Just Republicans Only: June 2012

Sunday, June 24, 2012

State turning blind eye to prison abuses

(PNI) Regarding the first part Sunday of The Arizona Republic's series "Death in the system":

Another article about prison abuse that makes one want to cry in shame.

While most people are indifferent to what happens in prisons because they think everybody is guilty anyway or that they deserve to be there, it is amazing that after being accused by Amnesty International of committing atrocities, the state's prison officials aren't even admitting that there's a problem.

They're just going to build more "supermax" prisons to house people in inhumane conditions.

How we can claim to be a society primarily based on Christian values and let these abuses and injustices continue? Or is it that because they are prisoners, they and their problems are ignorable?

--Michael House, Phoenix

Independents want decent choices

Regarding "Independents are just slow to choose" (Letters, Saturday):

The writer suggests that while R is for Republican, D for Democrat, I is for indecisive. I am an independent not because I am indecisive, but rather so that I have a choice to vote for either a moderate Republican or a moderate Democrat.

Since Ronald Reagan was president, the Republican Party has moved so far right it is left. Most Democrats are still further left than I like.

I want a representative, whether in the state Legislature, the U.S. House or Senate who will work for all, not just the very wealthy, who will represent all constituents and is willing to sit down and talk across the aisle and compromise. Compromise is not a dirty word.

--Patricia Abraham, Mesa

A new secondhand-smoke threat?

Regarding "Medical marijuana is a farce? Get real" (Letters, Thursday):

The criticism of drug companies is valid, but the endorsement of marijuana shows that many do not realize the danger of THC, a chemical compound of cannabis.

There are THC pills available, but they must be generic. Drug companies cannot get profits like their current products yield.

I was shocked during my course work in medicinal chemistry that THC inhibits cell division.

The thought of children or pregnant women being exposed to secondhand pot smoke is chilling.

Licenses for smoking of pot should be given only to people who have found that THC pills are ineffective.

--Donald Olander,

Ahwatukee Foothills

Attacking Bain Capital bad policy

It terrifies me to think that Bain Capital has become the centerpiece of the country's economic policy. It tells me the White House does not have a clue on how to energize an anemic economy and pull out of the sluggish recovery.

It seems like every liberal/progressive is now jumping on the Bain Capital assault bandwagon. The liberal media relish that negativity.

While Bain Capital is one of the world's leading private-investment firms, it is only a fraction of what makes the U.S economy tick.

A private-equity firm is very different from a government-led venture. It does not use taxpayers' money.

President Barack Obama has used taxpayer money to become the "social-venture capitalist" of the day. His social-venture failures -- Solyndra, Evergreen Solar, SpectraWatt and Mountain Plaza, to name a few -- suffered layoffs and plant shutdowns.

Bain Capital does not belong on the national campaign table. Take it off.

--Ray Torres, Scottsdale

Elect candidates who care for state

Regarding Laurie Roberts' column Saturday, "Fellow Arizonans, it's about time we shake the nuts from the tree" (Valley & State):

That was so very well said.

More and more often we are getting comments from out-of-state family and friends wondering what is going on in Arizona and where we find people like this to elect!

People in Arizona, we must find and elect candidates who have as their focus what is good for Arizona and not just on ways to make points with ideological zealots.

The same thing is happening nationally to a large degree, but let's not be the leader in hopeless and useless political combat.

Roberts' column is so right on. Thank you!

--C. and M.J. Howe, Chandler

There's plenty of tobacco outcry

Regarding "Follow tobacco industry's money" (Letters, Friday):

The author cites "443,000 tobacco-related deaths per year" and claims there has been "little public outcry." As a former smoker, I must ask if she is living in a cave?

Tobacco is one of the most heavily taxed "sin" items, done in the name of discouraging use. Advertising has been banned from television, restricted in print and, coming soon, actual packaging with sufferers' aliments printed on the package of cigarettes, which is unprecedented in scope.

Smoking is banned in almost every public place, including restaurants, bars and small businesses.

Lighting up is even banned outside within a certain amount of feet of the doors of buildings. Our children are taught tobacco dangers as soon as they start school.

This all sounds like plenty of public outcry.

While following the money is usually a great way to see where it is going, that has little to do with the public education about the dangers of smoking.

--Chuck Parkhurst, Phoenix

Heat, flip-flops, hiking don't mix

David Letterman has stupid animal tricks; Phoenix has stupid people tricks, like those hiking on one of our many trails in flip-flops with very little water -- and it's only 112 degrees.

--Angie Cole, Phoenix

Copyright 2012 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Wisconsin recall vote may be lift for Romney

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker provided a template for Republicans looking ahead to the presidential race with his victory in Tuesday's recall election: big money, powerful organization and enormous enthusiasm among his base. Can Mitt Romney match that in November?

Both sides will examine the results for clues as to whether Wisconsin, which hasn't voted for a Republican presidential candidate since 1984 but has been fiercely competitive in two of the last three elections, will again become a true battleground. If it does become as competitive as it was in 2000 and 2004, the electoral map will become far more challenging for President Barack Obama.

In defeating Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, Walker dealt a sizable blow to Wisconsin Democrats, progressives and the ranks of organized labor, who together threw everything they could into the effort to send the governor home before his term was half over. Whether he significantly damaged the president, who kept his distance from the contest, is less clear.

Romney was quick to seize on the results and claim broader implications. In a statement issued Tuesday by his campaign, he said, "Tonight's results will echo beyond the borders of Wisconsin. Gov. Walker has shown that citizens and taxpayers can fight back -- and prevail -- against the runaway government costs imposed by labor bosses."

Obama had no comment on the outcome.

Romney can hope to replicate Walker's model in two areas. The first is money. Walker raised more than $30million for his recall campaign, with some from large donations that exceeded the normal limits because of the laws governing recall elections. Barrett raised $4million. Romney won't raise significantly more than Obama. But the presumptive GOP nominee can count on Republican super PACs to give him an overall advantage.

Obama began the campaign more than a year ago amid assumptions that he would easily raise more than his Republican opponent. But Obama advisers worry that they will be heavily outspent by GOP super PACs. Other than the state of the economy, that potential funding disparity is the campaign's biggest concern. Money may not decide the election in the end, but Romney and the Republicans currently appear to have the edge.

Walker's victory was a party victory. The Republican Governors Association spent more than $9million on his behalf. The Republican National Committee, led by Reince Priebus, a former Wisconsin GOP chairman, and the state Republican Party combined for a total effort in mobilizing voters. All that paid dividends in defining Barrett and building an organization that proved superior to what many Democrats considered a fine get-out-the-vote operation of their own that was run by their party and the unions.

Democrats were divided over the wisdom of going ahead with the recall, although, given the determination by their rank and file in Wisconsin, there was no way to stop it from happening. Obama campaign officials worried that it would take resources and energy away from the presidential race. The Democratic National Committee drew criticism for not backing Barrett more aggressively. Had the outcome been closer, the president would have faced criticism for not campaigning on behalf of Barrett.

DNC Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida said before the election that the recall would be a "dry run" for the Democrats' ground operation for November. What Republicans showed in Wisconsin on Tuesday was their ability to run a superior voter-mobilization operation, at least in this one election. Democrats doubt they can do that elsewhere. Obama officials say they see little evidence that Romney is as well-organized as they are in the battleground states. But the Wisconsin effort gives the GOP something to build on.

Walker's victory was also very much a personal one. To Wisconsin Republicans, Walker is a hero, a rock star. Now, he may be one nationally as well. When he appeared at a GOP dinner with Romney and then-GOP candidate Rick Santorum a few days before the Wisconsin primaries in April, it was clear that he was the most popular politician in the room by far. Wisconsin Republicans may admire Romney, but the enthusiasm for him doesn't match the affection for Walker. He will need some of that Walker enthusiasm if he hopes to win the state in November.

There is one other important element to the Walker template for Republicans -- conviction. Walker took a controversial position in going after labor unions as part of his overall effort to deal with the state's fiscal deficit. In the face of a huge backlash, he stood behind what he did. He admitted he hadn't thought enough about how to sell his program and paid a price for it that won't be erased by Tuesday's victory. But he did not back away from the changes he implemented.

That makes Walker the kind of conviction politician that many Republicans want in their leaders today -- a model emulated by some of the other Republican governors around the country. It is what many Republican voters thought was missing in Romney during the primaries. Republicans in Wisconsin were willing to go to almost any lengths to keep Walker in office. It's questionable that they will do as much for Romney. His hope still rests on his ability to fuel and channel the anti-Obama anger in the Republican base as the chief motivator in November.

If the results Tuesday buoyed Republican hopes for November, the exit polls offered some counterevidence that Obama may still hold some advantages in Wisconsin as the campaign heats up. When voters who turned out Tuesday were asked how they would vote in the presidential election, Obama ran ahead of Romney, although his margin was short of the 14 points by which he won the state in 2008.

Overall, about 17 percent of Walker voters said they would support the president in the fall. Well over half were self-described independents -- disproportionately more than in the overall electorate on Tuesday -- and more than half were moderates. Overall, independents made up a larger share of the electorate Tuesday, and Walker won them, but by a somewhat smaller margin than in 2010.

A plurality of Wisconsin voters Tuesday also judged Obama superior to Romney in his ability to help the middle class. The president held a narrow advantage on who would likely be better at improving the economy. A memo from the Obama campaign's Wisconsin director that was issued overnight noted, "There hasn't been a single poll that shows Romney ahead of the president in Wisconsin."

