Monday, November 28, 2011

Obama turning to Biden for help in 3 key states (AP)

WASHINGTON ? A year from Election Day, Democrats are crafting a campaign strategy for Vice President Joe Biden that targets the big three political battlegrounds: Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida, states where Biden might be more of an asset to President Barack Obama's re-election campaign than the president himself.

The Biden plan underscores an uncomfortable reality for the Obama team. A shaky economy and sagging enthusiasm among Democrats could shrink the electoral map for Obama in 2012, forcing his campaign to depend on carrying the 67 electoral votes up for grabs in the three swing states.

Obama won all three states in 2008. But this time he faces challenges in each, particularly in Ohio and Florida, where voters elected Republican governors in the 2010 midterm elections.

The president sometimes struggles to connect with Ohio and Pennsylvania's white working-class voters, and with Jewish voters who make up a core constituency for Florida Democrats and view him with skepticism.

Biden has built deep ties to both groups during his four decades in national politics, connections that could make a difference.

As a long-serving member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Biden cemented his reputation as an unyielding supporter of Israel, winning the respect of many in the Jewish community. And Biden's upbringing in a working class, Catholic family from Scranton, Pa., gives him a valuable political intangible: He empathizes with the struggles of blue-collar Americans because his family lived those struggles.

"Talking to blue-collar voters is perhaps his greatest attribute," said Dan Schnur, a Republican political analyst. "Obama provides the speeches, and Biden provides the blue-collar subtitles."

While Biden's campaign travel won't kick into high gear until next year, he's already been making stops in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida this fall, speaking at events focused on education, public safety and small businesses and raising campaign cash. Behind the scenes, he's working the phones with prominent Jewish groups and Catholic organizations in those states, a Democratic official said.

Biden is also targeting organized labor, speaking frequently with union leaders in Ohio ahead of a vote earlier this month on a state law that would have curbed collective bargaining rights for public workers. After voters struck down the measure, Biden traveled to Cleveland to celebrate the victory with union members.

The Democratic official said the vice president will also be a frequent visitor to Iowa and New Hampshire in the coming weeks, seeking to steal some of the spotlight from the Republican presidential candidates blanketing those states ahead of the January caucus and primary.

And while Obama may have declared that he won't be commenting on the Republican presidential field until there's a nominee, Biden is following no such rules. He's calling out GOP candidates by name, and in true Biden style, he appears to be relishing in doing so.

During a speech last month to the Florida Democratic Convention, Biden singled out "Romney and Rick", criticizing former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney for saying the government should let the foreclosure crisis hit rock bottom, and hammering Texas Gov. Rick Perry's assertion that he would send U.S. troops into Mexico.

And he took on the full GOP field during an October fundraiser in New Hampshire, saying "There is no fundamental difference among all the Republican candidates."

Democratic officials said Biden will follow in the long-standing tradition of vice presidents playing the role of attack dog, allowing Obama to stay out of the fray and appear more focused on governing than campaigning.

The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to discuss internal strategy. The Obama campaign has been reluctant to publically define Biden's role in the re-election bid this early in the run, though campaign manager Jim Messina did say the vice president would deliver an economic message to appeal for support.

"You'll see him in communities across the country next year laying out the choice we face: restoring economic security for the middle class or returning to the same policies that led to our economic challenges," Messina said.

Democrats say Biden will campaign for House candidates in swing states as the party tries to recapture some of the seats in Congress lost during the 2010 midterms.

And here again, the vice president's efforts in politically crucial Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida could be most important. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is targeting 12 districts in those states that Obama and Biden carried in the 2008 presidential race but are represented by Republican representatives.

New York Rep. Steve Israel, who chairs the committee, said he believes Biden could be a "game-changer" in those districts.

"All he has to do is ask voters, has the Republican strategy of no worked for you?" Israel said.

Israel met with Obama and Biden at the White House earlier this month to discuss, among other things, their role in congressional campaigns. While Israel said he hopes Obama will actively campaign for Democratic House candidates, he said "the vice president has already volunteered."

___

Julie Pace can be reached at http://twitter.com/jpaceDC.

