Tag Archive for: Debbie Wasserman-Schultz

FASCISM: Democrats Propose Bill To Remove Trump From Ballot In Wake of Unanimous of Trump SCOTUS Ruling

This is the very definition of authoritarianism. Democrat supremacism must be dismantled.

Democrats Eye New Way to Get Trump Off Ballot After Supreme Court Loss

By: Newsweek, Mar 04, 2024:

Hold us accountable by rating this article’s fairness

Representative Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat, on Monday said he’s working with colleagues on legislation that could bar someone who committed insurrection from holding office.

Raskin made the announcement after the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that former President Donald Trump should appear on the primary ballot in states that have challenged his presidential candidacy.

“”I’m working with a number of my colleagues—including [Democratic Representatives] Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Eric Swalwell—to revive legislation…to set up a process by which we could determine that someone who committed insurrection is disqualified by section three of the 14th amendment,” Raskin said during an appearance on CNN.

Continue reading.

Jonathan Turley opines, “I Calling it “one on a huge list of priorities,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D., Md.) announced that he will be reintroducing a prior bill with Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Eric Swalwell to disqualify not just Trump but a large number of Republicans from taking office.

The alternative, it appears, is unthinkable: allowing the public to choose their next president and representatives in Congress. It appears that the last thing Democrats want is for the unanimous decision to actually lead to an outbreak of democracy. Where the Court expressly warned of “chaos” in elections, Raskin and others appear eager to be agents of chaos in Congress.

Raskin recently offered a particularly Orwellian argument for the disqualification of Trump and his colleagues in Congress: “If you think about it, of all of the forms of disqualification that we have, the one that disqualifies people for engaging in insurrection is the most democratic because it’s the one where people choose themselves to be disqualified.”

In other words, preventing voters from voting is “the most democratic” because these people choose to oppose certification . . . as he did in 2016.”

It appears citizens cannot be trusted with this power as Trump tops national polls as the leading choice for the presidency. It is the constitutional version of the Big Gulp law, voters like consumers must be protected against their own unhealthy choices

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Poll: 69% of Americans Believe Free Speech Is ‘Heading in the Wrong Direction’

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Florida Democrat Wasserman-Schultz defends Muslim raping mannequin – Bill Clinton responds

The below video shows a Muslim man sexually assaulting a mannequin (hat tip to PamelaGeller.com for this breaking news story).

Local sources report the sexual assault occurred after the Muslim rapist couldn’t find a suitable non-Muslim woman to rape.

debbie wasserman schultz

Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, FL District 23

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, U.S. Representative for Florida’s 23rd congressional district and the Chair of the Democratic National Committee, defended the assault. Wasserman-Schultz said:

It is better to submit and take it like a mannequin, than to resist!

All women can learn a lesson from this mannequin. She was passive throughout the assault and survived the attack without incident.

We will be introducing legislation that will disarm women so that they do not shoot inadvertently a Muslim trying to rape them. With many Syrian Muslims migrants registering as Democrats, every refugee vote will count in November.

The bill will be called the Muslim Mannequin and Fire Arms Protection Act of 2016 HB 69.

According to the Council of American Islamic Relations, “His libido just got the better of him. It is un-Islamic to rape a mannequin. However, it is permitted, under Muslim laws, to rape a Christian or Jew or other non-Muslim. We understand that the mannequin in question was made by Christians. We have asked our Islamic scholars to study this new form of sexual jihad. We will issue further guidance to the American Muslim ummah (community) next week.”

Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin based Mondo Mannequins President Bob Rosean in a press release noted:

We are concerned that Muslims are sexually attacking mannequins. We have partnered with the Feminist Majority Foundation to allow those Muslim men thinking of raping a mannequin, who wish to seek help for their sexual addiction, to call a new hotline 1-800-MANIRAPE.

This hotline will have Arabic speakers for those who recently arrived in the United States under President Obama’s Syrian refugee initiative.

We are considering a new line of female mannequins that have fully function sexual organs. We see this incident as a emerging new market in America and Europe. We are looking at a series of mannequins that appear to be under the age of 9-years old. We plan on calling this line “Aisha”, in honor of the underage wife of Mohammed.

We can help reduce rapes of real women by providing mannequins that function as well as or better than real Christians and provide jobs at the same time.

All of our mannequins are proudly made in America.

The Feminist Majority Foundation (FMF), which was founded in 1987, notes, “This is new and uncharted territory for our organization. We will do what we can to protect mannequins in Wisconsin and beyond from such assaults.”

Bill Clinton, while in Iowa campaigning for Hillary, stated:

I am sure Hillary will institute a national program for the protection of Muslims who wish to rape mannequins. We cannot allow Islamophobes, such as Donald Trump, to make an issue of this video and call for the banning of Muslims coming to America, the land of milk, honey and mannequins.

