Who’s afraid of Mitt and T-Paw…
It turns out that Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty are the scariest pair of presidential prospects in the GOP field today, judging from a new Democratic ad and remarks by some Democratic Party hierophants.
Priorities USA Action, a political group founded by two former aides to President Barack Obama, targets Romney as a flip-flopper in a South Carolina TV ad that wields Republican Paul Ryan’s Medicare reforms like a political cudgel.
The 30-second black-and-white spot begins with Newt Gingrich’s “Meet the Press” remarks opposing what he called radical right-wing social engineering on Medicare. The ad then recounts Republican South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley’s defense of Ryan before turning finally to Romney: “Mitt Romney says he’s ‘on the same page’ as Paul Ryan … but with Mitt Romney, you have to wonder: which page is he on today?”
The New York Times says the ad will run this weekend while Romney visits South Carolina.
Pundits view the ad as evidence that Democrats have locked on Romney as the GOP frontrunner, at least for now.
Ed Rendell, a leading Democrat who served as Pennsylvania governor and DNC chairman, put it this way on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe”: “What really is instructive here is that this group’s trying to knock out Mitt Romney in the primaries. We don’t want to face Mitt Romney. A Romney-Pawlenty ticket is the most credible general election ticket.”
A monster twosome, perhaps. But that doesn’t mean top Republicans aren’t still baying at the doorsteps of Mitch Daniels and Chris Christie in hopes that one or both will take the plunge.
As for Elizabeth Warren? Barney Frank says: “Let’s fight!”
Is President Obama up for a Senate confirmation fight over Elizabeth Warren? Maybe not right now. But that’s just the sort of rhetorical rumble Barney Frank would like to see.
The former Democratic chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, who co-authored the Dodd-Frank financial regulation bill, tells MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” that Warren might survive a confirmation battle.
His reasoning? “This is not just the left and the right. The Republican Party is united against healthcare and united against the environment. They’re not united against financial reform.”
Even more to the point: “The Tea Party people didn’t send people to Washington to defend derivatives. I think the fight over Elizabeth Warren would be worth having and I’m not sure how all the Republican senators would vote.”
Warren, of course, is the outspoken, bespectacled Harvard law professor who has struck fear in the hearts of bankers and their friends in Congress by pushing hard for consumer protection in the financial sphere.
Obama put her in charge of setting up the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. But he has not named her to head the operation, a post that would require confirmation in the Senate, where Democrats retain a slim majority. For now, she serves as a special advisor to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner
The confirmation fight Frank envisions sounds a bit like a fantasy match — a fantasy particularly for him, given that he sits in the House of Representatives and not the Senate.
CPAC victory in hand, Ron Paul takes on Tea Party
Libertarian Ron Paul, a godfather of the Tea Party movement, isn’t altogether happy with his political progeny these days.
Fresh from victory in last week’s CPAC presidential straw poll, the Republican congressman from Texas laments to MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” that some Tea Partiers aren’t measuring up when it comes to the tough defense and entitlement program cuts he believes are needed to save the United States from economic cataclysm.
“They don’t want you to touch Social Security. They don’t want you to touch anything but Obamacare,” Paul says. “Some of them are real Republicans and they wouldn’t dare touch Bush’s increase in medical care costs, you know, prescription health programs.”
“They treat the symptoms and they don’t look at it philosophically,” he adds.
This sounds like a new fissure in the divisions emerging among Republicans. The Tea Party movement swept Republicans into the majority in the House of Representatives last November, while narrowing the Democratic Party’s hold on the Senate.
This year, newly elected Republicans with Tea Party backing have embarrassed the party leadership in the House on high-profile votes and pushed to expand initial 2011 spending cuts of $40 billion to more than$60 billion.
Differences between Republicans have appeared to turn on degrees of conservatism and aggressiveness about spending cuts, with some balking at the prospect of reducing popular programs that could cost votes.
Fox News has been busted yet again editing video to misinform its viewers.
“Fox News. We distort, you buy it.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwo0Iyrh1 Zk
Trump accepts high marks for CPAC
Donald Trump went to CPAC this week and aced his performance as a prospective White House Wannabe. Any doubts? Just ask him.
“I tell the truth. I tell it like it is, and people understand what I’m saying, and the place did go crazy,” The Donald tells MSNBC’s Morning Joe today. ”That’s what I said in the speech. And that’s why I got 10 standing ovations.”
Remarks like that, taken out of context, might sound like the words of a talking ego.
But the billionaire New York real estate developer’s speech did get high marks from Politico. An A-minus, in fact, which put him right up there with Newt Gingrich and out in front of former Senator Rick Santorum (C-plus) and House Tea Party darling Michele Bachmann (B).
Bully for him, especially when you consider the seemingly tenuous circumstances that brought him to Washington.
“I was sitting in my office building buildings and doing things,” he says. ”I got a call from CPAC: Would I come and speak? And I just happened to be in the right mood. I got on my plane, I went down to Washington.”
