Cory Booker & Joe Scarborough: Scarborough Was Right! Booker's Admonishment Hurts Democrats; Turns Off Independents

“Inconsistency with ourselves is the greatest weakness of human nature.”
John Addison


"Morning Joe" Host Joe Scarborough's analysis of Cory Booker's first Apology Video following his appearance last week on "Meet The Press" DID in fact make him appear as if he were being "held Hostage".

Cory Booker's recent Admonishment by the National Democratic Party for speaking out on "Meet The Press" proves Independent Minds are NOT welcome in 21st Century Politics.
Its 100% Partisan Politics or Else!

The Democratic Party’s recent Attack on Cory Booker hurts his Political Brand & Disrupts his legacy of Helping the Poor and being able to reach across the Aisle as an Effective Bi-Partisan Leader.

As a result Independent Voters have been Turned off by how Poorly Booker was treated by Democrats following his "Meet The Press" comments.

Cory should NOT have Apologized!

I don't know WHO advised him (Male or Female) to Apologize but they offered him some very Damaging Career Advice.

Instead he should have just reiterated his Stand for Pres. Obama & also reiterated his Support for Private Equity.

However he should NOT have Apologized.

Here's Why.

During his appearance on "Meet The Press", Mayor Booker criticized Both Political Parties for Negative Ads which further Divide American Voters.

Millions of Voters & Political Leaders from all walks of life and ethnic groups agreed with Cory's Straight-From-The-Heart comments.

Voters are so tired of Politicians saying ANYTHING just to get Elected & Re-elected.

Thus when Cory Booker spoke so eloquently about Negative Campaign ads which revisit the Jeremiah Wright drama & attacks Private Equity, the Clouds opened up for American Voters.

However while Independent Voters were Lauding Booker, Leaders within the Democratic Party and many within Pres. Obama's Re-election camp obviously viewed Cory's comments as a Spotlight stealing gimmick.

It Wasn't!

Cory Booker has primarily been a Staunch Advocate of Pres. Barack Obama, even when he was just Senator Obama.

So why would he suddenly become a "Turn Coat" or a Traitor to Pres. Obama?

Cory merely stated an Opinion. An Independent Opinion.

How could an Honest Opinion in which he criticized the Negative Actions of Both Political Parties, cause Cory's Loyalty to Pres. Obama's Administration to be Questioned?

I thought all American Citizens regardless of their Ethnicity, Economic & Social Status were legally Afforded Freedom Of Speech rights as provided by the U.S. Constitution.

Hold It!

Cory Booker was an Obama Surrogate right?

Apparently Political Surrogates are NOT allowed to Express their Own, Independent Opinions.

Especially NOT BLACK, Political Surrogates within the Democratic Party.

You see its acceptable for WHITE Political Surrogates to Express their Independent Opinions once in a while, but BLACK, Political Surrogates are ALWAYS expected to do as they are told versus practicing Independent Thinking.

i.e., Slavery Group Think Mentally!

In essence Cory Booker largely known for being an Effective Bi-Partisan Leader, was Forced by the National Democratic Party and by some of his Inner Circle Socialite Friends to become a completely Partisan Political Leader or ELSE!!!

In other words pick a side or we will Black List You!

Sure sounds like "Hostage Politics" to me.

Cory Booker was Celebrated by Independent Voters for his "Meet The Press" comments because not only did he speak from the Heart but he demonstrated a Human trait so many 21st Century Politicians have lost.

How Sad such an Admirable Human Relations Trait is no longer welcome in the world of Partisan Politics.
Both Parties!

Partisan Politics are to blame for a Broken Congress & a Dysfunctional Executive Branch Government.

Booker sees American Citizens NOT just as Voting Blocks or as Separate Voting Groups, but Cory Booker sees American Citizens as Individual HUMAN BEINGS Created in GOD's Image.

Cory Booker was Admonished for simply Daring to be Independent & for Daring to be Human versus a Political Machine.

For that Mayor Booker's Political Career has been Damaged, All the Good he has done to help Clean Up a Corrupt Metropolitan City Forgotten & his Once shining light as a Rising Political Star Dimmed.

In 2008 Barack Obama was Praised by Registered Independent Voters for being a seemingly Effective Bi-Partisan Political Leader, willing to Compromise for the sake of the Collective American Electorate.

Fast forward to 2012.

Cory Booker another rising star within the National Democratic Party is Whipped, Admonished & Blacklisted for attempting to be an Effective Bi-Partisan Political, also willing to Compromise for the sake of the Collective American Electorate.

Perhaps there will Always ONLY be room for just ONE rising, BLACK Political Star within the National Democratic Party at a time.

I suggest Cory Booker choose some New Inner Circle Social Friends (Male & Female) and....a New Public Relations Adviser.

I also suggest Cory Booker decide if he should remain a Staunch Democrat or consider becoming a Registered Independent like one of his Mentors Mayor Mike Bloomberg.

After all what is the use of remaining a Staunch, Loyal Democrat Surrogate if the Democratic Party will treat you like Horse Manure if you choose to "Step Out Of Line"?
i.e., Political Slavery!
i.e., "Held Hostage"!


But Republicans shouldn’t laugh at this latest misstep by Democrat Leaders.

Key GOP Leaders have also been known to recently Attack rising Republican Leaders & Candidates who stray off-message.

So much for Authentic American Democracy.

So much for Bi-Partisanship.

So much for Independent, Critical Thinkers.

Dear God Help Us!

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Cory Booker’s truth — and its consequences

The past several days of Newark Mayor Cory Booker’s life have been painfully amusing to watch.

Painful because Booker, a rising Democratic star, is such a good guy. Amusing, because rarely are Americans treated to such premier seats in the political theater of truth and consequence.

That is, tell the truth and beware the consequences.

Booker has gained much unwelcome attention from his own political party, while being nearly sanctified by Republicans, for the singular offense of telling the truth.

And then untelling the truth.

And then . . . stay tuned.

To know Booker is to like him. He’s one of those political figures whose persona telegraphs “honest broker.” Educated at Stanford, Oxford and Yale Law School, he’s also a popular mayor in one of America’s toughest, most challenged cities. Open-minded and solution-oriented, he’s what we hope for in public officials. Or say we do.

