Video: Absolutely Uncertain

Via The Blaze:

A roughly 20-minute YouTube video analyzing President Obama’s relationship with Israel, narrated by a 23-year-old former Obama supporter, has gone viral.  In just three days, the little-reported on video “Absolutely Uncertain” has logged roughly 650,000 hits.

Irina, the 23-year-old “Jewish New Yorker” who narrates much of the documentary, explains that she has always seen American-Israeli relations as a cornerstone of American politics, reaching into both parties.

“So when it was time for me to vote for the first time in 2008, I didn’t doubt for a moment that the strong relationship would continue, no matter who won,” she states.

The short film features clips from longtime Democratic supporters including, Harvard Professor Alan Dershowitz, former NYC Mayor Ed Koch, Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT), Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ), and Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY).

Also worth watching at The Blaze: Krauthammer to Fellow Panelists: I Can’t Believe You Guys Are Covering For Obama on This Libya Disaster

Hat tip: Brian B.

Your Sunday Hymn: Glory and Praise to Our God

Written by Catholic composer,  Dan Schutte, and sung beautifully by an unknown choir:

Glory And Praise To Our God lyrics

Read the rest of this entry »

Saturday Movie Matinee: Benghazi-Gate

Fox News Confirms Terrorist Cover-up By The Obama Administration in First 24 Hours:

Hyscience: Must-Watch Video: Bret Baier’s Report With Extensive Time Line On Obama’s Two Weeks of Benghazi-Gate

Sean Hannity: Obama Regime’s Benghazi Lies:

CNN: Sources: No FBI agents in Benghazi:

Rush Limbaugh on Today Show’s covering for Barack Obama’s week-long lies on Libya debacle:

Gateway Pundit: Top Republican: Ambassador Rice Should Resign for Misleading Public on Benghazi Terror Attacks (Video):

Rep. Peter King told CNN Ambassador Susan Rice should resign for what he says was misleading comments about the Libya attack.

Huckabee: Obama In Denial Of Holy War:

Paul Ryan on Cavuto: This is Not What a Real Recovery Looks Like – Fox News 9/28/2012:


Another great video by Bullet People, (especially because ND is featured this time!):

The Republican Jewish Coalition presents “Perilous Times,” a mini-documentary in which Israeli experts and everyday citizens candidly discuss their concerns about the U.S.-Israel relationship under  Obama.

Among the notable experts consulted for this film are :
• Zalman Shoval, former Israeli ambassador to the U.S. and a highly-respected diplomat;
• Oren Kessler, foreign affairs correspondent at the Jerusalem Post;
• Barry Rubin, an expert on terrorism and Middle East affairs;
• Jacob Levy, Israel’s leading pollster and founder of Gallup Israel;
• Itamar Marcus, founder and director of Palestinian Media Watch; and
• Yair Shamir, leading Israeli businessman; former chair of El Al and Israel Aerospace; son of former PM Yitzhak Shamir.

Granny Jan and Jihad Kitty: Obama has been living on Easy St but come Nov he can kiss the good life goodbye:

PJTV: Terrorists Winning? Ivy League Professor Calls for Censorship of YouTube:

No Description Columbia law professor Tim Wu thinks YouTube should censor videos that could offend people in the Middle East. Is the liberal establishment raising the white flag to Islamic extremists? Are academics willing to sacrifice free speech and the First Amendment to satisfy the demands of radical Muslim terrorists? Find out.

Netanyahu Brings Visual Aid “Bomb Drawing” To UN General Assembly Speech:


Yid With Lid reported:

That Wiley Coyote prop was insurance. Bibi drew the red line right under the 90% and made a reasonable case.  Now everyone knows HIS red line, including Iran. Even if Obama didn’t like the bomb, his campaign will undoubtedly use the Prime Minister’s words for his next ads in Florida (don’t worry fellow Republicans it wont work–more people will remember Obama picked Whoopie Goldberg over Bibi).

What is most important is that Netanyahu gave a detailed explanation of his position before Obama could do the same with his. If his talks with Obama break down, or (God forbid!) if Obama wins a second term and puts the screws on Israel, Bibi has outlined the point of no return AND the timing to the American people.  That was the brilliance of what the Israeli PM did today.  If Obama does not come through and Israel has to act on her own, that cartoonish picture will be remembered by the American People as the rationale for acting. His simple and reasonable presentation will move Americans to ask why Obama is not backing Israel in what seems to be a fair demand.

Obama Addresses the UN General Assembly:

Charles Krauthammer:Obama’s cringe-worthy platitudes in U.N.

In mid-September 2008, Lehman Brothers collapsed and the bottom fell out of the financial system. Barack Obama handled it coolly. John McCain did not. Obama won the presidency. (Given the country’s condition, he would have won anyway. But this sealed it.)

Four years later, mid-September 2012, the U.S. mission in Benghazi went up in flames, as did Obama’s entire Middle East policy of apology and accommodation. Obama once again played it cool, effectively ignoring the attack and the regionwide American humiliation. “Bumps in the road,” he said. Nodding tamely were the mainstream media, who would have rained a week of vitriol on Mitt Romney had he so casually dismissed the murder of a U.S. ambassador, the raising of the black Salafist flag over four U.S. embassies and the epidemic of virulent anti-American demonstrations from Tunisia to Sri Lanka (!) to Indonesia.

Obama seems not even to understand what happened. He responded with a groveling address to the U.N. General Assembly that contained no less than six denunciations of a crackpot video, while offering cringe-worthy platitudes about the need for governments to live up to the ideals of the U.N.

The U.N. being an institution of surpassing cynicism and mendacity, the speech was so naive it would have made a fine middle-school commencement address. Instead, it was a plaintive plea by the world’s alleged superpower to be treated nicely by a roomful of the most corrupt, repressive, tin-pot regimes on earth.

Read on as Charles hammers Romney for his missed opportunities in all this.

Romney has accumulated tons of cash for 30-second ads. But unless they’re placed on the scaffolding of serious speeches making the larger argument, they will be treated as nothing more than tit for tat.

Make the case. Go large. About a foreign policy in ruins. About an archaic, 20th-century welfare state model that guarantees 21st-century insolvency. And about an alternate vision of an unapologetically assertive America abroad unafraid of fundamental structural change at home.

It might just work. And it’s not too late.

Via AIM: Pat Caddell’ speech at “The Audacity of Corruption” media conference 9/21/2012:

But I want to talk about this Libyan thing, because we crossed some lines here.  It’s not about politics.  When the—if any President of the United States—First of all we’ve had nine day of lies over what happened because they can’t dare say it’s a terrorist attack, and the press won’t push this. Yesterday there was not a single piece in The New York Times over the question of Libya.  Twenty Americans embassies, yesterday, are under attack.  None of that is on the national news.  None of it is being pressed in the papers.  If a President of either party—I don’t care whether it was Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton or George Bush or Ronald Reagan or George H. W. Bush—had a terrorist incident, and got on an airplane after saying something, and flown off to a fundraiser in Las Vegas, they would have been crucified!  It would have been—it should have been the equivalent, for Barack Obama, of George Bush’s “flying over Katrina” moment.  But nothing was said at all, and nothing will be said.

It is one thing to bias the news, or have a biased view.  It is another thing to specifically decide that you will not tell the American people information they have a right to know…

Obama Truth Team on Free Obama Phones: “We Didn’t Build That!”

It was all the telecom companies’ doing.

So there you have it. The Truth Team has spoken – so it is written, so it shall be done.

Because let’s face it, who can match this most transparent administration in American history when it comes to their commitment to the truth.

/sarc off.

John Sexton of Big Government reported back in June of the “Free Obamaphone” program:

A program called Lifeline provides free phones and free monthly minutes to anyone on food stamps, WIC, Medicaid, Head Start, and several other government programs. And just like food stamps, Lifeline (aka “phone stamps”) has been growing by leaps and bounds since 2008, at significant cost to taxpayers.

Lifeline was started in the mid-’80s to reduce the cost of phone service to rural and needy customers. The program’s costs are covered by a tax included on every monthly phone bill called the Universal Service Charge. The program eventually grew to include discounted cell service but took off in 2009, partly because TracFone announced a new program whereby eligible individuals could get a free phone and free monthly minutes. As a result, participation in the program (and costs) skyrocketed:

Program participation was stable from 2005 to 2008, from 6.9 million to 7.1 million participants, but increased to 8.6 million in 2009. Likewise, support payments were relatively stable from 2005 to 2008, from $802 million to $823 million annually, before increasing to approximately $1 billion in 2009.

LITTLE ROCK (KTHV) –  Tim Griffin, a Republican Congressman from Arkansas,  said he wants to end government issued cell phone program due to rampant abuse of the program.

“Some people are getting two, three, four,10, 20, 30, 40 cell phones.” said Congressman Griffin.

