White House 2012

Gingrich Gets Glittered by Gay-Rights Activist

Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
May 18, 2011, 8 a.m.

Ex-Rep. Nath­an Deal (R) “paid fed­er­al in­come taxes equal to” just 2% of his in­come in ‘06 and ‘07, “but won’t ex­plain how he did it.” Aides to Deal “said they will neither re­lease ad­di­tion­al tax doc­u­ments nor an­swer more ques­tions about the can­did­ate’s per­son­al fin­ances.”

Want More On This Race? Check out the Hot­line Dash­board for a com­pre­hens­ive run­down of this race, in­clud­ing stor­ies, polls, ads, FEC num­bers, and more!

In “every oth­er year,” the Deals “gave” the gov’t on av­er­age 17% of their ad­jus­ted gross in­come” or 26% of their “tax­able in­come” (Judd, At­lanta Journ­al-Con­sti­tu­tion, 10/10).

Com­mon Cause GA head Bill Boz­arth: “Rep. Deal may very well be our next gov­ernor and I be­lieve the people of Geor­gia would be much more com­fort­able trust­ing him in that job if he was will­ing to give us the an­swer to these ques­tions be­fore we voted for him.”

Ex-Gov. Roy Barnes (D): “Noth­ing matches up. When some­body pays $2,000 in taxes on $200,000 in in­come, something is wrong.” Deal spokes­per­son Bri­an Robin­son: “Nath­an has paid every cent he owes in taxes, and he’s had three ac­count­ants re­view all of his taxes to as­sure that every line of his tax forms is cor­rect” (Mc­Caf­frey, AP, 10/10).

The Money Trail

Barnes “is re­ly­ing heav­ily on con­tri­bu­tions” from atty. He “re­por­ted tak­ing in” $2.8M in the 3rdQ and “spend­ing” $2.3M. He has $1.6M CoH. Deal “raised” about $2.7M and “spent” $1.3M. He’s “sit­ting on more than” $1.7 CoH.

More than a “quarter of the money” Barnes raised “came from” at­tys and law firms (Red­mon/Shein­in, At­lanta Journ­al-Con­sti­tu­tion, 10/8).

Fam­ily First

Barnes’s camp “said the can­did­ate would can­cel all ap­pear­ances” 10/11 “to at­tend to a daugh­ter, Al­lis­on Barnes Salt­er, and two grand­chil­dren in­volved in a head-on col­li­sion” (Gal­lo­way, “Polit­ic­al In­sider”, At­lanta Journ­al-Con­sti­tu­tion, 10/10).

Po­lice “be­lieve ex­cess­ive speed may have caused a crash” that left a Cobb Co. teen­ager “in crit­ic­al con­di­tion” and “in­jured” Salt­er and “two grand­daugh­ters.” The teen “struck the front” of the vehicle op­er­ated by Salt­er with the Porsche Box­ter he drove (Stevens, At­lanta Journ­al-Con­sti­tu­tion, 10/11).

Barnes: “Mar­ie and I are so grate­ful for all your thoughts and pray­ers. Our pray­ers con­tin­ue to be with the oth­er fam­il­ies in­volved. I’m fo­cused on my fam­ily right now, but will be back on the trail to­mor­row. Thank you” (Twit­ter, 10/11).

Robin­son: “As fel­low par­ents and grand­par­ents, Nath­an and Sandra are keep­ing the Barnes fam­ily in their thoughts and pray­ers to­night. They are saddened to hear of the in­jur­ies and hope for speedy re­cov­er­ies for all in­volved” (re­lease, 10/11).

The gas-price war could gobble up Pres­id­ent Obama’s en­tire green-en­ergy agenda, be­cause it may de­vour his pres­id­ency. Gobble and de­vour may be a bit alarm­ist, I grant you. But polls this week — and White House be­ha­vi­or — be­speak deep-seated, le­git­im­ate con­cern.

Last month, the CBS News/New York Times poll re­gistered a 50 per­cent ap­prov­al rat­ing for Obama, the highest since last May and only the second time since April 2010 that he had hit 50 per­cent or high­er. Now, the same poll shows the pres­id­ent’s ap­prov­al rat­ing at 41 per­cent. Obama’s num­bers sank 9 points even as poll re­spond­ents said that things were mov­ing in the right dir­ec­tion (the right-track num­ber jumped from 24 per­cent to 29 per­cent). The ABC News/Wash­ing­ton Post poll showed a sim­il­ar down­ward pat­tern but a smal­ler or­der of mag­nitude. In one month, Obama’s ap­prov­al rat­ing in that sur­vey fell from 50 per­cent to 46 per­cent. In both, rat­ings for his hand­ling of the eco­nomy fell. In the ABC/Post sur­vey, ap­prov­al tumbled from 44 per­cent to 38 per­cent (with a 59 per­cent dis­ap­prov­al rat­ing), and in the CBS/Times poll, it fell from 44 per­cent to 39 per­cent (with a 54 per­cent dis­ap­prov­al rat­ing).

These sud­den re­versals, in what the White House dis­misses as out­lier polls, erase much of the steady gain in gen­er­ic ap­prov­al and sup­port for Obama’s eco­nom­ic policies since Septem­ber. That’s when the White House mes­sage shif­ted away from Re­pub­lic­an turf on debts and de­fi­cits to­ward jobs and high­er taxes on the wealthy.

The pop­u­list wave that Obama was rid­ing ap­pears to have been de­voured by the un­der­tow of high­er gas prices — des­pite hy­per­act­ive at­tempts to shield his pres­id­ency from the polit­ic­al back­lash.

Some Re­pub­lic­ans de­light in Obama’s gas-price pre­dic­a­ment, re­mem­ber­ing how he skewered Pres­id­ent Bush and GOP nom­in­ee John Mc­Cain dur­ing the 2008 cam­paign. On April 25, 2008, Obama stood in front of gas pumps in In­di­ana­pol­is and de­cried the hard­ships that high­er prices ($3.43 per gal­lon in In­di­ana­pol­is at the time) were in­flict­ing on middle-class fam­il­ies. “Few costs, ob­vi­ously, are rising faster than the ones people pay at the pump,” Obama said. “To most Amer­ic­ans, they are a huge prob­lem, bor­der­ing on a crisis.”

Fast-for­ward to this year. On Jan. 23, the av­er­age price of a gal­lon of gas in In­di­ana­pol­is was $3.19. On March 13, it was $3.98 — a 25 per­cent in­crease in 50 days. That isn’t bor­der­ing on a crisis. That’s a full-blown crisis.

Pan­ic with­in the White House is palp­able. Obama gran­ted in­ter­views on Monday to loc­al TV af­fil­i­ates from Cin­cin­nati; Or­lando, Fla.; Des Moines, Iowa; and Pitt­s­burgh. These are not only big swing-state cit­ies, each has also suffered alarm­ing price spikes. Here’s the tale of the tape from Gas­Buddy.com: Since Jan. 23, gas prices are up 67 cents in Cin­cin­nati, 40 cents in Or­lando, 59 cents in Des Moines, and 36 cents in Pitt­s­burgh.

Price pres­sure isn’t all that Obama faces, and, by it­self, it can­not ex­plain all of his ap­prov­al-rat­ing woes. It ap­pears that something deep­er is at work here, and the way the pres­id­ent deals with it will tell the na­tion a great deal about his en­ergy philo­sophy and his polit­ic­al strength.

In the 2008 gas-pump speech in In­di­ana­pol­is, Obama said, “There is no easy an­swer to our en­ergy crisis. Any real solu­tion isn’t go­ing to come overnight.” This is pre­cisely what he is say­ing now. Give him cred­it for con­sist­ency. What Obama prom­ised in 2008 was a $150 bil­lion in­vest­ment in “the green-en­ergy sec­tor” that would cre­ate “5 mil­lion new jobs.”

The ver­dict on these in­vest­ments is not yet in, but the pres­id­ent faces a danger that gas prices could be­come the proxy for voter an­ti­pathy to­ward his over­all “green jobs” agenda. Some of the evid­ence for Obama is troub­ling.

The eco­nom­ic-stim­u­lus pack­age de­voted $90 bil­lion to green jobs. A White House pro­gress re­port re­leased on Monday coun­ted 224,500 jobs cre­ated. That’s a far cry from a $150 bil­lion in­vest­ment cre­at­ing 5 mil­lion jobs. The Chevy Volt, its $48,700 stick­er price sub­sid­ized by fed­er­al tax­pay­ers to the tune of $7,500, has sus­pen­ded pro­duc­tion. Stock prices for non­sub­sid­ized elec­tric-vehicle com­pan­ies — such as Li-ion Mo­tors, T3 Mo­tion, and ZAP — are down sharply.

That’s not all. The fail­ure of sol­ar-cell maker Solyn­dra and two oth­er green-en­ergy firms, En­er 1 (lith­i­um-ion bat­ter­ies) and Beacon Power (en­ergy stor­age), col­lect­ively cost tax­pay­ers $696 mil­lion. A $500 mil­lion green-jobs train­ing pro­gram now un­der in­vest­ig­a­tion in the House has vastly un­der­per­formed. The Labor De­part­ment’s in­spect­or gen­er­al found that the pro­gram placed about 10 per­cent of the job seekers it ori­gin­ally en­vi­sioned.

In all of these cases, the White House says that today’s spend­ing and sub­sid­iz­ing will pay off in the fu­ture. Fur­ther, the ad­min­is­tra­tion ar­gues that Re­pub­lic­ans’ hos­til­ity to green tech­no­lo­gies will soon re­leg­ate them to “flat-earth-so­ci­ety” status. Obama has said that the coun­try has no choice but to catch up on years of neg­lect in fin­an­cing green start-ups — some of which might very well fail — to close the green-tech­no­logy gap with our glob­al com­pet­it­ors.  

That ar­gu­ment will get its stern­est test ever in the fiery de­bate about gas prices. Make no mis­take: What Obama says and does on gas prices will de­term­ine the fate of his green-en­ergy agenda “¦ and pos­sibly his pres­id­ency.

What We're Following See More »
SANS PROOF
NRA Chief: Leftist Protesters Are Paid
21 hours ago
UPDATE
NEW TRAVEL BAN COMING SOON
Trump Still on Campaign Rhetoric
23 hours ago
UPDATE
“WE’RE CHANGING IT”
Trump Rails On Obamacare
1 days ago
UPDATE

After spending a few minutes re-litigating the Democratic primary, Donald Trump turned his focus to Obamacare. “I inherited a mess, believe me. We also inherited a failed healthcare law that threatens our medical system with absolute and total catastrophe” he said. “I’ve been watching and nobody says it, but Obamacare doesn’t work.” He finished, "so we're going to repeal and replace Obamacare."

FAKE NEWS
Trump Goes After The Media
1 days ago
UPDATE

Donald Trump lobbed his first attack at the “dishonest media” about a minute into his speech, saying that the media would not appropriately cover the standing ovation that he received. “We are fighting the fake news,” he said, before doubling down on his previous claim that the press is “the enemy of the people." However, he made a distinction, saying that he doesn't think all media is the enemy, just the "fake news."

FBI TURNED DOWN REQUEST
Report: Trump Asked FBI to Deny Russia Stories
1 days ago
THE LATEST

"The FBI rejected a recent White House request to publicly knock down media reports about communications between Donald Trump's associates and Russians known to US intelligence during the 2016 presidential campaign, multiple US officials briefed on the matter tell CNN. But a White House official said late Thursday that the request was only made after the FBI indicated to the White House it did not believe the reporting to be accurate."

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login