Biden Cartoon

With lead dipping in early states, Trump touts overall dominance, unconventional foreign policy

Donald Trump, front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination, on Sunday steam-rolled a new poll showing his lead slipping in early-voting states, while touting his overall lead and his own brand of foreign policy.
Trump holds a 5-point lead in Iowa and New Hampshire among Republican voters, according to a Wall Street Journal/NBC News/Marist poll released Sunday.
However, his 24-percent support in first-in-the-nation Iowa among Republican caucus-goers is five percentage points less than it was last month. And his 21-percent support among New Hampshire Republicans is down from 28 percent.
“I'm winning everything,” Trump told ABC’s “This Week,” adding that a new poll in Florida shows he’s leading GOP primary rivals Jeb Bush, the state’s former governor, and Marco Rubio, a Florida senator.
“It’s been amazing. Texas, winning. Winning everything. Winning every state. Winning every national poll and big lead,” the provocative, billionaire businessman continued.
Trump said in a pre-taped interview for NBC’s “Meet the Press” that he’s “leading by a lot in every poll” including those in Texas, North Carolina and South Carolina.
He also continued to put forth his unconventional approach to solving Middle East problems after suggesting last week that Russia, now overtly launching airstrikes in Syria, will destroy Islamic State fighters in that country.
“This is usually not me talking because I’m very proactive. I’d sit back and see what’s going on,” Trump told NBC, arguing the mix of terror groups, supporters for the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad and rebel forces is now too complicated to decipher.
When pressed during the NBC interview, Trump suggested that the world would be better off had dictators Muammar Qaddafi and Saddam Hussein not been removed from Libya and Iraq, respectively.
“Of course it would be,” said Trump, calling Libya “a disaster” and Iraq “a mess.”
In sharp contrast to his repeated criticism of President Obama’s foreign policy, Trump appeared Sunday to agree with the president that Russian President Vladimir Putin is making a mistake by getting increasingly involved in Syria.
“He’ll get bogged down,” Trump said, arguing that the former Soviet Union’s involvement in Afghanistan sent the communist nation into bankruptcy.
On Friday, Obama predicted Putin’s heightened involvement would get Russia stuck in a "quagmire."
However, Obama suggested he was willing to work with Putin, while Trump said, “I don’t trust him at all.”

Biden suggests GOP and other presidential candidates are 'homophobes'

Vice President Joe Biden, who is considering a 2016 presidential run, on Saturday pledged his full support for gay and transgender equality while suggesting Republican and other White House candidates are “homophobes.”
Speaking at the Human Rights Campaign’s annual gala in Washington, Biden said gays and lesbians shouldn’t fear Americans trying to undo gay marriage and other advances because the country has moved beyond homophobia.
"There's homophobes still left,” he continued to laughter and applause, in his keynote address. “Most of them are running for president, I think."
His speech followed a morning address by front-running Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton who warned hundreds of activists and others in attendance about the potential danger of electing Ben Carson or other GOP candidates.
“We’re going to face some ridiculousness especially from our friends in the GOP,” she said. “In fact it’s already begun. Ben Carson says that marriage equality is what caused the fall of the Roman Empire.”
She also said Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, another 2016 GOP candidate, “slammed a political opponent for marching in a (gay) pride parade.”
The so-called LGBT community and the Human Rights Campaign will be an important voting bloc in the 2016 White House race, particularly in the Democratic primary.
The group contributed roughly $1.17 million in the 2014 election cycle, mostly to the Democratic Party and its candidates, committees and leadership PACs and to Democratic-leaning outside spending groups, according to OpenSecrets.org.
“If any one of them heaven forbid were ever to be elected president, they will do their best to threaten you and their families. Every single Republican candidate for president is against marriage equality,” said Clinton, who vows to make gay rights a key part of her presidency.
Her statements mark a clear political evolution, considering she opposed same-sex marriage for more than two decades in public life as first lady, senator and presidential candidate.
As recently as this year, Clinton said she personally supported gay marriage but that the issue was best left for states to decide -- a position held by most of the Republican presidential field.
Since then, she has placed equal rights at the forefront of her campaign, in part a reflection of the growing political and financial strength of the gay community in Democratic politics.
Biden also threw his unequivocal support behind letting transgender people serve openly in the U.S. military, as the Obama administration considers whether and when to lift the longstanding ban.
His declaration goes further than anything the Obama administration has said before, evoking memories of when Biden outpaced President Obama in endorsing gay marriage. Although the White House says Obama supports a Pentagon review aimed at ending the transgender ban, neither Obama nor the military has said definitively that the policy will be changed.
Biden also declared transgender rights to be "the civil rights issue of our time."
He reportedly could make his decision by this week about whether to run.
Transgender rights were a commanding focus at the group's gathering this year.
With gay marriage now law of the land nationwide, many gay rights activists have turned their attention to transgender issues, which have burst into the public spotlight only recently.
Biden won praise for endorsing gay marriage in 2012 ahead of Obama and Clinton, becoming the highest elected official to support the politically charged issue.
Vermont Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, another Democratic candidate, is also aggressively courting LGBT voters' support and working.
Clinton had been the Human Rights Campaign's first choice to keynote the dinner, but she turned it down when she was booked on "Saturday Night Live" for the same evening. The group also asked Obama to speak, then invited Biden when Obama was unavailable.
Although Biden has enjoyed strong support from gay groups, many prominent gay Democrats have committed to Clinton, who drew loud cheers whenever her face appeared in videos played before Biden's speech.

