Wednesday, May 30, 2012


Obama Presidential Seal Podium Speech SC 780x1024 Breakdown of Demographics Shows Obama In Trouble                                                 

Barack Obama is not winning any voting bloc he lost in 2008, and he is not doing better with any bloc he did win four years ago.

Nevertheless, the “experts” keep telling us that this race is tied or that Obama is leading. The only way to explain these “expert’” pronouncements is that Obama has captured the coveted Power Ranger vote.  Hey, if dead people and illegal aliens can’t vote anymore, toy dummies must be filling in the gaps for the real ones! As to real people, here’s the truth of where they stand on Obama.


Catholics
1) A recent Pew poll found Obama went from up 9 points to down 5 points with Catholics since March. This translates to a shift of 18 million voters.

Evangelicals
2) An April Pew poll found Evangelical Christians favor Mitt Romney 73/20, and white Catholics support him 57/37.

Jews
3) A Knowledge Networks poll conducted March 14-27 found Obama getting just 61% of Jewish support. No Democrat has ever won while getting 67% or less of the Jewish vote.

4) Young voters
In 2008, Obama won young voters 66/32. Today, the support for Obama among young voters has been measured at just  48/41, but more importantly, young voters  have little enthusiasm to vote. Today, at best, 56% said they would vote compared to 78% who said the same in spring of 2008.

5) Women
In 2008, Obama won the female vote 56/43. Monday’s Gallup poll found Obama ahead with women by 49/42.

6) Obama is losing men 50/42. In 2008, Obama lost men 49/48.

7) African Americans, Hispanics
In April, Gallup found Obama’s support among Blacks at 85% (down 5 points) and Hispanic support also down 5 points to 54%.

8) Veterans
In 2008, John McCain won the veteran vote 55/45. Monday’s Gallup poll found Obama losing 58/34.

9) White voters
Obama’s approval among white voters was 34% last month. It was 37% on Election Day 2010, a bloodbath for Democrats.

10) Union workers
Obama got 59% of the union household vote in 2008. That percentage actually went up in 2010 (61%), but it did them little good because the percentage of union voters fell 4% from 2008.  

11) Fraudulent/dead
In April, Reuters lamented, “ New state laws designed to fight voter fraud could reduce the number of Americans signing up to vote in this year’s presidential election by hundreds of thousands, a potential problem for President Barack Obama’s re-election bid.” Rock The Vote, a national voter registration project, has withdrawn from Florida because the Sunshine State’s anti-voter fraud laws are too tough to beat.

12) Big donors
Obama’s Big PACs are raising only a fraction of what Republican PACs are putting together for November.
13) Rank-and-file Democrats

The recent primaries in West Virginia (where a federal inmate got 40% of the vote against Obama), Arkansas (where an unknown Democrat got 42% against him), and Kentucky (where “uncommitted” got 40% against Obama) shows he has little support from rank-and-file Democrats.

So who are these “experts” interviewing?

Photo credit: Álvaro Felipe (Creative Commons)

Atlas Exclusive: Robert Spencer: Is Freedom Worth Defending?

JWHeaderAS3
Is Freedom Worth Defending?
By Robert Spencer

Muslim threats last week led Lady Gaga to cancel her planned concert in Indonesia. Because of their disapproval of Lady Gaga, some conservatives in the West have applauded this, noting that Christians there opposed her as well, and asserting that any non-Muslim society with a healthy regard for decent values would not allow to her to perform, either. Society, some argued, should hold the good, not freedom, as its highest value.

Left unexplained, however, is how a commonly accepted understanding of "the good" is to be arrived at, and particularly how such an understanding could be restored in 21st-century America without imposing an authoritarian regime of some kind. Also, one wonders if proponents of such ideas would object to the intimidation and particularly to the death threats that ultimately led to the cancellation of Lady Gaga's Indonesian show.

Sharia states are oriented toward the good, not freedom, as their highest value. How would the ideal state of these authoritarian Western "conservatives" be different? A young Saudi imam said it a few years ago: “Your leaders want to bring your freedom to Islamic society. We don’t want freedom. The difference between Muslims and the West is we are controlled by God’s laws, which don’t change for 1,400 years. Your laws change with your leaders.” Jihadists routinely deride Western freedom as libertinism: “In essence,” one explained, “the kufr [unbelief] of Western society can be summed up in one word which is used over and over to justify its presence, growth, and its glorification … Freedom. Yet what such a society fails to comprehend, is that such ‘freedom’ simply represents the worship and enslavement to desires, opinions, and whims, a disregard for what is (truly) right, and a disregard for the Creator of the Heavens and the Earth.”

While many of us might deplore the depravity of today’s pop culture, we should not let Islamic moral critique put us on the defensive. In reality, the freedom at which the jihadists sneer is an essential component of any genuine morality. “Australian law guarantees freedoms up to a crazy level,” remarked the controversial former Australian mufti Sheikh Taj al-Din al-Hilali—but without freedom, even “up to a crazy level,” morality is hollow. The secular West, with all its irreligion and debauchery, provides the only authentic framework for genuine virtue. Without the freedom to choose evil, choosing good is not a virtue. It’s nothing more than submitting to coercion. Islam’s moral critique likewise founders on the divine sanction given to violence in the Qur’an and Islamic tradition.

