Romney energizes campaign with feisty debate performance

0 comments


Mitt Romney energized his campaign for president Wednesday night, charging out of his first debate having, by most accounts from both sides of the political spectrum, dominated President Obama in a standoff for which he was evidently well-prepared. 

The Republican nominee was quick on his feet, polished and feisty as he repeatedly cut off the moderator and challenged his opponent on the facts. His central argument -- that Obama's economic policies have consigned the middle class to an eroding "status quo." 

Echoing the words of Vice President Biden earlier in the week, Romney said: "Under the president's policies, middle-income Americans have been buried." 

Liberal pundits and supporters of the president expressed disappointment coming out of the debate, while conservatives were ecstatic. 

Romney heads next to the battleground of Virginia on Thursday, while Obama heads to Wisconsin following a rally in the debate-state of Colorado. It's unclear whether Romney's performance will move the polls, but he was clearly looking for a race-shaking performance having slipped in recent weeks in several swing-state surveys. 

Obama, though, fought Wednesday night to cast Romney as bad for working Americans. He slammed Romney for wanting to turn Medicare into a "voucher" system, repeal the federal health care overhaul and allegedly push a tax cut for top earners. 

Each candidate strived throughout the 90-minute debate to appeal to the middle-class voters who likely will decide the election five weeks from now. While Romney accused Obama of pushing "trickle-down government," Obama accused Romney of wanting to "double down on the top-down policies" that led to the financial crisis. 

The debate, which focused exclusively on domestic matters, was heavy on policy details and light on zingers. It was one of three presidential debates set for October and marked Romney's first opportunity to go toe to toe with the president. 

The debate was tense at times, with the candidates standing just feet from each other and often cutting off the moderator, PBS' Jim Lehrer. Romney appeared to take a consistently more aggressive tone on stage, though the overall tenor of the debate marked a step back from what has become a bitter and nasty campaign in the closing weeks. 

Each candidate came armed with studies and stats to bolster his respective position -- but the central goal was to broaden their appeal before a national audience hurting for jobs and make the case for why their plans would boost growth. 

Obama argued that the issue to consider is not "where we've been" but "where we're going." 

"We've begun to fight our way back," Obama said. He accused Romney of wanting to roll back regulations and implement tax cuts skewed toward the wealthy and reverse those gains. 

But Romney, citing the millions who have gone on food stamps and hit the unemployment lines in the last four years, argued that "the status quo is not going to cut it." 

"We know that the path we're taking is not working. It's time for a new path," Romney said. 

He said Obama's push to raise taxes on top earners amounts to a tax on the very small businesses needed for a robust economic recovery. 

"You raise taxes and you kill jobs," Romney said. "I don't want to kill jobs in this environment." 

On taxes, though, Romney sought to wipe away the caricature that the Obama campaign has been drawing these last two years -- of Romney as an out-of-touch millionaire who's looking to make the rich richer with his tax cut plan. 

Obama again argued Wednesday night that the Republican nominee is pushing a $5 trillion tax cut plan that would skew toward the wealthy. 

To offset that, Obama claimed, Romney would have to either add to the deficit or raise the burden on the middle class. 

"It's math, it's arithmetic," Obama said 

Romney, though, insisted the 20 percent across-the-board rate cut he's pushing is not nearly as sweeping as the president describes. 

"I don't have a $5 trillion tax cut," Romney said. Further, he pledged to hold to his promise that it would be deficit-neutral and not hurt the middle class. 

"There'll be no tax cut that adds to the deficit. I want to underline that -- no tax cut that adds to the deficit," Romney said. He added: "I will not under any circumstance raise taxes on middle-income families." 

Romney addressed his tax plan after saying in an interview that one way to offset the rate cut would be to cap deductions at perhaps $17,000 -- and have taxpayers choose what deductions they want to take. The details may have been meant to undercut the Obama campaign's claims that he has not been specific. 

The president, though, repeatedly hammered Romney at the debate for allegedly hiding the details of his plans -- from his proposals for implementing tax reform to his plans for replacing "ObamaCare." 

"At some point I think the American people have to ask themselves, is the reason that Gov. Romney is keeping all these plans to replace (the health care law) secret, because they're too good?" Obama said sarcastically. 

Obama adamantly defended the health care law, saying he's warmed to the term "ObamaCare." He denied that it was a "takeover" of health care and warned against repealing it as Romney wants to do. 

The debate in Denver fell against the backdrop of a sputtering economic recovery and rising U.S. debt. While Romney used these factors to argue Obama does not deserve a second term, the president again made the case that he's still cleaning up the mess from the prior administration and needs four more years to finish the job. 

Romney arguably had the most to gain out of Tuesday's performance. Though competitive with Obama in national polls, he's been slipping in key battlegrounds. The debate was a chance for him to close that gap, and potentially benefit simply from being on the same stage as the president. 

The two candidates debate next on Oct. 16 and for the last time on Oct. 22. The only vice presidential debate is set for Oct. 11.


Source : foxnews[dot]com
Read More

Ryan, confident about victory, says debates will offer voters 'very clear choice'

0 comments


Republican vice presidential nominee Rep. Paul Ryan acknowledged Sunday the campaign has made some missteps, but expressed confidence about victory -- saying the presidential debates will offer voters a “very clear choice” in the final weeks of the race between failed policies and a stagnant economy or a “brighter future.”

Ryan said on “Fox News Sunday” that Romney will have the chance during the first debate Wednesday to “give the American people the choice we are offering.”

“We owe the country a very clear choice of a different future,” said Ryan, R-Wis. “We can either have a dynamic, growing economy that produces opportunity, or we can have a stagnant economy that fosters dependency. We can stick with the failed policies of the four last years … or we can get a brighter future.”

Ryan brushed aside recent polls showing President Obama leading Romney, and suggested that the so-called “mainstream media” has helped the president’s re-election effort.

 “We’re going to win this race,” Ryan said.

The roughly 20-minute interview covered a wide range of topics, including both candidates' economic policies.

Ryan said he and Romney want a 20 percent cut in all income tax rates, which would be paid by closing loopholes and deductions.

Ryan said Romney has been specific, but declined to say which loopholes, saying, "it would take me too long to go through all of the math."

The Obama campaign responded by saying: "Romney has promised $5 trillion in tax cuts skewed toward millionaires and billionaires, but refused to say how he'd pay for them without raising taxes on the middle class or exploding the deficit. He’s promised to repeal ObamaCare, but refused to say what he’d replace it with to protect the 129 million Americans with pre-existing conditions. He’s promised to repeal Wall Street reform, but refused to say what he’d replace it with so that big banks aren’t writing their own rules again."

Ryan acknowledged that Romney’s remark about 47 percent of Americans not paying taxes and being dependent on the federal government was a misstep.

“Mitt acknowledges himself that was an inarticulate way of describing how we're worried that in a stagnant Obama economy more people have become dependent on government because they have no economic opportunity,” said Ryan, chairman of the House Budget Committee. “It was an inarticulate way to describe what we're trying to do to create prosperity and upward mobility, and reduce dependency by getting people off welfare back to work.”

With five weeks before Election Day, Romney and Ryan are facing sharp criticism about why they are not leading in polls amid high unemployment and sluggish Gross Domestic Product, numbers that have historically sunk presidents seeking re-election.

Ryan argued that the Obama campaign has done “a very good job of distracting people.”

He also confirmed that Romney is set this week to deliver a major foreign speech, following the Sept. 11 terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans, and the administration’s response.

“Their response was slow. It was confused, it was inconsistent,” Ryan said. “It’s part of a bigger picture of the fact that the Obama foreign policy is unraveling literally before our eyes on our TV screens.”

Ryan also disagreed with the assertion that the debate message of a “clear choice” is a departure from the earlier campaign message that the race is a referendum on Obama’s past four years.

"It's not a change in strategy,” he said. "It's a phase of the campaign we've now entered into. Because I think it's important. The president is trying to paper over his problems. The president has been trying to mislead and distort a record. It's a failed record. We think it was very important to point that out.”


Source : foxnews[dot]com
Read More

Campaigns launch into expectations game ahead of vital presidential debate

0 comments


With the first presidential debate set for Wednesday, the campaigns are hard at work trying to jockey for advantage -- as the Obama campaign girds for a potentially aggressive performance by Mitt Romney. 

The three October debates could be Romney's best chance to overtake President Obama in the polls and build lasting momentum into Election Day. To date, he has trailed Obama by single digits for months in most national polls while the president recently has watched his lead grow in key swing states. 

The debate stage, for Romney, represents an opportunity to win over the wishy-washy. And Obama's team wants to make sure his opponent is not so convincing. In the run-up to Wednesday, each campaign is now engaged in a delicate political dance, trying to manage expectations and shoot down potential talking points while generally psyching out the other side. 

Dueling campaign memos released Thursday and Friday contained practically the same message: The other guy is a skilled debater, the other guy has the advantage, but our guy has the truth on his side and debates aren't the only factor. 

"Just as he was in the primaries, we expect Mitt Romney to be a prepared, disciplined and aggressive debater," Obama adviser David Axelrod wrote in a memo Friday, adding that debates "generally favor challengers." 

Axelrod went on to list several other advantages Romney supposedly has -- the Republican nominee got plenty of debate practice during the primaries, and he's "unencumbered" by the responsibility of being president. 

"Maybe this is why the Romney campaign has so confidently predicted for months that he will turn in a campaign-changing performance such as Ronald Reagan's in 1980," Axelrod wrote. 

He was referring to Reagan's late surge past then-President Jimmy Carter in the polls following a strong debate performance. 

Axelrod's counterpart on the Romney campaign, adviser Beth Myers, made a similar case. 

"While Governor Romney has the issues and the facts on his side, President Obama enters these contests with a significant advantage on a number of fronts," she wrote in a strategy memo. "Voters already believe -- by a 25-point margin -- that President Obama is likely to do a better job in these debates. Given President Obama's natural gifts and extensive seasoning under the bright lights of the debate stage, this is unsurprising. President Obama is a uniquely gifted speaker, and is widely regarded as one of the most talented political communicators in modern history." 

Myers stressed that this will be Romney's first "one-on-one" presidential debate, and argued that Obama was judged the winner every time he faced John McCain in 2008. "The takeaway? Not only has President Obama gained valuable experience in these debates, he also won them comfortably." 

The first debate will be held this coming Wednesday in Denver, Colo., and will focus on domestic policy. 

It will be followed by the lone vice presidential debate on Oct. 11 between Republican running mate Paul Ryan and Vice President Biden. 

The second presidential debate is set for Oct. 16 in Hempstead, N.Y., and is expected to be a town hall format covering a range of issues. 

The final debate is set for Oct. 22 in Boca Raton, Fla., and will focus on foreign policy. 

While each candidate is trumpeting the other's debating prowess in order to lower expectations -- and hopefully pull off what would then be perceived as a surprisingly strong night -- each campaign is also hammering the other on the issues. 

"But what must President Obama overcome?" Myers asked. "His record." 

She argued his "ample rhetorical gifts" will be used to try and mask the failures in that record, warning the president will go "negative" to divert attention. 

Axelrod argued the same, and went on to try and rebut any potential argument. Citing a recent comment in which Romney predicted Obama would "say a lot of things that aren't accurate," the campaign also released a web video Friday challenging several of Romney's recent claims of mischaracterization. 

It showed one clip of Romney saying he's not in favor of lowering taxes on wealthy people, followed by a debate clip of Romney saying he wants to cut taxes for everyone by 20 percent, "including the top 1 percent." 

"Facts will matter," Axelrod wrote.


Source : foxnews[dot]com
Read More

The Campaign Heads Home in October

0 comments


Just a few days ahead of the 2012 Presidential election, Warner Home Video will bring The Campaign to Blu-ray, DVD and Digital Download October 30. The political mudslinging comedy, from director Jay Roach, received mixed-to-negative reviews from critics (read our review here) and earned just over $85 million in the U.S.

Here's a synopsis of the picture, direct from Warner Bros., "When long-term congressman Cam Brady (Will Ferrell) commits a major public gaffe before an upcoming election, a pair of ultra-wealthy CEOs plot to put up a rival candidate and gain influence over their North Carolina district. Their man: naïve Marty Huggins (Zach Galifianakis), director of the local Tourism Center.

At first, Marty appears to be the unlikeliest possible choice but, with the help of his new benefactors' support, a cutthroat campaign manager and his family's political connections, he soon becomes a contender who gives the charismatic Cam plenty to worry about. As Election Day closes in, the two are locked in a dead heat, with insults quickly escalating to injury until all they care about is burying each other, in this mud-slinging, back-stabbing, home-wrecking comedy."

The Campaign will come to Blu-ray encoded in 1080p, mixed in 5.1 DTS-HD Master Audio. The DVD will feature an anamorphic widescreen transfer and 5.1 Dolby Digital audio. The discs will include the following features:

  • Extended Cut with 11 hilarious minutes of added footage
  • Line-O-Rama
  • Deleted Scenes
  • Gag Reel
  • DVD Copy
  • Ultraviolet Copy

With the exception of the deleted scenes and UltraViolet copy of the film, bonus features are exclusive to either the single-disc Blu-ray or Blu-ray/DVD combo pack.