But honesty is not always a rewarding trait in politics, especially during high-stakes election years, as Booker promptly learned when he recently spoke from the heart on “Meet the Press.” He said that attacks on Bain Capital, where Mitt Romney made a fortune, were “nauseating” to him, as were similar attacks from the right to resurrect the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

“I have to just say from a very personal level, I’m not about to sit here and indict private equity,” Booker said. “To me, it’s just this — we’re getting to a ridiculous point in America, especially that I know. I live in a state where pension funds, unions and other people are investing in companies like Bain Capital. If you look at the totality of Bain Capital’s record, it ain’t — they’ve done a lot to support businesses, to grow businesses.”

Hearts leapt.

While regular folks shielded their eyes from the blinding light of Truth, political operatives left and right shifted into warp speed. Republicans produced an insta-ad capitalizing on Booker’s remarks — See? Even Democrats dislike President Obama’s attack on Bain — while their counterparts on the left began launching correctives.

David Axelrod promptly made the rounds and explained to talk show hosts what Booker really meant. (As though Americans can’t understand what they plainly hear.) Others pointed out Booker’s own cozy relationship with equity capital political donors. And Booker, obviously scrambling to recapture favor with the Obama campaign, posted a YouTube video before another sun had set.

What he “really” meant: “Let me be clear. Mitt Romney has made his business record a centerpiece of his campaign,” Booker says in the video. “He’s talked about himself as a job creator. And therefore it is reasonable — and in fact I encourage it — for the Obama campaign to examine that record and to discuss it. I have no problem with that.”

Commentators have all cast their ballots as to whether Booker should have corrected himself. Almost unanimously, the answer was no.

Obviously, if you’re a surrogate for the president, as Booker described himself on “Meet the Press,” your job is to regurgitate talking points. No wandering around the reservation, no independent thinking, certainly no personal confessions. You absolutely do not declare the centerpiece of the president’s attack on his opponent to be “nauseating.”

Unless it is. And unless it’s true. For you, you know when you’re alone with your conscience. Or having lunch with your private-equity donors, as the case may be. But definitely not while on TV!

On Rachel Maddow’s show, Booker dug a little deeper: “Obviously, I did things in the ‘Meet the Press’ interview, as I told you, that did not land the points that I was trying to make. And in some ways, you know, frustratingly, I think I conflated the attacks that the Republicans were making with Jeremiah Wright with some of the attacks on the left. And those can’t even be equated.”

Worse, from the party’s perspective, Booker described himself as an “independent Democrat.” Oops.

We may like independents in theory, but surrogates don’t get to be independent. You gotta pick one or the other. This has been the immediate lesson for Cory Booker. But the broader lesson for the public is that there’s no space in our body politic for an independent mind, even though more Americans describe themselves as independent than either Democrat or Republican.

Thinking outside the box may solve problems in the real world. But in the political realm, creative noodling will get you cast into the outer darkness. No matter which way you lean, The Machinery requires cogs, not cognizance.





Cory Booker’s Brand takes a hit

It only took 15 seconds on “Meet the Press” to turn Cory Booker’s gold-plated political brand into an imperiled commodity.
Booker has cemented a reputation as a rising Democratic star with crossover appeal, whose open secret is his desire to become either senator or governor.

But the Newark mayor may have done himself serious damage before he gets the chance to act on his long-held ambitions, thanks to his pointed criticism of the Obama campaign’s assault on Mitt Romney’s private-equity tenure, which he equated with the GOP using the Rev. Jeremiah Wright against Obama.

Booker’s words, combined with his painful, videotaped walk-back hours later, may have done the Democrat more harm than good.

“Mayor Booker forgets there’s Democratic primaries you have to [go] through before you get the nomination and statements like that don’t help you with the Democratic primary base,” said Julie Roginsky, a New Jersey-based Democratic political strategist.

Some Democrats, and Republicans, believe that the telegenic, African-American mayor emerged from the week — in which he called the attacks on Romney’s record at Bain Capital “nauseating” on “Meet the Press” — as a pragmatist, one who could work with the Republicans in the Democratic-leaning Garden State.

But while the mayor’s “No Labels” centrist appeal may work with donors and center-right voters, it will do little for him in a Democratic primary against, say, Sen. Frank Lautenberg in 2014 — especially if Obama is reelected, and holding onto a grudge.
“It is absolutely crazy to go and blast the president,” said one Democratic operative who knows Booker well, and asked not to be identified. “And he could have gotten away with it. He could have bemoaned negative campaigning. That would have been fine and that would have been great. (But) he compared the Bain attack to Jeremiah Wright. That’s crazy.”

Booker, who has fundraised heavily from the financial-services sector and is a player in the private-equity-financed, education reform movement, has been eyeing statewide office for years.

He is believed to most covet the governor’s office, although he would never challenge Gov. Chris Christie, who’s been a political friend and has deftly moved to co-opt the Newark mayor, unless the Republican was truly vulnerable.

A potential Lautenberg challenge is seen as likelier — and it’s a fact of which that the senator is keenly aware. Following Booker’s comments, the 88-year-old senator went on a media tour to rub salt in the wounds after the mayor’s walk-back, which was made after national Democrats contacted him.

“Now we have a different record,” Lautenberg cheerily told Roll Call of the difference between himself and Booker, accusing Booker of “sabotage” against the president.

Not everyone thinks Booker did himself damage.

“I just don’t see any situation where this really hurts him politically in New Jersey,” said Bradley Tusk, who managed New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg’s 2009 reelection campaign and who has worked with Booker on education initiatives. “I don’t think voters will remember this if he runs for office. I don’t think they’d care even if they did remember.

Nor do I think anyone would challenge him from the left.”

“I don’t think that will” damage him, agreed former New Jersey Gov. Tom Kean.
“He’s a very attractive candidate — there aren’t that many of them around.

He is one of them. … I think what people like about candidates these days is when they’re honest — so what he said about ‘a plague on both your houses,’ I think it was very well received.

I don’t think it helped him or hurt him in the end.”

