A candidate for the Maine senate is being attacked because she plays World of Warcraft. Good to see they are still having fun in my home state.
Category: Politics
Mitt Romney performed better than I thought he was capable of performing. I completely underestimated his debate abilities.
Some quotes about Governor Romney’s performance:
[Alexis Levinson on The Daily Caller](http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/04/obama-surrogates-cant-quite-spin-a-win-after-denver-presidential-debate/):
> But style, more than substance, led to Romney’s clear advantage. The former Massachusetts governor was aggressive, and he made his arguments without any sign of hesitation. He repeatedly asserted himself and even interrupted moderator Jim Lehrer occasionally to ensure that he could respond to the president’s remarks.
[Erick Erickson on Red State](http://www.redstate.com/2012/10/04/bam-slam-pow-crash-boom/):
> The debate was so bad for Barack Obama I expect Eric Holder to send Jim Lehrer to GTMO. Barack Obama suddenly agrees with Republicans on defunding PBS. Without his precious TelePrompTer to feed his Gollumesque addiction to its illuminated, precious words, the President fell flat. Instead of John Kerry for a debate partner, the President should have just gone through airport security a few times or embraced BOHICA as a debate preparation strategy.
> Put it to you this way, within ten minutes of the debate ending, Jessica Yellin of CNN spoke with Stephanie Cutter of the Obama campaign. Ms. Cutter conceded up front that Mitt Romney won on both debate preparation and debate style. It went downhill from there. She began parroting talking points about the debate she herself released to Obama surrogate at sun up yesterday morning. She had nothing new to add.
[Michael Walsh on NRO](http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/329454/what-mitt-did-michael-walsh):
> No, what really mattered was that Mitt — until last night practically the epitome of the GOP establishment — rudely stripped Obama of his intellectual pretensions and made fools of the Praetorian Guard media that has both coddled and worshiped Obama since his (in retrospect) one and only great speech back in 2004. Last night was like the scene near the end of *The Man Who Would Be King*, when the villagers realize their soldier-of-fortune “god” is only human after his bride scratches him and he bleeds.
[Victor Davis Hanson on NRO](http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/329463/problem-last-night-was-not-just-obama-victor-davis-hanson):
> The problem for Obama is not that his performance was disastrous, but rather than it was his normal workmanlike coasting. But this time, and for the first time, he was pitted against a skilled debater who had both the better argument and the better intellectual artillery to deliver it. Disengaged cool could not cut it. “My/I/me/mine” first-person overload was of no value. “Make no mistake about it/Let me be perfectly clear” was of no use. “Bush did it” is passé. And the faux-patois of a Reverend Wright-like sermon had no place here. Obama was just Obama without the props.
> …
> The final irony? The real culprit for Obama’s disastrous night is not entirely Barack Obama, but rather the media training-wheels who assured Obama for years that he was riding on his own; when they went off last night, he immediately fell, and for some reason we are supposed to be surprised?
[Rich Lowry on Poltico](http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82028.html#ixzz28M6TacSL):
> Romney had an answer for everything the president said, partly because the president relied on tired riffs from the campaign trail that don’t sound nearly as good without an adoring audience looking for any excuse to laugh or applaud. It’s hard to imagine a better point-by-point argument than Romney made last night, when he seemed less a former management consultant than a former litigator.
> It’s not often a president of the United States has someone stand several yards away, look directly at him and contradict everything he says. It can’t be a pleasant experience. But all President Barack Obama could do last night was grimace and take it.
and a sampling from [John Fund](http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/329411/obamas-media-enablers-turn-him-john-fund) on how President Obama’s friends in the mainstream media turned on him:
> Bill Maher, HBO: “Obama looks like he DOES need a teleprompter.”
> How are capital gains different from ordinary income?
> Ordinary income is usually guaranteed. If you work a certain amount of time, you are legally entitled to the pay that you were offered when you took the job. Capital gains involve risk. They are not guaranteed. You can invest your money and lose it all. Moreover, the year when you receive capital gains may not be the same as the years when they were earned.
