Friday, December 31, 2010
Little did she know that in Canada, there has been a popular sit-com on for the past 5 seasons that looks like it might be right up her alley.
Here is a taste of the show. Part of the 1st episode:
To visit the series website, click HERE.
I know what they are trying to achieve with this show is that Muslims are regular folks like the rest of us. That maybe so. Of course if they wanted to prove that to me, they could skip the show and instead their leaders could publicly condemn terrorist acts by Muslim groups instead of becoming mute and going into hiding when an act is committed.
Unfortunately, a possible by product of this show on American TV might be is to start making people comfortable enough to let their guard down and forget about little things like, the war on terror, Sharia Law, and the fact that 90%+ of terrorists acts against America are committed by Muslims.
Saying all that, if they put the show on a trial bases opposite "Palin's Alaska" and any of it's re-runs, I might take a look.
After Bosman posted his thread on Mitt Romney's book "No Apology" being recognized on a 2010 Notable book list, I thought it ONLY FAIR to give Sarah Palin an equal billing:
Republican party officials decided this month to prohibit delegates from switching their votes at the Republican National Convention. That makes Nevada a key state for GOP hopefuls, as candidates can count on the state’s votes to push them closer to a nomination.
The party set Feb. 18, 2012, as the caucus date (the same day as the Democrats’), making Nevada the third Republican contest nationally and the first in the West. Members chose a proportional system, rather than winner-takes-all.
According to the Las Vegas Sun, potential candidates are looking now at Nevada from a whole new perspective.
As it stands now, according to recent polls, Mitt Romney is well ahead of the pack and has pretty much had the state to himself.
Only time will tell if this will change.
Complete Story HERE.
More on the story HERE.
It appears that some event related to this event took place on December 30th at 9:45 PM. If any audio or video tape of this becomes available I will update this post with it.
MSNBC recently gave a fair assessment of Mike Huckabee’s prospects for 2012, but Andrew Breitbart wants you to think otherwise: “Is MSNBC Promoting Huckabee for GOP Nomination?” Breitbart is implying that liberal MSNBC wants Huckabee to win and is therefore promoting him.
What exactly did MSNBC do to push Huckabee? Let's take it line by line.
(M) Huckabee is a likeable guy.
* Even Jim Geraghty at the Campaign Spot said, "I had a chance to hang around with the former Arkansas governor in a Fox News green room recently, and he reinforced my sense that it’s impossible to not like Huckabee personally."
(M) He's a Southern Baptist preacher. * True
(M) His problems are ones of structure. He does not like raising money, he’s admitted he does not like being measured by process and field operations.
* About raising money, Huckabee recently said when talking on the Alan Colmes radio show, “I love the retail end of politics. I hate the glad handing for money. I love talking to people who aren't necessarily the ones who can write the big checks.”
* Huckabee said this about process and field operations when interviewed by Bret Baier for the FoxNews 12 in 2012 series. Huckabee said, "It's a whole lot more about the money than it is the message. And so, because it's more process-focused than policy-focused, we end up not necessarily giving attention to the people with the best ideas, but giving attention to the people with the machinery and the money -- even if their message doesn't even sell."
(M) Polls that matter are going to be Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.
* So he is pretty much saying that the CNN poll that Huckabee came out on top of doesn’t really matter.
(M) Ya know the thing about Huckabee, is if people like you, he has a lot of name recognition because he ran before and he has been on cable news.
* Huckabee said in his interview with Alan Colmes, “The one nice thing whether I should decide to run or not is that more people at least would know me by what I actually believe or say as opposed to what my opponent has defined me to be and that is kinda encouraging. If I would have had that opportunity four years ago, things might have turned out differently."
(M) He also has shown himself to be willing to come to the middle on some issues. He said about the first Lady’s obesity campaign that maybe Sarah Palin misunderstood what Michelle Obama was trying to do.
* Huckabee said in a recent radio interview with New York radio host Curtis Sliwa, "With all due respect to my colleague and friend, Sarah Palin, I think she's misunderstood what Michelle Obama is trying to do. Michelle Obama isn't trying to tell people what to eat or not trying to force the government's desires on people, but she's stating the obvious: that we do have an obesity crisis in this country."