The counter-argument to why Booker has hurt himself, according to a number of Democratic operatives, is simple: he’s black and will pick up nearly every African-American vote, he can raise infinite sums of money, and he’s a terrific and tireless campaigner who has made good use of social media to grow his base of support. It’s the Obama playbook on a statewide stage.

Yet Kean pointed to what may have been the biggest problem for Booker out of last week — that his tortured-looking YouTube reversal of his “nauseating” remark, a nearly four-minute mea culpa in which he tried to stick with his original words while saying Romney’s Bain tenure is fair game — didn’t help someone trying to maintain a brand as a straight talker.

“The problem is he backtracked, so that makes him look like one of them, not one of us,” Kean said. “But I think the initial comments were on target. (I) don’t think they were critical of the president, they were critical of an ad strategy.”
Booker’s aides did not return calls for comment.

Booker’s words on last Sunday’s “Meet the Press” provoked a week of national scrutiny never before faced by the mayor criticizing the first black president.

He became the first Democrat to question whether the president should be launching attacks on private equity — which invests in New Jersey pension funds, and the Democratic Party — and was soon followed by other Democrats, such as ex-Rep. Harold Ford, and former Democratic National Committee Chairman Ed Rendell.

Although Democrats quickly piled on Booker — including Obama himself, stating clearly the Bain attacks would continue — Republicans embraced Booker as an ally. The GOP launched an “I Stand with Cory” campaign, and Romneyland has repeatedly emailed out his money quote, that the Bain attacks are part of a “nauseating” pattern of negativity in national politics.

It’s just a matter of time before Booker stars in a future Romney campaign ad, containing some version of this sentence: “Even Obama ally Cory Booker believes the Bain attacks are wrong…”

The two-term mayor, who’s in his early 40s, is at a crossroads in terms of his political future. A rising star for a decade, his chances for statewide office may start to dim if he doesn’t make a move soon.

Andrew Tisch, whose family runs the Loews Corp. and who is a major Booker donor himself, insisted that the mayor leaves this week in good shape, and is not running out of time.

“He’s 42 years old!” Tisch said. “When you say, name the great mayors in the United States, you start with Bloomberg, you go to (Rahm) Emanuel, you get to (Antonio) Villaraigosa, and then you get to Booker. He’s on the top of everybody’s tongue, and he’s made a hell of a name for himself at a very young age — and he’s one of the few people I’ve ever met in politics who has patience.”

But the “young gun/rising star” brand tends to have a shelf life.

“The challenge for Cory is, how many years can he keep his brand fresh and still be a viable statewide candidate,” said one Democratic operative.

One option is to run for a third term as Newark mayor, a city where he’s become famous for engaging with his citizens on Twitter, showing up to shovel people’s yards during a blizzard in 2010 and recently performing heroics during a building fire.

But Booker’s national presence and his social media prowess belies the fact that his own numbers in his city have not improved in recent years, and neither have some of the key indicators of urban success, most notably the perennial Newark crime scourge.

Crime statistics went down for his first years in office, but some rose again after the fiscal crisis. He only got about 59 percent of the vote in 2010 against a central rival who was soon after sentenced to prison.

He is not generally part of what one source called “the fabric of the Democratic party in New Jersey that wins elections.”

The $100 million investment that Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg pledged to the Newark school system, during a famous Oprah Winfrey chat with Booker and Christie, is actually a matching grant. And while Booker has made major progress toward matching it, he hasn’t yet completed his end.

Booker’s close connections to donors across the river in New York City have given him an air of distance from his state, and while his ties to Christie have helped him nationally, they inspire some distrust among Democrats statewide.

Lautenberg, meanwhile, is, as one Democrat said, “no shrinking violet,” and he has the personal wealth to help fuel a bloody intraparty challenge.

Booker also has an insular circle, and tends to heed his own counsel — which is fine on a local level, but difficult to pull off more broadly.

What the mayor may have demonstrated in his Sunday show outing, said one Democrat, is this: “He may not be ready for prime time.”

Where Booker has been successful is as a communicator — he gives strong speeches, and was frequently deployed as a surrogate for Obama during the 2008 campaign.

“He’s a solid Democrat, but he’s built this (reputation) where he speaks his mind and is unafraid to speak is his mind,” said Republican operative Mike DuHaime, a top Christie adviser.

Kean raised the prospect of Booker becoming a Cabinet member in a second Obama administration if he doesn’t run for office again.

“There could be a number of Cabinet positions open, one of them might be attractive to him,” Kean said. “He could do what certain candidates have done in the past, these cable shows would love to have you. (A) number of ex-candidates who have done pretty well there.

There are a number of doors open to him if he wants to take them. He’s still an attractive, compelling candidate.”

But despite insisting that they welcomed the focus on the Bain debate, Obama aides were displeased with Booker. Several Democrats suggested he was more loyal to the donors who fund his campaigns and his education reform efforts than he was to the president, and that he simply showed where his sympathies really lie.

And Booker’s remarks helped muddy the message that Chicago was trying to deliver.

A second-term Obama administration may not inspire much more fear than the first-term one did. But there are ways that an incumbent president can make things difficult for an aspiring candidate.

Democratic strategist Hank Sheinkopf, who has handled New Jersey races, said that only time will tell whether Booker suffered damage this week — but that he can’t exist without the donors who would fund a statewide campaign.

“He did help himself with Wall Street,” Sheinkopf said. “You can’t buy TV ads with great compliments — you gotta pay cash.”


View Larger Map


Sources: AOL, Crooks & Liars, Huffington Post, MSNBC, Mediaite, Meet The Press, Politico, Washington Post, Youtube, Google Maps

North Carolina's Democratic Party Is A Corrupt, Dysfunctional, Political Hot Mess! 2012 Obama Trouble!

North Carolina's Democratic Party is a Racist, Corrupt, Confused Political Hot Mess!

And Due to a recent Gay Sexual Harassment Scandal among State Party leaders, North Carolina's Democratic Party is even more chaotic & messed up!

Yes, right now its truly embarrassing to be a Democrat if you live in North Carolina.

Its a Fact NC Democrats are making the National Democratic Party look so BAD!

That's why as a NC Resident I am a Registered Independent.

