Better Goosestep with the Goons or Else Girlie …

Plenty of Reagan Republicans have criticized the current Republican Party and their embrace of policies and stances more suitable to the John Birch Society, the KKK and the Taliban than the party’s past lives or the US Constitution.  Bruce Bartlett and David Stockman have both come out with books that mince no words about the embrace of crazy economic policies that don’t resemble anything of Reagan’s views or modern economic theory. So, why is it they’re suddenly jumping on Peggy Noonan?   I guess the boyz don’t like one of their women stepping out of line more than it bothers them that many of their stallions have already bolted from the stable.  Sexism anyone?? First there’s Chris Wallace who is one of the clearest voices of John Birch propaganda and spurious economics to be found on the Fox Propaganda Network.

In her column today, Noonan doubled-down on criticisms she made earlier in the week: “This week I called [the Romney campaign] incompetent, but only because I was being polite,” she wrote. “I really meant “rolling calamity.”

During today’s interview, part of POLITICO’s “Turn The Table” series, Gavin asked Wallace whether conservative opinion makers who have criticized Romney — such as Noonan, David Brooks of The New York Times, and the Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol — had influence on conservatives around the country or were simply participating in an “inside-the-Beltway parlor game.”

“I think it’s more of ‘Inside-the-Beltway,” Wallace said. “Some of the people you’ve mentioned, like Peggy Noonan, sometimes they’re New York City’s idea of conservatives. Kristol is a different deal. Kristol is a serious, movement conservative, and he never wanted Mitt Romney. He always wanted people of the next generation like Ryan, Rubio — so I think he feels disappointed.”

Wallace then mentioned David Frum, the conservative columnist who now writes for the Daily Beast, though whether he was referring to David Frum or David Brooks was unclear.

“David Frum is the guy who turned on George W. Bush. Peggy Noonan has bashed George W. Bush, bashed Mitt Romney, wasn’t crazy about McCain. So, their conservative bona fides I’m not sure I take too seriously,” he said.

One of the creepiest goons in the enforcement racket is John Sununu. Evidently, he doesn’t mind going after Peggy either. Remember, we’ve had a series of wingers criticize Romney recently.  Why single out Noonan?

In today’s edition of the Sununu Series, Mitt Romney’s attack dog pushes back against Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan for her ongoing criticism of Romney’s campaign. “I wouldn’t hire Peggy Noonan to run a campaign,” Sununu says.

What set them off?  Noonan’s blunt assessment of  Romney ‘s inefficient management style was published in this WSJ op ed: Noonan: Romney Needs a New CEO. Here’s three of her points that really hit home.

5. “The president had a strong convention and Romney a weak one.” The RNC failed “to relaunch a rebranded Romney and create momentum.”

6. Team Romney has been “reactive,” partly because of the need for damage control, but it also failed to force the Obama campaign to react to its proposals and initiatives.

7. The “47%” comment didn’t help, but Mr. Romney’s Libya statement was a critical moment. Team Romney did not know “the most basic political tenet of a foreign crisis: when there is an international incident in which America is attacked, voters in this country will (at least in the short term) rally around the flag and the President. Always. It is stunning that Team Romney failed to recognize this.”

Still, the Romney team is attacking Noonan while letting other republican pundits off the hook.  After Scott Brown’s smirking performance last night, I’m beginning to see how much the boys really like to beat up on those uppity girls who dare to question their born-with-a-dick abilities.  Call a Whambulence boyz. The girls obviously hit you where it hurts.


Has Mitt Romney Been Exaggerating His Campaign Finances?

I mentioned this in the morning post, but I may not have emphasized it enough. On Tuesday, there was a report that the Romney campaign is $11 million in debt. The campaign had borrowed $20 million before the Convention to tide them over until they could begin spending funds from the general election coffers. The campaign is choosing to hold onto the cash for now and try to pay it back with new fund-raising.

There have been many reports over the summer that Romney was taking in huge amounts of money, but last night The New York Times posted an article explaining why Romney has been spending more time fund-raising than on the stump in swing states and why his campaign hasn’t been running that many ads in the media. The fact is, that Romney’s campaign Isn’t really rolling in as much money as he’s been leading us to believe.

Despite what appears to be a plump bank account and an in-house production studio that cranks out multiple commercials a day, Mr. Romney’s campaign has been tightfisted with its advertising budget, leaving him at a disadvantage in several crucial states as President Obama blankets them with ads.