Suggested retail is set at $29.98 for the single-disc Blu-ray, $35.99 for the Blu-ray/DVD combo pack and $28.98 for the DVD. Amazon pre-orders are already available. Current prices are $20.99 for the single-disc Blu-ray, $25.19 for the Blu-ray combo pack, and $19.99 for the DVD.

Be on the lookout for a review of The Campaign on Blu-ray this October!


Source : feeds[dot]ign[dot]com
Read More

Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 – Multiplayer for Everyone

0 comments


Millions of people play Call of Duty every year, but many of them don’t experience everything the games have to offer. For some, Call of Duty games have become campaign-only experiences with multiplayer being looked at as “too unapproachable” or “intimidating.” Even some of the players killing one another online every day never do things like Prestige or use the film systems, often because they don’t want to lose their progress or it’s too overwhelming, respectively.

Rather than just rehashing the same multiplayer modes and other tools, developer Treyarch is attempting to employ a number of smart tweaks to known systems in an effort to make Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 the most approachable Call of Duty to date. They want you, person-who-only-plays campaign, to jump into multiplayer and learn the ropes with people who make you feel competitive. They want everyone to create films with as little or as much effort as they want. They just want you to feel like Black Ops 2 was made for you, whether you’re a headshot master or the type of person who can’t seem to keep your gun straight.

Any of the millions of people who have gotten into Call of Duty over the years have probably experienced the hardships of starting out. You come into the game after the franchise has been out for years, or maybe even jump back in to the new game after it’s been out for a few months, and you get your ass handed to you. You just can’t compete with a legion of hardcore fans that have way more hours than you to hone their skills, and thus some of you put down the controller in frustration, never to return.

To combat this, Treyarch is first and foremost introducing Combat Training, a series of special takes on team deathmatch and Black Ops 2’s objective-based modes. Here players can level from 1-10, facing off against teams that have a mix of human and AI opponents. When they hit level 10 they’re no longer allowed to participate, though anyone can still do “Bot Stomps,” teaming up with five of their friends and just murdering AI opponents for no experience. The hope is that the Combat Training modes will ease new players into the game’s multiplayer in a less-harsh environment, and that things like Bot Stomps will allow them to fight easier enemies and experience some of the game’s cooler things, like the Kill Streak-replacing Score Streaks. Even skilled players could find something to enjoy in Bot Stomps, as Treyarch views this as an excellent way for clans to plan out tactics and practice them in private before taking them out in real matches.

Of course once you get a bit of multiplayer experience under your belt you get to build a class, and Treyarch is completely redoing Black Ops 2’s loadout system to make it intuitive for all users and still feel like something new for longtime fans. Referred to as the “Pick 10 system” (which you can read about more in our previous coverage), this is where you get the most flexible loadout system ever implemented in a CoD title. Every gun, attachment and perk has a value of one, and in the Pick 10 system you get to choose a loadout of your own devising that combines most any combination of them. For instance you could take a primary weapon with two attachments, a secondary weapon with the same, then two perks and two grenades. Or you could use Wild Cards, which take up a precious slot but in turn allow you to break a game rule, to go all out on a primary weapon and give it three attachments and then use another Wildcard to take four perks instead of three. The sheer number of combinations you can do is pretty incredible, and should give even seasoned fans a lot to think about and fun ways to experiment with their loadouts.

If the Pick 10 system sounds too overwhelming for new players they can also use pre-made loadouts or tweak these to suit your personal playstyle. Additionally, you won’t have everything unlocked at once, but instead will have to hit the right level to unlock the option to use tokens (earned through leveling) to permanently unlock the gear.

Maybe you don’t think the Pick 10 system lets you take enough gear, or maybe you wish that you could play multiplayer with just your friends. Well, for you Treyarch’s including a robust Custom Games mode in Black Ops 2. You can choose between any of the modes, add bots, restrict content, modify the Pick 10 system so you can choose as few as three or as many as 17 items, and more. If you want to create your own take on Capture the Flag or Kill Confirmed and then play with your buddies then Treyarch wants you to do so. With Custom Games it’s like Treyarch is trying to tell you that they don’t care how you play, just that you’re playing.

If all you want to do is play team deathmatch you can do that, but for people looking for something new you can check out the new Hardpoint mode, as well as multi-team battles. Hardpoint is essentially Halo’s Crazy King, with capture points that bounce around the level, forcing each team to see who can hold it the longest before it up and moves again. It’s nothing revolutionary, but it’s a great addition to Black Ops 2’s multiplayer suite.

The multi-team battles, though, they really change up the dynamic of a multiplayer match. You can play three teams of four or four teams of three, with up to 18 players in a Custom Game match. The only modes currently available in multi-team battles are team deathmatch, Hardpoint and the returning Kill Confirmed, but even with the limited list this mode makes for a great alternative to standard matches. Each team essentially turns into a roving pack, with teamplay and communication becoming crucial. Multi-team battles end up having the frantic pacing of a free-for-all match with the teamplay of TDM. It’s a weird mix that just works, and is a hell of a lot of fun.

If you decide to spend the time to level up you’ll have the option to Prestige in Black Ops 2, only now you don’t lose your Challenge and weapon progress. Let me restate that, because it’s a big deal: You don’t lose your progress when you Prestige in Black Ops 2. Instead, Prestiging earns you a token you can use to ignore level requirements and unlock an item permanently, as well as one of three additional options: an extra slot for Custom Class slot; reset your stats just like you would in previous versions of Prestige; a refund that you can use at any point during your Prestige level allowing you to get all your unlock tokens back and spend them how you see fit. The reset option is there for the hardcore players who liked the challenge of starting over, but the other choices exist because they want more people to participate in Prestiging, which previously the studio found people avoided. With 10 levels of Prestige available, and emblems available for each that showcase just how much of a badass you are, the hope is that Black Ops 2 Prestige system will draw people in like never before.

Once Treyarch has all of us playing hours and hours of Black Ops 2 multiplayer, they want us to get involved with the community. One part of this strategy is the built-in shout cast capabilities, which Treyarch hopes will build up a whole new wave of Call of Duty personalities. The other part of this is improved Theater. Just like before you can cut together your games, editing short films that showcase your skills or maybe show a hilarious failure. For some people, though, the system was too complicated and time consuming, thus they avoided it altogether. To better serve these parts of the audience, Treyarch has created a one-button system where you can take any match you’ve played and have the editor pick out the highlights and cut it together in seconds. After that it’s easy to upload it to the internet and spread it around, or go in with the editing tools and tweak it to your liking. On the flipside the Theater mode also has even more tools to let ambitious film makers create elaborate scenes, such as the “attach to object” tool that lets you stick the camera to parts of the world, including things like rockets as they fly out of an RPG. The goal is to cater to both extremes: the lazy or less-interested players who don’t want to take the time to create a film, as well as the future Martin Scorceses of the world.

Call of Duty: Black Ops 2’s multiplayer probably won’t change your mind if you dislike the franchise already, but with so many smart changes to previously established systems it just might manage to win over a few new fans, as well as surprise the hardcore with it's twists on the formula. The tagline for Black Ops 2 is “The future is black,” but with what I’ve seen so far I’d say it’s better written as “The future is bright.”


Source : feeds[dot]ign[dot]com
Read More

Flood Confirmed for Halo 4

0 comments


343 Industries has confirmed that The Flood will return in Halo 4. In a massive set of screenshots released today (which may contain campaign spoilers), Microsoft showed off The Flood in action, as well as a new map. The Flood will return in a new multiplayer mode called Flood. According to CVG, the mode supports up to 10 players. Two will start out as infected, with the goal of infecting the other players.

343 also showed off new shots of two UNSC vehicles, a troop carrier called Mammoth and a huge mech called the Mantis, as well as a new multiplayer mode called Complex.

Separately, during an event at the London Film Museum in Covent Garden last night, 343’s Frank O’Connor confirmed that Halo 4 is complete and ready for certification. According to Videogamer, O’Connor reported that "We had a big piece of news yesterday back in the office, which is that the game is literally finished at this point. They are handing it off through the various certification processes and that, and we're done. It's been three years of incredibly hard work by about 300 people."

Halo 4 will be released on November 6th. For more, check out our hands-on impressions from the campaign and our experience with multiplayer.

Andrew Goldfarb is IGN’s associate news editor. Keep up with pictures of the latest food he’s been eating by following him on Twitter or IGN.


Source : feeds[dot]ign[dot]com
Read More

Romney Stops Pulling Punches

0 comments


“That’s why they call it a battleground; because you have to fight like hell to make it out alive.”

-- An advisor to Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign to Power Play on new polls showing President Obama expanding his lead in key swing state Ohio.

Whatever Democratic skew may exist in the public polling on the presidential race, there’s no question about the current trajectory of the 2012 campaign: Republican Mitt Romney, who has steadily trailed by a small margin, is losing ground.

If he means to win Romney will have to do what successful Republican candidates have had to do for 40 years, tune out the background noise of the press and stay relentlessly on message, a message that seems to be fairly simple: We can’t afford the government Barack Obama has created and time is running out to stop it.

-

Conservatives and the Romney campaign may say that the swing state polls which shows a widening lead for Obama are out of whack, but the trend is unmistakable. A month ago in must-win Ohio, Romney trailed in the Quinnipiac University poll commissioned by the New York Times and CBS News by 6 points. It’s now 10 points.

Polls may not be predictive, but even a poll that doesn’t reflect the actual condition of the electorate can still show you the trend line. And right now, there aren’t any indications that Romney is closing the gap. Romney may be closer than a double-digit deficit, but he’s sure not where he needs to be.

Romney’s attack slogan on President Obama has been “Obama isn’t working,” but it’s clear that Romney’s strategy hasn’t been working.

That slogan itself is a great encapsulation of where Romney’s campaign has been in the five months since he clinched the Republican nomination. “Obama isn’t working” is a nod to the Margaret Thatcher’s successful 1979 campaign slogan “Labour isn’t working.” Very subtle, sophisticated and droll, no doubt, but seeing as it lacks the pun and doesn’t really seem to mean anything, it hasn’t exactly been a barnburner among heartland voters.

Romney has been a supremely cautious candidate when it comes to attacking Obama. Fearful that he will be called racist, mean or angry, Romney has pulled a lot of punches when it comes to the commander in chief.

At times, Romney has sounded like an insurance salesman respectfully submitting that his package of home, life and auto insurance is actually better than the coverage offered by a customer’s current carrier -- if you don’t mind him saying so, ma’am.

Part of this is rooted in a desire not to offend voters who took a chance on Obama in 2008 and still like him, but just believe that he hasn’t done a very good job. The message to these largely female voters has been that it’s okay to break up with Obama because your new suitor is a very nice and understanding guy. He doesn’t blame you a bit.

But another part is that Romney clearly fears what would happen if he, a decidedly white, awkward retail politician, and very wealthy man born to privilege, is out swinging brickbats at the first black president.

It ought to be some comfort to Romney that even with the delicacy of his campaign to this point, he has still been accused of race baiting, cruelty and dishonesty. The comfort should come from the fact that whatever he does, he will be accused of those things by many in the establishment press. So why not swing harder if you’re going to pay the same price?

Obama, who admitted to CBS News last week that his own ads have been misleading, has been spending millions every month since May in all of the swing states on an ad campaign that has been mostly a series of personal attacks on Romney’s character.

The Romney campaign has demanded accountability for the president and found puzzlement from reporters who can’t believe the Republican nominee doesn’t understand the game by now: Enough about your claim that you are not actually a vampire, governor, are your welfare ads really a dog whistle for racists? And a follow up, governor, Harry Reid says he has a friend who says you really are a vampire and drink the blood of middle class children exclusively. Care to comment?

While Obama has been raining down the most negative, most personal presidential re-election campaign in history all over Romney’s head, Romney has been telling voters that Obama is a nice guy who just isn’t quite up to the job. What’s so nice about a guy who dumps $100 million in attack ads that he himself says aren’t exactly true?

In fact, Romney’s “nice guy” theme has given Obama additional cover for running a campaign of such scorching negativity. And after all these months of attacks, it’s hardly a surprise that Ohio voters aren’t so sure they want to take a chance on this challenger, whatever they may think of the job the incumbent is doing.

While Republicans may console themselves by saying that the polls aren’t really as bad as they seem, Romney doesn’t seem to be looking for consolation. He looks like he’s finally had enough.

When Romney hit the ground in Ohio on Tuesday, he was swinging hard.

On Obama’s equivocations about the ongoing Muslim uprising and the attack in Libya, Romney told FOX News colleague Carl Cameron that the president was trying to hide the truth from voters. Is Romney really accusing the administration of a cover up? Yep, said running mate Paul Ryan. The sputtering began at once that Romney was politicizing foreign policy as if Democrats didn’t win in 2006 and 2008 by doing exactly that.

And on Obama’s vision of the role of government in American life: “This is a vision of government that’s entirely foreign to anything this nation has ever known.” The dog-whistle detectors must have practically exploded at that one. If folks who thought talking about Obama’s golf game was an allusion to Tiger Wood’s satyriasis, imagine what happened when Romney used the word “foreign.”

But maybe Romney, with less than six weeks to go until Election Day, is ready to start communicating some urgency and something about the direness of what he says is the nation’s condition. Maybe he is also ready to start ignoring a political press that is likely to find him guilty, whatever the charge.

If he means to win Romney will have to do what successful Republican candidates have had to do for 40 years, tune out the background noise of the press and stay relentlessly on message, a message that seems to be fairly simple: We can’t afford the government Barack Obama has created and time is running out to stop it.

If Romney is ever going to find his inner John Sununu, now’s the time.


Chris Stirewalt is digital politics editor for Fox News, and his POWER PLAY column appears Monday-Friday on FoxNews.com. Catch Chris Live online daily at 11:30amET  at  http:live.foxnews.com.


Source : foxnews[dot]com
Read More

Fact Check: Is Romney's tax rate really lower than yours?

0 comments


President Obama's campaign, with a good dose of help from the media, is pushing a claim that millionaire Mitt Romney is taxed at a "lower rate" than someone making $50,000 a year. 

The claim, though, is open to debate. It only holds up in a particular scenario in which both income and all payroll taxes are counted. 

The president's campaign presumably is referring to Romney's release last week of his 2011 tax returns, which showed he paid an effective tax rate of 14.1 percent. 

This revelation, as might be expected, fueled a wave of campaign stump speeches and videos. The latest was an Obama Web video blasting Romney's "strange take on tax fairness." It included clips of people accusing Romney of paying a lower rate than "average" Americans. An accompanying campaign email said: "Mitt Romney admitted he thinks it's fair that his $20 million income was taxed at a lower rate than someone making $50,000." 

IRS data, though, shows that Romney's effective income tax rate -- that's what he pays as a percentage of his income once deductions and other benefits are factored in -- is actually far higher than what most Americans pay. 

And it's certainly higher than what someone making $50,000 pays. 

IRS data from 2010 shows someone making between $50,000 and $75,000 on average pays an effective rate of 7.8 percent. Even someone making between $100,000 and $200,000 pays a 12.1 percent rate -- also lower than Romney's. 

So what is the Obama campaign referring to? There are a couple possibilities. 

The campaign likely is trying to make the point that Romney's income -- at least the huge chunk of it that is derived from investments -- is taxed at a 15 percent rate, while others who earn their money from a paycheck are taxed at marginal income rates going all the way up to 35 percent. 

The latter percentage, though, comes down once deductions and exemptions are included. The Tax Foundation estimated in a report in January that Romney's rate in 2010 -- which was also about 14 percent -- was higher than what 97 percent of Americans pay. 

The math works out better for the Obama campaign's claims if all payroll taxes are included in the formula. 

Since Romney earns most his income from investments and not from a paycheck, he doesn't have to pay much toward Social Security and Medicare taxes. But if both the employee and employer share of those taxes are included, according to a Tax Policy Center chart, the middle tier of earners would be paying a 15.5 percent effective rate. (As pointed out in an earlier report by FactCheck.org.) 

That would be slightly higher than Romney's rate. 

The Obama campaign, asked about its latest Web video, told FoxNews.com "you can't ignore the payroll tax" considering how big of a hit that is for most middle-class families.  

The Obama campaign also referred FoxNews.com to Romney's comments to CBS' "60 Minutes. 

In the interview, Romney was asked by reporter Scott Pelley whether Romney's rate is "fair to the guy who makes $50,000 and paid a higher rate than you did?" 

Without disputing that claim, Romney said it was fair and explained: "It is a low rate. And one of the reasons why the capital gains tax rate is lower is because capital has already been taxed once at the corporate level, as high as 35 percent." 

The claim by Pelley, though, made certain assumptions without explaining them. 

Obama used Pelley's phrasing to repeat the claim Monday on ABC's "The View." 

"Yesterday Governor Romney on 60 Minutes said -- was asked does he think it is fair that he pays a lower tax rate than somebody that's making $50,000 a year, and he said yes," Obama said. 

As the Media Research Center pointed out, an ABC reporter also claimed that Romney's 14.1 percent rate was "lower" than that of an auto mechanic making $75,000. 

While Romney may or may not pay less than the average middle-class earner -- depending on how one defines middle class and how one defines tax rate -- one thing is clear: Romney does pay at a lower rate than the typical wealthy person. 

IRS data for 2010 showed those making between $1 million and $10 million typically paid at an effective tax rate of more than 25 percent. 

Fox News' Jim Angle contributed to this report. 


Source : foxnews[dot]com
Read More

Fact Check: Is Romney's tax rate really lower than yours?

0 comments


President Obama's campaign, with a good dose of help from the media, is pushing a claim that millionaire Mitt Romney is taxed at a "lower rate" than someone making $50,000 a year. 

The claim, though, is open to debate. It only holds up in a particular scenario in which both income and all payroll taxes are counted. 

The president's campaign presumably is referring to Romney's release last week of his 2011 tax returns, which showed he paid an effective tax rate of 14.1 percent. 

This revelation, as might be expected, fueled a wave of campaign stump speeches and videos. The latest was an Obama Web video blasting Romney's "strange take on tax fairness." It included clips of people accusing Romney of paying a lower rate than "average" Americans. An accompanying campaign email said: "Mitt Romney admitted he thinks it's fair that his $20 million income was taxed at a lower rate than someone making $50,000." 

IRS data, though, shows that Romney's effective income tax rate -- that's what he pays as a percentage of his income once deductions and other benefits are factored in -- is actually far higher than what most Americans pay. 

And it's certainly higher than what someone making $50,000 pays. 

IRS data from 2010 shows someone making between $50,000 and $75,000 on average pays an effective rate of 7.8 percent. Even someone making between $100,000 and $200,000 pays a 12.1 percent rate -- also lower than Romney's. 

So what is the Obama campaign referring to? There are a couple possibilities. 

The campaign likely is trying to make the point that Romney's income -- at least the huge chunk of it that is derived from investments -- is taxed at a 15 percent rate, while others who earn their money from a paycheck are taxed at marginal income rates going all the way up to 35 percent. 

The latter percentage, though, comes down once deductions and exemptions are included. The Tax Foundation estimated in a report in January that Romney's rate in 2010 -- which was also about 14 percent -- was higher than what 97 percent of Americans pay. 

The math works out better for the Obama campaign's claims if all payroll taxes are included in the formula. 

Since Romney earns most his income from investments and not from a paycheck, he doesn't have to pay much toward Social Security and Medicare taxes. But if both the employee and employer share of those taxes are included, according to a Tax Policy Center chart, the middle tier of earners would be paying a 15.5 percent effective rate. (As pointed out in an earlier report by FactCheck.org.) 

That would be slightly higher than Romney's rate. 

The Obama campaign, asked about its latest Web video, told FoxNews.com "you can't ignore the payroll tax" considering how big of a hit that is for most middle-class families.  

The Obama campaign also referred FoxNews.com to Romney's comments to CBS' "60 Minutes. 

In the interview, Romney was asked by reporter Scott Pelley whether Romney's rate is "fair to the guy who makes $50,000 and paid a higher rate than you did?" 

Without disputing that claim, Romney said it was fair and explained: "It is a low rate. And one of the reasons why the capital gains tax rate is lower is because capital has already been taxed once at the corporate level, as high as 35 percent." 

The claim by Pelley, though, made certain assumptions without explaining them. 

Obama used Pelley's phrasing to repeat the claim Monday on ABC's "The View." 

"Yesterday Governor Romney on 60 Minutes said -- was asked does he think it is fair that he pays a lower tax rate than somebody that's making $50,000 a year, and he said yes," Obama said. 

As the Media Research Center pointed out, an ABC reporter also claimed that Romney's 14.1 percent rate was "lower" than that of an auto mechanic making $75,000. 

While Romney may or may not pay less than the average middle-class earner -- depending on how one defines middle class and how one defines tax rate -- one thing is clear: Romney does pay at a lower rate than the typical wealthy person. 

IRS data for 2010 showed those making between $1 million and $10 million typically paid at an effective tax rate of more than 25 percent. 

Fox News' Jim Angle contributed to this report. 


Source : foxnews[dot]com
Read More

Republican Rep. Akin rebuilding Senate bid in Missouri

0 comments


JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. –  Written off by many in his own party a mere month ago, Republican Rep. Todd Akin has been slowly rebuilding his Senate campaign after apologizing for inflammatory remarks about pregnancy and rape.

Now Akin is approaching a critical week that could determine whether his re-emerging campaign can gain enough momentum to put Missouri back in the battleground column as Republicans attempt to win control of the Senate from Democrats.

Tuesday is the deadline for Akin to get a court order to drop his challenge of Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill. But Akin says he won't do so. Instead, Akin plans to ramp up his campaign. He's holding a fundraiser Monday with former Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich. He's addressing a potentially influential group of pastors Tuesday morning. Then as the drop-out clock ticks down, he's kicking off a statewide bus tour for his Senate bid that will include venerable conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly.

"I believe the state of the campaign is looking better and better," Akin said Friday after engaging McCaskill in their first debate and then rallying on the Missouri Capitol lawn with supporters of a newly formed women-for-Akin coalition.

Akin has apologized repeatedly since a TV interview aired Aug. 19 in which he suggested that women's bodies have a natural defense against pregnancy in cases of "legitimate rape." He has repeatedly rejected calls of top national Republicans -- including presidential candidate Mitt Romney -- to quit the race so the state GOP committee can appoint a replacement candidate. Yet some have doubted Akin's resolve.

"There are a lot of donors who have sat on the sidelines and are waiting" for Tuesday's drop-out deadline to pass, said Rick Tyler, a former Gingrich aide who joined Akin's campaign as part of the re-building effort. "We are tilling that hard soil now -- that is, reaching out to people who could potentially give significant amounts of dollars."

Come Tuesday, "those donors are going to see that Todd's going to be on the ballot," Tyler adds.

Whether that triggers an avalanche of money for Akin remains one of the most important questions facing his campaign.

Akin already was starting from behind against McCaskill financially after spending all but a few hundred thousand dollars to win a contentious Aug. 7 Republican primary. After his rape remark, Akin lost the financial support of the Republican National Committee, the Republican senators' political committee and the deep-pocketed Crossroads group affiliated with Republican strategist Karl Rove. That zapped millions of dollars of planned TV advertising.

Since then, Akin has raised nearly $600,000 through a small-dollar, online appeal that has cast his candidacy as an anti-establishment crusade against both Republican Party bosses and President Barack Obama's administration. Former Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee has aided the Internet fundraising drive. But Gingrich's event Monday -- at $500 a person or $750 per couple -- will be Akin's first prominent headliner for a traditional fundraiser in at least five weeks.

"This is an act of conscience on my part -- I didn't like seeking a guy getting beaten up by the power structure," Gingrich said.

But Gingrich also is pragmatic.

"If the Republicans are going to win control of the Senate, they need Missouri," said Gingrich, who led the Republican takeover of the U.S. House in 1994.

Others also are considering coming to Akin's aid, including Sen. Jim DeMint, of South Carolina, who has built the Senate Conservatives Fund into a formidable fundraising organization for its favored candidates.

Republicans need a net gain of four seats in the November elections to take control of the Senate. But Republican-held seats in Maine and Massachusetts are jeopardy, and losses there would increase the number of seats the GOP must wrest away from Democrats. Missouri had been considered one of the Republicans' best chances for a pick-up until Akin's rape remark undercut his campaign.

Regardless, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus flatly reiterated on Sunday he would be sending no resources to aid Akin's campaign.

"We're not going to play in Missouri with Todd Akin, I can tell you that. So it'll be yet to be seen whether he stays in or not," Priebus told ABC's "This Week."

Republican consultant John Hancock, who worked for one of Akin's opponents in the primary, said outside groups had been expected to spend about $15 million to support a Republican Senate candidate in Missouri. Even then, a Republican candidate likely needed to chip in $6 million or $7 million from his own campaign to offset the money from McCaskill and Democratic-aligned groups, Hancock said.

Under that model, a typical candidate would need to be holding about two, $500-a-plate fundraisers a week and as many as five, $2,500-a-plate fundraisers a month, including some out of state, Hancock said.

Gingrich's fundraiser is just one of many that Akin will need in the coming weeks. But if he remains close in the polls to McCaskill, those dollars could start coming a little easier.

"If you get to the first week or second week of October and the Missouri race is still unquestionably part of the equation for getting to 51 senators, then I would be shocked if outside money didn't come in," Hancock said, of the Republican strategy to win control of the Senate.

Akin doesn't expect to recoup all of the financial support he lost. That's why his campaign is focusing heavily on organizing grass-roots coalitions. Akin likely can expect a strong effort from his traditional base of anti-abortion activists and Christian conservatives, but he also needs the support of gun enthusiasts and business owners, some of whom backed Akin's rivals in the Republican primary, Tyler said.

This past week, the inaugural event by a new group of female Akin supporters drew about 300 people in the St. Louis area. A few days later, around 100 turned out for a similar event in Jefferson City, though they were countered by protesters who chanted "rape is rape" while Akin spoke to the crowd.

Julie Thomas, a mother of three from the Lake of Ozarks, said she took it upon herself to organize the women-for-Akin rally. She described herself as strongly "pro-life" and praised Akin as "a man with unparalleled character."

"Whenever he got thrown under the bus by his own party, I just said, `uh, uh.' That was a tipping point for me," Thomas said.

Even as top Republicans abandoned Akin after his remarks, McCaskill insisted that she still expected a close Senate race. At their first debate Friday, McCaskill took on the role of a challenger -- striking first and furiously with accusations that Akin's positions are too extreme on contraception, Medicare, student loans and other issues.

"Our campaign is working hard and taking nothing for granted," said McCaskill spokeswoman Caitlin Legacki. "You can expect Claire to continue working as if she's running from behind."


Source : foxnews[dot]com
Read More

Debates: Obama camp downplays expectations, Romney looks for game changer

0 comments


It isn't often that top officials in President Obama's campaign praise rival Mitt Romney. But when it comes to the presidential debates, there is no stopping the plaudits.

"Gov. Romney is a very skilled debater," said Obama campaign manager Jim Messina. His boss, by contrast, is long and windy, "so clearly the governor has the advantage."

The presidential debates begin in less than two weeks, an important moment in any campaign. The Romney camp has for months argued this is the moment for their candidate to shine. With Mr. Romney lagging behind in national and most state polls, he more than ever needs to make a mark.

As a result both campaigns are working hard to shape expectations.

The Obama campaign wants to set a low bar for the president’s performance, reflecting in part the reality that Obama’s debating skills are weaker than his other political assets. More importantly, the campaign is looking to the three presidential debates, the first of which will be in Denver on Oct. 3, not for a breakthrough, but as a fresh chance to deliver the president’s core message.

Romney and his advisers, by contrast, are talking up the opportunity for the debate to shake up the race. His top advisers have made clear he is spending a lot of time preparing.  Romney began in the middle of the summer and spend almost all of the Democratic National Convention at the secluded Vermont estate of Kerry Healey, his former lieutenant governor in Massachusetts, where he ran practice sessions. Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, played Obama in the simulations.

This summer, Romney advisers anticipated three key moments in the race. The first two – choosing a running mate and the national convention – have come and gone with Romney taking the lead. They are now pointing to the debates.

The extensive early preparation is unusual for a presidential candidate, as is the fact that his advisers publicized his preparations so widely.

The Romney campaign is battling history as well as Obama. Polling organization Gallup reviewed a half-century of data from before and after televised debates and found “few” instances in which the debates may have had a substantial impact on the election outcomes.

Click for more from The Wall Street Journal.


Source : foxnews[dot]com
Read More

Exclusive: UN Still Has Ties That Bind With Bloody Assad Regime

0 comments


As the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad accelerates its ferocious military campaign against its own people, the United Nations Development Program, the U.N.'s flagship anti-poverty agency, is still intimately linked to institutions that keep the Assad family’s grip on power -- and that conduct surveillance and may be conducting cyber-warfare against those protesting the brutal regime.

One of the UNDP's partners in its elaborate development schemes for the battered nation -- now suspended due to Assad’s onslaught -- is the Syrian Computer Society (SCS), an organization created by Assad’s older brother and run by Assad himself until he assumed the presidency in 2000. In a 2007 U.N. report, the society was hailed as “the main and most widely used private provider of Internet services” in the country -- and a participant in major collaborations involving information and communications technology (ICT) with the Assad government dating back for years.   

The computer servers and other (ICT) installed in U.N. offices in Syria, which operate at www.un.org under the auspices of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP),  are hosted at an Internet address owned by SCS. 

Sharing the same Society-owned  IP address as  www.un.org  are a flock of Syrian government departments, clearly identified by their “.gov.sy” listings, many of which have also worked in close partnership with UNDP for years.

CLICK HERE FOR THE IP ADDRESS INFORMATION

Other U.N. organizations, including the U.N. relief agency known as UNHCR -- which is deeply involved in aiding refugees from the Assad reign of terror -- are hosted at another website address also owned by the Society.

According to a UNDP press spokesman, the agency’s relationship to the Syrian Internet provider is purely routine: “We contracted SCS services because it was the only organization with the required infrastructure and technical support able to provide Internet services.” He added that “servers hosted at UNDP’s Country Office in Syria are protected by a firewall system.”

Similar points were made by a spokesman for UNHCR.

In fact, in at least 79 of 166 UNDP country offices around the world, the organization bypasses local Internet services by using private -- and more secure --VSAT satellite transmissions for its Internet communications . The Syria office is not among the 79, though such services are readily available in the Middle East.

According to the UNDP spokesman, UNDP “has moved” to a VSAT system, but according to information on UNDP’s procurement website, the bidding for such a global system for UNDP seems to be ongoing.

CLICK HERE FOR UNDP’S VSAT BIDDING NOTICE

Despite the claims that the relationship with SCS is nothing out of the ordinary, a cloud of puzzles still surround it, starting with the different and directly contradictory answers provided by the same UNHCR spokesman on two consecutive days when asked to explain a financial riddle. 

Why, according to U.N. procurement records for 2010 and 2011, did the relief agency uniquely show the “location of the supplier” -- meaning the location of the payment – for “computer services” from  SCS  not, as other U.N. agencies did, in Syria but in Switzerland?

According to the first answer, the payments were merely made through UNHCR’s Swiss headquarters bank to “save costs and improve efficiencies.”  The next day the spokesman added an update: forget that.

“UNHCR pays SCS locally in Syria and not through HQ Bank accounts in Switzerland as UNHCR complies with the necessary restrictions on international banking transactions,” the spokesman said.  “There were no payments via Switzerland.”

The fact that two separate annual compilations of U.N. spending for two separate years showed the SCS supplier payments going to Switzerland, in computer-assembled statistical reports that also record numerous UNHCR payments -- in Syria -- for other goods and services used in Syria, is apparently “an error.”

CLICK HERE FOR THE PROCUREMENT RECORDS

Similar mind-bending might be required to consider SCS as no more than an ordinary Internet services provider.

As far back as 2009, the Paris-based organization Reporters Without Borders,  which has called Syria “one of the world’s most repressive countries toward Internet users,” put SCS on a list of “Internet enemies,” and charged that SCS  “can intercept emails and therefore monitor dissidents,” something that the regime had been doing for at least two previous years, tracking cyber-protesters  through their IP addresses.

Also in 2009, in confidential State Department cables later published by the rogue website Wikileaks, U.S. diplomats relayed concerns from American relief organizations that unauthorized SCS employees were being placed in their offices without permission, in order, the diplomats said, to “keep tabs” on the grassroots aid groups as popular hostility to the Assad regime deepened.

More recently, allegations have surfaced in the human rights blogosphere that members of the so-called Syrian Electronic Army -- pro-regime hackers who have taken down or defaced news websites with cyber-attacks, or used them to spread disinformation about Assad’s opposition -- might have ties to SCS. These ties have never been fully demonstrated, says Paul Rosenzweig, a visiting senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation and a former deputy assistant secretary for policy in the Department of Homeland Security.

“Plausible. Likely,” he told Fox News. “Can you call it proven? No.”

The main point, though, he notes, is that “everything in Syria is under the government’s thumb.”

For his part, a UNDP spokesman said, in reply to questions from Fox News, that “UNDP has not been officially informed of any complaints by NGOs regarding surveillance activities by SCS.  SCS does not have free access to UNDP premises.”

But there are connections between the Syria Computer Society and other Syrian institutions that are accused of more sinister intentions than spying and prying.

Also hosted at the IP address shared with UNDP is the Commercial Bank of Syria (CBS), a state-owned financial institution that has been under U.S. Treasury sanctions since 2006 for terrorist-related money laundering. On its website, www.cbs-bank.sy, CBS denies the money-laundering charges.

For the past year, however, the bank  has also been under U.S. Treasury sanctions for something even more alarming: alleged financial ties to Syrian and North Korean  organizations involved in ballistic missile production and creation of  “unconventional” weapons of mass destruction, as well as ties to Iranian banks linked to that country’s own nuclear proliferation program.

 CLICK HERE FOR THE 2011 U.S. TREASURY ANNOUNCEMENT 

Additional sanctions against the bank were levied by the European Union in October 2011,  in a bid -- so far unsuccessful -- to stem the “appalling and brutal campaign the Syrian regime is waging against its own people,” according to the European Union’s top foreign affairs official, Catherine Ashton.

Along with electronic ties, there is a human link between the sanctioned bank and the Syrian Computer Society.

According to website information obtained by Fox News, a  computer expert named Ghassan Fallouh, who is also a prominent academic at Syria’s International University for Science and Technology, has served on the boards of both institutions since 2010, and on the board of the Syrian Computer Society since 2006.

Fallouh’s university resume says that he also served from 1999 to 2004 as a “consultant to the UNDP for the [Syrian] Central Bank.”

CLICK HERE FOR FALLOUH’S RESUME

Questions to Fallouh about the Syrian Computer Society, sent by Fox News on August 16, had not been answered by the time this article was published.

According to UNDP’s spokesman, “UNDP has no commercial relationship with CBS.”

Whatever the connections between SCS and other organs of the regime, experts argue, the Syrian Computer Society is much more than an Internet host for the U.N., the Assad government and alleged financiers of weapons of mass destruction.

It is an important “tool of the regime,” according to David Schenker, head of the program on Arab Politics at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a prominent bipartisan think tank, and a former adviser on Syrian affairs to then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

“When Assad came to power, he was the Internet president,” Schenker says.  “He was setting the stage for how enlightened he would be. He made an effort to burnish the modern nature of the new regime,” with SCS as part of the effort.

Now, Schenker says, “we know he had no intention whatsoever of doing this.”

In the now-savage environment of Syria’s expanding  civil war, the relationship between the U.N. and its cyber-host raises additional questions about UNDP’s long relationship with Assad, and the organization’s strategy of “national execution” of its programs in dangerous corners of the developing world.

That strategy makes the government itself the chief implementer of social programs created with UNDP technical assistance and supervision, and builds intertwining financial and work relationships between the world body’s representatives on the ground and key ministries and institutions that ultimately help to ensure the regime’s control.

It also apparently made UNDP consider the Syrian Computer Society  as a “partner” of UNDP and a formal member of Syrian “civil society” in a planned six-year program  to help transform Syria under Assad, from a Soviet-style centrally planned economy to a “people-centered social-market economy,” in UNDP’s phrase.

A version of a so-called “country program document” for Syria covering 2007-2011 (and later extended to 2012), was distributed to UNDP’s 36-country supervisory Executive Board on April 26, 2006, prior to their June meeting . A record of  Executive Board decisions posted after the group’s subsequent  meeting in September 2006,  show that the body “took note” of the report -- U.N.-speak for passed it without making changes.

SCS  is listed in an appended “results and resources framework” to that document as a private sector partner in two central UNDP initiatives, to improve “structures and climate for trade, investment and competitiveness,” and likewise improve “employment environment and opportunities for skills enhancement for the under- and unemployed, especially women and youth.”

CLICK HERE FOR THE RESULTS AND RESOURCES FRAMEWORK.

According to the country program itself, the plan had also been approved by the Syrian government in February 2006.

According to UNDP’s spokesman, however, “although it was mentioned in UNDP’s results and resources framework, no agreement was made with SCS. Accordingly, the UNDP Syria country office has never had any development-related agreement with SCS.”


Source : foxnews[dot]com
Read More

Obama, Romney campaigns suspend negative ads on 9/11 anniversary

0 comments


President Obama and Mitt Romney are taking a rare break from the campaign cycle, suspending negative ads for a day and keeping their remarks apolitical out of respect for the victims of the Sept. 11 terror attacks -- as the nation marks 11 years since the tragedy. 

Obama, first lady Michelle Obama and White House staffers observed a moment of silence Tuesday on the White House south lawn in memory of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. 

Later in the afternoon, Romney will speak at the annual conference of the National Guard Association of the United States, whose members were deployed as part of the U.S. response to the attacks. 

Vice President Joe Biden will mark the day at a memorial service at Shanksville, Pa., where one of the hijacked airliners crashed after passengers fought the terrorists. Biden grew up in nearby Scranton, Pa. 

In a dramatic turn-around from the two previous presidential elections after the 2001 attacks, the race this year has been dominated by the economy rather than national security concerns. 

Polls show Obama leading Romney on terrorism and national security issues, but both are a low priority for voters concerned about sluggish economic growth and an unemployment rate still above 8 percent. 

A CBS News/New York Times poll conducted in July found just 37 percent of voters called terrorism and security extremely important to their vote, while 54 percent said the economy and jobs were uppermost. 

In 2004, the first presidential election after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, about two-thirds of voters said protecting the country was more important than creating jobs when deciding their vote for president, according to an AP-Ipsos poll conducted shortly before that election. President George W. Bush defeated Democratic challenger Sen. John Kerry in large part by convincing voters that he was the best candidate to keep the country safe. 

That role now falls to incumbent Obama, who accepted the nomination for a second term at a Democratic convention that reminded voters at every turn that the president ordered the daring raid that killed Al Qaeda leader Usama bin Laden. 

Attacks on the terrorist network continue. On Monday, an airstrike killed Al Qaeda's No. 2 leader in Yemen, Saeed al-Shihri, a Saudi national who fought in Afghanistan and spent six years at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay. 

The post-Sept. 11 wars in Iraq and Afghanistan continue to have political implications. Romney did not mention Afghanistan in his speech accepting the Republican Party's presidential nomination, though he did address the war in a speech a day earlier. Still, Democrats criticized him for the omission from his nomination address. 

The Associated Press contributed to this report.


Source : foxnews[dot]com
Read More