by

News/Politics 10-26-12

What’s news today?

This is. But now we have conflicting verdicts from different judges in different states. So I guess the next stop is the Supreme’s.

From Reuters

“A federal appeals court declined on Thursday to reconsider a ruling that would allow Texas to withhold funding for women’s healthcare from Planned Parenthood’s clinics because the organization also performs abortions.

Texas Governor Rick Perry said after the order by the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans that the state would immediately stop paying program participants that are affiliates of abortion providers.

“Today’s ruling affirms yet again that in Texas the Women’s Health Program has no obligation to fund Planned Parenthood and other organizations that perform or promote abortion,” the Republican governor said in a statement. “In Texas we choose life, and we will immediately begin defunding all abortion affiliates to honor and uphold that choice.”

And here are some updates from yesterday.

From TheWashingtonExaminer

“Patrick Moran resigned from his father’s reelection campaign after Project Veritas released video showing him coaching someone on how to commit voter fraud, and now the police are investigating the case.

“The Arlington County Commonwealth Attorney’s Office and the Arlington County Police Department have been made aware of a video released yesterday allegedly depicting Patrick Moran, former Director of Field Operations for the Jim Moran for Congress campaign organization, assisting another to vote illegally,” the city announced today.

“The Arlington County Police Department has initiated a criminal investigation of this matter.””

Here’s another update from yesterday via TheHill

“Texas authorities have threatened to arrest international election observers, prompting a furious response from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE).

“The threat of criminal sanctions against [international] observers is unacceptable,” Janez Lenarčič, the Director of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), said in a statement. “The United States, like all countries in the OSCE, has an obligation to invite ODIHR observers to observe its elections.””

“State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland sought to tone down the controversy during her briefing Thursday. The department is eager to avoid giving the impression that the United States is unwilling to submit to the same scrutiny it demands of others when it comes to human and civil rights.”

And yes, I’m enjoying this one. The irony in this one is too ripe to resist. And yes, there’s video.

From HotAir

“To cleanse the palate. If he’d forgotten to bring his driver’s license, this clip would have been 24-karat comedy gold. As it is, I’m surprised that he didn’t seize the opportunity to say something about voter ID laws afterward. His own DOJ has sued several states to try to get them lifted; some on the left have already pre-positioned them as a reason to declare Romney’s presidency illegitimate if Obama loses. You’d think O might have thrown them a bone here.

Fun fact: Illinois law doesn’t require voter ID on election day. Only early voters (plus a few others) are legally required to show it.”

Now see, that wasn’t hard, was it?

🙂

32 thoughts on “News/Politics 10-26-12”

  2. yeah, Ricky it’s always a good day for America when the foreigners are reminded that we think there should be independent election monitors for them but not for us — truly gives meaning to the term American exceptionalism abroad. Brilliant.

    Question for you guys: I’m sure you’ve been following the Indiana Senate race where yet another Republican weighed in poorly on rape. Let me preface this question by saying I do think I understand what Mourdock was trying to say and that unlike Akin it was not offensive but rather a reflection of his religious faith. Here’s my question though — knowing that rape is a sensitive and emotional topic for women and people who love them, why do Republican politicians feel the need to opine — wouldn’t they be better off to acknowledge that rape is traumatic and life is precious and leave it at that?

    Like

    Reply

  3. CB, I could care less if it is a good day for America, what foreigners think of America, or what the rest of America thinks. This is about Texas sovereignty.

    Like

    Reply

  5. Roe v Wade and The Voting Rights Act were encroachments on Texas sovereignty. The important thing is that we misbehave to an extent that Yankees conclude that the US would be better off without us.

    Like

    Reply

  6. I disagree with Rick at this point. We need Texas. I was opposed to including Hawaii and Alaska. We need the 48 contiguous states.

    I have a serious question about rape. Someone could explain it to me without getting into the question of abortion.
    I have always thought that a woman who was raped should have a D&C, regardless of any other complications. Is anything wrong with that?

    Like

    Reply

  7. Chas

    As a general proposition, I agree there’s nothing wrong with that. But if a woman decides she does not want it, imo it should not be forced as doing so would violate her twice.

    Like

    Reply

  8. Chas, I am pleased that you still want us around. However, we are trying to misbehave so that Yankees will want to be rid of us. They were the folks who gave us trouble 150 years ago.

    Like

    Reply

  9. Actually, the country needs Texas a lot more than Texas needs the country. Texas is a robust, manly state that is mostly cattle, oil, and business with a strong dose of serious religion and little hat. We could use a strong dose of the Texas spirit here in Massachusetts that has become a largely effete entity. There was a time when Massachusetts possessed a robust spirit, though it is now dominated by a bunch of bleeding heart liberals.