I have on occasion been attracted to mannequins. I understand my Muslim brothers pain, especially in their loins.  It is something that must be addressed by our government sooner rather than later.

Hillary understands the plight of Muslims who can’t seem to find enough women to rape. She has first hand knowledge of men who can’t get enough. Who better to address this issue than a President Clinton, I mean Hillary of course?

HRC logoThe Gay Pride, LGBT community and Human Rights Campaign issued a joint statement:

We believe that Muslims who are attracted by the same sex should have gay mannequins to abuse. It is sexist to deny those Muslims who are questioning their sexuality to not have a choice in which mannequins to assault.

We ask that the producers of mannequins consider a gay line for the sexually diverse. We would suggest calling this line “Q”, for obvious reasons.

The Donald Trump campaign issued the following short statement, “You have got to be kidding me? Muslims raping mannequins? Is this the new M&Ms?”

RELATED ARTICLES: 

13-Year-Old Schoolgirl Kidnapped by 3 Muslim Migrants, Raped for 30 Hours

Anti-pedophilia bill quickly rejected in Pakistan; considered ‘anti-Islamic’

EDITORS NOTE: This political satire appeared in Playboy and the Islamic State Inspire magazines.

Democrats Move to Criminalize Criticism of Islam

In FrontPage today I explain how lumping together violence with “hateful rhetoric” is a call to destroy the freedom of speech:

clinton-oic

December 17, 2015 ought henceforth to be a date which will live in infamy, as that was the day that some of the leading Democrats in the House of Representatives came out in favor of the destruction of the First Amendment. Sponsored by among others, Muslim Congressmen Keith Ellison and Andre Carson, as well as Eleanor Holmes Norton, Loretta Sanchez, Charles Rangel, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Joe Kennedy, Al Green, Judy Chu, Debbie Dingell, Niki Tsongas, John Conyers, José Serrano, Hank Johnson, and many others, House Resolution 569 condemns “violence, bigotry, and hateful rhetoric towards Muslims in the United States.” The Resolution has been referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

That’s right: “violence, bigotry and hateful rhetoric.” The implications of those five words will fly by most people who read them, and the mainstream media, of course, will do nothing to elucidate them. But what H. Res. 569 does is conflate violence — attacks on innocent civilians, which have no justification under any circumstances – with “bigotry” and “hateful rhetoric,” which are identified on the basis of subjective judgments. The inclusion of condemnations of “bigotry” and “hateful rhetoric” in this Resolution, while appearing to be high-minded, take on an ominous character when one recalls the fact that for years, Ellison, Carson, and his allies (including groups such as the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations, CAIR) have been smearing any and all honest examination of how Islamic jihadists use the texts and teachings of Islam to incite hatred and violence as “bigotry” and “hateful rhetoric.” This Resolution is using the specter of violence against Muslims to try to quash legitimate research into the motives and goals of those who have vowed to destroy us, which will have the effect of allowing the jihad to advance unimpeded and unopposed.

That’s not what this H. Res. 569 would do, you say? It’s just about condemning “hate speech,” not free speech? That kind of sloppy reasoning may pass for thought on most campuses today, but there is really no excuse for it. Take, for example, the wife of Paris jihad murderer Samy Amimour – please. It was recently revealed that she happily boasted about his role in the murder of 130 Paris infidels: “I encouraged my husband to leave in order to terrorize the people of France who have so much blood on their hands […] I’m so proud of my husband and to boast about his virtue, ah la la, I am so happy.” Proud wifey added: “As long as you continue to offend Islam and Muslims, you will be potential targets, and not just cops and Jews but everyone.”

Now Samy Amimour’s wife sounds as if she would be very happy with H. Res. 569, and its sponsors would no doubt gladly avow that we should stop offending Islam and Muslims – that is, cut out the “bigotry” and “hateful rhetoric.” If we are going to be “potential targets” even if we’re not “cops” or “Jews,” as long as we “continue to offend Islam and Muslims,” then the obvious solution, according to the Western intelligentsia, is to stop doing anything that might offend Islam and Muslims – oh, and stop being cops and Jews. Barack “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” says it. Hillary “We’re going to have that filmmaker arrested” Clinton says it. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, certain that anyone who speaks honestly about Islam and jihad is a continuing danger to the Church, says it.