All of this Political Dysfunction is sure to cause major problems for Pres. Obama's 2012 re-election chances because North Carolina is a Battleground state.

Considering North Carolina's extremely Racist, Klan loving history I'm beginning to think some NC Democratic Party Leaders are Intentionally trying to create havoc because they really don't want him to Win.

Just a thought.

You don't have to agree.










North Carolina a political headache for Democrats

Once a bright spot for President Barack Obama, North Carolina is now more like a political migraine less than four months before Democrats open the party's national convention in Charlotte.

The causes are plenty.

Labor unions, a core Democratic constituency, are up in arms. Democratic Gov. Bev Perdue isn't running for re-election; Democrats say she was likely to lose. The state Democratic Party is in disarray over an explosive sexual harassment scandal. Voters recently approved amending the state constitution to ban gay marriage, a position that runs counter to Obama's. And unemployment in the state remains persistently high.

"Nobody can sugarcoat the fact that we got problems here," said Gary Pearce, a former Democratic consultant who was an adviser to former Democratic Gov. Jim Hunt. Pearce was referring specifically to state party woes but could have been talking about any of the troubles here for Democrats.

But, he added: "I think the greatest strength that the party has is President Obama. And he's the thing that people will rally around."

It wasn't supposed to be like this — at least that was the hope — when Democrats chose Charlotte to host the national convention, where Obama will formally accept his party's presidential nomination for a second time, Sept. 4-6.

When Democrats announced the choice in February 2011, they said selecting the Southern city signaled Obama's intent to fight hard for the conservative-leaning state like he did in 2008. They also highlighted the economic transformation in the state and in Charlotte — from tobacco, textiles and furniture-making to research, energy and banking. Party leaders noted the state's strong political leadership and expressed hope that a Perdue re-election bid would get a boost from the attention that would be lavished on the convention.

Now traditional Democratic Party groups are threatening huge protests in part because they're deeply uncomfortable that the convention is being held in one of the least union-friendly states. And thousands of Democrats across the country are calling for the convention to be relocated because of the gay-marriage vote.

Democrats say that won't happen.

"Charlotte is going to host a great convention," insisted Mayor Anthony Foxx, who pushed to bring the event to North Carolina's largest city.

Said Democratic National Convention in Charlotte spokeswoman Joanne Peters: "The convention is staying in Charlotte."

Republicans point out the obvious.

"North Carolina is a mess for the Democratic Party and for President Obama," said Republican National Committee spokesman Matt Connelly.

Four years ago, Obama became the first Democrat to carry North Carolina since Jimmy Carter in 1976. He did it by exploiting voter anger at President George W. Bush and assembling a diverse coalition of supporters, including huge numbers of minorities who had never been politically organized and young voters. State law allowed people to register to vote on Election Day, which also meant the large student vote could be tapped.

The campaign also targeted highly educated newcomers to the state.

Obama's team has been hopeful about replicating that effort, while mindful of the new challenges confronting him here. They note that there are enough states in play that Obama can find a strategy to get the necessary 270 electoral votes to win a second term without the 15 North Carolina offers, while Republican Mitt Romney's path to victory is more limited, meaning he's more likely to need a victory here.

Criticism began immediately after Charlotte was announced.

Many labor leaders were upset that the convention would be held in a state that offers few protections for workers and in a city with no union hotels. While some unions plan to attend, more than a dozen trade unions are boycotting. Union protests also are planned for convention week.

But unions aren't the only ones stirring trouble for Obama.

Politically, things are much different in the state.

State unemployment was 9.7 percent in March, well above the national average of 8.2 percent that month, and it's much higher in some rural counties.

There's also the fired-up Republican base that turned out Tuesday to approve the constitutional ban on gay marriage. The vote prompted more than 28,000 people to sign an online petition — by the New York-based Gay Marriage USA — to move the convention from Charlotte. Twitter also was flooded with similar sentiment from angry supporters of same-sex marriage. Obama stated his support for gay marriage a day after the vote.

Democrats want to include gay marriage in the platform to be adopted at the convention. That could create controversy at a gathering that's intended to promote party unity by drawing attention to a divisive social issue when the economy remains the most pressing concern.

What's more, the state Democratic Party is in disarray.

With sagging poll numbers, Perdue announced in January that she would not seek a second term. Her decision came on the heels of bruising budget battles with the GOP-controlled Legislature. Republicans in 2010 captured the Legislature for the first time in 140 years.

Then there's the sex scandal roiling the state party.

State Party Chairman David Parker has refused to resign — although he has said he won't seek re-election — despite pressure to step down from Perdue and other Democrats who say his presence leading the party has become a distraction. Sexual harassment allegations against executive director Jay Parmley by a former party employee have siphoned off all the political air in North Carolina.

The turmoil is churning just as Democrats accelerate preparations for the convention.


View Larger Map


Sources: McClatchy Newspapers, WRAL, Google Maps

Rick Santorum vs Pres. Barack Obama This Fall? Its Very Likely!

FYI:
Please Begin To Obtain Your State-Approved Voter ID Cards.
Every VOTE Counts To Help Re-elect Pres. Obama This Fall.

Is it possible Rick Santorum will be selected (by GOP Voters) as the 2012 GOP Presidential Nominee at the RNC Convention in Tampa?
YES! Its Very Likely!

GOP Establishment Leaders Don't Want Santorum, however Most GOP Voters are NOT listening to them!

Pres. Obama's Re-election team knows they have a much better chance of defeating Romney than Santorum.

Here's Why.

Less than 40% of GOP Voters Support Mitt Romney.

Included within that number are the 1% Of America's Wealthiest Citizens.
Rick Santorum does NOT have the Money Factor Romney does

but.....

More than 50% of GOP Voters Support Santorum, including Conservatives, Evangelicals, Pro-Life Women, GOP Seniors & Southern Tea Partiers.
Many Independents are also excited by Santorum's Appeal.

It won't be long before Ron Paul's Youth Voters also defect to Santorum.

Romney is Shallow & seems to lack Conviction except when it comes to making Money.

Santorum on the other hand appears to possess Great People Skills & has the ability to Connect with Middle Class and Blue Collar Voters. i.e., Much like Pres. Obama did in back in 2008.

