IMPALIN’ — Stop Sarah Palin for President in 2012

(Source: The Des Moines Register) Uh oh. More bad news for the woman who believes no one is more qualified for the job of president “than a woman, a mom… who’s administered locally, state, with energy issues, so maybe a mayor, a governor maybe.”   Via The Des Moines Register : Sarah Palin’s popularity has declined among the very voters the former Alaska governor would need to impress first were she to seek the 2012 Republican nomination for president, The Des Moines Register’s new Iowa Poll shows. Palin’s favorability has ebbed with Iowa Republican likely voters, whose most active members make up the state’s presidential caucus electorate, in the past 15 months, according to the poll taken this month. … Palin’s favorability has slipped among Iowa Republicans who say they will vote in 2012 to 65 percent in the poll taken this month from 71 percent in November 2009. Sure, those numbers are still pretty high, especially compared with the ever-increasing majority of all Americans, including conservatives, who don’t like her and don’t think she’s qualified to be president. But it also demonstrates, again, for the bazillionth time, that every time she opens her mouth to incoherently opine on anything—from telling her “union brothers and sisters” in Wisconsin to give up the fight, to mocking the First Lady for encouraging mothers to breast feed their babies, even though, as Jed pointed out , she did the same thing thing in 2007—she makes it that much easier for the very people who once supported her to decide they really don’t like her after all.

Read the original post: 
Sarah Palin’s popularity drops with Republicans. Again.

Politics, like economics, is rooted in psychology. That is a truism which no one can overcome with something as unpsycholgical as facts. When people are angry, confused, hopeless, and afraid, they fall back upon emotions to trump the facts, and then new realities are born. I think that’s the biggest threat to President Obama now, as it has been since the passage of the health care bill. The facts are on his side. The 2009 stimulus did some good and was largely paid back. Detroit was brought back from the brink of disaster. Banks were stabilized. The markets rebounded. But psychologically, he has turned into a Rorschach test for disgruntlement and despair across the country. Today Obama is in deep trouble on the economy and handling the deficit, according to the most recent Gallup poll. Although his overall approval rating stands at a healthy 52%, only 27% of respondents approve of the job he’s doing on the deficit. If you look at newspaper editorials and their response to the President’s current proposed budget, they are all over the map, with words like “encouraging” bouncing off other words like “cowardice.” Last fall, when it appeared that the crushing midterm elections had put the handwriting on the wall for a second term, it seemed reasonable to think of calling for a Democratic challenger to oppose Obama in 2012. Then at the last minute there was the so-called compromise on the Bush tax cuts, and perception shifted in the President’s favor. Yet as the current furor over budget cuts in Wisconsin demonstrates, the public outcry against reason and facts has reached a tidal level. The Tea Party is perceived by a swath of the electorate as the right movement for our time, and no amount of sane, adult talk is making any difference. It probably doesn’t matter who runs on the Democratic ticket in 2012. The Rorschach test has spoken. Read More… More on Sarah Palin

Continued here:
Deepak Chopra: Welcome to the Rorschach President

Newly elected South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, whose campaign was boosted substantially by an endorsement from Sarah Palin, would not say Sunday whether she’d return the favor by endorsing Palin if the former Alaska governor seeks the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. Read More… More on Sarah Palin

Excerpt from: 
Nikki Haley: Sarah Palin Endorsement Not Something I ‘Owe’ In 2012

Newly elected South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, whose campaign was boosted substantially by an endorsement from Sarah Palin, would not say Sunday whether she’d return the favor by endorsing Palin if the former Alaska governor seeks the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. Read More… More on Sarah Palin

Original post: 
Nikki Haley: Sarah Palin Endorsement Not Something I ‘Owe’ In 2012

FAIRBANKS, Alaska — Todd Palin had trouble with his snowmobile skis toward the end of the world’s longest snowmobile race as a rival team to surged to victory Saturday. Tyler Huntington and Chris Olds crossed the finish line near Fairbanks to repeat as Iron Dog champions for the second straight year. They passed the team of Palin and Eric Quam in the final 100 miles of the 2,000-mile race across Alaska. Read More… More on Sarah Palin

See the original post: 
Todd Palin Loses Iron Dog Snowmobile Race

by Sarah Laskow, Media Consortium blogger The natural gas industry is afraid that Josh Fox, director of the muckraking film Gasland, might win an Oscar on Sunday. Earlier this month, an organization called Energy in Depth, backed by the oil and gas industry, sent the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences a letter in which it argued that Gasland , Fox’s exposé on the natural gas industry, should be removed from consideration for best documentary feature because it contained inaccurate information. After dealing with the industry for the past couple of years, Fox is not surprised by this tactic. “What this points to is the culture of that industry, which is bullying, which is aggressive, which is outlandish in their tactics, which will stop at nothing,” he told AlterNet . The film is still up for consideration, and the industry should be worried about the impact its nomination, let alone a victory, could have. Even if the film doesn’t win on Sunday, millions of viewers will see a clip of the film that documents the real threat of environmental devastation that comes along with natural gas drilling and, in particular, with hydrofracking. Nothing natural about it The Media Consortium’s Weekly Mulch has been tracking the fight over natural gas drilling . As noted back in September, Sandra Steingraber, in Orion Magazine , has called the rise of hydrofracking ” the environmental issue of our time .” In a more recent dispatch for the magazine, Steingraber reports from an Environmental Protection Agency hearing on fracking, a technique for extracting otherwise hard-to-reach gas from the ground. In upstate New York, where the hearing was held and where natural gas companies have been buying up drilling rights and properties for the past couple of years, residents are hugely concerned about this issue: four hundred people signed up to speak, for 120 seconds each, as Steingraber reports, over two days. One speaker in particular stuck out to her, though: An older man rose to speak….And then he let ten seconds of silence fill the theater….After hours of ceaseless, rapid-fire speech, the sudden hush flowed through the overheated room like cool water. Someone giggled nervously. And then, finally, he spoke. That silence, he announced, represented the sounds of migratory birds. And tourists. And professors. And organic farmers. And thus with no words at all he reminded the audience of all the good members of our beloved community who would – if our land filled up with drill rigs, waste ponds, compressor stations, and diesel trucks – disappear, exit the cycle. As in, forever. At Change.org, Austin Billings has another account of what natural gas drilling is putting at risk–the Bridger-Teton National Forest, miles of “spectacular hills and tall pine forests” that, Billings writes, “just kept going” as he drove through them. A company called Plains Exploration and Production Company is working to sink more than 130 natural gas wells in this area, Billings reports, a project that will strew the area with “pipelines, compressor stations, industrial water wells, truck staging areas, and other industrial features.” Push Back If Josh Fox wins an Oscar, however, natural gas projects like this one will face even more opposition. And that opposition matters. Just ask Costco, which caved in this week to a Greenpeace-led campaign against its sales of unsustainable seafood. For months, Greenpeace and its allies have been pushing the chain of wholesale grocery stores to sell only fish that can be captured or farmed in a sustainable way. The chain agreed to remove 12 “red list” species, at the highest risk for extinction, and to take other actions to promote sustainability and ocean conservation. “It was a long and arduous process,” said Casson Trenor, Greenpeace’s seafood campaigner, said, according to Change.org’s Sarah Parsons . “I’m really happy with where we’ve gotten to, and I think it says a lot about our methods and how effective we can be.” Guilty pleasures Of course, fish is not the only food that’s damaging to the environment. So much of what’s available to eat is damaging to the environment. Grist reported last week that Girl Scout cookies are made with palm oil, the production of which is driving deforestation in Indonesia. Earth Island Journal’s Maureen Nandini Mitra follows up by pointing out that Thin Mints aren’t the only sweet that sucks up palm oil: her list includes M&Ms, Snickers, and Twix, as well as Clif energy bars. Another point against those treats: They usually don’t come in recyclable packaging. On the other hand, it’s a little bit of a mystery what happens to the recyclable containers tossed into the recycling, especially those with a little food gunk left on them. For those worried about their fate, Mother Jones’ Kiera Butler has done a substantial public service by ferreting the best approaching to cleaning out recyclables. The takeaway: They can be a little bit dirty. “It’s not a giant deal if containers have little food residue on them,” Butler reports, but “the cleaner your containers, the more they’re worth on the recyclables market.” This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about the environment by members of The Media Consortium . It is free to reprint. Visit the Mulch for a complete list of articles on environmental issues, or follow us on Twitter . And for the best progressive reporting on critical economy, health care and immigration issues, check out The Audit , The Pulse , and The Diaspora . This is a project of The Media Consortium, a network of leading independent media outlets Read More… More on The Oscars

Read the original here: 
The Media Consortium: Weekly Mulch: Why Natural Gas Companies Fear Josh Fox, Gasland, and the Oscars

Photo credit: John-paul Zajackowski/Dreamstime.com Newt Gingrich, arguing President Obama’s decision to stop defending DOMA is impeachable: Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who plans within two weeks to announce if he will run for president, said today that if President Obama doesn’t change his mind and order his Justice Department to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act, Republicans in Congress should strike back and even consider impeachment proceedings. … “Imagine that Governor Palin had become president. Imagine that she had announced that Roe v. Wade in her view was unconstitutional and therefore the United States government would no longer protect anyone’s right to have an abortion because she personally had decided it should be changed. The news media would have gone crazy. The New York Times would have demanded her impeachment,” said Gingrich Leaving aside the fact that Roe v. Wade is a court decision and not a piece of legislation, Gingrich’s argument is absurd. In his hypothetical, Palin actually would break the law as decided by the courts. Obama is merely saying that his administration will no longer defend the law’s constitutionality. He’s not saying he won’t follow the law. And as for his “principled outrage,” Newt should consider this signing statement by his hero Ronald Reagan: While I am signing S. 1192, it contains a legislative veto provision which the Attorney General advises is unconstitutional. … The Secretary of Transportation will not, consistent with this objection, regard himself as legally bound by any such resolution. Reagan was saying his administration would ignore the law before he even signed it. President Obama, as I wrote above, is saying his administration will no longer defend the law. Unlike Reagan, the Obama Administration will still enforce the law, until and unless the courts finally overturn it. They just aren’t going to defend it. That’s a huge difference. Gingrich also said that President Obama campaigned in support of DOMA. That’s also a lie. But what else do you except from a hack like Gingrich? Neither truth nor facts are his strong suit.

Original post: 
Newt Gingrich floats impeachment over Obama’s DOMA decision

In the U.K., the group Wild Palms’ album Until Spring is getting all kinds of critical nods and experiencing some major success. On the band’s music, NME said, “Grandiose and melancholic… an expansive, romantic new sound for Wild Palms,” “(They) owe more to Disintegration-era Cure and Warp Records than Wire or Gang Of Four,” commented Mojo , “Deeply odd and deeply wonderful,” added Sunday Times , and Artrocker declared, “Virtually a phone call from Jesus himself.” Here in the U.S., Wild Palms’ Until Spring will debut on April 12th, but HuffPost has been given the premiere of the single “To The Lighthouse” presented here, airing for the first time in this territory. WILD PALMS - “To The Lighthouse” Read More… More on Sarah Palin

Read the original:
Mike Ragogna: HuffPost Premiere: Wild Palms’ "To The Lighthouse," Plus A Conversation With Susan Werner

No John Thune in 2012: For months now, my wife Kimberley and I have received encouragement from family, friends, colleagues, and supporters from across South Dakota and the country to run for the presidency of the United States…[but] at this time, I feel that I am best positioned to fight for America’s future here in the trenches of the United States Senate. Translation: Thune didn’t think he would win. He’s spent his entire career in politics, either as an aide, an appointed official, state party chairman, or candidate for office. He ran for Congress at age 35 and has probably imagined himself as President since he was a toddler. In short: I can guarantee you that if John Thune thought he would win this campaign, he would have run. The only question is whether Thune thinks the problem would have been winning the nomination or beating President Obama. Given how how much insider enthusiasm there was for him to run, I’m betting on the latter. Each of the top three candidates — Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, and Mike Huckabee — have serious flaws. Romney’s is that he’s an unprincipled hack, Palin’s is that she’s Palin, and Huckabee’s is that he doesn’t seem to be running. Thune could have run circles around Tim Pawlenty, and he had an army of operatives just dying for him to make the bid. In fact, as of September , he’d all but announced he would be running: Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), the “Daschle slayer” who beat the Senate Democratic leader in 2004, is ramping up plans for a presidential run in 2012, associates say. Thune, 49, spoke candidly about his plans for a cover story in The Weekly Standard — priceless exposure for an ambitious conservative. Senior Editor Stephen F. Hayes writes that Thune “is likely to run for president in 2012.” “Thune allows that he’s thinking about it seriously enough that he’s gamed out his ‘pathway to get there,’ calculated the amount of money it would take to be competitive in early primaries, and even thought about the timing of an announcement,” Hayes writes in “Dakota Dreaming: The Presidential Ambitions of John Thune.” Since that time, it’s not like the GOP field has gotten any stronger. Romney hasn’t gone anywhere except down, Huckabee is showing less interest than Mario Cuomo, and every time Sarah Palin opens her mouth, she turns off yet another swath of America. So if Thune wanted the nomination, it’s there for the taking. But while the GOP field has gotten weaker, President Obama has gotten stronger. In December and January he proved his political mettle, and despite the midterm results he’s bounce backed in a big way. I’m not saying President Obama is a lock for reelection. If Republican spending cuts lead to a double dip recession, he might pay the political price. But at least based on his decision today, it seems clear John Thune wasn’t willing to take a bet on that happening.