(M) Here's a guy who famously lost about a hundred pounds. * True
(M) He has shown himself to be sorta this common sense guy who is not going to attack Democrats for the sake of attacking Democrats. That is something that could appeal to a lot of independents.
* Huckabee has been doing well in all the polling. The CNN poll showed Huckabee doing best among all groups:
Among Republicans } 69/32 ..+37
Among Independents } 66/30 ...+36
Among Conservatives } 74/25 ...+49
Among Tea Partiers } 72/26 ....+46
Among Moderates } 61/35 ....+26
Click here to see all 2012 polling done in 2010.
(M) There is not as much heated rhetoric that comes from Mike Huckabee on every single issue, it’s not just totally anti-Obama, totally anti-Democrat.
(M) Mike Huckabee is very conservative, very socially conservative in particular. Fiscal conservatives don’t love him.
* Which is why Andrew Breitbart has posted this video clip with the label that MSNBC is pushing Huckabee.
(M) He is the only candidate actually, who had the Club for Growth run ads against him in Iowa. So he had tons of attacks from fiscal groups on the right. All that money from Mitt Romney and Club for Growth, and he still won the 2008 Iowa primary. * True
(M) This just shows how wide open this thing is going to be.
* But even Steve Kornacki at Salon indicated that “But it's getting harder to ignore the polls: The same CNN survey that shows Palin's GOP support collapsing also shows -- not for the first time -- that Huckabee is the most popular '12 prospect in the party.
(M) Can you tell the political types are very eager for the political season to get underway here?
* Yes, that is why they are talking about the current polls and the race for 2012.
* What Breitbart fails to recognize when he mocks Huckabee for the fair assessment he received, is that the 2012 Republican nominee needs to appeal to Republicans, Independents and Democrats. We need to win back those Reagan Democrats who voted for Obama in 2008. Huckabee has a great chance to not only earn their vote, but make them Huckabee Republicans.
Cross Posted at: I Like Mike Huckabee 2012
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Here is the text from the Romney segment:
ABERNETHY: Now you were referring earlier to the fact that the beginning of 2011 may well seem like the beginning of the election campaign of 2012, E.J.Below is the video of the entire program. To view the 2012 race comments only, fast forward to the 15:00 minute mark:
DIONNE: Right, and I think you’re going to see some sort of interesting positioning inside the Republican Party. I mean, we still don’t know if Sarah Palin is or is not going to run for president. Sarah Palin seems to be more representative of the Tea Party side of the right, although she has clearly some Christian conservative support. Mike Huckabee is going to be competing with her as the spokesperson for Christian conservatives, but every Republican running for president wants a piece of that vote, because it is such an important vote in the Republican primaries, and that’s going to start right now. It’s already started, before the show went on the air
ECKSTROM: And I think something worth watching there is Mitt Romney, who is at the front of a lot of these polls, these straw polls, whether or not he tries to make the case about his Mormon faith again with the evangelical base. A lot of people say, you know, he did that; he doesn’t need to do it again. Other people say that he’s never going to win them over; there’s a certain amount of the base that’s just never going to accept a Mormon candidate. So I think it will be interesting to watch how he navigates the Mormon question.
been there, done that. I believe it's only an ongoing issue for those folks with a personal agenda or those who would prefer one of the other candidates instead.
Anyone who puts a high priority on family values, a strong work ethic, fiscal conservatism, and a vast and successful background and experience in business, the private and public sectors, and takes a hard look at Mitt Romney, will know immediately that he is equipped to help turn around the economy and to put America back on the right path towards better times.
I think now, I've heard everything. There are some in the media who feel using the term "illegal aliens" or "illegal immigrants" may cause unnecessary violence or hurt the ILLEGAL'S FEELINGS:
If any ILLEGAL'S feelings are hurt, I've got the PERFECT SOLUTION that I can sum up in ONE WORD.
According to a story in the Hawaii Reporter, President Obama's current Hawaiian vacation isn't costing taxpayers a small fortune, it's costing them a LARGE fortune.
This is great reading for those of you who are unemployed, underemployed, tightening your belt, or just looking for some time to kill before starting a shift in your second or third part time job.
With estimates secured from a host of professionals, city officials and law enforcement, Hawaii Reporter estimates costs to taxpayers will at least include:For complete details on the Obama's latest jaunt, go HERE.
