Only if they aren’t up for reelection.

Politico has an article this morning entitled Democrats duck Obama. Here are the first two paragraphs:

Despite President Barack Obama’s sagging poll ratings, top Democratic leaders from around the country insist they’d love for him to visit. From state party chairmen to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, the message remains remarkably consistent: No one views the president as a political liability.

Roughly a year out from the 2012 presidential election, that may be true. But already, as Obama’s most recent forays into battleground states indicate, there are growing signs that many Democratic politicians don’t want to get too close to him either.

In state after state, leaders not up for reelection such as party chairmen and former members of Congress insist that Democratic office holders should be seen with the President. Former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell called those who don’t “wusses”. Anyone who runs from Obama is “…a wuss or a weenie”, according to him.

That’s easy for him to say. He doesn’t face reelection in just over a year. However, in multiple states so far those who do are finding all kinds of reasons to avoid having their picture taken with Obama. In North Carolina, the only office holder up for reelection in 2012 who showed up when the President visited last week was a congressman representing a majority black district. In Pennsylvania, nobody. Michigan was the same way. The President recently came to Detroit. Not one area Democratic member of Congress was to be found. They were too busy washing their hair and walking their dog.

Strange that. Wasn’t it Barack Obama who bailed out the auto companies, twisting arms so that the UAW came out on top whether they had a legal right to do so or not? But they all found better things to do when the man himself came to visit.

Yet across the country, Democratic party chairmen are quite effusive with their raptures of the President:

“When President Obama comes to Arizona, he is going to be welcomed with open arms. I don’t think you’ll see people shying away. We’re going to be excited,” said Arizona Democratic Party chairman Andrei Cherny.

“People still like him personally. The more visits, the merrier. Come on back,” added Ohio Democratic Party chairman Chris Redfern.

They can say that. Their jobs aren’t directly on the line, but their members of Congress are acutely aware that good paying jobs like Congressman or US Senator are difficult to find in today’s economy. So they are acting accordingly.

Remember, they have “taken one for the team” over and over and over again in the past three years only to see Obama repay their loyalty by running against Congress in his reelection campaign. I suspect that the Democratic members of Congress have had enough of it. They have decided that numero uno now needs to be looked after far more than “The ‘O’ “ does.

Former New Hampshire Governor John Sununu will endorse Mitt Romney today, solidifying Romney’s status as the man to beat in New Hampshire.  From the Boston Globe:

Sununu served three terms as New Hampshire governor in the 1980s and was White House chief of staff under President George H.W. Bush.

He took over as chairman of the New Hampshire Republican Party in 2009, and stayed on through the 2010 elections, when Republicans won all the open congressional seats and took control of the state Legislature.

Sununu is considered one of the most influential voices in New Hampshire politics.

 

Whoa:

Herman Cain’s presidential campaign has been raising more the $1 million a week since Oct. 1, campaign spokesman J.D. Gordon told NBC News.

Be sure to read the full story here.

Oof, that’ll leave a mark. If George Will isn’t impressed, Romney is in trouble.

“Ninety percent of success is showing up,” Woody Allen once observed. This helps explain why Herman Cain is soaring and Rick Perry has gone as flat as the Texas plains.

Turn on a TV, and there is the former Godfather’s Pizza CEO. From Fox and Friends to Face the Nation to The Tonight Show, the one-time chairman of the Kansas City Federal Reserve advances his message — virtually everywhere but the Weather Channel.

In the 18 days between the September 22 and October 11 Republican debates, Cain granted interviews to six broadcast-network programs, the Media Research Center reports, plus 19 national cable-TV news shows. Cain appeared thrice each on CNN and the Fox Business Network and 11 times on the Fox News Channel. He also butted heads with an especially confrontational Lawrence O’Donnell on MSNBC on October 6.

After September 22, critics slammed Perry for letting children of illegal aliens pay in-state tuition at Texas’ government universities. A lingering controversy soon re-emerged regarding a hunting camp that Perry’s family leased years ago. Long called “Niggerhead,” Perry’s father painted over that hideous word, which polluted a rock near the entrance. Precisely when the elder Perry did so remains unclear. And just after introducing Texas’ governor on October 7 to the Values Voters Summit in Washington, Rev. Robert Jeffress, Perry’s pastor, declared: “Mormonism is a cult.” Perry has yet to repudiate Jeffress’ insult.

Amid these media cyclones, where was Perry? He evidently vanished into the federal Candidate Protection Program. Rather than offer his side of these breaking stories, Perry largely faded into the sagebrush. Between the two latest GOP debates, Perry did just two CNBC interviews and zero network spots.

Since Ronald Reagan left Washington in 1989, Republicans have yearned for a presidential nominee who could present free-market ideas with passion, energy, and commitment. They have longed for someone who would labor for limited government. And they have sunk into disappointment and simmered in rage as two generations of Bushes surrendered to their patrician instincts by ducking fights and letting the Left bludgeon them until they barely had a cheek left to turn.

Herman Cain embodies the Reagan approach. He is confident, tough, and combative, yet sunny, funny, and buoyant. Cain permanently could demolish the Democrats’ vile, vulgar lie that the GOP is the Vatican of U.S. racism. Those who oppose President Obama are not wrong, misinformed, or misguided; rather they are bigoted, Democrats too often contend. Last month, Rep. Andre Carson (D – Indiana) claimed that pro-Tea Party Republicans in Congress want to see blacks “hanging on a tree.”

If Republicans nominate Cain, the Democrats’ default argument against the Right utterly implodes. Liberals then might have to battle conservatives on the merits.

Cain does not need to win 60 or even 40 percent of the black electorate. If 20 to 25 percent of black voters support this successful, self-made son of a maid and a chauffeur, the Democratic base dissolves, and victory belongs to Cain and many down-ballot Republicans wise enough to clutch his coat tails.

Also, many whites backed Barack Obama to be a part of history, reboot black-white relations, or dry clean their own racial linen. For such Americans, dumping Obama might be tough. But leaving Obama for a pro-growth Republican could be far easier if he happens to be black, too.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Rick Perry increasingly resembles another candidate who was expected to electrify the 2008 primaries. Former Senator Fred Thompson (R – Tennessee) entered the GOP fray to great fanfare in September 2007. He first debated his opponents in Dearborn, Michigan the next month. Thompson took off the rest of that week and then largely avoided the spotlight. One rival campaign strategist dubbed this situation “the hunt for Fred in October.”

To the astonishment of so many of his supporters — and to Herman Cain’s growing advantage — Rick Perry evidently has spurned Ronald Reagan’s example and embraced Fred Thompson’s.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

— New York commentator Deroy Murdock is a nationally syndicated columnist with the Scripps Howard News Service and a media fellow with the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University. This article first appeared on National Review Online.

With 100 percent of precincts reporting, Gov. Bobby Jindal has managed to pull off a massive supermajority victory over his opponents in his race for re-election as Louisiana governor. Jindal’s win is largely being overlooked by Republicans at the national level. It shouldn’t be. The fact that a youngish, non-white Republican wonk was able to win nearly two-thirds of the statewide vote in the state that nearly elected David Duke just two decades ago speaks volumes about the changing nature of Dixie and about the vacuity of the Left’s perennial critique of the Republican Party as a vehicle for the perpetuation of racial inequality.

Had Gov. Jindal won re-election a year earlier, we might be talking about Jindal-Mania right about now. As I recall, Jindal was one of the first prominent Republicans to come out of the gate talking about charting a way forward for the party after its loss to President Obama in 2008. Unfortunately, Jindal was derailed by a bust of a State of the Union response in 2009, and by the peculiar nature of his own state, with its election cycle timed very poorly for would-be presidents.

In any case, Gov. Jindal deserves a spot on the vice presidential short list of the ultimate Republican presidential nominee next year, especially if that nominee turns out to be Mitt Romney. Jindal’s endorsement of Gov. Perry notwithstanding, he remains, like Rubio and Cain, a Southern, base-friendly, non-white conservative that would balance a Romney ticket in so many important ways.

2012 Republican Presidential Nomination

2012 Iowa Republican Caucus

2012 New Hampshire Republican Primary

New Hampshire – Not Displaying Romney

Leon Wolf of Red State did something rare among bloggers and columnists. He admitted he was wrong when he stated Herman Cain was pro-choice on abortion over some confusing statements Cain made on CNN. Wolf, one of Red State’s most vocal pro-lifers declared, “I now realize that calling Herman Cain “pro-choice” was not just wrong, it was disastrously wrong, and for that I am sorry. I have come to understand that Herman Cain has in reality done far more for the pro-life movement than I ever have.”

Herman Cain’s record of Pro-Life support goes back to his 2004 Senate Campaign in which he denounced abortion and the Roe v. Wade decision, writing:

Today we mourn the murder of millions of innocent lives because of the decision made 31 years ago by the United States Supreme Court to give doctors the right to end the life of an unborn child. Unbelievably, the decision of Roe v. Wade shows that our Nation still chooses to place human convenience over the sanctity of human life. No great nation can prosper when life is not valued.

Cain spent $1 million of his own money for an ad campaign against abortion in 2006. The ads exposed the tough truth of the higher abortion rates among blacks and Hispanics which and as late as March of last year, he called Planned Parenthood, “Planned Genocide.” The National Right to Life Committee has backed Cain up, stating that he is fully pro-life. His clarifying statements to The Brody File coupled with his past record should dismiss the question of his dedication to pro-life principles.

Unfortunately, Wolf is almost alone in admitting his error. There are still people who are questioning’s Cain commitment to the pro-life cause to drive a wedge between Cain and pro-life voters.

Either they, like Wolf, are totally ignorant of Cain’s pro-life record, they are incredibly obtuse, or they’re smearing Cain to promote their favored candidates. And for Presidential candidates who are joining the attack such as Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann, and Rick Santorum, the attacks on Cain’s commitment life is really being made without regards to truth in an attempt to save their flailing presidential campaigns.

It is fair game to suggest that Cain committed a gaffe and got confused in his interview with Morgan. It’s fair to question whether based on his articulation skills in interviews, if he has what it takes to be President. What’s not fair is to ignore the totality of Cain’s commitment to the cause of life for the sake of political gamesmanship.

In an interview with David Brody this weekend, Herman Cain announced his support for a federal marriage amendment and one prohibiting abortion. Here’s an excerpt from the interview:

David Brody: “What is the lesson that you are learning from all of this would you say?”

Herman Cain: “The lesson that I’m learning is that I’ve got to be careful of being pigeonholed because people can take a piece of tape and edit out the first half and only pull out one snippet that could start a firestorm. The tape that you are referring to, I said specifically, ‘I am pro-life, from conception, no abortions, no exceptions,’ but they only focus on a later part of it where they were trying to pigeonhole me with a specific situation. So, the lesson learned is beware of being pigeonholed, because you know they can pull it, and take it out of context.”

David Brody: “Are you for some sort of pro-life amendment to the constitution that in essence would trump Roe v. Wade?”

Herman Cain: “Yes. Yes I feel that strongly about it. If we can get the necessary support and it comes to my desk I’ll sign it. That’s all I can do. I will sign it.”

David Brody: (In your Faith and Freedom speech) “You mentioned marriage as well so you’re also, just so I understand, you’re for a constitutional marriage amendment as well?”

Herman Cain: “I think marriage should be protected at the federal level also. I used to believe that it could be just handled by the states but there’s a movement going on to basically take the teeth out of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act and that could cause an unraveling, so we do need some protection at the federal level because of that and so yes I would support legislation that would say that it’s between a man and a woman.”

Check out the full interview in the link above.

Mike Huckabee was on Fox and Friends this morning, and the subject of Herman Cain came up. Here is Mediate’s report on his appearance (video included).

First Mike was critical of Cain’s 999 plan. What sold it to people was its simplicity. Now it is becoming more and more complicated as people begin to examine it closely and Herman thinks it through. It is beginning to lose its charm.

Then Mike described Cain’s abortion position as “very pro-choice”. He commented that it is going to hurt him in Iowa. Even as Herman tries to walk it back, “the damage has been done”.

Mike made the observation that in a Presidential campaign, you have people that you sit down with and go through all the issues large and small to make sure that you have all your ducks in a row, that you can speak comfortably about almost anything. Cain isn’t doing that. As Charles Krauthammer commented earlier today, Cain appears to be “winging it”.

This is going to get him in a whole lot of trouble real quick if he doesn’t get a handle on it. I like Herman Cain. He is a likable guy. But a Presidential candidate can’t keep clarifying and clarifying and repeatedly misunderstanding questions and stumbling over answers about major issues and remain a viable candidate, at least not a frontrunner candidate. Sooner or later it is going to catch up with him.

The Ohio Straw Poll was held as a pay to play event where participants paid $25 to vote. Of the 428 particants who voted, the results were:

Ron Paul 53.50%
Herman Cain 25.47%
Mitt Romney 8.88%
Newt Gingrich 5.37%
Rick Perry 2.80%
Jon Huntsman 2.10%
Rick Santorum .93%
Michele Bachmann .47%
Write-In .47%

The Huntsman surge continues.

It’s official:

(CNN) – Under pressure and amid threats of candidates boycotting the state, the Nevada Republican Party pushed back the date of its caucus to February 4.

The state’s GOP central committee voted in overwhelming favor of the new date on Saturday.

Nevada’s Republican Party made headlines earlier this month when it decided to move up its contest to January 14 in hopes of staying a key player in the early voting process. The move came after Florida threw the calendar into disarray by setting its primary for January 31, jumping ahead of the four early voting states.

A number of presidential candidates, including former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, had pledged to boycott the Nevada caucuses.

The January 14 date threatened to force New Hampshire to shift its primary into early or mid-December in order to save its first-in-the-nation primary status, according to a letter released by New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner.

Be sure to read the entire piece here.

Update – Jon Huntsman’s statement:

“I applaud officials in Nevada for recognizing the importance of New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary. The fight to preserve New Hampshire’s critical  role in vetting presidential candidates should not be dismissed as just another political process story. It is vital that New Hampshire’s primary be defended and the unique looking-glass it affords Americans be preserved.

“Ultimately, Granite Staters wouldn’t have had to struggle to keep their primary tradition intact if the Romney campaign, for its own advantage, did not attempt to game our democracy by lobbying states to move up their primary contests.

“This isn’t a victory for one candidate or one state, but a victory for the democratic process which values substance, authenticity and qualifications over slogans and sideshow theatrics that have attempted to dominate modern politics.”

Sarah Palin has released another Facebook editorial. Her target this time was Crony Capitalism. Entitled “American Crony Capitalism Brings Jobs to Finland”, she takes dead aim at the Obama administration’s poor record in that regard.

Yesterday, another shoe dropped in the chronicles of the Obama administration’s crony capitalism. A start-up electric car company with ties to Al Gore got a $529 million loan guarantee from Obama’s Department of Energy to build luxury electric cars…in Finland! Leaving aside the fact that to date only two of these $97,000 cars have been sold (one of them to a movie star), we might at least hope that this ridiculous exercise in the government picking winners minus any competitive, transparent process (Al Gore’s venture cap firm) and losers (the taxpayers subsidizing a car no one wants) would produce manufacturing jobs in the United States. Isn’t that the alleged purpose of Obama’s stimulus giveaways?

It’s bad enough that we borrow money from foreign countries to give to foreign countries. Now we borrow from foreign countries to finance jobs in foreign countries. (This kind of reminds me of the $2 billion assistance President Obama provided Brazil for their off-shore energy developments, while shutting down or blocking much of our own off-shore domestic drilling. He’s in favor of energy jobs in Brazil. But in America? Not so much.)

…

It’s a subject that is dear to her heart. It was, after all, the issue that got her elected Governor of Alaska.

A month ago, she went after Rick Perry for the same thing.

Sarah Palin took a hard swipe against her friend Rick Perry in a post-debate TV appearance, calling him out by name for “crony capitalism” for his effort to mandate an HPV vaccine for girls in Texas.

Asked by Greta Van Susteren about someone in Perry’s office going to work for a drug company that made the vaccine, Palin sought to put a finer point on it: “That someone, as Michele Bachmann pointed out, was Governor Perry’s former chief of staff.”

She went on: “That’s crony capitalism. That’s part of the problem that we have in this country is that people are afraid, even in our own party, to call one another out on that. True reform and fighting the corruption and fighting the crony capitalism is a tough thing to do within your own party. You have to go up against the big guns and they will try to destroy you when you call them out on the mistakes that they have made. Believe me, I know that, I have the bumps and bruises to prove it because that’s what I have been doing for the last 20 years … calling out the corruption in government. Michele Bachmann tried to make that point tonight and she’s going to get potentially crucified.”

Van Susteren asked another question, but Palin wasn’t done: “Let me go back to that issue with Governor Perry,” she said. She pointed out that at the time Perry was boosting the vaccine in Texas, she was opposing it in Alaska, and she thought Perry’s order was strange “because it just didn’t sound like Governor Perry,” who she thought was against big government.

“I knew even at that time something was up with that issue. And now we’re finding out, yeah, something was up with that issue,” she said.

…

This straw poll was taken of the attendees at the Western Republican Leadership Conference in Las Vegas — the event kicked off by the debate Tuesday night. The attendees were surveyed over a period of three days, and just 550 total votes were cast. Here are the results, for what they’re worth:

• Cain – 31%
• Romney – 29%
• Gingrich – 20%
• Paul – 10%
• Perry – 4%
• Bachmann – 1%
• Santorum – 1%
• Huntsman – 0.3%
• Johnson – 0%

In late April, 1945, Italian partisans caught Italian dictator Benito Mussolini, wearing a German Army coat and trying to escape the advancing Allied armies in northern Italy. He was subsequently executed by the partisans, and his body, along with those of his mistress and more than a dozen fascist leaders were taken to nearby Milan where they were strung up in an Esso gas station and deformed by angry local crowds. The photo images of his brutal treatment made their way to Berlin where the German dictator Adolf Hitler viewed them a few days later. Vowing this would not happen to him, Hitler was reported to have then decided to commit suicide with his long-time girlfriend, and only their burned bodies were found by Allied soldiers a few days later.

Libyan dictator Qaddafi had been holding out in his home town of Sirte with several of his sons and his most loyal supporters, but on Thursday this last refuge of the 42-year totalitarian regime was overrun by anti-Qaddafi forces, and the dictator was found hiding out from U.S. and French bombers which had attacked his convoy attempting to flee. He appears on videos to have been taken prisoner alive and wounded, but shortly afterward videos show him fatally shot in the head. His bloodied body was reportedly then dragged through the streets of Misrata, a Libyan coastal city where his body had been taken.

The striking resemblance of Qaddafi’s end to Mussolini’s also brings to mind that Libya was, during Mussolini’s fascist regime, a colony of Italy. In fact, Mussolini had used Libya as his base for attacking Ethiopia in the late 1930′s just before World War II began, and the failure of the forerunner of the United Nations, then called the League of Nations, to come to the aid of Ethiopia, proved to be its final failure. It did not meet again.

This time the United Nations condemned Qaddafi, but it was the old World War I and II alliance of the the British, the French and the United States under its NATO umbrella which provided vital air support to the Libyan revolutionary forces that retook Libya from the Qaddafi regime.

Remaining Middle East totalitarian regimes, most notably in Iran and Syria, should take note of what happens to most dictators in the end.

Like Tunisia and Egypt, and very soon Yemen, we do not know what kind of governments will replace previous Arab dictators. The “Arab spring” could quickly become another “Arab winter” if the forces of democracy and freedom are not allowed to fill the vacuums of power that now exist temporarily in this part of the world which has not ever known true representative government and true freedom.

Let’s hope the Libyan people, and the Egyptian and Tunisian people, decide to stop repeating the mistakes of the past.

________________________________________________________________________________

-Please visit Mr. Casselman’s personal site.

University of Iowa Republican Caucus

• Cain – 37.0%
• Romney – 27.1%
• Paul – 11.5%
• Gingrich – 7.7%
• Perry – 5.9%
• Bachmann – 3.9%
• Santorum – 3.1%
• Huntsman – 1.2%
• Someone else – 2.5%
• Undecided – 0.0%

Among those “very likely” to vote in the caucuses

• Cain – 38.7%
• Romney – 29.4%
• Paul – 10.3%
• Gingrich – 7.9%
• Bachmann – 4.3%
• Santorum – 3.2%
• Perry – 3.0%
• Huntsman – 2.1%
• Someone Else – 1.1%
• Undecided – 0.0%

Among those “somewhat likely” to vote in the caucuses

• Cain – 34.4%
• Romney – 23.6%
• Paul – 13.4%
• Perry – 10.0%
• Gingrich – 7.5%
• Bachmann – 3.4%
• Santorum – 3.0%
• Huntsman – 0.0%
• Someone Else – 4.7%
• Undecided – 0.0%

Survey of 778 voters was conducted Oct 12-19 with a +/-3.6% margin of error.

Well, now we have a picture of what happens when you push people and don’t allow for undecideds. Interesting the disparity of Perry’s support in the final two categories…

MEDIA ADVISORY
Saturday, Oct. 22 and Tuesday, Oct. 25

On Saturday, Texas Gov. Rick Perry will participate in a photo op with Congressman Steve King prior to a pheasant hunt. Later that day, he will speak at an event hosted by Iowa Speaker Pro-Tempore Jeff Kaufmann and at the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition Fall Banquet and Presidential Candidate Forum.

On Tuesday morning, Gov. Perry will unveil his economic plan at ISO Poly Films.

*NOTE: Media credentials from your news outlet are required to attend events listed below. Please note added events.

Saturday, Oct. 22

8:45 a.m. CT – Merrill, Iowa
Gov. Perry to hunt pheasant with Congressman King
Loess Hills Hunting Preserve
19813 C43
Merrill, IA 51038

This ad, produced by Priorities USA – an outside group formed to support President Obama’s re-election campaign – may provide a sneak peek into Team Obama’s attack strategy against Romney should he win the nomination:



Hat-tip: Political Wire

Rep. Michele Bachmann’s entire paid New Hampshire staff has resigned due to frustration with the campaign and a lack of commitment to the state.  While never a good sign, Bachmann has always been focused on Iowa and South Carolina with little attention given to New Hampshire.

Hotline has a really intriguing story up about the Romney campaign’s “new” website, careerpolitician.com, which serves as the home for attacks on rival Rick Perry. According to Hotline, the Romney campaign actually purchased the domain in March of 2007 when the primary battle between Giuliani, McCain, and Romney was heating up.

Presumably, Romney was going to launch the website as a method of attack against John McCain, who had been in Washington for 25 plus years at the time. It was a favorite line of Romney’s in the 2007-08 primary campaign to point out that people who had been in Washington caused the mess in Washington and couldn’t help solve the problem; he contrasted himself as a Washington outsider. This website would have fit into that narrative.

For whatever reason, Romney never launched the website in 2007. I wonder if, perhaps, the website never launched because the McCain campaign imploded in the early summer of 2007. Nobody thought McCain was a threat, and Romney fixed his aim squarely at Rudy Giuliani, and later, at Fred Thompson. Neither of them fit the “career politician” label. By the time McCain made his comeback, it was too late – just days prior to the New Hampshire primary, his poll numbers began to skyrocket, and with Romney’s loss to Huckabee in Iowa, the once left-for-dead McCain ran away with the nomination.

Whoever was responsible for the website at the Romney HQ, though, kept the registration active for four years until the site launched last week. And as I think about that 2007-08 storyline, I have to wonder if that’s not why Mitt Romney continues to attack Rick Perry. Four years ago, one of his chief rivals was written off. Everybody said, ‘Don’t worry about McCain. He’s not going anywhere’ — just as everyone is now saying the same about Rick Perry. And so this time around, Romney intends to keep his rival, who appears to be down for the count, laying on the mat. He wants to ensure there is no miraculous comeback a week before the actual voting starts. And so he revives the website which was intended to do just that in 2007, but which, in what Romney must view as a tactical error, was never launched.

Understanding the context of the past gives us a clearer understanding of what is going on today. That’s not to say the decisions made today are the best ones — or that the ones made in the past were mistakes. I think the attack of “career politician” used against McCain would have backfired because of McCain’s long and honorable military service, and the attacks on Rick Perry this time around may draw Romney into a spat he’d rather, as front runner, avoid. However, we can start to at least understand why Romney is making these decisions when we look at the narrative of his past experiences.

The about to be released biography of Steve Jobs contains an interesting account of his interaction with Obama last year.  It is well known that Jobs considered himself a “Clinton Democrat”, but he was apparently quite critical of Obama’s anti-business policies and he was particularly critical of the public school teachers unions and their obstruction of education reform, according to biographer Walter Issacson. In addition, unlike the typical CEO, Jobs refused to kow-tow to Obama or “beg” for an opportunity to meet with him; in fact, it was apparently the other way around.  Kind of funny, I think.  Here are some highlights from Issacson:

Jobs’ Meeting With Obama

Jobs, who was known for his prickly, stubborn personality, almost missed meeting President Obama in the fall of 2010 because he insisted that the president personally ask him for a meeting. Though his wife told him that Obama “was really psyched to meet with you,” Jobs insisted on the personal invitation, and the standoff lasted for five days. When he finally relented and they met at the Westin San Francisco Airport, Jobs was characteristically blunt. He seemed to have transformed from a liberal into a conservative.

“You’re headed for a one-term presidency,” he told Obama at the start of their meeting, insisting that the administration needed to be more business-friendly. As an example, Jobs described the ease with which companies can build factories in China compared to the United States, where “regulations and unnecessary costs” make it difficult for them.

Jobs also criticized America’s education system, saying it was “crippled by union work rules,” noted Isaacson. “Until the teachers’ unions were broken, there was almost no hope for education reform.” Jobs proposed allowing principals to hire and fire teachers based on merit, that schools stay open until 6 p.m. and that they be open 11 months a year.

Aiding Obama’s Reelection Campaign

Jobs suggested that Obama meet six or seven other CEOs who could express the needs of innovative businesses — but when White House aides added more names to the list, Jobs insisted that it was growing too big and that “he had no intention of coming.” In preparation for the dinner, Jobs exhibited his notorious attention to detail, telling venture capitalist John Doerr that the menu of shrimp, cod and lentil salad was “far too fancy” and objecting to a chocolate truffle dessert. But he was overruled by the White House, which cited the president’s fondness for cream pie.

Though Jobs was not that impressed by Obama, later telling Isaacson that his focus on the reasons that things can’t get done “infuriates” him, they kept in touch and talked by phone a few more times. Jobs even offered to help create Obama’s political ads for the 2012 campaign. “He had made the same offer in 2008, but he’d become annoyed when Obama’s strategist David Axelrod wasn’t totally deferential,” writes Isaacson. Jobs later told the author that he wanted to do for Obama what the legendary “morning in America” ads did for Ronald Reagan.

Seems to me that the GOP has an opportunity to get better acquainted with Silicon Valley and with the innovative industries of the new economy —”the creative class”—where ever their geography, as they  represent the current and future economic center of gravity of America.  The senior House leadership along with Governors Huntsman and Romney have attempted to do that to some extent, but more thought and effort should be directed that way.

-or- Romney Returns to What Made Him Frontrunner

Mitt Romney gave an extraordinary speech yesterday to the Sioux Falls Area Chamber of Commerce. It was full of hope, optimism, love of country, faith in the free enterprise system, and a confidence in our ability to deal with the problems facing the nation. Quite a contrast from the bickering that broke out in the debate the previous night, and far more uplifting and positive than that ill-conceived attack ad that briefly saw the light of day today before  they quickly yanked it.

Mitt spoke for a little more than 18 minutes and hardly touched upon his candidacy for the Presidency, or what he would do if elected. Instead, he focused on what a great country we have and how the free market is a much better solution than anything Washington could come up with.

Click on the picture below to view it:

Here’s an except from the Sioux Falls Argus Leader’s report on the speech:

“I believe in free enterprise and capitalism,” he said. “I believe in America.”

…

He did compare his experience in the private sector with his four-year stint as governor. When businesses make a mistake, people lose their jobs and get hurt, he said. When governments make mistakes, they blame the other political party. Governments should encourage incentives on taxes, regulations and energy policy, but the people in government often don’t understand how to do that.

Whether you are a Romney fan, a Romney hater, or just plain neutral, it was a great speech.

In the wake of today’s Rasmussen Iowa poll showing Romney in a comfortable second place and easily within striking distance of the lead, Mitt spent the day campaigning in in the state. Reports CNN:

Sioux City, Iowa (CNN) – On Thursday, Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney made his first appearance in Iowa since August.

And at a town hall meeting on the campus of Morningside College in Sioux City, the former Massachusetts governor was pressed on his commitment to the leadoff caucus state.

A questioner said he was disappointed with the “vitriol” and “hyperbole” from the other GOP candidates and pointedly asked Romney: “Are you here in Iowa today, and is your campaign here in Iowa today to finally give the people of Iowa an alternative to that?”

“Yes,” Romney responded.

“I want to get the support of Iowans,” he added. “I am in Iowa, this not my first trip to Iowa as you know. And I will be here again and again.”

After leaving Sioux City on the banks of the Missouri River, he headed south and a little inland to the small town of Treynor, IA, where he attended a lunchtime roundtable meeting at Treynor State Bank. Reports the Lincoln Journal Star:

The scene in the Treynor State Bank was emblematic of the retail politics required to gain traction in Iowa’s first-in-the-nation 2012 Republican presidential caucuses scheduled for Jan. 3.

Perhaps 50 people crowded into the basement room at noon, and more than one-third of them were regional and national media representatives.

…

Suggesting “there’s a good shot I might become president,” Romney told 14 people gathered at the table that he wanted to exchange views and hear their thoughts.

His private-sector experience equips him with the knowledge and skills required to lead the nation in a time of high unemployment and economic distress, he said.

“The current leadership does not have a fundamental understanding of how our economy works,” Romney said, relying too much on Washington rather than the private sector.

“There are people in government who think profit is bad,” he said. “I think profit is good.”

…

One of the panelists, Lori Holste of Walnut, Iowa, said afterward she was “very impressed” by Romney.

“I thought he brought some real personal values I appreciated,” she said.

Holste, who is executive director of the Western Iowa Development Association, may be a good reflection of the typical Iowa Republican caucus voter at this point in the campaign. Her choices are down to Romney and Herman Cain, she said.

The AP reported his response to a question concerning ethanol:

“I’m a friend of ethanol and at the same time I don’t want to say that I’m going to be proposing new legislation to provide new subsidies,” Romney said, walking a careful line of fiscal responsibility in front of an audience that’s heavily invested in the ethanol industry.

“I think that time is now completed and we’ll move on to encourage the availability for the American people to purchase ethanol on a choice basis,” he said.

(more…)

Okay, Herman Cain gave a confused answer yesterday to Piers Morgan on abortion, which he clarified today, simply stating that the President has no constitutional role or ability to tell people from day one not to have an abortion.  But is Cain pro-choice or trying to fudge his position on the issue? No.  In 2004, he ran for Senate on a pro-life platform and in 2006, he put his money where his mouth is:

“More and more African Americans are pro-life,” Cain said in a statement LifeNews.com obtained. “Our message to African Americans is simple — it’s time you vote for candidates who support our values.”

Cain will underscore that message with a $1 million advertising campaign in key states and congressional districts targeting black radio programs and urban radio stations young African Americans enjoy. Some of the ads focus on abortion.

The campaign is a second go-round based on a highly successful Ohio campaign in 2004 that helped President Bush garner 17% of the African American vote in the Buckeye State – double his vote total from the 2000 presidential race.

The ads appeared in Dayton, Cleveland and Cincinnati Ohio, as well as in Colorado, Minnesota, Florida, Georgia and other states.

The ads are funded by Americas PAC, a Cain-backed organization, which former Al Gore campaign manager Donna Brazile said did a great job in turning out black pro-life votes.

Americas PAC’s African American radio strategy “hampered our ability to expand the off-year electorate in 2002,” Brazile said.

Couldn’t be clearer. Tony Perkins over at the Family Research Council leads his comments on Cain with praise for his clear stance on homosexuality before addressing the abortion statement:

It’s encouraging to see candidates take principled stands on tough social issues. I recognize that in the same interview Cain had a confusing response to his stand on abortion. I’ll be talking with Herman about the need for clarity on his stand for the sanctity of human life.

Clearly Perkins isn’t confused and anyone who is confused hasn’t studied Cain’s career and record. For Senator Rick Santorum, there’s no excuse for the sort of petty demagoguery in accusing Cain of being pro-abortion unless being Rick Santorum counts as an excuse.

Herman Cain has received a lot of attention and traction in the polls largely due to his 9-9-9 plan. It is understandable why. It is catchy, easy to remember and most important bold. If there is one thing groups as diverse as OWS and the Tea Party can agree on it is that we need to do something large and creative to get out of our current situation.

Cain should be applauded for getting this conversation started. It is in the spirit of this conversation that I write this post. I wrote a while back on another site about the concept, or philosophy, of Distributism. I am neither an expert in, nor a proponent of, this idea but I think it deserves an honest vetting.

It has been getting some play lately in certain traditionalist conservative circles. Rod Dreher has brought it up in connection with OWS; and British Red Tory, Phillip Blond discusses its potential in the Washington Post.

For those unfamiliar with this nearly 100 year old idea here is the CliffNotes version from Wikipedia:

According to distributism, the ownership of the means of production should be spread as widely as possible among the general populace, rather than being centralized under the control of the state (state socialism) or a few large businesses or wealthy private individuals (laissez-faire capitalism). A summary of distributism is found in Chesterton’s statement: “Too much capitalism does not mean too many capitalists, but too few capitalists.”

While Cain’s 9-9-9 plan seems to be lacking in intellectual rigor, Distributism has a well thought-out philosophical grounding. Whether a Republican candidate could tailor it to appeal to a primary audience I do not know. So I ask the grassroots readers here. What do you think?

Steve blogs regularly at his own site.

Democracy Corps (D) 2012 Presidential Survey

• Barack Obama 45% [48%] (47%) {48%} [46%] (48%)
• Mitt Romney 45% [46%] (45%) {44%} [48%] (46%)

Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling his job as president?

• Approve 40% [45%] (46%) {49%} [44%] (47%)
• Disapprove 53% [50%] (48%) {45%} [50%] (47%)

Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Republicans in Congress are handling their job in charge of the House of Representatives?

• Approve 27% [31%] (32%) {33%} [38%]
• Disapprove 65% [64%] (60%) {59%} [55%]

I know it is a long way off, but thinking about the elections for Congress in 2012, if the election for U.S. Congress were held today, would you be voting for the Democratic House candidate or the Republican House candidate?

• Republican candidate 46% [47%] (47%) {45%} [47%] (47%)
• Democratic candidate 46% [46%] (44%) {46%} [45%] (44%)

Survey of 1,000 likely voters was conducted October 15-18, 2011, by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner for the Center for American Progress. The margin of error is +/- 2.5 percentage points. Party ID breakdown: 35% [38%] (35%) {38%} [38%] (34%) Democrat; 31% [33%] (32%) {31%} [36%] (34%) Republican; 32% [26%] (30%) {28%} [23%] (28%) Independent. Political ideology: 38% [42%] (43%) {41%} [43%] (42%) Conservative; 36% [35%] (33%) {31%} [34%] (34%) Moderate; 19% [20%] (19%) {21%} [18%] (18%) Liberal. Results from the poll conducted August 6-10, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted June 18-21, 2011 are in parentheses.  Results from the poll conducted May 21-25, 2011 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted April 10-12, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted January 9-12, 2011 are in parentheses.

-Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal.

Southern Illinois University-Carbondale Illinois Republican Primary

• Cain – 23.4%
• Romney – 20.6%
• Gingrich – 7.5%
• Perry – 7.2%
• Paul – 6.6%
• Bachmann – 3.8%
• Huntsman – 2.5%
• Santorum – 2.2%

General Election

• Obama – 46.1%
• Romney – 38.5%

• Obama – 46.3%
• Cain – 34.0%

• Obama – 50.8%
• Perry – 30.8%

• Obama – 49.3%
• Paul – 30.3%

Obama Job Approval: 52/46

Survey of 1,000 registered voters and “a smaller subset of Republican voters” was conducted Oct 11-16.

The primary numbers are not the main focus here, since most of those candidates will not be in the race by the time Illinois comes around. What is of incredible interest, however, are the general election matchup numbers. Obama won Illinois, his home state, 62-37 in 2008. For Romney and Cain to hold him at 46% now is pretty remarkable.