Solid Principles

Hillary Clinton for President Ad Hits Airwaves

john — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 12:29:09 +0000

A new ad advocating for Hillary Clinton for president in 2012 began running in New Orleans Wednesday.

From CNN’s Paul Steinhauser Rebecca Stewart and Frances Sanchez

(CNN) - We’ve still got two months left until the 2010 midterm elections, but we now have our first television commercial of the 2012 presidential campaign. And the ad advocates for a person who says she has no intention of running for the White House.

“She has more experience working in and with the White House than most living presidents. She is one of the most admired women in our nation’s history. Let’s make sure the president we should have elected in 2008 will be on the ballot in 2012. Hillary 2012: Hillary Clinton for President. Start now. Where there’s a Hill there’s a way,” says an ad that began running on television in New Orleans Wednesday.

The commercial was paid for by a Chicago dentist named William DeJean.

When asked why he put the ad up, DeJean told CNN Thursday that “I’m a dentist and I don’t think this country is headed in the right direction.”

Regarding Clinton, DeJean says “I think she is the most qualified.”

DeJean adds that he thinks people are having buyer’s remorse about President Barack Obama and says the current administration is ruining the Democratic Party. He says he spent $5,000 to create the commercial and tells CNN that besides New Orleans, the ad will run in Washington, New York and Los Angeles, and possible Houston. DeJean says he chose to first run the ad in New Orleans because he’s a native of the city and because the city’s in the news due to the fifth anniversary of Hurricane Katrina.

“I didn’t expect to see any ads about 2012 before the midterms in 2010, although this will likely not be a big TV buy, Mr. DeJean clearly is motivated to see change,” says Evan Tracey, Campaign Media Analysis Group and CNN’s consultant on political TV ad spending.

According to data from CMAG, DeJean paid to run ads supporting Clinton during the 2008 presidential campaign. Clinton, senator from New York at the time, battled then Sen. Obama of Illinois in a marathon and historic Democratic primary season, nearly becoming the woman to win a major party presidential nomination, before ending her bid and endorsing Obama in June 2008.

Since becoming secretary of state in the Obama administration, Clinton has squashed any talk of her either challenging Obama in 2012 or making another bid for the White House down the road.

In an interview with NBC last October, Clinton said “no” three times to the question “will you ever run for president again?”

At town hall in Saudi Arabia in February, Clinton said “I am very proud to support Barack Obama and I will continue to support Barack Obama.”

Follow Paul Steinhauser on Twitter: @psteinhausercnn

Mitt Romney Tops Sarah Palin in Alaska

john — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 15:34:26 +0000

Hold On to Your Hats, Folks…….When the Mittster Tops The Mama Grizzly in Her Own State, We are in for a Wild Ride!

~~John Cronin~~

By ANDY BARR

POLITICO

Even after watching her preferred candidate surprisingly triumph in Alaska’s Senate race, Sarah Palin’s home state is no sure thing for the former governor as she trails former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in a hypothetical 2012 matchup, according to a new poll.

Only 17 percent of the 805 Alaska Republicans surveyed by Public Policy Polling said they would back Palin in a 2012 GOP primary, the same percentage who voiced support for former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

Romney led the field, garnering 20 percent.

“Fortunately for Sarah Palin, Alaska decides few convention delegates, and coming more than a month after Super Tuesday, she may not survive the race to be embarrassed on her home turf,” said Dean Debnam, president of Public Policy Polling.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has the support of 16 percent of Alaska Republicans, placing him in fourth.

Ten percent of those surveyed said they would support Texas Rep. Ron Paul, and 20 percent were either undecided or would back another candidate not listed in the poll.

The survey was conducted Aug. 27-28 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

Barbara Boxer, Carly Fiorina Spar in First Debate

john — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 15:04:37 +0000

POLITICO

By EMILY SCHULTHEIS

MORAGA, Calif. — In the race for California’s Senate seat, Sen. Barbara Boxer and former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina have taken numerous personal swipes at each other on the campaign trail. But in their first televised debate Wednesday night, both candidates unleashed a new round of vitriol as they sparred over who is the real “fighter” for Californians.

Boxer, a Democrat running for her fourth term, dismissed Fiorina as a greedy executive whose positions on social issues put her out of sync with the state’s voters. Fiorina fought back, insisting that the only way to get the economy on track is to retire Boxer, the state’s “bitterly partisan” incumbent.

In the debate, held at St. Mary’s College in the San Francisco area, the candidates took questions both from a panel of journalists, as well as pre-recorded questions from California voters.

Boxer didn’t waste any time in attacking Fiorina for her tenure at HP, mentioning in her opening statement that Fiorina was “terminated” as CEO and that she “shipped 30,000 jobs overseas.”

And when discussing A.B. 32, the state’s energy and environmental legislation, Boxer said the measure is essential in keeping America ahead of other countries on energy — “but I guess my opponent is kind-of used to creating jobs in China and other places,” she quipped.

For her part, Fiorina insisted that Boxer and others in Washington don’t have what it takes to get California out of the economic crisis.

“We can grow our economy again, but it means we have to fight for private-sector jobs,” she said. “And, frankly, I don’t think there are enough people in Washington who even understand why private-sector jobs are created.”

The Republican moved to paint Boxer as a political opportunist, saying she uses issues as “political footballs” and takes positions because she is “just trying to create rhetoric.”

In a year in which three incumbent senators have already lost, the first voter-submitted question for Boxer addressed exactly that anti-establishment sentiment: “You’ve been in office three terms. Why don’t you let other people try?”

Boxer answered that every election is a chance for other people to try — and that each time she’s up for reelection, voters choose her because she “fights for people.”