One major reason appears to be that Mr. Romney’s campaign finances have been significantly less robust than recent headlines would suggest. Much of the more than $300 million the campaign reported raising this summer is earmarked for the Republican National Committee, state Republican organizations and Congressional races, limiting the money Mr. Romney’s own campaign has to spend.

For each the past three months, the Romney campaign has been claiming contributions of more than $100,000, but it turns out not all of that money went into the campaign account.

Yet at the same time Romney aides worked hard to project the image of a fund-raising machine far outpacing the president’s.

Romney aides released informal dollar figures that lumped several pools of money — some available for his use, others not — into a single figure, providing a perception greater than reality: $106 million in June and $101 million in July, far more than Mr. Obama and the Democrats.

Yet those figures obscured the fact that most of the money Mr. Romney was raising was reserved for those other political entities like the Republican National Committee.

Only $22 million of the huge RNC windfall can be spent in combination with Romney’s presidential campaign. On the other hand, President Obama has more cash on hand.

A closer look at Mr. Romney’s own filings revealed that Mr. Obama, while trailing in overall party fund-raising, was pulling far more money than Mr. Romney into his campaign account, the most useful and flexible dollars a candidate has to spend, in part because of strong collection from small donors who could give again and again without hitting federal limits.

One reason for this is that this year Obama is getting most of his contributions from smaller donors, while Romney has fewer and wealthier donors, many of whom may have already maxed out. They can give unlimited amounts to superpacs, but with all the problems Romney has been having over the past three weeks, you have to wonder if the big guys will want to keep throwing away millions on a losing cause.

To show how the effect the lack of funds is having on Romney’s campaign, the Times compared his and Obama spending on ads in a number of states:

According to a review of spending figures provided by a group that tracks political advertising, from Sept. 10 through Sept. 24, Mr. Romney and his allies reserved $3.7 million in advertising time in Ohio. That compared with $5.2 million for Mr. Obama and his allies.

In Colorado, Mr. Romney is being outspent $2.2 million to $1.5 million during that same period. In New Hampshire, Mr. Obama is spending $1.2 million, compared with $380,000 to benefit Mr. Romney. The vast majority of that is coming not from the Romney campaign but from American Crossroads, the conservative super PAC.

The Times also notes that the Obama campaign has reserved $40 million worth of ad time through November 6, while the Romney campaign has been purchasing ad time day to day–a week ahead at most.

Now I admit that I’m a mathphobe, and I haven’t seen this discussed much around the blogosphere today, so maybe I’m totally nuts. But to me it looks like Romney is worried about money.

The campaigns have to report their spending for the past quarter tonight, and Romney released his report a short time ago. From Politico:

Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign spent more than $66 million in August, ending the month with $50 million in the bank, new federal disclosure reports show….

The campaign took in nearly $67 million in August, doubling the $33 million the campaign in July.
That total doesn’t include a $20 million secured loan the campaign took out in August….

The Romney campaign’s August figures do not include money raised by the Republican National Committee, which operates a joint fundraising operation with the Romney campaign.

Right now Romney has $50 million in his campaign account. It looks to me like he’s going to be dependent on outside groups to fund his advertising. I also heard today that Karl Rove’s Crossroads superpac is not going to have a stunning report–their donations were down in August.

No wonder Romney has been going to so many fund-raisers instead of campaigning. It doesn’t seem smart to me. Doesn’t he have other people who could collect donations for him? Maybe not. And who knows how much longer the big money guys will stick with him? Will he have to start writing his own checks for the campaign?

As I said, I’m terrible at math. Let me know if you think I’m right or wrong about this.


Live Blog: Elizabeth Warren and Scott Brown in First MA Senate Debate

The first Massachusetts Senate debate is tonight at 7PM Eastern. You can watch it on C-Span or on-line at CBSboston. For anyone who is in the Boston area, Elizabeth will be holding a post-debate rally at Adams Park in Roslindale at 3:30 pm on Friday.

Are you ready to rumble? Scott Brown almost wasn’t.

As of 3:30 p.m. ET, Brown was still in Washington, held up by the prospect of late-night votes in the Senate on a continuing resolution to fund the government that needs to get passed before Congress goes into recess.

This afternoon, Brown said that he would need to stay in Washington and skip the debate if there turned out to be late-night votes.