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/obama/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20111126/ap_on_el_pr/us_biden2012

guy kawasaki jani lane the exorcism of emily rose the exorcism of emily rose fort knox quarry quarry

Sunday, November 27, 2011

Manchester Union-Leader: Then and Now

Today?s endorsement of neocon Newt Gingrich further demonstrates that The Manchester Union-Leader has substantially changed for the worse since the death of long-time president and publisher William Loeb (an admirer of Old Right Republican Robert Taft) which can be illustrated by Mr. Loeb's personal response to this letter below.

On April 11, 1978, when I was the executive director of the Libertarian Party of New Hampshire, I composed the following letter for publication:

Dear Mr. Loeb:

Your March 27 Union Leader editorial, "Red Sails On The Horizon," warned of the possible dangers of the ever-expanding Soviet Merchant Marine to the NATO alliance. I should like to add some important facts to your careful analysis.

Over fifty years ago, economist Ludwig von Mises stated, without refutation, that central planning by state bureaucracies is inherently inefficient. This is because rational economic calculation is impossible due to the absence of a market pricing system of profit and loss. Socialism is necessarily parasitical as an economic system, being in fact the violent abolition of the market.

If this is the case, how does one explain the increased production in the Soviet Union since 1917?

Anthony Sutton, former Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University, one of the most prestigious academic "think tanks," is an expert on the origins of Soviet technology.

He is the author of many works, including the three-volume Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development 1917 ? 1930, 1930 ?1945, 1945 ? 1964.

Surveying every possible source of information, in five languages, and regarding every industry, physical plant capacity, and technological development in the Soviet Union since 1917, Sutton proves "there is no such thing as Soviet technology," but technology transferred from the Western bloc countries by physical force, monopolistic concessions, harassment, breach of contract, or numerous other unsavory methods.

In National Suicide: Military Aid To The Soviet Union, Sutton observes that over two-thirds (68 percent) of the Soviet Merchant Marine ship tonnage has been built outside of the Soviet Union. The remaining 32 percent was built in Soviet yards and to a great extent with shipbuilding equipment from the West, particularly Finland and the NATO alliances' Great Britain and Germany.

Also, four-fifths (79.13 percent) of the main marine diesel engines used to propel the vessels of the Soviet Merchant Fleet, were built in the West. Moreover, even this startling statistic does not reflect the full nature of Soviet dependence on the foreign marine diesel technology because all the main engines manufactured in the U. S. S. R. are built to foreign designs.

In effect, powerful international interests in the United States and Western Europe have created the Soviet Military Industrial Complex.

We must end this destructive policy of having the honest, hardworking taxpayers subsidize a potential aggressor so a privileged elite can gain its profits and plunder.

We must adopt a new, realistic approach to foreign affairs . . . one which rejects the very dangerous premises of the present policy.

That approach is non-intervention. It was well regarded by men of our revolutionary era as they faced the concrete tasks of charting sound policy in a world of great power rivalry and large empires ? a world much like our own.

Our first president, George Washington, enunciated the non-interventionist viewpoint in his celebrated Farewell Address to the American people in 1796. It was reiterated by John Adams, our second president, and Thomas Jefferson, in his First Inaugural Address in 1801, called for "peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none." And so it went. Non-interventionism, despite serious lapses, was the major theme in American foreign policy up to 1898, even to 1917.

In the Twentieth Century, however, American statesmen have largely ignored the arguments for non-intervention, with consistently catastrophic results. A few courageous individuals, men such as Robert Taft, Sr., Harry Elmer Barnes, John T. Flynn, and Roger MacBride, have warned again and again that our freedoms could not survive "perpetual war for perpetual peace," that military adventures have always undermined republican forms of government. But their words have been generally unheeded.

American foreign policy should seek an America at peace with the world and the defense ? against attack from abroad ? of the lives, liberty, and property of the American people. Provision of such defense must respect the individual rights of people everywhere.

Sincerely,

Charles A. Burris
Executive Director

In response to this letter I received the following personal letter from Mr. Loeb:

Dear Mr. Burris:

Thank you for your good letter. It will be turned over to the editors for publication.

The problem is that the leaders of the American financial complex are such brilliant specialists in their own fields but so ignorant to the world as a whole and so isolated by their wealth that they think that they can make more money as Lenin once said, "manufacturing and selling the rope that will be used to hang them"; but they don't believe in the last apart of that equation.

Regards and best wishes,

Sincerely,

William Loeb
President

Source: http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/99427.html

osu reno news syracuse shonn greene oklahoma state plane crash syracuse basketball syracuse university