Rick Santorum is from the East Coast but he relates to Southern GOP Voters much more so than Romney.

The East Coast & Southern States are a Gold Mine for GOP Presidential Candidates.

As it relates to Debating Skills, both Barack Obama & Rick Santorum Excel in this Area.

The ONLY asset Romney has going for him are Campaign Donations & Negative Campaign Ads.

American Voters are NOT Stupid!

Romney won't be able to capture the Nomination on just Negative Campaign Ads Alone.

Make No mistake about it people!

If Rick Santorum becomes the 2012 GOP Presidential Nominee its going to be an even Tougher race for Pres. Obama.

So Who will emerge Victoriously?

I still believe Barack Obama can Defeat both Mitt Romney & Rick Santorum.

Please Begin To Obtain Your State-Approved Voter ID Cards.
Every VOTE Counts To Help Re-elect Pres. Obama This Fall.

If Santorum is the Nominee it Won't be an Easy Win but it will still be a win for Pres. Obama.






Santorum wins hurt Gingrich as GOP race stretches on


Rick Santorum took his re-energized Republican presidential campaign to Puerto Rico on Wednesday after key primary victories in the South that raised questions about conservative rival Newt Gingrich's viability as a candidate and portended a long battle with frontrunner Mitt Romney.

Romney, rejected again by Southern conservatives in the Tuesday primaries in Mississippi and Alabama, won caucuses in Hawaii and American Samoa to claim about a third of the total delegates available and maintain his lead.

However, Santorum's twin primary triumphs -- while narrow -- reframed the GOP race as a one-on-one battle between the socially conservative former Pennsylvania senator and the more moderate Romney, with Gingrich's chances fading fast.

Texas Rep. Ron Paul, the libertarian champion, continued to trail well behind the other three candidates in the campaign to face President Barack Obama in November.

"There is no end in sight," noted Ari Fleischer, a CNN contributor who was White House press secretary under President George W. Bush. "... For Republicans who thought that maybe Mitt Romney could come South and make this race look like it was coming to an end, this race is going on and on and on."

Santorum headed to Puerto Rico on Wednesday ahead of Sunday's primary there, which is a day after caucuses in Missouri and two days before a showdown with Romney in the Illinois primary.

"We did it again," Santorum told supporters Tuesday night in Lafayette, Louisiana, which will hold another Southern primary March 24.

The Alabama and Mississippi victories give Santorum 10 states so far to Romney's 18, and he poked at the frontrunner on Wednesday as he reiterated his stance that he is the viable conservative alternative to the former Massachusetts governor.

"It's pretty sad when all you have is to do math instead of trying to go out there and win it on substance and win it on what Americans want to hear about," Santorum told CNN in reference to Romney's claim of an insurmountable lead in delegates. "We're a long, long way from over."

Romney said Wednesday in an interview on Fox that his lead so far in the campaign shows he has support across the Republican spectrum, adding that "some who are very conservative may not be yet in my camp, but they will be when I become the nominee when I face Barack Obama."

He also noted Santorum called him a "real conservative" in endorsing his candidacy in 2008, "so obviously when campaigns get tough and you get towards the end of this process and you are way behind in delegates you say some things which may be contradictory to what you said only four years ago."

Earlier Wednesday, Romney received the endorsement of former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge, who was the first homeland security secretary when the department was created in the Bush administration after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

"I've met accomplished and strong leaders in my life," Ridge said in a statement released by Romney's campaign. "Mitt Romney is one of them."

Gingrich, who based his campaign on a Southern strategy after winning South Carolina and Georgia, appeared to be in major trouble after losing both Dixie primaries Tuesday.

Last week, Gingrich spokesman R.C. Hammond said the former speaker had to win Alabama and Mississippi in order to remain credible. Gingrich later said he would continue to the national convention in Tampa no matter what happens, and he repeated that assertion Tuesday night.

"The fact is that in both states, the conservative candidates got nearly 70% of the vote, and if you're the frontrunner and you keep coming in third, you're not much of a frontrunner," Gingrich said of Romney's performance in Mississippi and Alabama.

Citing what he called Romney's vulnerabilities on health care reform, Gingrich said he doesn't "believe that a Massachusetts moderate who created Romneycare as the forerunner of Obamneycare is going to be in a position to win any debates this fall," and that is part of the reason he's "insisted in staying in this race."

Calls for Gingrich to drop out and unite conservative support for Santorum have already started, but Gingrich argues that none of the candidates are likely to reach the 1,144 delegates necessary to clinch the nomination before May or June at the earliest, and probably not until the August convention.

CNN's estimated delegate count Wednesday had Romney at 498, with Santorum at 239, Gingrich at 139 and Paul at 69.

Prior to Tuesday, Romney needed to win roughly 48% of the remaining delegates to win, while Santorum needed about 66% and Gingrich needed 72%. Santorum, Romney, and Gingrich each won roughly a third of the combined delegates at stake in Mississippi and Alabama.

In Alabama, Santorum won 35% of the vote. Gingrich and Romney both had 29% -- although Gingrich was about 2,000 votes ahead with 99% of the vote counted -- and Ron Paul had 5%.

With 99% of the vote counted in Mississippi, Santorum had 33% to 31% for Gingrich, 30% for Romney and 4% for Paul.

Romney's victories in Hawaii and American Samoa demonstrated his stronger organization. Last Saturday, Romney won caucuses in Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands, and he also picked up a majority of the delegates in the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Santorum was coming off a big win in Kansas on Saturday, and his victories Tuesday indicated a comeback after trailing Gingrich and Romney in polls released Monday.
Romney's campaign has pointed to its large lead in delegates as a reason for Gingrich and Santorum to get out of the race.

Eric Fehrnstrom, a Romney campaign senior adviser, said the campaign met its goal of taking roughly one-third of the Mississippi and Alabama delegates.

"Once the dust clears, you'll be able to look and see that there really will be no ground that our opponents have made up against Mitt Romney," Fehrnstrom said Tuesday night. "And as you look at the upcoming contests on the calendar, there are no opportunities for them to have significant wins that allow them to accumulate large numbers of delegates so that they can close that gap with Mitt Romney."

