SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Justin C who wrote (117231)11/9/2011 5:48:03 PM
From: joseffy5 Recommendations  Respond to of 224757
 
DAVID AXELROD'S PATTERN OF SEXUAL MISBEHAVIOR
............................................................................
November 9, 2011
anncoulter.com


Herman Cain has spent his life living and working all over the country -- Indiana, Georgia, Minnesota, Nebraska, Kansas, Washington, D.C. -- but never in Chicago.

So it's curious that all the sexual harassment allegations against Cain emanate from Chicago: home of the Daley machine and Obama consigliere David Axelrod.

Suspicions had already fallen on Sheila O'Grady, who is close with David Axelrod and went straight from being former Chicago mayor Richard M. Daley's chief of staff to president of the Illinois Restaurant Association (IRA), as being the person who dug up Herman Cain's personnel records from the National Restaurant Association (NRA).

The Daley-controlled IRA works hand-in-glove with the NRA. And strangely enough, Cain's short, three-year tenure at the NRA is evidently the only period in his decades-long career during which he's alleged to have been a sexual predator.

After O'Grady's name surfaced in connection with the miraculous appearance of Cain's personnel files from the NRA, she issued a Clintonesque denial of any involvement in producing them -- by vigorously denying that she knew Cain when he was at the NRA. (Duh.)

And now, after a week of conservative eye-rolling over unspecified, anonymous accusations against Cain, we've suddenly got very specific sexual assault allegations from an all-new accuser out of ... Chicago.

Herman Cain has never lived in Chicago. But you know who has? David Axelrod! And guess who lived in Axelrod's very building? Right again: Cain's latest accuser, Sharon Bialek.

Bialek's accusations were certainly specific. But they also demonstrated why anonymous accusations are worthless.

Within 24 hours of Bialek's press conference, friends and acquaintances of hers stepped forward to say that she's a "gold-digger," that she was constantly in financial trouble -- having filed for personal bankruptcy twice -- and, of course, that she had lived in Axelrod's apartment building at 505 North Lake Shore Drive, where, she admits, she knew the man The New York Times calls Obama's "hired muscle."

Throw in some federal tax evasion, and she's Obama's next Cabinet pick.

The reason all this is relevant is that both Axelrod and Daley have a history of smearing political opponents by digging up claims of sexual misconduct against them.

John Brooks, Chicago's former fire commissioner, filed a lawsuit against Daley six months ago claiming Daley threatened to smear him with sexual harassment accusations if Brooks didn't resign. He resigned -- and the sexual harassment allegations were later found to be completely false.

Meanwhile, as extensively detailed in my book "Guilty: Liberal 'Victims' and Their Assault on America," the only reason Obama became a U.S. senator -- allowing him to run for president -- is that David Axelrod pulled sealed divorce records out of a hat, first, against Obama's Democratic primary opponent, and then against Obama's Republican opponent.

One month before the 2004 Democratic primary for the U.S. Senate, Obama was way down in the polls, about to lose to Blair Hull, a multimillionaire securities trader.

But then The Chicago Tribune -- where Axelrod used to work -- began publishing claims that Hull's second ex-wife, Brenda Sexton, had sought an order of protection against him during their 1998 divorce proceedings.

From then until Election Day, Hull was embroiled in fighting the allegation that he was a "wife beater." He and his ex-wife eventually agreed to release their sealed divorce records. His first ex-wife, daughters and nanny defended him at a press conference, swearing he was never violent. During a Democratic debate, Hull was forced to explain that his wife kicked him and he had merely kicked her back.

Hull's substantial lead just a month before the primary collapsed with the nonstop media attention to his divorce records. Obama sailed to the front of the pack and won the primary. Hull finished third with 10 percent of the vote.

Luckily for Axelrod, Obama's opponent in the general election had also been divorced.

The Republican nominee was Jack Ryan, a graduate of Dartmouth and Harvard law and business schools, who had left his lucrative partnership at Goldman Sachs to teach at an inner-city school on the South Side of Chicago.

But in a child custody dispute some years earlier, Ryan's ex-wife, Hollywood sex kitten Jeri Lynn Ryan, had alleged that, while the couple was married, Jack had taken her to swingers clubs in Paris and New York.

Jack Ryan adamantly denied the allegations. In the interest of protecting their son, he also requested that the records be put permanently under seal.

Axelrod's courthouse moles obtained the "sealed" records and, in no time, they were in the hands of every political operative in Chicago. Knowing perfectly well what was in the records, Chicago Tribune attorneys flew to California and requested that the court officially "unseal" them -- over the objections of both Jack and Jeri Ryan.

Your honor, who knows what could be in these records!

A California judge ordered them unsealed, which allowed newspapers to publish the salacious allegations, and four days later, Ryan dropped out of the race under pressure from idiot Republicans (who should be tracked down and shot).

With a last-minute replacement of Alan Keyes as Obama's Republican opponent, Obama was able to set an all-time record in an Illinois Senate election, winning with a 43 percent margin.

And that's how Obama became a senator four years after losing a congressional race to Bobby Rush. (In a disastrous turn of events, Rush was not divorced.)