See original here:
John Thune passes on 2012 White House bid

Today on a conference call with reporters, Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer blasted House Republicans over their refusal to negotiate on spending cuts. It left a strong impression that America should prepare itself for a government shutdown on March 5th. The call was held as a response to Republicans shooting down Harry Reid’s offer to keep the federal government operating for 30 days at 2010 spending levels while negotiations over deeper cuts take place. If federal government funded non-discretionary, non-defense spending at 2010 levels during 2011, it would result in a total of $41 billion in spending cuts. Some highlights of Reid and Schumer’s remarks: Above all, Reid and Schumer decried the House GOP for demanding pre-conditions (aka, specific cuts) to any negotiations. They repeatedly described the GOP demand for pre-conditions as unserious, bad faith, and not adult. “Next they will be negotiating over the size of the conference table,” Schumer added. Reid said Senate Dems were willing to go along with deeper cuts than the $41 billion proposed in his continuing resolution. However, since even those cuts were very difficult for the Democratic Senate caucus to accept, any further cuts needed to be worked out in negotiations with Boehner. He would not negotiate through the press by specifying which cuts he would agree to beforehand. Schumer said that many Republicans, such as Sarah Palin, wanted a government shutdown. He said they are trying to use “the threat, and God forbid, the actuality, of a government shutdown to get their way.” Schumer said John Boehner was a reasonable man, but that he needed to stand up to Republican freshman in the House who were not in Congress during the 1995 shutdown. Reid said that Senate Democrats would not go along with the numerous riders that House Republicans had attached to their spending bill on matters like abortion. “How do they expect us to go along with that? We’re not going to.” I’ve heard Harry Reid speak on a number of occasions, and this was most strident I’ve ever heard him. It gave me the sense that something similar to Wisconsin may be coming to the whole country, and soon.

The rest is here:
As government shutdown looms, Reid and Schumer accuse GOP of bad faith

Early last week, Glenn Beck had one of most bizarre meltdowns, accusing Google of being a tool of the Obama administration and warning his audience against using it to search for information about his conspiracy theories. Apparently, Sarah Palin didn’t get the memo, however, because by the end of the week she was still bragging about having asked her daughter Bristol to use Google to conduct research on fiscal policy: “Last night, I’m in my hotel room, and I have my entourage with me. That would be Bristol, and I’m asking Bristol, you’ve got to Google some stuff for me, you’ve got to look up some stats and some figures for me, because it seems like the last couple days, everything that needs to be said, about this very poor and short-sighted budget proposal of our president’s that’s been presented to the public, everything’s already been said. At least in my world, I certainly understand he’s on the wrong track,” said Palin. So the good news is that there’s at least one Glenn Beck conspiracy theory that has yet to find a home in Sarah Palin’s cozy little brain. The bad news is that the most important voice in teahadi nation is apparently depending on high school graduate Bristol Palin’s proficiency at Googling to develop her fiscal policy roadmap. At least it’s bad news if you’re a teahadist. If you’re anyone else it’s just fucking hilarious.

Read the original post:
Sarah Palin breaks with Beck over Google, asks Bristol to search web for budget stats

Via Maggie Haberman and Ben Smith , Rupert Murdoch’s New York Post slams Mitt Romney on what is supposed to be his biggest strength: business experience. In an article that Fox might call socialist if it weren’t published by their parent company’s flagship tabloid, Romney’s career at Bain Capital is slammed all over the place. For example: Likely Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has been out on the pre-campaign trail this month saying he is the man to get Americans back to work, despite a spotty jobs record while on Wall Street. However, the former private equity firm chief’s fortune — which has funded his political ambitions from the Massachusetts statehouse to his unsuccessful run for the White House in 2008 — was made on the backs of companies that ultimately collapsed, putting thousands of ordinary Americans out on the street. That truth if it becomes widely known could become costly to Romney, who, while making the media rounds recently, told CNN’s Piers Morgan that “People in America want to know who can get 15 million people back to work,” implying he was that person. According to the paper, Romney “made fortunes by bankrupting five profitable businesses that ended up firing thousands of workers.” Politico ’s Haberman also reports that Romney is also facing trouble from another corner of the Murdoch media empire: Mike Huckabee, who now hosts a weekend show on Fox after his failed 2008 presidential bid. Apparently, Huckabee despises Romney so much that it might prompt him to run or support another candidate: Ed Rollins, a national GOP strategist who ran Huckabee’s 2008 effort, recalled the “personal animosity” that the former Arkansas governor felt for Romney, citing the rawness over the negative campaign Romney ran as Huckabee started surging as the dark horse with no money or national establishment support in Iowa in January 2008. “I don’t think he particularly likes Romney,” Rollins said, although the strategist insisted Huckabee “doesn’t’ think much about Romney or Palin” and would only run if he believes the time is right. “I don’t think he felt that Romney had a real core of convictions.” While Huckabee is undoubtedly correct about Romney, I wonder if his animosity has roots in religion as well as policy. You may recall that Huckabee openly challenged Romney’s faith during the 2008 campaign, earning him rebukes from conservatives like Charles Krauthammer for egregiously exploiting Romney’s Mormonism. When Romney returned fire , Huckabee apologized, but the bad blood does not appear to have subsided. In her article, Haberman notes observers who say that even if Huckabee doesn’t run, he could still ding Romney from the sidelines. With Huckabee’s perch at Fox News Channel, that’s undoubtedly true, though I was intrigued by Ed Rollins’ statement that Huckabee also isn’t a fan of Sarah Palin. Rollins is close to Huckabee — he was chairman of Huckabee’s 2008 campaign — and by distancing Huckabee from not just Romney but also Palin, the logical conclusion is that Huckabee is either interested in running himself or would prefer to see a lower tier candidate win. In Howard Fineman’s view based on a conference call from earlier today, Huckabee is unlikely to run, so the latter scenario may be most likely. Despite the noises coming from Huck-ville and the slam in the New York Post , Mitt Romney’s big problem remains the fact that as Governor of Massachusetts he signed into law a health care reform plan that included an individual mandate — and that he supported imposing the mandate at the national level. Romney’s already slipped behind both Huckabee and Palin in 2012 GOP primary polling, and with his mandate problem he’s going to find it nearly impossible to recover. His only hope : dividing up the GOP field. But even that’s a longshot.

The rest is here: 
Murdoch’s N.Y. Post slams Mitt Romney: Made fortune by firing thousands of workers

First there was Michele Bachmann, accusing Michelle Obama of ushering in a “nanny state” by encouraging breastfeeding. Then it was Sarah Palin’s turn to mock Michelle Obama’s breastfeeding initiative: Sarah Palin slams Michelle Obama over nursing Sarah Palin followed in Rep. Michele Bachmann’s footsteps and took a swipe at Michelle Obama on Thursday, mocking her efforts to get mothers to breast-feed their children. “No wonder Michelle Obama is telling everybody, ‘You’d better breast-feed your baby,” she said at a Long Island appearance on Thursday, after slamming President Barack Obama for rising gas prices and other items — like milk — since he took office. “Yeah, you’d better, because the price of milk is so high right now.” ( Side note: Thanks to deflation in 2009 , dairy products are cheaper now than they were under Bush. However, there is a forecast for inflation in 2011.) Of course, before encouraging breastfeeding became a symptom of the “nanny state,” it was none other than Sarah Palin who promoted her own breastfeeding initiative way back in October 2007. WHEREAS, government and community organizations have a vested interest in protecting and promoting breastfeeding as a means of preventing infant malnutrition, morbidity, and mortality. WHEREAS, during October, organizations throughout our state will promote the importance of breastfeeding. This year, in conjunction with World Breastfeeding Week - October 1 through October 7 - the State of Alaska will support networks that encourage and promote breastfeeding in all communities. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Sarah Palin, Governor of the State of Alaska, do hereby proclaim October 2007 as: Breastfeeding Awareness Month in Alaska, and encourage all residents to recognize and support the important contributions breastfeeding makes in improving the quality of life for all Alaskans. Notice that Palin didn’t just promote breastfeeding for the sake of families — she also said that “government” has “a vested interest” in women breastfeeding their babies. That just sounds so….scary and socialist, doesn’t it? She better hope Glenn Beck doesn’t find out! But whether he does or not, when you hate somebody so much that you end up mocking them for promoting breastfeeding…well, that’s a pretty damn big case of Obama Derangement Syndrome.

Go here to see the original:
Sarah Palin flashback: Government has ‘vested interest’ in encouraging breastfeeding

MADISON, Wis. — Sarah Palin says union members protesting Wisconsin Republicans’ plan to help balance the state’s budget by cutting collective bargaining rights are taking up “the wrong fight at the wrong time.” Palin weighed in on the debate in a Friday night posting on her Facebook page but didn’t indicate whether she would join weekend conservative counter-protests organized by groups including the Tea Party Patriots and Americans for Prosperity. Read More… More on Wisconsin Protests

Read more: 
Sarah Palin Addresses Wisconsin Protesters: You Must Be ‘Willing To Sacrifice’

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin reportedly tasked her oldest daughter, Bristol, with taking to Google to mine a little data on the economy in preparation for her appearance Thursday in Long Island, New York. The Los Angeles Times reports : Palin was accompanied by her daughter, Bristol, whom she described as her “entourage.” She said she had asked Bristol, in their hotel room Wednesday night, to Google information about the economy in preparation for the appearance in a country club ballroom. Read More… More on Bristol Palin

Original post:
Sarah Palin: Bristol Googled Information On The Economy For Me

As you may have heard, a whole dumb political battle has broken out in America because First Lady Michelle Obama has been raising awareness about the benefits of breastfeeding and supporting the women who choose to nurse their children in that fashion. Because Michelle Obama happens to be on one side of a political divide, those on the other — most notably Representative Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) — are now totally yelling about this. The resolution to this problem will probably not improve the economy in any way, or end a foreign war, but at least it’s shiny and new. So, today, the New York Times digs into this important battle, in an important piece by Kate Zernike titled, “A Breast-Feeding Plan Mixes Partisan Reactions.” And I am terribly puzzled by this editorial decision: “Holy mackerel, I might have to agree with Michele Bachmann on this one!” noted one person on a blog. Read More… More on Michele Bachmann

See the original post:
Random Anonymous People With Unidentified Blogs Are Apparently Allowed To Be Sources For The New York Times

Palin at today’s Long Island Association Q&A session ::: Politico’s Maggie Haberman reports the good news : Sarah hints at WH run, slams Obamas WOODBURY, Long Island - Sarah Palin flirted openly with running for president on Thursday, saying there’s “no one” more qualified for White House multi-tasking than “a woman, a mom” and even went so far as to describe the man-on-the-street campaign she’s considering. … “I am still thinking about it - I certainly haven’t made up my mind,” said Palin, who was also asked why she hired a chief of staff this week and replied: “To tell you the truth, Todd’s getting kinda tired of doing it all for me.” “As for potentially an unconventional run and an unconventional cycle - that’s what going rogue is all about,” she said, but added that if she runs it would not be all about the social media, and she also would be on the ground in Iowa. “Certainly nothing is more effective than being there with the people in the diners, shaking hands,” Palin said. “I’m not saying it’s going to be me offering my name up in the name of service. There is so much to be considered, but I certainly believe that this is going to be an unconventional political cycle.” Let me be among the first to officially offer Sarah Palin my endorsement in the 2012 Republican Primary. And let me be the absolute first to predict that if she runs, by the time the campaign is over, Karl Rove will claim that Sarah Palin’s candidacy was a plot hatched by the White House .