He says a few years back the government extended the program to provide not just land lines, but cell phone service.

The congressman said the program is being abused and people are even selling the phones. “I have a four year old that goes to a school here in Little Rock. She came home with an advertisement for a free cell phone in her backpack.” said Congressman Griffin.

Via Ace of Spades HQ, Uncle Sam’s Unlimited Plan: Learn more about this costly government giveaway:

It’s a another costly government giveaway that spiked under Obama that our grandchildren get to pay for.

Shocking: U.S. Ambassador to the U.N Blew Off Netanyahu’s UN Speech (Video)

The U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., Susan Rice, who found time to go on five different Sunday talk shows a week ago to lie about the Benghazi attack,  blew off the Israeli Ambassador Benjamin Netanyahu yesterday at the U.N. General Assembly in New York City. She decided to have lunch with Hillary and some foreign ministers rather than listen to his boring ol’ speech about containing Iranian nukes..

Greta van Susteren had John Bolton on her show, On the Record, last night to discuss the slight.

Video via Gateway Pundit

Townhall’s Katie Pavlich noted:

This move by Rice came just days after President Obama blew Netanyahu off so he could go party with Jay-Z, Beyonce, the ladies from The View and David Letterman.

The CNN blog is reporting that  Romney and  Obama will speak with Netanyahu, Friday:

President Barack Obama and Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney will separately speak on the phone with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Friday.

The conversations come one day after the Israeli leader made a definitive statement at the United Nations General Assembly Thursday, urging the international community to draw a “clear red line” with Iran over its suspected nuclear development program.

Obama could easily have made room in his schedule to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, yesterday, as he only had one campaign event in  Virginia Beach, Virginia, scheduled.

Keith Koffler reported yesterday, that the trip would only take a few hours out of his day, but he delegated the meeting with  Netanyahu to Clinton instead.

Others who have found room in their schedule to meet with Netanyahu are Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper – who recently threw all of Iran’s diplomats out of his country – and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

The White House, which has been under fire for ducking Netanyahu, has not ruled out a meeting, and may in the end bow to pressure to schedule one. Netanyahu is in the United States until Saturday night.

Well, at least the Prime Minister, whose country  may soon be going to war with Iran, rates a phone call from the busy campaigner in Chief. But I strongly  suspect he only scheduled the phone call after he heard Romney would be speaking to him by phone.

Linked by Michelle Malkin, thanks!

Video: Obama Supporters Paid $11 an Hour by SEIU to Protest Romney Rally in PA

So this is the same protest near Cleveland Ohio, where those  two Mensa recipients were caught on tape gushing about Obama’s free phones, and saying that our Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens deserved what he got. I said that guy looked like a union goon, didn’t I?

This video should go viral because it exposes the type of astroturf in which the organized left specializes. The Community Organizer in Chief”s partner in political thuggery, the SEIU actually pays people to protest Mitt Romney at his appearances.

Does America want these repulsive people to win in November?


Gateway Pundit reports that the SEIU is also paying their goons in FL to harass Allen West:  Allen West Stalkers  Barge in on Rally Unfurl Banner and Scream on Bullhorns (Video)


Pat Caddell: “This press corps serves at the pleasure of this White House and President”

Public opinion pollster and political film consultant, Pat Caddell recently gave a speech on  “The Audacity of Corruption” at the Obamanation: A Day of Truth Accuracy in Media Conference 9/21/2012…

There’s a shorter version of his speech with just the highlights. But as far as I’m concerned, every part of a Pat F’n Caddell speech is a highlight. Caddell has never been better than in this speech blasting today’s ObamaMedia, which he repeats several times, scares him.

He said, “this press corps serves at the pleasure of this White House and President”, which is very similar to what another Democrat pundit, recently said: Kirsten Powers: The media seems to be taking their orders from the Obama administration.

Video and transcript via AIM

PAT CADDELL: Thank you.  Glad to be with you.  This could take a long time, but we don’t have that, so let me just get right to this.  I think we’re at the most dangerous time in our political history in terms of the balance of power in the role that the media plays in whether or not we maintain a free democracy or not.  You know, when I first started in politics—it had been for a long time, and for many years—everyone on both sides, Democrats and Republicans, despised the press commonly, because they were SOBs to everybody, which is exactly what they should be. They were unrelenting. Whatever the biases were, they were essentially—they were equal-opportunity people. That changed in 1980. There’s a lot of reasons for it. It began to change in the ’80s. It changed—an important point in the [Michael] Dukakis election, when the press literally was trying to—Dukakis-Bush, get Dukakis elected by ignoring what was happening in Massachusetts, with a candidate who was running on the platform of  “He will do for America what he did for Massachusetts”—and they were on the verge of bankruptcy.


The same thing: I raised the question of David Plouffe.  David Plouffe, who is the White House’s Senior Advisor—he was the campaign manager last time, he and [David] Axelrod sort of switched out, Axelrod going back to Chicago for the campaign—and just after it was announced that he was coming, an Iranian front group in Nigeria gave him $100,000 to give two speeches in Nigeria.  Now, let me tell you: There’s nobody that hands—no stranger gives you $100,000 and doesn’t expect something in return, unless you live in a world that I don’t.  And when he—no one has raised this in the mainstream media.  He was on with George Stephanopoulos, on ABC, a couple of weeks ago, and they were going through all these questions.  No one asked him whatsoever about that.  He was not inquired—there’s been no—George Stephanopoulos, a former advisor to Bill Clinton—who every morning, while Rahm Emmanuel was Chief of Staff, has his call with Rahm Emmanuel and James Carville, and the three of them have been doing it for years—and he is held out as a journalist.  He has two platforms.  I mean, he’s a political hack masquerading as a journalist.  But there’s no—when you don’t ask the questions you need to ask of someone like David Plouffe, who’s going in the White House—when we’re talking about Iran, I just finishedsurveys, some of you may have seen, with John McLaughlin this week, with Secure America Now, why not—just how strongly Americans are concerned with Iran, the Muslim Brotherhood, what’s happening in the Middle East, and cuts in defense spending.  This is not the place for that, but it strikes me as the American people identify, in the polling we’ve done over the last year, is Iran is the single greatest danger to the United States.  And here’s a man who’s being paid by an already named front group for that—for a terrorist regime, and is not asked about it, or queried about it!

The third thing I would say is that—then there’s of course [National Security Advisor] Tom Donilon, who I know very well from years back, who I would cause a little bit of a stir a few months ago when I said he was the “leaker-in-chief.”  I mean this ridiculous running around—“How did these secrets get out?”—when it is clear he is a person whose only credential—has no credentials for foreign policy; who has been in the White House; who was a political operative for Walter Mondale, Jimmy Carter, and others; who was known to have, in my opinion, to be just the most amoral person I know in politics; and who is using and orchestrating national security.  In Mr. [David] Sanger’s book [Confront and Conceal: Obama’s Secret Wars and Surprising Use of American Power], as a reviewer at [The New York Times] said, “The hero of this book, and the clear source of it, is Tom Donilon”—but let me just make a point.  Neither does—and I would say this to the Congressman—“You know, all the Republicans have to do”—you know, I talk often about the “Corrupt Party” and the “Stupid Party,” but the Stupid Party couldn’t be stupider when it comes to things like this.  They could have called Tom Donilon and other people down to the Congress, put them under oath, and asked them if they had leaked.  Instead you have Eric Holder, who runs the most political Justice Department since John Mitchell—only in John Mitchell’s administration we had Justice Departments that were so politicized and so corrupted by politics—and he appoints someone who gave two people to do a study on the leaks, sometime in the next century will come out, and one of them is a, was a contributor to Barack Obama when he was a state senator.  That’s a really unbiased source!  And the press, of course, won’t look into this.  It will not ask the question.  But the Republicans could have called them down.  Yes, the President could have extended Executive Privilege, but let him say “I will not answer that question, sir” on the question of “Did you leak these secrets that Dianne Feinstein, the Chairman, the Democratic Chairman, of the Senate Intelligence Committee said were endangering national security and American lives?”  As she said when she read Sanger’s book, “My God, every page I turn I learn something that I don’t know!”  I mean, these are serious matters but in Washington they’re playful, and the press does not pursue any of them.


We have a political campaign where, to put the best metaphor I can on it, where the referees on the field are sacking the quarterback of one team, tripping up their runners, throwing their bodies in front of blockers, and nobody says anything.  The Republicans don’t.  The reason you will lose this battle is for one reason.  Despite organizations like AIM and others who are pointing this out, and the fact that 60% of the American people are in on the secret here—I mean, they’re no idiots—Republicans and those candidates who are not the candidates of the press refuse to call them out.  If I were the Romney campaign I would’ve been doing this for months!  I’d have been looking at individual reporters!  I would be telling the American people, “They’re not trying to stop me; they’re trying to stop you!  And they are here to do this!”  And I would have made the press themselves an issue because, until you do, what happens is, they are given the basic concession of authenticity and accuracy, or that they are credible, by not doing that.


