Dems
Scramble to Explain Obama Debate Defeat
Going into
this week's first presidential debate Democrats were confident that
the most brilliant man to ever hold the office would easily trounce
his challenger. However, 67% of voters who saw the debate judged
Romney to have won. Only 25% saw Obama as the winner.
Obama
campaign strategist, David Axelrod blamed debate moderator Jim Lehrer
for allowing Romney “too much leeway. Time after time the President
was left to fend for himself against repeated attacks on his
policies. Lehrer failed to come to the President's aid despite
numerous opportunities to do so.”
Axelrod
expressed the hope that “our other friends in the media will put
forth a greater effort outside the context of the stilted debate
format to do the job we expect them to do. Our message that Governor
Romney is a greedy, lying, cheating bastard that has been working so
well in our ads needs the supporting confirmation of these widely
respected arbiters of truth.”
Debbie
Wasserman-Schultz, Chair Democratic National Committee, concurred
with Axelrod's take, saying that “review of the debate transcript
clearly shows an inappropriate handling of the event by the
moderator. First, the actual amount of time each was allowed to speak
was unacceptably allocated. Romney got almost as much time as the
President did even though the President is a much more important
figure in our government than a former one-term governor of a single
state.”
“Second,
Romney was allowed to repeatedly contradict the President,” she
observed. “This disrespect went unchallenged by the moderator. Even
worse, Lehrer's interruption of the President's closing statement on
the pretext that he exceeded the allotted time limit was a shamefully
arrogant affront to our nation's ruler.”
Stephanie
Cutter, deputy campaign manager for Obama complained that “the
whole debate thing unfairly exploits the President's weaknesses. The
President has said numerous times that prepping for these kinds of
events is boring. Having to bone up of the issues and confront a
disagreeable adversary is just not his thing.”
Cutter
maintained that debates aren't a good measure of a person's abilities
to perform in office. “Look, a president doesn't need to be able to
think on his feet. He can hire advisers to handle the technical
details and speechwriters to craft the words he uses to communicate
with the American people,” she pointed out. “An inability to
rebut an argument against his policies in a public forum is not a
crucial skill.”
MSNBC's
Chris Matthews faulted Lehrer for “not being aggressive enough.
There were opportunities for him to intervene on behalf of the
President that he missed.” Matthews speculated that “Lehrer may
have put too much emphasis on maintaining the appearance of
neutrality,” and wondered whether “a man of his advanced age
should be entrusted with such a weighty task in the future when abler
men like myself are available.”
Apparent
Gaffes Explained
Statements
this past week by both the President and Vice-President that many are
persuaded are gaffes were defended by Press Secretary Jay Carney.
“President
Obama's assertion that 'we don't believe anyone is entitled to
success in this country' is not a defense of a failed economic policy
as some are claiming,” Carney said. “It's a reaffirmation of the
President's belief in the essential equality of all people. After
all, is it really fair for some to succeed while others fail?
Shouldn't government strive to level the playing field to prevent the
more able or lucky from rising above others?”
“Is a
society where a self-made millionaire like Mitt Romney can live like
a king while millions of others live in shacks or shabby public
housing one we should be proud of?” Carney asked. “Wouldn't a
more equal distribution of the wealth of America be fairer?”
Carney had
a little more difficulty getting out from under Biden's admission
that “the middle class has been buried over the last four years.”
“What the Vice-President meant was that Republican obstruction has
buried the middle class' hopes,” Carney insisted. “While it's
true that there are 45 million on food stamps today compared with 32
million when the current Administration took office, who's fault is
that?”
“I mean,
it's the Republicans who say this is a bad thing,” Carney reminded.
“In an ideal world everyone's need for food would be seen to by the
government. But it's Republicans who object to expanding the
eligibility of Americans to participate in this program"depriving
the government of the opportunity to provide the middle class with a
healthy and nutritionally-balanced diet.”