Walker and the president actually share something in common. The governor did not back down from the most controversial elements of his platform, but he sought to avoid throwing them back in the faces of the voters. Instead, his main message was similar to what the president has been using as he campaigns around the country: We've made progress, things are a little better, don't go back to where we were before I came into office.

Tuesday's recall was described by partisans on both sides as the second-most-important U.S. election this year, just behind the presidential race. It lived up to those expectations, and Walker exceeded expectations with his victory. It was not a referendum on the president. That election is coming soon enough.

Posted

View the original article here

Saturday, June 23, 2012

Precinct races key to dekookification

Nominations are pouring in for Operation Dekookification. It seems readers see no shortage of qualified candidates in the Arizona Legislature.

One of the top nominees thus far is Sen. Judy Burges, a Sun City West Republican often on the front lines, battling national and global conspiracies. This four-term House member slid over to the Senate in January upon the departure of everybody's favorite freeway fighter, Scott Bundgaard. She has led the way in the quest for Barack Obama's birth certificate and in efforts to foil the United Nations' dastardly plot to interfere with our God-given right to pollute any darned corner of this country that we so desire.

Alas, Burges is unopposed. That's an electoral story that is repeated far too often around this state.

So, to the question. Where are the rest of the Republicans in this and many other GOP-dominated districts, the candidates less obsessed with one-world domination and more concerned with one state's well-being?

More to the point, what can people do to ensure that in 2014, the Burgeses of the state have solid competition?

Kathy Petsas would tell you that if you want to dekookify this state, it must start at ground zero of Crazytown -- 24th Street and Osborn, Republican Party headquarters, that would be, where the extremists are apparently running amok.

Petsas has been active in GOP circles for decades. Her uncle, Tom Pappas, was chairman of the Arizona Republican Party in the late 1970s and early 1980s, when legislators worked together to pass important laws that enabled this state to grow and (until recently) thrive.

"The Republican Party that my uncle was chairman of years ago, this is not that party," Petsas told me. "It has become this platform for people to discuss moral social issues and make judgments and to condemn people for differing views instead of it being about job creation, free enterprise and small business."

Petsas says the party used to recruit strong Republican candidates, raising money to help them get elected. These days, she says, party leaders -- the people elected by precinct committeemen -- are interested only in promoting ideologues over pragmatic Republicans.

The big tent, it seems, has become more like a mud hut.

"The party's been hijacked by these self-interests and social interests," she said.

So how to become once more the party of big ideas? Petsas would tell you that begins with pragmatic Republicans reclaiming the party's leadership from ideologues, which means filling those precinct committee spots.

Which must be done by Wednesday.

There are 6,383 Republican precinct committee spots in Maricopa County alone, according to Maricopa County Elections Director Karen Osborne.

These are the people who will elect new state and county leadership in January. Yet 3,467 of those slots are vacant, with no one running to fill them in the Aug. 28 election.

Put another way, of Maricopa County's 724 voting precincts, 235 have no one running to be a GOP precinct committeeman. Presumably, it's the same all over the state.

There is a chance to change that. The deadline for filing as a write-in candidate for a precinct committee spot is 5 p.m. Wednesday.

Petsas is looking for people to fill those vacant spots. If you're a Republican and you're interested in getting in on the ground floor of Operation Dekookification, here's what you need to do:

Go to the Maricopa County Recorder's Office website (recorder.maricopa.gov) and click on "elections" at the top. From the drop-down menu, choose "district locator" to find out what precinct you're in.

Then e-mail Petsas at info@reclaimRparty.org. Send her your name, address and precinct, and she will let you know if there are open spots that you could fill by becoming a write-in candidate.

If so, she'll send you the one-page application that must be filled out, notarized and returned to the Recorder's Office by 5 p.m. Wednesday. You can take it to either Recorder's Office location: 111 S. Third Ave. in Phoenix or 222 E. Javelina in Mesa.

If you're the only write-in candidate for a vacant spot, you'll be deemed elected on June 20.

It may sound like a small thing, but it's something you can do to begin the dekookification of our beloved state.

"This really effects change," Petsas said. "Responsible, pragmatic party leadership is going to evolve more pragmatic and responsible candidates. ? When it's run by mean-spirited ideologues, everyone's turned off. It doesn't help anybody. It doesn't help our state. The Republican Party needs to be working to get this state back on track."

Reach Roberts at laurie.roberts@arizonarepublic

.com or 602-444-8635.

Posted

View the original article here

Friday, June 22, 2012

Groups benefit from campaigns' focus on women's issues

Women's groups on both sides of the political spectrum are reaping the benefit of the campaign-season focus on women's issues, and say they have the opposing side to thank for the windfall.

By Jim Cole,, AP

Lilly Ledbetter, whose lawsuit led to the federal pay equity law that bears her name, speaks at a "Women for Obama" house party in Concord, N.H., on April 30.

By Jim Cole,, AP

Lilly Ledbetter, whose lawsuit led to the federal pay equity law that bears her name, speaks at a "Women for Obama" house party in Concord, N.H., on April 30.

Debates this year over contraception, federal funding for abortion services and Tuesday's Senate vote on equal pay for women have invigorated women's groups on the right and the left to try to sway the female vote.

Planned Parenthood has seen a steady increase in donations since Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation announced it would cut funding to the group for breast exams. Planned Parenthood raised $400,000 in the first 24 hours after the decision was announced. It was later reversed.

Last week, the group endorsed President Obama and launched a $1.4 million ad buy in swing states attacking Republican Mitt Romney.

Planned Parenthood Action Fund, has spent $1.6 million in independent expenditures this election cycle.

"Women's issues have not been the political football that they have during this cycle," said Dawn Laguens, Planned Parenthood's executive vice president for policy, advocacy and communications. Obama's administration "is the last line of defense" for women's basic health care, she said.

Laguens said Planned Parenthood is on pace to raise much more than it did in 2008 and plans to keep women's issues front and center throughout the summer and fall.

EMILY's List, a fundraising group for female candidates who support abortion rights, has doubled it's membership since January 2011.

Stephanie Schriock, president of EMILY's List, said the Republican takeover of the House of Representatives spurred the group's growth.

"Our membership has gone from 400,000 when John Boehner became speaker to 1.5 million," she said. "These debates over birth control, equal pay — even the violence against women act — the Republican Party has really been driving this and trying to move the clock backwards."

The group's super PAC, Women Vote!, has spent $443,755 since the beginning of the cycle on independent expenditures, according to the Federal Election Commission.

Terry O'Neill, president of the National Organization for Women, said the group is partnering with the American Association of University Women for a voter-mobilization project in 15 states. She said NOW saw an increase in fundraising and members after the Virginia Legislature passed a bill that would have required women to get a trans-vaginal ultrasound before having an abortion.

"What followed on the heels of the (Virginia bill) was the effort in the Senate to restrict birth control, and that's when the men started getting involved," O'Neill said.

Obama leads Romney among women 49% to 43%, according to the most recent Gallup polling. But Romney has been narrowing the gap. In late March, Obama's lead with women was 52% to 40% over Romney.

Conservative groups such as the Susan B. Anthony List, Concerned Women for America and the National Federation of Republican Women said they have seen increases in their membership and fundraising coffers as well.

Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List, a group that supports candidates opposing abortion rights, said, "What has been going on in the public conversation has attracted a lot of new women into the political arena, and none more than in the pro-life and the conservative moment because of the role Obama has taken on himself in speaking for women."

She added the group's fundraising is up one third from where they were at this point in the 2010 election cycle. The group has pledged to spend between $10 million and $12 million on Senate and presidential campaigns in important states.

Prior to endorsing Romney in April, Susan B. Anthony List spent $512,403 on independent expenditures in support of former senator Rick Santorum's campaign during the GOP primary.

In the 2008 election cycle, the group's independent expenditures totaled around $114,000.

On June 1, Concerned Women for America launched a voter-registration program called "She Votes" and plans to spend $1 million on get-out-the-vote and voter-registration efforts.

For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

View the original article here

Romney, GOP spring ahead in fundraising

WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON Mitt Romney outraised President Barack Obama in May, the first time the Republican presidential challenger has jumped ahead of Obama and his prodigious fundraising apparatus. The numbers illustrate how Romney and the Republican Party have jelled as a force after a protracted GOP primary.

Other developments

Automatic defense cutslooming in January would be more devastating than previously feared and make it impossible for President Barack Obama to refocus his national-security strategy, a bipartisan group of former lawmakers and retired military officers said Thursday. Members of the Bipartisan Policy Center painted a dire picture for the nation's economy, the military and large and small defense contractors if the automatic reductions occurred on Jan. 2, 2013. Based on a special task force's calculations, the group said the cuts would mean an indiscriminate, across-the-board 15 percent reduction in programs and activities within the military, not the 10 percent that had been estimated.

Scoffing at a White House veto threat, the House voted Thursday to repeal a tax on medical-device makers that Republicans cast as a job-killing levy that would stifle an innovative industry. Lawmakers approved the measure 270-146, with 37 Democrats from states with a heavy presence of medical- equipment makers like Minnesota, New York and California joining all 233 voting Republicans. Most Democrats said the bill was yet another GOP attempt to weaken President Barack Obama's health-care overhaul, which created the tax to help pay for that law's expansion of health-care coverage to 30million Americans.

A group seeking to recall Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder announced Thursday that it has ended the effort following Gov. Scott Walker's victory in Wisconsin's recall election. The group called Michigan Rising said it will stop collecting signatures, noting it already was short of its own gathering goals. Instead, the group said it will focus on a long-term effort to form a progressive think tank, develop progressive leaders and support current progressive legislators.