That prompted Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to declare that there would be no votes tonight. As he did so, Reid suggested Brown was trying to use the Senate as an excuse to get out of his debate.
“It’s obvious to me what’s going on,” Reid said. “I’ve been to a few of these rodeos. It is obvious there is a big stall taking place. One of the senators who don’t want to debate tonight won’t be in a debate. While he can’t use the Senate as an excuse, there will be no more votes today.”

Ha ha ha! Brown hates debating. You just know he was hoping to avoid tonight’s match-up with a much smarter and more experienced opponent.

Steve LeBlanc at The Boston Globe suggested what each candidate needs to do tonight.

Brown must continue reaching out to independent, Democratic and women voters — three key demographics for any Massachusetts Republican candidate. He also must portray himself as an independent thinker who is not beholden to either political party.

Warren must deepen the voting public’s sense of familiarity with her while also protecting and increasing her support among women and Democrats. The Harvard law professor also must counter the image that she is out of touch with average voters.

Two candidates not on the stage could also play a role in the debate — President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney.

Warren needs to tie herself closely to Obama, who remains popular in Massachusetts and leads Romney by double digits in recent state polls. Brown, on the other hand, has to show independence from Romney and other Republican leaders.

And of course Brown needs to pretend that he barely knows Mitt Romney. He has been trying to do that ever since the secret tapes became a front page story a couple of days ago. Warren needs to find ways to tie Brown to his former pal Mitt Romney and his sneering, dismissive attitudes toward working- and middle-class Americans.

At MassLive, Shira Schoenberg gathered more recommendations from a number of Bay State political experts. I also think this post at Bloomberg is quite helpful.

When Republican Scott Brown and Democrat Elizabeth Warren debate for the first time today, both candidates vying to represent Massachusetts in the U.S. Senate will hold advantages capable of tipping the race.

Brown’s upset victory in 2010 for the post held by the late Ted Kennedy for almost 47 years was fueled by his debate performances against Attorney General Martha Coakley, who was considered a shoo-in before Brown stole the spotlight with his one-liners and what the Boston Globe called “pointed attacks.”

Warren’s rise from academic scholar to Democratic star grew from her fight to create a federal consumer protection agency and her success at translating complex political ideology into succinct campaign themes.

Elizabeth Warren is an expert debater.

She was 16 and living in Oklahoma, where she was born and raised, when she graduated from high school and attended George Washington University on a full debate scholarship that paid for her room, board, tuition, books and some spending money.

But Brown is good at throwing out provocative one-liners. According to political consultant Michael Goldman, Brown needs to convince voters he has done a good enough job in the the past two years to earn a full six-year term in the Senate.

Warren needs to tie Brown to the Republican Party and its standard-bearer Mitt Romney, who is very unpopular in the state. She will also point out the times he has sided with Wall Street and oil companies rather than the people of Massachusetts.

In the past five days there have been five polls of this race, with Warren leading in four and Brown in one. Warren also got an important endorsement today from Boston Mayor Tom Menino.

I hope those of you who can watch will help me live blog. It should be an interesting night.


Thursday Reads

Good Morning!!

Is it over for Mitt Romney? I suppose something could still happen to turn things around for his campaign, but it would have to be something really really big. There are so many bizarre stories out there about the Romney implosion that I barely know where to begin. I’ll just select a few examples.

Republican candidates are already distancing themselves from the top of the ticket.

Usually, congressional candidates stick with their party’s presidential nominee until the last possible minute, when it appears their political fortunes are threatened. But not so with continuing fallout from Mitt Romney’s degrading comments that 47 percent of Americans don’t pay taxes and are overly dependant on federal subsidies.

New Mexico Gov. Susanna Martinez told reporters that New Mexico has a lot of people living at the poverty level. “They count just as much as anybody else,” she said, adding her state’s anti-poverty programs provide a “safety net [that] is a good thing.”

Then Connecticut’s GOP Senate candidate Linda McMahon said, “I disagree with Governor Romney’s insinuation that 47 percent of Americans believe they are victims who must depend on the government for their care. I know that the vast majority of those who rely on government are not in that situation because they want to be.”

And then came North Carolina Republicam House candidate Mark Meadows, who told the press, “Mitt Romney didn’t call me before he made those comments.”

