Erick Erickson's Blog, page 97

The Same Washington Post That Got Marco Rubio's Story Wrong, Attacks Him Again

Last week, the Washington Post attacked Marco Rubio for "misrepresenting" his family's story. The Post got called out by other newspapers for the Post's egregious truth stretching to make its story fit. In the quotes the Washington Post cited, the reporter misrepresented the context of Marco Rubio's remarks. It was true that Rubio had gotten some details wrong. But it was also very clear that they were the innocent mistakes of a son retelling his parents' story. It was also true the Washington Post got parts of its reporting wrong.

But the Washington Post has not stopped. Now the paper is back at it premising a new article on the last story without nothing the Washington Post itself got key elements of its story wrong. This time, the Washington Post wants to make the case that Marco Rubio could be a risky Vice Presidential pick for the GOP.

Seriously.

We have a President of the United States who, for twenty years, worshipped in Jeremiah Wright's church, had his house paid for by Tony Rezko, claimed his uncle freed Jews at Auschwitz, snorted cocaine, and got other key biographical details wrong and the Washington Post never seemed to think he was too risky.

The other angle of attack in the Washington Post is defending Univision's smear of Rubio's family. Marco Rubio refused to do an interview with the very liberal leaning network. After Rubio refused to do the interview, Univision ran a report on Marco Rubio's brother-in-law getting arrested 24 years ago for drug trafficking. Univision denies a connection and argues about the time line.

But somehow, according to the Washington Post, these two incidents make Rubio risky. There really is more of a story here than the Washington Post lets on.

Everyone knows that despite Rubio's denials he is every Republican's first choice for Vice President. The left cannot abide the first hispanic Vice Presidential candidate being a Republican. The Democrats expect to have the black vote locked up in 2012 and they want the hispanic vote locked up too. That would be made more difficult with Rubio on the Republican ticket.

So the left is using the Washington Post to attack Rubio now, just as the Obama Administration has begun attacking Mitt Romney now. The calculus is that Romney will be the nominee and Rubio the veep pick. Consequently, the left is on the attack now trying to damage Rubio's reputation as much as possible. CNN reports the Democrats even have a PAC run by a former Harry Reid staffer engaged in this.

The Democrats are deathly afraid of what Marco Rubio as the GOP's Vice Presidential nominee could do to Obama's re-election chances and the long term fortunes of the Democrats within the Hispanic community. The Washington Post is running the Democrats' attacks for them as part of the left.

Each attack shows just how scared of Marco Rubio the Democrats really are.

And they should be.

Morning Briefing for October 28, 2011

RedState Morning Briefing

For October 28, 2011

Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.

1. The Same Washington Post That Got Marco Rubio's Story Wrong, Attacks Him Again

2. Right Now It's The Message

3. Dems Dodge Questions On Discriminatory Union PLAs For DNC Convention

4. Ohio Democratic Party Targets Pro-SB5 Businesses

———————————————————————-

1. The Same Washington Post That Got Marco Rubio's Story Wrong, Attacks Him Again

Last week, the Washington Post attacked Marco Rubio for "misrepresenting" his family's story. The Post got called out by other newspapers for the Post's egregious truth stretching to make its story fit. In the quotes the Washington Post cited, the reporter misrepresented the context of Marco Rubio's remarks. It was true that Rubio had gotten some details wrong. But it was also very clear that they were the innocent mistakes of a son retelling his parents' story. It was also true the Washington Post got parts of its reporting wrong.

But the Washington Post has not stopped. Now the paper is back at it premising a new article on the last story without nothing the Washington Post itself got key elements of its story wrong. This time, the Washington Post wants to make the case that Marco Rubio could be a risky Vice Presidential pick for the GOP.

Seriously.

We have a President of the United States who, for twenty years, worshipped in Jeremiah Wright's church, had his house paid for by Tony Rezko, claimed his uncle freed Jews at Auschwitz, snorted cocaine, and got other key biographical details wrong and the Washington Post never seemed to think he was too risky.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

2. Right Now It's The Message

I got emailed from a few people last night that I was rather harsh toward Governor Perry's campaign on CNN tonight. I was.

When Rick Perry unveiled his economic plan, he spent the better part of two days talking about Barack Obama's birth certificate.

Now, instead of moving back to the economic plan, we've moved on to talking about Rick Perry and debates.