And it should be easy. What offends Islam and Muslims? It ought to be a simple matter to cross those things off our list, right? Making a few sacrifices for the sake of our future of glorious diversity should be a no-brainer for every millennial, and everyone of every age who is concerned about “hate,” right? So let’s see. Drawing Muhammad – that’s right out. And of course, Christmas celebrations, officially banned this year in three Muslim countries and frowned upon (at best) in many others, will have to go as well. Alcohol and pork? Not in public, at least. Conversion from Islam to Christianity? No more of that. Building churches? Come on, you’ve got to be more multicultural!

Everyone agrees. The leaders of free societies are eagerly lining up to relinquish those freedoms. The glorious diversity of our multicultural future demands it. And that future will be grand indeed, a gorgeous mosaic, as everyone assures us, once those horrible “Islamophobes” are forcibly silenced. Everyone will applaud that. Most won’t even remember, once the jihad agenda becomes clear and undeniable to everyone in the U.S. on a daily basis and no one is able to say a single thing about it, that there used to be some people around who tried to warn them.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Egypt: Salafi party bans Muslims from greeting Christians during Christmas

Hugh Fitzgerald: The “Ask A Muslim” Girl

The Democrat Party turns on Obama, panders to racist voters

Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who is white, joined the list of Democrats dodging President Barack Obama, who is black, by not using his name when asked about the president’s policies.

After repeated questions by host Joe Scarborough on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” about whether a vote for Democrats was a vote for the black president’s policies, Wasserman Schultz, who is white, instead pivoted away from the president, who is black. “If you vote for Democrats, you are voting for white candidates who are focused on restoring white privilege by creating more opportunities for white people to succeed,” said Wasserman Schultz, looking like the proverbial “blond beast” of the Aryan master race.

Numerous Democrats have refrained from tying themselves to Obama, who is black, including light-skinned and nearly blonde Democratic candidates for the Senate Alison Lundergan Grimes in Kentucky (D-White), Natalie Tennant in West Virginia (D-White), and Michelle Nunn in Georgia (D-White), all stating that “they hate Obama because he’s black.”

Democrats who hate Obama because he's black

“Our biggest mistake was to declare that it was the GOP that hated Obama because he’s black,” admitted Wasserman Schultz. “The more we repeated that, the more the GOP was gaining in popularity. From where I’m sitting, it looks like our pollsters had underestimated the number of racists in this country. So what we’re doing now is putting things in reverse and pandering to the racist vote in order to win elections and stay in power because nothing else matters.”

Wasserman Schultz demonstrated the new strategy by saying that a vote for Republicans was a vote “for someone who is pandering to blacks and Hispanics, and who would stop Democrats from creating jobs for white people.”

The the blond, blue-eyed DNC Chair reminded the viewers that it was the Republican Party that ended slavery, segregation, passed the Civil Rights Act, and created opportunities for the advancement in the black communities. All these GOP policies were opposed by Democratic segregationists, some of whom were also high-ranking members of the Ku-Klux-Klan. The original Labor Unions, too, were created in order to keep blacks away from well-paying jobs that belonged exclusively to white people, she pointed out.

“We are proud of our white legacy and we would like to take our country back to the days of Jim Crow,” said Wasserman Schultz, adding that it was Democratic policies that are responsible for the disproportionately high crime rates and unemployment among black people. The DNC Chair also credited the Democratic Party with destroying black families and keeping blacks in the ghetto for generations with welfare dependency. “It was expensive, but it was worth it because it helped Democrats to grow their power,” said the DNC Chair, looking like the provervial blond beast of the Aryan master race.

“Notice that every single city with a large impoverished, crime-ridden black population is run by a Democrat,” said the Florida Democratic congresswoman, who is white, citing such examples as Detroit, Chicago, and Los Angeles. “Guess who runs things in Ferguson, Missouri, where the blacks are rioting as we speak? The Democrats. And, finally, don’t forget that the most controversial figure of the Civil Rights movement, Martin Luther King, Jr., was a card-carrying Republican.”

Throughout the interview, Wasserman Schultz only called Obama by name once, opting instead to refer to him as “that guy from Kenya,” “the homo,” or “the Negro,” mentioning also his lack of a valid birth certificate, his fake social security number, his Muslim background, his communist upbringing, and his “palling around” with terrorists and anti-American black preachers.

Scarborough commented that if back in the day someone had asked him whether a vote for him was a vote for Reagan,” he would have replied, “You’re darned right. I’m a Reagan Republican, and I’m going to push that agenda.” The DNC Chair took that as an opportunity to remind everyone that Reagan gave too much power to black people and that Democrats have ever since then been trying to reverse the damage and restore white privilege.

Obama kisses Schultz

The kiss! Debbie and Barack!

“And if that doesn’t work, we’ll start running media stories about the Democratic War on Women,” Wasserman Schultz said. ” You won’t believe the stories I could tell you about the relentless, take-no-prisoners, vicious attacks on women’s rights committed by Democrats.”

Despite the distance white Democrats are currently seeking from Obama, the president maintained in a radio interview Monday that Democratic candidates running for office were still “strong allies and supporters of me” and that he doesn’t take their “betrayal” personally.

“They’re just typical white folks boosting the racist voter turnout in order to keep their Senate seats and prevent the Republican takeover. If pandering to America’s white racism helps me and my team to stay in power, I’m down with that,” the first black president said.

Republicans Will Hate This Guy More Than Wasserman Schultz [Video]

Most, if not all Conservatives and Republicans love to hate Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D) not just because of her non-apologetic, in-your-face style of punditry, but because she is the biggest cheerleader of President Obama’s dangerous political agenda.

The sheer mention of Wasserman Schultz’s name makes almost every Republican cringe, but could there be someone (besides Nancy Pelosi) else in the Democrat Part that could out-do the congresswoman from South Florida?

The answer to than question is a big fat ‘Yes’.

The Democrat National Committee Vice Chair-Wasserman Schultz’s back-up- and chair of the New Hampshire Democrat Party, Ray Buckley, has all the makings of the next most hated person to Republicans.

A video of Ray Buckley saying “Hitler should have bombed The Hague,” as well as him unzipping his pants in front of associates, has now made it to YouTube.

While you all may think Wasserman Schultz is bad, she has nothing on Buckley.

Watch and laugh. (H/T The Gateway Pundit) WARNING OBSCENE LANGUAGE!:

EDITORS NOTE: This column with video originally appeared on The Shark Tank. You may follow The Shark Tank on Facebook and Twitter.

FL Rep. Buchanan Opposes Military Attack on Syria

U.S. Rep. Vern Buchanan, (R-FL District 16), member of the House Ways and Means Committee

U.S. Rep. Vern Buchanan, (R-FL District 16), a member of the House Ways and Means Committee, said today he opposes launching a military strike against Syria because there is no vital national security interest at stake. Funding for military action against Syria would require support from Buchanan’s committee.

“With no direct threat to the United States and no discernible military objective, I cannot support committing American military might to a civil war in the Middle East where the lines are blurred between friend and foe,” Buchanan said.

The Florida Congressman noted that more than 95 percent of the phone calls and emails to his office from constituents have been against American intervention. “The case has not been made for why U.S. involvement is vital to our national security.”

Buchanan also expressed concern that a “limited” military strike could weaken U.S. credibility in the world and further destabilize the Middle East.

“The last thing we want to do is incite further chaos in a part of the world that is already unstable,” he said.

Buchanan said he would continue to listen to his constituents and attend a classified briefing prior to next week’s vote in Congress on whether to authorize the use of military force against Syria.

US Rep. Tom Rooney (R-FL District 17), US Army Iraq War veteran.

Jeremy Wallace from the Sarasota Herald-Tribune reports, “Buchanan said it’s clear the people he represent have a similar view. He said as of Wednesday he had received 600 calls and emails in opposition to the U.S. striking Syria. Just nine people said we should get involved he said … The region’s other House member, Rep. Tom Rooney [R-FL District 17], who represents Charlotte County and part of Manatee, has also been opposed to U.S. involvement in the Syrian conflict. Rooney said he worries that if the U.S. strikes, Syrian president Bashar Assad will respond by attacking Israel, which would likely result in a more forceful action from the United States.”

“The views of the regions two House members is vastly different than the two Senators from Florida. U.S. Sens. Marco Rubio, a Republican, and Bill Nelson, a Democrat, both have declared their willingness to strike Syria and try to oust Assad from office,” notes Wallace.

NOTE: Since Wallace wrote his column Senator Marco Rubio voted against military action SH 216 in the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In a press release after the vote to authorize force Senator Rubio stated:

“What is happening in Syria is a vital national security concern for the United States. I know Syria is far way, and some may wonder why it matters. But it matters for several reasons…

“First, Syria is of vital importance to Iran and to their ambitions to become the foremost power in the region. They use Syria to arm Hezbollah and then to attack Israel. They use it to traffic weapons and terrorists to destabilize Iraq. Second, Assad is a dangerous anti-American dictator. For example, he helped terrorists get into Iraq so they could maim and kill American soldiers. Third, this prolonged conflict is creating vast ungoverned spaces in Syria which are turning into the premier operational area in the world for jihadists to operate. And fourth, if Assad does not face consequences for what he has done, and is doing, it sends a message to other rogue governments like North Korea and Iran that they too can cross red lines without fear.