Read the original here: 
Sarah Palin openly flirts with 2012 presidential bid

WASHINGTON — Sarah Palin went rogue on Woodbury, Long Island today, where — at an event hosted by the Long Island Association — she ” flirted openly with running for president .” While she was there, Palin took a moment to ridicule First Lady Michelle Obama’s recent push to promote breastfeeding. As it turns out, it’s a flip-flop! Per Sarah Pavlus at MediaMatters’ County Fair blog : The perceived dig is quite a turnaround from the position Palin had as governor of Alaska, when she declared October 2007 “Breastfeeding Awareness Month” and issued a proclamation that said, “government and community organizations have a vested interest in protecting and promoting breastfeeding as a means of preventing infant malnutrition, morbidity, and mortality.” Read More… More on Sarah Palin

Here is the original post: 
Late Returns: Palin Reverses Support Of Breastfeeding After She Finds Out That A Democrat Also Supports It

What a shock. More than half of Republican primary voters think … using the term loosely … that President Obama isn’t a natural born American citizen: In the poll, 51% of all likely Republican primary voters erroneously believed that President Obama was born outside of the U.S. “Erroneously believe”? Baloney. Ignoring the reality of Obama’s certificate of live birth is nothing more than a way to pretend they’re not racists, which simply makes them look stupid and racist. And not surprisingly, among Sarah Palin fans that number is is even higher: For example, among the two-thirds of likely Republican primary voters with a favorable opinion of former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, 83% said Obama was not born in the U.S. Also. For complete results, see PPP’s polling memo .

View original here: 
51% of Republican primary voters are birthers

Wondering about how Obama is faring for re-election? Here are a pair of snapshots to ponder. From ImpreMedia on the Latino vote: Despite the dire situation of the economy and the lack of immigration solutions, President Barack Obama’s approval rating among Latino voters increased again to 70% after decreasing in mid-2010. But that support does not translate into automatic votes for 2012. The second part of a poll conducted by impreMedia and Latino Decisions (LD) also reveals that, although Latino voters will not automatically vote for Obama—only 43% are sure they will vote for him next year—doubts about the president and the Democrats are not turning into support for the Republicans. Gee, I wonder what Republicans have done to alienate Latinos (today). And the DREAM act? Back then, the White House made an effort to increase communication with Latinos. Although the bill failed, Latinos still give Obama the benefit of the doubt regarding the economy and immigration. And here’s one I really enjoy, given the media sponsor, Fox news. From Mother Jones : Fox’s bipartisan pollsters found that Obama would defeat Jeb Bush by a whopping 20-point margin, 54 percent to 34 percent. That’s a healthy gain for Obama since last September, when the same pollsters put Obama ahead 45 percent to 37 percent. The Fox poll results, then, throw some cold water on all the Jeb hype of late, suggesting that Jeb might be smarter to look to 2016 rather than 2012. Unfortunately for the Republicans, the rest of the party’s possible presidential field didn’t fare much better against Obama. The Fox poll shows Obama beating Mitt Romney by 7 percentage points, Mike Huckabee by eight, and Newt Gingrich by 20. The only possible GOP candidate whose loss margin is greater than Bush’s or Gingrich’s? Sarah Palin, who the poll finds would get trounced by Obama by 21 points, 56 to 35. The full poll (.pdf) is here .

Read more from the original source: 
Polling odds and ends suggest Obama doing well with Latinos and crushing Jeb

“To create suspense,” Palin allegedly said, “you must leak that you’re leaving and then surprise them and don’t go. That really gets them. Then, after the media covers this big news, wait one day and announce that you were just kidding.” Read More… More on Sarah Palin

Here is the original post: 
Maggie Van Ostrand: WikiLeaks Confirms Sarah Palin’s Conversation With Mubarak

For anyone who still doubts whether Sarah Palin will run for president, consider this : Palin recently announced that she has hired Michael Glassner to serve as chief of staff to her political team. Glassner, whose hiring was first reported by CNN, will be responsible for managing Palin’s small, loosely organized team across a number of states. While Palin has not formally announced her 2012 plans, hiring Glassner signals that she may be considering a presidential bid more seriously than has been thought. Glassner was John McCain’s director of vice presidential operations during the 2008 presidential election. Apparently, he is one of the very few former staffers from the McCain campaign who didn’t think Sarah Palin was an astoundingly ignorant, lazy, egomaniacal, shopping-obsessed “diva.” Or, as one anonymous aide described Palin and her family after the 2008 election, “Wasilla hillbillies looting Neiman Marcus from coast to coast.” Palin’s announcement came during the same weekend that other potential Republican presidential candidates were sucking up to their base at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference. Palin skipped the event, provoking fetus-obsessed former Senator Rick Santorum to criticize her for skipping it, which provoked Palin to insist that she wouldn’t call him a “knuckle-dragging Neanderthal,” leaving that to his wife. Oh, Sarah, you’re so clever. As Jake noted last week, even Palin’s absence still dominated conversation at and about the convention. And with the announcement of her selection of Glassner as her new chief of staff, no one cares that Ron Paul once again won the utterly meaningless straw poll . Even though Palin came in ninth , with only 3 percent of the vote, she still managed to upstage the presidential hopefuls who finished ahead of her, like Governors Gary Johnson, Chris Christie, and Mitch Daniels, as well as batshit crazy Rep. Michele Bachmann. Palin’s perfectly timed announcement is yet another prime example of why she can, and will, run for president, even without going through the typical motions that other candidates are making. She already has total name recognition and an obsessively loyal fan base. And despite meaningless boycotts by a handful of pundits who have vowed not to mention her name, her every utterance still commands widespread media attention. Palin didn’t need to appear at CPAC to keep her name in the headlines all week. She can’t win the White House, of course. No amount of deleting critical comments on Facebook or canceling appearances because people say mean things about her can change the fact that her unfavorable numbers have skyrocketed 46 points since the 2008 election, and the overwhelming majority of Americans, including conservatives, think she’s not qualified to be president . For Palin, running for president isn’t about winning. She has already proven she has no interest in governing. But running for president does mean more shopping sprees; more TV appearances; more gratuitous attacks on everyone from Michelle Obama to Rick Santorum; more chances to promote her daughter’s “career” (while, of course, insisting that the media should respect her family’s privacy); and more opportunities to cash in on the not-yet-trademarked Palin brand. For Palin, those are certainly compelling enough reasons to keep up the appearance of wanting to be president — until voters have their chance to finally, and in no uncertain terms, tell her to go away.

See original here:
Sarah Palin hires chief of staff from 2008 campaign

This is my surprised face : A Smart Politics analysis of more than 500 PolitiFact stories over the last year finds that statements made by Republican politicians have been rated as false at more than three times the rate of those made by their Democratic counterparts. Interestingly, the study (which can be found here ) focuses on Politifact itself, charging the nonpartisan analysis done by the St. Petersburg Times fact-checking unit with a systemic bias against Republicans. However, there are other explanations that are equally, if not more, plausible than charging Politifact with grading in bad faith. For one thing, the study was conducted during a time when the GOP was out of power. The party out of power, it could reasonably be assumed, is going to take more chances with their rhetoric, in an effort to turn the electorate against the party in office. Of course, it could just be that we are in a period in history that the most high-profile political trainwrecks all happen to suit up for the same team. The Smart Politics study does note, after all, that the two runaway leaders in the falsehood/barely true categories (with an impressive total of 15 examples logged between them) were none other than Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin. Rather than impugning the Politifact studies, couldn’t the folks at Smart Politics simply concede that having those two on your team might muck up the curve just a little bit? After all, it’s not exactly out of the realm of possibility, as a large swath of America has already concluded, that the tag team of Bachmann and Palin are reliable fountains of falsehoods.

Original post:
Documented proof that Republicans are the biggest liars in politics

An indie rock band has won the biggest prize in mainstream music. The Arcade Fire, whose third album, “The Suburbs,” set the summer ablaze for young fans around the world, completely shocked the Grammy Awards on Sunday , taking home the award for Album of The Year . They beat out Eminem and Lady Antebellum, both of whom had taken awards home earlier in the night. From Montreal, Canada, the band is led by husband and wife Win Butler and Régine Chassagne, both of whom sing for the group. Five other members include Will Butler, Tim Kingsbury, Sarah Neufield, Jeremy Gara, and Richard Reed Parry. Read More… More on Grammy Awards

See the original post here: 
The Arcade Fire: Grammy Award Winner For Album of The Year

. . . and by “best,” we generally mean “most amusing to those of us who don’t believe that Barack Obama is a Kenyan communist dedicated to melting all guns and gold owned by Americans for metal to forge a 2 mile tall statue of Stokely Carmichael beheading Ronald Reagan.” Although I live just a mile or so from the Marriott Wardman Park, where the CPACkers flock to buy insane crap and listen to even more insane speeches, I didn’t make it down to the Big Crazy. As usual, I did run into plenty of the attendees, particularly on the Metro — more on that later — but I couldn’t set aside the time to witness the hijinks in person. Maybe next year. But I did try and follow as best as I could the dispatches from those intrepid reporters who ventured into madness to report on the latest depredations of America’s “conservative” (really, though, how can any group of people so committed to radically destroying the social contract of the last 75 years be honestly described as “conservative?”) movement. Maybe you didn’t, because maybe you’ve got more sense than me. So if you missed it, here are the high points of CPAC 2011. Big shout out to all those who provided us with the laughs, especially TPM DC , Dave Weigel , and the fine folks at Wonkette . 10) Ron Paul peaks early by winning straw poll . As promised , goldbug heartthrob Doctor Ron Paul won the CPAC presidential straw poll , trouncing second-place Mitt Romney and all the rest of the hopefuls. We’ve already been over what an awful predictor the CPAC poll is — remember President Gary Bauer? — but this year’s might be the silliest ever. I mean, Gary Johnson, the pot-loving former governor of New Mexico, tied for third with firmly declared non-candidate Chris Christie. So I hope the Paulista enjoyed watching their guy inaugurated as the President of the Wardman Park, because this is probably going to be the high point for their campaign. 9) The prospect of a Donald Trump presidential candidacy. The Donald was in the house on Thursday, and he did not disappoint. Not only did he take the first tentative steps towards what would be a hilarious, doomed ego trip, he did so by insulting Wardman Park President Paul. You just made a . . . not very powerful enemy, Mr. Trump. De-nile is ignoring Egypt. You’d think that a collection of self-professed lovers of Liberty and Freedom such as the CPAC crowd would be over the moon about the popular uprising which rid Egypt of its evil dictator. Not so much: On a day of history in the Middle East, there was one topic virtually absent from the speeches of prospective 2012 Republican presidential candidates at the annual Conservative Political Action Committee’s convention: Egypt. The would-be contenders - and others who addressed the gathering - struck a series of common conservative themes, such as reducing the size of government as well as projecting strength and muscle abroad. All attacked President Obama for his domestic and foreign policies. But for the most part, they had little to say about the nation’s policy toward Egypt, whether to praise the demonstrators whose protests forced President Hosni Mubarak to step down, or to offer the principles that should guide U.S. policy as the American and Israeli ally takes the next steps toward democracy. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney didn’t mention Egypt at all in his speech. Nor did Sen. John Thune (S.D.), although his text included a line that said, “Let’s stand with those around the world who are risking their lives for freedom.” Former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty made a glancing reference, criticizing Obama as appeasing U.S. adversaries, including “Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.” Maybe they only get hot and bothered about democracy when it’s the US delivering it, hot and fresh. 7) They call him the Streak! Of course, it might have been a bit awkward to discuss liberalization in the Arab world immediately prior to the main entertainment at the Presidential Banquet, given that the entertainment in question was none other than ’70s novelty country sensation Ray Stevens . Here’s Ray performing his classic hit, A-hab the A-rab: “But don’t you see? Mubarak was Ahab! Keep it fresh, CPAC. 6) John Bolton was there, and wants to run for President. Seriously. 5) Fetch me another old fashioned, Senator. TPM’s Evan McMorris-Santoro ran into Texas Railroad Commissioner Michael Williams , who’s planning to run for Kay Bailey Hutchinson’s Senate seat next year. He was planning in running in the special election which would have been necessary had KBH resigned to run for governor last year, and received Jim DeMint’s very meaningful endorsement at that time. Sounds like a Tea Party comer, right? But there’s one other thing you need to know about Williams: he’s black. When I ran into him yesterday, it appeared conservatives have not made much progress on that front. Ahead of me was a CPAC attendee rushing past, as they are wont to do in this giant place. “Hey, are you Herman Cain?” the young man asked Williams, referring to another African American conservative running for federal office and attending CPAC. I asked Williams if that happened a lot. “Not really,” he told me. “A lot of people think I’m a waiter.” Williams blamed the confusion on his trademark bowtie, which — like a lot of conservatives — he wears all the time, and wears well. A friend with him said that on more than one occasion, people had asked him to get them a drink. “I think it’s really because of the bowtie,” Williams explained. 4) The street theater of wingers unleashed in DC. Bitching and laughing about wingers unleashed in DC is an annual tradition among those of us who live here year round. The most common complaint is the cluelessness displayed in the Metro, where they block escalators during rush hour, stand in front of doors in busy stations, and freak out if they think they’re headed in the wrong direction toward a scary neighborhood. But there’s more to it than that. A friend of mine tells a story about going to Open City, a diner near the Wardman Park, during last year’s CPAC. She ordered an omelet, and it was only when she received it dripping with double cheese and extra home fries, that she realized that it was CPAC time. But don’t just trust me. Listen to a brief, brief summary from the Twitters : sheaven Sally OMG the metro is filled with CPAC dweebs. Please send help. dismalscience Matthew McCormick Metro this morning: lots of skinny white kids with no fashion sense looking confused about mass transit. Must be #CPAC time. _rachel_m Rachel Marie Spotted: cpac-ers at woodley park metro. How I knew: men in bowties and blondes in too much makeup williamholby williamholby Dear #cpac -ers, please stand to the RIGHT on #metro escalators. I don’t appreciate missing trains while you discuss newt’s speech. adamtragone Adam J. Tragone Fact: I smirked at some Ron Paul supporters at the metro and they wanted to pick a fight. #CPAC EdEspinoza Ed Espinoza A good way to avoid crowds during CPAC week? Ride the green line metro. whrobinson whrobinson Someone carrying “don’t tread on me” flag on metro. And so it begins. #cpac I’ll be the first to admit that this entry is a bit mean-spirited, but then again, these are the great patriots who have denied me and 600,000 other District residents any Congressional representation and who micromanage my city’s government, so I don’t feel bad. Maybe we’d be more welcoming if the wingers respected our basic rights as citizens. 3) No EPIC NITES? As far as I can tell, CPAC 2011 did not include a reprise of last year’s after-hours “XPAC” party, held for and by the hip conservative youth: Brah. James O’Keefe and Steven Baldwin? Brah. How could they not bring that shiz-nit (am I saying that right? “shiz-nit?”) back, brah? SO EPIC. (h/t: JJ ) 2) Teh Gays have landed. GOProud, the latest version of the “chickens for Colonel Sanders” faction, took part in CPAC this year. This freaked out a bunch of people who were afraid of catching the gay, and actually caused a few high-profile folks to boycott — Jim DeMint and the Heritage Foundation among them. Mike Huckabee clearly thought the thing was icky , even if he didn’t explicitly support the boicott. Even those who were cool with GOProud’s presence had an interesting way of showing it; the charming Andrew Breitbart, who co-hosted a party with GOProud, prefaced his embrace of the gay Republicans by declaring that “I will be the harshest critic of the activist gay left, who I fear more than al Qaeda.” And at the Breitparty, which featured entertainment from Sophie B. Hawkins, the following exchange was observed: A word about Sophie B. Hawkins. Michael Steele, who was chairman of the RNC until last month, showed up at the party and stayed a while. Right before I showed up, in an exchange witnessed by several people who described it to me, Steele met Hawkins. She explained her political philosophy to him. “I’m not a conservative,” said Hawkins, “but I’d like to [expletive] Sarah Palin.” Steele reacted quickly. “Well, she’s very attractive,” he said. 1) This circus freak caravan got more ink and coverage from trad med sources than every Netroots Nation, combined. OK, that’s not really an amusing story. In fact, it kind of sucks. But it’s got to be true; coverage everyday on A2 or A3 of the WaPo, a daily recap on All Things Considered … it just goes to show that people who dress up in 18th century breeches and believe that the American president is an African socialist are Serious Thinkers, and you’re all a bunch of irrelevent hippies. Blah. Sorry to end it on a down note.