* Mrs. Obama’s early flight to Hawaii: $63,000 (White House Dossier)
* Obama’s round trip flight to Hawaii: $1 million (GAO estimates)
* Housing in beachfront homes for Secret Service and Seals in Kailua ($1,200 a day for 14 days): $16,800
* Costs for White House staff staying at Moana Hotel: $134,400 ($400 per day for 24 staff) – excluding meals and other room costs
* Police overtime: $250,000 (2009 costs reported by Honolulu Police Department) * Ambulance: $10,000 (City Spokesperson)
* TOTAL COST: $1,474,200
* Rental of office building in Kailua on canal
* Security upgrades and additional phone lines
* Costs for car rentals and fuel for White House staff staying at Moana Hotel (Secret Service imports most of the cars used here to escort the president)
* Surveillance before the president arrives
* Travel costs for Secret Service and White House staff traveling ahead of the President
More on Year End Governor Approval Ratings HERE.
More on the Senate Approval Ratings HERE.
Did anyone see any surprises?
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
According to the Wall Street Journal, a megachurch on the outskirts of Des Moines will be sending out invitations to speak at this event to anyone who has indicated the slightest interest in being a candidate for President in 2012.
Likely 2012 presidential candidates have been sniffing around Iowa for months on book tours and under-the-radar speaking engagements. But now the entire field–all dozen or so possible GOP challengers–are being invited to a megachurch on the outskirts of Des Moines for a March 7th candidates’ forum–the first of its kind for 2011.The million dollar question is, Will there be many takers this early?
“I’d think that these potential candidates would like the chance to come have a dialogue with evangelical Christians,” said Mr. Scheffler, one of the state’s most prominent GOP organizers and a member of the Republican National Committee.
More on the story HERE.
“We’ve never spoken, but she left me a nice message, and I believe she’s done more for the Republican Party than anyone since Ronald Reagan,” he said.The article also pointed out this:
DeMint backed Romney in the 2008 presidential primary — but said he’s got “an open mind” about 2012.
“He’s obviously near the top of my list, he’s a good quality candidate and we’ve got others who are looking at it,” said DeMint, who also is getting encouragement from some conservative activists to run for president.Now Senator DeMint, Here's a question for you:
Does Sarah Palin light up a room like Mitt Romney?
Federal authorities have opened a criminal investigation of Delaware Republican Christine O’Donnell to determine if the former Senate candidate broke the law by using campaign money to pay personal expenses, according to a person with knowledge of the investigation.Among the complaints are her using campaign monies to pay her rent.
Complete story is HERE.
Do you think he's calling on folks to work harder? Or just get more handouts?
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
It's a well known fact that Sarah Palin is the most unpopular major political figure in the country...one thing that may be less well known is that one of the states where voters have the dimmest view of her is her own home state of Alaska.
We've polled Palin's favorability in ten states over the last couple months. In Alaska just 33% of voters have a favorable opinion of her to 58% with a negative one. The only place where fewer voters see her positively than her own home state is dark blue Massachusetts.
Click the the PPP icon below for more on this story:
"That's a huge 18-point drop since December of 2008, when two-thirds of GOPers said they were likely to support Palin. It also puts her well behind potential rivals Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney, and a bit behind Newt Gingrich as well," adds Holland.More on the poll analysis HERE.
CNN Poll Question:
I'm going to read you the names of a few people who might run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012. For each one, please tell me whether you would be very likely, somewhat likely, not very likely, or not likely at all to support them if they decided to run for the Republican nomination in 2012.
Based on 470 Republicans and Republican leaning Independents. Sampling error:+/-4.5% PTS.To view cross tabs click CNN icon below:
Myth #2: The United States government has done nothing to stop illegal immigration.
As with the crime claim, this myth is very easily shown to be false. According to the Arizona Daily Star,
Has the federal government really done nothing to secure the border?What about deportations? Well, President Obama is breaking records. He has deported nearly 800,000 immigrants since taking office, which happens to be the highest number of deportations in any given two years in American history. The increased number of deportations has led to higher backlogs of immigration cases. In some areas of the countries, immigrants wait nearly 11 months before their case is settled. The $5.7 billion budget that ICE enjoyed in fiscal year 2010 simply has not been sufficient for the agency to keep up with the such high levels in deportations.