Byron York makes a very persuasive case that Rick Perry is actually right on the debates. According to John King tonight on CNN, by the time we get to Iowa, there'll have been 21 debates — more than either 2004 for the Democrats or 2008 for both the Democrats and Republicans.

Remember as well that the calendar is more compressed now than when those debates were set up.

But the Perry team should not have raised the issue right now. It makes him look weak. We know he sucks in the debates. We know he wants out of the debates. That is precisely why he should not have raised it himself or had his communications director, Ray Sullivan, raise it.

It makes us focus on Perry's bad debate performances instead of finally, finally focusing on his economic plan and jobs plan.

The Perry campaign has a problem. It has nothing to do with bad debate performances. It has everything to do with a lack of message discipline. If they want to turn things around, they need to get on and stay on jobs.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

3. Dems Dodge Questions On Discriminatory Union PLAs For DNC Convention

In February, when North Carolina was awarded the Democratic National Convention over forced-union states, we alerted you to the devil in the details of the DNC having its convention in a predominantly union-free state. At issue is something traditionally known as Project Labor Agreements that give work to unionized employers and, as well, discriminate against union-free workers. Now, that devil appears to be rearing its ugly head and Democrat mayor Anthony Foxx, who is running from Republican challenger Scott Stone, appears unwilling to give Charlotte residents a straight answer on how much work will go to unionized workers.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

4. Ohio Democratic Party Targets Pro-SB5 Businesses

As Ohio's SB5 (collective bargaining reform) goes to a vote on November 8th, pressure is being ramped up in the final week and a half. According to the Columbus Dispatch, unions and their fellow reform opponents have bankrolled the We Are Ohio anti-SB5 campaign to the tune of $19,048,680, dwarfing the pro-reform Building A Better Ohio's $7.6 million.

Democrats and their union cronies have dominated Ohio for decades and the collective bargaining reforms signed into law earlier this year pose a very real threat to their continued base of power. As a result, the Democrats did something incredibly arrogant on Thursday afternoon when the official Twitter account for the Ohio Democratic Party released the names of several businesses that have contributed to SB5, then told their 4,000 followers to "contact them."

Please click here for the rest of the post.

Right Now It's The Message

I got emailed from a few people tonight that I was rather harsh toward Governor Perry's campaign on CNN tonight. I was.

When Rick Perry unveiled his economic plan, he spent the better part of two days talking about Barack Obama's birth certificate.

Now, instead of moving back to the economic plan, we've moved on to talking about Rick Perry and debates.

Byron York makes a very persuasive case that Rick Perry is actually right on the debates. According to John King tonight on CNN, by the time we get to Iowa, there'll have been 21 debates — more than either 2004 for the Democrats or 2008 for both the Democrats and Republicans.

Remember as well that the calendar is more compressed now than when those debates were set up.

But the Perry team should not have raised the issue right now. It makes him look weak. We know he sucks in the debates. We know he wants out of the debates. That is precisely why he should not have raised it himself or had his communications director, Ray Sullivan, raise it.

It makes us focus on Perry's bad debate performances instead of finally, finally focusing on his economic plan and jobs plan.

The Perry campaign has a problem. It has nothing to do with bad debate performances. It has everything to do with a lack of message discipline. If they want to turn things around, they need to get on and stay on jobs.

#OccupyRacism

The Horserace for October 27, 2011

Is Rick Perry wasting our time? He came out with a great energy plan. He came out with an amazing economic plan. But I get the sense the campaign is in denial. Word is leaking that he may start skipping debates.

I don't blame anyone for skipping some of the debates. There are far too many and they do little more than provoke fights without substantive conversations on the issues. I'm cool with any of the candidates skipping debates. But the Heritage/AEI debate on Foreign Policy must be non-negotiable for all the candidates. They need to be there and answer these questions. Foreign policy is the one area in the constitution the President largely has unrestricted power. We need to know what they would do.

I don't think the Perry campaign really understands just how uninspired Rick Perry has left his own base of supporters, let alone the existing undecideds. To his credit though, he gave an entire speech this week and did not mention Texas. He's learning. I don't think he is wasting our time. But he needs to shore up his base of support quickly — probably more quickly than his campaign realizes.

