Search
Archives
Categories

Archive for the ‘National Security’ Category

When it comes to presidential acceptance speeches, Hillary Clinton’s speech was as devoid of vision as it was devoid of honesty. When she recognized Bernie Sanders’ supporters, Hillary was in full pander mode. People shouldn’t believe Hillary when she said “You’ve put economic and social justice issues front and center, where they belong. And to all of your supporters here and around the country: I want you to know, I’ve heard you. Your cause is our cause. Our country needs your ideas, energy, and passion.”

Translation into Hillary-speak: I need your votes and if I have to pander a little, it’s worth it. I’ve wanted this office so long and I’ve broken so many promises. What’s one more?

Hillary was back in pander mode again when she said “Now we are clear-eyed about what our country is up against. But we are not afraid. We will rise to the challenge, just as we always have. We will not build a wall. Instead, we will build an economy where everyone who wants a good paying job can get one.”

Q1: If we’re so clear-eyed, why can’t this administration admit that Islamic jihadist terrorists are killing people in Orlando, San Bernardino and Nice, France? If we’re so clear-eyed, why do Democrats insist that the solution to these terrorist attacks can be solved with stricter gun control laws? If Democrats are so clear-eyed, how could Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton say that Philando Castile would still be alive if he’d been white?

This is another jaw-dropping statement:

We will not ban a religion. We will work with all Americans and our allies to fight and defeat terrorism.

It isn’t that I can’t believe Hillary would say this. It’s that I don’t believe that her administration is serious about defeating terrorists. If there’s anything that we’ve learned about Democrats and terrorists, it’s that they pull their punches far too often.

We have the most dynamic and diverse people in the world. We have the most tolerant and generous young people we’ve ever had. We have the most powerful military. The most innovative entrepreneurs. The most enduring values.

Mrs. Clinton, if we have the most powerful military, which I think is true, why couldn’t US military assets get there to rescue Christopher Stevens? Mrs. Clinton, our military is the most powerful military in the world but it’s been getting ripped apart by the administration you served in. Why should we trust you to fight for our military when you won’t fight for our diplomats?

This part is jaw-dropping:

Don’t let anyone tell you we don’t have what it takes. We do. And most of all, don’t believe anyone who says: “I alone can fix it.” Those were actually Donald Trump’s words in Cleveland. And they should set off alarm bells for all of us.

Remember this?

Then-candidate Obama sounded awfully narcissistic in saying this:

I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on earth.

Now Hillary is preaching the gospel of collectivism. Why didn’t she speak out against President Obama’s unconstitutional amnesty executive action? Isn’t our Constitution worth fighting over? After all, she spoke passionately about the Founding Fathers earlier in the speech.

If I wanted to critique Hillary’s entire speech, I’d need to write a Part II, which I’ll do in the morning. Check back then.

The messaging from Joe Biden’s and President Obama’s speeches seems to have been ‘We’re on the right path. Elect Hillary to President Obama’s third term.’ Karl Rove thinks that they missed an opportunity. According to his article in the WSJ, he thinks that Bill Clinton blew it, too. Rove cited a “June 26 Pew Research Center survey found that 24% of Americans are ‘satisfied with the way things are going in this country today’; 71% are ‘dissatisfied.'”

From that, Rove concluded that “President Bill Clinton’s speech Tuesday night didn’t significantly alter this dynamic. Even his political talents couldn’t transform his wife into a “change-agent,” a phrase he repeatedly invoked. If anything, Mr. Clinton reminded voters that Mrs. Clinton has been a political fixture for decades.” It’s pretty difficult for a president who left office 16 years ago to talk about his wife as a change agent. It’s especially difficult considering the fact that he left office but she hasn’t, except to run for president. It’s virtually impossible considering that the elites in the Democratic Party rigged the nominating contest in Hillary’s favor. (It’s impossible to think that the Democratic Party’s insiders would rig a system in the outsider’s favor, isn’t it?)

More than all of that, the truth is that this is going to be a national security election, thanks in part to increased ISIS attacks on western Europe and radicalized Muslims killing people in an Orlando night club. Hillary’s record on national security sucks. The Democrats’ “Birkenstock-and-granola wing” is still living in la-la land by thinking that ISIS won’t really hit us. There’s nothing serious about their thinking, if it can be called that.