Read the original post: 
The Ten Best Stories from CPAC

Despite a big crowd, a Donald Trump ego address and a guest appearance by “one time Democratic pollster” Pat Caddell (what on earth is wrong with that guy?), there were no break-out or rally candidates in the 2012 line-up at the annual political gathering of the Conservative Political Action Committee. The non-predictive CPAC straw poll and convention was heavily Tea Party flavored, and voted 30% for Ron Paul (he won for the second straight year), a guy who has no chance to win the Presidency but who is terrific at busing in straw poll voters. The establishment candidate, Mitt Romney, ran from his record (for the umpteenth straight year) and came in second at a whopping 23%. Everyone else was in single digits. Some of the comments from the attendees are very revealing. This was from an LA Times piece: “They’re all looking for somebody and — you’d be surprised — they don’t think the person they’re looking for is here yet,” said Mark Pollard, 48, of Austin, Texas. He was searching for a candidate with presidential stature, but said: “I don’t think I’ve seen that yet.” Republican strategists at the event agreed the 2012 contenders had yet to generate broad enthusiasm among conservatives. They attributed that to a lackluster field and a contest in which none of the leading candidates had formally declared they were running. This one’s from NPR : “I know what I’m looking for, but I haven’t found the whole package yet,” says CeCe Heil, an attorney in Virginia Beach, Va. “My candidate would be a mixture of what we’ve got. If you took a little bit of each one, that would be my candidate.” So what does the GOP base want? Ask anyone attending the gathering, and you’d hear something like this: a dynamic conservative with a backbone who can win. “That’s it. But there’s nobody who meets that criteria,” added Bill Hemrick, a Nashville, Tenn., businessman who founded Tea Party HD, a conservative media company. He said the only two who even come close — former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann — “aren’t electable.” Well, there’s at least some insight shown. In fact, the whole Tea Party thing is causing major problems going forward. A new Pew Poll captures the issue, highlighting that non-Tea Party Republicans are closer to Democrats than to the tea bag extremists: Tea Party’s Hard Line on Spending Divides GOP It isn’t that conservatives won’t vote for the Republican. They generally do. But how hard they’ll work for the eventual winner, and whether non-tea party voters (also known as “the vast majority of the American people”) will be as interested as conservative activists in shutting down the government, running against education, and destroying Social Security remains to be seen. Just under half of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say they agree with the Tea Party — representing 17% of Americans overall. The remaining Republicans make up 23% of the public, and either disagree with (3%) or have no opinion of the Tea Party (20%). When you look at graphs like this, the attention given to Tea Party supporters seems way out of proportion to their numbers. That’s what happens when Democrats sit on their hands - see the 2010 election. Now, that’s not something likely to be repeated in a presidential year. And the Tea Party does give Democrats something substantial to run against. That’s a good reminder for those eager to jettison Social Security in the name of bipartisanship. Still, I will let Dave Weigel have the last word on The Meaning of It All: So I asked what it meant that most of the candidates that the media covers — Huckabee, Palin — didn’t show? Fabrizio, again, pointed out how unscientific the poll was. After all, Rudy Giuliani had won it in 2007, and John McCain came in fifth. “And where was John McCain one year later?” asked Fabrizio. “Losing the presidency,” said Keene. With polls showing Obama winning the swing states , with the tepid response to the current candidates, and with that kind of GOP divide on the issues, it looks more and more like that’s where the Tea Party will be next year: losing the Presidency for Republicans. And it couldn’t happen to a nicer American political party.

See more here: 
CPAC brews weak tea for Presidential candidates

So, this is the new place, huh? Well, I brought some political and polling headlines from the week, and I solemnly promise not to put my feet on the furniture! THE RACE FOR THE WHITE HOUSE NATIONAL (FOX NEWS): Fox News has taken the intriguing step (and, it is rare for me to say this, but kudos to them) of changing their polling unit. They have gone to (as NBC has done for years) a pairing of a GOP and Democratic pollster to collaborate on their surveys. They also, for the first time, are including cell phone respondents to their sample. The results, at least in the first go-round, are enough to send any Fox News viewer screaming for the House of Ras. According to their first presidential poll in the new setup, Democratic President Barack Obama enjoys a lead ranging from 7-21 points over his most likely GOP challengers. As with other polls we have seen, Mitt Romney comes the closest (48-41), with Sarah Palin trailing by the most (56-35). Mike Huckabee (49-41) and Newt Gingrich (55-35) fall in-between. The new crew at Fox News also found President Obama with a reasonably affirmative 51/43 approval spread. COLORADO (PPP): PPP, in its continuing tour of all of the potential swing states, heads to the Mountain West this week. The firm tested both Colorado and New Mexico, and find that their electoral votes would remain in the Democratic column if the election were held today. Colorado is the closer of the two, but Barack Obama still leads with a small measure of comfort here. The leads for Obama here range from six points (Mitt Romney) to 19 points (Sarah Palin). In a positive side note for Obama, the guys at PPP also tested him against the always formidable “Generic Republican”. Often, a generic opponent makes for a closer contest, because GOP voters can project their favored candidate into that position. However, in this survey, Obama maintained a solid 51-44 edge over the generic challenger. NEW MEXICO (PPP): As they headed south into New Mexico, PPP found President Obama with a considerably more impressive lead, one reminiscent of his blowout win in the state in 2008. The traditional four GOP candidates were tested, and Obama emerged with leads ranging from 16-29 points over the field. To add a hometown flavor, PPP tested former New Mexico Governor (and flavor of the month for libertarian GOP fetishists) Gary Johnson. But he did scarcely better, trailing by a 51-36 margin. Some conservative political junkies (the National Review’s Jim Geraghty prominent among them) have criticized the poll for being a bit heavy on Democrats in the sample. Of course, that was a common refrain from Democrats in 2010. In other words, it is not always easy to tell what is a sampling bias and what is legitimate change in the electorate. Usually, as we happily learned in 2008 and unhappily learned in 2010, the party who is convinced the polling samples are screwing them is usually the one less happy about the electoral outcome. IN OTHER NEWS… A few other pollsters took a shot at gauging President Obama’s job approval this week. Automated pollsters YouGov were the only ones to find the President underwater, with a 46/48 spread. Pew found the President at a net positive, albeit under 50% approval (49/42). Meanwhile, Ipsos/Reuters closely resembles the numbers for Fox News, giving the President a 51/46 spread on his approval. Alan Abramowitz looks back at history, and says that it is on President Obama’s side. His conclusion—the key stat is how many terms the incumbent’s party has held the White House. Only once in the past century (Jimmy Carter in 1980) have voters given up on a party who had held the WH for only a single four-year span of time. Would this be the 182nd or 183rd GOP officeholder or former officeholder contemplating a Presidential bid? Apparently, you can add the name of former Alabama Governor Bob Riley to the mix. One of his chief backers: Joe Scarborough, who seems to have shed that whole “No Labels” thing in time to talk up a challenger to President Obama. The nominally nonpartisan (but practically very Republican) Nebraska state legislature is likely to deny Barack Obama a single electoral vote by reverting to a winner-take-all allocation of electoral votes in the state. It is hardly a time-honored tradition (dating back only to the 1990s), but polls had shown that President Obama was doing very well in the Omaha-based 2nd district, even as he was getting thumped elsewhere in this red state. THE RACE FOR THE SENATE ARIZONA: No new data to report out of the Grand Canyon State, but the political events set off by the retirement of Republican Senator Jon Kyl have dominated the Senate-based political headlines this week. As the link above notes, a lot of the jockeying for this Senate seat (the first open Senate seat here in nearly two decades) is going to be enhanced by the redistricting which will break the state up into nine districts (instead of the current eight districts). Quirky Congressman Jeff Flake seems like a lock to run (with support from the Club For Growth), but he could be joined by several of his compatriots. Republican Trent Franks and Democrat Ed Pastor are being mentioned as possibilities, and the most intriguing prospect may well be the convalescing Gabrielle Giffords . Giffords’ name came up upon the late week revelation that she had discussed a bid if the seat came open before the assassination attempt on her in January. Meanwhile, a few other very intriguing names are in the mix on the GOP side, as apparently notorious Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is flirting with a bid, and even former NFL quarterback Kurt Warner is seeing his name being bandied about. Two names took themselves out of the running, and at least one of them was a big surprise. Former Congressman John Shadegg declined to make a bid. Shadegg has a national profile with conservative activists, and would have been formidable in a primary. Also declining a bid, a bit more predictably, was Arizona Governor Jan Brewer . NEW MEXICO (PPP): If longtime Democratic Senator Jeff Bingaman seeks another term in the Senate, he can expect to be re-elected. Such is the verdict from last week’s PPP poll in the Land of Enchantment, where Bingaman enjoys double-digit leads over any of the trio of high-profile Republicans tested. Bingaman leads former Governor Gary Johnson by 11 points (51-40), and is staked to larger leads over former Congresswoman Heather Wilson (56-37) and current Congressman Steven Pearce (57-34). Should Bingaman retire, the race gets infinitely more competitive, but ONLY if Johnson runs for the GOP. Against the more likely candidates (Wilson and Pearce), either of the state’s Democratic Congressmen (Martin Heinrich and Ben Ray Lujan) have leads of 8-15 points. VIRGINIA: A handful of things have occurred since Wednesday, when the piece in the link was front-paged here at Daily Kos. One Democrat considered to be a likely entrant into the sweepstakes, recently defeated Congressman Glenn Nye, elected not to make a bid. All eyes are now on former Governor Tim Kaine, but it still seems to be a less than 50/50 prospect that Kaine will give up his perch as head of the Democratic National Committee to make a bid. There is an effort to “draft” Kaine, and there is also an alternative campaign to draft former Congressman Tom Perriello. Meanwhile, one Democratic player seems eager to draft himself into the race, as NoVa Congressman Gerry Connolly is talking himself up as a “viable candidate.” The state party’s annual Jefferson-Jackson dinner is next weekend, and it will be interesting to see if the picture of who will emerge as the Democratic frontrunner will emerge before then. IN OTHER NEWS… Let the teabagging begin! Local tea party activist Andrew Ian Dodge is in for a primary challenge to Maine Senator Olympia Snowe, and was making the rounds at CPAC this weekend. PPP may well poll this race next week, so we might have data about the viability of his primary challenge sooner than later. He is only considered a second-tier target for the GOP, but New Jersey freshman Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez can take solace in the fact that his poll numbers appear to be edging upward. Once underwater, he now holds a still modest-but-improving 44/36 spread in his job approval, according to a new Quinnipiac poll. With one Democratic retirement this week came a piece of news to suggest that another possible retiree might try stick around, after all. Ben Nelson has hired a campaign manager for the 2012 cycle, in the form of his 2006 manager, Paul Johnson. Nelson has an uphill fight to retain his seat in red Nebraska, with Attorney General Jon Bruning and Treasurer Don Stenberg both ramping up to make bids for the seat. THE RACE FOR THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPS CA-36: Much has changed since Monday, when the news broke that the first special election of the 2012 cycle would be necessitated by the pending resignation of longtime LA-area Congresswoman Jane Harman. Los Angeles City Councilwoman Janice Hahn jumped in almost immediately, and has already amassed a number of endorsements from high-profile Democratic political players like LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and state Assembly Speaker John Perez. Popular Secretary of State Debra Bowen is taking a more contemplative approach, emailing supporters over the weekend to gauge support for a bid. Meanwhile, 2008/10 Harman primary challenger Marcy Winograd seems to be waiting to see what Bowen will do. If Bowen demurs from a bid (which is, admittedly, unlikely), Winograd would seem to be a lock. Winograd did not seem enamored with Hahn. On the GOP side, the two most-often mentioned names are 2010 GOP nominee Mattie Fein (who was defeated easily by Harman last year) and 2010 statewide nominee Damon Dunn, who was defeated (ironically) by Debra Bowen in his bid for Secretary of State. Another name getting some buzz was 2010 state legislative candidate Nathan Mintz , who is a local tea party leader who ran respectably, losing only 50-43 in a Dem-friendly Assembly district. NY-26: In the wake of the almost comical chain of events that led to the resignation of Republican Congressman Christopher Lee, the field is slowly coming together in upstate New York. Most of the news thus far has been about who was not running, rather than who was actually running. For a fairly thorough assessment of the potential Democrats in the field, The Albany Project has a few offerings on the matter. One complicating factor regarding this seat is the fact that it might not exist past this year, as this seat is a probable target for contraction as the state of New York needs to shed seats in the redistricting process.

