Mark Thiessen:

ere is the state of the presidential race in a nutshell: The Obama campaign charges that Mitt Romney might have committed a felony by misrepresenting his position at Bain Capital to the Securities and Exchange Commission. Outraged, Romney fires off this response:

“He sure as heck ought to say he’s sorry.”

Ward Cleaver, call your office.

Not surprisingly, President Obama brushed off RomneyÂ’s request and continued to hammer him over the weekend. Obama is playing by the brass-knuckle rules of Chicago politics. Rather than calling for apologies, Romney needs grab a bottle, break it on the bar and start fighting back.

This may not come naturally to Romney, but we know he can do it.

I think it does come naturally to Romney. I think he likes going for the throat. But I think he's wary of coming off as "the bad guy."

I don't mind this slow-to-anger posture. I believe (my speculation) this is his way of preparing the ground -- noting the justification -- for what comes after.

Thiessen notes, by the way, that the race should not be a tie:

Obama is coming off of the worst three months of an incumbent president during an election year in recent memory... Three months ago, Gallup had Romney with a five-point lead over the president; today, they are at 46-46.

Framed this way, the picture for Romney does not look so pretty.

No, not framed that way. But as I keep saying, I think the underlying structure of this race favors Romney. Polls will say what they say. The basic circumstances of this country are not changing for the better.

On Fox&Friends, Romney ripped Obama for running a fundamentally dishonest campaign -- one that might work in "Chicago," but not in "America" -- and added:

“If we want to talk about transparency, the real issue is, why has this president used his presidential power and executive privilege to keep the information about the Fast and Furious program from being explained to the American people?"

We'll see. I believe Romney will go after Obama with the tongs; but he'd prefer not to, for both political and personal reasons. But now that he's gotten a taste of Chicago politics, I think he's weighing when he's made enough of a case against Obama's negative campaign that he can start hitting him hard in return.

Posted by: Ace at 12:50 PM | Comments (329)
Post contains 404 words, total size 3 kb.

This isn't evidence about the shooting. It would be barred by any court as 1, irrelevant, 2, prejudicial, and 3, relating to unproven "prior bad acts." Not even your criminal record gets entered against you (unless it's directly related to the current crime or undermines your alibi).

And yet Angela Corey is releasing this. As "disclosure."

He real motive -- as was her motive for seeking perjury charges against Zimmerman and his wife -- is to pressure him into taking some kind of a plea that will save face for her, and avoid rioting.

This is completely unethical. She can't win in court, and knows it, so she's attempting to pressure him by unethical means to take a plea.

She wants him to know she poisoned the jury pool against him. She wants him to know that maybe copping to manslaughter isn't so bad.

By the way, the "molestation" charge is a stretch:

The woman, identified only as "witness 9," said the abuse started when she was six and ended when she was 16. Zimmerman, she said, is about two years older than her.

Two years older? That doesn't mean that molestation is entirely out of the question; it does, though, seem that this is a lot like playing doctor.

Witness 9 told prosecutors the molestation began when she and Zimmerman, who is two years older than her, were young children. Her parents were moving to another state and she and her sister were sent to stay with Zimmerman's family in Virginia.

"We would all lay in front of the TV" to watch movies, she said, "and he would reach under the blankets and try to do things. Â… I would try to push him off, but he was bigger and stronger and older," she said.

He touched her improperly, she said, and at least once, when she was 12, forced her to touch him.

The last sexual encounter, she said, happened when she visited Zimmerman's family in Lake Mary. He directed her to lay on a bed and began to massage her, she said.

"I just got up and I ran out of the house and I got in my car," she said, adding that Zimmerman "only chased me to the front door."

She and her parents eventually confronted Zimmerman at an Orlando-area restaurant, she said. Zimmerman said he was sorry and left, she said.

Witness 9 went on to allege that Zimmerman doesn't like black people, unless they act white.

Posted by: Ace at 12:21 PM | Comments (202)
Post contains 458 words, total size 3 kb.

That's the charge leveled by the Truth About Cars:

Jack Baruth surveys the literature and concludes: “The media really didn’t want to let anybody know that the new Malibu sucks.”

The Truth About Cars previously featured an ahead-of-the-curve review -- "The Malibu sucks" -- and now, only after initial reviewer spinning, is the truth breaking out that the Malibu sucks.

How bad is media bias? Well, political considerations even distort car reviews.

We know they distort movie reviews, but at least movies are communicative, and as such related, in a way, to political campaigning (as Leni Reifenstahl could tell you).

But even product reviews -- car reviews -- are infected with Obama boosterism.

When I was a kid, I thought the tale of the Emperor's New Clothes was funny, but stupid. That would never happen, I thought. That's what made it funny. It was so dumb. People were acting in such unbelievable ways.

But it's actually spot-on, isn't it?

Also At Kaus: Romney Should Go on Offense Against Obama's Welfare Backsliding. Will he though?

I doubt it. He will probably shy away from the inevitable "racist! Code word! Dog whistle!" pushback.