Answer: You can question the effectiveness of the billions spent, but there's no denying the massive buildup of border enforcement over the last five to 10 years:
• The budget for Customs and Border Protection - the Department of Homeland Security agency responsible for border security - soared to $11.4 billion in fiscal 2010, up 90 percent from $6 billion in fiscal year 2004. That's nearly twice the growth of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) budget, which increased 54 percent to $5.7 billion in fiscal 2010, up from $3.7 billion in 2004. ICE is responsible for immigration enforcement at worksites and across the interior of the country.
• The number of Border Patrol agents on the U.S.-Mexico border has increased to 17,500, up from 9,700 in 2004. The Tucson Sector, which stretches from New Mexico to Yuma County, now has 3,300 agents, up from 2,100 in 2004 and 1,500 in 2000.
• The miles of fencing along the border have grown exponentially. There are now 350 miles of pedestrian fence and 299 miles of vehicle barriers along the U.S.-Mexico border, for a total of 649 miles of barriers. That's up from 143 miles of barriers in 2006.
The Tucson Sector has 71 miles of pedestrian fences and 139 miles of vehicle barriers. In 2000, it had 11 miles of pedestrian fences and two miles of vehicle barriers.
Pedestrian fences are 12- to 18-foot-high barriers designed to stop, or at least slow down, people. Vehicle barriers are waist- to chest-high and are designed to stop cars.
• The agency has spent more than $1 billion since 2006 developing the SBInet "virtual fence," which tracks movement using a network of towers mounted with cameras, sensors and radar. But the program has been plagued by delays and glitches.
• In the past five years, the feds have twice sent the National Guard to the border to assist the Border Patrol. In Operation Jump Start, from 2006 to 2008, the government spent $1.2 billion to send 6,000 National Guard troops. In the current Operation Copper Cactus, the government is spending $135 million to send 1,200 troops.
• Homeland Security has devoted $225 million to border law enforcement agencies through Operation Stonegarden, including about $51 million to Arizona agencies. The program gives agencies money to pay officers who work overtime shifts aimed at securing the border. The money also buys four-wheel-drive trucks, radios and night-vision goggles.
Should conservatives argue for increasing the budgets of Customs and Border Protection and ICE? Sure, I believe that it is necessary. But only under two caveats. First, cuts must be taken out of other areas of the government. May I suggest the Department of Defense? It would be the easiest place to find excess funds and it could also gain support from the Democrats. Regardless, conservatives must vote against any increase in government spending unless it is paid for by decreases in other agencies.
Second, and most importantly, more immigration enforcement must come with comprehensive immigration reform. For lack of a better term and at risk of labeling immigrants as a bunch of donkeys, the United States government needs a carrots and stick approach: more enforcement and a system and laws that provide immigrants with a legitimate chance of entering the country legally.
More to come...
Cross posted at The Cross Culturalist
Monday, December 27, 2010
For What it's worth.
Most admired Man of 2010:
1 Barack Obama
2 George W. Bush
3 Bill Clinton
4 Nelson Mandela
5 Bill Gates
6t Pope Benedict XVI
6t Rev. Billy Graham
8t Jimmy Carter
8t Glenn Beck
10 The Dalai Lama
Most admired Woman of 2010:
1 Hillary Clinton
2 Sarah Palin
3 Oprah Winfrey
4 Michelle Obama
5 Condoleezza Rice
6 Queen Elizabeth
7 Angelina Jolie
8 Margaret Thatcher
9t Aung San Suu Kyi
9t Laura Bush
9t Barbara Bush
Here is the data.
Newt's running!Here's the video. Listen for yourself.
Don't underestimate Gingrich!
Palin is not running.
Palin doesn't have the intellect to be formidable against Obama.
Romney is the front runner.
Romney's Health Plan will be a major problem.
Mike Huckabee is underestimated.
His (Huckabee) so-con support will drive many Republican's nuts.
The race is wide open for a late comer.
Ryan? Christie? Barbour? Pence? Daniels? Pawlenty?
Are any of them on to something?