-- Wire services

Romney and his party raised more than $76 million last month, the campaign said Thursday. Obama's campaign reported that it and the Democratic Party raised $60 million for the month.

Obama, forced onto the defensive by lackluster employment numbers, launched a television ad Thursday in nine key election-year states targeting Congress and blaming lawmakers for not acting on his job proposals. The approach represents an expanded ad focus for Obama, who had been going after Romney.

The fundraising numbers and Obama's new ad signal a new stage in the campaign as a resurgent Romney capitalizes on his emergence as the GOP's standard-bearer and as Obama is forced to confront the political implications of a weak economic recovery.

"We got beat," Obama campaign manager Jim Messina wrote bluntly in an e-mail to supporters, urging contributors to step up their giving.

For Romney, the latest figure represents a significant jump in fundraising. He and the GOP brought in $40 million in April, just short of the $43.6 million the Democratic president and his party raised that month. What's more, Romney is getting a significant boost from Republican-leaning super PACs that have raised far more and spent far more than their Democratic-leaning counterparts.

Romney, stepping up his criticism of Obama, campaigned and was raising money Thursday in Missouri. In a speech at a factory in St. Louis, Romney accused Obama not only of a failure of policy but of "a moral failure of tragic proportions."

Citing millions of unemployed or underemployed Americans, Romney said that Obama nevertheless claimed he was doing a great job.

"I will not be that president of doubt and deception," he said.

Asked afterward to comment on topping Obama in fundraising, Romney said only: "Long way to go."

Obama was mixing more fundraising with official business Thursday as he wrapped up a two-day West Coast trip that included four fundraisers on Wednesday. He started the day under a sweltering sun in the Los Angeles area at a breakfast fundraiser for about 300 people. Tickets started at $2,500.

Later, addressing about 2,500 college students at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Obama picked up on the theme of his latest campaign ad and blamed congressional inaction for the lack of additional job growth.

"If they had taken all the steps I was pushing for back in September, we could have put even more Americans back to work. We could have sliced through these headwinds more easily," Obama said.

Obama campaign officials noted that Romney's fundraising surge could be temporary and that it reflects his recently sealed standing as the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, which allows him to raise more general election money. It also lets him raise money jointly for his campaign and for the Republican Party.

The Obama officials pointed out that Democratic presidential challenger John Kerry briefly experienced a similar surge in fundraising over President George W. Bush in the spring of 2004 after Kerry had locked up the nomination.

In his e-mail, Messina sought donations of $3 or more to "close the gap" against Romney in fundraising.

"More people giving a little bit is the only way to compete with a few people giving a lot,'' he said. So, let's fight like hell and win this thing."

Obama has been an active fundraiser and lately has stepped up the number of events he holds with donors. As of Thursday, the president has done 153 fundraisers since filing as a candidate for re-election on April 4, 2011, according to statistics kept by CBS News White House correspondent Mark Knoller. During same period in the 2004 election cycle, Bush had participated in 79 fundraisers.

In all, Obama and the Democratic National Committee and other state-focused funds have hauled in more than $500 million during the 2012 election campaign, compared with more than $480 million for Romney and the Republican Party.

The Romney campaign reported that the party and the campaign had $107 million cash on hand at the end of May. Obama's campaign did not list its comparable figure on Thursday, but last month, it reported $115 million in the bank through the end of April, with the DNC listing $24 million in hand.

Obama's new ad does not mention congressional Republicans, but its target is clear. Republicans have proposed their own measures aimed at creating jobs and have blocked several Obama proposals to promote hiring of teachers and police officers and to increase infrastructure projects. Obama has proposed paying for those measures with tax increases on wealthier taxpayers, an idea Republicans reject.

The ad is airing in the key presidential-election states of Colorado, Florida, Iowa, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia. The campaign declined to reveal how much it was spending on the ads, saying only that it was a "significant" purchase of air time.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Thursday, June 21, 2012

Letters: Conservatives value control over compromise

How funny to listen to a conservative such as commentary writer Jonah Goldberg defend conservatives' willingness to compromise ("Column: 'Compromise' is not a dirty word").

By J. Scott Applewhite,, AP

Republican leaders: Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, right, and Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

By J. Scott Applewhite,, AP

Republican leaders: Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, right, and Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

After Barack Obama was elected president, I remember Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., saying his priority would be to work on getting Obama out of office. And I have seen many federal legislators on the right do nothing but dis just about every single thing the president has tried to do in his first term.

Clearly, conservatives don't care about our country. They just want to take over.

Lastly, I ask Goldberg, what about George W. Bush? Conservatives have buried the former president because they are hoping the voters will forget what he did to us during his two terms.

Patricia Alexander; Marietta, Ga.

Letters to the editor

USA TODAY receives about 300 letters each day. Most arrive via e-mail, but we also receive submissions by postal mail and fax. We publish about 35 letters each week.

We often select comments that respond directly to USA TODAY articles or opinion pieces. Letters that are concise and make one or two good points have the best chance of being selected, as do letters that reflect the vibrant debate around the nation on a particular subject.

We aim to make the letters platform a place where readers, not just writers representing institutions or interest groups, have their say.

GOP right to push debt solutions

Jonah Goldberg's Forum piece on compromise was right on! I could not agree more with his point that Republicans must hold the line against the Democrats to stave off our soaring debt. They cannot condone or risk higher taxation for fear that money, too, will be squandered.

Perhaps there used to be more compromise in Congress, particularly during the Clinton administration, when there was more wiggle room on our debt levels. Today, the situation is too dire to be pushed any further. What is the debt solution offered by President Obama, Sen. Harry Reid and Rep. Nancy Pelosi?

This election is not about race (I would vote for Condoleezza Rice in a heartbeat) or religion. It is about economic policy and our inability to meet our debt obligations.

The Republican Party is the party of personal responsibility and believes in offering everyone the opportunity to succeed, but not giving handouts.

David Dale; Dover, Fla.

Obstructionist goals from start

How can Jonah Goldberg ask us to consider that the Democrats and, more precisely, President Obama are no more interested in compromise than Republicans?

As I recall, almost from the moment Obama was elected, the Republicans made it clear their agenda and priority would be to see to it that this president is limited to one term.

Given this, how can anyone with an ounce of political awareness really believe today's Republicans want anything other than to present obstacles to any deal that might give the impression that this president is an effective leader?

Richard Seidel; Chicago

View the original article here

Wednesday, June 20, 2012

Obama tries to turn 2008 GOP rival McCain into asset

WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON President Barack Obama seems to think that the world of politics would be better if someone like John McCain were running for the White House.

The Democratic incumbent and his re-election advisers are waxing nostalgic about the Republican senator from Arizona who lost to Obama in the 2008 presidential race. They're embracing McCain as a reasonable voice on climate change and immigration, someone who took on extremism in his own party.

It's all a way of drawing a contrast with Obama's current GOP rival, Mitt Romney, and trying to convince crucial independent voters that the former Massachusetts governor is outside the mainstream.

But Obama's flattering memories of McCain conflict with their campaign clashes of 2008. Back then, Obama hammered his rival as "out of touch" with many of the problems facing people in the United States.

Today's platitudes also conceal the reality of Obama's current dynamic with McCain. The senator is one of the president's staunchest critics on everything from health care to foreign policy, and he's a vocal Romney supporter.

To hear Obama tell it now, the McCain who ran against him in 2008 was an example of a principled Republican who knew how to reach across the aisle. The implication from Obama is that those qualities simply don't apply to Romney.

"John McCain believed in climate change," Obama told supporters at a fundraiser in Minneapolis on Friday. "John believed in campaign finance reform. He believed in immigration reform. I mean, there were some areas where you saw some overlap. In this election, the Republican Party has moved in a fundamentally different direction."

Obama's take on McCain has become a standard part of his fundraising appeal to donors. As the general election heats up, the Obama campaign is relishing more opportunities to try to turn its former foe into an asset.

When Romney didn't condemn his supporter Donald Trump for raising more questions this week about the president's citizenship, the Obama campaign dug up old video clips of McCain correcting supporters in the 2008 who said they were scared of Obama and one clip of a supporter who thought he was an "Arab."

"As the Republican nominee, John McCain stood up to the voices of extremism in his party," an Obama Internet video says. It then asks why Romney won't do the same.

The 90-second video ends with words on the screen that read: "McCain and Romney: Two Republican nominees, only one willing to lead."

Brian Rogers, a spokesman for McCain, said Friday that if McCain and Obama "share so many priorities and are in such agreement, why didn't the president or his staff ever reach out to Senator McCain to work on them?"

Not surprisingly, veterans of the 2008 campaign are split down party lines over whether the 2012 Obama campaign's strategic embrace of its former rival makes sense.

Steve Schmidt, a senior strategist to McCain's 2008 campaign, said voters will see through the Obama team's attempts to use the former GOP nominee to paint the party's current standard-bearer as an extremist.

"It's very difficult to make the case that Mitt Romney is a right-wing nut, particularly because a lot of real right-wing nuts have spent a lot of time saying Romney's not one of them," Schmidt said.

Like Romney, McCain faced criticism from Democrats in 2008 who said the independent-minded senator had kowtowed to the conservative wing of the party in order to claim the GOP nomination.

Posted

View the original article here

Wisconsin voters keep Walker after recall election

PEWAUKEE, Wis. – The political themes in Wisconsin turned from divisive and contentious to healing and concensus after state voters decided to keep their embattled Republican governor, whose drive to end collective-bargaining rights for most state workers resulted in a caustic recall campaign.