The truth is that the Clinton campaign is still stuck too often in a defensive posture. Yesterday’s Trump press conference confirms that. Trump said that he’d appreciate it if Russia would turn over 33,000 emails that Hillary deleted because they were personal and not work-related. Charles Krauthammer exposed the folly of that defense:

Rather than criticizing Trump, the Clinton campaign took the bait:

After Donald Trump’s comments at his press conference today Hillary for America Senior Policy Advisor Jake Sullivan released the following statement:

“This has to be the first time that a major presidential candidate has actively encouraged a foreign power to conduct espionage against his political opponent. That’s not hyperbole, those are just the facts. This has gone from being a matter of curiosity, and a matter of politics, to being a national security issue.”

I don’t know if that’s technically a Freudian slip or not but it’s essentially admitting that the emails Hillary deleted because they’re personal actually have national security, government-owned emails. If the Russians got Hillary’s yoga schedule or her helping Chelsea with wedding plans, that isn’t a matter of national security or espionage.

For all their supposed experience, that was still a rookie mistake.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

During his speech to the delegates attending the Democratic National Convention, Vice President Joe Biden was at his BSing best. At one point in his speech, Biden attacked Donald Trump, saying “lack of empathy and compassion can be summed up in a phrase I suspect he’s most proud of having made famous, ‘you’re fired,’. How can there be pleasure in saying ‘you’re fired?’ He’s trying to tell us he cares about the middle class? Give me a break!” That’s when Biden deployed “his own well-used tagline: “That’s a bunch of malarkey!”

In another part of the speech, Biden praised Hillary, saying “Everybody knows she is smart. Everybody knows she is tough. But I know what she is passionate about. I know Hillary. Hillary understands. Hillary gets it.”

When Biden praised President Obama, he went way overboard, saying that President Barack Obama was “the embodiment of honor, resolve and character, one of the finest presidents we have ever had.” What a bunch of malarkey.

First, if Hillary is so smart, why did she expose her emails to Chinese, Iranian and Russian hackers? If Hillary’s so smart, why did Russia experience a revival after Ronald Reagan killed it? Why did the Muslim Brotherhood take control of Egypt? If Hillary’s so smart, how did Christopher Stevens not get the security he needed?

Next, saying that President Obama is “one of the finest presidents we’ve ever had” isn’t just dishonest. It’s verifiably false on issue after issue. Obamacare was supposedly President Obama’s “signature accomplishment.” Today, Americans were forced out of policies that they were satisfied with and into policies with ever-increasing premiums and skyrocketing deductibles.

President Obama’s stimulus didn’t revive the economy. It’s been the most anemic economy since WWII. In June, 2012, the workforce participation rate was at a 30-year low of 64.3%. Four years later, the labor force participation rate dropped two-tenths of a point to 62.6 percent, near its 38-year low.

In terms of keeping Americans safe, President Obama is a failure. Police officers are getting assassinated, thanks in large part to President Obama’s unwillingness to call out #BlackLivesMatter activists and Al Sharpton for the ‘Hands up, don’t shoot’ hoax. In terms of preventing terrorist attacks and terrorist attacks increasing thanks in large part to President Obama’s unseriousness in destroying ISIS, he’s failed the US and the world.

If that’s the resume of “one of the finest presidents we have ever had”, I’ve got something to say to Vice President Biden: that’s a bunch of malarkey.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , . , , , ,

Politifact’s fact checks are notoriously questionable. This Politifact fact check is among the sloppiest fact checks they’ve ever published.

Politifact’s fact check of Trump’s claim about Syrian refugees is rated as half-true. That’s based on Mr. Trump’s statement that Hillary Clinton “has called for a radical 550 percent increase in Syrian … refugees … despite the fact that there’s no way to screen these refugees in order to find out who they are or where they come from.”