> …
> If a country wants investors to invest, it cannot tax their resulting capital gains at the same rate as the incomes of people whose incomes were guaranteed in advance when they took the job.
It is really quite simple[^fn1].
[^fn1]: If you want more of Dr. Sowell’s explanations of economics, I highly recommend [Basic Economics](http://www.amazon.com/Basic-Economics-Economy-Edition-ebook/dp/B0047T86CO/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1349264788&sr=1-1&keywords=basic+economics) (Affiliate Link).
Categories
Why Conservatives Oppose Obamacare
James C. Capretta nails it in two paragraphs:
> Instead of reforming these entitlements while trying to broaden insurance coverage, Obamacare leaves the current behemoth in place and then piles massive new commitments on top of it. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the law will entitle at least 30 million people to expensive new health-insurance subsidies, and that number could easily rise by 20 million or more if employers dump their workers at moderately higher rates than the CBO assumes. The new spending for these commitments will grow at a rate of about 8 percent per year from 2016 through 2022, pushing the new entitlement’s cost at the end of the ten-year projection period to $250 billion a year. Over the long run, this new spending commitment will add trillions to the government’s unfunded liabilities.
> The law’s proponents argue that these commitments are fully paid for with spending cuts and taxes. This is false. A primary source of funding is the reimbursement cuts in the Medicare program that are so plainly unrealistic that the chief actuary has said repeatedly they can’t be relied upon to finance the bill. And the tax hikes in Obamacare are reason enough for conservative opposition: Totaling $800 billion over a decade, these taxes will lessen growth by reducing investment and the labor supply, and will reintroduce “bracket creep,” a way to push tax collection higher and higher with each passing year. The CBO estimates that Obamacare will push up federal tax collection by more than 1 percent of GDP by 2035, largely because the taxes will apply to more and more middle-class Americans.
Unfortunately, it is tough to explain that in a 30 second campaign spot. Hopefully, over the next few weeks, Governor Romney and Congressman Ryan can at least make a few attempts at articulating it.
Interesting article from John Fund over at *National Review.* He opens up so many interesting arguments, both for and against early voting, that I have decided not to quote just one, but instead recommend you read the whole post.
Categories
At least we can Trust the NIE, right?
> The unusual statement from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence appeared to have two goals: updating the public on the latest findings of the investigation into the assault, and shielding the White House from a political backlash over its original accounts.
The foreign policy debate on Wednesday should be interesting.
Nothing like taxing the sale of medical devices. Of course, President Obama is just so much “likable” than Governor Romney, so we might as well give him 4 more years to drive the economy into the ground.
This is why industry regulation falls so consistently. What a mess.
Based on my experiences with the people I wrote software with, this is not surprising. The idea that liberal policies actually help people in the tech industry seems to be further pushed by tech press, especially in the independent tech press. Combine both of those things with the fact the tech industry has not been hit as hard by the economic downturn and you can see why it might be hard for people in the tech industry to recognize the negative effect President Obama has had on the economy over the past 4 years.
Categories
A Solid Take on Current Polling
Erick Erickson, writing on *Red State*:
> Here’s a simple truth: the polls and polling trends are by and large accurate, but — and pay attention to the but — the polls are overestimating Democratic turnout. Those polls that presume less than a 2008 Democratic wave, which I think is most reasonable, have the race very close, though pretty much all of them have Romney still behind. The reality is that Mitt Romney is behind, but that does not mean this thing is over. It is close and Romney can very much still win this election. Finally, at long last, it also seems Romney has a message that can resonate.
That seems to be the most straightforward, and honest, explanation of what is currently happening with the presidential polling.
Categories
Media Guilt over Obama
The *Daily Caller* points to [a post from Howard Fineman](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howard-fineman/barack-obama-floating-like-a-butterfly_b_1911017.html) that says President Obama has been getting a bounce in the polls
> without having to seriously and substantively defend his first-term failed promises or shortcomings, and without having to say much, if anything. about what, if anything, he might do substantially differently if he is fortunate enough to win again. …
> Obama was such a cool and uplifting story to so many in the media in 2008 that they essentially ceded ground to him that they have yet to reclaim. He ran a tightly controlled message campaign then, and has run an even more tightly controlled White House, with few press conferences and deep access only to those most likely to write positive stories. Univision didn’t get the memo, and its reporters hammered the president about immigration last week. It was a rare moment.