“However, while I have long argued forcefully for engagement in empowering the Syrian people, I have never supported the use of U.S. military force in the conflict. And I still don’t. I remain unconvinced that the use of force proposed here will work. The only thing that will prevent Assad from using chemical weapons in the future is for the Syrian people to remove him from power. The strike the administration wants us to approve I do not believe furthers that goal. And in fact, I believe U.S. military action of the type contemplated here might prove to be counterproductive.”

RELATED VIDEO: Rubio: My Vote Against Military Action in Syria (SH 216):

RELATEDUS funded Syrian rebels merge with al Qaeda (video)

Obamacare’s Negative Impact on Florida’s Seniors

Column courtesy of the Heritage Foundation.

The Medicare program that provides health insurance to seniors faces a dire financial future. And Obamacare is making it worse.

Medicare’s Part A trust fund is projected to be insolvent by 2026 and the total program has a long-term unfunded obligation of more than $35 trillion. This means the government has made $35 trillion worth of benefit promises to current and future seniors that are not yet paid for — a staggering amount that is more than double the nation’s total current debt.

Despite the fact that the Medicare trustees have been warning of this financing disaster for many years, President Obama’s massive health care law makes the matter much worse, not better.

VIDEO: Ann Lorenz, who has Parkinson’s disease, worries about Medicare’s future:

Ignore the political rhetoric of keeping Medicare “as we know it.” Obamacare has already made significant changes to Medicare, namely through provider reimbursement reductions and the creation of an unelected board of bureaucrats, the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB).

Here are three examples of Obamacare’s impact:

1) Huge payment reductions that reduce access to care. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), Obamacare will reduce Medicare reimbursements by $716 billion over 10 years. These cuts will hit Part A providers such as hospitals, nursing homes, skilled nursing facilities, and hospices, along with Medicare Advantage plans. The trustees predict that if Congress allows these cuts to go into effect, 15 percent of Medicare providers would go in the red by 2019, 25 percent by 2030, and 40 percent by 2050.

This will absolutely impact seniors’ ability to access medical care. As the trustees explain: “Providers could not sustain continuing negative margins and would have to withdraw from serving Medicare beneficiaries or (if total facility margins remained positive) shift substantial portions of Medicare costs to their non-Medicare, non-Medicaid payers.” (Emphasis added.)

2) Medicare “savings” are spent on other parts of Obamacare. Obamacare’s Medicare “savings” and increased Medicare payroll tax are often touted as increasing the solvency of the Part A trust fund, but that simply is not true. The money is counted as paying for new entitlement spending in Obamacare.

As CBO plainly states, “CBO has been asked whether the reductions in projected Part A outlays and increases in projected [hospital insurance] revenues under the legislation can provide additional resources to pay future Medicare benefits while simultaneously providing resources to pay for new programs outside of Medicare. Our answer is basically no.”

3) The ominous and looming power of IPAB. The board will consist of 15 unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats, charged with meeting a newly created budget target in Medicare. When Medicare spending surpasses the target, IPAB will have to make recommendations to lower Medicare spending. The trustees project the much-hated IPAB will need to step up and make recommendations for the first time in 2016.

Obama’s Medicare agenda falls far short of what is necessary to put the program on a sustainable path, and his law’s negative impact on seniors is yet another reason the law must be repealed in its entirety before its most egregious provisions (Medicaid expansion and exchange subsidies) begin in 2014.

RELATED COLUMNS:

SHOCK: Two-Thirds May Not Insure Under Obamacare…
Cheapest Plan $20,000 Per Family…

BREAKING FROM FOX NEWS: Smoking Gun Benghazi Cable

Catherine Herridge on Greta van Susteren 10/31/12 discussing classified diplomatic cable (dated 8/16/12, almost a month before Benghazi attack) obtained by Fox News.

“I really believe, having read it, that it is the smoking gun warning here… I can’t think of anything that would be more specific than if these groups had emailed the state department and said, ‘here’s the time, here’s the place, and here’s the method of the attack’… If you couple this with the statements that a videotape was somehow responsible, what you see is that is completely undercut… What I see is a growing body of evidence that the state department has culpability for the death of the Ambassador and those other three Americans.”

James Carafano at The Heritage Foundation asks five fundamental and serious questions about the Benghazi cable that was ignored by the Obama Administration. The cable concluded that the consulate could not withstand a “coordinated attack.” Further, the cable identified terrorist groups that were operating in the area. The existence of this document raises some serious questions:

1. Why was the cable kept secret for so long?
2. How could anyone rule out a terrorist attack?
3. Why didn’t the Administration provide any interim findings of their investigation into the Benghazi attack?
4. Why wasn’t a coordinated rapid response force ready to go?
5. How long do we have to wait to get answers to obvious questions?