In North Carolina we see a good old log jam with Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin tied at 21%, Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney tied at 18%, and the rest of the Republicans combining for 12%. This is another state where Romney's conservative problem rears its head. He has a strong advantage with moderates as 30% of them say he's their top choice with none of the other Republicans rising above 15%. But he posts yet another fourth place finish with conservatives at only 14%, with Palin at 24%, Gingrich at 22%, and Huckabee at only 19%.Favorable/Unfavorable/Not Sure:
Newt Gingrich 61/21/18
Mike Huckabee 71/16/13
Sarah Palin 67/25/8
Mitt Romney 57/22/21
Who would you vote for 2012:
Mitch Daniels 1
Newt Gingrich 21
Mike Huckabee 18
Sarah Palin 21
Ron Paul 7
Tim Pawlenty 3
Mitt Romney 18
John Thune 1
Someone else/Undecided 12
(Of note: Mitt Romney picked up 8 points since the last poll. Mike Huckabee lost 7.)
Would you describe yourself as Liberal, Moderate, or Conservative?:
Big 4 breakdown for GOP Primary: (Base/Liberal/Moderate/Conservative)
Newt Gingrich 21/39/15/22
Mike Huckabee 18/ -/15/19
Sarah Palin 21/31/13/24
Mitt Romney 18/11/30/14
December 17-19, 2010, Survey of 400 GOP primary voters
Click the PPP icon below to view cross tabs:
Mike Huckabee barely edges Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, 23-21-18, with Sarah Palin at 13%, Ron Paul at 8%, Tim Pawlenty at 4%, Mitch Daniels at 2%, John Thune at 1%, and 10% undecided. Romney tops with moderates over Huckabee and Gingrich, 25-23-15, but they make up only a quarter of the votes. The 70% who call themselves conservative break down very similarly to the overall electorate.Of note: Ron Paul who took 8% was included for the first time.
Newt Gingrich 59/24/18
Mike Huckabee 67/20/13
Sarah Palin 61/32/7
Mitt Romney 61/22/16
Jeb Bush 83/11/6
Who would you vote for 2012:
Mitch Daniels 2
Newt Gingrich 18
Mike Huckabee 23
Sarah Palin 13
Ron Paul 8
Tim Pawlenty 4
Mitt Romney 21
John Thune 1
Someone else/Undecided 10
Would you describe yourself as Liberal, Moderate, or Conservative?
Big 4 breakdown for GOP Primary: (Base/Liberal/Moderate/Conservative)
Newt Gingrich 18/24/15/19
Mike Huckabee 23/31/23/22
Sarah Palin 13/22/8/14
Mitt Romney 21/7/25/21
PPP surveyed 400 usual Florida Republican primary voters from December 17th to 20th. The survey’s margin of error is +/-4.9%. Other factors, such as refusal to be interviewed and weighting, may introduce additional error that is more difficult to quantify.Click the PPP icon below to view cross tabs:
My least favorite out of the group is Mike Huckabee. So I'll start:
10. Eat healthier. Only use trans fat free grease to deep fry oreos and other favorite desserts.
9. Enough with the pink dress shirts.
8. When playing base guitar on your show, start doing a Milli Vanilli version. Those who appreciate music will appreciate it.
7. When barbecuing squirrel, remember that squirrel roe should be well cooked before consuming.
6. Never again say, "No new taxes", especially just before you raise them. People tend to remember these things.
5. If you run in 2012, promise to shadow Chuck Norris again. His and your everyone's against me/anti-wealth shpeel has become your trademark. And like you, very ineffective.
4. Perhaps as a follow up to 'A Simple Christmas'. your next entry into the literary world could be a piece on the Easter bunny. Nothing to deep. You want to keep your support base happy.
3. As to not look the part of a fool, before denying you said something, make sure there is no video of you saying it out there first.
2. Limit the phrase, "I didn't mean that" to no more that 5 uses per day.
1. If you ever sit on a jury, remember how hard it was for the jury to reach a decision of innocence or guilt. Also remember the thought that was put into deciding a sentence. A jury decision and/or sentence should not be altered unless it is by another jury. No one person is smarter than a jury. Even if they are a Governor of Arkansas.
Sunday, December 26, 2010
Notice how many times Lazaran refers to himself and his fellow Palinistas as operating within the "center-right." Then notice how he attacks "moderate" Lisa Murkowski.
Ha, ha, ha. I understand the politics of Lazaran's word games. The only people on earth that have taken a fancy to Mrs. Palin are the most conservative members of the Republican base. This is why Palin's numbers are so terrible. So it must be time for Lazaran and his fellow personality cult followers to try to pass off Palin as "center-right."