See the rest here: 
Polling and Political Wrap, 2/13/11

Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) came out on top in the much-anticipated 2011 Conservative Political Action Conference straw poll, according to Fox News. Human Events confirmed that the Republican congressman won the vote before the results were officially announced. Here’s a breakdown of the numbers: Ron Raul: 30%, Mitt Romney: 23%, Gary Johnson 6%, Chris Christie 6%, Newt Gingrich: 5%, Tim Pawlenty 4%, Michele Bachmann 4%, Mitch Daniels 4%, Sarah Palin: 3%, Herman Cain 2%, Mike Huckabee 2%, Rick Santorum 2%, John Thune 2%, Jon Huntsman 1%, Haley Barbour 1% Read More… More on Predict the News

See the original post here:
CPAC Straw Poll 2011: Ron Paul Wins For Second Consecutive Year

Let us not forget, the Father of Modern Conservatism routinely fell asleep during Cabinet meetings, consulted astrology charts for the most auspicious time to take foreign policy trips, said ketchup is a vegetable and trees cause pollution. Read More… More on Sarah Palin

See the original post:
Will Durst: 100 Years of Reagan

by Sarah Laskow, Media Consortium blogger Agribusiness giant Monsanto is strengthening its hold over the food system both in this country and abroad, with some help from the U.S. government. Food safety advocates have been trying to derail the roll-out of the company’s newest product, Roundup Ready alfalfa, or at least limit its use, Mike Ludwig reports at Truthout . But Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack announced recently that use of the alfalfa seeds would be fully deregulated and available for use across the country. “The decision squashed a proposed compromise between the biotech industry and its opponents that would have placed geographic restrictions on Roundup Ready alfalfa to prevent organic and traditional alfalfa from being contaminated by herbicide sprays and transgenes spread by cross-pollination and other factors,” Ludwig reports. Home and away President Barack Obama’s food safety and agriculture team includes quite a few Monsanto supporters. Michael Taylor, the deputy commissioner for foods at the Food and Drug Administration, worked on public policy for the company for three years , for instance. And the agriculture department’s chief scientist, Roger Beachy, came to administration from a research organization co-founded by Monsanto . Obama administration officials are also working with Monsanto on a plan called “New Visions for Agriculture,” which promotes global food security, Kristen Ridley reports at Change.org . “This particular plan uses taxpayer dollars through Obama’s Feed the Future initiative to ‘advance market-based solutions’ to increase yield in the developing world,” she writes. “In other words, these companies will be exporting the Big Ag system to developing nations in the name of ‘feeding the world,’ but the only thing they’ll really be feeding is their profits.” International impacts For the developing countries involved, the pitch for food security might sound good now. But the United States doesn’t have a great track record when it comes to international interventions on behalf of corporate interests. In Colombia, for instance, local activists are pushing back against a new Canadian goal mining project in part because their communities have already experienced environmental destruction at the hands of U.S.-based mining interests, Inter Press Service’s Helda Martinez reports . While GreyStar, the Canadian company pushing the project, has promised it will not harm the environment, leaders like former environment minister Manuel Rodríguez are pointing to similar claims made by U.S. coal companies in the past. “The U.S. firm ‘Drummond told me the same thing 20 years ago,’ Rodríguez said,” according to Martinez. “The former minister was referring to the proven environmental damages caused in the northern province of Cesar by Drummond’s coal mining — a disaster compounded by serious allegations of violations of the human rights of local residents and mineworkers,” she writes. Unwelcome visitors As Eartha Jane Melzer reports for The Michigan Messenger , here in the United States, some lawmakers are pushing back against Canadian interests, as well. Bruce Power, a Canadian nuclear energy company, wants to to ship “16-school bus sized steam generators from the Bruce Nuclear Station on Lake Huron to Sweden for reprocessing and reintroduction to the commercial metals market,” Melzer writes. The generators would pass through U.S.-controlled portions of the Great Lakes. A cadre of senators from states touching the Great Lakes (Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, and New York) have asked the agency responsible for approving the trip, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, to take a close look at Bruce Power’s application. Pest control Here’s a different strategy for dealing with unwelcome visitors: Kiera Butler is chronicling her encounters with invasive species at Mother Jones. When the problem is feral pigs, however, the strategy is not diplomacy: it’s hunting them. As Butler explains, Jackson Landers , a.k.a the Locavore Hunter, aims to whet American appetites for invasive species like lionfish, geese, deer, boar, and even spiny iguanas by working with wholesalers, chefs, and restaurateurs to promote these aliens as menu items. As Landers recently told the New York Times ‘ James Gorman, “When human beings decide that something tastes good, we can take them down pretty quickly.” Check out Butler’s account of her hunt in Georgia. She also learns that the attitude towards the pigs–and invasive species in general–goes beyond a desire to simply be rid of them. “In Florida, the spiny iguanas are pests, but they’re also kind of pretty, so some people kind of like having a few of them around and object when people try to get rid of them,” she writes. Home turf Of course, not all negative environmental impacts happen abroad, or on account of invaders. Henry Taksier has a sad piece in Campus Progress showing the long-term problems that a wood-treatment factory has created in Gainesville, Florida: For 93 years, Koppers, Inc. operated a wood-treatment facility at 200 NW 23rd Ave, releasing industrial toxins–including arsenic, hexavalent chromium, creosote, and dioxins–into Gainesville’s air, water, and soil. The area is now ranked as one of the nation’s top-100 polluted sites. It has been designated a Superfund site–a place so heavily polluted with toxic waste that it poses a threat to human health and the environment–for 27 years. Even so, the area has yet to be fully cleaned up, and families live in close proximity to the site, worrying about their health and warning kids to stay away from the area. This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about the environment by members of The Media Consortium . It is free to reprint. Visit the Mulch for a complete list of articles on environmental issues, or follow us on Twitter . And for the best progressive reporting on critical economy, health care and immigration issues, check out The Audit , The Pulse , and The Diaspora . This is a project of The Media Consortium, a network of leading independent media outlets. Read More… More on Colombia

Go here to see the original: 
The Media Consortium: Weekly Mulch: Monsanto’s Mutant Alfalfa and the Feral Pig Invasion

“As one door closes, another one opens.” Canadian songstress Sarah McLachlan invoked that old homily while discussing changes in the music business, but it could just as easily describe her recent experiences with divorce and trying to revive her groundbreaking Lilith Fair tour. Read More…

Read the original:
Sarah McLachlan Divorce: Revival After Split

So a week after our inaugural 2012 cattle call , the first real-life Republican cattle call starts today, at the three-day CPAC shindig in DC. Most of the contenders (and not a few of the pretenders) for the nomination will speak at some point over the next couple days, and then a straw poll will reveal that Ron Paul is the frontrunner to win the nomination, or something. (Fun fact: the CPAC straw poll is about as accurate in predicting the Republican nominee as a close inspection of the entrails of a goat sacrificed to honor Ronald Reagan’s birthday. In ‘07, Mitt Romney won, and we all remember his valiant campaign against Obama in the general. In ‘99, Gary Bauer came out of nowhere to seize the hearts and minds of CPAC attendees, catapulting him into 8 years in the White House. And in ‘95, Phil Gramm triumphed over Bob Dole, and wasn’t at all the first candidate to drop out of the ‘96 race.) And with all this hot and exciting talent on the agenda — Herman Cain! Donald Trump! (please run, Donald, please) — who’s everyone talking about? Sarah Palin, of course. Who won’t even be at CPAC, for “reasons” that she “explained” with an inimitable word salad last week: Well, I’ve never attended a CPAC conference ever so I was a little taken aback this go around when I couldn’t make it to this one either and then there was a speculation well I either agree or disagree with some of the groups or issues that CPAC is discussing. It really is a matter of time for me. But when it comes to, and David, perhaps what it is that you’re suggesting in the question, is should the GOP, should conservatives not reach out to others, not participate in events or forums that perhaps arising within those forums are issues that maybe we don’t personally agree with? And I say no. It’s like you being on a panel shoot, with a bunch of the liberal folks whom you have been on and you provide good information and balance, and you allow for healthy debate, which is needed in order for people to gather information and make up their own minds about issues. I look at participation in an event like CPAC or any other event along kind of in that same vein as the more information that people have the better. Clear as day. Well, what did Grizzly Mama do to distract the attention of the CPACkers and the assembled media? She gave an interview to Sean Hannity, which is something that seems like it happens once a week. And in that interview, she inexplicably raised the profile of Rick Santorum, who had called her out for skipping CPAC by implying that she had to stay home with her kids: “I will not call him a knuckle-dragging Neanderthal that perhaps others would want to call him. I’ll let his wife call him that, instead. I think that, maybe, he is uninformed as to why it is that I can’t make it to another political speech in a couple of weeks. As I’ve explained, February is our busiest winter month, and just because I am a mom, that does not mean that I didn’t want to be there. It’s a basic rule of politics that you don’t give oxygen to rivals with a far lower profile. By allowing herself to be goaded into a public spat with Santorum, Palin is violating that rule, and providing Little Ricky with a spotlight he couldn’t dream of grabbing without her help. (And does it really hurt Santorum with the CPAC crowd to call him a Neanderthal?) As Palin said later in her Hannity interview, “hearing that, another part of me goes, ‘And the beat goes on’.” So enjoy CPAC, and let’s all hope that Donald Trump is a hit.

More:
CPAC kicks off GOP primary season, but no-show Palin still dominates

Snort : Bristol Palin has plans to follow in her mother’s political footsteps. The daughter of former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin says she would “probably” run for office one day, “but that would be further down the road.” “If I saw something that needed to be changed, then I would step up to the plate and do something about it,” she told E! News’ Guiliana Rancic in an interview airing Thursday night. Ah yes. If no one else is willing to stand up and be the voice for all of the underrepresented not-really-abstinent, born-again virgin reality TV stars cashing in on getting knocked up, Bristol might “step up to the plate.” Like mother , like daughter, eh? Or whether there’s nobody willing to do it, to make the tough choices and not care what the critics are going to say about you, just going forward according to what I believe the priorities should be. If there’s nobody else to do it, then of course I would believe that we should do this. I guess the self-delusion that the country desperately needs the voices of the fame-seeking, barely educated, self-serving, dumb-as-dirt ditzes from Alaska runs in the Palin family. Of course, Bristol, if you’re really thinking about getting into politics, remembering to vote might be a good start. After all, voters don’t take kindly to political candidates who can’t be bothered to participate in the electoral process until their name’s on the ballot. Just ask failed gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman .

The rest is here:
Candidate Bristol Palin?

Enjoy! (h/t Balloon Juice )

Originally posted here: 
The media boycott of Sarah Palin

US Weekly’s website published a story (link since deleted) about Sarah Palin Wednesday that turned out to be a complete hoax. The celebrity magazine posted a story claiming that Palin had slammed Christina Aguilera for her national anthem flub during Sunday’s Super Bowl. The outlet attributed quotes to a Palin appearance on Sean Hannity’s radio show. The only problem? They were completely made up. The quotes came from a parody site called SuperTuesdayNews , GossipCop points out . Read More… More on Sarah Palin

Read more here:
Us Weekly Falls For Fake Sarah Palin-Christina Aguilera Story

Opinion Research Corporation for CNN. 1/21-23. Republican primary voters. MoE 4.5% Although CNN’s numbers are a bit stale — they just released them today but the survey was completed on January 23 — they do give us a some trendlines to observe as the GOP primary field begins to take shape. As you can see, the field continues to be dominated by the big three potential candidates — Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, and Mitt Romney. Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul comprise the second tier in polling and everybody else trails far behind in the third tier. Of the top three candidates, only Romney has made it absolutely clear he’s running, but he’s fallen behind both Huckabee and Palin despite having been atop the field one year ago. Given that neither of his rivals have made a decision about running, Romney can’t be thrilled with those numbers. Aside from the big three dominating the field and Romney’s slow slide, Newt Gingrich is the other big name who may seriously think he’s got a shot at the nomination (sorry Ron Paul folks, but he ain’t running to win if he runs at all). Gingrich had himself a little boomlet last year, but interest in his candidacy seems to have waned. That leaves us with a bunched up bottom tier out of which nobody has yet emerged and probably won’t until the Huckabee and Palin situations are resolved, particularly the latter. All we can do is guess at this point, but the more I think about, the more I think Jake was onto something in his inaugural GOP 2012 Cattle Call “she’s got to run to feed the beast.” Unless Rupert offers her $20 million to stay out, it sure does make sense for to get in the race. Here’s to hoping!

Here is the original post: 
CNN: Huckabee tops GOP 2012 field, Romney slips behind Palin

Sarah Palin, providing a glimpse of her foreign policy expertise, firmly takes the side of Glenn Beck in the Beck vs. Kristol tussle: Mubarak, he’s gone, one way or the other. He is not going to be the leader of Egypt. That’s a given. So now the information needs to be gathered and understood as to who it will be that fills now the void in the government. Is it going to be the Muslim Brotherhood? We should not stand for that, or with that or by that. Any radical Islamists, no that is not who we should be supporting and standing by. So we need to find out who was behind all of the turmoil and the revolt and the protests so that good decisions can be made in terms of who we will stand by and support. For those who are completely confused by this gobbledygook, what Palin is saying is that if the Muslim Brotherhood or Communists become a part of a transition government in Egypt, she would not stand for that if she were president. Why does she suspect such an outcome in Egypt? Beck said he was sure that the uprising “is being orchestrated by the Marxist Communists and the Muslim Brotherhood,” something which O’Reilly seemed skeptical about. Beck also said that, if the Egyptian government fell, it could lead to a caliphate across the Islamic world. When you’re getting your foreign policy advice from Glenn Beck, you’re probably crazy the leader of the Republican base. And with Egypt and Israel sharing a border, you can bet your bottom dollar that there will be a whole lot of saber-rattling and fear-mongering in the Republican Party during the 2012 primaries if things don’t play out to their liking. It will be interesting watching them out-hardline each other on Egypt.

See the original post here:
Palin aligns herself with Beck on Egypt

Christian Broadcast Network’s David Brody interviews noted foreign policy analyst Sarah Palin on President Obama’s handling of the Egypt uprising: It’s a difficult situation. This is that 3am White House phone call and it seems for many of us trying to get that information from our leader in the White House, it, it seems that that call went right to, um, the answering machine. And, uh, nobody yet has, uh, explained to the American public what they know, and surely they know more than the rest of us know, who it is who will be taking the place of Mubarak. And, um, no, not not real enthused about what it is that is being done on a national level from DC in regards to understanding all the situation there in Egypt and, um, in, in these areas that are so volatile right now, because obviously it’s not just Egypt but the other countries too where we are seeing uprisings. Uh, we know that now more than ever, we need strength and sound mind there in the White House.  We need to know what it is that America stands for, so we know who it is that America will stand with.  And, um, we do not have all that information yet. Luckily for her, the question she was asked wasn’t that tough, otherwise we’d really have seen her deer in headlights look from the 2008 campaign. Still, she obviously has no fucking idea what the hell she’s talking about and she’s got all the political sense of gnat. I mean, is Sarah Palin really the person who wants to bring up 3am phone calls? The former half-term Governor of Alaska really wants to go there against the sitting President of the United States? And her rambling about “understanding all the situation there” in Egypt and throughout the region sure sounds like somebody who studied her Egyptology last week on Glenn Beck. She’s probably worried we’re going to see the emergence of a caliphate run by Frances Fox Piven with Bill Ayers as her right-hand man. If only Palin could just see it all from her porch. Then maybe she could give an intelligent answer.

More:
Palin on Egypt uprising: "Um…uh…uh..um…um"

JUNEAU, Alaska — Alaska lawmakers introduced legislation Friday to abandon a centerpiece of former Gov. Sarah Palin’s administration: a state-sanctioned effort to advance a major natural gas pipeline. The measure sponsored by at least five Republican representatives underscored the impatience and skepticism that many lawmakers have expressed about the current process and a belief the state is no closer than it was several years ago to realizing the long-hoped-for line. Read More… More on Energy

Read more: 
Alaska Lawmakers Propose Ditching Gas Pipeline Plan, Centerpiece Of Palin’s Administration

JUNEAU, Alaska — Alaska lawmakers introduced legislation Friday to abandon a centerpiece of former Gov. Sarah Palin’s administration: a state-sanctioned effort to advance a major natural gas pipeline. The measure sponsored by at least five Republican representatives underscored the impatience and skepticism that many lawmakers have expressed about the current process and a belief the state is no closer than it was several years ago to realizing the long-hoped-for line. Read More… More on Energy

See more here: 
Alaska Lawmakers Propose Ditching Gas Pipeline Plan, Centerpiece Of Palin’s Administration

Oh my : Former Alaska governor and Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin was scheduled to speak at an event for a Colorado nonprofit group May 2, but the event was canceled the day after it was announced due to “an onslaught of personal attacks” against Palin. Palin was to speak at the Patriots & Warriors Gala at the Infinity Park Event Center in Glendale, Colo., which was billed as an awards banquet and fundraiser for military families in need and for a grief camp for children who had lost loved ones in combat. So Sarah’s bailing on a fundraiser for military families — and their grieving children! — because people have said mean things about her? Hmmm. Wonder what she’d say if President Obama did that. Probably something about hating the troops and disrespecting their families? Families like Sarah Palin’s? Just a guess. For Sarah Palin ® , however, it is a matter of safety: A press release posted on the sponsoring organization’s Facebook page reads, “Due to an onslaught of personal attacks against Gov. Palin and others associated with her appearance, it is with deep sadness and disappointment that, in the best interest of all, we cancel the event for safety concerns.” The press release goes on to say that no direct threats were made against Palin, nor were any made against members of the organization’s staff, but in light of the shooting rampage in Arizona last month, the negative rhetoric “raises concern for her safety and the safety of others despite the call for civility in America .” That’s right. Yet again , the attempted assassination of Rep. Gabby Giffords is really about Sarah Palin. Again . Because her vitriolic criticism of others is just an expression of free speech, but when others criticize her , well, then, that poses a threat to her safety. Even if no one is threatening her. But here’s the best part: The cancellation of the speaking engagement frees Palin to attend the NBC/Politico Republican presidential primary debate at the Reagan Presidential Library in California, also scheduled for May 2. Hope to see you there, Sarah.

View original here: 
Palin bails on military families fundraiser because of "personal attacks"

WASHINGTON — A poll released Monday provides more evidence that Republicans would hamper their chances in the 2012 presidential election were they to choose Sarah Palin as their nominee. The survey, conducted by Vanderbilt University’s Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions, concluded that President Barack Obama would beat Palin in Tennessee in a hypothetical campaign matchup, despite the president’s approval rating of just 44 percent in the state. Forty-two percent of respondents said they’d vote for Obama, while 37 percent said they’d pick the former Alaska governor, the Tennessean reported on Monday. This, in a state that hasn’t gone for a Democratic presidential candidate since Bill Clinton in 1996 — even though the party’s nominee in 2000, former Vice President Al Gore, called Tennessee his home. Read More… More on Barack Obama

See the original post:
Obama Besting Palin In Deeply Republican Tennessee: Poll

Sarah Palin criticized President Barack Obama on the issue of transparency and sounded off on the state of the media in an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network over the weekend. Speaking to CBN’s David Brody, Palin alluded to a campaign ad released by then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton during her 2008 run against Obama for the Democratic nomination. “This is that 3 a.m. White House phone call and it seems for many of us trying to get that information from our leader in the White House,” said Palin in the one-on-one. “It seems that call went right to the answering machine. And nobody has explained to the American public what they know.” Read More… More on Sarah Palin

Read more here: 
Sarah Palin Criticizes White House, Says She Wants To ‘Help’ The Media (VIDEO)

Our polling partners at PPP have been absolutely tireless in their efforts since the confetti was swept up from the 2010 Midterms. They have polled well over a dozen states, and just this past week, they headed west to the biggest prize in the electoral college: California. The survey offered few surprises, of course, as PPP has found that Barack Obama leads the first-tier GOP challengers by margins ranging from 15-31 points. More notable than the trial heat numbers is the absolutely abysmal numbers for the Republican frontrunners in the Golden State: What allows Obama to hold his large leads is the incredible unpopularity of the Republican candidate field. None of the candidates can top a 32% favorability there- that’s Mitt Romney who is, relatively speaking, the ‘most popular’ of the Republican candidates. 46% of voters have an unfavorable opinion of him. After that it’s Mike Huckabee at a 29/47 spread, Newt Gingrich at 25/55, and Sarah Palin at 28% rating her favorably and a whooping 67% saying they have a negative opinion of her. In “defense” of the GOP quartet currently getting boat-raced by a Democratic President, it has been years, even decades, since the GOP was a force in California. That said, it is hard to imagine the party in more dire straits than they find themselves in right now in the Golden State. As bad as the GOP of recent vintage has been in California, 2010 might have actually allowed the party to plummet to new depths. Consider that the party’s two standard-bearers in California last year (Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina) are both trailing in a trial heat with Democratic incumbent Dianne Feinstein by a whopping 20 points (55-35). What’s more, their favorability numbers with the California electorate are painfully underwater, with Fiorina (29/48) only marginally less reviled than Whitman (28/50). With the much ballyhooed exceptions of Christine O’Donnell and Sharron Angle, it is difficult to conceive of two major party nominees who weathered their election worse than the California gazillionaires. After spending gobs of cash, they wound up being pretty universally disliked, and both lost by double digits to candidates who were considered extraordinarily vulnerable at the start of the cycle. And they did so in a disastrous Democratic year. Given how the GOP lost every contested race for the House, every single statewide constitutional office, and actually LOST seats in the state legislature, it is pretty clear that the Whitman/Fiorina pairing at the top of the ticket was quite the impressive albatross for the Republican Party downballot. Ironically, the not-so-dynamic duo that led the ballot for the GOP in 2010 is actually MORE popular than the only statewide Republican officer in recent years. Former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, according to PPP, sits at a truly awful spread (25/65), and trails Feinstein by thirty-four points (59-25). What’s more, as is the case across America , demographic trends seem to be working against the GOP in California, as well. Absent some kind of national realignment, it is hard to fashion a path to relevance for the GOP in California for the next several campaign cycles.