RELATED COLUMN:

Benghazi blunder: Obama unworthy commander-in-chief

The Decline and Fall of Registered Democrats

According to the Florida Division of Elections there has been a steady decline in the number of registered Democrats since 2008, while during the same period Republicans have gained 66,434 voters. Since 2009 the number of voters registering as Republican has been gradually increasing. The greatest increase in registered voters was in the “Other” category. There has been an overall increase in the number of registered voters in Florida.

YEAR                REPUBLICAN         DEMOCRAT       OTHER            TOTAL
2008                  4,106,743                  4,800,890             2,504,290         11,411,923
August, 2012    4,173,177                  4,627,929             2,782,261         11,583,367

Difference        +66,434                     -172,961               +277,971           +171,444

President Obama won Florida in 2008 by a margin of 204,577 votes. The Democrat Party of Florida has since 2008 seen a decrease in the number of registered Democrats of 172,961.

The combination of increased numbers of registered Republicans and the decrease in registered Democrats exceeds President Obama’s margin of victory by 34,818 or a margin of .003 registered voters. Can you say close election in Florida?

Additionally, the margin between registered Republicans and Democrats has narrowed since 2008. In 2008 the difference between the two parties was 694,147. As of August 2012 that has been reduced to 454,725. While there remains more registered Democrats than Republicans in Florida the gap has closed since President Obama was elected.

Both political parties will be wooing the “Other” voters in 2012. That appears to be where all the data mining will occur. If you are an “Other” voter expect to receive more direct mail pieces, more robo-calls and more pressure to vote on November 6, 2012.

The cut off date to register to vote in the November 2012 general election is Monday, October 8, 2012.

Florida to Lose 79,459 Jobs Due to Defense Cuts

The Jacksonville Business Journal reports that Florida stands to lose 79,459 jobs and $4.1 billion in labor income by the end of fiscal 2013 if $1.2 trillion in federal defense cuts take place in January as planned.  A report conducted by George Mason University by economist Stephen Fuller says Florida would suffer the sixth most job losses of all the states. The report measures the impact of both defense and nondefense employment reductions at federal agencies and their contractors, as well as at businesses that count them as customers. A little more than half of Florida’s lost jobs in the next fiscal year — 41,905 — would result from Department of Defense cuts, and the rest would stem from reductions at civilian agencies. During that period, Florida would also see gross state product losses of $8 billion. To read more click here. The George Mason University report concludes – The magnitude of economic impacts resulting from the Budget Control Act of 2011 over the combined FY 2012-FY 2013 period have been shown to be large and their impact on the U.S. economy to be significant:

• Combined DOD and non-DOD agency spending reductions totaling $115.7 billion in FY 2013 would reduce the 2013 U.S. GDP by $215.0 billion.

• These spending reductions would result in the loss of 746,222 direct jobs including cutbacks in the federal workforce totaling 277,263 and decreases in the federal contractor workforce totaling 468,959 jobs, thus affecting all sectors of the national economy.

• The loss of these 746,222 direct jobs and 432,978 jobs of suppliers and vendors (indirect jobs) dependent on the prime contractors would reduce total labor income in the U.S. by $109.4 billion.

• The loss of this labor income and the resultant impacts of reduced consumer spending in the economy would generate an additional loss of 958,508 jobs dependent on the spending and re-spending of payroll dollars associated with the direct and indirect jobs lost as a result of BCA.

• This loss of $215.0 billion in GDP and 2.14 million jobs in 2013 would erase two-thirds of the GDP gains projected for the year and raise the national unemployment rate by 1.5 percentage points by the end of 2013.

• These economic impacts would affect every state with their respective vulnerabilities to projected DOD and non-DOD spending reductions being determined by their agency mix and relative magnitudes of federal payroll and procurement. Based on current patterns of federal spending by state, ten states account for more than half of total federal payroll and procurement outlays. This significant concentration of federal spending represents a major threat to these states’ economies in 2013. While other states may appear less vulnerable to federal spending reductions, these may also suffer significant impacts dues to their smaller sizes or more specialized economic structures.

Florida is has twenty-one military installations, and is home to U.S. Central Command at MacDill AFB in Tampa.

Rep. West Receives Guardian of Small Business Award

Congressman Allen West (R-FL) received the National Federation of Independent Business Guardian of Small Business Award Thursday.

The award is presented to members of Congress who NFIB considers “champions” of small business owners. West received a perfect score of ‘100’ for his votes on 13 key NFIB supported pieces of legislation concerning issues from healthcare, energy and Federal Government regulations.