Politifact says “The 550 percent figure is correct. To say that there’s no way to screen them to find out who they are or where they come from ignores the extensive screening they undergo.” That last statement would surprise FBI Director Jim Comey and Jim Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence. This article publishes information that directly contradicts Politifact’s fact check when it says “Virtually no database of information exists to screen Syrian refugees coming into the United States, according to the FBI Director James Comey. The statements were made by Comey while testifying to the House Judiciary Committee about the security risks involved in taking in Syrian refugees.”

In other words, FBI Director Comey testified to the House Judiciary Committee that “virtually no database of information exists to screen Syrian refugees coming into the United States.” That directly contradicts Politifact’s published statements.

Then there’s this statement published in Politifact’s questionable fact check:

Compared to other countries, the United States has accepted very few – about 2,000 last year, for example. Half are children. Only about 2 percent are single men of combat age, the mostly likely demographic for a would-be terrorist.

That statement is directly contradicted by this information:

During the hearing, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) pointed out, according to the U.N., more than 43 million people worldwide are now displaced because of conflicts. Children constitute close to 41 percent of all refugees worldwide and women almost half.

However, the percentages are significantly different when it comes to the Syrian refugees. Of the close to 380,000 arrivals across the Mediterranean Sea from January through September of this year, 15%were children, 13% were women and 72% were men. Gohmert quoted Director of National Intelligence James Clapper as saying, “This provides a prime opportunity for Islamic State groups to attack Western targets … It’s a disaster of biblical proportions.”

This video must be watched for verification:

Based on FBI Director Comey’s testimony and DNI Director Clapper’s statement, I rate Politifact’s fact check mostly false. It ignores congressional testimony that directly contradicts their statements.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

Donald Trump’s acceptance speech last night has been characterized as being scary or dark by Democrats. Mo Elleithee, a former Hillary campaign spokesman, said that this was a dreadful week for the GOP. That’s spin but not very good spin.

Kellyanne Conway, Trump’s pollster, said that she expects Trump and Hillary to be tied in all of the major swing states when the swing state polls start coming out. While it’s wise to take anything from a candidate’s pollster with a grain of salt, I’ve watched Mrs. Conway since she was Ms. Fitzpatrick. She isn’t a spinner. She’s earned the benefit of the doubt with me.

As for Trump’s speech, it was different in important and profound ways. He stripped away the façade that the Obama administration has hidden behind for 8 years. It started when Mr. Trump said “It is finally time for a straightforward assessment of the state of our nation. I will present the facts plainly and honestly. We cannot afford to be so politically correct anymore. So if you want to hear the corporate spin, the carefully-crafted lies, and the media myths, the Democrats are holding their convention next week. Go there.”

Think of that as Trump’s way of telling the elitists in the media and in the Democratic Party (pardon the repetition) that America would hear the truth. Here’s an example of that truthfulness:

These are the facts:

Decades of progress made in bringing down crime are now being reversed by this administration’s rollback of criminal enforcement. Homicides last year increased by 17% in America’s fifty largest cities. That’s the largest increase in 25 years. In our nation’s capital, killings have risen by 50 percent. They are up nearly 60 percent in nearby Baltimore.

In the president’s hometown of Chicago, more than 2,000 have been the victims of shootings this year alone. And almost 4,000 have been killed in the Chicago area since he took office. The number of police officers killed in the line of duty has risen by almost 50 percent compared to this point last year.

Democrats say that the speech was dark. Let’s ask this question: Are those the type of statistics that should make us feel happy? Or are they the type of statistics that make your heart ache? If that wasn’t enough information to make a decision on, this will help thoughtful people make the right decision:

One such border-crosser was released and made his way to Nebraska. There, he ended the life of an innocent young girl named Sarah Root. She was 21 years old and was killed the day after graduating from college with a 4.0 grade point average. Her killer was then released a second time, and he is now a fugitive from the law. I’ve met Sarah’s beautiful family. But to this administration, their amazing daughter was just one more American life that wasn’t worth protecting. One more child to sacrifice on the altar of open borders.

There’s no spinning that story. If I were to put it in tennis language, that story would be “Game. Set. Match. Championship.” Thoughtful people can’t hear that story and think we need to continue this administration’s immigration policies.

This is a powerful indictment of Hillary’s incompetence:

In 2009, pre-Hillary, ISIS was not even on the map. Libya was stable. Egypt was peaceful. Iraq had seen a big reduction in violence. Iran was being choked by sanctions. Syria was somewhat under control.

After four years of Hillary Clinton, what do we have? ISIS has spread across the region and the entire world. Libya is in ruins, and our ambassador and his staff were left helpless to die at the hands of savage killers. Egypt was turned over to the radical Muslim Brotherhood, forcing the military to retake control. Iraq is in chaos. Iran is on the path to nuclear weapons. Syria is engulfed in a civil war and a refugee crisis that now threatens the West. After 15 years of wars in the Middle East, after trillions of dollars spent and thousands of lives lost, the situation is worse than it has ever been before.

This is the legacy of Hillary Clinton: Death, destruction and terrorism and weakness.

That’s a devastating and accurate before and after portrait of Hillary’s incompetence. Think of it as the indictment the Justice Department didn’t attempt to get.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

It’s easy to believe that Chris Christie was a US prosecutor in a previous career before politics. His prosecution speech Tuesday night at the Republican National Convention was intended, as Brit Hume put it, to rip the skin off of Hillary Clinton. If that was the goal, Gov. Christie succeeded.

Early in his speech, Gov. Christie said “Over the last eight years, we have seen this Administration refuse to hold her accountable for her dismal record as Secretary of State. Well, tonight, as a former federal prosecutor, I welcome the opportunity to hold her accountable for her performance and her character.” At that point, it was unmistakable what Gov. Christie was going to do. It was obvious that he was going to prosecute Hillary Clinton within an inch of her political life.

The first case he prosecuted was Libya, saying “In North Africa, she was the chief engineer of our disastrous overthrow of Qaddafi in Libya. Libya today after Hillary Clinton’s grand strategy? Libya’s economy in ruins, death and violence in the streets and ISIS now dominating the country. Hillary Clinton, as a failure for ruining Libya and creating a nest for terrorist activity by ISIS guilty or not guilty?”

The next count Gov. Christie prosecuted Mrs. Clinton on was Boko Haram:

In Nigeria, Hillary Clinton amazingly fought for two years to keep an Al-Qaeda affiliate off the terrorist watch list. What happened because of this reckless action by the candidate who is the self proclaimed champion of women around the world? These terrorists abducted hundreds of innocent young girls two years ago. These school girls are still missing today. What was the solution from the Obama/Clinton team? A hashtag campaign!

Christie was just getting warmed up. Later, it was onto prosecuting Hillary over Syria:

In Syria, she called President Assad a “reformer” and a “different kind of leader”. With 400,000 now dead…think about that. Four. Hundred. Thousand. Dead. At the hands of the man Hillary defended. We must ask this question: Hillary Clinton, as an awful judge of the character of a dictator-butcher in the Middle East guilty or not guilty?

Each time Gov. Christie asked the people in the hall if Hillary was “guilty or not guilty”, they responded with an emphatic statement of “guilty.”

Later, Gov. Christie said “In Russia, she went to the Kremlin on her very first visit and gave them the symbolic reset button. The button should have read, “delete” she is very good at that because she deleted in four years what it took 40 years to build. The next year, she said our goal was to strengthen Russia. Strengthen an adversary led by a dictator who dreams of reassembling the old Soviet empire? What a dangerous lack of judgment. Once again, as a flawed evaluator of dictators and failed strategist who has permitted Russia back in as a major player in the Middle East is Hillary Clinton guilty or not guilty?”

One of the goals of this convention is to turn Hillary’s supposed strength, foreign policy, into a weakness. Thanks to Rudy Giuliani and Chris Christie, they’re well on their way to accomplishing that.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , ,

I intentionally gave this post that inflammatory title. Other than a few left fringers that I could count on my fingers, nobody is pro-terrorist. It isn’t difficult to make a case that there are lots of lefties that hate America or that think that they need to apologize for America, with our current president at the top of that list.

After reading Chris Stirewalt’s article, though, I thought it was important to highlight how the Democrats’ passivity or indifference towards terrorism and their pandering towards #BlackLivesMatter, Hands up, don’t shoot and Al Sharpton have created the situation we’re currently facing.

Shortly after starting in office, President Obama said that he didn’t know the facts surrounding the Cambridge Police Department arresting Henry Gates but that he knew that “the cops acted stupidly.” Later, he sent then-US Attorney General Eric Holder to Ferguson to conduct a civil rights review and investigation. President Obama even bought into the ‘Hands up, don’t shoot’ storyline. President Obama didn’t speak out against Black Lives Matter, either, because he wanted them stirred up for the midterm elections.

Couple that with Bill DeBlasio’s shameful statement that he worries about his son and Gov. Dayton’s statement that he thinks that Philando Castile would still be alive if he wasn’t black and Mrs. Clinton’s statement that systemic racism is putting African-Americans in danger.

It isn’t a stretch to say that the Democrats’ default position is to question law enforcement authorities. It’s simply happened too many times to argue otherwise.

As for terrorism, it’s painfully obvious that this administration hasn’t done all it could in fighting ISIS. John Kerry admitted that attacks against Syria and ISIS would be “unbelievably small”:

In Afghanistan, generals recommended to President Obama that they use a troop surge to destroy the Taliban. Rather than immediately accepting their recommendation, the administration dithered and dithered until the opportunity had passed and the Taliban had escaped. After all that time waiting, President Obama ordered a troop surge, then stated in the very next sentence when he’d pull our the surge troops.

Hillary isn’t much better. She’s more ‘hawkish’, if you can call it that. She’s more willing to use the military but she’s only willing to do that in a photo op way. Look at Libya. She insisted that we get rid of Qaddafi. Eventually, that happened. Then she ignored all of Christopher Stevens’ urgent requests for additional security. After ignoring those urgent cables, the result was Christopher Stevens getting killed in a terrorist attack.

There’s no proof that she’s learned from that lesson.

Simply put, the Democratic Party hasn’t shown that they have the inclination to consistently support police officers or to fight terrorists wherever they are. If we want to make America safe again, then voting for Hillary isn’t an option. She has tons of national security experience with virtually no serious accomplishments. Think Benghazi, the Arab Spring, the Russian Reset Button and insisting that Bashar al-Assad was a reformer we could work with.

That isn’t the type of experience that I’d vote for.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Boston Globe’s Joan Vennochi is one of the most consistently liberal columnists in the nation. That’s her persona. Think of this morning’s column as the literary equivalent of Vennochi taking a wooden spoon to Mrs. Clinton’s political backside.

It didn’t take long for Ms. Vennochi to break out the punishment, saying “One man driving a truck, 84 people dead. Donald Trump wants to declare war on that. It isn’t real policy. It’s rhetoric, a direct appeal to the gut, to the anger and fear people experience when they watch the reports from Nice. Hillary Clinton wants us to be smarter, talk to our allies, and maybe hold a summit. Her typically wonky response reflects little understanding of what average Americans feel when they see bodies, strollers, and a stuffed animal strewn along a beach promenade.”

I haven’t been a fan of Mr. Trump but I’d be intellectually dishonest if I didn’t say that, when it comes to terrorism, Donald Trump gets it. Hillary’s litany of foreign policy mistakes is proof that she doesn’t get it. Ms. Vennochi wasn’t done. A couple paragraphs later, she wrote “Statistically, the likelihood of a terror attack may still be small, but at a certain point, statistics don’t matter. After terrorist attacks in Paris, Brussels, and Istanbul, such violence feels possible in any major city. And attacks at home, in San Bernardino and Orlando, instill fear of the lone wolf terrorist next door, making us suspicious of each other. Last week’s murders of five Dallas police officers were not inspired by any foreign terrorist cause, but elevate the fear and suspicion.”

Dissertations aren’t in order when terrorists hit a soft target. That’s for the professors to deal with a year later. Leaders need to lead. One of President Bush’s highest moments came while standing on a pile of rubble at Ground Zero:

That’s what leaders do. They rally their citizens to a cause bigger than themselves. They don’t issue 5,000-word dissertations on where terrorists start. They don’t explain why we need to understand the terrorists. They tell people that terrorists are evil and, like with other evil people, they need to be destroyed ASAP.

That doesn’t require a 2-year commitment of 250,000 ground troops in a distant country. That’s Iraq, not ISIS. To win this war, we need to listen to people like Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn and others who think like him. ISIS is constantly morphing and transforming itself. It’s essential that we do the same to keep them at bay and prevent their attacks.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Donald Trump is onto something that might change the dynamics of the presidential race. I don’t know whether it’s enough but it’s difficult picturing him not painting the Obama-Clinton foreign policy as anything but a failure. He certainly did in this article, saying “The Middle East today is more unstable than ever before”, adding that “She led him right down a horrible path. He didn’t know what he was doing.”

HINT TO MR. TRUMP: He still doesn’t. It isn’t that he’s stupid generally speaking. It’s that he’s foolish because his ideology won’t let him see reality. Steve Hayes has said multiple times that “Obama sees the world that he wants to exist, not the world that does exist.” That’s exactly right.

Hillary suffers from the same mental disease. On March 27, 2011, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said “many of the members of Congress of both parties who have gone to Syria in recent months have said they believe he’s a reformer.” Hillary is the idiot that gave Russia the infamous reset button. That’s been a disaster for the entire region, starting with Ukraine, then advancing into Syria to stabilize Assad and protecting ISIS.

With ISIS-planned or ISIS-inspired attacks happening more frequently, we can’t tolerate a terrorist ‘new normal’. We need clear-thinking people that aren’t afraid to tell the American people the truth and who won’t hesitate in killing terrorists. Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn is one of those guys. Watch this video and tell me that he isn’t a clear-thinking expert:

John Bolton is another clear-thinking expert:

If there is a Trump administration, Gen. Flynn should be Trump’s Secretary of Defense; Bolton should be his Secretary of State. These are serious men who see the world that exists and that are willing to help Islamic terrorists meet their allotment of virgins. It’s time the US had a national security team that took the world seriously. Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and John Kerry haven’t taken the world seriously in the last 8 years.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This article isn’t good news for Chuck Schumer. Sen. Schumer wants to be the Senate Majority Leader in January. At this point, that’s looking like an uphill fight. The worse news is that it’s looking like the Democrats’ fight is getting more uphill by the week.

The article’s second paragraph says “The Quinnipiac University poll of more than 1,000 Florida voters shows Rubio with a double-digit lead over each of the two likely Democratic nominees, Rep. Patrick Murphy (50%-37%) and Rep. Alan Grayson (50%-38%). The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.”

This is now a safe Republican seat. That poll takes this seat off the list of seats that the Democrats might potentially pick up.

That’s quite a difference from when Sen. Rubio initially announced that he’d seek re-election. At the time, the Cook Political Report said “Republican U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio has reversed his decision to retire from the Senate at the end of this Congress and will run for a second term. In doing so, he has breathed new life into the GOP’s chances of holding the seat, but that doesn’t mean that he has become anything more than the very slightest of favorites in November. The race will remain in the Toss Up column.” It will be interesting to see how Cook explains what tipped that race that quickly.

Remember that this poll happened before the terrorist attack in Nice, France. If I were a betting man, I’d bet the proverbial ranch that Rubio will have opened up a bigger lead next month, especially if the tempo of ISIS-inspired terrorist attacks keeps increasing.

Quinnipiac’s Swing State Poll isn’t good news for Ohio Democrats, either. Their poll says “Sen. Rob Portman [leads]former Gov. Ted Strickland 47–40%.” A couple months back, Portman trailed by 9 points. The next Quinnipiac Swing State Poll had them tied. Now, Portman has opened an outside-the-margin-of-error lead over Gov. Strickland. Clearly, it’s trending in Sen. Portman’s direction. What’s interesting about this is the fact that Gov. Strickland has higher name recognition than Sen. Portman.

Finally, it’s safe to say that Sen. Toomey is sitting in a strong position for re-election:

The man-woman matchup in the Pennsylvania Senate race produces only a small gender gap. Men back Toomey 53%-35%, while women are divided with 45 percent for Toomey and 42 percent for McGinty.

In the pure horse race poll, “Sen. Pat Toomey over Democrat Katie McGinty 49%-39%.” It’s probably too early to say this race is over but it isn’t too early to say that Sen. Toomey is in a solid position to win re-election.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , ,