Morning Must Reads: Fresh

  • Share
  • Read Later
763 comments
politathiest
politathiest

Liberalsllies,

in honor of your efforts to be technically correct in all things . wouldnt romney only be a murderer only if he had direct involvement in the death of this woman . at best can't we really only say he is guilty of negligent homicide , or maybe involuntary manslaughter , anybody here with a la background know which would be the more correct title . it would definitely probably be better for romney if he could say he's only guilty of negligent homicide . it would make all the other names we could call him pale in comparison wiouldnt it ? please someone weigh in on this so we can know for sure

MrObvious
MrObvious

MrObvious,No, Ob. I am pointing out the sloppiness of your thought process. You are like Barack Obama without a teleprompter.

Not at all - you were pointing out my grammar. But you're even so pathetic that you try to weasel yourself out of that. You're spineless.

But let me enlighten you of what you've become as you seek brotherhood with some here.

Are they on Obama's hit list too? Maybe he'll just send a drone this time instead of a dumb skinhead he bought off.

This is Rod.

You'll jump right on anyone here but you would never say anything to someone like Rod.

A person with stones would point out how idiotic this sounds. Remember how you were whining like a snotty little brat about me exploiting the massacre in Colorado. But you don't say anything to Rod that have been going on for days now with one thing more idiotic than the other.

You're simply yellow. You have no integrity, you're colorless like putty and you stand for nothing. If we here would count have many times you twist and turn dependent on what position you're against we'd be in the thousands. Something like 17k little nuggests of flip flopping mental masturbation.You earned your friendship well and you made your bed. Rod is your kind.

Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2012...

politathiest
politathiest

May be romney and obama should cut a deal . whoever wins he has to take the other candidate for vice president . that would be a great spectacle . can you imagine I'm at the debates fiercely going at each other and then stepping towards the middle of the podium doing that right hand to left hand raised arm victory stance yelling go team Romnbama or obamney. imagine what fun both convention would be like? of course then they have only 1 vice presidential debate ending in a fore mentioned victory grasp. best of all would be to see how the super pacs would deal with the issue . they could have a scathing attacks against the other ending by saying that they are not associate with the Romnboma or Obamney campaign. Mitt can legitimately go after the black and latino votes and obama can go after ...... coiffed hair business man vote. they could even get established the occupy tea party. just imagine oh wouldn't it be grand .

Paul Dirks
Paul Dirks

This is an article that describes the scam that Romney participated in as head of Marriott Corp's audit committee:

http://www.son-of-boss.com/SOB...

One of the wisest things I've read in a while though appears as a  footnote:

When one understands the tax code, it becomes apparent that the conflicts are not between liberals and conservatives, but rather the battle is between old wealth (both liberal and conservative) and new wealth – those living on investments verses those earning an income.  Thus, the estate tax, capital gains, and tax-free bonds laws favor old wealth, while those earning large incomes (professionals, business owners, entertainers and athletes) pay the highest rates on their compensation income, as well as employment taxes.

Paul Dirks
Paul Dirks

Some edumacation for the trolls:

There has been a five percentage-point Democratic advantage, on average, in Fox News polls this year. In this poll, the Democratic edge is nine points. That may or may not be on the high side, although it is similar to other recent national polls conducted by NBC News and the Wall Street Journal, which puts Democrats up 11 percentage points and the Pew Research Center, with Democrats up by 13 percent.

That my friends is Fox news taking away the number one excuse the Teaheads offer when confronted with a negative poll. OVERSAMLPLING!!!!!!!

http://www.foxnews.com/politic...

ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®©
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®©

If anyone is wondering why spambot and Rusty are going crazy (crazier than usual, that is) today...

http://www.foxnews.com/politic...

Mitt Romney has had a tough couple of weeks on the campaign trail -- and it shows in the latest Fox News poll. After a barrage of campaign ads, negative news coverage of his overseas trip and ongoing talk about his tax returns, Romney’s favorable rating and standing in the trial ballot have declined. As a result, President Obama has opened his biggest lead since Romney became the presumptive Republican nominee.

~

LiberalLies2012
LiberalLies2012

Al Gore - Anchorman!!

Big Fat Al will take over the reins as the "anchorman" for Current TV.  We don't know yet if it is because of Al's hefty weight or that Current couldn't get anyone else to do it.  We'll keep you posted on this late breaking news.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new...

LiberalLies2012
LiberalLies2012

Yes we do need Voter ID laws.  Here is yet another example, this time a Republican nut case, Thaddeus McCotter who used our voting system to commit fraud.  

http://www.freep.com/article/2...

We need a total clean up in Washington.  One that will be remembered for generations.  

LiberalLies2012
LiberalLies2012

Hope and change, the nightmare...

"“[W]e’ve come too far to turn back now,” Obama said in Pueblo, Colo.  “We’ve got too much more work to do."

Yea we know Barry.  We know you want to "fundamentally change" this country.  Well sorry, Pal, we don't buy the smoke and mirror routine anymore.  It is nothing more than a carnival sideshow.  A big joke.  

Your progressivism just doesn't work.  Americans woke up.  They looked at what you were doing and said "hey, wait a minute".  

Just because you tried to cover-up the old TAX AND SPEND Democrat way as being the road to prosperity, we know this time that way doesn't work.  We have been down that road before and that's why we are almost 16 TRILLION dollars in debt.  That's why this economy is so bad because of all the spending.  We know we pay enough in taxes.  You FAILED Barry.  Just like you failed when you were smoking dope back in Hawaii.  

You are FIRED!

http://washingtonexaminer.com/...

LiberalLies2012
LiberalLies2012

Doubling down on stupid.

Adviser Robert Gibbs said he didn’t know "specifics," while deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter said on CNN: “I don’t know the facts about when Mr. Soptic’s wife got sick or the facts about his health insurance."

And yesterday on Air Force One, Psaki said, "we don’t have any knowledge of the story of the family."

UPDATE: Amanda Henneberg, a spokesperson for the Romney campaign, said this in a statement: "President Obama’s campaign has been caught lying about its knowledge concerning a vicious smear run by his Super PAC.  And now, they have doubled down with another dishonorable and dishonest attack. In 2008, candidate Obama said ‘you make a big election about small things’ when you don’t have a record to run on.  Since President Obama can’t run on record unemployment, falling incomes, and massive debt, he has decided to run a dirty campaign that is an affront to everything he claims to stand for."

http://www.politico.com/politi...

What happened to the political team that took down one of the biggest Democrat dynasties of our time?  Is that why Bill Clinton is on the way back to save the day?

Even Bill doesn't have the power to save this sinking ship.  They've already lost Lanny Davis, the number 1 Clintonista.  

LiberalLies2012
LiberalLies2012

Barry Obama's dream was to "fundamentally transform" the US to look exactly like European countries he is so fond of.  Unfortunately for Barry, his time came when the European model for economics has imploded.

Now with austerity cuts which are totally unpreventable, "Baby Hatches" have made a rebound in Europe.  

What are baby hatches you ask?  Well let me explain.  Back in the early part of the last century, countries had "hatches" set up in various cities.  When families could no longer afford to take care of their kids, they put them in a hatch.  Someone then would come by take the kid out and take them to an orphanage.  

Barry's Baby Hatches, coming to a city near you real soon.

Protopapas cited the example of a four-year old child left at a nursery by her mother with a note that read: “I will not be coming to pick up Anna today because I cannot afford to look after her.  Please take good care of her. Sorry."

It is here, we just don't realize yet how bad it really is.  Just yesterday at the store I saw a young woman with two young boys in tow.  She looked to have been used to being in the middle class, but to my surprise, out came her EBT / Food Stamp Card.  She looked back at me and lowered her eyes.  It was very sad.  How soon will she have yet before she has to give up on her two boys?  Following Barry down the deep dark path of socialism, it won't be long at all.

 http://www.cnbc.com/id/4858578...

LiberalLies2012
LiberalLies2012

First it was blame it all on Bush.  That didn't work.

Then it was call Romney a "felon", that didn't work either.

Then we heard some truth, when socialist wannabe Barry Hussein Soetoro-Obama said "You Didn't Built That"

Now, with NOTHING left, they double down on name calling and call Romney a "Murderer".

America, wake up.  Obama is incompetent, lacks any shred of integrity and is nothing more than a stooge for the Chicago thugs who brought him to Washington.  The only thing Obama knows how to do well so far as running anything is his mouth.  

We don't need words, we need ACTION.  It's time for Barry to go!!

LiberalLies2012
LiberalLies2012

First it was FELON, that didn't stick so the Obama Campaign doubled down on MURDERER.

Gee, all that "hope and change". Where did it go?

LiberalLies2012
LiberalLies2012

Obama is done. His days are numbered in the White House. Barry nice to have known ya, but you are one and done.

paulejb
paulejb

Just how pathetic will Bambi get before this is over?

“[W]e’ve come too far to turn back now,” Obama said in Pueblo, Colo.  “We’ve got too much more work to do.  We’ve got too many good jobs we’ve got to create.  We’ve got too many teachers we still need to hire.  We’ve got too many schools we need to rebuild.” He also emphasized his belief in the renewable energy industry in Colorado, the need to support college students, and to disengage the military from foreign conflicts."

http://washingtonexaminer.com/... 

paulejb
paulejb

Not every Democrat is a lying, weasel dirt bag.

"Leading Democrat Calls Obama Super PAC Cancer Ad “Disgusting,” Calls On Burton To Apologize For It…"

http://weaselzippers.us/2012/0... 

Hey, Lanny, why not get the head man to apologize. Burton would do nothing without his okay.

NP042
NP042

Spending millions on attack ads in support of Republicans:  Good

Spending millions on attack ads in support of Democrats: Criminal!

LiberalLies2012
LiberalLies2012

Barry wants to "bail out ALL industry".  But, what that he means is turn all American businesses into one big Socialist State.

Isn't that right Barry?

http://www.politico.com/politi...

But, but, but Barry, no sane investor is buying into the stock.  Get it?

outsider2011
outsider2011

For you Paulie:

 

WASHINGTON -- Former Sen. Rick Santorum couldn't suppress his

laughter Wednesday morning when reminded that he had once declared Mitt

Romney to be the single worst Republican candidate to run against President Barack Obama on the issue of health care.

The Republican National Committee tapped Santorum to host a

conference call attacking the Obama administration's new welfare waiver

policy. But the question and answer session quickly turned back to that

heated moment between the two, which took place during the Republican

primary.

Andrea Saul, a top spokeswoman for Romney, stoked conservative fears

on Wednesday by touting the health care law the former governor had

passed in Massachusetts during an appearance on Fox News. Reporters

wanted to know if Santorum felt a sense of vindication.

"I didn't see the show so I'm not going to comment on that," he said of Saul's remark

that a woman, highlighted in a recent ad from a pro-Obama super PAC,

would have had health insurance to help pay for her cancer had she lived

in Massachusetts.

But even as Santorum ducked the issue, it seemed clear that his heart

wasn't entirely in it. He let out a noticeable laugh as he offered a

defense against the notion that Saul had given Obama a gift by speaking

positively about the universal insurance model that Romney pioneered and

the president adopted.

"All I can say is that [laughter] Governor Romney is going to be a

far superior candidate [laughter] on the issue of health care than

Barack Obama," said Santorum. "And Governor Romney has been clear,

number one, he would fight for the repeal of Obamacare. He said that

during the campaign."

"The differences between Governor Romney and me in the primary really

fall to the wayside when it comes to the differences between the

Republican nominee, Governor Romney, and Barack Obama," Santorum added.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

outsider2011
outsider2011

 Foreign money and

American elections are like fire and water, orange juice and toothpaste,

Yankees fans and Red Sox fans: The two don't mix. At least they haven't

for nearly 50 years, when the federal government banned foreigners from giving or spending any money on local, state, and federal elections.

But for the secretive nonprofit groups pumping hundreds of millions of dollars into the 2012 elections, the rules are different. These outfits, organized under the 501 ( c ) section of the US tax code,

can take money from foreign citizens, foreign labor unions, and foreign

corporations, and they don't have to tell voters about it because they

don't publicly disclose their donors. What's more, with a savvy attorney

and a clean paper trail, a foreign donor could pump millions into a

nonprofit without even the nonprofit knowing the money's true origin.

Anyone,

American or not, can give any amount—$ 1 or $ 10 million—to politically

active nonprofits like the Sierra Club or Americans for Prosperity, the

national free-market organization cofounded

by billionaire industrialist David Koch. Federal law prohibits a penny

of that foreign money from being spent on politics. But it's not hard to

dodge that ban, says Marcus Owens, a tax law attorney who ran the IRS

division that oversees tax-exempt groups.

Owens offered this hypothetical scenario: Say a Chinese businessman

wants to funnel $ 10 million to a nonprofit that runs anti-Obama ads. For

a few hundred dollars, that donor—or his attorney—can create a Delaware

shell corporation that can funnel the $ 10 million to the nonprofit. And

when the nonprofit discloses its donors to the IRS (as the law

requires), all the taxman sees on the donor line is the shell

corporation. Owens says it's not IRS policy to figure out who's behind a

particular shell corporation. What's more, the IRS' audit rate for

tax-exempt nonprofits is less than 1 percent. "There are a lot of ways

that IRS filings can avoid disclosure of the actual source of funds," he

says.

Complicated as it may sound, the use of shell corporations isn't so

implausible. Last year, Edward Conard, a former partner and colleague of

Mitt Romney's at Bain Capital, used

a newly created shell corporation called W Spann LLC to anonymously

funnel $ 1 million to the pro-Romney super-PAC Restore Our Future.

Satirist Stephen Colbert lampooned this shell game

by creating an anonymous shell corporation called "Anonymous Shell

Corporation" for the purpose of shoveling dark money to his super-PAC,

Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow.

Conard outed himself because his shell corporation gave to a

super-PAC, which publicly discloses its donors. When the super-PAC

released its donor records, reporters investigated. But if Conard's W

Spann LLC gave to a dark-money nonprofit, the public would never know

and the press couldn't raise a ruckus. Reform advocates say the

possibility of foreign money being routed into US elections by shell

corporations underscores the need for politically active nonprofits like

Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS and the pro-Obama Priorities USA to disclose

their donors. "How do you protect from foreign money working its way

into campaigns?" asks Fred Wertheimer, president of the pro-reform group

Democracy 21. "It's extremely hard to do without public disclosure."

For 501 ( c ) ( 4 ) nonprofits, also known as "social welfare"

organizations, which include some of the biggest 2012 spenders, there's a

big upside to banking foreign money that's not for pure

politics, according to Owens. Tax law says 501 ( c ) ( 4 ) s can't make

politics their primary purpose, and so these groups carefully track

their spending so that more goes toward ostensibly nonpolitical

activities than toward politics. An injection of nonpolitical foreign

cash, Owens says, frees up other American money for overtly political

ads or mailers. "US donors are going to be incentivized to give money to

defeat Obama or elect Obama or elect Romney or defeat Romney," he says.

"They're not going to give money about why you should defend 20-ounce

sodas in New York." Friendly foreign donors might.

Officials with some of the most influential nonprofits dismissed

concerns about foreign money. Jonathan Collegio, a spokesman for

Crossroads GPS, notes that the nonprofit's donation policy

states that Crossroads "does not accept contributions from foreign

nationals." Priorities USA, the pro-Obama nonprofit founded by former

Obama White House aides Bill Burton and Sean Sweeney, also requires donors

to certify that they're American citizens or legal US residents to

donate. Chris Fleming, a spokesman for the American Federation of

State, County, and Municipal Employees, says it gets no money from

foreign sources. Mark McCullough, a spokesman for the Service Employees

International Union, says its union members in Canada do pay dues, but

that that money is kept separate from the union's political fund.

Spokespeople for the tea-party-aligned nonprofit Freedomworks, Americans

for Prosperity, and the AFL-CIO did not respond to requests for

comment.

In 2010, ThinkProgress, a blog affiliated with the liberal Center for American Progress, sent shock waves through Washington when it accused the US Chamber of Commerce of funding political ads with money from foreign businesses. A Chamber spokesman told FactCheck.org

that it kept foreign money separate from its political honeypot but

declined to give any details on how the funds are segregated. The

accusations went viral enough that President Obama weighed in, saying

that "groups that receive foreign money are spending huge sums to

influence American elections, and they won't tell you where the money

for their ads comes from."

In the early 1990s, then-Republican National Committee chair Haley Barbour used a phony think tank called the National Policy Forum

to funnel $ 2.2 million from Hong Kong businessman Ambrous Young into

the RNC's coffers for 1994 and 1996 elections. Barbour faced a grilling

from Senate investigators, but ultimately avoided punishment. The story

of Barbour's scheme, Sen. John Glenn (D-Ohio) said

in 1998, "is the only one so far where the head of a national political

party knowingly and successfully solicited foreign money, infused it

into the election process, and intentionally tried to cover it up."

Owens says the Barbour-Hong Kong scandal illustrates the ease by

which foreign money can find its way into American elections. And he

believes foreign money will come into play again this election cycle.

"We've been in this cesspool before," he says. "Now you've got more

incentive to do it, and I have to believe someone's doing it."

http://www.motherjones.com/pol...

outsider2011
outsider2011

 Foreign money and

American elections are like fire and water, orange juice and toothpaste,

Yankees fans and Red Sox fans: The two don't mix. At least they haven't

for nearly 50 years, when the federal government banned foreigners from giving or spending any money on local, state, and federal elections.

But for the secretive nonprofit groups pumping hundreds of millions of dollars into the 2012 elections, the rules are different. These outfits, organized under the 501(c) section of the US tax code,

can take money from foreign citizens, foreign labor unions, and foreign

corporations, and they don't have to tell voters about it because they

don't publicly disclose their donors. What's more, with a savvy attorney

and a clean paper trail, a foreign donor could pump millions into a

nonprofit without even the nonprofit knowing the money's true origin.

Advertise on MotherJones.com

Anyone,

American or not, can give any amount—$ 1 or $ 10 million—to politically

active nonprofits like the Sierra Club or Americans for Prosperity, the

national free-market organization cofounded

by billionaire industrialist David Koch. Federal law prohibits a penny

of that foreign money from being spent on politics. But it's not hard to

dodge that ban, says Marcus Owens, a tax law attorney who ran the IRS

division that oversees tax-exempt groups.

Owens offered this hypothetical scenario: Say a Chinese businessman

wants to funnel $10 million to a nonprofit that runs anti-Obama ads. For

a few hundred dollars, that donor—or his attorney—can create a Delaware

shell corporation that can funnel the $ 10 million to the nonprofit. And

when the nonprofit discloses its donors to the IRS (as the law

requires), all the taxman sees on the donor line is the shell

corporation. Owens says it's not IRS policy to figure out who's behind a

particular shell corporation. What's more, the IRS' audit rate for

tax-exempt nonprofits is less than 1 percent. "There are a lot of ways

that IRS filings can avoid disclosure of the actual source of funds," he

says.

Complicated as it may sound, the use of shell corporations isn't so

implausible. Last year, Edward Conard, a former partner and colleague of

Mitt Romney's at Bain Capital, used

a newly created shell corporation called W Spann LLC to anonymously

funnel $ 1 million to the pro-Romney super-PAC Restore Our Future.

Satirist Stephen Colbert lampooned this shell game

by creating an anonymous shell corporation called "Anonymous Shell

Corporation" for the purpose of shoveling dark money to his super-PAC,

Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow.

Conard outed himself because his shell corporation gave to a

super-PAC, which publicly discloses its donors. When the super-PAC

released its donor records, reporters investigated. But if Conard's W

Spann LLC gave to a dark-money nonprofit, the public would never know

and the press couldn't raise a ruckus. Reform advocates say the

possibility of foreign money being routed into US elections by shell

corporations underscores the need for politically active nonprofits like

Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS and the pro-Obama Priorities USA to disclose

their donors. "How do you protect from foreign money working its way

into campaigns?" asks Fred Wertheimer, president of the pro-reform group

Democracy 21. "It's extremely hard to do without public disclosure."

For 501(c)(4) nonprofits, also known as "social welfare"

organizations, which include some of the biggest 2012 spenders, there's a

big upside to banking foreign money that's not for pure

politics, according to Owens. Tax law says 501(c)(4)s can't make

politics their primary purpose, and so these groups carefully track

their spending so that more goes toward ostensibly nonpolitical

activities than toward politics. An injection of nonpolitical foreign

cash, Owens says, frees up other American money for overtly political

ads or mailers. "US donors are going to be incentivized to give money to

defeat Obama or elect Obama or elect Romney or defeat Romney," he says.

"They're not going to give money about why you should defend 20-ounce

sodas in New York." Friendly foreign donors might.

Officials with some of the most influential nonprofits dismissed

concerns about foreign money. Jonathan Collegio, a spokesman for

Crossroads GPS, notes that the nonprofit's donation policy

states that Crossroads "does not accept contributions from foreign

nationals." Priorities USA, the pro-Obama nonprofit founded by former

Obama White House aides Bill Burton and Sean Sweeney, also requires donors

to certify that they're American citizens or legal US residents to

donate. Chris Fleming, a spokesman for the American Federation of

State, County, and Municipal Employees, says it gets no money from

foreign sources. Mark McCullough, a spokesman for the Service Employees

International Union, says its union members in Canada do pay dues, but

that that money is kept separate from the union's political fund.

Spokespeople for the tea-party-aligned nonprofit Freedomworks, Americans

for Prosperity, and the AFL-CIO did not respond to requests for

comment.

In 2010, ThinkProgress, a blog affiliated with the liberal Center for American Progress, sent shock waves through Washington when it accused the US Chamber of Commerce of funding political ads with money from foreign businesses. A Chamber spokesman told FactCheck.org

that it kept foreign money separate from its political honeypot but

declined to give any details on how the funds are segregated. The

accusations went viral enough that President Obama weighed in, saying

that "groups that receive foreign money are spending huge sums to

influence American elections, and they won't tell you where the money

for their ads comes from."

In the early 1990s, then-Republican National Committee chair Haley Barbour used a phony think tank called the National Policy Forum

to funnel $2.2 million from Hong Kong businessman Ambrous Young into

the RNC's coffers for 1994 and 1996 elections. Barbour faced a grilling

from Senate investigators, but ultimately avoided punishment. The story

of Barbour's scheme, Sen. John Glenn (D-Ohio) said

in 1998, "is the only one so far where the head of a national political

party knowingly and successfully solicited foreign money, infused it

into the election process, and intentionally tried to cover it up."

Owens says the Barbour-Hong Kong scandal illustrates the ease by

which foreign money can find its way into American elections. And he

believes foreign money will come into play again this election cycle.

"We've been in this cesspool before," he says. "Now you've got more

incentive to do it, and I have to believe someone's doing it."

http://www.motherjones.com/pol...

paulejb
paulejb

outsider2011,

"However, you're trying to wrap it around ACA - which has nothing to do with wanting people to die."

-------------------------------------------------

The whole premise of ObamaCare is letting people die. That is why it cuts $500 billion from Medicare.

outsider2011
outsider2011

 Shouldn’t Mitt Romney be ahead by now?

Mitt Romney was speaking in a slow, measured cadence from a packed

and steamy auditorium at Des Moines Central Campus High School on

Wednesday. “We’re worried about the drought,” Romney said, “and are

looking for more rain.”

It is an open question whether

presidential candidates have a special relationship with the Almighty,

but at least Romney was in “gaffe-free” territory, it being unlikely

that there were many pro-drought activists ready to pounce.

And Romney soon ended the “localizing” of his remarks and reverted to his stump speech.

“President Obama came in with a lot of promises,” he said. “But it is now 42 straight months with unemployment above 8 percent.”

The unemployment rate under Obama hit a high of 10 percent in October

2009 and has never done better than 8.1 percent during any full month

of his presidency. (It was 7.6 percent in January 2009, but Obama didn’t

become president until the 20th of that month.)

And as has been pointed out many times, no president since FDR has been reelected with unemployment greater than 7.2 percent.

Further, more than 60 percent of Americans feel the nation is on the “wrong track” under Obama.

I could list other gloomy figures for Obama, but they all leave me

with one question: So why is Obama still ahead in the polls? And not

just in national polls, but also in key states that are needed for an

Electoral College victory.

Shouldn’t Romney be wiping the floor with Obama? By the measurements

Romney uses again and again in his speeches — prolonged high

unemployment, a failed economy and the unpopularity of “Obamacare” —

shouldn’t Americans be rallying around Romney by a significant majority

by now?

After all, how long can Romney wait to catch fire? The election is

only about three months away. True, Romney gets the opportunity to make a

stirring convention speech — but so does Obama. True, Romney gets the

opportunity to make an invigorating choice for his running mate, but

Obama has already selected Joe Biden, who has shown himself to be a

vigorous and popular campaigner.

True, the events that, in my opinion, actually could turn things

around — the presidential debates — lie ahead in October. But there is

little to suggest that Romney will be a dead-bang winner in those.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/s...