Of course, we could just look at all of the polls that have come out since 2008 that show how moderates, and those who operate in the center of politics, view Palin. But most polls don't question 'centrists.' They questions 'moderates,' a group that overwhelmingly dislikes Palin. So Lazaran is trying to persuade us that moderates are bad and centrists are good. And Palin is center-right, but not one of those icky, moderate establishment types.
Lazaran's piece is comparable to when he tried to argue that there are five reasons why Palin is more experienced than the past five Presidents (qualification number #2: her ten years volunteering for the PTA-- ha, ha, ha). Or the time when Conservatives4Palin argued that Palin is a quitter because she refused to quit (Don't ask me to try to explain that piece -- but still -- ha, ha, ha).
Here is the lesson that we get from C4Palin. Nobody takes them seriously. They are comic relief, if not sad, pathetic people who hang on the words of one person that they have probably never met. Here's to hoping that 2011 will see the bloggers at Right Speak engage in thoughtful, rational discourse. Let's not become a hodgepodge of personality cult followers. I like Romney, but I will be the first to criticize him when he is wrong and the first to admit his weaknesses. I hope that everyone on this site can do the same, even if they already support a particular candidate.
Saturday, December 25, 2010
Friday, December 24, 2010
A Politico article points out, that this may trigger a domino effect.
Last week's decision by Nevada Republicans to set a Feb. 18 date for their 2012 presidential caucuses may set off a domino effect that would push the primary season into January.New Hampshire state law mandates that their primary must be at least 1 week before the next contest that would move it down to February 7. And because Iowa generally goes eight days before New Hampshire, a Feb. 7 New Hampshire primary could force Iowa to hold its caucuses on Jan. 30.
The Republican Party had been trying to set a calendar that would begin the primary season in February and limit the early states to Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina.
I don't know if this change matters much or will have any effect on the eventual outcome. I'm just happy that Nevada is still right after New Hampshire. If you know what I mean?
H/T Texas Fossil
This will come in handy when it comes time for certain senators to stand for re-election. In addition, more than one on this list has been mentioned as a possible presidential candidate...
Having that in mind, I will be starting a short series on the immigration problem. I believe that the conservative position ought to be greater border security, comprehensive immigration reform, and a pathway to legalization for current, undocumented workers. This series will seek to dispel some of the myths surrounding our immigration system, so that the conservative movement can base their policies on facts and not on cultural resentment.
Myth #1: Violence is out of hand on our border.
The scope of empirical evidence is so largely against this tall tale, that it seems hardly worth even mentioning. That is, if it wasn't for the fact that Fox News and conservative leaders preach it on a daily basis. I don't have time and space to fully summarize all of the data that debunks this myth, but here are a few snippets.
Both contemporary and historical studies, including official crime statistics and victimization surveys since the early 1990s, data from the last three decennial censuses, national and regional surveys in areas of immigrant concentration, and investigations carried out by major government commissions over the past century, have shown instead that immigration is associated with lower crime rates and lower incarceration rates.
In particular, ﬁrst-generation immigrants (those born outside the United States) were 45 percent less likely to commit violence than third-generation Americans, adjusting for individual, family, and neighborhood background. Second-generation immigrants were 22 percent less likely to commit violence than the third generation. This pattern held true for non-Hispanic whites and blacks as well. Our study further showed living in a neighborhood of concentrated immigration was directly associated with lower violence (again, after taking into account a host of correlated factors, including poverty and an individual’s immigrant status). Immigration thus appeared “protective” against violence.
Even as the undocumented population has doubled to 12 million since 1994, the violent crime rate in the United States has declined 34.2 percent and the property crime rate has fallen 26.4 percent.Cities with large immigrant populations such as Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, and Miami also have experienced declining crime rates during this period.Among men age 18-39 (who comprise the vast majority of the prison population), the 3.5 percent incarceration rate of the native-born in 2000 was 5 times higher than the 0.7 percent incarceration rate of the foreign-born.