By Darren Hauck, AP

In heavy voting, Gov. Scott Walker turned back the challenge from Democrat Tom Barrett. Walker had defeated Barrett in the 2010 election.

By Darren Hauck, AP

In heavy voting, Gov. Scott Walker turned back the challenge from Democrat Tom Barrett. Walker had defeated Barrett in the 2010 election.

In heavy voting, Gov. Scott Walker drew 53% of the vote to Democratic challenger Tom Barrett's 46% in Tuesday's recall election. The results were a virtual reprise of the 2010 election, when Walker defeated Barrett, Milwaukee's mayor, 52%-46%.

"Bringing our state together will take some time, but I hope to start right away," Walker said in a victory speech. "It is time to put our differences aside and figure out ways that we can move Wisconsin forward."

Barrett conceded in a telephone call to Walker. "Now we must look to the future," he said. "We are a state that has been deeply divided. And it is up to all of us, their side and our side, to listen to each other and to try to do what's right for everyone in this state."

The race was closely watched nationally for clues about fallout for other elected officials who cut workers' benefits to ease crunched budgets. There also could be implications in the presidential race between President Obama and Republican rival Mitt Romney in a state with 10 electoral votes that both would like to win.

By Tom Lynn, Getty Images

Tom Barrett speaks with members of the media after voting in Milwaukee on Tuesday.

Romney issued a statement saying Walker's victory "will echo beyond the borders of Wisconsin."

Walker "has shown that citizens and taxpayers can fight back — and prevail — against the runaway government costs imposed by labor bosses," Romney said. "Tonight voters said no to the tired, liberal ideas of yesterday, and yes to fiscal responsibility and a new direction."

Charles Lipson, a political science professor at the University of Chicago, said Walker's win is "a big deal" because "it squashes the Democrats in the most important by-election of the year."

The results also suggest "suggest that Republican and moderate Democratic governors can retain voter support even if they take on public-sector unions - and perhaps because they take on public-sector unions."

Lipson said Wisconsin's results spell "big trouble for unions," which have already lost power in private industry. He also believes some unions will blame Obama for the loss.

"The unions would rather keep Obama than deal with Romney, but the fizz has gone out of that champagne," he said.

Walker's win "suggests that Wisconsin's in play" in the presidential race, said Barry Burden, a University of Wisconsin-Madison political scientist. "This is a state that's competitive."

Other analysts said Walker and the state's Republican Party will be strengthened after winning the rematch with Barrett.

"He's empowered and emboldened" after withstanding the Democrats' efforts to recall him, said Kathleen Dolan, a political scientist at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.

"He withstood as much heavy artillery as any governor could," said Brandon Scholz, a Republican lobbyist and strategist based in Madison. Other elected officials, he said, "will take that lesson and apply it in their state" with austerity proposals.

"People are going to realize the presidential race and U.S. Senate race and the Legislature are up for grabs," says Paul Maslin, a Madison-based Democratic pollster.

The recall election was the culmination of a bitter battle that began in February 2011, when Walker announced his plan to erase a $137 million budget shortfall in part by requiring state workers to give up collective-bargaining rights and pay more for health insurance and pension benefits.

Recalls of four Republican state senators also were on Tuesday's ballot. The results in those races could shift control of the Senate, which is now divided 16-16.

Walker's proposals triggered massive protests in the state Capitol in Madison and prompted 14 Democratic state senators to leave the state for three weeks in an ultimately failed attempt to prevent passage of Walker's legislation. He signed it into law in March 2011.

Before the vote, the state's sharp divide was evident in the Democratic stronghold of Madison. The house across from the governor's official residence displayed a "We Stand With Scott Walker" sign. The house two doors down: "Tom Barrett for Governor."

"Unfortunately, Wisconsin has become in some ways a microcosm of the partisan wars that have been raging nationally," said Dolan, the political scientist.

Regardless of the election outcome, she said, it will take time for the state to recover from the divisive debate and revive bipartisan spirit in the Legislature. "We really are at a place of sort of paralysis," Dolan said.

The amount of out-of-state money flowing to the campaigns here and the appearances of high-profile supporters of Walker and Barrett were evidence of the race's national overtones. More than $62 million was spent by the candidates and outside groups. Much of the $30 million raised by Walker came from outside the state. Barrett has spent about $4 million; most of his donors live in Wisconsin.

Former president Bill Clinton campaigned with Barrett, and fellow Republican governors Chris Christie of New Jersey and Bobby Jindal of Louisiana appeared with Walker.

No Republican presidential candidate has won Wisconsin since Ronald Reagan in 1984. Obama defeated Republican John McCain here in 2008, 56%-42%.

Scholz, the Republican strategist, saw Walker's victory as "a significant blow" weakening the clout of the labor unions that provide campaign cash and infrastructure for Democratic presidential candidates.

Dolan cautioned against reading too many presidential implications into Wisconsin's political fight. "Will Obama's chance of winning Wisconsin be made harder if Walker wins? Sure, maybe a little," she said. "But what's going on here is so episodic and so idiosyncratic."

View the original article here

Tuesday, June 19, 2012

South Dakota's Thune is on short list for vice president

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. – John Thune has been a favorite in Republican circles for almost a decade. In the next few months, the senator from South Dakota could be taking that notoriety national.

By Stephen J. Boitano, GANNETT

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., speaks with high school students during their visit to the Capitol Thursday.

By Stephen J. Boitano, GANNETT

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., speaks with high school students during their visit to the Capitol Thursday.

Now in his second term in the Senate, what happens in the coming months could give the onetime high school basketball star from Murdo a title everyone would recognize. For instance:

• How does Vice President Thune sound? If Mitt Romney likes it — and some say he might — then Thune could follow in the footsteps of Joe Biden, Dick Cheney and Al Gore.

• What about Senate Majority Leader Thune? The man Thune beat in 2004, Tom Daschle, once held this position. And while Thune might be years away from following suit, he could be just one step away by Christmas.

• And either path, or others entirely, could set the stage for Thune to capture the most significant title of them all: Mr. President.

Or maybe not. There's plenty of competition among other talented politicians for all these positions.

Nevertheless, Thune's political talents have helped him him rise from a conservative hero after defeating Daschle, through a series of leadership roles in the Senate, to flirtation with a presidential run last year. Now, after building strong relationships with both his Senate peers and Romney, whom Thune endorsed early on in this campaign, the South Dakotan is at a crossroads with multiple paths leading to national prominence.

For his part, Thune insists he's taking things day by day and not pursuing the job of vice president or anything else. But unlike some politicians, Thune hasn't ruled anything out, either.

"I made a decision that the difference I can make is in the Senate, but I don't think you ever rule out options and opportunities to serve your country," Thune said Friday in Sioux Falls. "I'm not ever going to close the door if an opportunity to serve my country comes along."

The most immediate possibility is that Thune could be the Republican nominee for vice president. Coming from a small, safely Republican state such as South Dakota, no one's calling Thune a favorite. But experts say he's in the conversation.

"I'd say he's a long shot to be the nominee, but then look at the history of vice presidential candidates. Quite a number of long shots have been picked," said Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia Center for Politics. "Anything can happen."

Robert Costa, a reporter with the conservative National Review magazine, has covered Thune and Republican politics for several years. He's talked to Romney advisers who say Thune might be just what the former Massachusetts governor needs in a running mate.

"From everything I hear, Romney wants to pick someone who's low-key, respected, has Washington experience and comes from the Midwest," Costa said — all factors, he added, that apply to Thune.

Others considered to be on Romney's short list: Sens. Marco Rubio, Fla., and Rob Portman, Ohio; Rep. Paul Ryan, Wis., and N.J. Gov. Chris Christie.

Thune's background and experience aren't the only assets he might bring to a national ticket. He seems to be a political natural, said Jon Schaff, a professor of political science at Northern State University in Aberdeen. He easily relates to people and speaks well extemporaneously.

Thune's style of speaking, in particular, could make him a valuable asset on the campaign trail.

"He's very comfortable about bringing the Republican message … in a way that isn't ham-fisted," Schaff said. "He's got a way of speaking that people who weren't necessarily with the Republican Party will listen to Thune and give him the time of day, because he can present his arguments in a way that appear to be non-ideological."

Thune's not a "fire and brimstone" Republican like Reps. Michele Bachmann and Allen West, Schaff said.

But not everyone agrees with that, or about Thune's strengths as a communicator who can appeal to moderates.

"John Thune, by his nature and by the positions he's taken, he's not the one you go to to look for solutions," said Ben Nesselhuf, chairman of the South Dakota Democratic Party. "He's one you go to to look for the Republican position and talking points. He doesn't know what the word compromise means."

Nesselhuf said he would advise national Democrats to attack Thune for his Washington ties.

"I think most South Dakotans would agree that's what's wrong with Washington -- too many people unwilling to look for solutions," he said.

Indeed, Thune's Washington experience might be both an asset and a liability, Costa said.

"In an anti-Washington climate … there's a sense from many voters of 'throw them all out.' Thune's Washington experience, though helpful to a president, could be a drawback to voters who might like to see more outsiders in Washington," Costa said.

Thune disputes Nesselhuf's charge that he doesn't compromise, citing his work with Democratic senators on legislation dealing with agriculture, trade, transportation and others.