Gateway Pundit: Rush Limbaugh Accuses Obama of Coordinating a Campaign of Deceit & Lies (Video)

The Right Scoop: Kirsten Powers: The media may be complicit in another terrorist attack on America

You know what? They don’t care. They’ve got an election to win for their Precious, and that’s all that matters right now.

Ace of Spades HQ: Only ABCNews’ Jake Tapper Reports That Adminstration Secretly Knew Benghazi Was a Terrorist Attack From Day One; CBS, NBC Embargo

Linked by The Anchoress, thanks!

Obama: “I’m the President”, PA GOP: “That’s the Problem” (Video)

Via the Right Scoop, I’d say the PA GOP is hitting all the right notes with this.


AoSHQ: Pethokoukis: Year Of Sub-2% GDP Growth Signals A Recession 70% of the Time:

“Red zone.”

I can only express my disgust so many times — this is huge, and the media is embargoing it entirely.

U.S. economic growth is dangerously slow. I’ve frequently written about research from the Fed which finds that since 1947, when two-quarter annualized real GDP growth falls below 2%, recession follows within a year 48% of the time. And when year-over-year real GDP growth falls below 2%, recession follows within a year 70% of the time.

Poll Watch: Mitt Romney’s Leading in Swing States

What’s the best way to know what libs have up their sleeves? Pay attention to what they accuse others of doing.

Traveling to campaign in Virginia from Washington today, President Obama‘s team said the news media wants a “comeback kid story” for Mitt Romney.

“We know there are going to be twists and turns and ups and downs in this campaign,” Obama press secretary Jen Psaki told news media aboard Air Force One. “We know we’ll have them in the next 40 days as well. campaign we know we’ll have them it in the next 40 days as well. Mitt Romney has set it up and his team have set it up where they want the debate to be that moment for him. They fully expect that moment is going to be their turning point. We know people want to write a comeback kid story, so we’ll see if that happens.”

Well, who’s the “Comeback Kid” in the media narrative, right now?

Dana Perino called it back in June.

She said Team Obama wanted to be the underdog in this election, and it looked like they were getting their wish. But  she also said to watch for stories starting in July that would herald Obama’s amazing recovery – how he was getting his groove back, etc.

Well, it’s coming a little later than expected, perhaps because Obama was having so many bad weeks/months in a row, the narrative just wasn’t tenable until now. The ObamaMedia has been working overtime to paint Romney as a “gaaaaaffe” prone, out of touch, rich white guy who doesn’t pay his fair share. And they think now is the time to go in for the kill. Romney’s 47% “gaffe” is causing him to lose ground to the comeback kid, is their story and they’re sticking to it..

Remember how al-Reuters covered Romney’s massive 7,000+ person rally in Colorado, last weekend? : Romney tries to put “47%” gaffe to bed with focus on jobs .  That got my attention: Shameless, ObamaZombie Media Reaching New Heights in Hackery.

Now here’s Rush Limbaugh on his show,today: Obama and Media Coordinate to Attach the “47% Video” to Romney’s Supposedly Falling Poll Numbers:

RUSH: Now, Obama is in Virginia, he’s got a campaign appearance going, and he just told a whopper.  Grab sound bite five, by the way.  He just told a whopper to the crowd.  And, by the way, let’s play sound bite five.  This is what has caused this big change.  The Romney video where he claimed that 47% of the voters are just beyond his reach, they don’t pay taxes or whatever, you remember the video from May at a fundraiser. Obama has latched on to that to now try to talk about the people of this country as great, hardworking, stick-to-it, self-reliant, rugged individuals.

Obama has done a 180.  I’m here to tell you that what this campaign is doing is not representative of a campaign that thinks this election is over and that they have it locked up.  He is in states that the polls tell us he’s leading by ten to 12 points.  He is now making campaign statements, trying to put words in Romney’s mouth that Romney has denigrated people as a bunch of victims and Obama is now becoming the champion of entrepreneurs and rugged individuals?  And this isn’t gonna fly anywhere because nobody believes that.


So they’ve decided at the Obama campaign to defend the hardworking people that Romney is attacking. This is a campaign that does not have a core message that it’s locked into.  It’s hop scotching all over the place, and now they think this one might work.  I’m telling you, feel free to disagree with me, I guess I could be wrong about this, but this strikes me as a campaign in disarray.  I know that’s what they’re saying about the Romney campaign.  But I think it’s the Obama campaign that’s not well-oiled and not a smooth running machine.  The very idea it takes ‘em a week to gin up a coordinated response with the media on this 47%, and then they have to makeup what Romney meant, put words in his mouth. And now here’s Obama whose existence is based on victims, Obama’s reason for existing as a politician is to help victims and make even more of ‘em.  That’s what a community organizer does.

A community organizer makes people feel like they’re victims.  He tells them they’re victims.  A community organizer tells people they’re getting dumped on, that they’re getting the shaft, that they’re getting the screw by The Man, by the elite, by the rich. And now all of a sudden Obama’s out, (imitating Obama) “There aren’t any victims. They are hardworking people.  The way you get ahead in this country is hard work.”  No, it’s not.  If you work hard and you become successful, you are a target of this administration.  You’re gonna be paying higher taxes. You’re the reason that there’s poverty.  You’re the reason that there’s despair.

You are the reason, you small business owners that are perceived to have loads and loads of money, you know it as well as I do, in Obama’s world, you’re the reason we have this bad economy, you and Bush.  You’re not hiring people.  You’re hoarding all of your money.  You’ve got it.  You’re just not hiring.  You’re greedy.  This has been Obama’s whole message, and now all of a sudden — here, we got a media montage yesterday, last night, and this morning, of a bunch of media people, State-Controlled Media, tying this 47% video of Romney to these polls and trying to explain this is why Romney’s plunging.

Here’s his Obama Media montage:

ALLEN:  New polls show Ohio slipping away after Romney talking disparagingly about the 47%.

MUIR:  Romney described 47% of Americans as victims.

CRAWFORD:  Romney is still shadowed by “it’s not my job to worry about the 47%.”

MORGAN:  The 47%  fiasco.

REICH:  In response to that 47% video.

STODDARD: The potency of the 47% video.

CAVUTO: Mitt Romney, the 47 thing.

TUCKER:  This 47% remark so absolutely devastating for him.

CARDONA: He’s denigrating 47% of the American electorate.

STEINHAUSER:  Those controversial 47% comments.

GUTHRIE:  Repair the damage from the 47% comment.

SILVER:  Since Romney’s 47% comments Obama’s gotten a second wind.

Yeah, yeah, yeah…HERE’s your “second wind”, drones:

Rasmussen (R) 2012 Daily Swing State Presidential Tracking Poll
Including “Leaners”

  • Mitt Romney 48%
  • Barack Obama 47%

Not Including “Leaners”

  • Mitt Romney 46%
  • Barack Obama 46% 
  • Some other candidate 4%
  • Undecided 5%

Survey of approximately 1,300 likely voters was conducted September 20-26, 2012. The margin of error is +/- 3 percentage points. The swing state poll covers 11 key states: Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin.

Inside the numbers:

The president’s Job Approval in the swing states is currently at 48%. Fifty percent (50%) disapprove. These figures include 28% who Strongly Approve and 41% who Strongly Disapprove.

DaTechGuy analyzes RCP’s right track/wrong track numbers.

Right now the MSM is running a ton of polls with huge Democrat skews yet take a look at the results at the end of the chart for today:

56.3 vs 37.6 Wrong track over right track that’s a spread of 18.7 and consider this: The CBS/NYT poll and the NBC/WSJ poll, the two polls that are the most skewed have a wrong track/right track numbers of -19 & -16 respectively.

Think about that: Even with a sample that couldn’t favor Obama more if they were paid employees of the white house they can’t even get a gap of less that 10 pts let alone a favorable number.


VDH notes how few votes it would have taken to make 1980 a Carter victory:

In other words, until the very last week of the campaign, Reagan had an uphill fight. True, he eventually won a landslide victory in the Electoral College (489 to 49) and beat Carter handily in the popular vote. Yet Reagan only received a 51-percent majority.

What had saved Reagan from a perfect storm of negative factors — gaffes, additional conservative candidates on the ballot, a single debate, and a biased media — was not just the debate. Voter turnout was relatively low at only 53 percent. If Reagan’s conservative base was united and energized, Carter’s proved divided and indifferent.

John Nolte of Big Journalism: To Help Democrats, the Media’s Been Lying About Swing State Polls Since 1980:

How Carter Beat Reagan:

So what do we have here?

What we have is the liberal “paper of record” systematically presenting the 1980 Reagan-Carter election in 9 “Crucial States” as somehow “close” in five of the nine — Texas, Illinois, Ohio, Florida and Michigan. New York was in the bag for Carter. Only in his own California and New Jersey was Reagan clearly leading.