The Obama Department of Agriculture has pulled the radio”novelas” that urged Spanish-speakers to wise up and get on the dole. (“In one of these, an individual tries to convince a friend to enroll in food stamps even though that friend declares: ‘I don’t need anyone’s help. My husband earns enough to take care of us,” says GOP Sen. Jeff Sessions, describing the novelas. “The first individual replies back: ‘When are you going to learn?’”)

Why is the USDA’s retreat significant? Because it shows the administration is sensitive, in an election year, to being perceived as dismissive of the work ethic. Like a prize fighter who winces when you hit him in a sore spot, the Obamaites have revealed their weakness. If the Republicans’ have any strategic sense they will now hit that sore spot again by making a big fuss about the Health and Human Service regulations that renege on the work requirements imposed on welfare recipients by the 1996 welfare reform law (and its successors). If Romney, Boehner and McConnell can’t frame these regs as part (along with the food stamp push) of Obama’s cavalier disregard for the value of work–in embarrassing contradiction to the image he portrayed in 2008–they should really retire to Austria with Denise Rich. …

I suppose it does fold in neatly enough with Romney's "government-centered society" argument. Who knows, maybe he'll show a little bit of steel.

Posted by: Ace at 11:36 AM | Comments (209)
Post contains 444 words, total size 3 kb.

You may think you've achieved something.

Think again, buddy.

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If youÂ’ve got a business -- you didnÂ’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didnÂ’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we donÂ’t do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.

This is part of his Elizabeth-Warren-esque attempt to claim that the rich owe it to the country to pay higher taxes. After all, their wealth is a product of something called "The Government," which is, sort of, a representation of "The People."

The People gave the wealthy their wealth through their joint venture called The Government, and so now the Wealthy owe it to repay the people back some of this wealth.

There are a lot of problems with this formulation, but among them is this: The People may vote for Government, but only some of the people actually fund it.

The wealthy -- the very people Obama insists owe something back to the government (and then to the people) -- actually fund most of the government.

Since Obama is always talking about the Top 1%, and his new higher hypothetical taxes are intended to extract more from this Top 1%, let's look at how much of the total tax burden of the United States -- the costs of running "The Government," to which Obama claims so much is owed -- is funded by the top 1% of earners.

ewly released data from the IRS clearly debunks the conventional Beltway rhetoric that the "rich" are not paying their fair share of taxes.

Indeed, the IRS data shows that in 2007—the most recent data available—the top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 40.4 percent of the total income taxes collected by the federal government. This is the highest percentage in modern history. By contrast, the top 1 percent paid 24.8 percent of the income tax burden in 1987, the year following the 1986 tax reform act.

Remarkably, the share of the tax burden borne by the top 1 percent now exceeds the share paid by the bottom 95 percent of taxpayers combined. In 2007, the bottom 95 percent paid 39.4 percent of the income tax burden. This is down from the 58 percent of the total income tax burden they paid twenty years ago.

This analysis is from 2009 but won't have changed much (except that the top 1% now pay an even greater share).

So the top 1% pay 40.6% of all government costs, the next 4% pay about another 20%, and the bottom 95% pay less than 40% of all government costs.

So when Obama says that the wealthy wouldn't be where they are if not for "The Government" building roads and maintaining police -- the wealthy ought to agree, and say, "Yes, and you're welcome. We paid 40 cents out of every dollar spent on those things."

"The Government" spends money, but it has no money of its own. What it has is the power to coercively extract money from citizens. And it coerces a lot of it from the wealthy -- the wealthy pay a disproportionate amount for the roads and police and armed forces, even though they don't really use such things much more than anyone else.

Yet Obama seems to think "The Government" just came by its trillions (and borrowed trillions) by happenstance, and spent its money out of its own good heart. And he wants to be compensated for his benevolence.

Obama's a demagogue. The country will not survive four more years of him.

Posted by: Ace at 10:32 AM | Comments (386)
Post contains 698 words, total size 4 kb.

They do this, of course. Pirates and jihadists. They fill their boats with explosives and try to get close to a big Navy ship, trusting that the Rules of Engagement are forbidding enough that they won't be fired upon.

Well, the RoE wasn't steep enough for them.

I'm assuming the part about the explosives. Either they had explosives, or this was a probing mission, or the boat was sent out as a sacrifice, so that Iran can whip up anger about the shooting, and then maybe the RoE will be modified so the next ship -- which will have explosives -- will get through.

The ship, though, was no Iranian.

A spokesperson for the Navy's 5th Fleet, which is based in nearby Bahrain, said that a security team aboard the oil supply ship U.S.N.S. Rappahannock fired a .50 caliber machine gun at a "small motor vessel after it disregarded warnings and rapidly approached the U.S. ship" off the coast of Jebel Ali, a city approximately 30 miles from Dubai in the United Arab Emirates.

The Navy is investigating the incident as details continue to emerge. A Navy official said the offending vessel was a white pleasure craft, but a UAE official told ABC News it was a fishing boat with four Indians and two Emirates on board. There doesn't appear to be any indication the incident was terror-related, the UAE official said.