But Fiorina insisted Boxer has been in the Senate long enough.

“Barbara Boxer has been in Washington, D.C. for 28 long years,” Fiorina said in her opening statement. “Barbara Boxer may say she is fighting for Californians, but the truth is she’s fighting hardest for another six years in Washington, D.C.”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/41693.html#ixzz0yNqdoesY

Gloom for Democrats as they look to November

john — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 15:21:58 +0000

By Dan Balz

Washington Post Staff Writer

The Gallup organization dropped a bomb on the political world this week. In shorthand, the pollsters said Monday that if the midterm elections were held now, Republicans would take control of the House – and probably by a comfortable margin.

On Tuesday, James Campbell, a professor of political science at the University of Buffalo, weighed in with a prediction based on his modeling of the political climate. He said that Republicans are poised to gain 51 or 52 House seats, at least 11 more than needed to depose the Democrats.

Election Day is still two months away, but the twin findings added to the fear among Democrats that their House majority – and possibly their Senate majority as well – is in jeopardy.

For decades, Gallup has asked voters the following question: “If the elections for Congress were being held today, which party’s candidate would you vote for in your congressional district?”

This week’s survey produced the largest lead for the Republicans in the history of asking that question: 51 percent to 41 percent. Ninety-six percent of Republicans said they would vote for the GOP candidate, while 88 percent of Democrats said they would support the Democrat. Independents, who helped power Democratic victories in 2006 and 2008, split 48 percent to 31 percent for Republicans.

This measurement (known as the generic ballot question) has sometimes been considered an imperfect or misleading indicator of House election results. Gallup begs to differ. Frank Newport, editor in chief of the Gallup poll, said that Gallup’s final survey of likely voters before Election Day has been an accurate predictor of the two parties’ share of the national vote in House elections. The national vote, in turn, he added, is an excellent predictor of seats won or lost.

Four years ago, when Democrats won control of the House, the final Gallup survey of likely voters gave Democrats an advantage of seven percentage points over Republicans. Their actual share of the national two-party vote was eight points more.

In 1994, when Republicans won the House and Senate, Gallup showed the GOP with a seven-point advantage in its final survey – exactly the margin between the two parties on Election Day.

In both those elections, the Democrats’ share of the two-party vote was almost identical to their share of House seats after the election. And in those elections – and all midterms between 1994 and 2006 – the number of seats won by the Democrats was almost identical to the number predicted by Gallup’s models, within three.

It’s worth noting that in midterm elections before 1994, Democrats ended up with a higher share of House seats than their take of the vote.

John Cusack Calls for ‘Satanic Death’ of Fox News, GOP Leaders

john — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 06:57:51 +0000

[Editor's Commentary: Anyone who has read this blog for any length of time can probably guess exactly what I am about to write, so let's all say it together: one, two, three aaannnddd....Can you imagine the outcry if this had been a Republican who said this?? OMG! 24/7 cable coverage on these crazy, religious, right-wing nuts and their fundamentalist beliefs. How backward, how Luddite, how caveman can these people be!!

But…..a Republican didn’t say this. A Hollywood star said this. Therefore we will be respectful and ponder this man’s insight and wisdom in political affairs. Or maybe the author of this post will insert a hookey image of a horned devil to try to display his complete contempt for the lunacy that is inherent in much of Tinsle Town.

~~John Cronin~~

FOXNEWS.COM

Actor John Cusack went on a caustic Twitter rampage Sunday evening, attacking former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Fox News.

“I AM FOR A SATANIC DEATH CULT CENTER AT FOX NEWS HQ AND OUTSIDE THE OFFICES OR DICK ARMEYAND NEWT GINGRICH-and all the GOP WELFARE FREAKS,” Cusack tweeted.

Cusack has long been outspoken about politics. He supported Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential election and has contributed to The Huffington Post, but this is the first known time he has stooped to the level of making threats.

And while the U.S. Constitution protects Cusack’s right to speak his mind, some critics say he should be more careful about what he says, since he has more than 200,000 Twitter followers.

“His provocative tweets could easily incite a rabid fan to commit violent acts against Fox News Headquarters and others he names,” said Dr. Carole Lieberman, a Beverly Hills-based psychiatrist and author of “Coping With Terrorism: Dreams Interrupted.”

“Fans could not only be influenced because of their devotion to Cusack, the man, but also because of their love for one of the characters he plays,” she told Fox411.

Cooper Lawrence, the author of “Cult of Celebrity” told Fox 411: “The fear isn’t that a celebrity will influence someone to do something violent or out of character due to the sheer devotion to the celebrity, the fear is that someone who is already vulnerable, mentally disturbed, already considering something dangerous, may be encouraged to do so if it is advocated by their favorite star,”

Lawrence explained that while celebrities don’t make healthy people do things they wouldn’t normally do, they could impact someone who is on the fence or mentally unstable.

“John Cusack has to know that his words carry weight because he is an actor beloved by many generations of folks who may not get his humor and might think he is calling for something more sinister. The responsibility is on him to not abuse his fame to influence something negative on the off chance that even one person takes his words to heart,” Lawrence said.

Cusack could also be doing his career some damage. Image consultant Michael Sands says that Cusack should be worried that his vituperative words could turn off some of his fans.

“I think his fans will not appreciate his tone. They will be turned off to his rhetoric,” Sands told Fox411. “John Cusack is taking his fame too seriously. He is having delusions and his anger towards Fox News may get him arrested!”

Ironically, Cusack has just been signed to play Edgar Allen Poe in “The Raven”, a movie about a serial killer who uses Poe’s stories as inspiration for his killing spree.

Read More at foxnews.com/entertainment…..