The actual results had only New York “close” — with Reagan winning by 2. Reagan carried every other “close” state by a minimum of 6 points and as much 17 — Florida. Florida, in fact, went for Reagan by a point more than California and about 4 more than New Jersey.

How could the New York Times — its much ballyhooed polling data and all of its resulting stories proclaiming everything to be “close” — been so massively, continuously wrong? In the case of its “Crucial States” — nine out of nine times?

Remember, in order to buy today’s media polling, you have to believe Romney has shored up his base and is winning Independents, but still losing because Obama’s going to match or best the extraordinary party advantage he enjoyed during the perfect storm of 2008.

Poll apologists just say they believe the polls. What they’re really saying, though, and can’t defend, is that during a bad economy and all the Middle East unrest, Obama’s going to win a record turnout advantage.

Zombie: The Five False Assumptions Behind Poll-Skewing:

The Purpose of Poll-Skewing

Each side has defined for itself an ultimate goal. Obama’s supporters in the media and online strive incessantly to demonstrate and publicize that Obama is ahead in the polls. Romney’s supporters strive to demonstrate that those polls are skewed, since the published totals are “weighted” (i.e. arbitrarily distorted) to match statistics about past voter behavior that are no longer true.

Now, if you had just landed on Earth from another galaxy, you likely would be very confused about this behavior on the part of the poll-wrestlers. Presuming there is such a thing as objective reality, there must be a certain true percentage of people who support each candidate — so what purpose is served by intentionally misrepresenting that reality if, at the end of the campaign, that misrepresentation will be trumped by an actual vote? Isn’t the purpose of polls to reveal a snapshot of how things really stand?

Oh you naive extraterrestrials, we reply. Originally, yes, polls were meant to document reality, but nowadays polls are designed to mold reality. If two candidates are in truth currently tied, but we announce that one of them is in the lead, then on election day he will actually win, because our false poll reporting affected how people vote. Get it?


Poll Watch: PPP (D) Ohio 2012 Presidential Survey

With Poll sample +8 Democrat

Q15 If you are a Democrat, press 1. If a Republican,
press 2. If you are an independent or identify
with another party, press 3.
Democrat ……………………………………………….. 41%
Republican……………………………………………… 33%
Independent/Other…………………………………… 26%

The results show Obama winning by 6:

PPP (D) Ohio 2012 Presidential Poll

  • Barack Obama 50% [50%] (48%) {47%} [50%] (49%) {50%} [46%] (45%) {46%} [46%] (44%)
  • Mitt Romney 44% [45%] (45%) {44%} [43%] (42%) {41%}[46%] (43%) {42%} [40%] (42%)

Among Independents

  • Mitt Romney 51% [46%] (39%) {42%} [40%] (40%) {45%} [46%] (43%) {44%} [39%] (40%)
  • Barack Obama 34% [44%] (49%) {42%}[43%](45%) {39%} [35%] (38%) {34%} [37%] (34%)

Among Men

  • Mitt Romney 50% [48%] (48%) {48%} [50%] (49%) {47%} [54%] (44%) {50%} [47%] (47%)
  • Barack Obama 43% [46%] (44%) {41%} [44%] (43%) {45%} [38%] (42%) {43%} [38%] (37%)

Among Women

  • Barack Obama 55% [53%] (52%) {52%} [55%] (54%) {54%} [53%] (47%) {49%} [52%] (51%)
  • Mitt Romney 39% [43%] (43%) {41%} [36%] (36%) {36%} [38%] (43%) {35%} [35%] (37%)

Obama is losing Independents…


The Iowa Republican reports that Romney is leading in the latest (unskewed) poll:

The stories of Mitt Romney’s demise in Iowa may be exaggerated.  While the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News/Marist poll results have caused NBC to move Iowa from being a toss-up to a lean Democrat state, a new TIR-Voter/Consumer Research poll suggests otherwise.  The poll of registered voters conducted between September 23rd and September 25th shows Romney with a one-point lead over President Obama in Iowa.

Respondents were asked whom they would vote for if the election for president were held today.   Forty-seven percent chose Republican Mitt Romney, while 46 percent said Democrat Barack Obama.   Two percent said neither, one percent refused to answer, and only four percent of respondents were undecided.

The poll is significantly different from last week’s Wall Street Journal/NBC News/Marist poll that showed Obama leading Romney by eight points, or the most recent Public Policy Polling poll that had Obama’s lead at seven points in the state.

The major difference between the polls could be attributed to the political make up of the sample.  Public Policy Polling’s Iowa sample was comprised of 37 percent-identified Democrats, 33 percent of identified Republicans, and 27 percent of identified independent or no-party voters.  The TIR/VCR poll was comprised of 36 percent registered Republicans, 35 percent registered Democrats, and 30 percent no-party voters.

Keep in mind, there are now roughly 20,000 more registered Republicans in Iowa than registered Democrats.

September 24, 2012 4:20 P.M.

This news release – announcing that there are now roughly 20,000 more registered Republicans in Iowa than registered Democrats –

suggests that Hawkeye state Republicans can crow about a dramatic turnaround, pointing out that back in January 2009, Iowa Democrats enjoyed a 110,000 voter registration advantage.

For what it’s worth:

WH Insider said this December 2011: Heads Up – The Cook The Books Campaign Is Underway:

Not sure if you are abroad or not but wanted to get this message to you so you know what to specifically watch out for in the coming weeks and months.  Got word there is a comprehensive polling and economic data program about ready to be launched via some administration operatives and particular media outlets.  Big time cooking the books on this polling data they will be pushing out there soon.

Told Wapo will be one of if not the first.  Urge you to read beyond the polling headline and you will find the facts behind the numbers.  All campaigns attempt to do this kind of thing, but nobody gets away with it as much as the Obama administration.  It will prove to be a huge obstacle for whoever the GOP nominee is. And this is just the start.

These polls are fabrications intended to shape public opinion.  They are not reflections of public opinion.  That make sense?  The poll itself will be regurgitated to other secondary media.  That is how we did it over and over again in 2007 and 2008.  We used the polling to work against Hillary, and then we used the same platform of tricks to use against and paralyze the McCain campaign.

Linked by Doug Ross, thanks!

You have to find the actual polling data.  It will be buried but you can find it easy enough once you figure out the links.  Then go back and compare to previous polling and you’ll note the shift. That shift is proof of the dishonesty of the media.  At least some of them.  The Obama people fed them the request, and these polls will be used to paint the picture.

Hat tip: Charles B.

Classy Cleveland Woman Explains Why She’s Voting for Obama (Video)

I know you’ve probably seen this video, by now, Drudge linked to it, and Rush played it on his show a little while ago, but DAYUM! I’m posting this, anyway because it must be seen to be believed…

Talk about a poignant validation of Romney’s 47% makers vs takers remark. This woman should be a spokeswoman for the Romney campaign:

If I didn’t know any better I’d say that that video is a spoof of how liberals think conservatives view Obama voters: ignorant, ridiculous, uneducated sponges – how racist of us!- Perhaps an attempt by the  left to save face after being punked so badly, yesterday on Romney/Ryan stench hoax.

But unfortunately….it’s all too real, and we’ve seen glimpses of this pathetic entitlement mentality before.

FLASHBACK to 10/2009:

FLASHBACK to 10/2008:

Do I think all Obama voters are like this? Of course not. But Obama has encouraged the entitlement mentality with his policies, not discouraged it.


Another utterly moronic and vile Obama voter weighs in on the Libyan Embassy attack: Obamavoter –Assassinated Libya Ambassador “had it coming”.

This guy has union goon written all over him:

Video: Michelle Malkin Blasts “Stephanie Cutterocchio” on ‘War On Women” Lies

In case you missed it, last night, Michelle Malkin turned in another bravura performance on Hannity, last night, where she blasted shameless lying liar, Stephanie Cutterocchio,  offered advice to Mitt Romney on how to handle the debates with Obama, and ridiculed team Obama’s vastly overplayed “War on Women” narrative – “that women think with their chromosomes and internal organs” and the “Sandra Fluke types and radical Code Pinkos prancing around in costumes dressed up as  reproductive organs…this is not what mainstream females are about..”

Video via:

Hump Day Silliness: Libtalk Dummies Fall For Ryan ‘Stench’ Hoax (Audio)

We can thank Radio Equalizer, Brian Maloney for capturing these gullible Libtalkers’  embarrassing buffoonery for us. He listens so we don’t have to – and God knows – we owe him a debt of gratitude for that.

Ace explains the hoax as only he can:

Snark seems easier to people than actually being funny. All you need to do is say something that isn’t true, or something you don’t believe. You may or may not add some “funny” punctuation to it, such as an exclamation point.