The Navy official said it's not uncommon for Iranian speed craft to harass U.S. ships in the region, but in this case the boat wasn't Iranian.

Posted by: Ace at 09:50 AM | Comments (194)
Post contains 288 words, total size 2 kb.

@benk84 suggests the campaign slogan: "Working So F***in' Hard for You."

Weiner, the Post reported, still has a $4.5 million war chest and wants to run for office again soon before the public match on his campaign funds expire after the 2013 election. His preference would be for mayor though is also open to the post of public advocate, the newspaper said.

“I’ve heard he is seriously thinking about getting into a citywide race in 2013 and would like it to be mayor,” a source with “ties to Weiner” told the Post. “In his mind, he’s trying to figure out how to run for mayor.”

The theory they have is that maybe he can't run for mayor, but he could win a lesser office, like public advocate.

He's begun using FaceBook again, so you know he's horny, and thus needs some kind of an erective position. I mean, elective position.

Posted by: Ace at 09:41 AM | Comments (98)
Post contains 162 words, total size 1 kb.

No, seriously. Action-packed.

Posted by: Ace at 09:15 AM | Comments (95)
Post contains 13 words, total size 1 kb.

So, here's something.

itt Romney has already made his decision on who heÂ’ll pick as his running mate, an announcement which could come this week, according to a New York Times report, and former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who shares a close relationship with the Romney family and has become an energetic cheerleader for the GOP nominee, sits at the top of the list four years after he was passed over for the number two spot by John McCain....

JINDAL RISING: Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal will appear at a fundraiser with Mitt Romney today in Baton Rouge, fueling speculation about his vice presidential chances, the Washington PostÂ’s Nia-Malika Henderson reported in a profile of the Louisiana governor.

....
“Asked recently about his vice-presidential prospects, Jindal offered the classic non-response. ‘We’re not going to speculate. I’ve said this for the last several weeks. We’re not speculating. We’re not commenting on that,’ he said on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” referring questions to the Romney campaign. ‘No disrespect to Joe Biden, nobody’s going to the voting booth and voting based on who’s vice president.’ Yet social conservatives are looking closely at Romney’s choice for signs that he wants to assuage their concerns about issues that are important to them, such as their opposition to abortion and gay rights. Jindal would fit that bill.”

John Thune just met with Romney's people in Boston to discuss the VP slot, too.

The short list is:

Ayotte, Jindal, Pawlenty, Portman, Ryan, Rubio and Thune. (A top Romney source already told Bob Costa it’s “not Condi” Rice.)

You know what would be hilarious? If he consulted Dick Cheney for advice on who to pick, then held a news conference, and announced, "After speaking with a dozen highly-qualified individuals, and speaking with former Vice President Dick Cheney about the demands of the job, I have decided that there is only one possible choice for Vice President: Dick Cheney."

Posted by: Ace at 08:32 AM | Comments (272)
Post contains 345 words, total size 2 kb.

Some are wondering if Obama isn't weaker than he seems.

So the Obama team has shot its wad. Its opponent has more ammo and more money now. Romney hasnÂ’t been mortally wounded. And there isnÂ’t money from Obama to keep up the 4-to-1 spending barrage. In fact without it, Obama might well have fallen behind in the race. So the Obama team pleads for money and turns up the volume of the attacks. (After calling Romney a criminal in July, whatÂ’s left for September and October?)

William Galeston claims that Obama is running a Bush 2004 style campaign, but wonders if that can win for Obama. After all, Obama is an a worse position than Bush was in 2004.

[I]t’s not too early to say that Obama’s vital signs look dicey. Over the past 33 months, his job approval has been lower than George W. Bush’s at a comparable time in his presidency for all but one week. Bush averaged above 50 percent in the quarter before his successful reelection campaign, while Obama has been stuck in the 46-48 percent range for months. And the famous “wrong track” measure now stands at 63 percent, versus 55 percent in the days preceding the vote in 2004. If these two numbers don’t improve for Obama, his presidency will be in jeopardy. And they probably won’t—unless the economy perks up noticeably.

One thing that has to be remembered, though, is that Bain is not Obama's Big Attack.

Mediscare is his biggest attack -- demolishing Romney among seniors over his support of the unpopular (and yet wise) Ryan plan.

He hasn't played that card yet because he doesn't want to waste it so far out from the election. That's something we'll be seeing in September.

Posted by: Ace at 08:07 AM | Comments (130)
Post contains 315 words, total size 2 kb.

In quotes because that is an actual Washington Post headline.

Democrats are making increasingly explicit threats about their willingness to let nearly $600 billion worth of tax hikes and spending cuts take effect in January unless Republicans drop their opposition to higher taxes for the nationÂ’s wealthiest households.

Emboldened by signs that GOP resistance to new taxes may be weakening, senior Democrats say they are prepared to weather a fiscal event that could plunge the nation back into recession if the new year arrives without an acceptable compromise.

Sounds like they have a figurative gun to the economy's head, huh? more...

Posted by: andy at 06:09 AM | Comments (374)
Post contains 147 words, total size 1 kb.