Exit polls from Alabama and Mississippi show that Romney still has some ground to make up to win over conservatives: In Alabama, 55% of those polled said Romney's position on the issues wasn't conservative enough; in Mississippi, the number was 49%.

In another trend that has continued throughout the campaign, more voters saw Romney as the best choice for defeating Obama in the general election.

In Alabama, 46% saw Romney as being the most likely to beat Obama, while both Santorum and Gingrich were the favorites of 24%; in Mississippi, 50% of those polled saw Romney as having the best chance of beating Obama, compared to 24% for Gingrich and 23% for Santorum.

As results were coming in Tuesday night, CNN chief political analyst Gloria Borger said that hardcore conservatives' persistent preference for Santorum or Gingrich means Romney benefits from the presence of both.

"Gov. Romney needs Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich right now. ... If it weren't for them splitting the conservatives -- the very conservative, the evangelical, the tea party voters -- Mitt Romney would not be within sort of a position to win in either of Mississippi or Alabama. So the fact that they're splitting the vote ... he ought to pay them both to stay in for a little bit longer."

Results of all races

Santorum and Romney are expected to split the next few contests on the calendar. Santorum won the nonbinding primary in Missouri in February and is expected to take the state's caucuses on Saturday. Romney is expected to win Puerto Rico's primary on Sunday.

Polls in Illinois, which votes Tuesday, show a tight race and Santorum is expected to win in Louisiana a week from Saturday.

Then the race turns north and eastward -- the District of Columbia, Maryland and Wisconsin vote on April 3 and Romney is the early favorite there. But that's three weeks away and much has changed in such a span in the most volatile Republican race in generations.

Paul didn't campaign over the past week in either Alabama or Mississippi. Both states held open primaries, which meant Republicans, independent voters and Democrats could cast ballots in the GOP contests.


View Larger Map


Sources: CNN, The Hill, Youtube, Google Maps

2012 DNC Convention Changes Venue, Shortens Event Timeframe

This Evening I Attended (Via Invitation) The 2012 DNC Media Reception Party In Charlotte, NC At The NASCAR Hall Of Fame. I Was Blessed To Meet Various Media Professionals From Politico, C-Span, NY Times, Charlotte Observer, etc., I Also Spoke Briefly With Charlotte Mayor Anthony Foxx. I Encourage Everyone Of You To Attend The 2012 DNC Convention This September If Possible. The Event Will Be Held For 3 Days From September 3rd Through The 7th. To Begin At Time Warner Arena & End At Bank Of America Stadium Where Pres. Obama Will Deliver His Acceptance Speech. Volunteer Opportunities Are Available. Please Visit charlottein2012.com For More Info.





Major changes to length, location of Charlotte DNC

The length of the Democratic National Convention set to take place in Charlotte later this year is being shortened.

Instead of a traditional four-day event, the DNC will be shortened to three days to make room for a day to celebrate the Carolinas, Virginia and the south, the committee announced Tuesday. On September 3, the program will celebrate Labor Day with a DNC kickoff at the Charlotte Motor Speedway in Concord.

"Dedicating Monday, September 3rd to families and the community hosting the convention will help show the world what we can do when we out-innovate, out-educate and out-build the rest of the world and build an economy that creates opportunity for all," said DNC Committee CEO Steve Kerrigan in a statement Tuesday morning.

That Monday event will be free and open to the public and is not an official DNC event. Tuesday and Wednesday's programs will still take place at the Time Warner Cable Arena in uptown Charlotte.

"It's an exciting day for Charlotte and North Carolina. It will be a big moment for this region and community," Charlotte Mayor Anthony Foxx said during Tuesday morning's press conference.

On Thursday, September 6, President Barack Obama will deliver his acceptance speech at Bank of America Stadium.

Moving his acceptance speech allows the party to open its doors to tens of thousands of people at the 74,000-seat stadium.

"We want this to be the most open and accessible convention ever," Chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee Debbie Wasserman-Schultz said.

The DNC Committee hasn't said exactly how ticketing will be offered for the final event at the Bank of America Stadium. The festival-like event at the Charlotte Motor Speedway will be open to the public. It is not an official convention event.


View Larger Map

Sources: 2012 DNC, Charlottein2012, Charmeck.org, McClatchy Newspapers, WCNC, Google Maps, Youtube

Obama Will Win In 2012 Because Tea Party Destroyed GOP! (Decision 2012)

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

President Obama Will Win In An Overwhelming Landslide in 2012 and Will Deserve the Victory

America is a one party state. The Democratic Party is the sole political party in the US now.

The Republican Party is no more. It is not a political party; as David Brooks noted "the Republican Party may no longer be a normal party."

It has become a clearing house for religious fanatics, Ayn Rand groupie weirdos and angry white racists driven literally mad by seeing a black man in the White House, a black man more articulate and intelligent -- not to mention annoyingly even tempered -- than they or their bizarre leaders are.

I was a Republican activist in the 1970s and 80s. My father was a founder of the religious right and I was his sidekick. What he and I did --sadly -- still resonates today.

For instance Michele Bachmann got into politics because of reading my father's work. I escaped -- fled -- in the early 1990s. But I do know the Republicans from the inside and in the past hung around with the likes of the Bush Sr., family, the Fords, Bill Buckley etc. And whatever you may think of those Republicans, they belonged to a normal -- if misguided -- political party.

No more. Roll over in your grave Jack Kemp! Call your office Bill Buckley!

As Hal Crowther writes:

The Republican Party's slapstick search for a leader would be heartwarming and sidesplitting, but for the tragic knowledge that one of these scrambling midgets will collect tens of millions of votes in the presidential election of 2012. Never have so many amounted to so little, talked so much rubbish, dreamed of an office so far above their abilities. Blood pressures rose among party elders when Donald Trump, marginally Republican and one of the greatest fools in the solar system, momentarily tossed his hairpiece into the ring and became the instant favorite.

The GOP dilemma -- a golden opportunity to rule but nothing to say and no one to say it -- is so desperate that my instinct is to help them sort it out. Could we make a start, at least, by dismissing candidates who called for President Obama's birth certificate or raised the specter of Sharia law in America, followed briskly off the stage by lunatics who dismiss global warming as a socialist plot?