Exclamation points make things funny. Or so people who think Snark is Humor seem to believe.

So, Roger Simon, who just seems like a big fat ball of failure to me in most respects, trotted out his own attempt at this “Snark” all the kids were into these days.

Paul Ryan has gone rogue. He is unleashed, unchained, off the hook.“I hate to say this, but if Ryan wants to run for national office again, he’ll probably have to wash the stench of Romney off of him,” Craig Robinson, a former political director of the Republican Party of Iowa, told The New York Times on Sunday.
Continue Reading

Coming from a resident of Iowa, a state where people are polite even to soybeans, this was a powerful condemnation of the Republican nominee.

Though Ryan had already decided to distance himself from the floundering Romney campaign, he now feels totally uninhibited. Reportedly, he has been marching around his campaign bus, saying things like, “If Stench calls, take a message” and “Tell Stench I’m having finger sandwiches with Peggy Noonan and will text him later.”

The Democrat media complex’s reaction to this was a collective: “Wowwwwwww!”

This isn’t the first time Rachel Maddow has been punked by an obviously bogus story. In fact, that’s sort of her specialty.

Linked by Michelle Malkin

Poll Watch: “All the Signs Point to a Big REPUBLICAN Voter Enthusiasm Advantage in this Election”

Eric Allie cartoon via Townhall

To combat the massive amounts of polling high jinks going on, right now, Poll Watch is going to be a regular feature here until the election.

First, here’s the always optimistic Dick Morris, last night on Hannity. Listen to him snap “I can!” when Sean Hannity opens the segment saying, “I can’t predict what will happen November 6th.” He goes on to predict, “if the Election was held today Romney Would Win by 4-5 Points…”

John Giokaris of Townhall, a Chicago-based political operative with five years of experience in law and journalism, explains what’s going on with all the skewed polling.

The liberal mainstream media and blogosphere are desperately trying to write Romney’s funeral using polls that oversample Democrats by as much a D+10, D+11 and D+13. In 2008, an historic election wave for Democrats, the electorate was D+7. In 2004, when George W. Bush won re-election, the electorate was evenly split. In other words, D+0. So was the 2010 midterm election: evenly split. The Democrat share of the electorate is not going to double this year. Given the well-noted enthusiasm edgefor Republicans this year, the electorate is going to be far closer to the 2004 and 2010 models than 2008. Any poll trying to replicate the 2008 is going to artificially inflate Obama’s support.

But as pollster John McLaughlin explains, “The Democrats want to convince [these anti-Obama voters] falsely that Romney will lose to discourage them from voting. So they lobby the pollsters to weight their surveys to emulate the 2008 Democrat-heavy models. They are lobbying them now to affect early voting. IVR (Interactive Voice Response) polls are heavily weighted. You can weight to whatever result you want. Some polls have included sizable segments of voters who say they are ‘not enthusiastic’ to vote or non voters to dilute Republicans. Major pollsters have samples with Republican affiliation in the 20 to 30% range, at such low levels not seen since the 1960s in states like Virginia, Florida, North Carolina and which then place Obama ahead. The intended effect is to suppress Republican turnout through media polling bias. We’ll see a lot more of this.”

A certain pundit on this site (guess who?) provided a link to some web site claiming that a national average of 2012 election polls (without citing which ones specifically) shows Obama leading Romney in several key states when excluding Rasmussen polls, implying Rasmussen has a Republican bias. What they fail to mention is that a Fordham University study concluded that Rasmussen had been the most accurate pollster throughout the 2008 election (and that was Obama’s goodyear).

I could just as easily provide a link to another website that claims to unskew the polls’ oversampling of Democrats to show that Romney actually leads Obama (and they even list which specific ones). But whether you look at Rasmussen, which has been accused of leaning right, Gallup, which has been accused of leaning left, both are showing the same thing: this race is virtually tied.

Another conservative poll watcher, Brian Cates of Draw and Strike! explains the familiar pattern of skewed polling in the weeks and months before an election.

During the Spring and Summer months leading up to the fall, Mainstream media pollsters try to shape the campaign news and drive a narrative with their polls.  To accomplish this, they do funky things with the numbers.

Note that in the past few weeks in polls taken since the beginning of September, 11 of those pollsters shown above in that chart had a sample in their poll that was +4 Democratic or greater.  6 of them expect an electorate on Nov. 6th that is +7 Democrat or greater.  And 3 of them expect Democrats to outvote Republicans by +10 points or more.

Now in 2008, Democrats DID outvote Republicans by +7.  That was a historic wave election for the Democratic party; you’d have to go back decades to find another election where Democrats outvoted Republicans by anything like that kind of number.  Usually the partisan split between Dems and Repubs is pretty damn close, and if it’s not tied within the margin of error, it’s between a +1 or a +3 advantage to whichever party gets the upper hand.  So +7 was pretty damn eye-opening in 2008.

Despite the fact that a lot has changed since 2008, many of these MSM pollsters are using a 2008 template for their polls. That is, they are presuming a huge Democratic voter enthusiasm advantage that pushes the Democratic vote to another big advantage over the Republican vote.  They are assuming Republicans are going to be outrepresented in the actual electorate that votes on November 6 by at least +4 or more.

However, all the signs point to a big REPUBLICAN voter enthusiasm advantage in this election.

Right now Romney is winning that Independent vote by a considerable margin.  To make up for this, the MSM pollsters are undersampling Indies and Republicans in their polls and blowing up the Democrats in their samples, sometimes to ABSURD sizes, such as the ABC/News, Reuters, and Democracy Corp polls in that chart at the top of the page.  +7 was a historic turnout for Democrats, yet some of these pollsters desperate to keep Obama way ahead of Romney are claiming a Democratic electorate of +10 or +11.

These MSM pollsters KNOW what the actual numbers are. Which is why they are in full-blown panic mode the past month and a half, trying to convince anyone who will listen to them that Romney’s lost already.  They are seeking to dampen Republican voting enthusiasm because they know if Republicans turn out, it’s over.  Their guy, their shining Prince, will lose.


If you’re going to believe the polls released from CBS/New York Times this morning — you know, the polls the media’s currently using to beat Romney senseless and to depress Republican enthusiasm, you have to believe that the turnout advantage for Democrats over Republicans will blow away every previous record and common sense.

It’s that simple. Because these polls are not only telling us that Romney is losing OH, PA, and FL by insurmountable margins; these polls are also telling us that Democrat turnout is projected to blow away every modern record.

But these media polls don’t headline what they’re seeing as far as the Democrat turnout advantage because no one would believe it. In fact, no one believes Obama will match the D+7 nationwide advantage he enjoyed in 2008. And no one certainly believes he will surpass it.

Oh, except this non-stop litany of media polls being wielded like weapons by the corrupt media.

Via AoSHQ, Jay Cost of The Weekly Standard affirms that  Yes, Most Polls (The Ones The Media Prefers) Are Giving Obama a Phantom 3-4 Point Edge

Obama is only even with Romney with Independents, and many Independents remain undecided. The only way, then, Obama can have a healthy lead is if he is getting much more out of his base than Romney is out of his own, a historically dubious proposition.

He does not mention the old rule — which actually isn’t a very strong rule — that remaining undecideds will break for the challenger. It should be noted that this rule really isn’t one, which is why I don’t think he mentions it.

That said: In this election, if the constant media fawning over Obama, and his overexposure, haven’t convinced you to support him, I just don’t think you’re going to wind up voting for him.

2. Currently the polls show the Democratic base being more unified than the Republican base — that is, there are more Republican defectors, away from Romney, than Democratic defectors, away from Obama.

Cost doesn’t even question this based on common sense (that is, given that Obama is presiding over a Depression at least partly of his making). He just looks at historical party unity numbers– in previous elections, the Republicans were more solid for the Republican candidate that the Democrats were for their own. Ergo, he finds the current situation indicated by polls — that Obama is more popular with Democrats than Romney is with Republicans — either wrong as of the moment or possibly correct at the moment but unlikely to persist.

Rush Limbaugh warned conservatives about the biased polling, on his show, today:Don’t Let Bogus Polls Depress You:

It’s a roller coaster. It is. This is why… I talked about it yesterday. Why do you think so many people in this country are stupid? ‘Cause of polls like this! Obama’s leading Romney in Ohio on a question of who’s better suited to run the US economy for the first time in the campaign? Why does that make any sense? How does that make any sense at all? The economy’s getting worse! So this effort to suppress your vote and depress you at the same time, folks? They’re ratcheting it up.

(I said essentially same thing on Twitter, yesterday:)

They’re trying to wrap this up before the debates even start, because I think they’re worried about the debates. I think they’re trying to get this election finished and in the can by suppressing your vote and depressing you so that you just don’t think there’s any reason to vote, that it’s hopeless. They want you making other plans. We are told that according to the latest New York Times/Quinnipiac/CBS News poll, Obama is leading Romney by nine points in Florida, by ten points in Ohio, and by 12 points in Pennsylvania.