In the meantime, the Romney camp is still targeting the Perry camp, largely because they don't see the Cain camp as viable. The Cain camp continues building steam. Ron Paul is encountering his own version of Romney's problem, and sneaking up from the rear is a guy most of us had written off.

We'll get into all in the Horserace.

Michele Bachmann

The Bachmann camp really believes she can make a play in Iowa and take on Mitt Romney. She is not a Romney stalking horse. That may be what happens with her in the race. But her campaign really believes it can win Iowa. Unfortunately for Bachmann, the money is not flowing as she'd like it. Her New Hampshire team is gone — not that she ever cared about New Hampshire. But it seems the wheels are coming off the Bachmann campaign as it has veered off a path to victory and onto a path of irrelevance. Notwithstanding that, Michele Bachmann has a strong chance to revitalize at the Heritage/AEI debate. She is very, very good on foreign policy and has a background on the Intelligence Committee the other candidates do not.

Herman Cain

That Herman Cain ad is just weird. This is a mirror of the Perry problem. Perry imploded in debates and proved himself not a credible candidate based on his handling of the debates. Cain has released some of the stupidest ads this campaign season. His problem is the overall image of his campaign.

It has worked to his advantage so far in that the other candidates ignored him and he got into first place. But he can only stay there for so long and projecting a frivolous image in his advertising won't help. That said, as the race stands right now, any consolidation that happens against Romney is going to help Cain.

We know, however, the Romney camp is not worried about him. Why? They've barely touched him. When the Romney camp goes into attack mode, you'll know Herman's lead is more locked in.

Newt Gingrich

Gingrich is going after Cain. It's a wise move for him. His polling is coming up. It has surprised a lot of people, myself included, who thought his campaign was dead. He's got a pulse and he sees a path to victory. But that path involves taking out Herman Cain and hoping that the Cain supporters come to him.

We're all seeing the phenomenon. When one candidate peaks and falls, someone else goes up against Romney. Gingrich thinks he is the next guy to go up and it is a smart guess to make. If Cain implodes, his supporters will go to Gingrich or back to Perry. Of course, Gingrich has to throw Cain off his game without seeming like a bad guy. That's while he'll focus on the national sales tax part of 999.

Jon Huntsman

Does he still have a campaign?

Ron Paul

Ron Paul has a Mitt Romney problem. Romney is capped out at about 25% of the electorate. For Romney, that's good enough to be the nominee if the race does not consolidate. Paul is capped out at about 13%. That's not good enough to be the nominee. He does not have the ability to build a winning coalition. Ironically, a lot of polling shows most Paul supporters would drift to Romney. So Paul staying in hurts Romney more than anyone else. But he will not be the nominee.

Rick Perry

He had a good debate performance in Vegas. But just one really good performance. His campaign now says he may stop debating. He cannot have one good performance after a series of flubs and decide he is good. He particularly cannot miss the Heritage/AEI debate, though I suspect a number of the questioners would be hostile to him. He just can't do it. Why? Because they are the two big conservative think tanks and foreign policy is a relevant, pressing issue that has yet to be explored.

Perry can skip a lot of the December debates. Hell, he and the rest of the candidates should go on now and say no to NBC's January debate with the hacks from Politifact.

But he cannot skip this coming debate after just one good performance. If he does, I think it is game over for him because he'll look both scared and weak.

All that said, Perry's jobs/energy and economic plans have been super solid, very conservative, and filled with pro-growth, limited government ideas. He can be proud of his plans. He has an expanded team and a lot of money. But Perry needs to re-engage.

I don't think his campaign understands just how frustrated his core supporters are, how depressed they are by him on the trail, and how badly undecided voters think he has performed. Perry needs to do serious damage control to win hearts and minds and he only has about a month and a half to do it. He's got the money. I'm not sure he has the time or the self-discipline.

Mitt Romney

The odds grow every day that Mitt Romney will be the nominee. He is continuing to focus on Perry because his analysis is the same as mine — this remains really a Perry v. Romney race. Romney has kept the base from settling for him because of his last debate performance, his Ohio misstep earlier this week, and the rest of his record.

But as long as the field does not consolidate against him, he can survive and win without the race settling. Mitt Romney will be the nominee unless Perry, Gingrich, or Cain seriously step up their game.

Rick Santorum

Santorum will not be the nominee.

Morning Briefing for October 27, 2011

RedState Morning Briefing

For October 27, 2011

Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.

