アメリカトップ政治家の教養度
Obama’s Love Letters: The Power of the Poetry Nerds
By Massimo Calabresi | May 3, 2012 | 2inShare0
I don’t know if it means anything–it may mean nothing–but two of the most powerful people in the world, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, apparently spent a lot of time in college thinking, writing and/or speaking about T.S. Eliot’s Four Quartets.
For those familiar with English majors on American campuses in the quarter century from 1964-1989, this may be unsettling news. But before we spawn any conspiracy theories about a global takeover by surly, anemic stacks-dwellers–”If they can make you buy health insurance, they can make you read Lacan”–let’s consider the facts:
Last fall, in a post linking to our cover on Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State, I quoted the passage from Eliot’s East Coker that Clinton cited as a touchstone in her first major public speech at graduation from Wellesley in 1969. “There’s that wonderful line in East Coker by Eliot about there’s only the trying, again and again and again; to win again what we’ve lost before,” Clinton said at the time. The actual lines are:
…What there is to conquer
By strength and submission, has already been discovered
Once or twice, or several times, by men whom one cannot hope
To emulate—but there is no competition—
There is only the fight to recover what has been lost
And found and lost again and again: and now, under conditions
That seem unpropitious. But perhaps neither gain nor loss.
For us, there is only the trying. The rest is not our business.
Not bad. But that is tame stuff compared with Obama’s analysis of Eliot more than a decade later. We learn from the great David Maraniss in the Vanity Fair excerpt of his upcoming biography, Barack Obama: The Story, that our president went way deeper on Eliot as a 20-year-old at Columbia University in New York. In a letter to his then-girlfriend apparently responding to her deconstructionist interpretation of Eliot, Obama wrote:
Eliot contains the same ecstatic vision which runs from Münzer to Yeats. However, he retains a grounding in the social reality/order of his time. Facing what he perceives as a choice between ecstatic chaos and lifeless mechanistic order, he accedes to maintaining a separation of asexual purity and brutal sexual reality. And he wears a stoical face before this. Read his essay on Tradition and the Individual Talent, as well as Four Quartets, when he’s less concerned with depicting moribund Europe, to catch a sense of what I speak. Remember how I said there’s a certain kind of conservatism which I respect more than bourgeois liberalism—Eliot is of this type. Of course, the dichotomy he maintains is reactionary, but it’s due to a deep fatalism, not ignorance. (Counter him with Yeats or Pound, who, arising from the same milieu, opted to support Hitler and Mussolini.) And this fatalism is born out of the relation between fertility and death, which I touched on in my last letter—life feeds on itself. A fatalism I share with the western tradition at times.
OK, maybe we all will be reading (re-reading?) Lacan’s Four Fundamental Concepts in 2013. But if that makes you want to vote for Mitt Romney, you fail to see the full scope of the threat. Clinton and Obama ended up majoring in political science. Before he got his business and law degrees at Harvard, Willard Mitt Romney spent his time tracing the influence of Homer and Dante on 19th century thought as an English major at Brigham Young University.
射殺後、残された手紙から分かるビン・ラデンの頭の中
Bin Laden's letters reveal a terrorist losing control
By Ashley Fantz, CNN
updated 11:18 AM EDT, Fri May 4, 2012
Here are the documents. What do you think? Let us know in the comments section.
(CNN) -- A trove of never-before-seen letters by Osama bin Laden portray the terrorist leader as an irritated boss chiding his underlings for mistakes yet sure that they could pull off elaborate attacks against the United States.
U.S. Navy SEALs took the correspondence after they killed bin Laden in a raid on his Pakistan compound in May 2011. On Thursday, the Combating Terrorism Center at the U.S. Military Academy in West Point, New York, released 17 letters totaling 175 pages, with more documents to be made public later.
U.S. officials say that the documents found in the compound -- about 6,000 worth -- were written between September 2006 and April 2011 and were recovered from five computers, dozens of hard drives and more than 100 storage devices. The cache has been described as the single largest batch of senior terrorist material ever obtained.
CNN reviewed the released papers, which can be read in full here.
Taken as a whole, the letters suggest that al Qaeda senior leadership couldn't decide on how to move forward. What tactics should they use? Do they need better strategy? A segment of the records reveals that bin Laden was revamping al Qaeda's media strategy, particularly in the wake of the Arab Spring protests, a movement toward freer societies in the Middle East and North Africa. He wanted to launch a publicity campaign that would inspire those who had "not yet revolted."
As a leader, bin Laden reveals himself to be hot-tempered and annoyed that the terrorist network he built had too many uncontrollable affiliates around the globe. At one point, he demands that four senior figures in al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula write their own detailed self-reviews and send them to him.
1-6
As a man, he seemed given to the same vanities and tasteless musings of any aging power player. He was coloring his graying hair with Just for Men dye, taking Viagra and making bad jokes about having multiple wives.
But, at the same time, he wrote that he was concerned for at least one of the women and was also deeply worried that his adult sons were being watched and should be careful when traveling. In other points in the letters, bin Laden appears jealous of a Yemeni cleric whom followers had grown to admire.
In summer 2010, bin Laden appears so desperate to re-energize al Qaeda that he calls for admitting that attacking inside Muslim countries has been a mistake for which members should apologize. In urging more U.S. and U.S.-related targets, he wrote, "Making these mistakes is a great issue ... as a result the alienation of most of the nation from the Mujahidin.
"For the brothers in all the regions to apologize and be held responsible for what happened."
CNN terrorism analyst Peter Bergen was the only journalist to get early access to some of the documents while researching his new book "Manhunt: The Ten-Year Search for Bin Laden From 9/11 to Abbottabad." Bergen was also allowed inside the compound and saw the walls spattered with bin Laden's blood after a SEAL shot him.
Bergen described his reporting in an exclusive interview with CNN this week, suggesting that bin Laden was an "inveterate micromanager but was also someone almost delusional in his belief that his organization could still force a change in American foreign policies in the Muslim world."
But that didn't mean he lacked ambition.
Biden is totally unprepared for that post
Osama bin Laden on why he wanted to kill President ObamaBin Laden wanted to see another major terrorist attack occur in the United States and wanted to kill President Barack Obama and Gen. David Petraeus when he was the commander of international forces in Afghanistan. Bin Laden ordered that units be established at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan and in Pakistan to target planes carrying Petraeus or Obama.
Vice President Joseph Biden should not be attacked, he instructed.
If Obama were killed and Biden took control of the White House, bin Laden wrote, it would "lead the US into a crisis."
If Petraeus were killed, he reasoned, it would alter the course of the war.
Writing to one of his top lieutenants in 2010, he said he wanted "qualified brothers to be responsible for a large operation in the US."
He wanted high-ranking al Qaeda brass to nominate al Qaeda members distinguished by "good manners, integrity, courage and secretiveness, who can operate in the US."
Bin Laden still believed that attacks in the air worked well. He urged about 10 "brothers" -- preferably from the Gulf states -- to be sent to "study aviation" so they could carry out suicide attacks.
In an undated letter, unsigned but believed to have been written by bin Laden, the author likened the U.S. to a tree and its allies and cooperating Muslim countries as the branches. The writer explains that al Qaeda and its affiliates make up the saw that will slowly cut down the tree, after which its branches will die.
"Our abilities and resources, however, are limited, thus we cannot do the job quickly enough. The only option we are left with is to slowly cut that tree down by using a saw. Our intention is to saw the trunk of that tree, and never to stop until that tree falls down."
Bin Laden wrote that he was concerned that a "lack of coordination" was becoming a problem for the terrorist group. He warned against making "errors" like the ones that "happened easily" with 30-year-old Pakistani-American Faisal Shahzad, who attempted to detonate a car bomb in New York's Times Square on May 1, 2010. The bomb didn't go off, and Shahzad was arrested two days later, trying to leave the U.S. on a flight to Pakistan.
"It would be good if you coordinate with our brothers of the Pakistan and Afghanistan Taliban in regards to the external work, so that there is complete cooperation between us, and tell them that we started planning work inside America many years ago," bin Laden wrote in late May 2010 to an unknown recipient.
Al Qaeda had "gained experience in that field" and should know how the get the job done.
■A new media message
On the 10th anniversary of the September 11 attacks, bin Laden was concentrating on how to craft the perfect media message. He suggested that al Qaeda contact Al Jazeera.
"If al-Jazirah shows responsiveness, we should contact the correspondent of al-Jazirah Arabic and English and tell them that we are willing to cooperate with them in the area of covering the tenth anniversary by answering any questions that you think the public is interested in."
He wanted to approach media in the U.S. and perhaps push for a documentary that al Qaeda would help with.
"We should also look for an American channel that can be close to being unbiased, such as CBS, or other channel that has political motives that make it interested in broadcasting the point of view of al-Mujahidin," he wrote. "Then we can send to thee channel the material that we want the Americans to see.
"Tell them that we suggest that they make a documentary on this anniversary and we will provide them with printed, audio and video materials."
3-5
Bin Laden was so concerned about affiliate groups -- in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia -- that by 2010, he was even suggesting repackaging al Qaeda's brand.
Al Qaeda in Arabic means "The Base." It was first used in reference to muhajedeen who battled the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s.
Some of the newly released documents show that al Qaeda members were considering a more general "Jihad Group," kind of a one-size-fits-all Mayhem Inc. outfit.
"I plan to release a statement that we are starting a new phase to correct (the mistakes) we made; in doing so we shall reclaim, God willing, the trust of a large segment of those who lost trust in the jihadis," he wrote in a lengthy letter between July and October 2010 that was sent to one of his top lieutenants, Attiyatullah.
He says that "the brothers in all the regions" should "apologize and be held responsible for what happened."
Bin Laden was a tough boss. In one letter written between July and October 2010, he demanded that four senior figures within the affiliate al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula based in Yemen (his home country) write self-reviews of why their groups had made mistakes. One of those figures is radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaqi, by then an Internet "rock star" among jihadists.
■Too many franchises
If bin Laden were a CEO, he was dealing with far too many middle managers. He wrote that he was concerned about the al Qaeda franchise in Iraq killing too many civilians and consequently attracting too much heat from coalition forces.
It was a waste of energy to target governments, as al Qaeda in Iraq was doing, he said.
Bin Laden struggled to get his followers to focus instead on U.S. interests in non-Muslim states such as South Korea, "where we have no bases or partisans or Jihadist groups that could be threatened by danger." He also suggested targeting Americans in South Africa because it is outside the Islamic Maghreb.
"On (August) 7, 2010, he wrote to the leader of the brutal al-Shabaab militia in Somalia to warn that declaring itself part of al Qaeda would only attract enemies and make it harder to raise money from rich Arabs," Bergen noted.
But seven months later, al-Shabaab did just that, announcing a merger with the organization now headed by Ayman al-Zawahiri.
A U.S. intelligence bulletin after the announcement suggests that the relationship could undermine efforts by al-Shabaab supporters in the United States.
The letters also contain advice to the leader of Al-Shabaab not to identify his group as being part of the larger terrorist network so it wouldn't put off potential financial donors.
