Compare this rather understated report with the shooting of Gabby Giffords.

A security guard at the Family Research Council was shot and wounded Wednesday morning after a scuffle with a man who expressed disagreement with the groupÂ’s conservative viewsin the lobby of the groupÂ’s headquarters in downtown Washington, authorities said.

He "expressed disagreement," apparently in between gunshots.

So am I fair game, Washington Post? I don't notice any alarm here about this development. I notice you are greatly alarmed if a liberal is harmed (justifiably) or even jeered; but now that the FRC is literally being targeted by the left, it all seems such a laugh to you now.

Mary Katharine Ham advises the 48 hour rule for cooler heads, to allow facts to emerge.

I agree. Just finding it very odd that this rule only seems to be observed in cases where conservatives are victimized.

In addition, I do not expect any follow-up stories by the media. After all, no one who counts got shot.

Posted by: Ace at 04:38 PM | Comments (161)
Post contains 204 words, total size 2 kb.

They really don't know, or are pretending they don't.

Watch, open-mouthed, as they question whether it was Biden's comment that Romney planned to unshackle Wall Street that was problematic.

Um, no. That wasn't the problem so much.

They also claim -- I'm just going to say this; it's the black female reporter -- she also claims that what Biden said is that Romney's going to "put the middle class in chains."

Um, let's get that quote right, Petunia. And let's have it with the Uncle Remus accent, too.

They -- both -- don't just ask him once. They ask him over the course of several minutes. For some reason, Romney is adverse to just telling them what Biden said; perhaps he doesn't want the gotcha to come out of his own mouth (as the DNC might run an ad with Romney saying Biden's words).

But according to them, the reporters really do not understand what the problem is, and really need Romney to explain it to them in detail.

This part of the clip begins at 2:32 and continues on until 4:54.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 04:14 PM | Comments (137)
Post contains 224 words, total size 2 kb.

Must watch. I'm not even going to steal the video because @theH2's such an important member of the team here.

And I mean that in a Bain-like way; I intend to kill him and take his stuff. Profit.

Posted by: Ace at 02:57 PM | Comments (208)
Post contains 62 words, total size 1 kb.

Restoring the money cut from Medicare, for ObamaCare, back to Medicare.

This is how they'll win -- if they do win.

In the last few days, the Romney campaign has moved to dramatically change the terrain of Medicare politics, and it looks like the Democrats are beginning to realize how vulnerable they might be. Because of Obamacare, it is the Democrats who now plan to cut current seniorsÂ’ benefits (especially those in Medicare Advantage) and access to care (thanks to the IPAB) while still failing to avert the programÂ’s (and the nationÂ’s) fiscal collapse, and because Romney would repeal Obamacare and pursue a version of the Ryan-Wyden premium-support reform it is the Republicans who would protect current seniorsÂ’ benefits and make them available to future seniors while saving the program from collapse through market reforms. Through the candidatesÂ’ statements this week and through this new ad, Romney and Ryan have made clear theyÂ’re going to inform voters about this and force the Democrats to defend themselves on Medicare.



That wonÂ’t be easy for the Left, since the Romney campaignÂ’s charges are true, and it is beginning to become apparent that the Democrats are totally unprepared for the coming fight. Their defenses so far fall into roughly three categories: Ryan did it too, the Obamacare Medicare cuts arenÂ’t very serious, and finally what can only be called frantic distractions. Even as pure demagoguery (let alone as efforts at actual substantive arguments) all three are exceptionally weak defenses, and suggest the Democrats could be in serious trouble. LetÂ’s examine each one.




The “Ryan did it too” defense is perhaps the most amusing of the three, as it succeeds in being simultaneously untrue, irrelevant, and an admission of the basic charge against the Democrats. Even as they call Paul Ryan a cruel and merciless budget cutter who cares not for the weather service and would gladly see children exposed to E. coli, the Democrats justify their taking $710 billion out of Medicare and spending it on Obamacare over the next decade by pointing out that Paul Ryan didn’t put that money back into Medicare in his budget. So if he had, would that have made their cuts unjustifiable? Well it so happens that he did. By repealing all of Obamacare’s spending, the Republican budget does not spend the money Obamacare took out of Medicare and thus those funds are used to extend the Medicare trust fund. And this point is hardly hidden in the Ryan budget. The budget document spells it out in its spending tables and also explains it in its narrative section, noting on page 54 that:

This budget ends the raid on the Medicare trust fund that began with passage of the new health care law last year. It ensures that any potential savings in current law would go to shore up Medicare, not to pay for new entitlements. In addition to repealing the health care lawÂ’s new rationing board and its unfunded long-term care entitlement, this budget stabilizes plan choices for current seniors.

Rather than keeping their heads down and avoiding Medicare as an issue, they intend to run on it.

Interesting. Let's see that Romney ad again:

more...

Posted by: Ace at 01:48 PM | Comments (340)
Post contains 651 words, total size 4 kb.

41% obviously isn't great, but we're going to lose this demographic (probably...), so it's a matter of how bad we lose it.

41% isn't so bad. Considering that only 49% support Obama -- not 59% -- there is room for Romney-Ryan to grow.

Zogby has been especially interested in the youth vote this election. In 2008, 66 percent chose Obama over Sen. John McCain,the highest percentage for a Democrat in three decades. But their desire for hope and change has turned to disillusionment and unemployment. Zogby calls them "CENGAs" for "college-educated, not going anywhere."

In his latest poll, Obama receives just 49 percent of the youth vote when pitted against Romney, who received 41 percent.

I'm omitting the part about putting Gary Johnson into the mix. Long story short, Gary Johnson keeps Obama at just 50%. Romney's numbers go down, too, but Obama doesn't get more than 50% among the young.

Zogby speculates that Romney's selection of 42-year-old Rep. Paul Ryan helped turn more younger voters to him. "It could be his youthfulness," said Zogby of Ryan. Plus, he said, more younger voters are becoming libertarian, distrustful of current elected officials and worried that they are going to get stuck with the nation's looming fiscal bill.

"They want change," said Zogby.

Yes, change. Math and Change.

Posted by: Ace at 01:14 PM | Comments (179)
Post contains 232 words, total size 2 kb.

One for the ladies. No, it's not a shirtless guy. But at some point Paul Ryan will be caught without a shirt and then you'll have that.

For now, just a cute thing. The psychology of cats, distilled into 23 seconds. more...

Posted by: Ace at 12:33 PM | Comments (254)
Post contains 90 words, total size 1 kb.

Boom.

Romney is now enjoying his first lead over Obama in the 12 state swing poll in months, increasing his approval rating from -8 to -3, and his VP is the only person on either ticket with positive approval.

Romney's lead in Florida dropped from last month from +3 to +1, but has reversed Obama's dominance in the monthly Purple in Virginia and regained a lead in Ohio. Romney has gained five points in both.

Now if only they started polling Wisconsin and Pennsylvania individually...

Also, as pointed out by Slu in an email:

Romney-Ryan budget plan
Tax breaks for rich/ends Medicare: 42%
Reduce defict/help economy and Medicare: 45%
Not sure: 13%

Running on offense is working so far.

Posted by: CAC at 11:54 AM | Comments (290)
Post contains 137 words, total size 1 kb.

Get in their faces.

The media coverage on this is going to be... nonexistent. Prepare to be outraged as never before as the media simply embargoes this, almost entirely.

Over at JWF, lefties already know what happened -- the guard shot himself to push his hateful agenda, or something.

Posted by: Ace at 11:28 AM | Comments (212)
Post contains 63 words, total size 1 kb.

Is he prepared? is he mentally alert? Does he have the "integrative complexity" necessary for the job?

Gee, we (the royal we, by which I mean the media) used to ask this question quite a bit. But now? Not so much.

Rudy Giuliani just says what everyone's thinking-- including those in the media, though they would never ever say something that could seriously hurt the Obama ticket.

KUDLOW: You know, what did he say? ‘Y’all going to be put back in chains’? That almost has racial overtones, Rudy Giuliani. What’s your take on that?

GIULIANI: Well, I think if it came from somebody serious maybe we’d get all excited about it. But the — I think the vice president of the United States has become a laugh line on late night television. I mean, he — I’ve never seen a vice president that has made as many mistakes, said as many stupid things. I mean, there’s a real fear if, God forbid, he ever had to be entrusted with the presidency, whether he really has the mental capacity to handle it. I mean, this guy just isn’t bright. He’s never been bright. He isn’t bright. And people think, ‘Well, he just talks a little too much.’ Actually he’s not very smart.

Video at the link.

Bernie Goldberg also asks The Question The Media Daren't Ask.

As does John Fund.

Biden has been very lucky that the national media have largely given him a pass until now. American history for the last half century has been replete with Republicans who have been portrayed by the elite media as dim or addled — from Dwight Eisenhower to Gerald Ford to Ronald Reagan and Dan Quayle to, of course, George W. Bush and Sarah Palin. No Democrat with comparable national stature has been saddled with a similar reputation. The media have tended to explain away Biden’s strange statements and unforced errors by saying, “Oh, well. That’s just Joe, you know.” Or they casually admit, “Well, he just talks a bit too much,” and then move on.

In the middle of a hotly contested presidential campaign, that may now be changing. In the Washington Post yesterday, Alexandra Petri discussed “the trouble with Joe” and took the VP to task for “periodically alarming outbursts” that are unbecoming of the second-highest office in the land. “He inspires the sort of discomfort one feels upon introducing one’s fiancé to Grandpa after he has had a Scotch too many,” Petri scolded. “His cringe-inducing gaffes . . . inspire less anger than embarrassment.” A New York publishing source told me that “Biden is now seen as a Catholic Sam Goldwyn, and that’s not a good place to be.” Sam Goldwyn was the legendary Hollywood producer who was known for malapropisms (“A verbal contract isn’t worth the paper it’s written on”).

Prediction: The media will begin casting the most important qualification of a would-be president as not as his brains and smarts but as his heart and spirit.

Bonus: Biden, who is a confused borderline-retarded old man, doubles down on his casually racist ploy, and announces he said exactly what he meant to say.

Video of Stephanie Cutter's Defense of Biden: Although the quote is well-reported, the video came out later. Here's @stefcutter, telling a reporter she endorses Biden's "chains" statement.

Via the Jamster. more...

Posted by: Ace at 10:52 AM | Comments (360)
Post contains 588 words, total size 5 kb.

I was holding off (as did Drew and the cobloggers) on jumping to conclusions, which is what the left always does. In 90% of these things, the reason for the violence is personal -- either getting fired or something, or some kind of weird psychosis which can only be called "politics" by disgusting liars (as with Jared Loughner).

But there are reports indicating the crazed gunman shot innocent civilians in order to champion... "values."

You know, values. Like killing people who disagree with you politically.

Caution is still required, as those reports, while suggestive, are also unconfirmed.

Posted by: Ace at 10:06 AM | Comments (343)
Post contains 115 words, total size 1 kb.