All among likely voters.

If that’s true, it’s over. If that’s true, it’s over, because there’s no way to recover that kind of ground in the number of days left. So the question is: Is this true? Is it anywhere near true? Well, the pollsters will all tell you, “What’s in it for us to be wrong?” But, folks, these pollsters can massage the sample in any number of ways to get what they want out of a given poll, and they will always be able to go back and say, “According to that sample, our poll was right on the money.”

Open your eyes – it’s beyond obvious, now what their doing.

The Examiner: Don’t trust presidential race polling data, says conservative PAC:

There are now only six weeks until the all-important presidential election and the news and entertainment media are working very hard to cover for Obama — whether it be about his failures on jobs and the economy, or his failures in foreign policy including the loss of a U.S. ambassador, claim officials from the Campaign to Defeat Obama in a report on Monday.

In an attempt to discourage Republicans, especially conservatives, from going to the polls the denizens of American newsrooms keep suggesting that the Romney/Ryan ticket is finished, and point to their own polls to show how great Obama is doing in this campaign, according to the report, say the CDO officials.

“Recall the 2004 election between incumbent President George W. Bush and Democratic Sen. John Kerry: Several polls showed Kerry edging out Bush on election day. The media told the country beginning at 5:00 p.m. on the East Coast that exit polls showed Kerry beating Bush by a wide margin. Well, we know what happened that night,” said political strategist Mike Baker.

“And why did the media tell the nation Kerry was winning when he eventually lost? Because they hoped Republican voters wouldn’t bother voting,” Baker said.

“In fact, the only talk show host to tell Republicans not to believe the polls and go out and vote was former Justice Department chief of staff Mark Levin,” noted Baker.

DaTechGuy has been on top of the skewed polling, all year:

…with a sample that is D+9 in Florida, Barack Obama has a +9 lead on Mitt Romney! In Ohio with a D+9 Sample Obama has a +10 Lead and in Pennsylvania with a D+11 sample he has +12 lead.
Now I have absolutely no trouble believing these states are close nor to I disagree that Mitt Romney should be more aggressive but come ON guys?
By an odd coincidence the last time this poll came out Hugh Hewett questioned Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac Polls and asked him about this (emphasis mine):

HH: Do you expect Democrats, this is a different question, do you, Peter Brown, expect Democrats to have a nine point registration advantage when the polls close on November 6th in Florida?

PB: Well, first, you don’t mean registration.

HH: I mean, yeah, turnout.

PB: Do I think…I think it is probably unlikely.

Mind you this is the guy who actually does the poll saying this

Let me close with this bit from the American Spectator and an exchange between Ben Bradlee and Ed Rollins from 2004

A few weeks later, the Washington Post ran a story that confirmed Rollins’ initial beliefs. The Post confessed that… well… oops… it had made a mistake with those California polling numbers. Shortly afterward came the November election, with California once again giving Reagan a more than 16 point victory. In fact, Reagan carried 49 states, winning the greatest landslide victory in presidential history while losing Minnesota in — yes — a close race. Mondale had 49.72% to Reagan’s 49.54%, a difference of .18% that might have been changed by all that money that went into California. Making Reagan the first president in history to win all fifty states.

After the [2004] election, Ed Rollins ran into the Washington Post’s blunt-speaking editor Ben Bradlee and “harassed” Bradlee “about his paper’s lousy polling methodology.”

Bradlee’s “unrepentant” response?

“Tough sh…t, Rollins, I’m glad it cost you plenty. It’s my in-kind contribution to the Mondale campaign.”

Let’s be blunt…we’re dealing with damn,  dirty, scheming libs who, as we all know by now, (say it with me) “wake up every morning and ask themselves, how can we fool them, today?”

Here’s where the only poll that matters has the race:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows both President Obama and Mitt Romney attracting support from 46% of voters nationwide. 

When “leaners” are included, it’s Romney 48% and Obama 46%.  

Via Charles B., some sweet polling news from Iowa.

Obama expands Iowa lead to 7 points
Raleigh, N.C.– PPP’s newest Iowa poll finds Barack Obama leading Mitt Romney by 7
points in the state, 51-44. Obama’s advantage has increased by 5 points since PPP’s last
poll of the state in late August when he led just 47-45.
The biggest change in the last month has been significant
Wait – how’s that good news – Obama’s winning!
It’s a PPP poll, silly: IOWA  PARTY ID           D+4
Democrat (34%)            Republican  (33%)
Democrat (31%)            Republican  (35%)

This news release – announcing that there are now roughly 20,000 more registered Republicans in Iowa than registered Democrats – suggests that Hawkeye state Republicans can crow about a dramatic turnaround, pointing out that back in January 2009, Iowa Democrats enjoyed a 110,000 voter registration advantage.

In terms of how many voters are registered with each major party, Democrats continue to hold advantages in several key swing states, but in all of those states, their advantage is considerably smaller than it was in 2008.


The Right Scoop: TRIFECTA puts the election in perspective: Why does the media think Obama is winning?

Via CDBO Headquarters:

Dick Morris, Karl Rove & Scott Rasmussen were on Fox News Channel tonight and they articulated the message that we’ve been trying to convey to you for weeks.  Don’t believe the major media polls.  They are wrong.  They are deliberately over-sampling Democrats, and it is adding several bogus points to Barack Obama’s numbers in the polls.

The media is doing this to depress conservatives – hoping that you will stop contributing to the campaign against Obama, that you won’t volunteer at the local Republican Victory Center, and that you’ll hopefully stay home on Election Day.  Don’t let the media get away with this shameful behavior!

The good people at have produced further evidence to show you the bias in the polling, again – being done to trick you into thinking Obama has already won.  Below is a review of the latest polls taken among Ohio voters.  Here’s what is fascinating:  over the past four years, Democrats have turned out more of their voters to the polls than Republicans by a 1% margin.  You read that right – just 1%.  Yet, as the team at just discovered, the polls being reported in the media showing Obama with this supposedly big lead do so only because they weighted the poll to have a 6%-10% Democrat turnout advantage:

Do you want to know what the truth is?  The truth is that the race in Ohio is a dead heat, and that’s why the media and the Obama campaign are working so hard to convince you not to contribute, volunteer and vote.

Don’t let them win!  We ask that you please make a contribution to The Campaign to Defeat Barack Obama.  You can contribute as little as $5 up to the maximum allowed contribution of $5,000.  Please, contribute online – HERE.
Karl Rove broke out his white board on O’Reilly, tonight: Rove: Romney Is Winning Republicans and Independents & Media Has Him Down 9 Points
More great stuff via Charles B:

Wednesday, September 26, 2012

Poll Watch: Franklin & Marshall Pennsylvania 2012 Presidential Survey     Barack Obama 52%      Mitt Romney 43%        D+9

Party registration:                                            Democrat; 50%                            Republican  37%                    D+13
2008 Pennsylvania EXIT POLL PARTY ID               Democrat 44%)                               Republican  (37%)                     D+7
2010 Pennsylvania EXIT POLL PARTY ID               Democrat 40%)                               Republican  (37%)                     D+3
2012 Pennsylvania GALLUP PARTY ID ( adults )     Democrat 46%)                               Republican  (51%)                     D+5
PA is in PLAY.

Linked by Michelle Malkin, and Doug Ross, thanks!

Posted in polls. 28 Comments »

Walid Shoebat: Innocence of Muslims Film was Made by Terrorists

Oh boy…the implications here are staggering. If this film was indeed produced by Islamic hucksters, and Shoebat makes a very good case that it was — what does that make the Obama administration, who so enthusiastically jumped on the anti anti-Mohammed film bandwagon, and stayed on, even as the narrative fell apart? It’s now being reported that the US knew Stevens assassination was the work of terrorists within 24 hours of the attack. Why, as Romney and Ryan ask, doesn’t Obama  want the American people to know exactly what happened in Benghazi?

Is it because the truth would reveal the deplorable lack of security at our Middle Eastern consulates and embassies?  Or is there an even darker explanation?

Many of you are probably familiar with Walid Shoebat. He used to be a radicalized Muslim willing to die for the cause of Jihad before he converted to Christianity in 1994. As a member of the PLO he was involved in terrorist activity, and was even imprisoned in Jerusalem for three weeks. More about his background, here.

He has some questions about the identity of the man who made the film, Innocence of Muslims, who calls himself Nakoula Basseley Nakoula and claims to be  a Coptic Christian.

…no one has stepped forward or can confirm for certain that whoever holds an identity by the name of Nakoula Basseley Nakoula is that man’s true identity. In the Middle East, if a man by the name of Nakoula Basseley Nakoula indeed exists while being blamed for creating a mess of international proportions—which included the anger of over one billion Muslims—it would not be that difficult to find the entire family in Egypt, including brothers, cousins, aunts, siblings wife, wives, ex-wives, mistresses, pets and all.