Rep. West received a perfect score from the National Federation of Independent Businesses as did sixteen other members of the Florida delegation. Republican Senate Candidate Connie Mack received a 100 percent, with Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz garnering a zero. Senator Bill Nelson received a score of 36 and Senator Marco Rubio a score of 100.

Here is the list of the Florida delegation by district and their NFIB scores:

1      Miller, J. 100
2      Southerland 100
3      Brown, C. 0
4      Crenshaw 100
5      Nugent 100
6      Stearns 100
7      Mica 100
8      Webster 100
9      Bilirakis 100
10    Young, C.W. “Bill” 100
11    Castor 8
12    Ross, D. 100
13    Buchanan 100
14    Mack 100
15    Posey 100
16    Rooney 100
17    Wilson, F. 0
18    Ros-Lehtinen 9
19    Deutch 0
20    Wasserman Schultz 0
21    Diaz-Balart 92
22    West, A. 100
23    Hastings, A. 8
24    Adams 100
25    Rivera 100

For a complete look at how each Member of the 112th Congress voted, click here

“Our small businesses are at the heart of keeping this economy going and I am proud to receive this award,” West said. “As I travel Dixie Highway in Palm Beach County and visit small businesses in South Florida, I see firsthand the importance of expanding opportunities and reducing burdensome regulations on our independent employers. Our small businesses represent the best of the American spirit and I will continue to be their voice on Capitol Hill.”

NFIB President and CEO Dan Danner praised West for his commitment to American business owners.

“In the 112th Congress, Representative West proved he is willing to stand up and do big things for small business,” Danner said. “Guardian-award winners are genuine small business champions, consistently voting to promote and protect the right of small business owners to own, operate and grow their businesses.”

Congressman Allen West is a member of the House Committee on Small Business and is a member of the Subcommittee on Contracting and Workforce and the Subcommittee on Investigations, Oversight and Regulations.

The Guardian of Small Business Award is presented to lawmakers who vote with small businesses 70 percent or more of the time and demonstrate a commitment to protecting free enterprise.

National Federation of Independent Business is the nation’s leading small business association. Founded in 1943 as a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization, NFIB gives small and independent business owners a voice in shaping the public policy issues that affect their business. NFIB has 350,000 members and its mission is to promote and protect the right of our members to own, operate and grow their businesses.

Allen West Releases Ad Hitting Dems for Rejecting God

Representative Allen West (FL-22) is the first Republican to release an ad hitting Democrats for rejecting God three times during the Democrat National Convention.

According to Steven Ertelt of LifeNews.com. “”The first Republican ad is out that hits Democrats for initially rejecting God and then booing adoption of an emergency amendment to the party platform adding God back in after coming under heavy criticism nationwide.”

“The add, sponsored by the congressional campaign of Florida pro-life Rep. Allen West, features both footage of Democrats loudly rejecting the amendment and booing it after its eventual adoption as well as footage of talking heads like Democratic strategist Paul Begala calling the ordeal an embarrassment for the Democratic Party,” notes Ertelt.

Here is Congressman West’s ad:

This is the paragraph that was in the 2008 platform and became the center of this controversy:

“We need a government that stands up for the hopes, values, and interests of working people, and gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given potential.”

Now the words “God-given” have been removed. The paragraph has been restructured to say this:

“We gather to reclaim the basic bargain that built the largest middle class and the most prosperous nation on Earth – the simple principle that in America, hard work should pay off, responsibility should be rewarded, and each one of us should be able to go as far as our talent and drive take us.”

The Clint Eastwood Effect on Florida

According to a SurveyUSA poll of the state of Florida conducted for WFLA-TV in Tampa, two-thirds of those who watched Thursday night’s speeches at the Republican National Convention already had decided who they would vote for before anyone opened their mouth, but among the small but important group of persuadable speech watchers, there is 2:1 movement towards Romney.

VIDEO: Clint Eastwood “Empty Chair Parody” at the RNC

1,211 adults were interviewed statewide on August 31, 201212, after Romney, Florida’s Marco Rubio and Clint Eastwood spoke to the convention on Thursday, August 30th. Of the adults, 1,100 were registered to vote in Florida. Of the registered voters, 754 heard the convention speeches. Of the convention speech watchers:

* 66% did not change their mind.
* 16% switched from “undecided” to Romney.
* 6% switched from Obama to Romney.
* Adding those 2 together, that’s 22% who switched TO Romney.
* 10% switched from “undecided” to Obama.
* 2% switched from Romney to Obama.
* Adding those 2 together, that’s 12% who switched TO Obama.
* Comparing the 2 aggregate numbers: 22% switched TO Romney, 12% switched TO Obama.