The rest is here:
PPP Golden State poll underscores GOP dilemma in California

To take a page from Senator Harry Reid’s book: if you’re a woman anywhere to the left of Fred Phelps, I don’t understand how you can in good conscience vote for the Republican Party. Once elected by voters allegedly disaffected by the Democrats’ record on job creation and pulling our country out of its prolonged economic slump (a slump engendered by disastrous GOP-enabled tax policies and financial deregulation, for those keeping score at home), it didn’t take long for the new Republican majority to show its true colors. First came the pointless H.R.2, a purely political gesture of a bill to repeal the recently enacted Affordable Care Act. Designed only to fulfill a campaign promise, this bill had absolutely no prospect of success–and would, in fact, have expanded our country’s deficit over time. At that point, with the signature issue of repeal out of the way, rejected by the Democratic Senate, and off the table, one would have expected the Tea Partiers in Congress to introduce something sweeping that would fulfill their other signature issue: reducing spending. Didn’t happen. Instead, the 112th Congress’ second offering, H.R.3 (the numbering being off by one because the Congress has reserved H.R.1 for the Speaker) reflected the worst of what we’ve come to expect from the Republican Party–except this time, with the zealotry of a desperate blackjack player getting ready to double down and hit on fifteen. Despite losing a number of Senate seats they ought to have won–Colorado, Nevada and Delaware come to mind–by nominating candidates far outside the mainstream on social issues and thus allowing Democrats to maintain control of the Senate, the Republicans in the House unveiled legislation that was ostensibly designed to restrict “taxpayer funding of abortion”–but went so much further than that. The much-discussed and annually renewed Hyde Amendment, whose purpose is precisely to limit federal subsidies of abortion procedures, has been an unfortunate but well-established detente between pro-life social conservatives and their counterparts who actually support a woman’s right to self-determination. But the odious H.R.3 is so much more. The Hyde Amendment has always specifically exempted victims of rape from the federal funding ban, even though the hypothetical child resulting from a rape is no less innocent than one resulting from consensual procreative activities–which clearly goes to show that the funding ban clearly has much more to do with punishing women for daring to have sex than it does with “protecting innocent life.” As originally written, however–before a gigantic outcry from across the nation forced a reconsideration of this idea–H.R.3 would have narrowed exempted rapes to those considered “forcible.”  Date-raped young teenager? Out of luck. Plied with alcohol or drugs? Too bad for you. Physical or mental disability? Oh well. Victim of incest? Grin and bear it–literally. But someone is going to have to determine whether a rape is “forcible” enough to qualify for taxpayer funding, right? So how is the GOP proposing this happen? Maybe each rape victim should be led through a miniature version of a CSI episode to investigate her cuts, bruises and defensive wounds to figure out if she put up enough of a fight–because if she didn’t die fighting, she really wanted it, right? Or maybe the GOP Congress can empower a Congressional Rape Panel modeled after the “death panels” that exist in Sarah Palin’s alternate reality, and this panel of wealthy older white men can evaluate on a case-by-case basis whether a rape is bad enough to merit consideration for an abortion. And lest you think I’m joking, some people actually think it’s a good idea. Remember this gem from South Dakota State Senator Bill Napoli some years ago? BILL NAPOLI: A real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life. Bill Napoli and those like him have clearly spent a lot of time thinking about issues exactly like this, so they seem like prime applicants for the GOP’s newly empowered rape severity panels. What say you? Even outside of its redefinition of rape, however, H.R.3 will have a chilling effect on health insurance plans that provide abortion services–but more on the hypocrisy of that in a minute. One would think that after seeking to redefine rape, that these appropriately embarrassed misogynist barnstormers would give it a break for a while. But no. At least one Congressional Republican has made a modification to another abortion-related bill, H.R.358. And this modification is simple: it would allow hospitals to make a “decision of conscience” to let women die . Even as they attempted to modify this rape-related provision found in two pieces of legislation, H.R. 3 and H.R. 358, these lawmakers inserted a new provision on page six of H.R.358, sponsored by Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Pa.), that would allow hospitals to refuse to provide abortion care when necessary to save a woman’s life. Once you’re done redefining rape to imply that if you didn’t escape or die trying, you deserved it; or writing a bill that would allow a “hospital of conscience” to exercise that conscience by letting you die–it’s hard to imagine where the Republican Party might go from here. Or maybe there is nowhere else to go, and the real intention is to produce proposals so extreme that that the horror created by the rest of H.R.3 goes unnoticed by comparison. The objective of H.R.3 is not to prevent taxpayer funding of abortion. As mentioned, the Hyde Amendment already does that. Rather, the objective is to influence private insurers to stop spending their private dollars paying for abortion services by preventing individuals and businesses who pay for those insurance plans from taking the tax credits that they would normally receive from doing so. The fact that Republicans and conservatives would call tax credits resulting from purchasing private insurance plans “taxpayer funding” is, of course, hypocritical: fiscal conservatives love to claim that tax cuts and credits result in the government taking less of your money–unless it’s this type of tax credit, in which case the money all of a sudden becomes the government’s money that it is then giving back to you. But regardless of this ideological inconsistency, this “moderate” version of H.R.3, should it be enacted into law, would likely result in the dropping of abortion coverage by major private insurers, leading to a massive decrease in availability for lower-income women. This, of course, is the entire point. John Boehner’s female relatives will always have access to abortion services, either at home or abroad, because they have the money, resources and connections to access a provider and pay for the service. But this high-priority legislation will essentially insure that millions of other women don’t have the same opportunity. The voters in this country should take a good, long, hard look at what the Republican Congress has introduced and promoted in its first weeks in office. A Congress and a party that was elected in a desperate quest for more jobs has shown itself once again to a subsidiary of the fundamentalist elements of its base. As it is, the voters should determine if this is actually the Congress they want in 2012; but women especially should reconsider any inclination they might have otherwise had to vote for a party that seeks to redefine rape to include physical violence, and then allow hospitals to let them die as opposed to terminating the pregnancy. If you vote GOP…you’re asking for it.

Read the original here: 
The Rapeublican Party

As one should expect, there is still a relative trickle of polling data for the 2012 cycle. Given that the elections are still 21 months away, that makes sense. That said, we are starting to get a general sense of where the electorate is, based on the smattering of polls that have been released thus far. And while one pollster has dominated the zone this year (and amazingly, it isn’t the House of Rasmussen), their results have been more or less buttressed by other pollsters. Here are some early conclusions, some of which will be explored in more depth as we get into the numbers: President Obama’s job approval and favorability numbers, while they have come off of the mat, are still relatively mediocre. His re-election prospects, however, remain strong because his likely GOP challengers have approval/fav numbers that are even worse. There is still some voter dissatisfaction, and it appears (on the Senate level) to be creating fewer “safe seats”. Overall, it seems clear the picture emerging of the 2012 electorate is one that, while perhaps not as amenable to Democrats as the 2008 electorate, is not even close to the lopsided 2010 electorate. With those general themes in hand, let’s hit the specific data: THE RACE FOR THE WHITE HOUSE Arizona (PPP): President Obama’s nine-point defeat here in 2008 left little clue to the true state of Arizona politics, given that GOP rival John McCain hailed from the state. PPP is the first to take the temperature of the Grand Canyon State in a neutral environment. On balance, they find numbers that are only marginally better for the Democrats, suggesting that Arizona could be a tough get for the Democrats. Unless, of course, the GOP nominee is a certain former half-term Governor from Alaska. As PPP (and others) have routinely found in their surveys, Sarah Palin could put the President over 400 electoral votes, potentially, given her massive unpopularity. She trails Obama in Arizona by eight points. Meanwhile, Huckabee and Romney keep Arizona in the red column, albeit by slightly narrower margins than McCain (4-6 points). The voters of Arizona are deadlocked as to whether they prefer Obama or former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. California (PPP): Indeed, as the first two entries would attest, our polling partners at PPP have opened the 2012 cycle with a bang, already hitting most of the competitive states in the Union just three months into the cycle. As a result, they are starting to hit some states where polling confirms that the status quo is intact, if nothing else. The Golden State is one such example. A rare oasis for the Democrats on Election Day 2010, the state’s 55 electoral votes seem comfortably in the President’s column, according to this week’s data. If there is any surprise here, it is that Southern evangelical Mike Huckabee (54-39) actually does better than former “moderate” Mitt Romney (56-36). Notably, while both are down markedly, they both do considerably better than John McCain’s twenty-four point margin of defeat in 2008. Florida (Quinnipiac): One of the Q poll’s first forays into the cycle lands them in the Sunshine State, where they find that President Obama cannot necessarily count on the state’s steadily increasing electoral vote tally. Doing things a bit differently, the Q poll measures the President against a “generic Republican”. While some decry this measurement (saying that it allows voters to compare their president to the ideal Republican in their own minds, rather than the actual potential nominees), I see no problem with using it this early in the game. By that metric, President Obama trails the GOP’s phantom standard-bearer by two points (42-40). This tracks the President’s approval and generic re-elect numbers, which are barely underwater. One could, I suppose, classify this as good news for the President. Given how big a disaster the state of Florida was for Democrats in the 2010 cycle, being down two (especially paired against a generic foe) isn’t all that bad. Georgia (20/20 Insight): Let’s open the examination of this poll with a quick caveat–I am not familiar with this pollster, and I have nothing in my database suggesting that they released data in 2006 and 2008. Might be a new outfit, or I suppose it could be an established outfit that was renamed. That said, the numbers here are pretty interesting. First, on the GOP primary, we see a true logjam, with (count ‘em!) five Republican contenders within eight points of one another. Joining the traditional four (Huckabee, Romney, Gingrich, Palin) are pizza magnate Herman Cain, who if memory serves hails from the state of Georgia, which might explain his presence in the mix. In the general election trial heats, meanwhile, this poll echoes recent polling. Particularly on this point: if Sarah Palin can wrest away the GOP nomination, she will offer President Obama the first true landslide Presidential election in a generation. She is the only GOP competitor to trail Obama in the right-leaning Peach State, although Obama remains marginally competitive with the other three Republicans tested. He leads Palin by four (47-43), and trails the balance of the field by margins of 2-6 points. Nebraska (PPP): While new polling out of the Cornhusker State makes clear that Barack Obama is incredibly unlikely to carry the state (heck, even Palin beats him there), he looks poised to repeat his effort from 2008, where he wrested away one of the state’s electoral votes by claiming the Omaha-based 2nd district. While Obama trails the GOP field by margins ranging from 1 (Palin) to 13 (Huckabee), he leads all comers in the 2nd district by healthy margins. At present, Romney comes closest to the President in the region, and even he trails Obama by nine. Of course, there is a caveat there, which is taking 1/3rd of a statewide sample means that the margins of error for the CD-by-CD numbers in Nebraska are bound to be considerably higher. South Carolina (PPP): The Palmetto State was a single-digit GOP win in 2008, and this PPP poll suggests that the same scenario is in place for 2012. The two presumptive GOP frontrunners (Huckabee and Romney) lead by 6-7 points over President Obama, while Obama actually leads the others in the front pack (Gingrich and Palin). That Obama leads Gingrich, a Georgia native, in neighboring South Carolina is nothing short of stunning. Perhaps surprisingly, PPP finds little appetite for a Jim DeMint candidacy in his home state. He only leads Obama by a handful of points (47-45), although he would have an edge in the state’s important early primary. If DeMint stays on the sidelines, Mike Huckabee is the leader among state Republicans. South Dakota (PPP): Not surprisingly, if there is anywhere in America where the electorate is ready for a John Thune revolution, it is in his home state of South Dakota. Relegated deep into the second tier elsewhere, the young Senator has a solid following back home, and is the only Republican with a double-digit edge over President Obama according to PPP’s latest numbers there. Perhaps most interesting is the fact that two other names in the first-tier (Gingrich and Palin) actually trail the President in this state, which has gone reliably Republican since the LBJ landslide in 1964. Romney and Huckabee do better, but they are far from dominant, scoring six-point leads over the President. IN OTHER NEWS… This week’s most eye-popping hedge on presidential ambitions? It’s gotta be the fact that rookie Senator Rand Paul is refusing to rule it out. But, here’s the question: if his dad runs (and keeps his streak alive), could we really get father vs. son?! While the point is undoubtedly a valid one, doesn’t this tweet from a GOP pollster sound an awful lot like a guy rooting for people to be out of work in America? The National Journal posts an intriguing piece about the inside players in New Hampshire and Iowa that Republican contenders and pretenders would do well to harness. THE RACE FOR THE SENATE Arizona (PPP): Class of 1994 incumbent Jon Kyl looks like he is a reasonably safe bet to win a fourth term, if he wants it. PPP polls the state and finds only former state Attorney General Terry Goddard lurking close to Kyl (trailing the incumbent by a 50-40 margin). Other potential Democratic challengers fall behind by 12-21 point margins. The big story out of Arizona this week, however, is increasing speculation that Kyl may retire at the end of this term. Should that happen, expect quirky libertarian Congressman Jeff Flake to jump in, possibly joined by former colleague John Shadegg. California (PPP): Given that Senator Barbara Boxer just notched a double-digit win in an awful Democratic year nationally, it seems logical that her Senate mate, Dianne Feinstein, appears safe for 2012. A new PPP poll shows that only former Congressman Tom Campbell (who has always been viewed as the “moderate alternative” in any race he has run statewide) prevents a blowout, and even he trails by fourteen points (51-37). In a sign of how ultimately unelectable the twin millionaire nominees from 2010 have become, both Carly Fiorina and Meg Whitman would trail Feinstein by 20 points (55-35) if the election were held today. Florida (Quinnipiac): This race is the clearest sign that the target list might be wider than normal in 2012. On paper, Nelson does not seem incredibly endangered. His approval ratings are historically decent (an approval spread usually in the +10 to +20 range), for example. Yet, when paired with a “Generic Republican” challenger, Nelson finds himself staked to an early lead of only five points (41-36). His re-elect numbers are a bit better (43-33), suggesting that Nelson would still remain the betting favorite for November. Nebraska (PPP): PPP confirms something that has long been suspected–even repeated acts of fealty to the right-wing are no longer enough to save Ben Nelson’s seat in the United States Senate. He trails either of the two Republican frontrunners battling to replace him in the Senate. When paired with state Attorney General Jon Bruning, Nelson is down eleven (50-39). Nelson does slightly better against 2000 opponent (and current state treasurer) Don Stenberg. Still, however, Nelson trails the Republican by four points (45-41). IN OTHER NEWS… Let the (potential) teabagging begin! Republican state Treasurer Richard Mourdock appears poised to offer a primary challenge to longtime Indiana Senator Richard Lugar. The most interesting game of “He’s out! No…wait…” might have come from Michigan this week. When former Congressman Peter Hoekstra took a DC advising gig, that immediately led the DC press to conclude that he would not be contemplating a Senate bid against second-term Democrat Debbie Stabenow. Hoekstra immediately let it be known that his decision to hook with with this firm was not an impediment to a Senate bid, which he was still refusing to rule out. So there. With well-liked Congressman Chris Murphy and Sec. of State Susan Bysiewicz already in the mix, it looks like we will know by month’s end about a third Democrat sniffing out that open-seat race in Connecticut: Congressman Joe Courtney. Meanwhile, another potential candidate has set a timetable, as Republican Rob Simmons says he will make his own decision on the race by next month. Not a huge surprise, but one Senate prospect took himself out of the running this week: Minnesota’s Norm Coleman . Coleman was considered a longshot to face Democrat Amy Klobuchar, whose polling has been awesome. In fact, Klobuchar’s numbers have been so impressive in her first term that is becoming increasingly likely that she will avoid a serious challenge in 2012. THE RACE FOR THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPS SD-AL (PPP): Given that redistricting is likely to play Hell with district demographics, don’t expect a lot of House polling for the next several months. That said, we actually do get a poll this week, and out of a district that is certain not to change in 2012: the sole at-large district in South Dakota. The headline here: Democrat Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin would be at least an even-money bet against the Republican that tossed her from office in November. Newly minted GOP Rep. Kristi Noem actually trails Herseth-Sandlin in the PPP poll, albeit by a single point (46-45). Noem defeated the Democrat by just over two points in November, meaning that the result of the poll do not fall terribly far from November’s results. It is still unclear, however, that the former three-term Democratic Congresswoman is interested in a rematch. IN OTHER NEWS… Politico engages in a biennial parlor game of looking at the Q4 fundraising reports and looking at potential retirees based on meager hauls. Among the names on the list: Republicans Jerry Lewis and Roscoe Bartlett, and Democrats Dale Kildee and Leonard Boswell. It also points out the impact of redistricting, pointing out that contracting districts might be squeezing out folks like Louisiana’s Jeff Landry and Michigan’s Gary Peters. Cillizza’s “The Fix” points out a silver lining to the decision by Republican Denny Rehberg to go after freshman Democratic Senator Jon Tester: the real possibility that the Democrats could steal a House seat in nominally red (or at least purplish-red) territory. Here is a head-scratcher: You come within a handful of points of knocking off a popular Democratic Congressman. Said Congressman decides to run for the Senate. What do you do? Well, if you are Connecticut Republican Sam Caligiuri, you decide to remain on the sidelines . Caligiuri announced this week that he would not run for the House in 2012.