    Harvard once had a manly Teddy Roosevelt spirit; now it has become symbolized by Elizabeth Warren.

    Like

    Reply

  11. Kimberly Strassel has a great WSJ artcle, A Chronic Case of Obamnesia: The president has left a long trail of flip-flops.

    She has a long, devastating list of his flip-flops including the following:

    “The way Bush has done it over the last eight years is . . . [he] added $4 trillion by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back. . . . That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic”—Sen. Obama, July 2008.

    “I don’t remember what the number was precisely. . . . We don’t have to worry about it short term”—President Obama, September 2012, on the debt figure when he took office ($10 trillion) and whether to worry about today’s $16 trillion figure.

    Like

    Reply

  12. Ricky,

    I’ve been a Yankee all my life. Even when I resided in Kentucky for a time. I’ve always been proud of that. But not so much anymore given what’s happened to our state and especially, it’s leaders. Mostly they’re a bunch of PC Nancys. Texas is sounding good about now.

    CB,

    I get what you’re saying, but you need to admit that this situation could have been avoided. Things would be going as they have in the past, whether we all agreed to it or not. But you can blame the NAACP and the ACLU for this. Most people weren’t even aware of their presence until these 2 groups made a big deal about it. They shoulda kept their whiney little mouths shut. They made half the country ticked off because people who aren’t doing anything wrong are now accused of doing illegal acts to swing an election. People don’t like that. I hope you are at least willing to admit these clowns brought this on. The OSCE should have ignored them and gone about their business, but they didn’t. Now they act all indignant. Too late. When they seemingly bowed to the requests/pressure from these liberal groups, they opened themselves up to this. They don’t seem like such nuetral observers when they keep company with such liberal agenda driven groups as the NAACP and ACLU. They should have responded by telling them to butt out. This has cost them the appearance of nonpartisanship, whether accurate or not.

    Like

    Reply

  13. I have several thoughts about babies produced by a rape.

    1. Are these rapes reported to the police? How many of these rapes are investigated and prosecuted?

    2. Do we hold human fetuses responsible for the sins (law breaking) of their fathers?

    3. Is this an easy issue? How many have kept their mouths shut about their thoughts about rape babies because it won’t further the ending of abortion?

    4. Abortion needed for the health of the mother, puleeze!! So rare as to be a no-brainer. (Mental health is an excuse.)

    Like

    Reply

  14. CB, the issue of the rape comments came up yesterday at lunch with a few friends from church. We pretty much agreed that while we understood — theologically — where the comments came from and agreed that God is sovereign over all (and certainly over new life), that the remarks were ill-advised and unwise, to put it kindly.

    Presented outside of its deeper theological context, the remark made in a secular public setting came off as, well, boneheaded. I’m sure I wasn’t the only Christian who cringed at hearing what he said.

    That’s why believers must remember to always be wise in how and where we say things that could be misconstrued.

    Like

    Reply

  15. I keep thinking it can’t get any worse.

    And then it does.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/26/cia-operators-were-denied-request-for-help-during-benghazi-attack-sources-say/

    “Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that three urgent requests from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. Consulate and subsequent attack nearly seven hours later were denied by officials in the CIA chain of command — who also told the CIA operators to “stand down” rather than help the ambassador’s team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.

    Former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were part of a small team who were at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. Consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When they heard the shots fired, they radioed to inform their higher-ups to tell them what they were hearing. They were told to “stand down,” according to sources familiar with the exchange. An hour later, they called again to headquarters and were again told to “stand down.”

    Woods, Doherty and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the Consulate which at that point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The quick reaction force from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the Consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight.

    At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Specter gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights. The fighting at the CIA annex went on for more than four hours — enough time for any planes based in Sigonella Air base, just 480 miles away, to arrive. Fox News has also learned that two separate Tier One Special operations forces were told to wait, among them Delta Force operators.”

    Woods and Doherty should be being hailed as hero’s by the President. Yet for political reasons, they’re not. If he admitted to their bravery and how they defied orders to help others in harm’s way, then the gig would be up. These men exhibited bravery and fearlessness in the face of overwhelming odds. The President left them behind, defenseless, when he could have helped. It’s disgusting. He needs to be held accountable.

    And Panetta and Hillary are liars as well.