4-5
In addition to his faltering grip on al Qaeda's franchises, bin Laden's ideology was in jeopardy when the Arab Spring started in the Middle East and North Africa in 2011. Bin Laden called the movement toward more free and open societies in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and elsewhere a "formidable event" in the modern history of Muslims.
He wrote in April 2011 that he intended to use the media to deal with that.
Bin Laden wanted al Qaeda to launch a campaign in the Arab world, he wrote, to incite "people who have not yet revolted and exhort them to rebel against the rulers."
But he also wanted to invest in educating Muslims that they shouldn't settle for "half-solutions," according to the Combating Terrorism Center's analysis.
"Given that the enemies have knowledge of and experience with the Arabs and their history, they have learned that Arabs have dangerous qualities that make them suitable to quickly carry out the call to Jihad," he wrote.
The "enemies" have launched a "destructive media bombardment against Arab culture and their characteristics."
As proof, he offered that the BBC translates its stories in Arabic. He argued that China has more people than the Arab world, so why wouldn't the BBC give top priority to translating stories in Chinese?
"It was possible for the voice of the British Empire to reach 40% of the world's population through just its broadcast, but their primary concern was with destroying the Arabs via the media," he wrote.
■Attack of the drones
While he busied himself with crafting a clever media message, bin Laden was also concerned the U.S. drone strikes were hurting al Qaeda in Pakistan.
In October 20, 2010, he wrote, "I am leaning toward getting most of the brothers out of the area."
He continued, "We should leave the cars because they are targeting cars now, but if we leave them, they will start focusing on houses and that would increase the casualties of women and children."
He warned his men that they should "not meet on the road and move in their cars" and noted that "Americans have great accumulative experience in photographer in the area due to the fact that they have been doing it in the area for many years."
It's best to stick to rougher, more mountainous terrain that has rivers and trees, because those areas are harder to surveil, he wrote.
He reminded his followers to move "when the clouds are heavy." Concerned about the group's finances, he also urged them to discard bags that carry money in case the bags were carrying chips that might disclose the user's whereabouts.
He gave one more piece of advice: Don't speak on the phone or through the Internet.
It's best, he said, to communicate by letters.
CNN's Pam Benson, Peter Bergen, Tim Lister, Jamie Crawford, Suzanne Kelly, Nic Robertson, Mike Mount and Paul Cruickshank contributed to this report.
5-5
アメリカ政治とモルモン教
With or without Romney, D.C. a surprising Mormon stronghold
By Dan Gilgoff, CNN.com Religion Editor
May 12th, 2012 10:00 PM ET
Alexandria, Virginia (CNN) – A few hundred Mormons filed into a chapel just outside the Washington Beltway one recent Sunday to hear a somewhat unusual presentation: an Obama administration official recounting his conversion to Mormonism.
“I have never in my life had a more powerful experience than that spiritual moment when the spirit of Christ testified to me that the Book of Mormon is true,” Larry Echo Hawk told the audience, which stretched back through the spacious sanctuary and into a gymnasium in the rear.
Echo Hawk’s tear-stained testimonial stands out for a couple of reasons: The White House normally doesn’t dispatch senior staff to bare their souls, and Mormons hew heavily Republican. It’s not every day a top Democrat speaks from a pulpit owned by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
And yet the presentation by Echo Hawk, then head of the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs, is also a perfect symbol of a phenomenon that could culminate in Mitt Romney’s arrival at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue next year: The nation’s capital has become a Mormon stronghold, with Latter-day Saints playing a big and growing role in the Washington establishment.
The well-dressed crowd gathered for Echo Hawk’s speech was dotted with examples of inside-the-beltway Mormon power.
In one pew sits a Mormon stake president – a regional Mormon leader – who came to Washington to write speeches for Ronald Reagan and now runs a lobbying firm downtown.
Behind him in the elegant but plain sanctuary – Mormon chapels are designed with an eye toward functionality and economy – is a retired executive secretary of the U.S. Supreme Court.
A few pews further back, the special assistant to the U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan sits next to a local Mormon bishop who came to Washington to work for Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah and now leads a congressionally chartered foundation.
Mitt Romney, who would be the first Mormon president if elected, is the son of a cabinet secretary under Richard Nixon.＝写真
“In a Republican administration, there will be even more Mormons here,” whispers the bishop, Lewis Larsen, pointing out prominent Washingtonians around the chapel. “Every Republican administration just loads up with them.”
Regardless of which party controls the White House, Mormonism in Washington has been growing for decades.
When Larsen arrived in Washington in the early ’80s, there were a just handful of Mormon meetinghouses in northern Virginia, where he lives. Today, there are more than 25, each housing three separate congregations, or wards, as they’re known in the LDS Church.
“There’s been an absolute explosion in Mormon growth inside the beltway,” Larsen says before slipping out of the pew to crank the air conditioning for the swelling crowd.
1-8
The LDS Church says there are 13,000 active members within a 10-mile radius of Washington, though the area’s Mormon temple serves a much larger population – 148,000 Latter-day Saints, stretching from parts of South Carolina to New Jersey.
Signs of the local Mormon population boom transcend the walls of the temple and meetinghouses.
Crystal City, a Virginia neighborhood just across the Potomac River from Washington, has become so popular with young Mormons that it’s known as “Little Provo,” after the Utah city that’s home to church-owned Brigham Young University.
Congress now counts 15 Mormon members, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, according to the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. That means the 2% of the country that’s Mormon is slightly overrepresented on Capitol Hill.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, is the highest-placed elected Mormon in Washington.=写真
Even many Latter-day Saints joke about Washington’s “Mormon mafia” – referring to the number of well-placed LDS Church members across town – though they cringe at the thought of being seen as part of some cabal. (Echo Hawk, for his part, left the Obama administration a few weeks after his chapel presentation for a job in the LDS Church hierarchy).
“No one talks about Washington being an Episcopalian stronghold or a Jewish stronghold,” says Richard Bushman, a Mormon scholar at Columbia University. Talk of “Mormon Washington,” he says, “represents a kind of surprise that people who were thought of as provincial have turned up in sophisticated power positions.”
Bushman and other experts note that, despite Mormons’ growing political power, the official church mostly steers clear of politics. It’s hard to point to federal legislation or a White House initiative that bears distinctly Mormon fingerprints, while it’s easy to do the same for other faiths.
For example, the White House’s recent “compromise” on a rule that would have required religious groups to fund contraception for employees was mostly a reaction to pressure from Roman Catholic bishops.
Nonetheless, Mormon success in Washington is a testament to distinctly Mormon values, shedding light into the heart of one of America’s fastest-growing religions.
And though the official church is mostly apolitical, most rank-and-file Mormons have linked arms with the GOP. Romney’s own political evolution mirrors that trend.
Such forces help explain why Mormons’ beltway power is poised to grow even stronger in coming years, whether or not Romney wins the White House.
‘A ton of Mormon contacts’
For many Washington Mormons, religion plays a key role in explaining why they’re here.
Larsen, who sports a brown comb-over and tortoise shell glasses, arrived in Washington in the early 1980s as an intern for Hatch, also a Mormon.
He landed the internship courtesy of Brigham Young University, his alma mater. The Mormon school owns a four-story dorm on Pennsylvania Avenue, not too far from the White House, which houses 120 student interns each year. It’s the school’s largest such program in the nation.
2-8
“Part of our church’s tradition is to be connected with civic life, to make our communities better,” says BYU’s Scott Dunaway, who helps place students on Capitol Hill, at the Smithsonian and other Washington institutions. “We don’t believe in being reclusive.”
It’s a perfect characterization of Larsen. He grew up in Provo, in the shadow of BYU, and wanted to prove he could make it outside of Utah.
“Kids growing up in the LDS Church have been told, ‘Go ye out in the world and preach the gospel of Christ - don’t be afraid to be an example,’ ” Larsen said, sitting in the glass-doored conference room of the foundation he runs on K Street.
“So we are on our missions, converting people to Christianity,” he continued. “And coming to Washington, for me and probably for a lot of people, came out of that interest. We see it as our career, but also we’re going out to preach the word of Christ.”
For Larsen, that usually means correcting misinformation about Mormonism or explaining Mormon beliefs and practices – you really don’t drink coffee, ever? – over lunch with co-workers or at business functions, rather than on-the-job proselytizing.
He learned about integrating work and faith from Hatch. He was initially shocked to discover that the senator prays in his office each morning. Larsen and Hatch developed what the bishop calls a “father-son” relationship, with the intern rising up through the ranks to become Hatch’s chief Washington fundraiser.
“We would go on trips, and I’d quiz him on the plane: Why did the church do this? Why didn’t the church do this?” Larsen said. “He was like a tutor to me.”
Now, as the head of a foundation that educates teachers about the U.S. Constitution, the bishop helps other young Mormons with job leads and introductions. Larsen was appointed to the role by Hatch and the late U.S. Sen. Ted Kennedy.
Much of Washington’s Mormon professional network is still anchored by BYU, which operates a handful of big, well-connected alumni groups with major Washington chapters. The most prominent is BYU’s Management Society, a global organization whose biggest chapter is in Washington.
At the chapter’s recent alumni dinner, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was the guest of honor. She has strong ties to the Mormon community and has hired Mormons as top aides. Says Larsen: “Condi’s got a ton of Mormon contacts.”
Patrice Pederson also knows how to work a Rolodex. A lifelong political activist, she moved from Utah to Washington last year and soon tapped into BYU’s local network.
Pederson served as the U.S.-based campaign manager for Yeah Samake, a Mormon running for president in the West African nation of Mali.
Samake traveled frequently to the U.S. to raise money and build political support, so Pederson enlisted the help of BYU’s Management Society and other groups to host events for the candidate.
Both in Washington and across the U.S., many Mormons are watching his candidacy.
“Members of the church on Capital Hill were anxious to introduce the candidate to other members of Congress,” says Pederson, sipping an herbal tea (Mormons eschew black leaf teas) in a strip mall Starbucks near her apartment in Alexandria, Virginia.
3-8
“It’s cool to have a member of the church running for president in Africa.”
Beyond making connections, many Washington Mormons say the LDS Church provides an ideal proving ground for careers here.
Unlike most churches, it has no professional clergy; from the bishop to the organist, each role is filled by everyday Mormons, most of whom have other day jobs. As a result, Mormons take church leadership roles at an early age, speaking publicly at Sunday services almost as soon they learn to talk.
“My kids grew up in the church, and we get together for three hours on Sundays, and each member needs to get up and speak,” says U.S. Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah. “By the time they graduate, they have all these speaking assignments that other teenagers just don’t have.
U.S. Rep. Jason Chaffetz, a Utah Republican, says Mormonism provides ideal training for aspiring politicians.=写真
“For those who grow up in the Mormon church, they are taught skills that allow them to be successful in a tough city like Washington,” says Chaffetz, who converted to Mormonism shortly after college.
Young Mormons also hone leadership skills by serving missions away from home. The missions last from one and half to two years and happen when Mormons are in their late teens and early 20s and often include intensive foreign language training.
“Young Mormons are more formidable in public settings and international settings than others,” says Terryl Givens, a Mormon scholar at the University of Richmond. “Normally you would have to acquire more age and work experience before you feel comfortable and useful at NGOs and think tanks.”
Chaffetz, whose son is serving a mission in Ghana, says the experience is the perfect preparation for political careers.