In the Middle East, no one can hide. Egypt is where the demonstrations that have taken place all over the Middle East and Asia were sparked. Yet, it cannot produce this man’s background?

Court documents have revealed that Nakoula Basseley Nakoula partnered in a scheme with Eiad Salameh, Shoebat’s first cousin, a Muslim from the Palestinian district of Bethlehem.

Shoebat blogged about Eiad Salameh back in 2008.  The first real reportage of the Eiad and Nakoula connection was revealed at The Smoking Gun on September 14th, 2012.

why would Nakoula, who claims to be a religious Coptic activist, have extensive connections with Eiad? My cousin hated Copts with a passion and is well-known in the Middle East as a master schemer, probably one of the best the Middle East has produced. He also has multiple contacts with terror networks.

Eiad is from Beit Sahour, Bethlehem. He is a dubious individual who was well known in the Arab community as the main contact for obtaining authentic, legitimate identifications from passports to credit cards, under many nationalities. He then places these identifications into the hands of dubious characters whose names are not the names written on the passports.

Eiad is a Muslim terror supporter and is not an Egyptian Copt. Both my cousin Eiad and whoever this man is who pretends to be Nakoula, had multiple, fraudulent identifications and the two connected for a decade in multiple scheming operations—the type that usually links to terrorism.

The Daily Beast reported regarding Nakoula’s bust:

The bust came around the time the feds were launching Operation Mountain Express, which would become a huge investigation into pseudoephedrine-dealing involving numerous people of a Middle Eastern background. The authorities initially insisted there were no links to terrorism, but suddenly switched and decided that a chunk of the money was going to Hizbullah.

Eiad, like Nakoula, portrayed and identified himself as an Israeli Jew, a thing Eiad did for years. He even fraudulently holds an authentic Israeli passport.

No one knows for certain that Nakoula is even who he claims to be, but we are 100% certain that both my cousin Eiad and Nakoula had multiple fraudulent identifications and what has never been disclosed until now is that the two were linked for at least a decade.

There’s much much more at the link, including a radio interview in Arabic he obtained, in which Nakoula  stated that he is not Christian but a secular liberal.

A serial liar and con man, Nakoula claimed that he produced the film with his son, Abanob Basseley with money from his wife’s family in Egypt, but that hasn’t been proven..

What has been proven is that he embezzled millions with Eiad and the money must have come from these scandalous operations, which are usually linked to terrorist activity.

Shoebat asks, “why would any anti-Islam Christian or even Jewish activist want the destruction of his own? It makes zero sense, unless of course this person intends to do harm to his real enemies—Israel and the Copts.”

Both are Eiad’s ardent enemies.

How is it possible that these two would snuggle up together for a decade?

On one hand, we have a Meth-dealer-Egyptian-Coptic-anti-Muslim-activist-fundamentalist-Christian. Then on the other hand, we have a Muslim-fundamentalist-Palestinian-scam-artist-terrorist.

According to Shoebat, despite Nakoula’s  serious offenses, DOJ lawyers defended him in court – “giving several excuses to Judge Snyder and pushed for leniency, all because of him supposedly promising to help them catch Eiad.”

Yet when Eiad was finally locked up in January 2011 in Canada, and the Canadians were working with the Feds to extradite him to the United States, the Obama administration opted not to bring Eiad in to face justice. Instead, they asked the Canadians to fly him to freedom in Palestine.

I received my last email from my contact on July 15th, 2011, which stated: “He is awaiting deportation to Palestine, unless the US hurry up and indict him…” The feds never responded to the Canadian’s last appeal and within a few days, Eiad was put on a plane, courtesy of the Canadian taxpayers.

Where did he go?


From day one, this international clusterfark (that started on 9/11 – hello?) over an absurdly moronic film no one had ever heard of, posted months ago,  looked fishy to me. The whole thing looked orchestrated –  “community organized” by the international organized left/Islamic alliance – like the so-called “Arab Spring” was.

What has been the result of all this Islamic outrage over a dopey film? Besides repeated apologies and appeasement from the Obama administration?

A look at today’s headlines at Weasel Zippers offers a clue:

All over the Islamic world we’re hearing calls for a ban on mocking Islam…

Even the Lefty Rag Slate Says Americans “Overvalue” Free Speech, Should Censor Themselves When Criticizing Islam…

Indonesian President Calls For Global Ban On Blasphemy During Speech To U.N. General Assembly…

Egypt’s Islamist President Morsi Speaks At Bill Clinton Event, Calls For U.S. To Limit Free Speech To Stop Criticism Of Islam…

Breakdown Of Obama’s U.N. Speech: 5 Minutes Spent Talking About Mohammed Film, Only 1 1/2 Minutes On Iran…

That’s just from today.

We’ve seen the lengths that this administration will go to curtail our Second Amendment rights. Is manufactured outrage over a bogus film, perhaps produced by radical Islamists –  a pretext  to curtail our First Amendment rights?

I’m just throwing the question out there. There’s a reason why this whole thing smells…and I submit it’s not just due to the incompetence of the Obama administration.

Last July, Cliff Kincaid of America’s Survival held a critical National Press Club event: The Vetting: Obama, Radical Islam and the Soros Connection.

James Simpson of Right Side News called it: The Most Important Press Conference Ever Held at Any Time in U.S. History:

It revealed how a huge network of U.S. and foreign communist and hard left organizations connected to this President has colluded with radical Islam for decades to oversee the destruction of their mutual enemy: America.


Overshadowing all is the malevolent Soros network, and the billions he and others like him are devoting to facilitate this goal.


When the so-called “Arab Spring” launched in February of last year, I wrote that we are witnessing the collapse of the Middle East. The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt long sought to aid the Palestinian terrorist group, Hamas, operating in the Gaza Strip. Under Mubarak, Egypt sealed the border with Gaza, while Israel erected a blockade against shipments to Gaza, to stem the flow of arms to Hamas. They were aided by American Marxists

Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, Medea Benjamin and Jody Evans, all radicals with close ties to Obama, visited Egypt repeatedly, joining in pro-Hamas protests, and reported in to the White House upon their return. Benjamin and Evans also notoriously participated in the “Gaza Flotillas” that attempted to run the Israeli blockade. Radicals throughout the U.S. have repeatedly expressed their solidarity with Muslim terrorists.

Overthrowing Mubarak and installing a Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt would facilitate aid to Hamas. As has been reported before, the U.S. State Department assisted the Mubarak regime’s opponents behind the scenes in the interest of “democracy,” while the Obama administration publicly advocated the overthrow of Mubarak.·

Given what we know about President Obama and what we have learned about the nexus between communists and Islamic radicals, his support for the Muslim Brotherhood is, sadly, unsurprising. Still, his public statement demanding that transition to a new government “must begin now!” was still shocking. Never in our history has any president so blatantly, publicly betrayed a loyal and critical ally.·

Kincaid again calls on Congress:·

It is the Marxist and Soviet/Russian/Cuban connection to radical Islam and the Palestinian terrorist cause that now deserves follow up and scrutiny from the Congress. There is a body of evidence that suggests Marxist organizations in the U.S. are working hand in glove with what they call “revolutionary Islam” here and abroad.·


Michelle Malkin: Who Is White House visitor Hisham Altalib?:

Altalib is an Iraqi-born Muslim identified by the FBI as a Muslim Brotherhood operative before he moved to America in the 1970s to earn an advanced electrical engineering degree from Purdue University in Indiana. By his own account, Altalib “soon became active in Islamic work in North America, which continues to this day.”

He was the “first full-time director of the Leadership Training Department of the Muslim Students Association of the United States and Canada (MSA)” — a longtime Muslim Brotherhood front group whose explicit goal is to “conquer” America through Islamic propagandizing.

Altalib is also a founding member of the SAAR Foundation and the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT). Last year, his online biography proudly notes, he was “awarded the ISNA (Islamic Society of North America) Community Service Award.” The Saudi-subsidized ISNA is regarded as the primary U.S. umbrella group for Muslim Brotherhood fronts and was named specifically by the global MB godfathers as a key player in their “Grand Jihad” strategy of infiltration from within.