"Yes, I'm very principled when it comes to my party and the things I believe in, but I also understand that I'm elected to get things done," Thune said. "I don't ever look at compromising my values and my principles, but I certainly on a tactical level understand that you need to work with people who have a different point of view … find common ground and consensus."

Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., praised Thune as someone he can work with even though they come from different political backgrounds.

"We're dealing with a tough economy and a jobs shortage, and even if we don't always agree, John wants to work together to overcome our nation's challenges," Baucus said in an e-mailed statement.

One of Thune's biggest strengths as a potential vice presidential pick could be something that others might call a weakness: He's not very exciting. After the last Republican vice presidential pick, then-Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, became controversial, Schaff said Romney might want to pick a less contentious running mate.

"Picking your vice presidential candidate, you take a Hippocratic Oath: First, do no harm," Schaff said.

With considerable numbers of Americans unhappy with President Barack Obama's handling of the economy, Sabato said, many Republicans think they should pick noncontroversial candidates who will keep the focus on Obama rather than distracting attention with their own antics.

"Thune is not controversial," Sabato said. "He's seen as acceptable, if bland."

When told that some people describe him as something less than exciting, Thune laughed.

"I never really think of myself as bland, but I guess it's maybe that Scandanavian heritage," Thune said. "I don't ever think that necessarily bland is a bad thing. I suppose I wish I were more exciting, but sometimes you are who you are, and you have to be comfortable with that and not try to be something you aren't."

There still are plenty of factors weighing against Thune's chances of being Romney's running mate. Many other potential candidates can bring Thune's strengths to the ticket, plus represent bigger or more closely divided states.

"In what looks to be a close election, Romney is likely to pick someone who brings a little more electorally to the table," Schaff said.

That makes sense to some political observers, who say the more likely route to power for Thune is in his current job of senator.

"Politically speaking, I think Thune has a much better chance of being one day Senate majority leader than president of the United States," Costa said.

Thune currently is the chairman of the Senate Republican Conference. It's the third-highest position among Senate Republicans, behind only the majority or minority leader and the whip or assistant floor leader.

The No. 2 spot of Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., is opening up this fall. Thune is one of a handful of senators who might have the support it would take to move up.

Thune's climb up the leadership ladder started in 2006, about a year after he took office. That's when he was appointed chief deputy whip, an assistant to the No. 2-ranked party leader.

By taking a leadership position, Thune made a choice that he could get more done as part of Senate leadership than by trying to become the chair of a powerful committee -- the two traditional paths senators can take as they accumulate seniority and influence in the Senate.

"I'm sure what John Thune thinks it means with constituents is he's able to bring their issues to the highest level in the party," Schaff said. "A potential side effect, of course, that we saw with Tom Daschle is the further you move up leadership, the more you're responding to the national needs of the party and not so much the local needs of your constituency."

Sabato predicted Thune's popularity in South Dakota could give him the longevity needed to rise to the top of the Senate, presuming he doesn't leave Congress for another position.

"He's relatively young in Senate terms," Sabato said. "With the electoral security he has in South Dakota, he could be there for as long as he wants."

And while some powerful South Dakota senators have suffered defeat after being seen to care more about Washington, D.C., than their home state, Schaff said Thune has taken care to protect against that. "He's been a fairly constant presence back in the state," Schaff said. "He hasn't let the state go."

Thune's friends and family say he hasn't let his South Dakota roots go, either.

"I think he's the same person he always was," said Frank Brost, who was living in and near Murdo as Thune was growing up there, and later worked with him in Pierre under Gov. George S. Mickelson. "If there's any person Washington can't screw up, it's John Thune."

If selected as Romney's vice presidential candidate, Thune said he would present himself to the country as a principled man who hasn't strayed from his South Dakota upringing.

"I try to be authentic and very much a down-to-earth person," Thune said. "I don't think I've ever gotten away from my roots."

Critics point to Thune's rapid rise to prominence in Washington and say that reflects ambition rather than "down-to-earth."

"He's definitely trying to create a national name for himself," Nesselhuf said. "I think anybody who's watched his career would say that from day one, that's the way he operates — looking for the next step up."

Thune, in contrast, said he's not looking for anything other than opportunities to serve the country. "Growing up I never thought I'd be doing any of this in the first place."

Despite that the next few years could put Thune in a position to take the biggest step up a politician can make. Last year he stayed out of the race for president when he decided he wasn't ready to make that huge commitment. At the time, he said he wanted to focus on his work in the Senate. But his presidential dreams might not be finished. He still will be young enough to run for president in 2016, 2020 and possibly beyond.

The events of the coming months could give him a head start if he still aspires to the Oval Office.

"If Thune is picked, and Romney loses, it would make Thune an automatic contender for the nomination in 2016," Costa said. "Even if he's not picked, you're going to still hear about Thune in the 2016 conversation if Romney loses."

Sabato cautioned that a future run for president could be tough for Thune.

"Everybody and his brother and sister will be running if Romney loses," he said.

View the original article here

Monday, June 18, 2012

Economists don't seem to have a Plan C

(PNI) It is all very scary, the world financial situation. Is it all really on the verge of collapse, and what to do?

The left says follow Keynesian theory and continue to spend. The right says Friedrich Hayek is right: sacrifice and pay our bills.

Modern economics mavens Paul Krugman on the left and Milton Friedman on the right tout their respective solutions or disaster is certain. How can they both be right?

Or can they both be wrong and there is, in fact, no chance for world financial survival with either solution? No Plan C for the independent.

Perhaps it would be best to have our children and grandchildren forgo their dreams and aspirations of space exploration, scientific discovery, art, literature and business and just concentrate on learning homesteading to survive the coming chaos.

It's enough to give us average Joes the willies.

--George Weitzner, Mesa

Don't harm defenseless children

Another abused child, 4-year-old Toryn Buckman of Phoenix, has died.

What is going on in this world? How many children will die or constantly be abused by mothers, fathers, mothers' boyfriends, caregivers, etc., before something changes?

Please, if you can't handle the pressures of raising children, give them to a family member or put them up for adoption. There are many couples who desperately want children and can't have them.

Young children are defenseless. They can't tell anyone what's going on. The Arizona child-protection system is so overburdened that these cases can't be adequately handled. Many times, these abuses aren't even reported and the child suffers in silence.

Please don't take your anger out on a child. More importantly, use birth control!

--Judy Felicetti, Phoenix

Open primaries will favor liberals

The push for an open primary in Arizona is quite alarming. Like every other "red state" with an open primary, it would allow liberals and independents to have a say about who will be representing the Republican Party.

This desire to have the Republican candidate molded by the liberals and independents is completely insane for the Republicans, as it will greatly increase the chances that a "moderate" will be opposing a liberal and, in that situation, a liberal will win.

In order for a Republican to defeat a liberal Democrat, there needs to be a strong contrast between the two ideologies. This stark difference will not be achieved through an open primary.

The open primary could serve to eliminate the most viable candidate, which would be a true Reagan conservative, and put the weakest candidate in his place, such as a McCain liberal Republican.

I am a registered Republican. However, philosophically, I am more closely allied with the Libertarian Party platform.

That being the case, I can't see why true moderates such as Libertarians would want a liberal Republican running against a liberal Democrat.

The only moderates wanting an open primary would be liberal "moderates," as this would ensure that a liberal would be elected regardless of which party won. There would really be no opposing voice in Arizona.

--James Brandt, Surprise

We need to shift high court to left

Regarding "Super PACs hijacking system" (Another Voice, Friday):

The letter writer from Sun City pleads for Sen. John McCain "to do something for the sake of our democracy" in regards to the obscene amounts of money being blindly dumped into our elections with no accountability or transparency.

She is foolish to think McCain can do anything to right this wrong perpetuated on the American electoral process by our current Supreme Court. Only "We the People" can fix this problem by electing a president who would alter the court away from the conservatives such as Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and their ilk.

Our next president will most likely have two appointments to the Supreme Court during his term, as the court currently has four justices out of nine in their mid- to late 70s. Mitt Romney, being self-proclaimed "severely conservative" would certainly shift this court further to the right. That, in itself, should warrant the re-election of President Barack Obama.

--Stuart Epstein, Scottsdale

Let's elevate elections, end muck

As political campaigns heat up alongside our summer mercury, their integrity dips.

On KJZZ's "Here and Now" public-affairs radio show, high-profile political strategists confirmed that negative campaigning prevails over promoting a candidate's positive platform. If that is the case, the reflection is on voters.

The ones who remain standing in the political arena are responsible for magnetizing policies that guide our enlightened society. I believe most of us want to live peacefully, with more ease and less anxiety. Contentious conditions cannot herald greater tranquillity.

As temperatures rise, let's elevate our elections with cool-headed voting conduct.

--Deanne Poulos, Phoenix

We survived without Facebook

Facebook was off-line for over two hours on Thursday. How did we survive?

There was no chaos in the streets. There was no coup d'etat anywhere in the world. No government was overthrown. The world was not thrown off its axis. The world economy did not come to a halt.

So, don't sweat it, people. Ignoring your Facebook account for a few minutes or hours while you are in a car, a meeting, a movie or enjoying a meal with your family or friends is not going to kill you. We all functioned fine before 2004, when it was invented.

--Jerry Manning, Mesa

Unicorn should be born in the U.S.

Regarding Dana Milbank's column ("Romney must prove he's not secret unicorn," Opinions, Thursday), requesting proof that former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is not a unicorn:

I find nothing in the Constitution that would preclude a unicorn from being president, provided he was born in the United States.