More here: 
Polling and Political Wrap, 2/6/11

Even some of Sarah Palin’s supporters might concede she is a polarizing figure. But she gets some stiff competition on that score from President Obama. For a chief executive in the second year in office, he had a wider divide between how the two major political parties see him than any chief executive dating back to Dwight Eisenhower during comparable points in their terms, according to Gallup’s numbers for 2010. Read More… More on Barack Obama

Read more:
Poll Reveals Widened Partisan Divide In How Voters View Obama

It could hardly be a coincidence that in the days and weeks leading up to the Reagan centennial , pro-democracy protests have broken out around the Middle East, most notably in Egypt . Clearly , the millions of people taking to the streets are doing it for ” The Gipper “, who single-handedly invented democracy with a few simple words . That being said, it should be noted that, her humility notwithstanding, Sarah Palin ® deserves some credit . Also , too .

See the original post: 
Sunday Talk - Live and Let Die

Apparently, and perhaps soon legally, Sarah Palin and Bristol Palin will have no substitutes. Both mom and daughter have applied for trademark protection for their respective names. Read More… More on Sarah Palin

Read the original:
Jim Moret: What’s in a Name? Ask Sarah

Sarah Palin will be in Denver on May 2 to speak at the Sharon K Pacheco Foundation’s annual Patriots and Warriors Gala. The event will be held at the Park Events Center in Glendale. Tickets are already on sale . The Pacheco Foundation describes the fundraiser as “[A]n event with a two-fold purpose - first to honor service members and those who have given of themselves in service and/or sacrifice to our country… and to serve as the major fundraiser for the SKP Foundation.” Read More… More on Sarah Palin

More:
Sarah Palin To Speak At Patriots And Warriors Gala In May

It’s not exactly news that the Palin family is obsessed with promoting and cashing in on the Palin brand, but now it’s official : In the last several months, Politics Daily has learned that the Palin family lawyer, Alaska attorney Thomas Van Flein, has filed applications to the United States Patent and Trademark Office to trademark “Sarah Palin®” and “Bristol Palin®.” Apparently, it’s not uncommon for celebrities to trademark their names, which is why America’s favorite born-again virgin is seeking to protect her name so that only she can make money for “educational and entertainment services, namely, providing motivational speaking services in the field of life choices.” Mama Palin is also seeking to protect her name for entertainment purposes, but also for “information about political elections and providing a website featuring information about political issues.” In case you’re wondering whether it’s common for politicians to trademark their names — nope, it’s not: Politicians seldom trademark their name but they might do so to prevent others from using it, for example, to sell shoddy, unapproved merchandise or “official” candidate memorabilia. A search for other political figures such as President Barack Obama and potential 2012 GOP presidential candidates Mike Huckabee, Tim Pawlenty and Mitt Romney do not show any pending trademark applications. It is a rarity, say trademark attorneys, for political figures to file such forms. So anyone sitting on a great idea for Palin Pitbull Perfume or Bristol Birth Control better act fast before the only ones who can exploit the Palin name for money will be the Palins Palins®.

See more here:
Palins file applications to trademark their names

SIMI VALLEY, Calif. — Ronald Reagan’s name is enshrined on an airport, an aircraft carrier, belt buckles and highways. His likeness – with that sunny smile – appears on drink coasters, statues, talking dolls and a Rose Bowl Parade float. Conservatives make the pilgrimage to his presidential library in Simi Valley, a showcase of all things Reagan. Presidential candidates debate there, hoping to be dubbed heir to the Reagan legacy. Even President Barack Obama invokes his name. Read More… More on Sarah Palin

See the original post: 
Ronald Reagan Centennial Celebrations In Southern California

With her mantra of “build better, not bigger,” Susanka promotes quality over quantity when remodeling a home. Through transforming your living space into a more beautiful and comfortable environment, Susanka says that any home’s occupants will automatically take better care of their space in a more sustainable way. We sat down with Susanka to get the low-down on how to do more with less when revamping your space. Read More… More on Green Living

More:
Sarah Susanka’s 5 Tips To Remodel Your Home The Green Way

If we look up “self-serving” in the dictionary, this is should be the entry. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) says he isn’t sure yet if he should run for president, but he thinks Sarah Palin should. Speaking with Piers Morgan on CNN Tuesday night, Romney said Palin would bring a lot to the 2012 Republican primary. Romney, whom no one loves, needs Palin to make him look like a grown-up—and split Huckabee’s vote. He wants Sarah to run more than anyone.

Original post: 
Romney: Run, Sarah, Run

(A table set under a tree. Starched Hair and the Mad Hater throwing teacups at each other. Enter Sarah, dressed as Alice.) THE MAD HATER Read More… More on Sarah Palin

Here is the original: 
Robert Brustein: Sarah in Blunderland or the Mad Hater’s Tea Party

The choice has been made . Democrats have chosen Charlotte, North Carolina, as the host city for the 2012 Democratic National Convention, a source with knowledge of the decision told CNN. Obama scored an unlikely and unexpected victory in North Carolina in 2008, the only southern state aside from Virginia to go Blue. And it was tight! Obama 50%  2,142,651 McCain 49%  2,128,474 Now, conventional wisdom might dictate that Obama’s lower numbers these days might doom him in a Southern state he barely won two years ago. But the polling suggests otherwise. [January 25, 2011] Barack Obama’s popularity rise has come to North Carolina. For the first time since December of 2009 PPP finds more voters in the state approving than disapproving of him, at a 49/47 spread Obama’s gain in popularity has been fueled by voters in the center. A year ago his approval rating with moderates was 59%. Now it’s up to 69%. This improvement in his standing, along with the lukewarm reaction of voters in the state to the leading 2012 Republican Presidential contenders, has him in position to repeat his surprise North Carolina victory from 2008. He leads the four most likely GOP contenders at this point by margins ranging anywhere from 3 to 9 points in this month’s poll. Mitt Romney comes the closest to Obama this time, trailing 47-44. Mike Huckabee is next, with a 49-45 deficit. Newt Gingrich is down 50-44 and and Sarah Palin as usual fares the weakest of the GOP hopefuls trailing Obama by nine points at 50-41. It’s safe to say Republicans have no chance at taking back the White House next year without winning North Carolina. Obviously the election is 21 months away but the President’s resurgence here is a very bad sign for the GOP. It’s clear Obama’s team will go all-in to hold North Carolina, and holding the convention in Charlotte is a key component of that strategy. And it doesn’t hurt that Virginia — another close 2008 state that the Dems would love to hold — is just across the state line. Charlotte was competing against St. Louis, Minneapolis, and Cleveland. Ohio, of course, will be of supreme importance once again, and holding the convention in St. Louis would’ve been a boost to flagging Democratic fortunes in the Midwest (and Sen. Claire McCaskill’s reelection effort). But holding the convention in North Carolina sends a message that Obama won’t surrender hard fought territorial gains in the new South. Update : BBB got his wish : I’ll admit to being biased towards Charlotte. I remember the city fondly from the road trip days of my youth. But politically as well, Charlotte makes sense. President Obama did something no Democrat has done in one seems like ages: He won North Carolina. Strengthening his position there puts him on offense in a state he has won before and that Republicans need if they are going to get back to a more G.W. Bush-like map. On the downside, playing in Charlotte could be a waste of time considering how solidly conservative the region is and that there is no spillover effect in neighboring South Carolina and Tennessee. But Charlotte as a choice most certainly would be as bold an in-you-face move as the president has on this list. He’d be telling the GOP: I’m in the South. Feel me? Update II : Yes, I know Florida is geographically in the South, but culturally it’s something entirely different. The same is happening in Virginia (NoVa) and North Carolina (Research Triangle) — where demographics will eventually have them secede from the South. Those states are much different than the Old South, which is getting even more Republican than ever. So sure, throw Florida in the list of Southern states Obama won. But when people talk about winning the South, they ain’t talking about Florida.

Read the original:
Charlotte, NC, to host 2012 Democratic National Convention

Anybody else miss the Bush Doctrine? In which Jon Kyl makes Sarah Palin look like a Rhodes Scholar : “We might be in a better position if we had more closely followed President Bush’s prescription for support of greater democracy in all parts of the world,” Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Arizona, said as he stepped off the Senate floor Monday. So instead of going to Cairo in July 2009 to make the case for true democracy, instead of repeating that message eighteen months later as the Egyptian people rise up to reclaim control of their nation, Jon Kyl believes President Obama should be following the example of George W. Bush, telling Egyptians something like this : Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict commenced at a time of our choosing. For their own safety, all foreign nationals, including journalists and inspectors, should leave Iraq immediately. Good idea, Jon. Because as George W. Bush proved, the only way to spread democracy is through shock, awe, and the tip of the spear.

Read more here:
GOP senator: Obama should have promoted Egyptian democracy like Bush