Asian-American rock band fights to trademark 'disparaging' name

                                           Politically Correct Changing of America.

An Asian-American rock band called The Slants asked a federal appeals court last week to trademark its name even though the government says it disparages Asians.
The group argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Friday that it has a First Amendment right to trademark the name because offensive speech or ethnic slurs cannot be censored by the government, Reuters reported. The case is being watched closely because it could affect an appeal brought by the NFL’s Washington Redskins after its trademarks were canceled by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on the grounds that the team’s name disparaged Native Americans.
The Slants frontman Simon Tam told Reuters that while most people today believe “Redskins” is offensive, few Asian Americans believe “Slants” is. He said the band, which plays "Chinatown" dance rock, named itself The Slants as a way to reclaim the racial slur.
The band sued after they tried to register the name with the patent agency and it was rejected. Federal law prohibits trademarks which may be considered disparaging.
Their appeal was dismissed by a three-judge appellate panel, leading to a rare “en banc” review by the circuit’s full slate of 12 judges.
During Friday’s oral arguments, the judges appeared evenly divided, with several expressing skepticism of the patent office’s powers to determine what is offensive, Reuters reported.
Judge Kimberly Moore asked what would happen if the government started rejecting copyrights for controversial art or other expressive works as it is doing with trademarks.
Would there be “no more porn? No more crucifixes in urine?” she asked alluding to a controversial photo many Christians found offensive.
The band’s lawyer Ronald Coleman told the judges the First Amendment “requires all speech, no matter how offensive, not be restricted or gate-kept in any way,” according to Reuters.
Justice Department attorney Daniel Terry countered that the law governing trademark registrations does not violate the First Amendment, Reuters said. Its purpose is not “to help people to make a political statement or prevent people from making political statements,” he said.

Hillary Clinton to push new gun control proposals, executive action expanding background checks

Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton will propose new gun control measures, including a vow to employ executive action to expand background checks for firearms sellers at gun shows and online.
Clinton will unveil her plans Monday during a campaign swing through New Hampshire. Her campaign says her proposals include a repeal of legislation shielding gun manufacturers, distributors and dealers from most liability suits, even in the case of mass shootings like the one that killed nine students and teachers at a community college on Thursday.

The proposals mark an attempt by Clinton to make up ground among the liberal wing of the Democratic party against her closest rival, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. While Sanders has wooed the Democratic base with his liberal positions on issues like income inequality and college debt, he's struggled to defend a more mixed record on gun legislation--a reflection, he says, of his rural, gun-friendly home-state. Sanders backed all the Democratic gun bills brought up in Congress after the Sandy Hook shooting in 2012. But in 1993, he voted against the landmark Brady handgun bill, which imposed a five-day waiting period for gun purchasers, and he backed the 2005 legislation granting legal immunity to many in the gun industry.
Sanders now says he supports banning assault weapons and closing the so-called "gun show loophole" that exempts private, unlicensed gun sales from background checks.
Clinton, meanwhile, has made strict gun laws a centerpiece of her presidential campaign. Clinton has emerged as one of the fiercest proponents of tougher gun control after a series of shootings over the past several months has reignited debate over gun laws on the presidential campaign

"What is wrong with us, that we cannot stand up to the NRA and the gun lobby, and the gun manufacturers they represent?" Clinton said on Friday in Florida. "This is not just tragic. We don't just need to pray for people. We need to act and we need to build a movement. It's infuriating."
Clinton also used the event to slam Republican lawmakers, who, she said, "refuse to do anything" about mass shootings.
"We need to make every politician who sides with [the NRA] to look in the eyes of parents whose kids have been murdered," she said. "The GOP counts on a dedicated group that scares politicians and says 'We will vote against you' ... So we will take them on. We took them on in 90s and we will do again."

The proposals mark an attempt by Clinton to make up ground among the liberal wing of the Democratic party against her closest rival, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. While Sanders has wooed the Democratic base with his liberal positions on issues like income inequality and college debt, he's struggled to defend a more mixed record on gun legislation--a reflection, he says, of his rural, gun-friendly home-state. Sanders backed all the Democratic gun bills brought up in Congress after the Sandy Hook shooting in 2012. But in 1993, he voted against the landmark Brady handgun bill, which imposed a five-day waiting period for gun purchasers, and he backed the 2005 legislation granting legal immunity to many in the gun industry.
Sanders now says he supports banning assault weapons and closing the so-called "gun show loophole" that exempts private, unlicensed gun sales from background checks.
Clinton, meanwhile, has made strict gun laws a centerpiece of her presidential campaign. Clinton has emerged as one of the fiercest proponents of tougher gun control after a series of shootings over the past several months has reignited debate over gun laws on the presidential campaign

Carly Cartoon

Team Fiorina responds to report trying to tie few donations from HP employees to candidate’s time as CEO

Carly Fiorina’s campaign is pushing back against a published report suggesting the candidate’s tenure running Hewlett-Packard was so bad that no former employee wants to donate to her 2016 White House bid.
Fiorina raised $1.7 million from the May 5 start of her campaign until June 30, the end of the first filing period. However, just two people who contributed during that time identified themselves as Hewlett-Packard executives, according to the most recent Federal Election Commission filings.
The donations were made by former board member Ann Livermore and husband Thomas Livermore, who each gave $2,700.
A Sept. 30 story in The Daily Beast suggested the dearth of support from employees speaks volumes about Fiorina’s legacy at the computer-technology giant, despite the Republican candidate touting herself on the campaign trail as a fearless and overall successful chief executive at Hewlett-Packard from 1999 to 2005.
“The lack of early financial support from almost anyone associated with Hewlett-Packard is hard to square with Fiorina’s own description of her achievements there,” reads one part of the story.
Fiorina spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores said Friday that the story is another attempt to belittle Fiorina’s business chops.
“The liberal media is once again showing that they will hide facts and mislead readers as long as it fits their narrative,” she told Foxnews.com.
The story also points out that no contributions were made by Meg Whitman, Hewlett-Packard’s current chief executive and a former California GOP gubernatorial candidate, nor any members of the company’s senior leadership team and board of directors during Fiorina’s tenure, with one exception.
The campaign points out that most of the $1.7 million raised early in the campaign was in small donations and that listing one’s occupation when contributing is not a legal requirement.
As for HP executives, there are currently no members left over from Fiorina’s tenure and they tend to stay “politically neutral” during elections, the campaign also argued.
“I don’t think it is an issue for her,”  GOP strategist Mark Corallo said Friday.
He said Fiorina’s CEO credentials got a big boost in August when former board member Tom Perkins took out a full-page advertisement in The New York Times saying Fiorina was a strong steward of HP through the dotcom bust and that he regretted voting to fire her.
“Carly’s vision and execution not only helped to save HP but made it a strong, more versatile company that could compete in the changing technology sector,” said Perkins, co-founder of the California venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers.
Corallo said Perkin’s praise is like gold in the business world and should count for something in the political arena, too.
“The guy is a legend,” he said. “For him to come out and say ‘I was wrong and I’m supporting her for president,’ I think that says more to me than any middle manager at HP giving 50, 100 or 1,000 (dollars) or whatever.”
Fiorina’s time at HP has dogged her politically since her failed 2010 bid to unseat California Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer.
She led the charge to acquire Compaq, which barely got 50 percent of the board and shareholder approval and has since been pilloried as unwise. And 30,000 people were laid off under her watch.
More recently, primary opponents such as Donald Trump have raised the issue of her business acumen at HP.
"The company is a disaster and continues to be a disaster," Trump said during the Sept. 16 primary debate. "When Carly says the revenues went up, that's because she bought Compaq. It was a terrible deal, and it really led to the destruction of the company."
Fiorina responded by saying that she grew the business from roughly $44 billion to $90 billion and had other successes in the middle of the biggest technology recession in 25 years.
“You can’t fudge the numbers,” she said on the stage. “We went from lagging behind to leading in every product category in every market segment.”
Fiorina’s performance led to a boost in poll numbers. She is now at 11.8 percent, behind Trump and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson in the GOP primary field, in an averaging of polls by the nonpartisan website RealClearPolitics.
But it is not yet clear whether her rise will result in a fundraising boon or if more HP employees and executives have opened up their wallets for their former chief executive officer.
The next quarter filings, July 1 to Sept. 30, are due by the campaigns on Oct. 15.  

GOP House leadership race intensifies with Chaffetz mentioned, McCarthy counting every vote

If you want to know how well a member of the congressional leadership is fairing, check their fingernails. Inspect the cuticles. Peer at the epidermis. Any hangnails? Are they in need of a manicure?
Former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss, knows a lot about the rigors of serving in congressional leadership.
And political palmistry.
“I kept noticing, I kept getting these ridges on my fingernails,” said Lott during a visit to the Capitol this week.
Lott sought out a doctor.
“I said, ‘What is this?’ He said, ‘Well, that’s stress,’ ” said Lott, recalling the conversation.
We already knew that candidates seeking a promotion in the House Republican leadership ranks were battling tooth and nail after Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, announced his resignation.  Perhaps with an emphasis on the nail. This brings a whole new spin to the term “nail biter.”
Lott was a member of the House or Senate leadership for about 17 of the 34 years he served in Congress. He served as House minority whip, Senate majority whip, Senate majority leader, Senate minority leader, Senate majority leader (again) before concluding his tour as Senate minority whip.
And Lott lived the perils of leadership. There’s the pressure. The second-guessing. The infighting. Every word scrutinized and parsed. It’s a lot like the current firestorm embroiling House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, a California Republican and the frontrunner to succeed Boehner.
McCarthy suggested on the Fox News Channel that House Republicans empaneled the chamber’s Select Committee on Benghazi strictly to quash the presidential aspirations of Democrat Hillary Clinton. And that sent the House into a tizzy.
McCarthy’s line was an offhanded comment like the one that swatted Lott from his majority leader perch in December 2002.
It was the 100th birthday party in the Dirksen Senate Office Building for the late-Sen. Strom Thurmond, R-S.C.  Thurmond sought the presidency in 1948 on the Dixiecrat ticket that championed state’s rights and segregation.
“When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him,” Lott opined at the Thurmond soiree. “We’re proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over the years, either,”
Lott’s apparent backing of Thurmond’s once-segregationist politics torpedoed him from the majority leader’s suite by Christmas.
“It’s windy when you are in the leadership in the House and Senate,” Lott said.
He says when you serve in leadership, someone is always coming for you. Always putting you on the spot. He recounted efforts of political foes who checked into the fidelity of his marriage and his personal finances.
“What did they finally get me with? My own words,” Lott exclaimed.
Lott’s run in leadership in both the House and Senate is remarkable because of its longevity. But you can’t avoid the controversy.
“In the leadership, you take on barnacles like a ship at sea and they start to weight you down after battle,” he said. “Once you get in the leadership, there ain’t no such thing as purity.”
This is why there is discord in the Republican ranks over McCarthy. The House Republican Conference will vote behind closed doors on Thursday to tap a speaker-designate.
But it’s the full House that elects the speaker. House rules dictate that the successful candidate command not just the most votes -- but an absolute majority of those casting ballots.
Upon Boehner’s resignation, the House will have 434 seats. That means the magic number -- if everyone votes for a candidate by name -- is 218. With 246 Republicans in the House by that point, the next GOP Speaker can only lose 28 votes.
Boehner lost 25 Republicans in the January speaker vote. Think those who voted for someone besides Boehner aren’t more revved up now than they were over the winter?
“Nobody has 218 today for speaker,” said Rep. Tim Huelskamp, a Kansas Republican and often an antagonistic voice when it comes to the GOP leadership. In January, Huelskamp cast his speaker ballot for Rep. Dan Webster, a Florida Republican who is running again.
Huelskamp says Republicans are watching McCarthy closely after the Benghazi declaration.
“Those comments were not helpful,” he said. “I don’t think that got him one vote.”
Another GOP source who asked not to be identified said some Republicans are looking for an “excuse” to vote against McCarthy. And they may have found it.
“Kevin is dealing with some very thin margins on the floor” in the speakership vote, said Rep. David Jolly , R-Fla., adding the Benghazi comment “took its toll.”
“It would be helpful, given the way (McCarthy’s Benghazi remarks were) interpreted if the majority leader clarified his remarks,” said Rep. Scott Rigell, R-Va., who also voted for Webster in January.
McCarthy tried to do just that Thursday night during an appearance on Fox’s “Special Report with Bret Baier.”
“I did not intend to imply in any way that the work (of the Benghazi Committee) was political,” McCarthy said.
Congressional observers generally panned McCarthy’s appearance, saying it failed to clean up the mess. One GOP source suggested that McCarthy had failed one of his first tests as a speaker candidate. When asked if he had the necessary 218 votes, McCarthy replied “We’re very close, yes.”
A failure to secure 218 votes on the first ballot for speaker would be a blow to McCarthy  -- even if he’s ultimately successful.
A second or third ballot for speaker immediately diminishes his political prowess. It exposes vulnerabilities and reflects the volatility of House Republicans. No vote for speaker has gone to a second ballot since 1923. And if McCarthy does emerge the victor, it might not be for long.
“If he’s lucky, he gets a two-week honeymoon,” said one senior Republican.
“I give him six months,” augured one lawmaker.
On Wednesday, the House voted to avoid a government shutdown. Only 91 Republicans voted yes. Democrats, as is customary these days in the House, carried the way with 186 yeas. McCarthy voted aye. Webster voted nay. Some conservatives viewed that roll call tally as a possible litmus test for speaker.
Oh. And House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, voted nay.
Chaffetz is now tinkering with running for speaker, potentially disrupting the entire race. Earlier in the week, he called for McCarthy to apologize for what he said about Benghazi. He also advocated Benghazi committee Chairman Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., for majority leader.
Chaffetz might not be able to command more votes than McCarthy in the closed-door conference vote or on the floor. But he can discombobulate the entire state of affairs.
To wit: The ballot for speaker in the Republican conclave is secret. But the GOP announces the vote tallies. How can Republicans proceed to a vote for speaker later this month if McCarthy or anyone else receives fewer than 218 backers in the conference meeting?
Moreover, presuming McCarthy commands the most votes for speaker in the conference, how can Republicans immediately vote for a prospective vacancy in the majority leader’s slot when it’s not clear that the current majority leader has the votes to prevail in the speaker vote the floor?
No one has the answers to these questions right now.
There’s a reason why other GOP stalwarts like House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, Wisconsin; Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling, Texas;  and even Gowdy aren’t pursuing any leadership position now.
“Where’s the varsity?” asked one House Republican.
Here’s the answer.
“This isn’t a manageable conference right now,” said one House Republican. “We’re too fratricidal.”
In other words, respected lawmakers aren’t pursuing a position in the GOP ranks because the rank-and-file will eat them alive -- perhaps immediately.
On Friday, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew sent a letter to Congress, begging lawmakers to raise the debt ceiling by November 5.
“Without sufficient cash, it would be impossible for the United States of America to meet all of its obligations for the first time in our history,” Lew posited.
An increase in the debt limit is one of the most-toxic votes a member of Congress can take. A failure to do so could call into question the credit-worthiness of the U.S. to say nothing of triggering a global financial shock.
Anyone in leadership -- or pursuing leadership -- is on the hottest of seats right now.
So why would McCarthy put himself through this?
“It was the only chance he has to be speaker, if only for a short period of time,” one lawmaker said.
And what about those passing on a leadership bid now?
“Kevin McCarthy has had this opportunity cast upon him and he knows it will shorten his career,” said Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, R-Neb. “It could be seen as an act of humility and leadership character.”
With such a rambunctious group, how could anyone run the House with authority? If the chamber does elect McCarthy, Trent Lott thinks he knows how he would succeed.
“He worked with Bill Thomas, the most-impossible person to work for,” said Lott with a laugh.
Thomas is the former House Ways and Means Committee chairman. McCarthy served as Thomas’s top aide in his California congressional district. McCarthy won Thomas’s congressional seat when his mentor retired. Thomas was smart as a whip and wielded a steady hand on the House’s tax-writing panel. He was also known for sporting one of the most acerbic, caustic temperaments of any lawmaker in the House.
McCarthy’s nature is a polar opposite of Thomas’s. McCarthy is genial. A backslapper. Inviting. Non-confrontational. Funny. Some ask if that’s what the House needs now. Can McCarthy play tough with Tea Party lawmakers? Will he just go-along-to-get-along with Republicans, inviting major standoffs on key issues this fall. Can he spar with Democrats, namely House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
“She goes for the kill when she senses weakness,” said one lawmaker. “You can’t show weakness with her.”
So why would anyone want this job, be it McCarthy, Webster or Chaffetz? Why would House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., or Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price, R-Ga., want to succeed McCarthy as majority leader?