“They learn rejection early on,” he says. “If you’re going to be in politics, that’s a pretty good attribute.”
Christina Tomlinson served her mission in nonexotic Fresno, California. But working with the Laotian community there, she acquired the foreign language skills that landed her first internship at the U.S. State Department.
“I look back at that and it’s nothing but divine providence,” Tomlinson says one night at an office building-turned-chapel in Crystal City, after a weekly discussion about Mormon teachings. “I would have never made those choices.”
When she arrived at her foreign service orientation in the late 1990s, Tomlinson was surprised to find that a half-dozen of her State Department colleagues were also Mormon. The thriving LDS community at State even runs its own e-mail list server so Latter-day Saints can find each other wherever in the world they’re stationed.
Like former presidential candidate Jon Huntsman, who used the Mandarin language skills acquired through a Mormon mission to Taiwan to help secure his job as President Barack Obama’s previous ambassador to China, Tomlinson leveraged her mission to get ahead at State, where she now serves as special assistant to the U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
“I’m basically the chief of staff for the president’s representative charged with implementing U.S. foreign policy towards Afghanistan and Pakistan,” she e-mailed on a recent plane ride back from the region.
Language skills acquired on a Mormon mission helped Christina Tomlinson get her start at the State Department.=写真
4-8
Like many Mormons, Tomlinson says her professional life is driven by a faith-based patriotism that sounds old-fashioned to modern ears: “I just really wanted to serve my country.”
But that distinctly Mormon patriotism was hard-won. From their very beginning, Mormons had tried to forge a special relationship with Washington. And for decades, they failed.
5-8
Joseph Smith, who founded Mormonism in the 1830s, petitioned the U.S. government to protect his fledgling religious community from the violent persecution it was experiencing, even meeting repeatedly with President Martin Van Buren.
But Washington refused, provoking Smith – who Mormons consider their founding prophet – to run for president himself in 1844. He was assassinated by an anti-Mormon mob in Missouri well before Election Day.
In the face of such attacks, Mormons fled west, to the territory that’s now Utah. But they continued to seek ties with Washington, dispatching representatives to the capital to lobby for statehood.
Congress refused to grant it. Instead, Uncle Sam disincorporated the LDS Church and sent the U.S. Army to police Mormon territory.
In the eyes of Washington, Latter-day Saints were flouting federal law by practicing polygamy. The feds saw the LDS Church as an undemocratic rival government that threatened Washington’s power.
Joseph Smith, Mormonism’s founding prophet, ran for president in 1844 but was killed before Election Day.=写真
Mormons would eventually ban polygamy, paving the way for Utah statehood in 1896. But Congress nonetheless refused to seat the new state’s Mormon senator, who also served as a top church official.
For four years, the U.S. Senate held hearings to grill U.S. Sen. Reed Smoot and other church leaders, alleging that Mormons continued to practice polygamy despite promises to the contrary.
“The political trial was as much a galvanizing cultural moment as was Watergate,” says Kathleen Flake, a scholar of Mormonism at Vanderbilt University in Tenneessee.
When Smoot was eventually seated – after the LDS Church took further steps to stamp out polygamy – he managed to become a Washington powerbroker. He would chair the Senate Finance Committee and act as a presidential adviser.
“He was Mr. Republican,” says Flake. “For a while there, he was the Republican Party.”
Smoot’s unflagging pursuit of legitimacy in Washington, despite the city’s bias against him and his faith, symbolizes what many call a uniquely Mormon appreciation for American civic life. It helps explain the Mormon fascination with Washington to this day.
It may seen counterintuitive, but Mormons’ early exposure to persecution at the hands of other Americans – aided, Mormons say, by the U.S. government – wound up strengthening their patriotic streak.
In the face of attacks, Mormons clung to the U.S. Constitution and its unprecedented guarantee of religious freedom. They distinguished between the document and those charged with implementing it.
Mormon scripture goes so far as to describe the U.S. Constitution as divinely inspired, establishing a unique environment in which Mormonism could emerge.
“Mormons are superpatriots,” says Columbia University’s Bushman. “Joseph Smith said that if the government was doing its job as laid out in the Constitution, it would protect Mormons from their enemies.”
Mormons began to shed their Utah-only siege mentality and fanned out in the early part of the 20th century. Their patriotic streak, which translated into military enlistments and applications for government jobs, led many to Washington.
That wave included J. Willard Marriott, the hotel chain founder, who launched his business career by opening an A&W root beer stand here. He would go on to forge the kind of deep political connections that would help make Willard “Mitt” Romney his namesake.
Washington’s Mormon community got another boost in the 1950s when President Dwight Eisenhower appointed a top church official, Ezra Taft Benson, as his agriculture secretary.
“Mormons took it as a sign of maybe, just maybe, we’re being accepted,” says Flake. “It signified a cultural acceptance of Mormonism. People thought Mormons believed weird things, but also that they were self-reliant, moral and good neighbors.”
As Mormons became more accepted, they became more upwardly mobile, landing in parts of the country that could sustain careers in commerce, academia and government - another reason Washington was a big draw.
By the time there were enough Mormons in the eastern U.S. to justify the construction of the first Mormon temple east of the Mississippi River, the church chose a site just outside Washington.
The temple opened in 1974, shortly after another high-profile Mormon – George Romney, Mitt’s father – left his post as Richard Nixon’s secretary of Housing and Urban Development.
“The Washington temple served as a symbol of the triumphant return of Mormonism to the east,” says Givens, the University of Richmond professor. “Mormons left from the point of a bayonet in the 1800s and the temple is this gigantic symbol that says ‘We’re back – and we’re back in the nation’s capital.’ ”
The Mormon temple outside Washington was the first such temple built east of the Mississippi River.=写真
Unlike Mormon meetinghouses, where members meet for Sunday worship, temples are grander buildings reserved for certain rites, such as proxy baptisms for the dead.
To this day, the first monument many Washington visitors see isn’t a federal landmark. It’s the massive Mormon temple, its Georgian marble towers and gold-leafed spires looming above the trees on the Washington Beltway like an otherworldly castle.
The temple houses a J. Willard Marriott-financed mural of Jesus Christ’s second coming, which features a picture of the Washington temple itself in the background.
“Are you implying that the millennium will begin in Washington?” a temple visitor once asked Marriott, referring to Jesus’ return.
Replied Marriott: “What better place is there?”
6-8
These days, the Mormon impulse toward Washington is often as much political as patriotic.
Patrice Pederson - the campaign manager for the Mormon running for president in Mali - made her first foray into politics at 15, hopping the bus from her home in the suburbs of Salt Lake City into town to intern with a Republican candidate for the U.S. House.
“I remember that when Bill Clinton was elected, I wore all black to school that day,” says Pederson, who was in junior high at the time. “I was mourning the death of liberty.”
When then-Vice President Al Gore visited Utah, Pederson protested his speech with a homemade poster that said “Blood, Guts & Gore – Healthcare’94.” (She can’t recall the poster’s exact meaning).
Pederson’s activism as a “total hardcore right-winger” continued into her 20s. She put off college at BYU to start a “pro-family” advocacy group aimed at lobbying foreign governments and the United Nations. The work brought her to Washington so frequently that she decided to relocate last year: “I had more friends here than in Utah.”
Pederson’s path to D.C. speaks to the growing Mormon/Republican alliance since the 1960s, driven largely by the emergence of social issues such as abortion and gay marriage and the rise of the Christian Right.
“In the 1950s and ’60s, Utah became Republican,” says Bushman. “It’s partly about being anti-communist, but it’s also a response to the 1960s and the decay of old-fashioned moral virtues. It’s an anti-1960s movement, and the Republicans seemed to be the party of old-fashioned virtues.”
Pederson’s roommate, Kodie Ruzicka, grew up squarely in that movement, with her mom heading the Utah chapter of Eagle Forum, a conservative Christian group founded by rightwing icon Phyllis Schlafly.
In the 1970s, when the Catholic Schlafly led a successful grassroots campaign against the Equal Rights Amendment, which would have made gender-based discrimination unconstitutional, she enlisted the help of Mormons.
To its opponents, including the LDS Church, the ERA was the work of radical feminists who wanted to upend traditional gender roles.
Much of Schlafly’s organizing was among evangelicals, and “given the sometimes hostile evangelical line on Mormons, [Schlafly’s] Mormon outreach was kind of revolutionary,” says Ruzicka, who now works at the Justice Department. “But we’re good at organizing, and we have a lot of useful structures for it, so that was useful to her.”
Today, Mormons head Eagle Forum chapters across the West, including California, Arizona and Nevada, as well as Utah.
Bridge-building between Mormons and the conservative movement helps explain the Reagan administration’s push to hire many Mormons into the White House - which further cemented the alliance. That bond continues to lure Mormons to D.C.
Ruzicka, for one, continued in the political footsteps of her mother, arriving in Washington in her mid-20s to lead a nonprofit that promotes safe haven laws, which allow young mothers to legally abandon young children at fire stations.
Beyond hot-button social issues, U.S. Rep. Chaffetz says the Mormon faith engenders support for limited government.
“The church is very adamant about personal responsibility, and for people to voluntarily participate in service,” the Utah Republican says. “There’s this feeling that service is not something that should be mandated by government.”
7-8
アメリカ大統領選と選挙資金の現行批判。
In election, 'a seat at the table' costs $5,000
By LZ Granderson, CNN Contributor
4:15 PM EDT, Tue May 15, 2012
Grand Rapids, Michigan (CNN) -- President Obama appeared at two recent fundraisers with some serious sticker shock.
About 200 people ponied up at least $5,000 per ticket for an event hosted by Ricky Martin. That was followed by a function at a private home where 60 people spent $38,500 each to get through the door.
Just last week, Obama -- with George Clooney -- raised $15 million in one night. This makes me wonder how in the hell our political process became so distorted that Obama needs this much money to run for re-election. I thought we were broke? And yet, at the end of March, Obama and his presumed general election opponent, Mitt Romney, had raised nearly a combined $300 million, almost enough to fund Planned Parenthood's annual budget by themselves.
Forget Wall Street, it's the campaign trail that needs to be occupied.
The median income in the United States is about $50,000, so I doubt very many 99 percenters are able to meet the $75,000 minimum that was expected at a recent Romney fundraiser. Did you know the goal of the RNC is to raise $800 million by November? Imagine how many families could be helped if just half of that was used to train people for the new job market, as opposed to being spent to help one guy get hired?
Face it, the president and Romney may have different political and economic views, but they are both propped up by highly affluent power brokers who are expecting big returns for the big checks they are writing.
Reiner's insight on Obama's fundraiser This is why the worst thing to happen to our process was the Supreme Court's 2010 Citizens United decision, which allows corporations (and unions) to spend unlimited funds to promote a candidate. This is akin to handing the keys of a bakery to the Cookie Monster. These big spenders are not just involved in shaping dialogue. They get involved with shaping policy, which inevitably makes the good of the people secondary to the good of the deepest pockets.
We don't just need campaign reform, we need roadblocks to prevent special interest groups from turning the democratic process into more of a sham that it already is.
Let the Supreme Court keep its ridiculous ruling, but set a limit on the amount of money candidates can raise and spend on their campaigns. Require all ads and debates to be aired on public television, and then cap the number of hours each party is allowed to use during the general election.
By putting it on public television, we stop large media conglomerates from profiting from the process. So, ideally Obama and Romney would both get $10 million and 40 hours of advertisement to state their case.
Let's take away the $200 million war chests that Obama has been able to amass in both 2008 and 2012, and force him and future candidates to find a way to persuade the country to vote for them without relying on their ability to outspend their opponent.
I know, I know, Romney wouldn't even be in the position he's in without outspending -- and dare I say, bullying -- his opponents.
By leveling the economic playing field, our politicians have a chance to return to being representatives of the people, not just the ones who know the right people or make the right promises.
Before making the rounds in New York on Monday, President Obama tweeted a sentence from the commencement speech he gave at Barnard College: "Don't just get involved. Fight for your seat at the table. Better yet, fight for your seat at the head of the table." He left out the part about needing $5,000 to get in the door so you can even see the table.
But I guess those messy details are easy to overlook in a country with an 8.1% unemployment rate, whose leaders still find it appropriate to hold fundraisers for rich people.
アメリカ大統領選挙の行方を占う一つの大きな指標-政治献金額。大統領選は４年に一回の一大イベント。選挙に勝つためには、大きなお金が必要。２００８年オバマとジョンマッケインの大統領選ではオバマが空前の政治資金額を集め、圧倒的な有利な立場にあった。
*****
Romney campaign, RNC raise $100 million in August
Sep 4, 4:25 PM EDT
By JACK GILLUM and THOMAS BEAUMONT
Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Mitt Romney's presidential campaign has raised at least $100 million in August, The Associated Press has learned, hitting that mark for a third consecutive month with a fundraising prowess that has let him outraise President Barack Obama so far this summer.
The early numbers, which include money raised by the national Republican Party, will be publicly released next week. They were described by two people familiar with the figures who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to share internal campaign matters.
The numbers were revealed on the first day of the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, N.C., where delegates will nominate Obama for a second term. Federal records show that Romney and the GOP have pulled in more cash than Obama's re-election effort in May, June and July, including money collected by the Democratic Party.
It is usually difficult for a challenger to raise more money than an incumbent holding a major elective office, particularly in a presidential race.
The figures exclude tens of millions of dollars that outside "super" political action committees are pouring into the race to help Romney. Those groups have been largely bankrolled by wealthy Americans, thanks to changes in recent years that have loosened campaign-finance regulations.
The fundraising news further underscores the problem Obama's campaign may have in staying above water on the money side. While once a record-breaker - Obama raised a remarkable $750 million four years ago - the president's advisers are now publicly acknowledging the incumbent likely will be outspent.
Obama and the Democratic Party have not released their August fundraising figures.
Money is a crucial bellwether in presidential campaigns. It costs millions of dollars to run pricey television ads, pay staffers, keep field offices open and conduct get-out-the-vote efforts. Spending by campaigns, parties, super PACs and other outside groups will likely approach $2 billion by November.
Romney and the GOP raised a combined $101 million in July, $106 million in June and $76.8 million in May. For their part, Obama and the Democrats pulled in $75 million last month, and $71 million in June and $60 million in May. Last month, Obama's campaign spent much of its cash - about $59 million - on advertising and paid staff.
Pro-Romney super PACs like American Crossroads and Restore Our Future have spent tens of millions of dollars on TV ads critical of Obama in key states, and the groups expect to spend much more as November approaches. Obama also has super PACs working in his favor, although the groups have yet to catch up to the fundraising benchmarks of their GOP counterparts.
All told, the groups' fundraising strength means Romney could have a permanent financial advantage over Obama. An Obama campaign spokesman declined to comment Tuesday.
Romney fundraising officials have told donors there were few states that haven't broken fundraising efforts. That could put Romney on track to raise $800 million by Election Day.
Both campaigns' financial reports detailing sources of revenue and where the money is spent are due to the Federal Election Commission by Sept. 20.
The fundraising figure was first reported by Politico.
クリントイーストウッド最高!!! テレビで大いに楽しませていただきました。
****
TRENDING: Eastwood breaks silence: Obama a 'hoax' on American people
September 7th, 2012
11:25 AM ET
(CNN) - In his first public statements since his rambling, improvised remarks at last week's Republican National Convention, Clint Eastwood told a California newspaper that Mitt Romney's campaign wasn't able to approve his speech, since he wasn't sure what he was going to say until he walked out on stage.
"They vet most of the people, but I told them, 'You can't do that with me, because I don't know what I'm going to say,'" Eastwood told the Carmel Pine Cone. Eastwood served as the mayor of Carmel-by-the-Sea in the 1980s.
Eastwood said ahead of his speech, the only guidance he could offer Romney's campaign was "to reassure them that everything I would say would be nice about Mitt Romney."
During Eastwood's remarks, delivered directly ahead of Sen. Marco Rubio's introduction of Romney on the final night of the GOP convention, the legendary actor and director addressed an empty chair that he said represented President Barack Obama.
At times, Eastwood sent the crowd into laughing fits when he pretended Obama was offering colorful objections.
"What do you want me to tell Romney?" Eastwood asked the empty chair. "I can't tell him to do that to himself ... you're getting as bad as Biden ... of course we all know Biden is the intellect of the Democratic Party. Kind of a grin with a body behind it ..."
In the interview published online Friday, Eastwood said the chair was a last-minute decision made backstage.
"There was a stool there, and some fella kept asking me if I wanted to sit down," Eastwood said, according to the newspaper. "When I saw the stool sitting there, it gave me the idea. I'll just put the stool out there and I'll talk to Mr. Obama and ask him why he didn't keep all of the promises he made to everybody."
The intention of his speech, Eastwood said, was threefold.
"That not everybody in Hollywood is on the left, that Obama has broken a lot of the promises he made when he took office, and that the people should feel free to get rid of any politician who's not doing a good job," he told the Carmel Pine Cone.
"President Obama is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people," Eastwood continued. "Romney and Ryan would do a much better job running the country, and that's what everybody needs to know. I may have irritated a lot of the lefties, but I was aiming for people in the middle."
"But I didn't make up my mind exactly what I was going to say until I said it," he said.
That much seemed clear during his remarks, which were not delivered using a teleprompter and at times seemed to ramble in multiple directions.
Reaction to Eastwood's remarks was mixed but discussion of #eastwooding immediately went viral on the internet. While many observers said he overshadowed Romney's acceptance speech later than event, Romney's campaign said his remarks were "a break from all the political speeches."
"Judging an American icon like Clint Eastwood through a typical political lens doesn't work," a Romney campaign aide said shortly after the speech.
Eastwood himself gave a similar assessment in the interview.
"They've got this crazy actor who's 82 years old up there in a suit," he said. "I was a mayor, and they're probably thinking I know how to give a speech, but even when I was mayor I never gave speeches. I gave talks."
"It was supposed to be a contrast with all the scripted speeches, because I'm Joe Citizen," Eastwood added. "I'm a movie maker, but I have the same feelings as the average guy out there."
CNN's Jim Acosta, Halimah Abdullah and Kevin Liptak contributed to this report.
アメリカ、イギリスに次いでカナダがイランとの外交断絶
*****
Canada closes Tehran embassy, kicks out diplomats
Sep 7, 4:23 PM EDT
By ROB GILLIES Associated Press
TORONTO (AP) -- Canada shut its embassy in Tehran on Friday, severed diplomatic relations and ordered Iranian diplomats to leave, accusing the Islamic Republic of being the most significant threat to world peace.
The surprise action reinforces the Conservative government's close ties with Tehran's arch foe Israel but also removes some of Washington's eyes and ears inside the Iranian capital.
It comes as Iran's talks with world powers over its nuclear program have stalled and Israel is weighing the option of a military strike to prevent it from developing atomic weapons. Iran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful objectives only.
The move also underscores the widening gaps between Western countries' attempts to isolate and punish Iran and Tehran's efforts to forge closer ties with energy-hungry Asian trading partners such as India and Pakistan to counter Western sanctions. Iran's recent push to bolster and redefine its links with Asia makes the break with Canada a less serious blow to Tehran than it would have been years ago.
Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird said that the Canadian embassy in Tehran will close immediately and Iranian diplomats in Canada have been given five days to leave.
A spokesman for Iran's foreign ministry, Ramin Mehmanparast, called Canada's decision "hasty and extreme" and said that Iran would soon respond, the semiofficial Fars news agency reported.
A note in Persian posted on the door of Iran's embassy in Ottawa read: "Because of the hostile decision by the government of Canada, the embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Ottawa is closed and has no choice but to stop providing any consular services for its dear citizens."
Baird said Canada was officially designating Iran a state sponsor of terrorism and gave a long list of reasons for Canada's decision, including Tehran's support for Syria's embattled President Bashar Assad in that country's civil war.
"The Iranian regime is providing increasing military assistance to the Assad regime; it refuses to comply with U.N. resolutions pertaining to its nuclear program; it routinely threatens the existence of Israel and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide," Baird said in a statement. "It is among the world's worst violators of human rights; and it shelters and materially supports terrorist groups."
Baird said he also was worried about the safety of diplomats in Tehran following attacks on the British embassy there.
1-3
Britain downgraded ties with Iran following an attack on its embassy in Tehran in November 2011, which it insists was sanctioned by the Islamic Republic's ruling elite. After the attack, Britain pulled all of its diplomats out of Iran and expelled Iranian diplomats from U.K. soil.
Most European countries maintain a diplomatic presence in Tehran despite increased tensions over European Union sanctions that block imports of Iranian oil. The Swiss represent diplomatic interests of the United States, which broke ties with Tehran after protesters stormed the U.S. Embassy in the chaotic months following the Islamic Revolution in 1979. Fifty-two Americans were held for 444 days.
Canada's break with Iran removes another channel for Washington to get first-hand diplomatic assessments of Iranian affairs. Canada and Britain had been main conduits of information for the U.S., which also maintains special Iranian monitoring offices in several locations including Dubai.
But Canadian relations with Iran have been strained since former Canadian Ambassador Ken Taylor helped rescue six Americans during the hostage crisis three decades ago. The countries resumed normal diplomatic relations with an exchange of ambassadors in 1996.
But relations soured again in 2003 after Zahra Kazemi, a freelance photographer with dual Canadian-Iranian citizenship, died in custody. Kazemi was arrested while taking photographs outside a Tehran prison in 2003.
Canada also has criticized Iran over the arrest of pioneering Canadian-Iranian blogger Hossein Derakshan, who helped develop the first Farsi language blogs and is considered one of the founders of Iran's social media community. Derakshan was detained in 2008 and sentenced to nearly 20 years in prison two years later.
Canada hasn't had a fully accredited ambassador in Tehran since Iran ordered Canada's ambassador, John Mundy, to leave the country in 2007 after trying unsuccessfully to come to an agreement on an exchange of ambassadors for some time.
Baird said the skeleton staff that was operating Canada's embassy has already fled the country.
"The Iranian regime has shown blatant disregard for the Vienna Convention and its guarantee of protection for diplomatic personnel," Baird told reporters in Vladivostok, Russia, on the sidelines of the 21-nation Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation forum. "Under the circumstances, Canada can no longer maintain a diplomatic presence in Iran. Our diplomats serve Canada as civilians and their safety is our No. 1 priority."
He also told Canadians to avoid traveling to Iran and warned Canadians with dual citizenship that Iran doesn't recognize the principal of dual nationality.
All Iranian diplomats in Canada have now been declared "personae non gratae," Baird said.
An Iranian semiofficial news agency, Mehr, said the Canadian decision was "in accord with the U.S. hostile policy" against Iran and that it "served Zionists."
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu issued a statement praising Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper for his "bold leadership," which he said sends a "strong message to Iran and the entire world."
2-3
Israel views a nuclear-armed Iran as an existential threat, citing frequent references by Iran's leaders for Israel's destruction, its development of missiles capable of striking the Jewish state, and Tehran's support for violent Islamic militant groups hostile to Israel in Gaza and Lebanon.
"The determination shown by Canada is very important in order for the Iranians to understand that they cannot continue with their race for nuclear weapons," Netanyahu said. "This practical step must serve as an example of morality and responsibility to the international community," he said.
Israeli leaders have hinted that they may soon attack Iran's nuclear sites if U.S.-led international diplomacy and sanctions fail to curb the nuclear program. World powers involved in stalled talks with Iran all hope to avoid an Israeli strike and the possibility of igniting a larger war. They also hope to avoid an Iran with nuclear weapons.
Iran's demands include recognition of its right for uranium enrichment - at the center of the nuclear standoff - and calls for the U.S. and European allies to ease the sanctions that have hit Iran's critical oil exports and left it blackballed from key international banking networks.
The U.S. and others worry Iran could use its enrichment labs to produce warhead-grade material. Iran insists it seeks to make nuclear fuel for energy and medical reactors only.
"We share Canada's concerns regarding Iran's behavior," U.S. State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell said. He cited Iran's "military assistance to the Assad regime, failure to comply with U.N. resolutions pertaining to its nuclear program and continued violations of human rights."
"We want all countries to join us in isolating Iran," Ventrell added.
Baird also registered Canada's displeasure over Russia's continued support for the regime in Syria in a meeting with his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov.
"I've already had a meeting with my Russian counterpart and I did so in no uncertain terms," Baird said.
Canada and other countries are upset that Russia and China has repeatedly used their veto powers in the U.N. Security Council to block actions that could have led to sanctions against Assad's regime.
Iran, Syria's key remaining ally in the Middle East, has backed Assad's government for years, and has kept up its strong support for the regime since the uprising began in March 2011. Syrian activists say at least 20,000 people have been killed in the conflict.
U.S. officials have said they believe Iranian flights of aid to Syria include weapons. Iran denies arming Assad's regime.
---
Associated Press writers Nasser Karimi in Tehran, Brian Murphy in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Ian Deitch in Jerusalem, Phil Couvrette in Ottawa, Bradley Klapper in Washington and Charmaine Noronha in Toronto contributed to this report.
3-3
With $114 million, Obama just outraises Romney in August
By Jeff Mason and Sam Youngman
WASHINGTON/BOSTON | Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:42am EDT
WASHINGTON/BOSTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama's campaign and its Democratic partners raised more than $114 million in August, narrowly beating Republican rival Mitt Romney for the first time in months as the race for the White House approaches its final stretch.
Former Massachusetts governor Romney and fellow Republicans raised more than $111 million, continuing a string of high-dollar hauls that leave him well equipped to contest the November 6 election.
While Obama shattered every fundraising record in 2008 after becoming the first presidential candidate to opt out of a federal matching funds system, Romney has outpaced him significantly on the fundraising front since April.
That has added to a cash advantage on the Republican side that is helped by the success of outside groups, or Super PACs, that have spent lavishly in support of the Republican candidate with unlimited funds from millionaire donors.
In July the Obama campaign raised $75 million to Romney's $101 million. That discrepancy shifted in August.
The Democratic incumbent broadened his donor base last month with more than 317,000 donors who had never given money before, Obama campaign manager Jim Messina said in a statement. More than 1.1 million donors in total gave to the Obama cause.
"The key to fighting back against the special interests writing limitless checks to support Mitt Romney is growing our donor base, and we did substantially in the month of August," Messina said. "That is a critical downpayment on the organization we are building across the country - the largest grassroots campaign in history."
Obama is counting on that grassroots "ground game" to help make up for the cash advantage enjoyed by Romney, whose campaign along with the Republican National Committee and state Republican parties reported having about $168.5 million in cash at their disposal.
Before the August report, Romney and the joint Victory Fund he shares with the RNC already enjoyed a $60 million cash-on-hand advantage over Obama.
Obama's campaign takes pride in having a broad base of low-dollar donors, which it hopes will keep giving more in the coming months. In August the average donation it collected was $58, and 98 percent of donations were for $250 or less. It is the first month Obama's campaign together with the Democratic National Committee and affiliated groups have broken the $100 million threshold this year.
1-2
But the president's campaign has burned through money faster than the Republican candidate, spending $58.5 million in July, with about two-thirds of that going to advertising.
Republicans view the combination of Obama's high cash burn rate and polls that show a tight race as evidence that they have withstood the advertising onslaught Obama's campaign launched early in the year.
"This race is a dead heat, even after they have spent over $100 million attacking Mitt Romney with negative ads," one senior Romney adviser said on Sunday.
Obama's advisers say they are confident they spent their campaign cash well by seeking to pinpoint Romney's weaknesses over the summer months, but the discrepancy in available funds is a big concern.
Romney is also now free to spend the millions of dollars he raised during his primary campaign.
Legally, Romney was barred from spending money he raised before he formally accepted the Republican nomination, which he did in Tampa more than a week ago.
The day after Obama accepted his party's nomination for president at the Democratic convention in North Carolina, the Romney campaign demonstrated it was ready to start spending some of that money in a homestretch assault on Obama.
Republicans seized on a disappointing jobs report on Friday morning, announcing they bought ad time in the key swing states Obama won in 2008 but are now in play.
Romney, on the air in the key states of Iowa, Virginia, Colorado, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio and North Carolina, was set to expand his advertising to Wisconsin on Monday.
"What we very deliberately did, we held our powder and we knew these jobs numbers were going to be a big moment," said one Romney adviser. "And we loaded up to come back on Friday, and we've gone up in a big way."
While Romney spent much of the summer fundraising, senior adviser Kevin Madden indicated that the Republican candidate would shift his focus to spending time with voters.
"We'll continue to do some fundraising throughout this month, but I think we're in that critical phase where we're trying to put our emphasis on voter contact and having the governor do more retail campaigning," Madden said.
Obama's team believes the president has an advantage at retail campaigning. He just finished a two-day bus trip of Florida, which included chats with voters at local restaurants and bars throughout the state.
Still, it sees Romney as having the financial advantage, and it urged supporters not to become complacent after the successful August figure.
"No celebrating, because they're going to have an even bigger September," Obama's campaign said via Twitter. "But now we know we can match them, doing this our way."
大統領選第一回テレビ討論戦ミットVSオバマ
Mitt Romney is the smartest guy in the room
By Wayne Allyn Root/Published October 04, 2012
FoxNews.com
Four months ago I made a bold prediction: that Mitt Romney will win in a landside. I called it a repeat of Reagan’s landslide over incumbent President Jimmy Carter. Don’t look now, but after last night’s debate that prediction is becoming reality.
Do you hear the air hissing loudly? That’s the air coming out of Obama’s balloon Wednesday night. Mitt Romney is not only the smartest guy in the room (by far)…he proved it on that presidential debate stage.
Romney schooled Obama. He made Obama look weak, small, and childlike. Obama was listless and uninspiring. He could not look Romney in the eye, and worst of all, could not muster the confidence or energy to defend his own record.
The whole nation saw it. It was almost as if Romney was debating an empty chair.
Worse, an empty chair without the benefit of a TelePrompter.
Romney was at ease. He was smiling and willing to look Obama right in the eye, debunk his lies, and take the fight to him. Mitt stayed on message. It was as if Mitt’s debate coach was James Carville -- the message was “It’s the economy, stupid.”
Mitt debunked the lies that the media has allowed Obama to tell. It’s easy to lie when you are speaking to a journalist who is on your side. It isn't so easy to lie on that stage, with the nation watching, with your opponent staring at you. Obama’s lies, myths, and misrepresentations about Romney’s tax and budget plans were all debunked on that stage Wednesday night.
Of course the great zinger that exposed Obama’s lies was when Mitt said that raising five boys had prepared him for hearing things that aren’t true, and then hearing the lie repeated over and over again to try to make it appear true.
Every parent in America was smiling and nodding in agreement.
Mitt looked presidential and stayed focused on distinct targeted messages.
First, that he will cut taxes without adding to the deficit, and will never raise taxes on the middle class. Ever.
Second, that what matters above all else now is jobs. That is Mitt’s priority. He stressed that you can only create jobs by growing the economy and you can only grow the economy by keeping taxes low, cutting regulations, and reducing the size of government.
1-2
Third, that Obama is the one hurting seniors by cutting over $700 billion from Medicare. Mitt made it clear he will protect Medicare and change nothing for current recipients. Obama is endangering it. Suddenly every senior in America was reassured this is not a man with a radical plan, nor should they ever fear losing their Medicare or Social Security.
Fourth, that Obama promised to cut the debt in half, but instead doubled it. Romney called it immoral to keep spending more than we take in. Did you see the look on Obama’s face? Did you see his body language? He looked like a defeated man. He looked like he wanted to be anywhere, but on that stage defending his record. Of course that's because his record on debt and spending is indefensible.
Fifth, Romney pointed out that ObamaCare will cost $2,500 more per family annually and that it will kill jobs. ObamaCare will make it less likely that small business will hire people. On Wednesday night Romney used something that befuddles Obama: FACTS. He pointed out that the CBO predicts 20 million Americans will lose their current insurance under ObamaCare.
You could hear millions of Americans who are happy with their current insurance, standing and cheering for Romney.
Then Romney went for the kill. He pointed out that Mr. Obama wasted his first two years on ObamaCare, something the majority of Americans didn’t even want, in the middle of an economic tragedy, when jobs should have been his priority. He squandered his two years when he should have been fighting for jobs for the American people.
But the line of the night that completely emasculated Obama was, “Yes, Mr. President your spending does show your priorities. You spent $90 billion on green energy tax breaks. That’s like 50 years of tax breaks to oil companies. You gave $90 billion to companies like Solyndra. You could have hired 2 million teachers with that money.”
Bullseye.
Romney looked and sounded like a president. He showcased his CEO leadership skills. Obama was depressed, befuddled, stumbling, bumbling, and fumbling throughout the night. He wasn’t presidential, even though he IS the president. He was a man out of his league.
In the end Jim Lehrer had the best line of the night when he tried to stop Obama from going over his allotted time. He said, “Mr. President, your time is up.”
How prophetic.
Wayne Allyn Root is a capitalist evangelist and serial entrepreneur. He is a former Libertarian vice presidential nominee. He now serves as chairman of the Libertarian National Campaign Committee. He is the best-selling author of "The Conscience of a Libertarian: Empowering the Citizen Revolution with God, Guns, Gold & Tax Cuts."
2-2
米大統領選挙における副大統領立候補対抗馬同志の選挙討論戦の意味とは。
*****
VP debates can kill political careersBy Julian Zelizer, CNN Contributor
updated 3:31 PM EDT, Mon October 8, 2012
Editor's note: Julian Zelizer is a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University. He is the author of "Jimmy Carter" and of the new book "Governing America."
(CNN) -- Thursday's vice presidential debate will not receive nearly as much attention as the battles between Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama. After all, the debates between the vice presidential candidates are a bit like watching AAA baseball. Right now, most voters are focused on the people running for the highest office in the land.
Julian ZelizerNevertheless, vice presidential debates have a colorful history. Although they don't do much to affect the results of the actual campaign, they can have an effect on the future of a candidate's career regardless of whether the ticket wins or loses.
In several cases, promising stars have been badly harmed by their performances, developing public perceptions that proved hard to shake.
With Vice President Joe Biden possibly considering a run for the presidency in 2016 and Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan widely considered to be one of the most promising stars of the GOP, both men have a lot to lose if their effort on Thursday does not go well.
In 1976, Sen. Bob Dole, R-Kansas, ripped into his opponent on many fronts, but he came off looking nasty and unnecessarily aggressive. Some of his statements were so controversial that they raised questions about whether he was fit to hold the office, particularly because voters were still leery from the nastiness of President Richard Nixon's White House.
During the debate Dole said that "If we added up the killed and wounded in Democrat wars in this century, it would be about 1.6 million Americans, enough to fill the city of Detroit."
Walter Mondale seized on the statement, saying that "Sen. Dole has richly earned his reputation as a hatchet man." That phrase stuck, even more than Dole's comments, and for many years Republicans remained skeptical that Dole could be an effective presidential candidate because of this negative image.
In 1988, Sen. Lloyd Bentsen, running with Michael Dukakis, picked apart Sen. Dan Quayle. The charismatic young conservative from Indiana was a fresh voice in the party, a politician who many observers thought could be a new leader for the GOP down the road. This was why Vice President George H.W. Bush selected him as his running mate.
When Quayle, who had stumbled through some gaffes early after his announcement, likened himself to President John F. Kennedy, Bentsen fired back: "I served with Jack Kennedy. I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy." The zinger played into fears that Quayle was a lightweight who could not handle the obligations of the presidency. While Quayle was on the winning ticket, his image took a big hit as a result of the debate and other events on the campaign trail.
1-2
In 2004, North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, running with Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, also suffered from his encounter with a more experienced candidate, Vice President Dick Cheney. At the time, Edwards was one of the darlings of the Democratic Party, a photogenic senator who spoke emotionally about the issues of poverty and inequality, something that energized the party's base. But his performance in the debate was unsuccessful.
Cheney dug into Edwards, saying, "The first time I ever met you was when you walked onto the stage tonight," a statement highlighting the accusation that Edwards was more interested in advancing his career than politics and that he had constantly missed votes.
When Edwards brought up Cheney's daughter Mary, who is gay, to challenge his opposition to gay marriage, Cheney came back by saying, "Let me simply thank the senator for the kind words he said about my family and our daughter," ending Edwards' assault on the spot. Edwards' performance left many uncomfortable. The senator looked like a lightweight, and many came away more skeptical about whether he could handle the pressures of the presidency.
The 2008 debate between then-Sen. Joe Biden and Sarah Palin didn't have as many dramatic moments. Still it was harmful to Palin. The Alaska governor entered the debate with low expectations after a series of botched television interviews led voters to question whether she was really qualified to hold higher office.
During the debates, Palin did not do much to impress voters. Her decision to evade certain questions and give vague responses to others continued to fuel discussion as to whether she was out of her league.
What would you ask Biden, Ryan?
Some scratched their head when she asked her opponent, "Can I call you Joe?" At another point she admitted that she "may not answer the questions the way the moderator and you want to hear."
The performance became fodder for "Saturday Night Live" comedians, with Tina Fey playing Palin, constantly winking and talking about being a maverick without any substance. When the segment ends, Fey asks: "Are we not doing the talent portion?" (A reference to Palin having been in the Miss Alaska competition.)
It might be that following the first presidential debate, where Mitt Romney dramatically turned the media narrative in his favor and walked away with a major victory, that interest will be greater than usual in this vice presidential debate, and a decisive victory either way could play some role in the campaign. But the chances are still slim.
Regardless, we do know that poor performances in vice presidential debates can harm the chances for a candidate to run for higher office down the road. Though they will obviously be focused on 2012, both Ryan and Biden will need to be careful not to act in ways that undercut their ability to run for the presidency four years from now.
2-2
アメリカ大統領選副大統領立候補者対抗討論会への準備法−共和党の場合 プラクティス メイクス パーフェクト！
****
Paul Ryan prepares to take on skilled debater Joe Biden
Published: Wednesday, October 10, 2012, 11:44 PM Updated: Wednesday, October 10, 2012, 11:47 PM
By The Associated Press
WASHINGTON — To prepare for his biggest test yet on the national stage, untested debater Paul Ryan has been hauling two thick briefing books around the country and intently studying up on Vice President Joe Biden, who has been sparring over public policy since the Wisconsin congressman was learning how to talk.
Ryan, the 42-year-old Republican vice presidential nominee, has suggested his youth will be an asset in connecting with voters at the sole vice presidential debate Thursday in Kentucky against the 69-year-old former senator. But risks abound for the GOP rising star, who hasn't participated in a campaign debate since his first run for office 14 years ago.
The main goal for Ryan's inner-circle: get him comfortable answering questions in broad terms that connect with voters and avoid the wonky, in-the-weeds answers more appropriate for a budget hearing than a living room.
Ryan's team wants to keep him talking about positive changes a Romney-Ryan administration would mean for the country, not a full-throated defense of the campaign's sometimes nebulous math.
As the House Republicans' top budget writer, aides say Ryan is confident he can handle questions about federal spending and taxes. He is a bit more nervous on international affairs — and for good reason. Ryan was thrust into the national spotlight a few months ago when he joined the Republican ticket but has limited exposure in that arena.
Biden is a former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a skilled debater, both within the administration and against its critics, and someone whose opinion President Barack Obama seeks out on major decisions.
Ryan also is bracing for Biden to try to help Obama overcome a rough patch by staking out an aggressive tone.
"I really think that because they had such a bad debate that Joe is just going to come flying at us," Ryan said this week.
His biggest worry: looking unprepared the way his mentor and former boss, Jack Kemp, did in the 1996 debate against Vice President Al Gore.
Ryan has spent hours huddling with advisers to polish his delivery and has been cramming with aides to sharpen his grasp of foreign policy and national security issues. As they prepared in Virginia's mountains about 150 miles from Washington, Ryan focused on trying to shoehorn knowledge gained from seven terms in the House into two-minute answers. He has watched video of Biden's 2008 vice presidential debate and recent campaign appearances. He knows Biden's cadences and verbal ticks, including the signature "ladies and gentlemen" and punchy "folks" to get the audience's attention.
1-2
Ryan also has spent time working on trying to keep Biden from cutting him off, talking over him or throwing a wrench into his rehearsed answers. During practice debates, his stand-in for Biden, former Solicitor General Ted Olson, has been aggressive in trying to throw Ryan off his game.
Above all else, aides tell Ryan to avoid specific numbers.
"He's learning how to debate," said Michael Steel, Ryan's traveling spokesman who was a top aide to House Speaker John Boehner. "It's not about learning policy. ... It's about learning how to debate at this level."
Ryan and his aides also are trying to play up the vice president's skills and perhaps set unrealistic expectations for Biden, who is doing his own cram sessions in Delaware before the meeting in Danville, Ky.
"Joe Biden's been doing this for 40 years," Ryan told WTMJ-AM radio in Milwaukee. "I mean, the man ran for president twice, he's the sitting vice president. And this is my first time on this kind of stage. So sure, there's a lot of pressure."
He later seemed to suggest that his youth gave him the upper hand.
"I've been in Congress 14 years. I'm a younger person. I'm next generation," he told WTOL in Toledo, Ohio. "I'm in my 40s. Joe Biden is in his 60s. I'm used to debating people in Joe's generation in Congress."
Ryan aides note that more people watched Biden's 2008 debate against then-Gov. Sarah Palin, the GOP vice presidential nominee, than any of Obama's debates against Republican John McCain. But that was as much about Palin's celebrity and curiosity about her and not the weight of the vice presidents' roles.
This time, Republicans have nominated a wonk who is a walking collection of think tank studies — not a first-term governor from Alaska like Palin.
Ryan and Olson practiced three times before heading into more intense sessions in the Virginia mountains. They wore suits and ties and dined on room service in Washington hotels for two sessions, then donned plaid shirts and ate Jimmy Johns sandwiches at the other session in Ryan's hometown of Janesville, Wis.
In Virginia, they simulated the debate setting, in which Biden and Ryan will be seated.
Kerry Healey, who was Romney's lieutenant when he was governor of Massachusetts and now advises him on foreign policy, stood in for debate moderator Martha Raddatz of ABC News and even channeled the newswoman's speaking style.
Ryan has tried to keep the number of advisers in the room with him to fewer than 10. From time to time, Romney aides from the Boston campaign headquarters joined the preparations, including strategist Russ Schriefer, longtime loyalist Beth Myers and conservative liaison Peter Flaherty. Foreign policy hand Dan Senor also has been helping Ryan.
Ryan hasn't debated since his first run for Congress — in 1998 at age 28.
2-2
アメリカの政党政治と選挙戦略がよく分かる記事。日本のような宣伝カーや所かまわず街頭宣伝する喧騒な選挙ではない。選挙戦真っ只中でも、普段と変らず、庶民はいたって静かな日常生活が営める。
****
Republicans' ad blitz hits congressional campaigns
When it comes to advertising, Republicans are banking on a last-minute barrage, much like in 2010. Democrats spent more earlier, hoping to build a firewall to withstand the GOP's final push.
By Melanie Mason, Washington Bureau
October 18, 2012, 5:50 p.m.
Rep. Leonard L. Boswell (D-Iowa) is locked in a tough -- and expensive -- reelection campaign. (Tom Williams, Getty Images / August 15, 2011)
WASHINGTON — For Rep. Leonard L. Boswell, an eight-term Democrat from Iowa, the first hint of the ad war to come appeared in summer 2011. Almost a year and a half before election day, Crossroads GPS, the conservative nonprofit co-founded by Karl Rove, was on the airwaves in the congressman's district, chewing him out over the deficit.
"The Republicans have been trying to buy this race from the get-go," said Kevin McTigue, who manages Boswell's campaign against nine-term GOP Rep. Tom Latham in a redrawn district that stretches from Des Moines to Council Bluffs.
But the biggest onslaught arrived last week, when Crossroads bought $850,000 worth of ads in the district. The buy, part of an $8.1-million offensive in 11 House districts, coincides with a nationwide swell of ad spending by conservative groups.
Sound familiar? It was at this point two years ago that Republican outside groups unleashed a flash flood of spending, catching Democratic House candidates off guard.
This year, the spending strategies by Republicans and Democrats illustrate just how differently the two sides have adapted to court decisions two years ago that upended campaign finance limits and launched an era of top-dollar spending by outside groups.
Republicans are largely following their 2010 script, banking on a last-minute blitz. Democrats are spending more money earlier in the cycle, hoping to build a firewall to withstand the GOP's final push.
The inverse battle plans have echoes in the presidential race, where Mitt Romney, who trailed President Obama on the airwaves through spring and summer, now has the on-air advantage.
Outside groups spent $114 million in 2010 House races, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. This season's tab is to be even higher, as both sides embrace the new campaign finance landscape, which allows individuals, corporations and unions to spend unlimited amounts, independently of parties and campaigns.
So far, outside groups have spent and booked more than $104 million in television time, according to a Democratic ad tracking source. That will almost certainly grow.
Before last week's GOP offensive, Democratic outside groups held a slight edge in spending.
"We made this conscious decision to go in early to serve as a bulwark," said Andy Stone, spokesman for House Majority PAC, a Democratic "super PAC."
1-2
The group, founded in response to the Democrats' 2010 walloping, has spent about $30 million so far this cycle and plans to spend an additional $5 million or so. It has also served as a clearinghouse where other reliable liberal allies, including labor unions and environmental groups, can share strategy and divvy up the political map.
"Clearly, in 2010, the Republicans adjusted to the new landscape much faster, more efficiently and more ruthlessly," said Craig Varoga, whose group, Patriot Majority, has been supporting Democrats since 2005.
Cooperation among liberal groups "happened more slowly, but it happened effectively," he said.
The Democrats' initial spending advantage has been wiped away with the latest Republican barrage. GOP outside groups now have a margin of about 2 to 1.
Five groups — Crossroads GPS, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the YG Action Fund, the American Action Network and its super PAC affiliate the Congressional Leadership Fund — have committed at least $35 million to help Republican candidates in the final three weeks of their House races.
"This is our biggest push to date," Crossroads spokesman Nate Hodson said. "House races tend to develop later. We want to wait to make sure we're in a position to be most effective."
By conserving the bulk of their resources for the end, Republicans say they have more flexibility to adapt to changes in the political environment and make Democrats scramble in response.
But the October surge has its risks. In some states, early voting began before the Republican air assault. And in this cacophonous political environment, television and radio ads could provide diminishing returns if voters tune them out.
Also significant: For independent political advertising, a dollar spent early goes further than one spent late. Whereas candidates for federal office pay a television station's lowest commercial rate, outside groups pay market rates, which have been increasing as demand has soared.
In the Boswell-Latham race, conservative groups are spending at least $1.2 million in anti-Boswell ads in the final weeks — a closing bang for a contest that has seen incursions from a swarm of outside players.
Crossroads GPS weighed in on the race several times in 2011, with spots tying Boswell to a litany of White House policies including the stimulus bill and healthcare overhaul. American Action Network, like Crossroads, hammered Boswell on government spending. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce ran an ad commending Latham as an advocate for lower taxes.
The early volley spurred House Majority PAC to jump in, portraying Latham as more loyal to his close friend House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) than to his constituents. (Perhaps not coincidentally, the Congressional Leadership Fund, a super PAC aligned with Boehner, included this district in its latest blast of spending.)
After a lull, the back-and-forth began in earnest in September. Nearly every major House-focused outside group — as well as both parties' congressional campaign committees — have taken a swing. Some not-so-major groups have waded in too, including the National Assn. of Realtors and the Center for Individual Freedom, a nonprofit with past ties to the tobacco industry. Both took aim at Boswell.
House Majority PAC plans to reenter the district this weekend with radio ads. Most of these ads will air in the Des Moines media market.
Viewers there will also see ads for three other House races. And they have been seeing presidential ads since the lead-up to the GOP caucuses in 2011.
Iowa "has had two years of attack ads," said James Carstensen, a senior aide to Latham. "I don't know if it just becomes white noise at this point."
2-2
Lawyers, CEOs boosted Obama's Sept. donations
October 20, 2012 RSS Feed Print
By JACK GILLUM, Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) — Attorneys, business owners and retirees were among those who helped President Barack Obama maintain slim fundraising supremacy over Republican challenger Mitt Romney last month, with the president raising $181 million as he entered the last full month in the fight to keep his job.
An Associated Press review of newly released financial reports found at least $11 million from lawyers and at least $3 million from investors and bankers, some of whom cooled to the president earlier this election when critics say he cracked down on Wall Street and pushed for consumer-protection reforms. About $22 million more came from retired Americans, an important bloc of voters likely more tuned in to health care reform and changes in retirement benefits.
Their contributions, among hundreds of thousands, went hand-in-hand with record donations to an outside political group helping Obama win a second term. Still, the president began October with less available money to spend than Romney, as Obama's campaign, the Democratic Party and related groups reported $149.8 million cash on hand. That's compared with $183.1 million in the bank among Romney's campaign, the GOP and his joint-fundraising apparatus.
All told, a swath of small-dollar contributions helped Obama and the Democratic Party best Romney and the GOP by more than $10 million last month after being repeatedly walloped in the money race earlier this year. The president's fundraising haul topped the more than $114 million he and the Democrats raised during the month of August, and the cash Obama pulled in last month was slightly less than his record-breaking $190 million from September 2008.
Financial support to Obama and Romney are putting the presidential election on track to cost nearly $2 billion, thanks to mountains of cash earmarked to both campaigns and independent "super" political committees working on their behalf. Wealthy Americans are increasingly picking up the tab this year, at times giving millions of dollars apiece to super PACs that have buoyed costly advertising.
September's reports show major financial support going to both Republican and Democratic super PACs, with the pro-Romney Restore Our Future PAC reporting it collected $14.8 million in September, the group's second-most lucrative month. Late Saturday, American Crossroads, the major super PAC headed by GOP strategist Karl Rove, reported $11.6 million for September, the highest single-month total for the group.
Rove's top donors in September included Texas billionaire Harold Simmons, who gave $2.5 million and Oklahoma coal baron Joseph Craft III, who gave $1 million. Another $1.32 million was donated by the Armstrong Company, a Pennsylvania conglomerate which provided the donation as "in-kind cable access, and $1 million from Jay Bergman, an Illinois oilman.
1-2
Meanwhile, Priorities USA Action, the pre-eminent Obama-supportive super PAC, said it raised a record $15.3 million.
"People who support the president know that we've come too far to go back now," Priorities senior strategist Bill Burton said. "We're ahead a little bit now, but it is time to close the deal."
Both campaigns and super PACs have made an all-out push for contributions as Election Day quickly approaches. The contributions are funding a record-breaking campaign operation for both candidates, which translates to paying a legion of campaign staff and hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of television ads.
So when it came to contributions directly to Obama's campaign, business owners and some Wall Street types helped pick up the tab, even if they didn't make up a majority of total contributions. Obama's donors in September included more than 4,000 CEOs, records show, and his campaign continued to tally millions pouring in from key battleground states.
Yet Obama hardly has a lock on winning the financial fight.
Republican super PACs have helped to match or exceed Obama's TV ad spending in dozens of media markets in battleground states. Ad spending data obtained by the AP from April through early October found pro-Romney spending has exceeded pro-Obama ad spending by at least $65 million across the nine states expected to decide the election: Colorado, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Virginia, Iowa and Wisconsin.
Obama broke presidential fundraising records four years ago, but has found himself financially outgunned for much of the summer, thanks in part to super PACs supporting Romney. Meanwhile, an AP review of campaign data this fall found Obama out-raising Romney in most of the 11 states that at one point were pivotal to win the election.
Reports detailing revenues and expenses for the first half of October are due to the Federal Election Commission by Oct. 25. Those will provide the public with the last financial snapshot before the Nov. 6 election.
___
Associated Press writer Stephen Braun contributed to this report.
___
Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
2-2
偽造した出生証明書をホワイトハウスの公式ウェブサイトに堂々と掲載するくらいだから、裏では何が起こっているか想像を絶する。オバマに都合が悪い記事が主要メデアにブロックされているので、この記事が日の目を見るかは疑問がある。
****
Obama campaign accepted foreign Web donation -- and may be hiding more
By ISABEL VINCENT and MELISSA KLEIN
Last Updated: 10:11 AM, October 21, 2012 Posted: 12:34 AM, October 21, 2012
EXCLUSIVE
The Obama re-election campaign has accepted at least one foreign donation in violation of the law — and does nothing to check on the provenance of millions of dollars in other contributions, a watchdog group alleges.
Chris Walker, a British citizen who lives outside London, told The Post he was able to make two $5 donations to President Obama’s campaign this month through its Web site while a similar attempt to give Mitt Romney cash was rejected. It is illegal to knowingly solicit or accept money from foreign citizens.
Walker said he used his actual street address in England but entered Arkansas as his state with the Schenectady, NY, ZIP code of 12345.
When I did Romney’s, the payment got rejected on the grounds that the address on the card did not match the address that I entered,” he said. “Romney’s Web site wanted the code from the back of card. Barack Obama’s didn’t.”
In September, Obama’s campaign took in more than $2 million from donors who provided no ZIP code or incomplete ZIP codes, according to data posted on the Federal Election Commission Web site.
The Obama campaign said the FEC data was the result of “a minor technical error.”
“All the ZIP codes and numbers are real and can be verified,” spokesman Michael Czin said.
The Obama campaign’s apparent lack of safeguards makes it possible to violate the law, says a report released by the Government Accountability Institute, a Florida-based watchdog group.
The report found that one Obama site — Obama.com — gets almost half of its traffic from foreign computer addresses. The site directs users to an Obama donation page.
“We are not suggesting that just foreign traffic by itself is a problem,” said Peter Schweizer, president of the GAI. “But for a campaign that is very sophisticated in its fund-raising capabilities, they do not make one effort to try to even see or ask somebody to check a box that says they are a US citizen.”
1-2
Obama’s re-election campaign took in $130,867 from donors who provided no ZIP codes and $2 million from those with incomplete ZIPs in September.
That same month, Romney’s campaign recorded $2,450 from donors without ZIP codes and $2,500 from those with incomplete ZIPs.
Walker said it should have been clear to the Obama campaign’s computers that his donations came from a computer with a foreign IP address.
The Obama campaign says it “screens all credit-card contributions that originate from a foreign IP address” and requests proof of citizenship if questions arise.
But not only did Walker’s Obama donations go through, but he said he began receiving two to three e-mail solicitations a day to give more. The e-mails asked for $188 or more.
If Walker gave $188, his total contribution to Obama would be $198 — less than the $200 threshold at which campaigns have to identify the donor to the FEC.
“I have not had any e-mails asking for proof of identity,” Walker said.
The GAI report found the Obama campaign Web sites do not ask donors to provide their three-digit card-verification value, or CVV, numbers to ensure they are the legitimate holders of the card. Romney’s campaign asks for such information, which is considered a standard security measure.
One conduit for Obama donations is Obama.com, which was registered in 2008 to Robert Roche, an American who lives and works in China, where he owns an infomercial company.
Roche is also a bundler for the Obama campaign and was given a seat at the head table for a 2011 state dinner with the Chinese president
The GAI report said that the site registration was changed in 2010 to make it anonymous and that it was unclear whether Roche still owns it.
Roche’s mother in Chicago referred calls to the Obama campaign. The campaign declined to comment.
2-2
確かな出生証明書がない以上、州の選管へ向けて、個人がオバマの2012年の大統領選への立候補が妥当かどうかの異議を申し立てるのは道理に適う。ところが権力に雇われた弁護士団の圧力やオバマ支持派の執拗な嫌がらせに、個人の力ではなかなか真実に迫れないのが現状である。
****
Kansas Ballot Challenge Over Obama’s Birth Is Ended
By JOHN ELIGON
Published: September 14, 2012 The New York Times
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Citing a wave of angry backlash, a Kansas man on Friday withdrew a petition in which he argued that President Obama should be removed from the state’s election ballot because he did not meet citizenship requirements.
The challenge filed this week by Joe Montgomery of Manhattan, Kan., prompted state election authorities to seek a certified copy of Mr. Obama’s birth certificate and reignited long-running conspiracy theories that the president was not born in the United States. The state will continue to try to obtain the birth certificate, and officials will meet on Monday as scheduled to close the case officially. But without the petition, Mr. Obama will remain on the ballot, Secretary of State Kris W. Kobach told The Associated Press.
Mr. Montgomery, the communications director for the Kansas State University College of Veterinary Medicine, explained his decision in an e-mail to Mr. Kobach.
“There has been a great deal of animosity and intimidation directed not only at me, but at people around me, who are both personal and professional associations,” he wrote. He added that he did not “wish to burden anyone with more of this negative reaction.”
After a hearing on Thursday, the state’s Objections Board, led by Mr. Kobach, a conservative Republican, said it needed more information before issuing a ruling.
Mr. Montgomery argued that under case law, to be eligible to become president, a person must be born in the United States to parents who are citizens. Mr. Obama’s father was from Kenya, and his mother was from Kansas. Mr. Montgomery also speculated that the birth certificate that Mr. Obama released last year may have been forged.
But a lawyer for the Obama campaign, in a letter to Mr. Kobach, said that Mr. Montgomery’s interpretation of the law was contrary to what the Supreme Court had held for “over a hundred years.”
Because no representative of Mr. Obama appeared at the hearing on Thursday and the only response his campaign provided was the one-and-a-half-page letter, which the state deemed cursory, the board decided it could not rule immediately.
Brad Bryant, the state’s election director, noted that in other states like Arizona, officials had also sought to verify Mr. Obama’s birth certificate to ensure his eligibility for their ballots.
A spokeswoman for Mr. Kobach’s office said that the state was required to review objections to the ballot.
1-2
The Objections Board is made up of Mr. Kobach and two other Republicans, Attorney General Derek Schmidt and Lt. Gov. Jeffrey Colyer.
In a lengthy brief filed with the state, Mr. Montgomery cited 19th-century case law in arguing that Mr. Obama was not a natural-born citizen. “Our nation’s founders wanted to prevent our president from having any citizenship conflicts due to parents who were not citizens and who did not intend to become citizens,” Mr. Montgomery wrote.
Later, Mr. Montgomery wrote that “Mr. Obama has failed to provide any valid, certified documentary evidence to legally establish birth in this country, much less to citizen parents. Further there is substantial evidence showing that much of Mr. Obama’s alleged birth certificates have been forged or doctored, and have not been confirmed as legally valid, true and accurate.”
Mr. Montgomery did not respond to e-mail and telephone messages seeking comment.
Fearing that the “birther” conspiracies had started to move into the mainstream, in large part because one of their loudest advocates was Donald Trump, Mr. Obama pushed back last year, releasing his long-form birth certificate. It shows he was born in Hawaii in 1961.
“We’re not going to be able to solve our problems if we get distracted by sideshows and carnival barkers,” Mr. Obama said at the time.
A spokesman for the Obama campaign declined to comment on Friday. But in a letter sent to Mr. Kobach on Wednesday, a lawyer for the campaign, Kip F. Wainscott, wrote that both state and federal courts had rejected Mr. Montgomery’s legal contentions.
“These tired allegations are utterly baseless, and the objector’s arguments are entirely without merit,” Mr. Wainscott wrote.
This challenge to Mr. Obama comes in a state where the Republican nominee, Mitt Romney, is heavily favored, and where the electorate has shifted sharply to the right over the past couple of years. With the backing of the state’s first conservative governor in decades, Sam Brownback, several far-right Republicans defeated moderate state senators in primary elections last month, opening the way for conservatives to win control of the State Senate. Conservatives already control the House, meaning the state is expected to swing even more heavily to the right, with major tax cuts and stringent social policies.
Mr. Kobach, one of Kansas’s leading conservatives, has pushed for tougher voter identification laws, helped write Arizona’s controversial immigration law and called two years ago for Mr. Obama to release his long-form birth certificate.
Mr. Kobach declined an interview request on Friday. But The Topeka Capital-Journal quoted him as saying Thursday that the board was doing its due diligence.
“I don’t think it’s a frivolous objection,” he said. “I do think the factual record could be supplemented.”
A version of this article appeared in print on September 15, 2012, on page A13 of the New York edition with the headline: Ballot Challenge in Kansas Over Obama’s Birth Is Ended.
2-2
主要メデアはオバマの勝利を予想しているが、ロムニーの圧勝を予想するものが少数ながらいることを報告している。凡人もその少数派。
*****
George Will predicts 321-217 Romney landslide
11:21 AM 11/04/2012
Add Washington Post George Will to the landslide column along with Fox News Channel’s Dick Morris and the Washington Examiner’s Michael Barone.
On this weekend’s broadcast of “This Week with George Stephanopoulos” on ABC, Will revealed his prediction and added a bonus surprise by saying traditional Democratic state Minnesota would go for Romney as well.
“I’m projecting Minnesota to go for Romney,” Will said. “It’s the only state that’s voted democratic in nine consecutive elections, but this year, there’s marriage amendment on the ballot that will bring out the evangelicals and I think could make the difference.”
Even Liberal Rags Are Dumping Obama: 21 Papers Switch Endorsements to Mitt Romney in 2012
Posted by Jim Hoft on Sunday, November 4, 2012, 1:19 PM
At least 21 major newspapers have flipped endorsements from Barack Obama in 2008 to Mitt Romney in 2012.
Poyntner.org reported:
At least 21 papers that supported Obama for president in 2008 have flipped to endorse Romney for president in 2012. They include:
Whitewashing History in Japan
DEC. 3, 2014 By THE EDITORIAL BOARD/The New York Times
Right-wing political forces in Japan, encouraged by the government of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, are waging a campaign of intimidation to deny the disgraceful chapter in World War II when the Japanese military forced thousands of women to serve in wartime brothels.
Many mainstream Japanese scholars and most non-Japanese researchers have established as historical fact that the program allowed Japanese soldiers to sexually abuse women across the Asian warfront ― based on widespread testimony from the “comfort women.”
Now a political effort to treat these events as wholesale lies concocted by Japan’s wartime enemies is gaining traction, with revisionists trying to roll back the government’s 1993 apology for the coercion of women into prostitution. The Abe government, intent on stoking nationalistic fervor, was rebuffed earlier this year in its effort to have revisions made to a 1996 United Nations human rights report on the women Japan forced into sex slavery. But, at home, the right wing continues to hammer away at The Asahi Shimbun newspaper, seizing on the paper’s retractions of articles published in the 1980s and 1990s that turned on limited aspects of its coverage to deny the larger historical truth of the “comfort women” program.
The Abe government is playing with fire in pandering those demanding a whitewash of wartime history. “They want to bully us into silence,” Takashi Uemura, a former Asahi reporter, said in describing how ultranationalists have made violent threats against him and his family.
Mr. Abe, under criticism from China and South Korea and frustration in the United States, said in March that he would uphold the apology. In it, Japan admitted that tens of thousands of women from South Korea and elsewhere were coerced into sexual slavery. This is where the historical truth stands, despite revisionist scheming.
Japan clears its memory banks
Dangerous revisionism is afoot
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Monday, December 8, 2014, 8:00 PM BY Richard Cohen
Japan is working hard at forgetting. Its prime minister, Shinzo Abe, suggests in code-talk that Japan was the victim of World War II ― no war criminals at all, thank you ― and its influential conservative press, with a wink from the government, is determined to whitewash the country’s use of sex slaves during the war.
This sort of thing can be catching. Maybe others will forget why they consider Japan a friend.
Certainly the task will be harder when Angelina Jolie’s film “Unbroken” hits the theaters on Christmas Day. The movie, like the book by Laura Hillenbrand, is the story of Louis Zamperini, a former Olympic runner whose plane crashed in the Pacific during World War II and who wound up spending 21/2 years as a prisoner of the Japanese.
He was horribly brutalized by his captors ― starved, tortured both physically and psychologically, worked nearly to death, and so often beaten viciously and capriciously that the sickening thud of a kendo stick on a human skull will trail you for days.
Men died from such abuse, but not Zamperini. He lived long enough to cooperate with both the book and the movie, dying just this year at the age of 97. He reconciled with the Japanese. That’s more than what Japan has done with its past.
The country has much to atone for. Japan mistreated prisoners of war and even established a medical research team ― the infamous Unit 731 ― which conducted experiments on captured enemy soldiers, most of them Chinese. Among other atrocities, the unit performed hideous vivisections without anesthetic on living men, removing organs or limbs for some concocted medical purpose.
It is not my purpose here to revive anti-Japanese sentiment, which in wartime America commingled with racism to produce the unjust incarceration of Japanese-Americans in internment camps. But certain important Japanese seem intent on reviving the past by revising it.
With an implied nod from Abe, they have put enormous pressure on the Asahi Shimbun newspaper to retract stories exposing Japan’s conscription of thousands of women to serve as sex slaves for the military during the war. Increasingly, this historic fact is being denounced as a fiction.
1-2
This is a serious matter. First, it is unspeakably ugly to once again deny these women their humanity by saying they were volunteers ― prostitutes ― and not sex slaves. Second, the attempt to erase the whole sordid “comfort women” episode is part of a ferocious attempt to rewrite history.
One of the most startling parts of Hillenbrand’s book is her recounting of what happened to the POWs once Japan surrendered. Some were executed, but the liberated ones were allowed to amble out of their camps and into nearby towns and cities. The Japanese police who, just moments earlier, might have shot a POW on sight, were soon engaged in the hunt for American-designated war criminals. Japan did an instant 180; the Emperor Hirohito had ordered surrender and cooperation. Japan surrendered and cooperated.
These sudden reversals have been a feature of Japanese culture ever since Adm. Matthew Perry forcibly opened the country to American trade in 1854. The nation, both humbled and instructed, swiftly modernized, and by 1905 had beaten mighty Russia in a war that Western conventional wisdom thought it would lose.
Japan similarly adopted American-style democracy after World War II and literally rose from the ashes (Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the often-overlooked incineration of Tokyo) to become so substantial an economic power that China supplanted it as No. 2 only recently. These were breathtaking achievements.
Now, though, a more ominous reversal may be underway. With its economy once again showing weakness ― it has recently fallen into recession ― the mythologizing of the past may well accelerate. Japan’s revisionists have their eye on the past. Others wonder what this means for the future.
2-2
