The exit poll reduction: Pennywise and pound foolish, by Steve Singiser Billionaire homophobes and school privatizers are behind drive to weaken California unions, by Laura Clawson Gray Panthers, Raging Grannies and savvy seniors, by Denise Oliver Velez Let's not give Mitt Romney a pass on gay marriage, by Scott Wooledge Debate advice for President Obama: Mitt Romney will tell a lot of lies, and you must refute them, by Laurence Lewis Mitt Romney's win is conservatism's loss, by Dante Atkins
President Obama's campaign set a monthly record for the 2012 cycle in September, hauling in more than $150 million, according to the Wall Street Journal: The September total far surpasses the $114 million raised in August, when the Obama team snapped a three-month streak in which it was outraised by Republican challenger Mitt Romney. At the time, the $114 million was the most the Obama campaign had collected in any one month in the 2012 election season. The most the Romney campaign has collected so far was $111 million in August.
The September total far surpasses the $114 million raised in August, when the Obama team snapped a three-month streak in which it was outraised by Republican challenger Mitt Romney. At the time, the $114 million was the most the Obama campaign had collected in any one month in the 2012 election season. The most the Romney campaign has collected so far was $111 million in August.
In a Fox Business interview Wednesday, Rep. Ron Paul refused to say who he was planning on voting for — but ruled out voting for Mitt Romney or President Obama, leaving only one plausible option. "I obviously haven't announced in support for Romney, so that means that's very unlikely," Paul said. "And I don't think anybody think's I'm going to vote for Obama. So it's back to that frustration level in not seeing a dramatic choice in how the system works."
"I obviously haven't announced in support for Romney, so that means that's very unlikely," Paul said. "And I don't think anybody think's I'm going to vote for Obama. So it's back to that frustration level in not seeing a dramatic choice in how the system works."
Jim Lehrer has been widely criticized for his passive performance as the moderator of Wednesday’s night’s presidential debate, but in his first post-debate interview, he tells POLITICO that he was simply fulfilling his new mission, which was to allow the candidates to engage one another without interruption. “Based on what the goal was, I saw it as successful,” Lehrer told POLITICO. “I’ve always said this and finally I had a chance to demonstrate it: The moderator should be seen little and heard even less. It is up to the candidates to ask the follow-up questions and challenge one another.” “I don’t consider that being passive, I consider it being effective,” he said.
“Based on what the goal was, I saw it as successful,” Lehrer told POLITICO. “I’ve always said this and finally I had a chance to demonstrate it: The moderator should be seen little and heard even less. It is up to the candidates to ask the follow-up questions and challenge one another.”
“I don’t consider that being passive, I consider it being effective,” he said.
Star Jones, of all people. I mean, I haven’t thought about Star Jones in I don’t know how long, I was unaware she was even on TV still. But she apparently shows up on a morning show… and all of a sudden out of the blue, Star Jones said after I sent this email [coming out], Star Jones said that this was a ratings ploy by me to boost ratings. That’s why it’s so annoying. Of all the ways to boost ratings, like, if I was wanting to boost ratings, I’d have waited to announce it on a “very special episode,” that would have been promo’d for weeks and weeks, and there would have been commercials, “Andersons HUGE announcement!”, and you would have a cutaway of the audience going “oh!” [covers his mouth in shock]. But instead, I was in Africa on an assignment for 60 Minutes. I sent an email to a friend of mine who put it on a Web site. I gave no interviews about it. I never talked about it. I wasn’t even on the air for days afterward.
That’s why it’s so annoying. Of all the ways to boost ratings, like, if I was wanting to boost ratings, I’d have waited to announce it on a “very special episode,” that would have been promo’d for weeks and weeks, and there would have been commercials, “Andersons HUGE announcement!”, and you would have a cutaway of the audience going “oh!” [covers his mouth in shock].
But instead, I was in Africa on an assignment for 60 Minutes. I sent an email to a friend of mine who put it on a Web site. I gave no interviews about it. I never talked about it. I wasn’t even on the air for days afterward.
A pornographic website that said it launched a fundraising effort for and was adamantly rejected by Susan G. Komen for the Cure still wants to raise money for Breast Cancer Awareness Month. The porn site said in a press release that it is now looking for a new charity for its “Save the Boobs” campaign throughout October. [...] But the Dallas-based organization said Wednesday that it was aware of the campaign and wanted nothing to do with it. “We are not a partner, not accepting donations, and have asked them to stop using our name,” Komen said.
The porn site said in a press release that it is now looking for a new charity for its “Save the Boobs” campaign throughout October. [...]
But the Dallas-based organization said Wednesday that it was aware of the campaign and wanted nothing to do with it. “We are not a partner, not accepting donations, and have asked them to stop using our name,” Komen said.