the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.
2. I Hate You
Barack Obama told ABC News yesterday that he is the “underdog” in 2012. He actually raced to embrace the title George Stephanopolous threw out there for him. There was no deliberation, no pause — just an immediate “absolutely” to lay claim to the title.First understand that the Obama wants to be the underdog because of America’s fixation with rooting for the guy behind. He sees it as a positive.Second, understand that underdogs do not get to take campaign bus tours through swing states at taxpayer expense on buses paid for by taxpayers and also fly around in a blue and white 747 and get pretty much as much free press as he wants, including great photo ops in front of Congress talking about jobs.Underdogs do not get that.Incumbent Presidents get that. And incumbent Presidents do not, more than year from an election get to call themselves “underdogs,” if ever they do. When a President is a year from election, sees his popularity going down, and can’t even muster enough Democrats to vote for his jobs plan because they neither fear nor respect him, the President is not an underdog. He is a loser.This President is a political loser. Every time he speaks the stock market goes down. Every time he acts boldly, independents attribute it to increasing political desperation without seriousness. Every time he tries to lead, his own party privately mocks him.Jimmy Carter was no underdog and neither is Barack Obama. With the trappings of power, the brightest men in the room to advise them, and massive war chests — Obama’s is the biggest there is — he is not an underdog.And it’s not just because he is a political loser. Americans cheer underdogs. No one is cheering Barack Obama.Please click here for the rest of the post.
2. I Hate You
Since I managed to make just about every Sarah Palin fan on earth mad on Friday by quoting Palin, I decided I would go on and make everyone else mad too. I keep getting the “you’re Rick Perry’s guy” stuff now, which follows on the “you’re Tim Pawlenty’s guy” and the “you’re MIchele Bachmann’s guy” and the “you’re Herman Cain’s guy”, all of with mix with the healthy ramblings of the out of touch who accuse me of being “Mitt Romney’s guy.”I actually am no one’s guy because I think none of the above are truly stellar candidates. I was, in fact, in 2008 quite excited about Mitt Romney until I felt like every other day there was another changed position and I couldn’t rationalize in my mind how someone could change so much on so much from 2002 to 2008.This year, I’ve been excited by Cain and Bachmann and Pawlenty and Perry, if only to be a healthy alternative to Mitt Romney so we can finally have a debate on the consistency of the conservative message before getting to Obama. After all, we just had a pile of Republicans run in 2010 as tea party conservatives only to see them go to Washington and have guys like Allen West vote more with House Republican leaders than against.So I kind of want to be cautious. And while I’m willing to settle for Mitt Romney, I think even though the GOP typically nominates the guy who has waited in line there are times we need to break out of the habit and this year is one of those times.But, just so I don’t lose my well earned reputation of hating on everybody, below the fold, I’ll tell you precisely what it is about each of the candidates that I don’t much care for. You can take it or leave it. I speak for no one but myself.Please click here for the rest of the post.
Last week’s shock poll bringing Herman Cain into third place needed confirmation before we could be sure that Cain was a serious contender.Two new polls of Florida Republicans by SurveyUSA for WFLA and by War Room Logistics seem to provide that confirmation and more: Both put Herman Cain in second in the key early primary state.These are not national polls, so they aren’t directly comparable with the last four major national polls, three of which put Rick Perry first, and the fourth which put Perry in second behind Mitt Romney. But that fourth poll seemed to show Perry voters giving Cain another look, and these two bolster that theory.Please click here for the rest of the post.
I read that the Washington Post has already put more words on its front page about Rick Perry and Schrodingers Rock — a ginormous boulder with a racial slur on it that some people see, some people don’t see, and no one seems to be able to take a picture of the damn thing — than the Washington Post ever did about Jeremiah Wright.I mentioned that on TV last night and everyone still wants to just talk about Rick Perry. But the story really is not about Rick Perry as a racist, though the media would have you believe that. It was, to be sure, a hit job on Rick Perry, but the story really is about a cultural divide too.Few of those who have reported on it seem to have any idea of how a hunting lease works or why the Perry family just didn’t find some other land in Paint Creek to hunt on. To those asking about the latter, you have no idea how popular hunting leases are or how high the demand is. For perspective, the Perry family was only allowed to hunt on 2% of the total acreage of the land in question — land they did not own, control, or manage.But the larger issue is that reporters believe Southerns still have to prove, not their guilt, but their innocence when it comes to racism. Please click here for the rest of the post.