1. Student debt is a symptom of our lack of economic literacy

2. Stop Harry Reid's Egregious Budget Power Grab

3. Public-Sector Unions To Ohio Taxpayers: We Will Bury You

4. Al-Jazeera and Green Peace Unite Against Keystone Pipeline

5. You Can't Rely On American Cars Because American Car Makers Rely On Bailouts

6. In Which John Tillman Plays With Fire

7. An Anti-Semite?

———————————————————————-

1. Student debt is a symptom of our lack of economic literacy

One of the failings of our public school systems is the lack of basic economic literacy of so many of our students. I am afraid this has infected our political discourse and policy making to a degree that is frightening and deeply disheartening. One prime example of this, are attempts to ignore basic things like supply and demand when making public policy. In my humble opinion, Democrats are guilty of this more than Republicans but a depressing amount of Republicans follow this path as well.

A good example is a hot topic these days: student debt. This is a subject I have some inside knowledge about having acquired far too much student debt in order to achieve an advanced degree from a fancy Ivy League school (fine, a MA from a MAC school, but that is beside the point).

This is also a classic example of politicians blindly declaring something a universal good and then making policy that not only ignores economic reality but undermines the economy and harms people (see, housing policy). We blithely declare that everyone should go to college and set up a system that allows anyone breathing to borrow large sums of money with no consequences or connection to reality and wonder why the system doesn't function. Soon we have millions of people with massive debt and very little to show for it.

The sad thing is that these people are now protesting in the streets and asking for what? More hair of the dog that bit them – more government intrusion and less economic reality. And it appears President Obama is happy to oblige them.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

2. Stop Harry Reid's Egregious Budget Power Grab

Senate Democrats (and all other Democrats, for that matter) have not passed a budget for over 900 days, yet they are planning to come late to the game and commandeer the appropriations process. After delaying the process for over two years, Harry Reid, with the help of some Senate Republicans, is planning to expedite appropriations bills in a way that disavows standard procedures of transparency. House Republicans must rebuff this insidious plan.

When Republicans assumed control of the House earlier this year, they completed the job that Democrats refused to do regarding the FY 2011 budget. Additionally, they passed a concurrent budget resolution for FY 2012, and proceeded to complete half of the 12 annual appropriations bills. When it became clear that Senate Democrats were dithering with roll call votes and speeches, and had no intention of even passing a budget resolution, Republicans held back the remaining approps bills, in an effort to wait for the Senate to get its act together.

Now, instead of coming to the table and passing the 12 individual appropriations bills along with a budget resolution, Harry Reid is seeking to circumvent the process by using "Minibus" bills. He rightfully perceives that a 12-bill omnibus package would be politically unpopular, so he is planning to bundle the 12 appropriations bill into four minibus bills, containing three spending bills apiece.

Why does Reid want to use this awkward and obscure process for appropriations bills?

Please click here for the rest of the post.

3. Public-Sector Unions To Ohio Taxpayers: We Will Bury You

With less than two weeks before the November 8th elections and with the polls leaning toward repealing SB5, it appears that Ohioans are ready to vote to increase their taxes and unemployment. Ultimately, that is a choice Ohio taxpayers will be making and fiscal self-immolation is certainly within their rights and, frankly, there are states who would be all-too happy to see Ohio's unions put the nail in the coffin there.

Curiously, though, after months of being pounded by a multi-million dollar union campaign of fear-mongering and deceptive propaganda, there seems to be very few Ohioans who know the true economic consequences of what happens when they repeal SB 5—and the unions, in their attack ads, certainly aren't telling them either.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

4. Al-Jazeera and Green Peace Unite Against Keystone Pipeline

Al Jazeera, arguably the most terrorist-friendly news station after MSNBC, has offered some thoughts on the proposed Keystone Pipeline which will bring billions of dollars and thousands of jobs to the United States.

Calling it a "pipeline of poison," writer Dahr Jamail makes the case that the project will be an environmental catastrophe. Quite a shocker that the media outlet of choice in the middle east would be against something that might make us more energy independent.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

5. You Can't Rely On American Cars Because American Car Makers Rely On Bailouts

The Consumer Reports Company just rated the reliability of 28 makes of automobile from around the world. No American car manufacturer scored better than 13th in ordinal ranking. Ranked on a Lickert Scale from 1 to 5, Jeep, the best American competitor, scores approximately 3.0. No American car does better than average at staying in one piece. This raises a fair question: did we really save GM and Chrysler or did we just screw the bondholders to put off the inevitable?

Much-hyped and manfully-bailed General Motors finished 22nd out of 28 world manufacturers. Their subjects over at Chevrolet performed modestly better (17th out of 28) and are currently the standard-bearers and great hope for bailout motors. Their marquis offering, The Chevrolet Cruze, has received positive reviews and is temporarily well-positioned to sell well against other small cars.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

6. In Which John Tillman Plays With Fire

I understand where John Tillman is coming from. The CEO of the illinois Policy Institute has encountered a few of the occupiers and shares some concerns with them.

I've written about the common ground conservatives might find with some of the folk who've joined in the occupation cause. The Sam Adams Alliance and other groups have found that there are some in the crowd who really are just angry about feeling like the deck is stacked against them. They aren't there for punishment. They are there because they want to be able to compete.

But as I noted at the time, "Most of the common ground with most of these damn dirty communists is superficial." The more we learn about the crowds, the more I am set in that opinion.

Playing with fire is going to get Tillman and likeminded souls burned. The better approach would be to push forward the legislative proposal Tillman thinks we find common ground on. Make sure the Occupy crowd knows about and let those who share our values come out of the crowd. If we push sound policy, they'll come if they really are there.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

7. An Anti-Semite?

I'm so used to being called a Zionist, among other things, I am actually shocked tonight to learn Jenn Rubin thinks this statement makes me anti-Semitic:

"A conservative friend says she's best understood as 'Likud' rather than Republican or conservative. There's nothing wrong with being Likud, but one ought to be honest about it."

I nor the friend of mine who offered that up are anti-Semitic, but it has apparently hit a nerve that I did not intend to hit and I feel I do need to apologize for that. A friend of mine explains to me that a Jewish-American might find it insulting because it suggests they put Israel ahead of the United States.

I had not thought of that when writing it and was not my intention. Where I finally had enough of Jenn Rubin was her position on Jonathan Pollard that I cannot in any way, shape, or form comprehend as being the right position. It was that position of hers and her positions on national security, terrorism, and Israel (all three of which she and I see eye to eye on) that didn't make me think twice about using the Likud comparison. Apparently I should have. Likud as a party is tough as nails on terrorism and security issues, but is liberal to left (by American standards) on fiscal and social policy, and that's what I intended by the comparison, not a suggestion of misplaced loyalty. And certainly not anti-semitism.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

An Anti-Semite?

I'm so used to being called a Zionist, among other things, I am actually shocked tonight to learn Jenn Rubin thinks this statement makes me anti-Semitic:

A conservative friend says she's best understood as 'Likud' rather than Republican or conservative. There's nothing wrong with being Likud, but one ought to be honest about it.

I nor the friend of mine who offered that up are anti-Semitic, but it has apparently hit a nerve that I did not intend to hit and I feel I do need to apologize for that. A friend of mine explains to me that a Jewish-American might find it insulting because it suggests they put Israel ahead of the United States.

I had not thought of that when writing it and was not my intention. Where I finally had enough of Jenn Rubin was her position on Jonathan Pollard that I cannot in any way, shape, or form comprehend as being the right position. It was that position of hers and her positions on national security, terrorism, and Israel (all three of which she and I see eye to eye on) that didn't make me think twice about using the Likud comparison. Apparently I should have. Likud as a party is tough as nails on terrorism and security issues, but is liberal to left (by American standards) on fiscal and social policy, and that's what I intended by the comparison, not a suggestion of misplaced loyalty. And certainly not anti-semitism.

I do not think Jenn Rubin is a conservative. On those positions she and the Politico chose to highlight on fiscal issues, I actually don't buy that she is as right as claimed, though certainly more center than left. Through the budget shutdown fights of the past year, she routinely chose to side with the establishment GOP, not the conservatives trying to fight for smaller government, has been less than kind to Jim DeMint, etc. The one anomaly has been her coverage of Rick Santorum.

But all of that is another matter to this anti-Semitism business. My initial reaction was that I must have hit close to home for her to cry foul in that way. But after a friend explained to me the implication — that it suggested a loyalty to Israel above a loyalty to the United States among other things — that's absolutely not what I meant and certainly do apologize for leaving anyone, including Jenn, with that impression.

We can fight on other matters, including whether she's a conservative, but I don't question her love of this country.

In Which John Tillman Plays With Fire

I understand where John Tillman is coming from. The CEO of the illinois Policy Institute has encountered a few of the occupiers and shares some concerns with them.

Here is what I learned: First, they don't like crony capitalism in which politicians and government pick the winners and losers. We agreed. Second, they don't like it that people misbehaved on Wall Street. We agreed again. But when I pointed out that the financial collapse occurred primarily because of people playing within the rules created by government and that it was the government itself that made the rules, we began to find more common ground.

One thing that has bothered the occupiers is their image as portrayed in the news media. They think corporate media are misleading the public about who they really are and what they really want. I told them my take, based on news reports, was that they are engaged in class warfare and hate corporations and capitalism. They said that that was not what it was all about; their occupation, rather, is about stopping abuses of the system at the expense of average people. We agreed once more.

I've written about the common ground conservatives might find with some of the folk who've joined in the occupation cause. The Sam Adams Alliance and other groups have found that there are some in the crowd who really are just angry about feeling like the deck is stacked against them. They aren't there for punishment. They are there because they want to be able to compete.

But as I noted at the time, "Most of the common ground with most of these damn dirty communists is superficial." The more we learn about the crowds, the more I am set in that opinion.

We know, for example, that the Working Families Party is on Craigslist offering to pay protestors. They deny that, but the implication is clear and the ads are there. Last night, we saw Oakland, CA explode.

In Atlanta, GA last night, the police were called in. An 11 Alive reporter in Atlanta captured interesting nuggets from the crowd there. One of the unofficial leaders in the crowd, Tim Franzen, told the reporter they were going to protest in front of Georgia Pacific's building because of the Koch Brothers. According to Franzen,

We've been having a team of alchemists and faith healers and doctors of physics working together to develop a mathematical formula to levitate the building

Walter Williams noted the other day that

[t]he Occupy Wall Street protesters are following the path predicted by the great philosopher-economist Frederic Bastiat, who said in "The Law" that "instead of rooting out the injustices found in society, they make these injustices general." In other words, the protesters don't want to end crony capitalism, with its handouts and government favoritism; they want to participate in it.

That is the key nugget and why John Tillman should be careful what he wishes for.

There are some people out in the crowd who just want the level playing field. And the right should be pushing legislation to help those people. They want the same level playing field we want. We share a mutual recognition that Wall Street and both political parties in Washington are joined together to tightly. We recognize that this union hurts entrepreneurs and drives up the cost to compete against established companies.

But it is increasingly apparent across the nation that those in the movement who share common values with the tea party crowd are a small minority within the crowd. The bulk of the crowd is neo-Marxist or plain old Marxist. They want an end to capitalism, they want to punish the successful, and they are as greedy as the fat cats they condemn.

The danger is that their greed is greed for power. At least the capitalists want to make something and give it to us in exchange for money. Greed for power is a far more dangerous thing and we play with fire by humoring these people are finding much common ground outside those in the minority of this movement.

Playing with fire is going to get Tillman and likeminded souls burned. The better approach would be to push forward the legislative proposal Tillman thinks we find common ground on. Make sure the Occupy crowd knows about and let those who share our values come out of the crowd. If we push sound policy, they'll come if they really are there.

The Washington Post Puts a Romney Blogger on the Payroll to Attack Romney's Opponents

The Washington Post has been subsidizing the left's bloggers for a while now. Greg Sargent is a veritable mouthpiece of the Democratic National Committee. Ezra Klein repackages left-wing talking points as an "economics" blogger or some such despite the fact that his only credential as an economist is a college degree in political science.

Now the Washington Post has put a Mitt Romney blogger on the payroll and everybody is pretty open about that connection.

Jenn Rubin, when not pushing out Romney talking points is in favor of freeing traitors, claims to be a conservative covering the conservative movement, though she has nothing in common with conservatives other than hating terrorists. A conservative friend says she's best understood as 'Likud' rather than Republican or conservative. There's nothing wrong with being Likud, but one ought to be honest about it. (Please be sure to read this update regarding this reference)

In any event, in a profile in the Politico, we get two rather stunning admissions for a supposedly objective blogger covering the conservative side of the aisle for the Washington Post.