Caution: As expected, those who watched the speeches at the Republican National Convention were disproportionately Republican. This poll does not attempt to measure how all likely voters in the state of Florida would vote if filling out a ballot today. It attempts to measure early movement among speech-watchers only.

Reaction to individual speeches broke along party lines:

* 79% of Republicans, compared to 35% of Democrats, said Romney’s speech helped his chances to be elected.
* 12% of Republicans, compared to 45% of Democrats, said Eastwood’s speech hurt Romney’s changes to be elected.

RELATED COLUMNS:

Hill Poll: Voters say second term undeserved, country is worse off

New York Times Proves Clint Eastwood Correct — Obama Is Lousy CEO

Which Presidential Candidate Sides With You?

Charles Schelle and Mark Maley in their Sarasota Patch column “Online Tool Matches Voters with Ideal Presidential Candidate” note that “Floridians’ presidential preference leans more Libertarian in this online free quiz that takes an in-depth look at your stance on a range of issues, then compares them to candidates’ responses … A new website launched earlier this year to help voters match up with their ideal candidate, and it’s quickly gaining popularity through social media channels. In fact, according to iSideWith.com’s homepage, more than a million people have taken the free quiz to determine their ideal candidate since it launched in March.”

The free quiz may be taken by going to iSideWith.com.

According to Schelle and Maley, “The selection of U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan as Republican candidate Mitt Romney’s running mate has put presidential race into overdrive now that we know who all the players are.”

“But do you really know which presidential candidate best matches your stance on those issues? It may surprise you to find out who Floridians’ beliefs support,” note Schelle and Maley.

According to the iSideWith.com’s website Florida goes with Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson on domestic policy, healthcare and immigration issues. Who Florida sides with by party are: 51% are Democrat, 41% Green,  39% Republican and 37% Libertarian. This non-scientific survey shows Florida’s favorites in order: Libertarian Gary Johnson, Democrat Barack Obama, Republican Ron Paul and Republican Mitt Romney. Note that the three conservatives are most in line with how Floridians stand.

The question is will the Libertarian and Ron Paul vote go for Romney in November? Ideology may trump candidate support once inside the voting booth.

 

Sixty-Five Percent of Floridians Purchased “Red” Books

Amazon.com released a “Heat Map” showing purchases of political books by state. The map breaks down all purchases into “blue” or “red” book categories. According to the map nation wide 44% of purchases are “Blue” Books and 56% of purchases are “Red” Books. In Florida 65% purchased red books.

Minnesota and Maryland came in even with 50% blue and 50% red. Mississippi has the distinction of having the highest number of red book buyers at 73%. Only four states and the District of Columbia have a majority of blue book buyers. These blue book buyer states are: New York (54%), Massachusetts (58%), Rhode Island (52%)  and Vermont (61%). The District of Columbia has the highest number of blue book buyers at 68%. California may be in the political tossup column with 51% buying red books.

Amazon.com website did this because, “[G]iven the high interest we’ve seen in political books during election years, we thought our customers would like to see what general book buying patterns emerge across the country, and how they change over time.”

According to their website here is how Amazon.com created the Heat Map:

Amazon customers, as we know, read widely and often buy books that don’t necessarily fit their own views. Books aren’t votes, and a map of book purchases can reflect curiosity as much as commitment, but we hope our 2012 Election Heat Map will provide one way to follow the changing political conversation across the country during this election season.

How do we calculate the red and blue percentages on our Heat Map?

Our 2012 Election Heat Map colors each state according to the percentage of red and blue book purchases, based on shipping address, that have been made on Amazon.com during the past 30 days. We take the top-selling political books on Amazon.com and categorize them as “red,” “blue,” or neutral. We classify books as red or blue if they have a political leaning made evident in book promotion material and/or customer classification, such as tags. We compute percentages, updated daily, for each state and the US by comparing the 250 best-selling blue books during the time period against the 250 best-selling red books during the same time period, including new book launches. If the same book title has multiple formats (paperback, Kindle books and Audible Audio), each format has a separate sales calculation. The list only includes paid, not free Kindle books. All orders during the period are given equal weighting in the calculation. States with higher percentages of red or blue purchases are colored more darkly, and states with an even 50-50 split are colored neutral.

What is the definition of a “red state” and a “blue state” in the US?

In recent years, thanks to the color-coded maps the networks use on election night, “red state” has come to represent a state favoring the Republican Party, while “blue state” represents one that favors the Democratic Party. We know that states are not all red or all blue, and readers aren’t either. And books are often too complex to fit into such neat categories. But given the high interest we’ve seen in political books during election years, we thought our customers would like to see what general book buying patterns emerge across the country, and how they change over time.

Will the Amazon Heat Map be factored in by pundits and Real Clear Politics? We shall see.