--Mike Trapuzzano, Chandler

Enough praise for Trump, Arpaio

Who takes the prize for old men looking for more publicity? Donald Trump? Joe Arpaio?

Do they really need to get more praises from the crazies? I guess they do.

--William Johnson, Phoenix

Posted

View the original article here

Not Afraid to Talk About Race

Hey, I heard that: “Oh, no, the black columnist is writing about race, again.”

Yes, I am. Deal with it. The moment we allow ourselves to be browbeaten out of having important discussions about issues that persist, we cease to command the requisite conviction to wield the pen — or to peck on a keyboard, but you get my drift.

Varying political views among racial and ethnic groups are real.

They have always informed our politics, and no doubt they will continue to do so. The idea, naively held by many, that the election of the first black president would nullify racial grievances, bridge racial differences and erase racial animosities has quickly faded. We find ourselves once again trying to wrestle with the meaning and importance of race in our politics.

In fact, one could argue that examinations of racial attitudes in politics have become more fraught as racial motives, political objectives and accusations and denials of racism and reverse-racism serve as a kind of subterfuge hiding resentments and prejudices.

Either racial attitudes are naked, blatant and visible, this thinking goes, or they’re nonexistent, manufactured by race baiters and hucksters as devices of division. The middle ground, sprinkled with land mines made up of racial labels, is now a place where fair-minded people dare not tread.

That’s a shame.

But it’s not going to stop me. Strap on your lead boots and let’s go for a stroll.

A Pew Research Center American values survey released this week offers fascinating insights into how racially divergent values and the changing racial compositions of political parties influence our politics.

Let’s look at the racial makeup of the two major parties: from 2000 to 2012 the percentage of Republicans who are white has remained relatively steady, about 87 percent. On the other hand, the percentage of Democrats who are white has dropped nine percentage points, from 64 percent in 2000 to 55 percent in 2012. If current trends persist, in a few years the Democratic Party will be a majority minority party. But the largest drop in the white percentage has been among Independents: they were 79 percent white in 2000, but they are only 67 percent white now.

The racial diversity among Democrats and the lack of it among Republicans means that the two bases bring differing sets of concerns to the national debate.

For instance, blacks and Hispanics are far more likely to believe that poverty is a result of circumstances beyond a person’s control than a result of lack of effort.

Blacks and Hispanics also look far more favorably on the role of government, particularly as it relates to guarding against poverty and evening a playing field that they feel is tilted. Seventy-eight percent of both blacks and Hispanics believed that government should guarantee everyone enough to eat and a place to sleep, while only 52 percent of whites agreed with that idea.

This is not to say that minorities who favor a stronger government want more government handouts. There was very little difference in the percentage of blacks, Hispanics and whites who believed that poor people have become too dependent on government assistance programs (it’s pretty high for all three groups, at 70, 69 and 72 percent, respectively).

They seem to want a chance, not a check.

To wit, 62 percent of blacks and 59 percent of Hispanics say that we should make every possible effort to improve the position of blacks and other minorities, even if it means giving them preferential treatment. Not surprisingly, only 22 percent of whites agreed with this idea. Only 12 percent of Republicans — almost all of whom are white — agreed. This percentage has been decreasing since 2007, while the percentage of white Democrats who agree has been increasing.

Now what does that mean for the presidential race?

A staggering 90 percent of Romney supporters are white. Only 4 percent are Hispanic, less than 1 percent are black and another 4 percent are another race.

Of Obama’s supporters, 57 percent are white, 23 percent are black, 12 percent are Hispanic and 7 percent are another race.

And what of the all-important swing voters (those who are undecided, who lean toward a candidate, or who say that they could change their mind)? Nearly three out of four are white. The rest are roughly 8 percent each blacks, Hispanics and another race.

That might explain why the Pew poll found that the swing voters lean more toward Obama voters on issues like civil liberties and the role of labor unions, but are closer to Romney voters on the role of social safety nets, immigration and minority-preference programs.

Put another way, Romney voters and swing voters — who are both overwhelming white — agree on the more racially charged issues.

Pointing out these correlations is not only valid, it is instructive and helpful. In large part this election will be about the role of government in our lives, and different racial and ethnic groups view that particular issue very differently.

The economy always looms large, but for those who feel left behind by the economy even when it’s roaring, but especially when it sputters, social safety nets and governmental activism can also have tremendous weight.

The trick will be to have a conversation about the direction of the country that takes that into account but lifts the language to a level where common goals can be seen from differing racial vantage points — to show a way to be merciful to those struggling while providing a path to financial independence and social equality. Contrary to what many Americans think, most people do in fact want a hand up and not a handout.

View the original article here

Sunday, June 17, 2012

Besides the Hats, What Good Are State Conventions?

Are political conventions necessary?

Texas Democrats are in Houston for their state convention. Texas Republicans are in Fort Worth for the same thing. The Libertarians are meeting this weekend near DFW Airport, and the Green Party is having its convention outside San Antonio.

It’s actually easier to make the convention case for the Libertarians and the Greens, who use their gatherings to put people on the ballot, because they don’t hold primary elections.

The two major parties, on the other hand, held their primaries on May 29 and will sort out the remaining 37 contests in runoffs on July 31. The conventioneers don’t have anything to do with that, except when they vote back home.

They are at their conventions to elect the officers of their party and the executive committee members who meet periodically to handle party business, as well as to pick the delegates and others who will get passes and floor and voting rights at the national conventions this summer. Whether those conventions are still necessary is another open question, but this is about the state contests.

How many people need to be at these gatherings?

Is this a scam invented by the state’s convention and visitors bureaus and the rest of the travel industry?

Is it meant just to get some publicity for the parties and candidates? To get the party faithful enthused for the remaining five months of the political season? To make money?

And, as a selfish and personal side note, how is it that both of the political parties landed their conventions in the only two places in Texas with Major League Baseball teams, on a weekend when the Astros and the Rangers are, respectively, in Chicago and San Francisco? Do the teams know something we don’t? Do the planners want everyone to concentrate and avoid sports and other amusements?

State conventions don’t usually make news — other than the perfunctory official business stories — unless candidates say amazing things or partisans get into arguments.

Texas Democrats have historically made news with their intramural fights, where two caucuses take opposite positions and put everyone else in the party on edge, or when two or more groups contend to represent the same part of the party.

Texas Republicans almost always make news with their platform, which is full of specific programs and planks that spook candidates and other Republicans alike.

The Democrats have a long list of weird caucuses. The Republicans fly their colors in their platform. These are conventions, after all, for the most Republican Republicans and the most Democratic Democrats. They are fervent, like ham radio operators or model rocketeers, quilters or comic book collectors.

The conventions rally the faithful. Like those various and numerous rabid hobbyists, political people find comfort with members of their own herd. It’s not appropriate in most other settings to put on that vest with 57 different campaign buttons, that bowler with the red, white and blue sequins, or the old Ross Perot T-shirt.

And the conventions do give the partisans a chance to see many of the people on their ticket, like them or not. But not the big dogs: Mitt Romney didn’t schedule a visit to the Republican convention in Fort Worth. President Obama wasn’t planning a stop in Houston.

Unless they’re looking for money, presidential candidates from both parties ignore us, assuming that the state will hand its electoral votes to whatever Republican gets the nomination. That’s been a safe bet for more than 30 years.

These can be risky places even for the locals. On Thursday, the crowd at the Republican convention roared with boos when Gov. Rick Perry reasserted his support for Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, now a United States Senate candidate.

Tough crowd.

Soon, they’ll be gone. The Fort Worth Convention Center will get ready for real estate asset managers and then for a gathering of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Houston’s George R. Brown Convention Center will get the State Bar and then a gun and knife show.

The delegates, energized and/or exhausted, will pack up the vests and funny hats and get to work on elections, safe in the knowledge that they are a part of something bigger than themselves.

View the original article here

No Nomination, but Paul Predicts Strong Contingent at G.O.P. Convention

Representative Ron Paul may be the most libertarian of the Republicans who ran in the 2012 primaries, but he is encouraging his supporters with delegate estimates that veer toward liberal.

In a statement late last night, Mr. Paul suggested that, either officially or in spirit, his backers would represent “just over 20 percent” of the delegates at the Republican National Convention in August.

“And while this total is not enough to win the nomination, it puts us in a tremendous position to grow our movement and shape the future of the GOP!” he said.

“We stand to send nearly 200 bound delegates” to Tampa, Fla., Mr. Paul said, a number that “shatters the predictions of the pundits.” According to The Associated Press, Mr. Paul currently has 137 bound delegates, behind Newt Gingrich. There are still 261 delegates up for grabs: 40 delegates in Utah’s June 26 primary and 43 “super delegates,” with the balance coming from states that have held nominating contests but will not assign all their delegates until local and state conventions. Though Mr. Paul announced last month that he would not actively campaign, his highly organized supporters have successfully racked up delegates in states that Mr. Paul did not win. (For example, though Mr. Paul came in a distant second in Minnesota’s nonbinding caucuses, he has 30 delegates from the state. Rick Santorum, who won, and Mitt Romney both have three.)

A weekend dispute between Paul supporters and other Republican officials at Louisiana’s convention resulted in an arrest.

Mr. Paul also said his campaign would send “several hundred” people who are bound Romney delegates but nonetheless back Mr. Paul’s ideas, resulting in “nearly 500 supporters” on the convention floor — a figure impossible to verify.

“We have never had this kind of opportunity,” he said. “There will be hundreds of your fellow supporters in Tampa who will be ready and willing to push the Republican Party back to its limited government, liberty roots.” Mr. Paul also cautioned his followers to “be respectful.”

Meanwhile, Paul supporters who are trying to plan a multiday festival in his honor in Tampa just days before the official convention are accusing Republican officials of blocking approval for their venues.

View the original article here

Saturday, June 16, 2012

Obama Backs Away From 'Fine' Comment

President Obama on Friday afternoon backed away from his earlier comments that the “private sector is doing fine,” telling reporters that he does not believe the economy is doing fine.

“That’s precisely why I asked Congress to start taking some steps that can make a difference,” Mr. Obama said in brief remarks to reporters during a meeting with the visiting Philippines president.

Republicans had seized on comments Mr. Obama made during an earlier news conference, in which he repeatedly made the point that hiring at private businesses is doing well, while hiring by state and local government is not.

“The private sector is doing fine,” Mr. Obama said at the news conference.

But by later in the day, Mr. Obama had decided to emphasize that he does not believe that the overall economy is doing fine, as Republicans were trying to suggest.

“Listen, it is absolutely clear the economy is not doing fine,” he said. He suggested that Republicans had misstated his words from earlier in the day.

“I think if you look at what I said this morning, what I’ve been saying consistently over the last year, we’ve actually seen some good momentum in the private sector,” he said. “There’s been 4.3 million jobs created, 800,000 this year alone, record corporate profits.”

He added: “And so that has not been the biggest drag on the economy.”

Mr. Obama said the economy “needs to be strengthened,” adding that “I believe that there are a lot of Americans who are hurting right now, which is what I’ve been saying for the last year, two years, three years, what I’ve been saying since I came into office.”

Related: Six Words From Obama, and a Barrage in Return From the G.O.P.

Follow Michael D. Shear on Twitter at @shearm.

View the original article here

Latino Growth Not Fully Felt at Voting Booth

Interviews with Latino voters across the country suggested a range of reasons for what has become, over a decade, an entrenched pattern of nonparticipation, ranging from a distrust of government to a fear of what many see as an intimidating effort by law enforcement and political leaders to crack down on immigrants, legal or not.

Here in Denver, Ben Monterosso, the executive director of Mi Familia Vota, or My Family Votes, a national group that helps Latinos become citizens and register to vote, gathered organizers around a table in his office and recited census data demonstrating the lack of Latino participation.

“Our potential at the ballot box is not being maximized,” Mr. Monterosso told them. “The untapped potential is there.”

More than 21 million Latinos will be eligible to vote this November, clustered in pockets from Colorado to Florida, as well as in less obvious states like Illinois, Iowa, North Carolina and Virginia. Yet just over 10 million of them are registered, and even fewer turn out to vote.

In the 2008 presidential election, when a record 10 million Latinos showed up at the polls nationwide, that amounted to just half of the eligible voters. By contrast, 66 percent of eligible whites and 65 percent of eligible blacks voted, according to a study by the Pew Hispanic Center.

That disparity is echoed in swing states across the country. In Nevada, 42 percent of eligible Hispanics are registered, while just 35 percent are registered in Virginia, according to Latino Decisions, which studies Latino voting trends.

Although Latinos do not turn up at the polls in the same numbers, relative to their population, as other ethnic groups, their overall numbers are growing so rapidly that they are nevertheless on the verge of becoming the powerful force in American politics that officials in both parties have long anticipated — an effect that would only be magnified should they somehow begin to match the voting percentages of other ethnic groups.

Mr. Obama’s campaign has seized on that as a central part of his re-election strategy, with an early burst of three Spanish-language television advertisements in four swing states, including Colorado, and voter registration drives in Latino neighborhoods.

“Hi, are you registered to vote?” Linda Vargas, 62, called out in English and Spanish to people walking into a public library on the outskirts of Denver as she sat behind a table stacked with voter registration forms.

This segment of the American electorate is by any measure sprawling, with near-explosive population growth in places like California and Texas and growing numbers in swing states like Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Nevada and New Mexico. Their presence in such politically important states has only fed the frustration of Latino organizers over their underrepresentation at the polls.

Matt A. Barreto, an associate professor of political science at the University of Washington and head of Latino Decisions, said the population growth had produced a higher Latino vote in every presidential election over the last decade, a number that had the effect of masking the political apathy of many Latino voters.

“The population growth has driven increases in the Latino vote every year,” he said. “But we still need to confront a registration gap that is quite significant.”

Jim Messina, Mr. Obama’s campaign manager, said Latino voters were a critical factor in the president’s re-election hopes. “Look, if we do our job right and have a good ground game, I absolutely believe that Latino voters can be one of the big reasons we win this election,” he said.

Officials in Mr. Romney’s campaign argued that he would cut into Mr. Obama’s Latino support by challenging his record on the economy, and how, they said, it had been particularly harmful to Latinos. Last week, the Romney campaign posted a Spanish-language advertisement on its Web site pointing to rising unemployment among Latinos.

Marisa Gerber contributed reporting from Nogales, Ariz.; Dan Frosch from Colorado and New Mexico; and Susannah Nesmith from Miami.

View the original article here

Friday, June 15, 2012

No Recall

For disappointed Democrats, seduced by early exit polls into a vain hope that the union-busting Wisconsin governor Scott Walker might actually be recalled from office late last night, the good news is that some of their pre-election spin still holds up. Yesterday’s recall vote is not necessarily a bellwether for the general election, not necessarily a sign that Mitt Romney can win a slew of purple states, not necessarily proof that the country is ready to throw in with Walker’s fellow Wisconsinite Paul Ryan on issues of spending and taxation.

But neither is it anything like good news for liberalism. We are entering a political era that will feature many contests like the war over collective bargaining in Wisconsin: grinding struggles in which sweeping legislation is passed by party-line votes and then the politicians responsible hunker down and try to survive the backlash. There will be no total victory in this era, but there will be gains and losses — and the outcome in the Walker recall is a warning to Democrats that their position may be weaker than many optimistic liberals thought.

To understand the broader trends at work, a useful place to turn is Jay Cost’s essay on “The Politics of Loss” in the latest issue of National Affairs. For most of the post-World War II era, Cost argues, our debates over taxing and spending have taken place in an atmosphere of surplus. The operative question has been how best to divide a growing pie, which has enabled politicians in both parties to practice a kind of ideologically flexible profligacy. Republicans from Dwight Eisenhower to George W. Bush have increased spending, Democrats from John F. Kennedy to Bill Clinton have found ways to cut taxes, and the great American growth machine has largely kept the toughest choices off the table.

But not anymore. Between our slowing growth and our unsustainable spending commitments, “the days when lawmakers could give to some Americans without shortchanging others are over; the politics of deciding who loses what, and when and how, is upon us.” In this era, debates will be increasingly zero-sum, bipartisan compromise will be increasingly difficult, and “the rules and norms of our politics that several generations have taken for granted” will fade away into irrelevance.

It’s useful to think of Obama’s stimulus bill and Walker’s budget repair bill as mirror image exercises in legislative shock and awe.

This is a perfect encapsulation of what’s happened in Wisconsin these last two years: Walker and the Republicans used a narrow mandate to enact unexpectedly dramatic public-sector reforms, and the Democrats responded by upping the ante significantly, with mass protests, walkouts by state legislators and finally a recall campaign. A similar story could be told about Barack Obama’s Washington, in which a temporarily ascendant Democratic Party pushed through sweeping spending bills and social-compact altering health care legislation before unprecedented Republican obstructionism ground the process to a halt. In fact, it’s useful to think of Obama’s stimulus bill and Walker’s budget repair bill as mirror image exercises in legislative shock and awe, and the Tea Party and the Wisconsin labor protests as mirror images of backlash.

At both the state and national level, then, the two coalitions are aiming for a mix of daring on offense, fortitude on defense and ruthless counterattacks whenever possible. The goal is to simultaneously maximize the opportunities presented to one’s own side and punish the other party for trying to do the same.

That’s obviously what the organizers of the recall hoped to do to Walker – to punish his union busting and spending cuts as thoroughly as House Democrats were punished in the 2010 mid-term elections for the votes they cast on the health care bill and the stimulus. The fact that the labor unions and liberal activists failed where the Tea Party largely succeeded sends a very different message, though: It tells officeholders that it’s safer to take on left-wing interest groups than conservative ones (the right outraised and outspent the left by a huge margin in the recall election), safer to cut government than to increase revenue, safer to face down irate public sector employees than irate taxpayers.

A similar message is currently being telegraphed by the respective postures of the two parties in Washington. The House Republicans have spent the past two years taking tough votes on entitlement reform, preparing themselves for an ambitious offensive should 2012 deliver the opportunity to cast those same votes and have them count. The Senate Democrats, on the other hand, have failed to even pass a budget: There is no Democratic equivalent of Paul Ryan’s fiscal blueprint, no Democratic plan to swallow hard and raise middle class taxes the way Republicans look poised to swallow hard and overhaul Medicare. Indeed, there’s no liberal agenda to speak of at the moment, beyond a resounding “No!” to whatever conservatism intends to do.

That “No!” might still be enough to win Barack Obama re-election. But November 2012 will just be one battle in a longer war, and the outcome in Wisconsin suggests that the edge in that war currently (and to some extent unexpectedly, given the demographic trends that favor the left) belongs to a limited government conservatism. The Democrats threw almost everything they had at Scott Walker, and it wasn’t nearly enough. And when you fail in what is essentially a defensive campaign, it makes it that much more difficult to get back on offense.