Couple these two together and one must objectively wonder how the Washington Post can keep her on the payroll without fundamentally changing the description of who she is and what she does.

First:

Anonymous Republican attacks on Perry, for instance, may or may not come from Romney aides, she said.

and second:

[Her attacks on Rick Perry] often echo or prefigure former Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney's attacks on him.

Together, that paints a picture of a blogger who is ostensibly charged with covering conservatives for the Washington Post abusing her position to fixate on one candidate at the expense of another — though to be fair, Rubin has attacked pretty much any candidate who comes close to Romney in the polls whether it be Michele Bachmann, then Rick Perry, and also Herman Cain.

She does, however, adore Chris Christie and adored Rick Santorum when he was attacking the non-Romney candidates.

On Tuesday alone, Rubin wrote eight attacks on Rick Perry alone in a column styled as "commentary from a conservative perspective."

But this "conservative" has sided with the guy 75% of the Republican primary voters do not want, is pro-abortion, and cannot even admit that all partial birth abortions are wrong. To be fair, I guess it is progress to have someone at the Washington Post who at least speaks for 25% as if they are something.

But I object to the characterization of her. Not only is she not a conservative, she's shilling for one candidate while being paid by the Washington Post.

Morning Briefing for October 26, 2011

RedState Morning Briefing

For October 26, 2011

Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.

1. The Washington Post Puts a Romney Blogger on the Payroll to Attack Romney's Opponents

2. Rick Perry's Birtherism

3. "An Incredible Moment in Politics." Mitt Romney Won't Go There.

4. A Conservative Look at Perry's Economic Plan

5. Elizabeth Warren on Occupy Wall Street: 'I Created the Intellectual Foundation for What They Do. I Support What They Do.'

6. Joe Biden wants the scary, scary Human Events reporter to go away.

7. BLS September Mass Layoff Report: It's unpleasant and inconvenient

8. Indiana GOP goes after election fraud; 65 indictments in southern Indiana

———————————————————————-

1. The Washington Post Puts a Romney Blogger on the Payroll to Attack Romney's Opponents

The Washington Post has been subsidizing the left's bloggers for a while now. Greg Sargent is a veritable mouthpiece of the Democratic National Committee. Ezra Klein repackages left-wing talking points as an "economics" blogger or some such despite the fact that his only credential as an economist is a college degree in political science.

Now the Washington Post has put a Mitt Romney blogger on the payroll and everybody is pretty open about that connection.

Jenn Rubin, when not pushing out Romney talking points is in favor of freeing traitors, claims to be a conservative covering the conservative movement, though she has nothing in common with conservatives other than hating terrorists. A conservative friend says she's best understood as 'Likud' rather than Republican or conservative. There's nothing wrong with being Likud, but one ought to be honest about it.

In any event, in a profile in the Politico, we get two rather stunning admissions for a supposedly objective blogger covering the conservative side of the aisle for the Washington Post.

Couple these two together and one must objectively wonder how the Washington Post can keep her on the payroll without fundamentally changing the description of who she is and what she does.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

2. Rick Perry's Birtherism

On a day when he should be focused on his 20/20 plan, the press wants Rick Perry to focus on Barack Obama's 'birth certificate." Why? Because a Parade interviewer asked Perry about it and Perry did not flat out say "Obama is an American citizen."

So now the press is after him. John Harwood of the New York Times asked Perry three times about the subject in one interview.

It is clear from the interviews that (A) Perry does not much care; (B) Perry thinks it is fun to tease Barack Obama about it and (C) the press wants a definitive answer.

Because Perry admits it is a distraction and it is clear the press will not let go of it, Rick Perry just needs to get it over with and say the man is an American. But I suspect he won't do that even though he should, though in South Carolina late yesterday he pretty adamantly moved on telling a local reporter the question was "a distraction" and he was talking about jobs.

Rick Perry likes picking on Barack Obama. Watching the video below, it seems to me that Perry is not a birther, but sure isn't afraid to use the issue to needle the President, whether I or anyone else likes it or not.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

3. "An Incredible Moment in Politics." Mitt Romney Won't Go There.

Hey Rick Perry, if you weren't trying to have fun with birtherism, this would probably be a much bigger media story today. Peter Hamby over at CNN referred to it as "an incredible moment in politics."