“And as
Vice-President Biden pointed out, it's the Republicans who oppose the
trillion dollar tax hike the Administration is pushing,” Carney
continued. “How can we redistribute income to the middle class if
obstructionists in Congress won't let us take it from those who
already have more than they need?”
Latest
Unemployment Data Said to Prove Obama's Economic Policies Are Working
Though the
number of new jobs created during the month of September was a paltry
114,000, the official unemployment rate fell from an August rate of
8.1% to 7.8%. With an estimated 120,000 entering the ranks of new job
seekers each month based on population growth, the drop in the
official rate of unemployment has been credited to a surge of 800,000
new part-time jobs.
This was
hailed by the President's Council of Economic Advisers chairman Alan
Krueger as a sign that the President's plan is working. “Most
people I know would prefer to work fewer, not more hours each week,”
Krueger recounted. “The President's policies are now making this
more feasible.”
That fewer
hours normally net fewer dollars of take-home pay was brushed aside
as “a temporary phenomenon.” “We're still working out the kinks
on the President's long-term goals,” Krueger argued. “The lower
take-home pay from fewer hours of work has been offset by an increase
in the number of Americans receiving food stamps. On top of this, ten
million have received free cell phones.”
Krueger
says a key subsequent measure awaiting a second term is “the
redistribution of income from high-earners to low-earners. Just
because there are some people who are determined to be workaholics
shouldn't deter us from implementing policies that bring the benefits
of leisure to a broader spectrum of our society.”
While
admitting that the transformation underway has not been entirely
painless, Krueger maintained that “history will regard this as a
critical turning point for humankind"when the delusions of the
Judeo-Christian work-ethic were finally overthrown and a new era of
government-funded hedonism was born.”
State
Department Says “Other Priorities” Precluded Funding Libya
Embassy Security
Despite
requests for upgraded security from Libyan Ambassador Christopher
Stevens dating back several months before his murder, the US State
Department couldn't comply. Resources that could have funded more
guards for both the Embassy and Consulate were “unavailable.”
Among the
items deemed to be a higher priority: the purchase of 1500 Chevy
Volts. The outlay for these costly, yet poorly performing vehicles
was part of the Defense Department's “green initiative.”
“In our
judgment, providing a few Marines for one embassy or consulate was
less important than making this broader commitment to preserving the
environment,” said Secretary Hillary Clinton. “Of course, if we
had known that the consequence would lead to the death of Ambassador
Stevens we may have made a different decision. Unfortunately, there's
no 'reset button' we can push to undo what has happened. Regret is an
unavoidable cost of having to make choices without the benefit of
hindsight.”
Clinton
rebuffed Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform
Committee Darrell Issa's demand for more information about Stevens'
murder. “Now is not the proper time for us to be poking around on
such a sensitive topic,” Clinton responded. “Any information we
might disclose at this time could have repercussions beyond the
pursuit of justice for this crime. There's a hotly contested election
currently underway in our country. There will be more time to
dispassionately contemplate what happened in Libya after November
6th.”
First
Lady Lauds Obama's Imperial Presidency
First Lady
Michelle Obama encouraged voters to reelect her husband “so he can
continue to bypass congressional obstruction and keep America on the
path to true social justice.”
Michelle
described her husband's frustrations with “a Congress that has
never been willing to help move the country forward,” but praised
his willingness “to go outside the traditional limits on
presidential power to plow new ground on how this nation will be
ruled in the future.”
“So far,
I think that Barack has done a phenomenal job working around
Congress,” Michelle boasted. “He's issued, I think, about 900
Executive Orders in less than four years. Bush issued fewer than a
hundred in his eight years in office. I think this shows that Barack
will not be constrained from doing what he sees as right.”
As proof
of her husband's strength and “nerves of steel,” Michelle pointed
to his foreign policy successes. “He killed bin-Laden"an
accomplishment that eluded Bush for eight years,” she bragged. “And
he hasn't rested on his laurels. After assassins killed our
ambassador to Libya he didn't hesitate to make a speech at the UN
condemning the instigators of anti-Islamic hate responsible for this
atrocity.”
