Demcratic pundit Hilary Rosen accuses Ann Romney of "never working," Opens new front in the "War on Women" debate

Democratic pundit Hilary Rosen tonight opened a new front in the War on Women debate which has been occurring on Twitter and other Social Media sites in the aftermath of the Rush Limbaugh/Sandra Fluke story by declaring on CNN that "Ann Romney has never worked a day in her life." (See Reuters story here).

Unfortunately for the President, while apparently intended to reinforce a recurring theme of both the White House and some conservatives that Mitt Romney is "too wealthy" to be in touch with the needs and concerns of "average" voters, the comments instigated an firestorm of criticism on social media and an immediate and effective response by the Romney camp, (see here).

In a historic first, Mrs. Romney, not known for her social media expertise, (in fact, she didn't even have a Twitter account previously!) took to cyberspace to respond to the criticism, tweeting, "I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys. Believe me, it was hard work." She immediately garnered 6000 followers, and thus began an object lesson in the critical nature to both parties of this key part of the electorate in this year's Presidential elections.

Indeed, in an obvious attempt at damage control and to prevent the GOP from regaining the high ground with this core constituency and keep the momentum going their way from a previous "war on women" narrative which the Whitehouse has been successfully using to target female voters on the heels of Rush Limbaugh/Sandra Fluke controversy, the White House and its surrogates responded swiftly with attempts to distance Obama from Rosen's incendiary comments.

Jim Messina, the President's campaign manager, tweeted the following:



David Axelrod, the President's chief election advisor and strategist, was also quick to respond:



Josh Romney, one of those five children Mrs. Romney raised, also jumped in with his own tweet:


A subsequent "apology" by Ms. Rosen, couched in a defense of her comments, didn't seem to help much, driving home the general point that in this election cycle, women, who President Obama leads vs. Romney, are critically important to his chances for reelection, See here.

While Romney leads the President by about 13 points among men, President Obama bests Romney by an even larger margin among women, a state of affairs the President and his campaign would like to keep.  Unfortunately for them, the recent uproar throws a monkey wrench into their plans, as Romney is all but assured of a boost in support among, in the very least, those women who have also chosen children over career.  We shall have to see if this translates into actual votes in November, but one things for sure.  This is going to one very contentious election that will pit poor against rich, black against white, and apparently, family against family.  Fasten your seatbelts folks. jp

UPDATE:  We have  just learned that sources are reporting that Ms. Rosen has been a regular guest at the White House, leading some to speculate that these were more than just random comments, but perhaps even planned to "test" new campaign themes that the President is interested in using on the stump.  While that is certainly conjecture, there is no doubt from the White House visitor logs, that Ms. Rosen indeed seems especially well connected to the Obama White House, having visited more than union leaders or others with natural ties to the President.  Read the whole story here.  jp

Obama to Black America: Quit whining, grumbling and get to work

 As of late President Obama's re-election strategy has become increasingly clear.  Tack left to his base and run against an "obstructionist" Republican Congress that favors the rich at the expense of the middle class, (or so goes the argument).

 While such a tactic is of questionable effectiveness in the best of circumstances, (because frankly, after blaming George W. Bush for 3 years most people, including us here at the ACLP, would rather hear about what President Obama is going to do instead of simply finding a new scapegoat to blame), and completely ignores the lack of the President's leadership in creating jobs and the failed keynesian "stimulus" plan he championed, at least President Obama knows how to play to his base. Or maybe not?!

 In a mystifying jab at black America, one of Obama's last and strongest remaining bastions of support in the American electorate amidst a torturous slide in popularity among all groups which presages potentially ominous chances for his re-election, the President brazenly admonished-- replete with semi-black-preaching style cadence and mock southern accent-- a gathering of African-American activists at the annual awards dinner of the Congressional Black Caucus by stating:

"Take off your bedroom slippers... Stop complaining... Stop grumbling, stop crying... We have work to do."  - President Obama, Congressional Black Caucus dinner, Sept 24, 2011.

  Unfortunately for the President, rather than rally his supporters, (the speech's ostensible intended effect), it's patronizing and somewhat condescending tone had the same effect as Governor Rick Perry's recent gaff at the Republican primary debate in Orlando when he bluntly told conservatives they "had no heart" if they didn't support in-state university tuition for illegal immigrants in response to fellow Republican critics.   The reaction of influential black caucus members was swift.

  Maxine Waters, (D-CA.), was particularly keen in her response to the President's chastisements, stating, "I don't know who he was talking to because we're certainly not complaining." 


  Continuing her criticism of the President's remarks, the California Congresswoman said:

"I found that language a bit curious because the president spoke to the Hispanic Caucus, and certainly they're pushing him on immigration... he certainly didn't tell them to stop complaining... And he would never say that to the gay and lesbian community, who really pushed him on Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

Click here for full story and video links at CBS news. 

  Now we are not genuises here at the ACLP, but it doesn't take a genius to know that when you've ticked off your base and the best you can come up with generally is blaming everyone and everything else for your problems as the leader of the most powerful nation in the free world-- including your normally strongest supporters-- you are in serious trouble.

 Of course, as any reader of this blog can tell you, we are not fans of the Obama Administration's policies. But neither are we extreme partisans who want a U.S. President, any President, to fail simply for failing's sake.  Rather, our concerns are rooted in very real philosophical differences and a deep belief that this Administration, in the very least, is utterly inept to solve the great problems facing our country at this critical time.  In short, it is the failed and corrupt policies of the Obama Administration that we object to, not the man himself.

  What the dustup with the Congressional Black Caucus reveals is that, in addition to failing to be the "great uniter" of America that President Obama promised in 2008, he can barely unite his most natural base of political support.

  And that, to us, by any measure bodes very poorly for this President going into the 2012 election season.  jp

U.S. decides against seeking further appellate review of Obamacare.

Supreme Court Next Likely Stop for Sprawling, Controversial Legislation

The Justice department, currently involved in multi-state litigation with at least 26 states regarding the controversial "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act," (i.e., 'Obamacare,'), has decided against seeking further review in the 11th Circuit court of appeals which recently upheld a lower court decision striking down its controversial "individual mandate" to buy health insurance.

As a practical matter, this means that the future of our nation's health delivery system, (and by some perspectives, the nation's very liberty and free-enterprise roots), is likely to be taken up by the Supreme Court in its term beginning in Oct., and possibly decided by the High Court in late summer or Fall 2012, (placing it smack dab in the middle of what already promises to be one of the most heavily contested and contentious Presidential election cycles in our nation's history!)

In practical terms, this also means the constitutionality of this historic legislation will also be decided by five men and women in black robes appointed for life and utterly unaccountable to the American Electorate.  Of course, for those more practiced in the art of court watching, this means this incredibly far reaching legislation touted by the Obama Administration as its crowning achievement, will come down to the vote of one man who has often played a central 'swing-vote' role in controversial cases in the last 30 thirty years of our nation's at times schizophrenic jurisprudence.  That one man is President Ronald Reagan-appointee supreme court justice Anthony Kennedy.

Over the next few weeks we will get back to our long promised analysis of Kennedy's decision making with an eye to perhaps familiarizing ourselves to what to expect from the High Court in this historic case, as well as a general and brief analysis of the 11th Circuit's substantive decision as appropriate, contrasted with contrary circuit court decision's, (long overdue I know), and their probable effects on American law and life in our Republic 'based on laws and not of men.'

 And while no one can accurately predict how the members of the Supreme Court will ultimately come down on this legislation with 100% accuracy, we are convinced that a studious examination of prior decisions and rulings of the Supreme Court, and Justice Kennedy in particular, can yield helpful clues.

 At least it is to that end that we will endeavor, and ask our friends (and all readers) to actively contribute to the discussion using the comment feature and by linking with their blog, social media site, or webspace however it may exist in the vast universe of cyberspace.  We also would like to ask those of you so inclined to pray for wisdom and the right decision to be made by our Supreme Court members, especially justice Kennedy, in undoubtedly what will be one of the most significant decisions ever made by our High Court in the 21st century!

 For those new to our blog we also suggest you might want to read our previous analysis of the Florida district court decision that started at least the 11th Circuit case here, as well as our assessment of Obamacare itself, which you can read here.

 With that said, stay tuned dear reader; this should be fun!  jp

Obama outlines plan for cutting deficit, raising taxes

 President Obama today made good on his promise to address the nation's fiscal woes and pay for his "jobs plan" first revealed in a joint address to Congress Sept. 8, 2011 with a plan to cut the nation's burgeoning budget deficit by three trillion dollars over the next ten years.

 The plan also forms the basis of his suggestions to the Congressional "Super committee" established as a part of the "budget compromise" hashed out over the summer between Republicans and the White House at the last minute in order to avoid a government shut down.

 But the long awaited plan seems to be a case of much ado about nothing, at least to us.

 As Republicans were quick to point out, the plan is half paid for by tax increases on the "rich," something which Obama himself once stated would harm the already weak economy, (see here), and does nothing to systematically reform entitlements, which threaten to consume the entire federal budget within 20 years, (in spite of Obama hinting at such systemic reforms over the summer).

 Republicans however weren't the only ones to criticize Obama's deficit-cutting plan. 

 Hillary Clinton's prior campaign manager for her 2008 Presidential bid, Mark Penn, said in an article for the liberal Huffington Post, 

He (Obama) should be working as a president, not a candidate... He should be holding down taxes rather than raising them.  He should be mastering the global economy, not running away from it.   And most of all, he should be bringing the country together rather than dividing it through class warfare." (for full article click here).

  Leaving aside for now the obvious, that it is only the "rich" who can afford to open factories and hire others, (after all, one rarely gets hired by a poor man!), and the other erroneous views of Mr. Penn that cutting government spending will result in a loss of jobs, (when in fact government spending crowds out private enterprise which is the only real engine of job growth in our system), the President's plan follows a consistent "us vs. them" theme that has emanated from the White House as a steady drumbeat of speeches promising to make the "rich" pay their "fair share" of taxes, (always a popular stump topic intended to buoy the President's support among his Democrat-left base ahead of the 2012 elections).

  And what of the fact that according to the IRS the top 10% of income earners already pay approximately 70% of all income taxes, (see here and click on table two for tax year 2008), while fully half of the citizenry pay absolutely no income taxes (while simultaneously drawing from our national "safety net?")  

  Or that the top 1%, (you know, those greedy millionaires and billionaires the President likes to talk about making pay their "fair share"), pay 38% of all income taxes? Details, smetails!  Now why do you have to go messing up perfect presidential re-election politics with the facts?

  Meanwhile, ideas like Rep. Paul Ryan's doa budget and attempts at entitlement reform, or replacing the IRS with a truly flat, fair tax national sales tax which would shutter one of the most feared and invasive government bureaucracies in our nation, capture "black market" underground income and end the loopholes that have allowed international conglomerates like General Electric-- headed by the way by Jeffrey Immelt, a known democratic supporter of Obama's-- to avoid paying any U.S. taxes at all last year on profits over 14 billion, languish on the vine without any support from the White House.

 Don't get us wrong, we are happy the President has finally weighed in on the subject of deficit reduction, (even if coming late to the party), as in doing so he is at least publicly acknowledging the importance of tackling our nation's dire fiscal woes. 

 Perhaps such gestures are merely the beginning of a process that will result in a much-needed public conversation and eventual compromise with the Republican Congress that will result in real and substantive reform sufficient to save our nation from impending economic ruin.   We can only hope.  jp