I wonder how long it is before people really stop believing anything from the *traditional* media. People talk about the rise of the Internet and how that has resulted in a decline in print media, but part of the problem is also the circle of liberal reporting that dominates so many *traditional* publications. Why should people who have conservative values pay to support a bunch of people who attempt to inject their liberal views into every news story?
Why would CBS air a clip that paints President Obama in a bad light? It is not like they are claiming to be an unbiased news organization or anything.
> [T]oward the end of the speech, Ryan was gaining applause for the solutions he offered:“Medicare is a promise, and we will honor it. A Romney-Ryan administration will protect and strengthen Medicare, for my Mom’s generation, for my generation, and for my kids and yours.”
What a surprise that this was not covered in all the news stories saying how Paul Ryan was “booed” for his talk about repealing Obamacare.
Mitt Romney gave $4 million to charity, almost 30% of his income, but that is not enough for Democrats.
> With Romney trailing Obama in favorability, Gingrich encouraged Romney to play aggressively on the debate stage. The most recent CNN/ORC International Poll of likely voters, conducted earlier this month after the conclusion of both conventions, showed Obama with a 9 point advantage over Romney in their respective favorability ratings.
> “He’s in a competition to be capable,” Gingrich said. “We need somebody who can turn America around. We need him to convince us that a Romney recovery is better than an Obama stagnation. Unless he can do that, I don’t care how much effort they spend trying to make him likeable – it won’t work.
I like it.
Categories
Vetting Obama
The *Washington Examiner* with an in-depth look at the man who has been president for the past 4 years, and who wants to be president again. I wonder if people would still want him to their [boat captain](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/09/11/mitt-romney-and-the-captain-of-the-ship-question/) if more media outlets did the level of analysis that *Examiner* did.
> Drudge has [linked](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ge3aGJfDSg4) to an audio someone dug up from what is reportedly an October 19, 1998, conference at Loyola University where Obama spoke. In the audio, Obama says, “I actually believe in redistribution.” It’s certainly interesting, although not surprising, to hear Obama explicitly defend the notion of government as an instrument of redistribution. As Katrina [points out](http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/325942/obama-1998-i-actually-believe-redistribution-katrina-trinko), his position now is more or less the same as in the video, although nowadays he’s careful to leave out the word “redistribution.”
Does this really come as a surprise to anyone? Of course this is what President Obama believes.
Categories
The Role of Governement
> Most conservatives see government as a ministerial device needed to perform a few functions that a free society must see to in order to maintain the order and security necessary for society to flourish. I have never thought “government has a responsibility to help those who can’t help themselves”; I have thought that I have a responsibility to help those who can’t help themselves.
Exactly.
Categories
Bias in Political Polls
Katrina Trinko at *National Review*:
> But regardless of partisan breakdown, Republicans should be wary of taking any polls as completely accurate.
“Part of the reason the Democrats won in 2008 was that when it looked as if McCain was going to lose, some Republicans stayed home,” argues McLaughlin. “So if President Obama is in a dead-even race with Mitt Romney in so many swing states, if the Democrats can convince enough Republicans they’re going to lose, it could take a one-point loss for the Democrats to a one-point win.”
That is the main thing: do not let the media convince you that the election has already been won before voting even starts.
Categories
A Pep Talk for Conservatives
> You can let the media win, or you can double your efforts to defeat a President whose reason to be is to lessen U.S. influence in the world, to reduce the country to just one among many, to impose a European-style socialism, and yes, to create a dependency state in which the Julias of the country look to government as savior.
> …
> Defeating Obama is a fight which needs to be fought with everything you have, regardless of who is winning the media narrative.
> …
> Defeating Obama is a fight which needs to be fought with everything you have, regardless of who is winning the media narrative.
I needed this earlier today.