The first is that, by and large, crime is down across the board. In Arizona as a whole, it has dropped 12 percent in the past seven years. But in major Maricopa County cities with their own police forces -- Phoenix, Mesa, Scottsdale and Tempe -- the rate has dropped even faster. (The group measured within Maricopa County because it is the epicenter of the immigration debate. But in Tuscon, which is not in the county, there has also been a drop in the crime rate since 2002, according to law enforcement statistics)
The FBI's uniform crime reports show violent crime is no more prevalent in border cities than in nonborder cities.
Since 2001, the average violent-crime rate in eight border cities declined, and it has remained below the national violent-crime rate since 2005, said an August 2010 report by the Congressional Research Center, which reviewed FBI crime reports from 1998 to 2008.
In Tucson and Phoenix - the two largest cities on the smuggling route through Arizona - murder and violent crime decreased from 2005 to 2009, FBI data show.
The ratio of assaults on Border Patrol agents dipped 36 percent across the Southwest border from 2007 to 2010.
Are there drug traffickers operating in the United States? Of course. Americans consume more drugs than any other nationality in the world. There are drug traffickers all over the United States. Is Arizona falling to the violence that we read about going on daily in Mexico? No.
We ought to have more border security. But not because of Arizona.
More to come...
Cross posted at The Cross Culturalist
It seems the conference goal is to better the relationship between center right Hispanics and the Republican Party. Jeb Bush and former U.S. Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez will co-chair the event.
To view a tentative agenda go HERE.
There is already buzz out there as to which of the 2012 hopefuls will attend this event. At this point, only Tim Pawlenty is a yes. Mitt Romney, John Thune, Mitch Daniels, and Rick Perry have declined.
More on that story HERE.
Politico also has a recent article on new efforts to bring Republicans and Latino together. They say it's spelled, JEB. The following video is a Politico summation of those efforts:
Thursday, December 23, 2010
The official website for the U.S. Naval Institute reports some sobering words from former nuclear plans monitor Vice Admiral Jerry Miller, USN (Ret). After reading this, and the opinions of other opponents of the treaty, it's difficult to determine how we benefit from this.
“...The Obama administration is continuing a dated policy in which we cannot even unilaterally reduce our own inventory of weapons and delivery systems without being on parity with the Russians,” Miller told the U.S. Naval Institute in Annapolis, Md. “We could give up plenty of deployed delivery systems and not adversely affect our national security one bit, but New START prohibits such action - so we are now stuck with some outmoded and useless elements in our nuke force.”
“The Soviets/Russians were done in by Reagan and our missile defense program because they cannot afford to build such a system,” said Miller. “They instead try to counter our program with rhetoric at the bargaining table. And they won by outmaneuvering Obama. START plays right into their hands.”
“We have always been superior in quality of our nuclear force, so we did not have to negotiate with a party we do not trust,” said Miller. “If Obama wanted to save some money and improve national defense, he should have gotten out of the nuke negations and acted unilaterally. START is simply a political victory for Obama.”
“The treaty prohibits the conversion of an existing ballistic missile system into a missile defense system,” said Miller. “We might want to do that with a Trident or an ICBM sometime in the future, particularly if the Chinese alleged threat materializes.”
Here's a list of the eleven Republicans who voted in favor of the treaty:
Alexander, Bennett, Brown, Cochran, Collins, Corker, Isakson, Lugar, Murkowski, Snowe, and Voinovich.
Brown and Murkowski have been particularly reliable in helping to enact Obama's agenda as of late. Unfortunately, there probably isn't anything we can do about those two. However, I suspect Cochran, Isakson, Voinovich, and Corker will likely face hotly contested primaries when their current terms are up.
Read the entire article HERE
Update: More disturbing developments courtesy of The Washington Times.
One of the key arguments made by American proponents of New START is that the language in the treaty’s preamble linking strategic offensive and defensive weapons is nonbinding. Sen. John Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat who has been leading the fight for ratification, said during floor debate that the treaty’s preamble is “a component of the treaty that has no legal, binding impact whatsoever.”
Moscow apparently has a different view of the preamble.
ITAR-Tass, the main Russian government information agency, reported last week: “The treaty will have a legally binding provision on the link between strategic offensive and defensive weapons and will affirm the increasing importance of this link amid the reduction of strategic offensive weapons.”
Several Republican-authored amendments to the treaty that sought to alter the preamble were voted down, based in part on assertions that the preamble had no legal standing.
There were two bombings today in Rome. As I was viewing the following video I thought to myself, with America's laissez-faire attitude about our national security, (see my previous post), is this a glimpse of some of what we have to look forward to in our future?
Complete story HERE.
Midway through Philip Rucker and Paul Kane's story about Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's transition to minority leader comes an interesting bit of news. The California Democrat, vilified by Republicans in the last election, has turned to director Steven Spielberg for help rebranding House Democrats.
Lawmakers say she is consulting marketing experts about building a stronger brand. The most prominent of her new whisperers is Steven Spielberg, the Hollywood director whose films have been works of branding genius. Lawmakers said Spielberg has not reported to Pelosi with a recommendation.To read the full article, go HERE.
Do you think he can help?
Today, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano was confronted by the news media after fallen border agent Brian Terry's funeral service. It appears like most Americans, the Terry family isn't buying what President Obama and Janet Napolitano are selling.
Just how bad is it at the border? I posted the following thread back in June as just ONE EXAMPLE of just how bad it is there. It doesn't appear that much has changed:
Two men shot earlier this week could be the result of the ongoing battle between Mexican drug cartels now spilling over deep into Arizona, officials say.
Pinal County investigators say an area known as the smuggling corridor now stretches from Mexico's border to metro Phoenix.
Bill O'Reilly discusses the situation there with Pinal County Sheriff:
In a related topic, Mexico's President Calderon directly blamed the United States for the drug smuggling problem..
"The origin of our violence problem begins with the fact that Mexico is located next to the country that has the highest levels of drug consumption in the world," Calderón wrote. "It is as if our neighbor were the biggest drug addict in the world."
If we're going to continue to let Mexican drug and Human smugglers to run rough shot on our U.S. soil, maybe President Obama should consider giving them their own area. I say leave Arizona alone. Maybe he can cut a chunk out of Mexifornia instead.
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
According to PPP, Palin leads all others among older voters (You know, the people who ACTUALLY vote!)
Where Romney leaves Huckabee and Palin in the dust is with moderates, independents, and the 45+ year olds. You know, the people who ACTUALLY vote!Since I've heard this line repeated on sevaral occasions in recent days, I feel obligated to set the record straight. According to the most recent national GOP primary poll by PPP, Palin out-polled all others in both the "45-65" age group, and the "65+" age group. This phenomenon has played out in a large number of PPP's recent state by state polls as well. In addition, her favorable numbers are the highest among these age groups.
If what Bosman says is true in regards to older voters, Palin appears to be in great shape!
Full data is available HERE
The reason I'm bringing this up is that according to current data supplied by Pollster.Com, Independents lead both Democrats and Republicans in numbers:
Note: The following graph would not embed. To view the graph and it's data, click on the photo of the graph below. Once there, drag your mouse over the dots on the line graphs for specific data.
It is obvious from these figures, that in order to win a general election in 2012, you will NEED INDEPENDENTS. You can't win the general election with just Republicans.
I found this site OpenSecrets.org that had Mitt Romney's PAC's financial information provided by the Center For Responsive Politics.
Here are some of the links from the graphs above with further information:
To view expenditures
List of recipients
List of major donors
List of donors giving $200+
Actual documents filed
If you would like to see the other 2012er's PAC information, here it is:
Newt Gingrich (I found no information)
A Mitt Romney nomination would make the race in the Sunshine State neck-and-neck, with Obama prevailing only 46-44, but the president would beat the other four by at least five points: Mike Huckabee, 49-44; Newt Gingrich, 47-42; and Sarah Palin by a whopping 52-38. He would also lead a hypothetical challenger, new conservative darling Marco Rubio, 48-40.Head-To-Head (Obama/Candidate/not sure):
Mitt Romney 46/44/11 (-2)
Sarah Palin 52/38/10 (-14)
Mike Huckabee 49/44/7 (-5)
Newt Gingrich 47/42/11 (-5)
Marco Rubio 48/40/12 (-8)
Mitt Romney 43/38/20
Sarah Palin 36/57/6
Mike Huckabee 41/43/16
Newt Gingrich 36/47/18
Marco Rubio 43/42/15
PPP surveyed 1,034 Florida voters from December 17th to 20th. The survey’s margin of error is +/-3.0%. Other factors, such as refusal to be interviewed and weighting, may introduce additional error that is more difficult to quantify.For PPP Florida cross tabs click icon below: