Yes. Has President Obama failed younger voters, as Mitt Romney claims? “When you look at fifty percent of the kids coming out of college today can’t find a job or can’t find a job which is consistent with their skills, how in the world can you be supporting a president that’s led to that kind of an economy? And then the debt that’s been amassed that they’re going to have to pay off all their lives. . . . I think this is a time when young people are questioning the support they gave to President Obama three-and-a-half years ago. He promised bringing the country together; that sure hasn’t happened. He promised a future with good jobs and good opportunity; that hasn’t happened. And the pathway that he pursued is one which has not worked.”
No. “Does the President Have the Will to End Assad’s Atrocities in Syria?”
Yes. Is Obama’s economic policy incoherent? “When you strip out all of the excessive and grandiose rhetoric, what the president is attempting to argue in these speeches is that the keys to higher economic growth in the United States are higher marginal tax rates on the successful, no reforms to entitlement programs and more government spending on selected ‘investments.’ To say that this is a pathetic plan for growth would be to give it too much credit.”
No. Is Ed Whelan against openly gay judges? “Last week, a Daily Caller reporter asked me by e-mail ‘about how Chris Christie’s judicial appointments [note the plural] in NJ could hurt him with conservatives.’ In response, I provided by e-mail the statement that ended up in this weekend Daily Caller article. Unfortunately, the context in which my quoted statement is put—the lead-in points out that [Bruce A.] Harris is ‘openly gay’ and has ‘compar[ed] opposition to gay marriage with segregation,’ and it doesn’t mention [Phillip H.] Kwon at all — obscures my focus on concerns of judicial philosophy. When it comes to judging, I would much rather have a gay judge who is genuinely committed to originalism and judicial restraint than a heterosexual judge who isn’t.” My original post on the topic is here.
Yes. Is postal “reform” a bad idea? “A key Senate Republican is seeking to block a postal reform bill he argues would require the government to borrow billions more, at a time when the government is already borrowing $1 trillion a year. Senate Budget Committee ranking member Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) said the Senate legislation would require the U.S. Treasury to pay back $11.4 billion to the U.S. Postal Service. This is the amount that the USPS overpaid to its own employee retirement system, but Sessions argues that money should still be offset by cutting spending elsewhere.”
No. Is this consistent? “Romney, senior advisers David Plouffe and David Axelrod intoned time and again, was a political shape-shifter who lacked any real moral or political ‘core.’ The slogan was the Obama talking point for months. But Clinton, echoing survey data presented by Obama’s own pollster Joel Benenson, quietly argued that the empty-core approach failed to capitalize on what they see as Romney’s greatest vulnerability: An embrace of a brand of tea party conservatism that turns off Hispanics, women and moderate independents.” I guess it is whatever the market will bear.
Yes. Are the entitlement programs a mess? “Medicare and Social Security, the nation’s two largest programs, have long-term deficits of $63.3 trillion, according to annual reports from the programs’ trustees released today. The reports underscore the dire need to reform the programs if the nation wants to avert a fiscal crisis. Though most news reports will focus on the trust fund exhaustion date (2024 for Medicare and 2033 for Social Security) the reality is that the trust fund is a farce.. . . Unfortunately, with a predictable crisis staring us in the face that promises to wreck the futures of younger Americans, Obama has spent his first term avoiding dealing with the problem so he has a free hand to attack his Republican opponents.” Or maybe they to attack him for gross irresponsibility.
No. Does anyone care? “Former Republican candidate Jon Huntsman took a battle axe to his own party, comparing it to China’s Communist Party and criticizing its standard bearer in a wide-ranging interview at the 92nd Street Y Sunday night.” he later sort of backed off that. Whatever.
Maybe. Is there hope that immigration posturing and rhetoric will cool? “Net migration from Mexico has plummeted to zero thanks to changing demographic and economic conditions on both sides of the border, a new study shows, even as political battles over illegal immigration heat up and the issue heads to the U.S. Supreme Court. After four decades that brought 12 million Mexican immigrants — more than half of them illegally — to the U.S., the curtain has come down on the biggest immigration wave in modern times.”