Mitt Romney refused to endorse John Kasich's reforms in Ohio. This is a huge freaking deal.

Playing it too safe is finally biting Romney in the rear end. He's refused to call social security a ponzi scheme. He's refused to offer bold economic reform plans. He's refused to address significant changes in entitlement reforms. His whole campaign has centered around tapioca.

And yesterday, while at a call center where volunteers were calling people to support Governor Kasich's reforms, Mitt Romney . . . well . . . he wouldn't commit.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

4. A Conservative Look at Perry's Economic Plan

When Herman Cain proposed his 9-9-9 plan, many conservatives became energized, despite their misgivings with the fine print of the plan. It wasn't so much the details of the proposal that excited the base, as most conservatives intuitively recoiled from a consumption tax; it was the boldness of the plan that resonated with them. Cain's 9-9-9 brought some excitement to a race that was defined by a frontrunner who offered 160 pages of banal fluff. Nevertheless, his plan was too flawed to be utilized as a viable rallying cry in the general election. Perry appears to have proposed both a viable and bold economic plan, albeit with some inevitable flaws.

Here is a synopsis of all of the major components.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

5. Elizabeth Warren on Occupy Wall Street: 'I Created the Intellectual Foundation for What They Do. I Support What They Do.'

"I created much of the intellectual foundation for what they do. I support what they do." This quote, from Massachusetts Democratic senatorial candidate Elizabeth Warren, can be found in this otherwise unremarkable (and poorly written) article by Daily Beast writer Samuel Jacobs. It's nice, in a way, that the true creator of the Occupy Wall Street movement has stepped forward to announce herself; after all, now we know who to credit for their motivation, goals, and actions.

Speaking of what the participants in Liz Warren's brainchild are doing, let's take a quick look at Occupy Wall Streeters around the country.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

6. Joe Biden wants the scary, scary Human Events reporter to go away.

First, let's refresh people's memory of what happened.

For those without video: basically, what happened was that after Joe Biden Opened His Mouth and announced that voting against the President's job bill would result in more rapes in Flint, Michigan, Jason Mattera of Human Events confronted the Vice President on Biden's statement. If you watch the video, you'll see that Mattera 'ambushed' VP Biden by cruelly saying the magic word 'picture:' this of course caused Biden to go into full Pavlovian politician mode… thus freezing him for just long enough for Mattera to ask Biden on the record whether that language was appropriate for a sitting Vice President. Biden then attempted to push out a cloud of link by standing by his statement that rapes were up three times in Flint – which, by the way, Factcheck.org calls a 'whopper;' i.e., a lie – and then made a hasty retreat.

So. Point to Human Events. But now it gets better.

You see, now there has to be an investigation.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

7. BLS September Mass Layoff Report: It's unpleasant and inconvenient

It's become something of a legend among unions and the nation's labor relations community but, for those old enough to remember the mid-90s, when Whole Foods was under constant attack by the United Food & Commercial Workers, John Mackey, Whole Foods' CEO once shared his opinion of unions with a reporter, as follows:

"The union is like having herpes. It doesn't kill you, but it's unpleasant and inconvenient, and it stops a lot of people from becoming your lover."

Of course, the UFCW and other unions went ballistic. They protested and picketed and boycotted. [I mean, really, who wants to be told they're like a case of herpes?] But, that was more than 15 years ago and times have changed for unions—although, with more than 93% of the private-sector now union-free, not for the better. Yet, unions are still having their unpleasant and inconvenient consequences.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

8. Indiana GOP goes after election fraud; 65 indictments in southern Indiana

Two weeks ago, we noted a Chicago Tribune story about fraud by either the Indiana Democratic Party or the Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton campaigns in the 2008 Democratic Primary in Indiana. Now Indiana Republican Party Chairman Eric Holcomb is doing what I urge GOP chairman to do: document all the fraud that actually happens on the ground and the convictions that occur. I always like to point to the 32 convictions from the 2003 East Chicago Democratic Mayoral primary because the election was overturned, and we have testimony under oath of how the various sides try to cheat each other. One example was sort of boring. In 2010, a Muncie city councilman who had been on the city council since 1987 was convicted of mishandling absentee ballots. But the tastiest was a new one.

Please click here for the rest of the post.