Chavez, Castro, Putin and Iran: Four more years!

Ira Strauss of The Corner says: Happy October Surprise: Iran Endorses Obama:

It’s from Iran again, an October move that could throw the election, and this time it’s for real. Iran is near to agreeing to hold direct nuclear talks with the U.S. It throws a big bone to Obama, on the eve of his final foreign-policy debate with Romney.

Plainly, it does not want to face a Romney presidency.

It’s not something dreamed up after the fact, as in the 1980s “October Surprise.” This time around, the story comes from the parties that stand to benefit from it, and it’s out there in real time — indeed, with exquisite campaign timing.

Administration officials anonymously leaked it just in the nick of time to affect the final debate. They couldn’t afford to wait for Iran to complete the agreement on talking with us.

What does it tell you when a regime that has been dissing the Empty Chair for four years suddenly wants to talk less than a month before the election? What does it tell you that Iran Says Obama Sent Secret Message Through Swiss Envoy Recognizing Their Nuclear Rights? Does it not suggest that the rulers of Iran have assessed that another four years of an Obama Presidency is the best possible outcome for their evil and oppressive Islamic state? What other American President would have sat on his hands or gone out for ice cream while the country was in upheaval – possibly at a tipping point in 2009?

Said Charles Krauthammer in December of 2009:

In Iran, it was a year of revolution, beginning with a contested election and culminating this week in huge demonstrations mourning the death of the dissident Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri— and demanding no longer a recount of the stolen election but the overthrow of the clerical dictatorship.

Obama responded by distancing himself from this new birth of freedom.

First, scandalous silence. Then, a few grudging words. Then relentless engagement with the murderous regime. With offer after offer, gesture after gesture — not to Iran but to the “Islamic Republic of Iran,” as Obama ever so respectfully called these clerical fascists — the U.S. conferred legitimacy on a regime desperate to regain it.

Why is this so important? Because revolutions succeed at that singular moment, that imperceptible historical inflection, when the people, and particularly those in power, realize that the regime has lost the mandate of heaven. With this weakening dictatorship desperate for affirmation, why is the U.S. repeatedly offering just such affirmation?

Apart from ostracizing and delegitimizing these gangsters, we should be encouraging and reinforcing the demonstrators.

Well, that never happened, obviously. But the good news is,  Obama has apparently earned the approval -or at least the implicit endorsement of the evil despot who’s in power there.

Meanwhile, this Washington Times report seems vaguely familiar to me:

The latest [dictator] to publicly announce his support for the commander-in-chief’s reelection bid was Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, who this week assured he’d vote for Obama if he were from the United States. The America-bashing strongman made the announcement on state-owned television, saying “Obama is a good guy” and that if Obama was from Caracas, he’d surely return the favor by voting for Chavez.

Earlier in the year the government-official daughter of Cuban military dictator Raul Castro proclaimed her country’s support for Obama during a visit to the U.S. “I believe that Obama needs another opportunity and he needs greater support to move forward with his projects and with his ideas, which I believe come from the bottom of his heart,” Mariela Castro said during a cable news interview. …

The reason for my deja vu? That’s kinda how I started my Radicals, Terrorists And Tyrants Of The World Root For Obama post four and a half years ago.

The latest terror group to weigh in was of course:


Cameron’s Corner, Fox News reports:

During an interview on WABC radio Sunday, top Hamas political adviser Ahmed Yousef said the terrorist group supports Obama’s foreign policy vision.

“We don’t mind–actually we like Mr. Obama. We hope he will (win) the election and I do believe he is like John Kennedy, great man with great principle, and he has a vision to change America to make it in a position to lead the world community but not with domination and arrogance,” Yousef said in response to a question about the group’s willingness to meet with either of the Democratic presidential candidates.

Oh, but that wasn’t all…there were/are all sorts of nefarious characters  supporting Obama:  Hatem El-Hady, The New Black Panther Party, FARC, Jodie Evans, Ali Abunimah, Louis Farrakhan, ACORN, Father Michael Pfleger, Arab American Action Network, Rashid Khalidi, Dr. Khalid al-Mansour, Marilyn Katz, Dr. Jamal al Barzinji, Sokoni Karanja, Trita Parsi, and Carlos the Jackal.

Hit the link for the complete list.

A couple of weeks later, I followed up with Reds Who Support Obama:

CPUSA National Board’s Tim Wheeler, Socialists For Obama, Marxists, Socialists, Communists For Obama, Democratic Socialists of America, Communist Party USA, Rev Wright, William Ayers and Bernadette Dohrn, Fidel Castro, Daniel Ortega, Progressives For Obama,  Hugo Chavez, Raila Amolo Odinga, Kim Jong Il, The New Party, George Galloway, Mike Klonsky, Carl Davidson etc – etc – the list goes on and on.

We speculated that Charles Manson would eventually come out and endorse him, too, but to be fair – that remains to be seen.. Notorious left-wing terrorist, Carlos the Jackal did, however, offer Obama encouragement in a touching letter of support in March of 2009.

What the Washington Times story tells us is, after four years of watching Obama in action, all of the world’s biggest bad guys LIKE WHAT THEY SEE.

Pray that most voting Americans on November 6 do not.

Hat tip: @seedubya

Gallup: Romney: 52 Obama: 45 – Phoenix CBS Affiliate KPHO Control Room Glitch: Obama: 43 Romney: 40 UPDATE: ABC Affiliate in OH Posts Similar Results

First the good news – Gallup has it 52 – 45 for Romney among likely voters:

These results are for likely voters, who are the respondents Gallup deems most likely to vote based on their responses to a series of questions asking about current voting intentions, thought given to the election, and past voting behavior. Each seven-day rolling average is based on telephone interviews with approximately 2,700 likely voters; margin of error is ±2 percentage points.

Axelrod must be having a cow.

Now for the oh – so predictable newsroom bias story, brought to you by PJ Tatler’s Stephen Kruiser:

Phoenix CBS affiliate KPHO had a bit of a control room slip-up while testing election night graphics last Friday afternoon. A friend just sent this screen grab to me.

Check the link for the screen grab.


Okay, this is just weird…

The same thing happened at an ABC affiliate in Cleveland Cincinnati, Ohio, with similar results O: 46 R: 39.

Via TD Blog:

Here’s the page where WCPO at this writing still has the “results” posted:

What the freak?! Why are these tests projecting Obama to be the winner?

I believe some kind of an explanation is in order, here.

Matthew Boyle of The Daily Caller has more: CBS News affiliate calls 2012 presidential race for Barack Obama weeks ahead of election


Team Obama is now desperately flailing around, trying to find something to halt Romney’s momentum…

NRO reports:Obama, Media Reportedly Preparing to Slam Romney as Flip-Flopper on China:

It hasn’t been a good weekend for the President.  The NBC/WSJ poll, released earlier today, shows the race tied at 47 percent.  As NBC’s Chuck Todd told David Gregory, “Sitting at 47 is a good number for a challenger, not a good number for an incumbent.”  The latest Gallup pollhas Romney up 7 points, 52-45.  NRO hears that the latest attempt by the President’s team to check Romney’s momentum will come via a years-old video in which Romney sounds more conciliatory toward the PRC. Romney, of course, will be portrayed as a flip-flopper.  It will be another instance of “Romnesia.”

Our understanding is that the Obama campaign is  working closely with media outlets to broadcast the video below, part of a 2007 talk Romney delivered in Pittsburgh:

Finish reading at the link.

How Romney Should Counter Gloria Allred’s “October Surprise”

Jim Hoft of Gateway Pundit thinks he’s figured out what ambulance chaser of feminist causes, Gloria Allred has in mind for an “October Surprise” on Romney…

On Friday Drudge teased that far left sensationalist Gloria Allred was about to drop a bomb on the Romney Campaign.

Allred has a reputation of dragging perceived female victims in front of the camera as props to bash Republican candidates. In October 2010 Allred dragged out illegal alien Nicki Diaz to attack heartless Meg Whitman. Minaj was upset Whitman didn’t buy her child a present and claimed Meg took advantage of her despite the fact she made a good wage. In November 2011 she dragged out Sharon Bialek who accused Herman Cain of sexual abuse.

The book Horror Stories: Mitt Romney’s Shameful Record with Mormon Women details Mitt Romney’s “psychological intimidation and bullying” during his role as a Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The report describes how Romney “tried to bully” Carrel Hilton Sheldon when she was suffering through a difficult pregnancy into not having an abortion.
AlterNet reported…

You can read the rest of the tale at Gateway Pundit.

Couple things…

#1. YAWN…As Ace says:

If he’s right, it’s neither surprise nor October, given that it has been reported on before, to yawns.

#2 The fact that a pro life Bishop of a pro-life church took a pro-life stance in the case of a difficult pregnancy doesn’t exactly pass the scandal test, I’m sorry. But it does give us an excuse to revisit Obama’s rabidly pro-abort/infanticide positions from his Chicago State Senate days right up to his ( abortion at taxpayer expense) White House days.

Nobody tried harder to bring Obama’s sickening opposition to the Born Alive Infant Protection Act to the voting public’s attention in 2008, than Jill Stanek:

Obama caught on tape arguing against giving medical attention to aborted babies

The IL General Assembly destroys audiotapes of its floor debates after transcripts have been written. That is why there is precious little audio, if any, of Barack Obama as state senator making any speeches.
But a pro-life sleuth has found a short audio clip on the Chicago Tribune website of Obama arguing on the IL Senate floor on April 4, 2002, against Senate Bill B1663, a companion bill to the Born Alive Infants Protection Act that would have required an abortionist to call a second physician to assess a baby aborted alive.

Okay, so the left wants to bring up a case where Romney counseled a woman to have the baby in difficult circumstances. Then we on the right need to counter with the story of how Obama, “all by his lonesome” fought tooth and nail against the rights of already born babies, because as he argued, doctors shouldn’t feel an “obligation” or “burden” to save those who have been condemned to death by abortion.
An abortion survivor told her story in an ad, last summer.

If Melissa Ohden had been born in President Obama’s Illinois, she might not be alive today. That’s the uncomfortable implication of a hard-hitting new ad released by the Susan B. Anthony List this week, featuring Ohden, who was born alive after a failed saline infusion abortion in 1977.In the ad Ohden draws attention to the fact that during his time as an Illinois state senator, Obama cast four votes against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act (BAIPA), a bill that mandated that doctors must try to save the life of babies born alive after failed abortions.

The bill was introduced after pro-life nurse Jill Stanek witnessed babies being born alive after failed abortions, then being brought to a room in the Illinois hospital where she worked and left to die.

“Is this the kind of leadership that will move us forward, leadership that would discard the least and the weakest among us?” Ohden asks in the ad.

This year’s HHS Mandate  has spurred protests all across the country:

Daniel R. Jenky, the Catholic Bishop of Peoria, Illinois, told a reported 500 men on Sunday that President Obama is following in the footsteps of Adolph Hitler and Josef Stalin, and urged them to wage war on the federal government to defend their religion. Saying, “Christ wins! Christ reigns! Christ commands!,” Bishop Jenky spoke vehemently about the Obama administration’s HHS mandate ensuring all women have access to contraception services.

“Hitler and Stalin, at their better moments, would just barely tolerate some churches remaining open, but would not tolerate any competition with the state in education, social services, and health care,” Bishop Jenky said. “In clear violation of our First Amendment rights, President Obama – with his radical, pro-abortion and extreme secularist agenda, now seems intent on following a similar path.”

Perhaps the Bishop is guilty of invoking Godwin’s Law, there.

But nobody would ever conflate Romney’s pro-life stance with Naziism or Communism.

Lila Rose urged Republicans to make Obama’s extremist views on abortion an issue in a piece at The Daily Caller, before the Republican Convention:

Republicans should be as bold on life from the podium and campaign stump as they are in their platform. After all, 50 percent of Americans now identify themselves as pro-life, according to Gallup, while an historic low of 41 percent of Americans identify as pro-choice.In another Gallup poll, 86 percent of Americans said abortion should be illegal in the third trimester. Meanwhile, an out-of-touch Democratic Party supports abortion on demand through all nine months of pregnancy.

Overwhelming majorities of Americans want common-sense restrictions on abortion and protections for the unborn. They support a ban on the brutal practice of partial-birth abortion, a ban on sex-selective abortion, and a ban on abortion after the unborn child can feel pain. Americans also oppose taxpayer funding of abortion.

These majorities cut across party lines, ethnicity, and religious denominations. Many Catholic, Hispanic, and Evangelical Democrats oppose abortion. Yet the Democratic Party supports a federal “Freedom of Choice Act” that would overturn state parental consent laws and other basic abortion regulations.

Many African Americans also oppose abortion, which is no wonder since an astounding 35% of the nation’s abortions are committed on black women. The statistics are worse in urban areas. According to the New York City Department of Health, 60 percent of black babies are killed by abortion in New York City. In Philadelphia, half of all babies aborted are black. Democrats often play the race card. Considering President Obama’s extremist support for abortion and the Democratic Party’s obsession over abortion funding, it’s time to call them out on it.

Go ahead, Gloria – make our day.
More speculation from the grapevine:
Some are claiming that as early as tomorrow a former maid who worked in the Romney Household will come out and say she had an “interaction” with the GOP candidate.
If so, it will be time to drop the “Bathhouse Barry” nuke.
They might want to rethink this….

In a speech on Friday in Virginia, President Barack Obama unveiled a new attack against his rival, accusing him of “Romnesia” (Romney + amnesia) about his past positions. The media treated the word as an innovation.

But the term has a prior–and specific–history.

According to the AlterNet article, which was published last Wednesday, “Romnesia” was the term created by Mormon feminists to describe his inability to recall specific details of his advice on abortion to female congregants. (Questions about Romney’s position on abortion, and his role as a church leader, first arose during his campaign for U.S. Senate in 1994.)

That is Obama’s possible original source–the same story Allred may be mining.