In the right mood … just happened to be.
LOL–Well, he certainly knows a thing or two about bankruptcy…
As Obama speaks, Democrats target GOP’s Ryan
President Barack Obama may grab all the headlines with his State of the Union address. But Democrats want the GOP’s chosen responder, Paul Ryan, to share the spotlight — as poster boy for politically unpopular ideas that could be used against Republicans in 2012.
Here’s New York Senate Democrat Chuck Schumer’s take on Ryan on that electorally tender topic, Social Security. “What Paul Ryan suggests — privatization — is really a dismantling of Social Security,” he tells MSNBC’s Morning Joe.
More than that, Schumer says Ryan epitomizes policies that are straight out of the 1920s, those heady days of flappers, speakeasys and laissez-faire good times that preceded the Great Depression.
“The election said reduce government spending and refocus the government on the middle class. It didn’t say go back to the 1920s and just get government out of everything including Social Security,” says Schumer, one of the Democratic Party’s leading political strategists.
Why pick on Ryan?
The 40-year-old chairman of the House Budget Committee is a rising Republican star on fiscal issues that will top the U.S. domestic agenda for as far as the eye can see. That means he could be quite a force in U.S. politics in years to come, including presidential politics.
Democrats know that those chosen to respond to SOTUs in the past have not always fared well afterward. So, they see this as a chance to get Ryan’s newfound prominence off to a good stumble.
How about a new poll—How many people would like to hear the word bipartisin eliminated from political speech period. We don’t believe in it-It’s a unicorn–fantasy–with no real life application.
Would Congress swing its spending ax at the war in Afghanistan?
You’d think the war in Afghanistan would be the sacred cow of federal spending. The Republicans now in charge of the House have always embraced “Support Our Troops” and “Defeat Terrorism” as two of the most serious ”Thou Shalts” of their political playbook.
But could the times be a-changing? Two influential conservative voices suggest they might be, as lawmakers search for the right balance between spending cuts and their own job preservation.
Grover Norquist, the influential political hierophant at Americans for Tax Reform, says in a Newsmax interview that the time has come for a serious cost-benefit discussion about Afghanistan.
Norquist says the United States will spend $119 billion this year in Afghanistan, a country with a GDP of just $14 billion. In his view, supporters of the war should not be afraid to debate their position, to come up with good reasons to stay and the benefits of doing so. “Only (conservatives) can convince the country to stay the course or to take a different approach,” he says.
Then there’s House Republican Ron Paul of Texas. He’s long been a voice crying in the wilderness about the need to scale back on America’s overseas military commitments. Except now, with the Tea Party’s ascent, Paul is no longer a political backwoodsman.
“Politically speaking, I think that I can make the case that we should bring our troops home, change our foreign policy, quit these ridiculous wars,” Paul tells MSNBC’s Morning Joe this week.
“I think I could actually sell that politically easier (sic) than saying: ‘Oh OK let’s cut medical care for the elderly’,” he added.
Could there be two John Pistoles?
Could John Pistole have an identical twin who helps him run the Transportation Security Administration — a John Pistole and a John Pistole, maybe?
Here’s why…
John Pistole appeared over the weekend on CNN’s State of the Union to say that TSA’s highly invasive airport security screening procedures are here to stay. Those would be the ones that give travelers the choice of having their physical accouterments inspected either by sight or by hand — but always by complete strangers.
“No, we’re not changing the policies,” he told CNN.
Then on Monday, John Pistole showed up on NBC’s Today show and ABC’s Good Morning America with the news that TSA is rethinking its methods of operation.
“What I’m doing is going back and looking at: Are there less invasive ways of doing the same type of screening?” he said.
But at the same time, John Pistole was in front of the cameras again, this time on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, where he defended full-body scans as safe and patdowns as effective at preventing people from boarding airliners with bombs.
Gentile people of the USA know this nation was founded for “FREEDOM” from tyranny. Demand Obama dismantle the HomeLand Insecurity Department and the Federal Reserve.
Will she? Won’t she? Palin’s still a maybe
Republican celebrity, best-selling author, reality TV star and self-proclaimed mama grizzly Sarah Palin is thinking about adding another title to her ever-growing resume: U.S. president.
Not exactly news, except that the forthcoming issue of the New York Times Magazine says she’s now thinking seriously, right down to the need for new advisers and the means to prove herself on the issues.
Palin, whose titles also include 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee and former Alaska governor, acknowledges that much in an interview with the magazine, according to a preview published by Politico.
“I’m engaged in the internal deliberations candidly, and having that discussion with my family, because my family is the most important consideration here,” Palin says.
Politico says that the magazine says that Palin says there aren’t meaningful differences in policy among the field of GOP hopefuls “but that in fact there’s more to the presidency than that” (those are Palin’s words in quotation marks). Her decision would involve evaluating whether she could bring unique qualities to the table. “Yes, the organization would have to change,” Palin says. “I’d have to bring in more people — more people who are trustworthy.”
The magazine is published with The New York Times’ Sunday editions.
The U.S. political debate has shifted like quicksilver to the 2012 presidential race since the Nov. 2 midterms, with Republican victories in the House and Senate boosting the hopes of Palin and a dozen other prospective GOP White House wannabes.
Her family is the most important consideration for her? OK, how is she managing to shoot her reality series while taking care of a Downs baby with her eldest with her own baby to take care of playing reality TV star dancer? I’m guessing she’s got a lot of help, but she can afford it now that she’s on Murdoch’s payroll.
White House Intrigue: Could Hillary Replace Joe?
Could Hillary replace Joe as Barack’s main squeeze in 2012? That’s the juicy bit of palace intrigue enlivening today’s U.S. political melodrama.
It started when author Bob Woodward told CNN that the idea of a Clinton-Biden switch was “on the table” — at least among some Clinton advisers. A switch would mean Hillary becoming President Obama’s vice presidential running mate and Joe taking up her State Department chores.
“President Obama needs some of the women, Latinos, retirees that she did so well with during the 2008 primaries. And so they switch jobs,” explained the veteran journalist whose new book, “Obama’s Wars,” offers an inside look at the administration.
It may not be a bad idea given the latest Pew poll showing that Latinos are disillusioned with the political process. Only 51 percent of Latino registered voters are sure to get to the polls in the November midterm elections, according to Pew. That’s bad news for Democrats because Latinos favor them over Republicans by a margin of 65 percent to 22 percent.
But some who might welcome a Clinton-Biden switch could have more than the 2012 campaign in mind. “The other interesting question is (that) Hillary Clinton could run in her own right in 2016 and be younger than Ronald Reagan when he was elected president,” Woodward added. For the record, Hillary would be 65. Ronnie was the oldest incoming president ever, at 69.
Shocking enough to knock a presidential seal off a podium? Both ABC and NBC reported finding no evidence that Obama is considering such a plan. In fact, NBC’s Today Show quoted senior Obama adviser David Axelrod as calling the Woodward scenario “absolute fiction” and talked live to Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine who said he’s never heard such talk except in the media. Apparently, the president believes Biden’s doing a heck of a job as Veep. But what if Hillary wanted a new job in a second Obama term? Her most likely destination would be Secretary of Defense, according to NBC. The current Pentagon chief, Bob Gates, is expected to leave before the end of 2011.
So much for that rumor, right? Not so fast.
White House adviser says Obama to energize his base for November
President Barack Obama adds a new item to his first-term to-do list: energize his most loyal supporters in a national get-out-the-vote campaign for the November congressional midterm elections.
That’s the message Obama advisor Valerie Jarrett delivered on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, where she predicted a robust White House campaign to encourage voters including blacks and Hispanics to get to the polls next month.
Obama has already been out trying to stir up enthusiasm among the younger voters. But that was just for starters.
“He’s going to be energizing his base. He’s going to be energizing the entire country to come out and participate in this election,” Jarrett said.
“The president may not be on the ballot. But it’s very important that everybody come out and vote and that will be his message going forward.” Democrats hope to limit the loss of House and Senate seats in an election widely expected to yield Republican gains.
Some Democratic incumbents have sought to save their jobs by distancing themselves from the president and some of his more unpopular programs including healthcare reform. But analysts say Obama could help compensate for Republican strengths among white and independent voters by reaching out to voting blocs that enthusiastically supported him in 2008 and convincing them to come out to the polls on Election Day. A Gallup poll released on Monday showed that the president’s GOTV campaign may face challenges with some segments of its intended audience, however. Obama’s approval ratings stand at 91 percent among blacks, 79 percent among Democrats and 75 percent among liberals. But Hispanic’s give him only a 55 percent approval rating, according to findings based on interviews with 15,200 adults conducted Sept 1-30 in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The results have a 1 percentage point error margin. The presidential approval rating was 47 percent among women and 54 percent among moderates. Obama’s overall approval rating has firmed a bit from an August low of 44 percent — but only to 45 percent. Gallup says Obama’s overall approval rating is similar to midterm results of Democrat Bill Clinton (45 percent) and Republican Ronald Reagan (42 percent), whose parties suffered substantial congressional losses at the same juncture in their presidencies.
Photo credits: Reuters/Jim Young (Obama); Reuters/Denis Balibouse (Jarrett); Reuters/Jim Young (Obama supporters).
its good to see that hispanics are waking up to Barry the liar. it is a shame to see his support rate amoung blacks @ 91%.
How blind blacks are to the political process. Name one other race who so blindly follows one political party. Whites, hispanics, all races came out in droves to vote for Barry and even now people play the card…
And I dare you to play that card, you know what i mean…
Glad to see serious (though flawed) GOPers running. The more Palin, Trump and Newt just muddy the waters.