    Like

    Reply

  16. CB,

    I don’t think there should be election monitors for Canada, France, Britain, Germany, Ireland, Israel, etc., etc. These countries, like us, have histories of free, open elections. Another one is Poland; it’s a well-established democracy and in ’07, it banned OSCE poll observers in its elections that year. If a nation is a well-established democracy, international monitors are an affront to its sovereignty.

    On the other hand, countries like Ukraine (history of massive bribery, corruption, and outright vote rigging) and other countries with a similar history of corruption, little democratic instincts or having strongman-type leaders ought to have the election monitors. There is no moral equivalence between the U.S. and those nations.

    Now if they are more like “students” rather than monitors, i.e. people from countries just beginning to have free elections looking to get insight and see how it’s done, I have no problem with that.

    Like

    Reply

  18. Thanks for that news from Fox, AJ. It does seem unbelievable that higher ups would put people in such a sitting duck position without any help. That is so unlike how our nation use to operate.

    Like

    Reply

  20. Matt

    There is an osce election observation report on the odihr website reporting on its 2007 election observation meeting. I’m not so sure about your link. I do disagree on limiting election observation for 2 reasons. The first is that people do learn best practices. The second is leading by example and preventing countries from using an excuse to bar observers.

    Ricky, for the past 4 elections conservatives have made similar complaints so you can blame aclu etc, but it wouldn’t be wholly accurate. And the best way to put to rest aclu complaints would be to discuss the substance of the laws. From an international perspective, the voter id laws look just fine.

    Like

    Reply

  21. AJ and Sails, It would be useful if you could tell your liberal neighbors that if we stay in the union, Texans are determined to force them to: a) carry a gun at all times; b) drive an 8 cylinder vehicle; c) stop recycling; d) watch old John Wayne movies and e) eat at Chick-Fil-A once a week.

    Like

    Reply

  22. Fascinating, though, how the social issues keep leading the news and not the far more serious international and economic issues. I think many people’s opinions are made up on the social frames, but the rest is huge and yet we’re tossed all these stupid sound bites. Ridiculous.

    Of course here in northern California 2/3 of the front page is devoted to the Giants winning their second World Series game–which is a little better than the rest of the frustrating news, I suppose.

    Like

    Reply

  25. Looks like Hillary now has at least some cover for herself. She at least attempted to do the right thing security wise, but Obama shot her down. I thought that should be pointed out.

    http://nation.foxnews.com/hillary-clinton/2012/10/26/report-hillary-asked-more-security-benghazi-obama-said-no

    “Last night, it was revealed that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had ordered more security at the U.S. mission in Benghazi before it was attacked where four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens were murdered by Al-Qaeda but President Obama denied the request.”

    The Blaze is also reporting on a potential bombshell that would destroy Obama’s re-election hopes.

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/ed-klein-bill-clinton-urging-hillary-to-release-benghazi-documents-that-would-exonerate-her-destroy-obamas-re-election-hopes/

    “Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ordered additional security for the U.S. mission in Benghazi ahead of the terrorist attack but the orders were never carried out, according to “legal counsel” to Clinton who spoke to best-selling author Ed Klein. Those same sources also say former President Bill Clinton has been “urging” his wife to release official State Department documents that prove she called for additional security at the compound in Libya, which would almost certainly result in President Obama losing the election.

    Appearing on TheBlazeTV’s “Wilkow!” on Wednesday night, Klein told host Andrew Wilkow that Bill and Hillary Clinton have been having “big fights” for “two or three weeks” about the issue, according to his two sources on Clinton’s legal counsel. While Bill Clinton wishes his wife would “exonerate” herself by releasing the documents that show she wasn’t at fault for the tragic security failure in Libya, the secretary of state refuses to do so because she doesn’t want to be viewed as a traitor to the Democratic party.”

    Like

    Reply

  26. I vote we keep Texas and give CA back to Mexico with one agreement that all the Dem in the State of CA must surrender their citizen ship and they must never leave the State. We then have this right to put up walls with Arm Guards to ensure those Dem do not try a return to the United States.

    As for the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), (which is a joke) should focus on States and Cities that have a history of voter fraud. Like CA, IL, Cities like Chicago, Philadelphia.

    Hello and Good Bye

    Like

    Reply

  29. “Nah” @Anonymous 3:09, perhaps because those hopes are already evaporating. ?

    Seriously, the election is till too close to call in my opinion. But the movement in the romney direction appears to be still moving that way.

    And while it may not make the ultimate difference — it’s breaking a bit late in the cycle — the growing news stories recounting what was (I think) clearly a mishandling of the Libya embassy crisis certainly won’t help the incumbent.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to rickyweaver Cancel reply