Axelrod destroyed the only two men who stood between Obama and the Senate with illicitly obtained, lurid allegations from their pasts.

In 2007, long after Obama was safely ensconced in the U.S. Senate, The New York Times reported: "The Tribune reporter who wrote the original piece (on Hull's sealed divorce records) later acknowledged in print that the Obama camp had 'worked aggressively behind the scenes' to push the story."

Some had suggested, the Times article continued, that Axelrod had "an even more significant role -- that he leaked the initial story."

This time, Obama's little helpers have not only thrown a bomb into the Republican primary, but are hoping to destroy the man who deprives the Democrats of their only argument in 2012: If you oppose Obama, you must be a racist.



To: Justin C who wrote (117231)11/25/2011 12:38:07 PM
From: Justin C2 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224757
 
Republican Senate Prospects in 2012

By Bruce Walker

How do prospects look for Republicans in 2012 and beyond? So far, the tea leaves are encouraging.

It is probable that Republicans will continue to control the House of Representatives, as this Real Clear Politics analysis shows. That means the key to Republicans really changing Washington, if the White House is recaptured, lies in control of the Senate. Because of the need for cloture to enact real reforms, the larger the Republican Senate majority, the easier reforms will be; and because cloture is a procedural issue, it is much more likely to get RINOs to support the leadership on cloture than on substantive votes. What that means is that if Republicans have 57 Senate seats but only 52 conservative Republicans, the five RINOs can vote for cloture on conservative bills and then proudly vote against the bill on the floor.

Now 2012 is going to be a tough year for Democrats in conservative states. Eight senators from normally conservative states -- Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Mark Begich of Alaska, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Kay Hagan of North Carolina, Max Baucus of Montana, Mark Warner of Virginia, Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, and Tim Johnson of South Dakota - will be up for reelection, and persuading three of them to vote for cloture for the right sort of reforms will be very possible (senators like Landrieu, Rockefeller, Baucus, and Begich, for example, will be hard-pressed to oppose environmental reforms that allow energy extraction in their states).

The prospects of Republicans gaining the Senate seats that they need for real reform have brightened recently. North Dakota is a very red state, and although the Democrats have recruited a real candidate, in a normal year, that seat will flip with the retirement of the Democrat incumbent. Tester in Montana got less than half the vote in a strong Democrat year, and strong Republican candidates are jumping at the chance to make him a one-term senator. Nelson in Nebraska misread voter sentiment on ObamaCare, and the "Cornhusker Kickback" could easily end his political career. McCaskill in Missouri barely won in a Democrat wave, and now, in an increasingly conservative state, she is fighting for her life. When Herb Kohl decided to retire and Thompson entered the race in Wisconsin, that state also became a pickup in a modest Republican year. New Mexico also began a good prospect when Bingaman retired and popular Congresswoman Wilson jumped in. Virginia will be a marquee race, but in 2009, 2010, and 2011, Republicans made major gains, so it is easy to see former governor and senator Allen recapturing his seat. Those seven seats should flip in a year in which the Republican nominee carries the state in question (which would mean a Republican win with between 52% and 54% of the vote).

With that sort of Republican year, other Senate seats could be on the cusp: Manchin of West Virginia, if he faces a real candidate like Congresswoman Capito, could be defeated; Republicans in Michigan have a robust group who feel that Stabenow is vulnerable; Pennsylvania's Casey also is in only the "lean Democrat" category. Those three would give Republicans the 57 seats probably needed for cloture.

But recent Republican entries in a couple of Senate races have increased the probability of big gains. Linda Lingle, a popular governor running for an open Senate seat in Hawaii, has a real chance of winning. Connie Mack in Florida is running ahead of incumbent Senator Nelson.

Beyond those two, which might put Republican Senate strength at 59, Maria Cantwell in Washington is saddled with a very unpopular Democrat Party in state government. Democrats would normally be expected to hold Joe Lieberman's seat, but the abandonment of his party four year ago and a run by a very wealthy and well-known Linda McMahon could make things difficult for them. Could Tom Kean win a rematch in New Jersey against Senator Menendez? Sure -- he almost won in 2006, and polls show today that Kean could beat the Democrat. That means that in a Republican "wave" of 55% or more, Republicans could end up with as many as 62 Senate seats.

If that happens, then for the first time in its history, the Republican Party will have the muscle to push through its agenda without Democrat votes. What could that mean? How about a radical reform of environmental regulations to make extraction of energy easier and faster? How about a truly flat tax and abolition of the capital gains tax? Why not a reform of the Taft-Hartley Act to create a presumption of an "Open Shop" unless the state affirmatively rejects Right to Work? How about abolishing useless federal agencies like the Department of Education? Or how about requiring any college that receives federal funds to adopt David Horowitz's Academic Bill of Rights?

Winning the White House and holding the House are not enough. Republicans need, just for two years, to be able to actually change the federal government, to jump-start the engine of American prosperity and to melt the state-supported instruments of leftist totalitarianism. In 2012, that could happen.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/republican_senate_prospects_in_2012.html#ixzz1ejJ48mtv