View the original article here

Democrats Get Line of Attack in Europe’s Woes

In a new line of attack, top Democrats are arguing that Mitt Romney and the Republicans, with their focus on spending cuts, are following Europe’s austerity-first example, to dismal effect so far: Greece over the edge; Italy, Spain, Portugal on the edge; Britain in recession; and the United States suffering through a needlessly weak recovery because of government cuts.

Former President Bill Clinton offered the clearest version of the case on Monday night, when, introducing Mr. Obama at a fund-raiser in New York, he listed the steps that Mr. Obama had taken to spur the economy, and then asked: “Why aren’t things roaring along now? Because Europe is in trouble and because the Republican Congress has adopted the European economic policy.”

Mr. Clinton added, “Who would have thought, after years and years, even decades, in which the Republican right attacked ‘old Europe,’ that they would embrace the economic policies of the euro zone — austerity and unemployment now at all costs.”

Mr. Obama has so far declined to take up the line of attack himself, in part, administration officials say, because it would be unseemly for him to do so when he is trying to persuade European leaders to move away from austerity and deal more aggressively with their financial crisis.

But plenty of administration officials, Obama advisers and campaign surrogates have been quick to take up the argument, making a case that had previously been relegated to liberal writers instead of Democrats. At a time when the American economy is looking weaker than it had seemed only a few weeks ago, the European analogy gives Democrats a story to tell about why the recovery has been slower than they had hoped.

Romney campaign officials and other Republicans are not entirely unhappy about the new Democratic message, in part because it keeps the debate focused on Mr. Obama’s biggest weakness: the state of the economy.

Mr. Romney’s aides respond that Europe is in bad shape all right, but that is because European leaders have not gone far enough on austerity.

“Europe is facing some terrible choices because they postponed the effort to get their economic house in order,” said Kristen Silverberg, a United States ambassador to the European Union under President George W. Bush and now a Romney campaign official. “The United States still has the chance to correct course, but not if we sustain four more years of Obama-styled deficits.”

The prime example for Democrats is the European country that has long seemed most similar to the United States — Britain — where Prime Minister David Cameron came into office in 2010 arguing that excessive spending by his Labor predecessors had spurred the country’s economic woes. Mr. Cameron, a conservative, slashed spending and eliminated hundreds of thousands of public sector jobs in a bid to reduce the deficit. Two years later, Britain’s Office for National Statistics says the country is experiencing a double-dip recession and is doing even worse than only a few months ago.

“We have a laboratory experiment going on for what the Republicans want to do here, and that’s Europe,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York. “Particularly England, because they had the equivalent of a Democratic government, and Cameron comes in with austerity, and now they’re in a recession.”

Mr. Obama, Mr. Schumer said, “can point to England as what could happen if the Republicans win.”

Since the depth of the economic crisis in 2009, the United States, which has put a bigger emphasis on stimulus than Europe, has performed better than Europe, after the two had suffered similarly from the start of crisis in 2007 until 2009. Over all, gross domestic product in the United States was 3 percent higher in the first three months of this year than in late 2007, according to Haver Analytics, while gross domestic product in both the 17 countries of the euro zone and in Britain was still slightly smaller than at the end of 2007.

“Europe has failed trying to do austerity,” said Representative Norm Dicks, Democrat of Washington. “They took the austerity approach, and that’s not how you get out of recession. Even Franklin Roosevelt learned that — we didn’t get out of the Great Depression until World War II.”

Obama advisers argue that the budget proposal of Representative Paul D. Ryan, Republican of Wisconsin, which Mr. Romney has called “marvelous,” is actually a radical vision that would deepen the inequality in American society. They say that Mr. Ryan’s call for overhauling Medicare could drive up costs for future retirees and fundamentally change the popular health plan.

“The Republican budget approach is far more extreme than austerity measures considered in Europe, in terms of both underlying goals and specific short-run policies, and the lack of any balance in approach,” said Jason Furman, principal deputy director of the National Economic Council. “Republican plans in Congress would be even more detrimental to longer-term growth because their refusal to consider any revenues necessitates even deeper spending cuts. In contrast, even conservative governments abroad have taken a more balanced approach to deficit reduction.”

Mr. Romney recently gave the Democrats some ammunition when he appeared to acknowledge the connection between spending cuts and recessions in an interview with Time magazine, saying that he would not make too many cuts in his first year as president.

“If you take a trillion dollars, for instance, out of the first year of the federal budget, that would shrink G.D.P. over 5 percent,” Mr. Romney said. “That is, by definition, throwing us into recession or depression. So I’m not going to do that, of course.”

Still, his campaign and Congressional Republicans remain comfortable making an economic argument that revolves largely around spending cuts. Polls show that many Americans are skeptical that the Obama stimulus made a big economic difference.

View the original article here

Six Words From Obama, and a Barrage From Republicans

By late afternoon, Mr. Obama was forced to clarify one line from his morning session with reporters — “the private sector is doing fine” — after Congressional Republicans and his presidential rival, Mitt Romney, had seized on the comment to criticize Mr. Obama as out-of-touch and detached from the millions of Americans who cannot find jobs or have given up looking.

“Listen, it is absolutely clear that the economy is not doing fine. That’s the reason I had the press conference,” Mr. Obama said in clarifying his earlier remark when asked about Mr. Romney’s criticism during an Oval Office appearance with the president of the Philippines, Benigno S. Aquino III.

“There are too many people out of work. The housing market is still weak and too many homes underwater,” Mr. Obama said. “And that’s precisely why I asked Congress to start taking some steps that can make a difference.” He ended, “What I’m interested in hearing from Congress and Mr. Romney is what steps are they willing to take right now that are going to make an actual difference. And so far, all we’ve heard are additional tax cuts to the folks who are doing fine.”

But for the day at least, the damage was done, as Republicans hijacked the news cycle with their barrage against Mr. Obama’s six words in a professorial 29-minute exchange. While the metaphor of the bully pulpit originated with President Theodore Roosevelt about a century ago and generally remains apt, it does not allow for a 21st-century media environment of constant cable television chatter, blogging and instant Internet videos that empower a president’s opponents to bully back.

Campaigning in Iowa, Mr. Romney called Mr. Obama’s statement “an extraordinary miscalculation and misunderstanding by a president who is out-of-touch. And we’re going to take back this country and get America working again.”

What was worse for Mr. Obama, the controversy was the capstone of an already bad week that had started the Friday before with a disappointing monthly jobs report showing an increase of just 69,000 jobs in May. There had been a similar media commotion over comments by former President Bill Clinton that were unhelpful to the Obama campaign (he, too, clarified himself later), a defeat for Democrats in Wisconsin’s election to recall the Republican governor and the latest monthly fund-raising reports showing that Mr. Romney and the Republican Party for the first time had out-raised Mr. Obama and his party.

Mr. Obama’s point at his news conference was that for more than two years, monthly jobs reports have shown growth in the private sector, but continuing cutbacks in the public sector as state and local governments slash jobs in their struggle to balance their budgets; the public sector — not the private sector — most needs additional government help.

He argued that “if Republicans want to be helpful” as Europe’s financial crisis again threatens the American economy, they should quit opposing proposals in his jobs plan of last September that would aid states so they can keep teachers and first-responders at work and finance public-works projects to employ construction workers left jobless by the 2008 housing bust.

Mr. Obama’s comment, in context, was: “We’ve created 4.3 million jobs over the last 27 months, over 800,000 just this year alone. The private sector is doing fine. Where we’re seeing weaknesses in our economy have to do with state and local government — oftentimes, cuts initiated by governors or mayors who are not getting the kind of help that they have in the past from the federal government and who don’t have the same kind of flexibility as the federal government in dealing with fewer revenues coming in.”

Republicans hope they can turn Mr. Obama’s “doing fine” line into the sort of bumper-sticker comment that would damage him with swing voters much like his 2008 rival, Senator John McCain, was hurt when he said “the fundamentals of the economy are strong.” Mr. McCain, however, spoke in September 2008 as the financial system was already imploding, and his comment underscored his well-known and self-acknowledged unfamiliarity with economic policy.

Seeking to even the day’s score, Democrats quickly mounted a counteroffensive by the same cable and Internet outlets to amplify one of Mr. Romney’s remarks on Friday.

Speaking of Mr. Obama, Mr. Romney said: “He wants another stimulus. He wants to hire more government workers. He says we need more firemen, more policemen, more teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did: It’s time for us to cut back on government and help the American people.”

Ben LaBolt, an Obama campaign spokesman, said in a statement that “Mitt Romney promised to eliminate even more public-sector jobs.”

Mr. Obama’s news conference also provoked Republicans to revive their charge that he is blaming Europe’s ills for slow growth here to distract from his own culpability.

“He used his old standby excuse — headwinds — for his failure on the economy,” said Kirsten Kukowski, press secretary for the Republican National Committee.

Yet many economists say that Europe is a big factor in the American outlook. AllianceBernstein, an asset management firm in Manhattan, wrote to clients and reporters on Friday that it had slightly lowered its forecast for economic growth this year “amid increasing international headwinds facing the U.S. economy.” And Bank of America Merrill Lynch said “the uncertainty shock from Europe is building rapidly, undercutting both U.S. and global growth.”

View the original article here

Google Search

Sunday, June 24, 2012

Saturday, June 23, 2012

Friday, June 22, 2012

Thursday, June 21, 2012

Wednesday, June 20, 2012

Tuesday, June 19, 2012

Monday, June 18, 2012

Sunday, June 17, 2012

Saturday, June 16, 2012

Friday, June 15, 2012