The First
Lady described her husband as “the one man who can be trusted to
steer America on the right course,” and urged voters to “pull out
all the stops to ensure he is reelected.”
Lawmaker
Refuses Pledge of Allegiance
Pennsylvania
state Representative Babette Josephs (D-Philadelphia) declined to
lead attendees of a House State Government Committee meeting in a
pledge of allegiance. Although the pledge has normally been
considered a non-controversial ritual for such meetings, Josephs
found it to be highly objectionable.
“Where
do I begin to enumerate the improprieties of injecting these words
into our process,” Josephs said. “Well, first off, this is a
state legislature, not a federal legislature. Why should my
allegiance, or lack thereof, to the nation be an issue? What
relevance does it have to the State of Pennsylvania?”
“Second,
the pledge mentions God,” Josephs continued. “I don't believe in
God. Why should I lead others is a recitation that offends my
beliefs?”
“Finally,
the pledge's assertion that ours is a republic with liberty and
justice for all doesn't stand up to scrutiny,” Josephs concluded.
“A republic is a representative form of government. Yet, many are
barred from voting because they can't prove they're citizens or
they've been incarcerated for committing crimes. The fact that so
many Americans are incarcerated shows that liberty nor justice is not
for all. So, why should I perpetuate a lie?”
Judge
Rejects Religious Objection to Obamacare Mandate
Missouri
federal district Judge Carol Jackson ruled that forcing Catholics to
pay for contraception and abortion services mandated under Obamacare
does not violate their right to freely practice their religion.
“The
plaintiffs argue that their religious freedom is infringed by a
government law requiring them to finance health services they view as
repugnant to their beliefs,” Jackson wrote in her decision.
“However, none of these plaintiffs is required to undergo an
abortion or to make use of the covered contraception benefits.
Consequently, they remain totally free to adhere to their religious
beliefs insofar as the effects are confined to themselves.”
“That
the religious beliefs of the plaintiffs regard abortion as murder and
that compelling them to contribute financial resources to support
this procedure is irrelevant. The law states that women are entitled
to this health service. The plaintiffs' religious preferences cannot
override this legal requirement.”
To help
clarify her ruling, Jackson offered a hypothetical case. “Suppose
that the government enacted a law permitting human sacrifice,” she
wrote. “Would we allow a person's individual belief that this is
wrong to totally overwhelm society's decision that it is right"as
would be evidenced by the fact that a law was passed endorsing the
practice? No. As long as the individual is not the person being
sacrificed he cannot justifiably raise his own religious objection to
the implementation of this law for the benefit of someone else.”
Iran
Set to Agree to Five-Week Postponement in Uranium Enrichment Program
While
reaffirming its inherent right to pursue the full benefits of nuclear
power for his country, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei
announced a five-week postponement of uranium enrichment activities.
Khamenei
was quick to assure that “this in no way yields our right and
obligation to obtain the means to annihilate the Jewish pestilence
that occupies Muslim lands in Palestine. However, it has been brought
to our attention that a slight delay in our timetable could be of
inestimable value over the longer term.”
The
announcement was perceived as a boost to President Obama's reelection
chances. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hailed the postponement
as “a concrete achievement that could not have been accomplished
under other circumstances. Much as the President's critics might
belittle a 'mere' five-week delay, the fact is that this means five
more weeks of life for Israelis who would otherwise be targeted by
nuclear-armed Iranian missiles. Meager as this might be, it is more
than Governor Romney can offer American voters between now and
November 6.”
French
Government Floats Plan to Discourage Layoffs
In a bid
to stem the rising tide of unemployment, France's Socialist President
Francois Hollande has advanced legislation that would impose severe
penalties on businesses trying to fend off bankruptcy by trimming
labor costs.
Labor
Minister Michel Sapin says “the intent is to make layoffs so
expensive that keeping unproductive employees on the payroll will be
the less costly option.” Sapin admitted that “many in our Party
favored simply outlawing layoffs, but others advised against this
saying that if no one could be laid off for any reason too many
workers would slack off on the job.”