Pat Dollard: Bombshell Obama Vetting: 1979 Newspaper Article By Valerie Jarrett Father-In-Law Reveals Start Of Arab Purchase Of U.S. Presidency:

Why would Muslim oil billionaires finance and develop controlling relationships with black college students? Well, like anyone else, they would do it for self-interest. And what would their self-interest be? We all know the top two answers to that question: 1. a Palestinian state and 2. the advancement of Islam in America. The idea then was to advance blacks who would facilitate these two goals to positions of power in the Federal government, preferably, of course, the Presidency. And why would the Arabs target blacks in particular for this job? Well, for the same reason the early communists chose them as their vanguard for revolution (which literally means “change”) in America. Allow me to quote Trotsky, in 1939: “The American Negroes, for centuries the most oppressed section of American society and the most discriminated against, are potentially the most revolutionary element of the population. They are designated by their historical past to be, under adequate leadership, the very vanguard of the proletarian revolution.” Substitute the word “Islam” for the words “the proletarian revolution,” and you most clearly get the picture, as Islam is a revolutionary movement just like communism is. (Trivia: it is from this very quote that Van Jones takes his name. Van is short for vanguard. He was born “Anthony”). In addition, long before 1979, blacks had become the vanguard of the spread of Islam in America, especially in prisons.

Interestingly, in context with the fact that this article was written by her father-in-law, Valerie Jarrett has an unusual amount of influence over Obama (along with personal security that may be even better than the President’s, another unusual and intriguing bit of business here). And equally interesting is that Obama, who may have been a beneficiary of this Muslim money, and may now be in this Muslim debt, has aggressively pursued both of the Muslim agendas I cited above. And, also equally interesting, is that Obama has paid a king’s ransom for court ordered seals of any such records of this potential financing of his college education, and perhaps, of other of his expenses.


GBTV: Muslim Brotherhood infiltration:


The Blaze: ‘The Project’ Part I — All Totalitarian Ideologies Are Threat to U.S

Is there a government cover-up at play?

A 2001 raid in Switzerland unearthed a chilling manifesto now dubbed “The Project,” a detailed Islamic blueprint for infiltrating, subverting and ultimately defeating the U.S. and the West. Today, 80 file boxes worth of evidence submitted during the 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial — the largest terror financing trial in U.S. history to date — including “The Project” documents, are being withheld from the American public by the Department of Justice.

On Wednesday, September 26, TheBlaze documentary unit released the first installment of this chilling two-part series outlining how the current administration has stonewalled repeated requests by Congress to release the disturbing documents and for allowing the Muslim Brotherhood greater entree into American government. Further the documentary reveals just how close American-Islamic operatives from groups such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) have been to subverting the U.S. and Israel.

Creeping Sharia: Muslims tell DOJ to find a way to criminalize criticism of Islam!

via Progressives | Islamists | Justice Department | The Daily Caller.

Top Justice Department officials convened a meeting Wednesday where invited Islamist advocates lobbied them for cutbacks in anti-terror funding, changes in agents’ training manuals, additional curbs on investigators and a legal declaration that U.S. citizens’ criticism of Islam constitutes racial discrimination.

The department’s “civil rights lawyers are top of the line — I say this with utter honesty — I know they can come up with a way” to redefine criticism as discrimination, said Sahar Aziz, a female, Egyptian-American lawyer.

“I’d be willing to give a shot at it,” said Aziz, who is a fellow at the Michigan-based Muslim advocacy group, the Institute for Social Policy & Understanding.

The audience of Islamist advocates and department officials included Tom Perez, who heads the department’s division of civil rights.

“We must continue to have the open and honest and critical dialogue that you saw in the robust debate,” Perez responded in an enthusiastic closing speech a few minutes after Aziz made her demands at the event.

“I sat here the entire time, taking notes,” Perez said. “I have some very concrete thoughts … in the aftermath of this.”

The meeting at George Washington University showcased the expanding alliance between American progressives and Islamists, said Andrew McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor in New York.

Progressives “are making these Islamist groups into the [political] representatives of Muslims in the United States,” he told The Daily Caller. That elevation of Islamists to a leadership role sidelines the majority of American Muslims who don’t want Islamist leaders, as well as American Muslims who are female or gay, he said.

McCarthy investigated and prosecuted Egyptian-born Imam Omar Abdel-Rahman, dubbed “the blind sheik,” for urging Muslims to kill New Yorkers. Abdel-Rahman was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1996.

Progressives ally with the Islamic lobby because “they think it will be a political voting bloc that will be reliably Democratic,” said Robert Spencer, an author and expert on Islam.

None of the Islamist advocates of civil rights officials in attendance, including Perez, objected to Aziz’s call for free-speech restrictions.

Of course not because free speech restrictions are part of the regime’s agenda, too.

Big Government, 8/8/12: Obama Administration Paves the Way for Sharia Law:

The most terrifying danger Americans face from a second Barack Obama term isn’t the economy, which is scary enough.

The most harrowing prospect is the Obama Administration’s passivity in the face of attempts to introduce aspects of sharia law into our legal system.  Now there is strong and open evidence of the Obama administration collaborating with Islamist activists to ensure the path toward sharia law is accelerated.

Just last week, Thomas Perez, Assistant Attorney General of the Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Rights Division, was asked this question by Trent Franks (R-AZ), a member of the House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on the Constitution: “Will you tell us here today that this Administration’s Department of Justice will never entertain or advance a proposal that criminalizes speech against any religion?”

Perez refused to answer. Four times.

And why would Franks target Perez?

Here’s why:

Keep reading at the link.

Lady Liberty: Incompetence or Failed October Surprise?

Over at Creeping Sharia, someone has a similar theory to one I have been kicking around since late yesterday. This ‘random’ video, made by a not so Coptic man as it turns out, lands on Egyptian TV just as the U.S. Presidential election heads into the debates before election day. No one here has heard of it or the maker until the riots break out in Cairo. No knows who this guy really is right now…except for the government, because it was this administration who arrested him and also let him out of jail when he agreed to turn snitch for them.

From Creeping:

Counterterror chief’s company linked to “Innocence of Muslims” video

The more Obama and his team blame the movie, and now they’ve arrested the purported producer of the video, the easier it is to believe it was intentional. via Douglas J. Hagmann at the Northeast Intelligence Network h/t to the reader who left the link in comments

Body of lies from Benghazi to Barack

Linked by Waznmentobe, and iOWNTHEWORLD, thanks!

About My blog’s Suspension

All I know is that it was due to a “violation of terms of service”. I never received any kind of warning about the alleged violation, and I’ve yet to receive an explanation from for what happened. As far as I know, it may have been nothing more than an internet glitch.

I’d like to thank everyone who lobbied WordPress to get my blog back online – the news spread on Twitter like wildfire…during the dinner hour while I was celebrating my husband’s birthday. It was almost impossible to keep up with all the helpful tweets.

Several valiant bloggers came to my aid, as well:

The Other McCain’s chivalrous Smitty was the first to leap into action: Free @NiceDeb !!!

NiceDeb is one of the solid blogs on the right, and a friend of this blog for years. ToS violation my left foot. She’s being harassed.

Wasn’t that nice?

The awesome and loveable Doug Ross is never at a loss for words: Fascists-In-Training Just Knocked Conservative Blogger @NiceDeb Off the Air. Here’s How You Can Help!

My guess is that some miscreant, wannabe-fascists on the left reported bogus “Terms of Service” (TOS) violations to get her all-too-accurate commentary kicked off the air.

That could be…but I don’t have any information to confirm or deny it. Hit the link for a photo of me smacking him in the chops at BlogCon, last Spring. If I posted it, here, I might be violating my terms of service.

The Camp of the Saints’ ever vigilant Bob Belvedere joined the chorus: ALERT: @NiceDeb Needs Our Help [Updated]

As did my blogging sister just a conservative girl at Potluck: Fellow PotLuck Blogger Has Nice Deb Blog Removed by WordPress:

Nice Deb has had her blog suspended for reasons that have not been made clear to her.  If you go to her blog you just get the message: is no longer available.

This blog has been archived or suspended for a violation of our Terms of Service.
For questions or concerns, contact Support.

I suggest you contact them to ask them why they would take down a blog that has been up for five years or so without so much as an emailed explanation to the reasons why.

Now, I read her blog almost daily, I have never seen anything on there that would violate these terms:

And Smitty was linked by Instapundit!

It wasn’t long after Insty linked that my blog reappeared online. Hmmmm!

Thank you so much, all of you. Now I feel bad for not blogging at Potluck for how long, now? I’m ashamed to say….Years?

Don’t feel bad – I haven’t had time for my own blog, Leftwing Institute for Civil Discourse aka Moonbattracker, all month, either. There just isn’t enough time in the day for me to do everything I want to do online.

Actually, I have another post I’d like to do, here,  tonight. Charles B. tipped me a good one. But it’s after midnight and I have to get to bed. It will have to wait until morning.


I neglected to thank the Twitchy Team for coming to my defense: Blogger Nice Deb sent to WordPress gulag; Conservatives rally in support; Update: blog restored


Wed morning, 8:16: Of course, Gateway Pundit has it now.

Linked by The Other McCain, and Daily Pundit, and Notion Tidbits thanks!

  • Blog Stats

    • 4,594,784 hits
  • free counters
  • Is your cat plotting to kill you?
  • Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 509 other followers

    %d bloggers like this: