Even before he was forced to vote again and again on ObamaCare: "Among 21 Democratic senators up for re-election next year, there is little question that the most endangered is Nebraska's Ben Nelson, a conservative Democrat in an even more conservative state. . . .If the election were today, [Attorney General Jon] Bruning would oust Nelson, 50-39, as would [State Treasurer Don] Stenberg, but by a narrower 45-41 margin." And that's from a Democratic polling outfit, PPP.
Even Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) can hear the footsteps. Now she is co-sponsoring a spending cap. But didn't she vote for all the Obama spending? A tough re-election campaign makes all the difference in the world, doesn't it?
Israel is even more nervous than Obama about Hosni Mubarak's departure. Elliott Abrams counsels: "[Mubarak's] insistence on staying, his theft of last November's elections, and his flirting with the idea of setting his son upon the throne have led Egypt to its present crisis. Now he has said that he won't run in Egypt's scheduled presidential elections in September. Too late. . . . Now the crowds demand that he leave instantly, and the idea that this man will preside over the transition to free elections will strike them as grotesque--which it is. It's a sad ending to Mubarak's long career. It could have been avoided. But the Israeli reaction of wishing he would stay on--thirty-five years? forty?--shows a deep misunderstanding of the situation in Egypt."
Even Mitt Romney's book title (No Apology) sounds off key. It is intended as a paean to American greatness, but now it sounds like his defense on ObamaCare.
I suppose even a Bush daughter's appearance at CPAC would cause some social conservatives to boycott. "Barbara Bush, one of former President George W. Bush's twin daughters, is appearing in a new video voicing her support for same sex marriage."
Even the Koch brothers have rights, says the Los Angeles Times editorial board. "A decidedly odd protest took place over the weekend in Rancho Mirage, where hundreds of environmentalists, union members and other liberal activists descended on a resort to demonstrate not against pollution or poor working conditions or government policies, but a pair of billionaires. The point of the rally was to decry the corrosive impact of money on American governance, but we're not sure that the marchers were quite clear on the concepts of democracy and free speech."
Even "No Labels" can see Jon Huntsman is no conservative. ("Huntsman certainly reflects the kind of bipartisanship, civility and centrism that generally appeals to the No Labels community.") But I guess if Meg Whitman can throw away $144 million on a losing California gubernatorial race, Huntsman can throw away as much on a presidential run.
Posted by: SCMike1 | February 2, 2011 8:24 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: jsfh1 | February 2, 2011 11:10 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: johnmarshall5446 | February 2, 2011 11:14 AM | Report abuse