Violent coercion is a fundamental element of Sharia law, with its stonings and amputations. Ayatollah Khomeini admitted this without apology: “Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for the Holy Warriors!” Dinesh D’Souza wrote eloquently on this point in 2004: “Consider the woman in Afghanistan or Iran who is required to wear the veil. There is no real modesty in this, because the woman is being compelled. Compulsion cannot produce virtue; it can only produce the outward semblance of virtue.” He mocked those who imagined that a cleanup of American pop culture would lessen the force of the jihad: “Some Americans may be tempted to say, ‘The Muslims have a point about Jerry Springer and Howard Stern. If they will agree to stop bombing our buildings, in exchange for us sending them Springer and Stern to do with as they wish, why not make the deal? We could even throw in some of Springer’s guests.’”

Yet by 2007 D’Souza had joined those he had earlier derided, claiming that the failure to throw Springer and Stern to the wolves was creating more jihadists: “When you make America synonymous with permissiveness, when you dismiss serious moral offenses with a no-big-deal attitude …you are driving the traditional Muslims into the arms of the radicals.”

It is true that the jihadists’ presentation of themselves as holy warriors fighting Western blasphemers and libertines is a potent recruiting tool. But the proper response to their critique of the West is to challenge them on their own ground: to point out that the Judeo-Christian tradition, with its principle of individual freedom as a prerequisite for virtue, offers a superior vision of God and the world than that offered by Ayatollah Khomeini and his sword as the key to paradise. Yet it necessarily involves tolerating some who exercise their freedom in ways to which some might object – even Lady Gaga.
GOP Can Win On Budget Cuts
By Dick Morris / Published on TheHill.com

In the repetitive congressional debate over budget cuts, spending and taxes, the dialogue between the parties has become so ossified that we all know it by rote.

The Republicans say we have to cut spending. The Democrats counter that we must save vital programs. The Republicans demand cuts before they approve more borrowing. The Democrats reply that we have only to raise taxes on the wealthy and our problems are history.

In my survey of 6,000 likely voters, including a special sample of 1,500 swing voters, taken from May 5 to 11, I probed these clichéd arguments and found that the tax-the-rich rebuttal fails to sway swing voters.

By harping on the theme of taxing the rich, Obama wins the battle but loses the war.

Swing voters do strongly support taxing the rich more. But they also believe that the economy won’t recover unless we cut spending and borrowing. They do not believe that taxing the rich will do the trick. They support these taxes, but they do not feel that they can generate enough revenue to make big spending cuts unnecessary. Obama is running a sideshow on taxing the wealthy while, in the view of swing voters, he fails to address our central need for spending cuts.

Swing voters believe that we “cannot balance the budget and eliminate the deficit without cutting some important programs like education, Head Start, the environment, food stamps and Medicaid.” Even when asked if tax increases on the rich would obviate the necessity for cutting these programs, most swing voters disagree and believe the cuts would still be needed.

The more Obama and the Democrats hang tough on opposing cuts without taxes on the rich, the deeper they dig their political graves because, while swing voters support the taxes on the rich, they do not regard them as central to solving our major problem of spending and borrowing.

The survey of swing voters indicates that on the energy issue, Republicans have a big advantage as well.

Asked if they agree with the Keystone pipeline, swing voters support it by 45-23. When told that “some support the pipeline because they say it would bring Canadian oil and gas to the U.S. Others are opposed because they worry about environmental damage,” swing voters embrace the need for the pipeline by 49-38.

Oil drilling is broadly popular among swing voters. They support an increase in offshore oil drilling despite the risks of environmental damage, and strongly support increases in domestic oil production.

And, as noted in last week’s column, while they back higher oil-company taxes and loathe these corporations, they do not believe taxing is the answer to our energy problems. They believe that drilling is.

Nor do swing voters buy into the Obama record on foreign policy. While the president does better on foreign policy than on the economy, pluralities of swing voters believe that things are getting worse for us around the world. By 41-30, swing voters say that “the Middle East and the Muslim world is more anti-American than it was four years ago.” By 38-3, they think that Iran is closer to developing nuclear weapons than four years ago. And by 28-13, they feel North Korea is more of a threat. By 27-5, they believe that China is engaging in more unfair trade practices now than it did four years ago.

So while Obama wins points for pulling out of Iraq and, so far, for his handling of Afghanistan, swing voters broadly dissent from his view that things are better now for the United States than they were four years ago.
Op-ed:
And the battle for America officially begins
By: Diane Sori


Last night presidential hopeful Mitt Romney locked up the Republican nomination, and I could not be happier as I supported Mitt in ’08 as I did from day one now.
 
While NO candidate is perfect, and NO one ever agrees with any candidate one hundred percent of the time, Mitt Romney has one very important thing going for him that Barack Hussein Obama does not...he ‘Believes in America’ and in the American people.

Mitt Romney is a patriot who honors and respects our Constitution.  Barack Hussein Obama simply does not as his actions speak louder than any words I can ever say.  Mitt Romney will NEVER apologize for America or her ideals, because he believes in America, believes in her ideals, believes in her ingenuity, and believes in her exceptionality.  

Mitt Romney believes in free enterprise, capitalism, and most importantly, in limited government.  Mitt Romney will ensure that America once again becomes the strongest, most respected nation in the world.  And for the first time in almost four years Israel will have a friend an ally in the White House.

Mitt Romney WILL put Americans back to work as this is will be one of the prime focuses of his presidency.  And putting Americans back to work is what will start our economy on the true road to recovery.

But for Mitt to undo the damage Obama has done he needs ‘We the People' to come together as one, UNITED in our strength and in our conviction that Barack Hussein Obama, the worst president in our nation’s history MUST go!

While there were many good candidates running for the nomination, men and women like Rick Perry, Herman Cain, Rick Santorum, Michelle Bachmann, John Huntsman, and my second choice Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney is the people’s choice, as he swept state after state, racking up delegates across the country.    

And that is the bottom line...Mitt Romney got the nomination because his message resonated with a majority of voters and he did it with hard work and determination knowing that America’s survival as the nation we all know and love was at stake.

Mitt Romney knows that Barack Hussein Obama intends to radically change our America into a socialist entitlement nation (like many of the countries in Europe), while he intends for us to return to the rule of law as laid down in our constitution, and this huge difference in ideologies helped fuel his message, his campaign, and gave him strength to carry on against all odds.

So, I hope all of you who supported and voted for a different candidate to please accept the fact that it’s over, that our candidate has been chosen.  ‘We the People’ have only one job to do now, and that is to send Barack Hussein Obama packing.

United we WILL win, divided we could very well lose and that is NOT an option I am willing to entertain.
Obama's 'who does he think he's kidding' budget cuts                                       By Diane Sori (with Saul Hakim)                  
 
President Obama has 'ORDERED' Congress to cut $100,000,000.00 ($100 MILLION) from the 'proposed' yet to be passed $3,500,000,000,000.00 ($3.5 TRILLION) federal budget.
Being that I was so NOT impressed by this superficial cut in federal spending, I decided to see how these cuts would relate to real people, real world budgeting.  The calculations are based on a hypothetical individual or family that spends roughly $2,000 a month on groceries, household expenses, medicine, utilities, etc...a definite workable real day budget.  
In the spirit of fair play, I figuring that said budget should be cut by exactly the same ratio, 1/35,000, as that of the Obama demanded federal budget cuts.  Now here's the shocker, after doing the math, it looks like instead of spending $2,000 a month, the individual or family's budget will now be cut by a miserly 6 cents ($0.06).  That individual or family will now have to get by with $1999.94 instead of $2000 per month.  
Hey, such sacrifices we must make for our president (insert sarcastic laugh here)!
What's even more mind-boggling is the thought that Obama doesn't think that any of 'We the People' would do the math!  But some of us did and now we understand just how ridiculous a mere $100 million dollar cut is in a 3,500,000,000,000.00 federal budget.
But that's how it is in Obamland...November 6th can't come fast enough!

Birth-certificate 'surprise' in October?

Hawaii source claims forgery of 'original' with 1961 materials

An intelligence source in Hawaii who warned early last year that a forged Obama birth record would be released now says that amid continued doubts about the authenticity of the document posted on the White House website, a forged “original” birth certificate intended to pass forensic inspection by using 1961 materials is being prepared and could be released as an “October surprise.”

The source, who has contact with Hawaii government officials, was questioned by Mike Zullo, the head of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse team. Zullo recently returned from a trip to Hawaii to follow up on leads in the posse’s investigation of Obama’s eligibility for the 2012 election ballot in Arizona. Arpaio announced March 1 that his team found probable cause that the document posted by the White House April 27, 2011, is a forgery.

Zullo told WND today that regardless of whether the Hawaii source’s information pans out, he wants to see the original microfilm record of Obama’s birth.

“If they decide to try to produce a document, we’re going to be skeptical,” he said. “We’ve been calling for the microfilm from the beginning.”

Arpaio has said he wants to see the entire roll of microfilm that contains Obama’s birth record and submit it to court-certified forensic examiners to determine its authenticity.

The Hawaii source said ink and paper from 1961 have been secured to create an “original” document that would correspond with the digital copy posted on the White House website.

As WND reported one year ago, radical supporters of Barack Obama have openly admitted their role in the forging of a Kenyan Obama birth certificate.

The White House released a purported copy of Obama’s long-form birth certificate shortly after the Drudge Report prominently leaked details of WND Book’s then-upcoming expose “Where’s the Birth Certificate.”

WND reported yesterday that a letter from Hawaii’s Department of Health last week verifying Obama’s birth in Honolulu has actually opened the door to “shocking revelations” the posse is promising to disclose.

Zullo has said the sheriff plans to schedule a press conference “at the earliest possible date in June.”