That would leave plenty of unbalanced extremists still in the running, yet reduce the stench of sheer evil and madness. The "birther" and Sharia cults reek of cheesy talk-radio racism; climate-change denial is a stranger faith yet, a political assault on basic science that insults a ground squirrel's intelligence and casually threatens the survival of life on earth.


That is what, not whom, President Obama will run against in 2012. He will be running against the "party" that in the matter of the debt crisis is happy to take the whole county with them over the cliff of loony and contradictory Bible-based/Ayn Rand-inspired, ideology into economic chaos. None of which any former Republicans, let alone any actual Christians -- i.e., those who try to follow the teachings of Christ -- would recognize.

This folly will not be forgotten. Nor will the insanity of the Rick Perry prayer meeting sponsored by a list of homophobic fanatics.

No matter what the president has to do to resolve this manufactured debt limit crisis, he will do something effective. And he will -- once again -- succeed in confounding his insane far right/religious right critics, and also once again prove his left wing critics wrong.

President Obama towers over his political rivals, left and right.

While the country and many of its leaders seem to feed on hysteria, the president takes the long view, and consistently wins.

The "disappointed" left says president Obama sold out.

The racist-laced Medicaid-mugging, billionaire-codling right staggers under the weight of terminal "birther" mythology-to-Ayn Rand "economics" of fascist selfishness.

Meanwhile president Obama continues to bide his time and looks down the road to the post-2012 reality when his patience with an impatient country filled with some very silly people, his thoughtfulness in the context of a sound-bite-entertain-ourselves-to-death era of short attention spans and historical amnesia will be vindicated.

If you think that president Obama played the Republicans in the last lame duck congress like a violin just wait until after 2012. Just wait to see how he end runs the opposition both left and right, and scores big for the moderate middle in the debt crisis.

The disappointment on the left has apparently led some folks to concoct an alternate reality in which -- in a mirror image of the loony embittered far right, not to mention in a mirror image of people like Sarah Palin who have made a profitable career out of being professional Obama haters -- no matter what president Obama does they dismiss it.

In other words some on the left don't just disagree on tactics they act like jilted lovers (and/or opportunistic cynics trolling for the next book advance) and have turned their once too-ardent love into hate.

The president's critics left and right all had one thing in common: impatience laced with little-to-no sense of history.

Meanwhile back in the real world ...

• Health care reform passed

• Bin Laden is dead

• Gay rights in the military took a quantum leap

• The economy began to revive and will again after the President resolves the debt crisis one way or another

• The world loved an American president for the first time in half a century

• The war in Iraq drew down

• America foiled countess terror attacks

• We're drawing down in Afghanistan

And in post-Libya intervention President Obama has in a little noticed historic move -- changed America's arrogant unilateral habit of global intervention perfected by Bush II.

Mr. Kupchan (of the Council on Foreign Relations) says that something new about Obama regarding actual change is the way he acts in international interventions. "The governing mantra since World War II has been, 'America is out in front,' so it's quite striking how prominent the administration's focus is on letting others take the lead," he says. "It's really kind of revolutionary."

... And everything president Obama has done he did against the backdrop of a hate campaign against him -- from the right and the left -- the likes of which no American president has faced since Lincoln faced down the slave-owning states.

Make no mistake the Tea Party, the rise of shills-for-profit like Palin, Bachmann, Trump et al, the sale of bumper stickers calling for the president's death (Psalm 109) etc., etc., all add up to one thing: the white rube underclass is lashing out. (Jimmy Carter was correct; it's always about race in America.)

And in THIS context, with the just-say-no Republicans doing nothing but obstructing him our first black president has nevertheless:

Extended child tax credits and marriage-penalty fixes; killed bin Laden: increased minority access to capital; established a credit card bill of rights; expanded loan programs for small businesses; closed the "doughnut hole" in Medicare prescription drug plan, required insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions; required children to have health insurance coverage; expanded eligibility for Medicaid; increased the Veterans Administration budget to recruit and retain more mental health workers, fully fund the Veterans Administration, fully funded the Violence Against Women Act; directed military leaders to end war in Iraq; sought verifiable reductions in nuclear stockpiles; repealed "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy; raised fuel economy standards and reversed restrictions on stem cell research...defended a woman's right to abortion...

While President Obama brilliantly cajoled 13 Republicans to join every Democratic senator to ratify the New START nuclear arms treaty with Russia, adding (as the Times put it) "the capstone to what now shapes up to be a remarkably successful legislative agenda for President Obama's first two years..."

And while President Obama signed the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell into law and while President Obama orchestrated the push back in the Senate -- that then unanimously approved a bill to pay for the medical care of workers who cleaned up ground zero... the president also kept proving that his rabid critics on the right, who have been working so hard to undermine his presidency at every turn, are dead wrong. And then president Obama foiled the great Tea Party budget "victory" of April 2011.

We Americans are very lucky people. A sane and compassionate president is in charge.

Maybe when President Obama is able to once again pull one out of the fire for sanity's sake, and America's sake in the debt crisis, maybe some of his usual critics on the left will at least admit that he is a good president, maybe a great one -- and that 2012 looks good.

As for the "Republicans," there are none, just a rag-tag group of losers who have hooked their despicably low expectations to bronze-age biblical myths on the one hand and a cult of anti-middle class selfishness and union-busting, job-exporting, billionaire-worship on the other.

Sources: AP, Barack Obamadoctcom, CNN, Huffington Post, MSNBC, Youtube

Obama's Liberal Base Still Strong Despite Disappointment (Obama Or GOP?) OBAMA!!

Why the liberal base has so little leverage with Obama

Progressive elite disgruntlement with the administration of Barack Obama has been aired so many times during the last year that it is sometimes difficult to remember how deep and wide it has become. Like lights blinking off in house after house late at night, the number of liberal opinion-leaders willing to offer robust support for Obama’s policies and political strategy and tactics has steadily dwindled to the point where it appears as an occasional dull glimmer on the cable news shows and in the op-ed pages and the blogosphere.