Industry
Minister Arnaud Montebourg is crafting a companion bill that would
prohibit struggling firms from selling their businesses in order to
avoid penalties for laying off workers. “Businesses have a social
responsibility to provide good-paying jobs,” Montebourg contended.
“We cannot allow them to escape this responsibility by selling
their assets.”
US
Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis called the French initiative “an
intriguing 'outside-the-box' approach that we may want to take a look
at in a second term. The more indirect measures we've been trying
here"the Fed's quantitative easing, the various stimulus packages,
the green-jobs investments"haven't had the kind of impact we'd
hoped. Something more explicitly targeted at employment may be
necessary.”
Defense
Department Brushes Off Absentee Ballot Issue
Reports
that a majority of the nation's overseas soldiers and sailors won't
be able to cast votes in this election because the Department of
Defense hasn't made the effort to implement an effective absentee
ballot process were brushed off by DOD brass.
Secretary
Leon Panetta said he “regrets that some of our valiant warriors
will be disenfranchised,” but attributed the problem to “the need
to set priorities.”
“Among
the lengthy enumeration of 'things to do' that are on my plate,
ensuring that the troops get to vote is pretty far down the list,”
Panetta said. “I have to meet with the President on a weekly basis
to decide who we'll be targeting for elimination. I have to argue
with Secretary Napolitano over who gets first dibs on ammo. I have to
ensure that our troops are trained to respect Muslim religious
sensitivities. I have to work out our troop withdrawal schedule. So,
you see I have more to do than I have time to do it in.”
Panetta
argued that “losing the chance to vote is a sacrifice that I think
most of our forces find more tolerable than losing an arm or leg to
an IED. Realistically, the chance that anyone's vote will be decisive
is infinitesimal. So, I don't think we should get bent out of shape
over our inability to muster the resources needed to put a ballot in
the hand of every deployed trooper.”
Racist
Remarks in 2007 Video Called “Old News”
The
emergence of a video from 2007 in which then Senator Barack Obama
made some racially incendiary remarks was dismissed as “old news”
and “an act of desperation” by Obama campaign spokesman Ben
LaBolt.
“The
appropriate time for anyone to have raised this issue has long
passed,” LaBolt insisted. “What the President may have said or
done before he was the President is no longer relevant. What matters
now is what the President has done while he's held the office. Voters
should be focusing on his record as President and not get bogged down
in reviewing ancient history.”
Administration
Tells Defense Contractors to Flout the Law
The Worker
Adjustment and Retraining Notice (WARN) Act is intended to alert
workers of firms holding government contracts if their jobs might be
in danger due to government budget actions. Right now, unless
Congress takes preventative measures a significant reduction in
defense outlays will occur on January 1, 2013. According to statute,
firms must notify workers 60 days in advance of that date.
The Obama
Administration’s Department of Labor (DOL), contrary to this law,
has instructed contractors not to comply with this legal requirement.
Though failure to comply would expose these firms to potential tort
damages, the DOL has assured these contractors that the federal
government will cover their losses.
Labor
Secretary Hilda Solis defended her Department's incitement to commit
an illegal act as “the lesser of evils. Governing often presents
one with hard choices. The question is whether we have the courage to
do the right thing even if it is against the law.”
Solis
characterized the WARN requirements as “a technical formality,”
and argued that “a more realistic approach should take precedence.”
“Look, these firms sending out potential layoff notices on November
2 could have irreversible consequences for the President's reelection
chances,” Solis said. “Workers receiving these notices could be
stampeded into voting for the President's opponent. Why should the
Administration stand by and let this happen?”
The
Secretary emphasized that compliance with the DOL's illegal directive
is “voluntary. We're not ordering these firms to break the law.
We're just letting them know it's okay with the President if they do.
The only real risk for them is if the President isn't reelected. A
Romney Administration might not be as forgiving.”