that will make it prosperous in the long run. He is failing because he is unwilling to fight for Michigan’s long term economic survival and then, prosperity. It is because he is not speaking up against this initiative that his GOP legislature is not speaking up and people whom live there remain blindly unaware of the awful calamity that is at their door. As Rahe succinctly put it:

But, locally, silence reigns.

How tragic.

State of the Race, 3 Weeks Out — Absent of bad surprises, Mitt Romney will be President. Second, 12 Senate races are toss-ups.

Wed, 17 Oct 2012 05:07:07 +0000

Mitt Romney’s performance tonight was very, very good again. He handled himself impeccably. Sure, some people have issues with Candy Crowley’s moderation of the debate, particularly the mess she created regarding the Libya topic. It guaranteed the Libya story will be in the news cycle leading up to the last debate which Barack Obama will have a very tall order just to come out of that debate with a draw. However, Mitt did what he had to do and judging by the post debate polls, cleaned Obama’s clock on the most important issues of this election.

A Pleasant Choice

With Mitt Romney and the RNC announcing their September haul of $170 million with $191 million cash on hand at the end of September, I am wondering if they would be able to spend all that prior to Election Day. With states like Pennsylvania, Michigan and Minnesota (!!!!!!) either being toss-ups or getting dangerously close to attaining that status, there are a lot of pleasant options. The best thing to do would maybe grant a sizable gift in the tens of millions of dollars range split out among 12 GOP Senators where the races are considered toss-ups. I would argue that there are 13 with the latest Rasmussen poll showing Ben Nelson up 1 point over Connie Mack in Florida. The Real Clear Politics Map tells it all. I love the group of battlers that are in these toss-up races. However, it is amazing what Tom Smith has done in Pennsylvania (I now believe he is going to win), Linda McMahon in Connecticut, and Josh Mandel in Ohio. They should be commended for the races they have run. No disrespect meant to the other GOP Senate candidates at all. But those three candidates have the “WOW” factor going for them. Heidi Heitkamp is trying to pull one over the voters of North Dakota in her race against Rick Berg. What the passing of Obamacare taught us is there is no such thing as a conservative Democrat. Many Democrats in the House and Senate got into office by campaigning on a conservative platform and then revealed who they really were when they passed that awful health care bill.

If the Romney campaign and the RNC has more money than necessary to deluge their final ad blitz in the swing states and Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Minnesota, it can’t hurt to invest and help the Senate campaigns of those 13 Senate races. A strong GOP majority in the Senate could yield a very effective mandate and first-term agenda for Mitt Romney.

The race is still not over until you’ve voted, the polls have closed, and you’re watching the returns on TV. Donate, volunteer, be a Cold Warrior precinct leader. If there was one thing I was very happy about Romney’s performance is that he didn’t sit on his lead. He forcefully pressed the attack forward. We should continue as he did tonight.

Electoral Earthquake: Romney up 7 points in Florida and Virginia.

Thu, 11 Oct 2012 23:17:41 +0000

OH WOW.

Likewise, Obama’s lead among likely women voters in Florida fell from 15 percentage points last month to just 2 points, 49 percent for Obama and 47 percent for Romney.

Obama’s once 11 point lead among likely independent voters had cascaded into a 13 point lead for Romney this week, 52 percent to 39 percent.

The poll found little change among Florida youngest voters, 18-34, or oldest voters, 65 and up. But those ages 35 to 64, who had been evenly divided a month ago, moved dramatically to the Republican nominee. Romney now has a nine point lead among voters age 35-49 and a 15 point lead among those between 50 and 64.

Especially ominous were the numbers for Hispanic voters, a demographic where the Obama campaign is banking on an advantage of at least 15 percentage points. The poll showed 44 percent of likely Hispanic voters favoring Obama and 46 for Romney, though the margin of error is higher with that smaller group of voters.

Mason Dixon is a reputable pollster and its polls are usually on the mark.

The Times poll “is just not rooted in reality,” senior Obama adviser David Plouffe said Thursday. “We got 57 percent of the Latino vote, according to exit (polls) last time. We think we’ll probably push 60 or above this time.”

So I guess that Univision debacle didn’t have any effect huh?

And then…

POW!!

In that Virginia poll, Allen is up 3 on Kaine as well. Party ID is D+o which is reasonable for Virginia.

My gut is telling me Romney might be about to break this open. Keep donating and volunteering as if it is a tied race.

The predictable Democratic debate strategy from here on out: Attack, attack, attack. Liar, liar, liar. BS, BS, BS. And hope Romney and Ryan just defend and hope they don’t counter back

Tue, 09 Oct 2012 07:29:57 +0000

Since the mile-high massacre in Denver, Democratic operatives, pundits, and liberals have launched into one of the biggest tirades against the character of Mitt Romney that I have ever witnessed. The American people have taken quite a liking to Mitt Romney and it really has them panicked. The beginning of it was when Chris Matthews and the MSNBC panel were howling of how much Mitt Romney got away with that night. Here’s the problem. I didn’t see a stretch in anything Romney stated that night. It was packed full of substance, what he was going to do and how he was going to do it, and a surgical prosecution while Obama was in office and he did it with a smile on his face. This makes it easy to see what their debate strategy is going to be:

Always be attacking — Obama and Biden have to do this now because there is some big time momentum toward Romney now that the Obama campaign is desperate to stop before it gets beyond their control. So here is what happens. They are going to attack and hope all Romney and Ryan do is defend. They’ll do this so they’ll try to create the perception that they are winning because they are attacking and RR is defending all the time. The simple way to counter this is defend, call out any untruths and attack back. In other words, just replicate Romney’s performance last Wednesday from here on out. Personally, I like Moe Lane’s simple strategy. Obama and Biden cannot debate on their record so they have to hope that Romney/Ryan defends and sits on their hands. It’s the kitchen sink strategy and that really is all they have here. However, I am sure RR and the debate team know this and will simply defend and counter-attack with substance and their ideas while prosecuting the last four years of the Obama presidency.
Character attacks – Watch for Obama and Biden to constantly say “You’re not being truthful with the American people” “That’s not true.” and the like.
Make the case that Romney-Ryan would be a worse alternative — They have already been doing this, calling Romney’s foreign policy to the right of George W. Bush (that’s quite a compliment if you ask me), saying that going back to what got us in this mess won’t solve anything. Actually they have been doing this for awhile. The fact is, they do this because they don’t have anything left in the holster. This typically is a losing strategy for the incumbent but historically, this is what a failed term in office forces an incumbent into.

From MSNBC to Paul Krugman, to the Obama campaign (too many instances to link), it is obvious what their strategy is from here on out. Can’t debate their record and can’t debate with Romney and Ryan on the vision and ideas for the country the next four years. All they have left is the kitchen sink to throw at RR these last three debates. The important thing is not to get cocky and the Romney campaign isn’t showing any signs of that. They are still running with the urgency that they are still behind though the most recent polls suggest otherwise. Paul Ryan has a difficult task ahead of him this Thursday. Don’t laugh. It’s gonna be hard for Ryan to handle all the baloney that Biden is going to be throwing his way while still telling the country what the Romney/Ryan ticket will do while in office.

There was a very enlightening thing that David Axelrod stated about Romney. He said Romney had a great performance but it had no substance. Now that’s either an entirely delusional statement, gutter level spin, or an insight into what the Obama campaign thinks debates are. I believe that the Obama campaign believes that the debates are just all theatrics and putting on a good show. It’s a good thing that Romney doesn’t think so.