But up until now, signs of any rank-and-file liberal Democratic "base" revolt against Obama have been few and far between. Perhaps that’s why a poll from CNN last week publicized as showing that liberals were the main source of his latest drop in approval ratings got more attention than a random survey normally captures.

There has certainly been a persistent and growing gap between elite and non-elite progressive attitudes towards the 44th president and his administration. Liberal elite defections from the Obama camp started early and have spread steadily.

First off the grid were those angered by TARP and the coddling of miscreant CEOs and other elements of the financial community. They were quickly followed by civil libertarians upset by the failure to reverse Bush policies on surveillance and treatment of terrorist suspects; foreign policy doves alleging broken promises on Iraq and Afghanistan; and economists pining for mega-stimulus.

The health reform debate produced another cohort of progressive dissenters baffled by the administration’s successive concessions to private health industry lobbies and Blue Dogs, while many environmentalists denounced a watered-down climate change bill before that entire effort was abandoned. In the months since the appalling 2010 midterm elections, progressives have largely deplored the president’s “cave” on expiration of the Bush tax cuts and, with ever-greater intensity, his advocacy of deficit reduction and “entitlement reform” as paramount national priorities.

Suffusing all these sources of discontent on the left has been a growing impatience with Obama’s steady commitment to bipartisanship in the face of Republican disrespect and obstruction; frustration over his apparent inability to articulate progressive values and goals in a way that mobilizes public opinion and gives hope to down-ballot Democrats; and contempt for suspected incompetence in such quotidian matters as executive and judicial appointments.

To say that liberal elites are "disappointed" with Obama is a great understatement; terms of moral opprobrium such as "betrayal" and "sellout" are now routinely tossed at the White House.

But so far, this profound unhappiness has failed to translate into any tangible intramural challenge to the administration, in a way that defies all precedent. During his first term Bill Clinton faced regular revolts from congressional Democrats, losing a majority of House Democrats on NAFTA, GATT and welfare reform.

Despite threats over the healthcare public option, Afghanistan funding, and most recently, administration offers to "reform" Medicare and Social Security, congressional Democrats have yet to bolt from Obama on any major legislation. LBJ and Carter attracted powerful left-bent primary challenges. Not so Obama, beyond vain fantasizing among the chattering classes.

A big part of the paper-tiger nature of progressive protests against Obama’s policies and politics has been the absence of any mass base for a serious revolt. Until such time as Democratic (or Democratic-leaning independent) liberal voters begin to share elite anger toward the incumbent, then all the thundering from thinkers and writers on the left (or even from staunch Progressive Caucus members in Congress) represents little more than a standing invitation to be "triangulated" by a White House seeking swing voter approbation.

And that’s why the headline accompanying the new CNN poll -- "Drop in liberal support pushes Obama approval rating down" -- is arousing fresh hopes of the left finally obtaining some political leverage over the administration at a critical moment in the budget/debt limit brouhaha.

But they are probably false hopes.

First of all, CNN’s numbers don’t quite back up the hype. The results note that Obama’s approval rating among self-described liberals is "only" 71 percent, "the lowest point of his presidency." CNN doesn’t provide a trend line for liberal approval ratings of Obama’s job performance, but Gallup’s latest weekly tracking poll has him at 75 percent among liberals, five points higher than in mid-May and six points higher than in early December of 2010.

Among "liberal Democrats," probably a more reliable subcategory for capturing the sentiments of normally progressive voters, Gallup has Obama’s approval rating at 85 percent, roughly where it’s been on average throughout 2011. CNN also shows Obama’s approval rating among Democrats at "only" 80 percent, and his"renominate" number among Democrats at 77 percent, "relatively robust by historical standards but also down a bit since June." (The "historical standard" CNN supplies is a 1994 post-election poll showing Bill Clinton’s "renominate" number at 57 percent, which is indeed less robust than Obama’s).

Finally, CNN’s latest survey shows that fully 13 percent of the electorate disapproves of Obama’s job performance on grounds that he is "not liberal enough," up from nine percent in a spring survey.

But other survey findings (an all-time high percentage saying Obama’s not cooperating enough with congressional Republicans, and an all-time low approval rating for the direction offered by congressional Democratic leaders) call into question the idea that Obama’s in trouble because liberals are revolting against Obama for excessive cooperation with Republicans to gut Social Security and Medicare.

But the more important cautionary note to mention is that approval ratings are absolute, not comparative. Everything we know about Obama’s reelection strategy indicates that he hopes to make this a comparative rather than a "referendum" election, as he must unless economic conditions improve more than they are expected to prior to November 2012, or there is some incumbent-strengthening national security crisis.

This strategy might fail, as it did for Jimmy Carter in 1980, or it might succeed, as it (arguably) did for Harry Truman in 1948 and for semi-incumbent George H.W. Bush in 1988. A Republican Party that is on a remarkable ideological bender is certainly doing everything possible to cooperate.

But if a "comparative" strategy works at all, it will work most effectively with liberals, who are more acutely aware of the stakes for everything they care about -- from the survival of anything like a social safety net to the maintenance of constitutional guarantees on urgent priorities like abortion rights -- in an election that could give return Washington to united Republican control.

Liberal voters are precisely the least likely Democratic-leaning segment of the electorate to sit on their hands in 2012, no matter how they feel about Obama.

And that reality, I suspect, is contributing significantly to the anger and despair expressed by progressive elites about Obama. They may now regret his nomination in 2008, or even (on strategic grounds) his election.

But they know in their hearts they will be voting for him in 2012, and for the most part, speaking out for his re-election. Next time there is an open Democratic presidential nomination contest, the organized left will almost certain to make far greater ideological demands on candidates, and make a far less speculative choice of a favorite, than it did in 2008.

In the meantime, liberals will mostly have to bury a sense of cold fury that they have been "had" by a politician who in the course of less than three years has devolved from being the left’s great hope for a "transformative" presidency to a heresiarch over whom the Left has virtually no leverage.


View Larger Map


Sources: CNN, Gallup Polls, MSNBC, Salon, Youtube, Google Maps

Michael Bloomberg On Obama: "We Need To Be Behind The President" (Video)

View Larger Map

Sources: PBS, Youtube, Google Maps