But by late afternoon the Romney retreat was still growing. In Nevada’s Senate race, Republican incumbert Sen. Dean Heller told reporters in Washington, “Keep in mind, I have five brothers and sisters. My father was an auto mechanic. My mother was a school cook. I have a very different view of the world. And as United States senator, I think I represent everyone, and every vote’s important… I don’t write off anybody.”

Even Mich McConnell, one of the most disagreeable, repulsive Republicans ever, doesn’t want to touch Romney with a ten foot pole.

The Senate’s GOP leaders refused to answer any questions at their weekly press conference. Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell left in the middle of the event. Majority Whip John Kyl dodged a reporter’s question afterwards and downplayed grousing that reportedly occurred in the Senate lunchroom earlier in the day.

Other Republican office holders are giving Romney unsolicited advice. For example,

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) said the nominee should be spending more time campaigning in critical states and leave more of the fundraising to others.

“I think what Romney needs to do is get into Virginia and run for sheriff. This is not rocket science,” Mr. Graham said. “Being in Utah to raise money is necessary, but he doesn’t have to be there, in my view…If I were Mitt Romney, no person in Virginia could go very long without meeting me.”

Several Republicans, including Mr. Graham and Sen. Susan Collins (R., Maine), said Mr. Romney needs to clearly articulate why the economy is struggling and how he would fix it.

“To me, he needs to outline a clearer vision of where he wants to take America and have a very detailed economic plan that will contrast sharply with the dismal economic record of this president,” Ms. Collins said.

Good luck with that.

So why is Romney spending so much time fund-raising? On Tuesday there was a report that his campaign is in debt.

For the first time in this campaign, Mitt Romney’s campaign is $11 million in debt after borrowing $20 million in August.

The debt and borrowing sums were first reported by the National Review Online and confirmed by ABC News.
The campaign borrowed the money from the Bank of Georgetown, according to the report.

The move came just before the Republican National Convention when aides had complained they had been running out of primary campaign dollars to compete with President Obama’s campaign. At the conclusion of the Republican convention, when Romney officially became the party’s nominee, Romney had access to general election funds it had raised.

While Romney campaign has debt, it also reports having $168.5 million on hand after August.

The New York Times has a piece about Romney’s sparse campaign appearances and limited TV advertising lately.

Despite what appears to be a plump bank account and an in-house production studio that cranks out multiple commercials a day, Mr. Romney’s campaign has been tightfisted with its advertising budget, leaving him at a disadvantage in several crucial states as President Obama blankets them with ads.

One major reason appears to be that Mr. Romney’s campaign finances have been significantly less robust than recent headlines would suggest. Much of the more than $300 million the campaign reported raising this summer is earmarked for the Republican National Committee, state Republican organizations and Congressional races, limiting the money Mr. Romney’s own campaign has to spend.

With polls showing President Obama widening his lead in some of these states and the race a dead heat in others, Mr. Romney’s lack of a full-throttle media campaign is risky, especially as he struggles to get his message out over the din of news about his campaign’s recent setbacks.

In some states the disparity is striking. Mr. Obama and his allies are handily outspending Mr. Romney and the conservative “super PACs” working on his behalf in Colorado, Ohio and New Hampshire.

And in states like Florida, Iowa, Nevada and Virginia, where the Romney and Obama forces are roughly matching their spending dollar for dollar, the super PACs are responsible for nearly half the advertising that is benefiting the Republican nominee.

Interesting, huh? No wonder Romney was in Utah raising money yesterday. He’s desperate–and the big money donors may not stick with him much longer. The Romney campaign did release a couple of ads yesterday though. The ads highlight Romney’s supposed support in the coal industry. Here’s one of them:

Do those coal miners look familiar? I wrote about them awhile back. Those miners were docked a day’s pay because the mine shut down for Romney’s rally–and then the boss made them show up for it instead of having the day off. From the LA Times:

On Wednesday, the Mitt Romney campaign released an ad spotlighting President Obama’s putative “War On Coal,” despite a controversy in Ohio about the coal miners’ rally featured in the spot. In the ad, Romney appears on a stage before rows of hard-hatted miners, their faces smudged with coal dust, as he says, “We have 250 years of coal. Why wouldn’t we use it?”

The rally was held last month in Beallsville, Ohio, thick with miners from the Century coal mine, owned by Murray Energy, a major donor to Republican causes. Within days of the rally, Murray employees contacted a nearby morning talk radio host, David Blomquist, to say they were forced to attend the Aug. 14 event at the mine.

Can you believe it? Romney and his gang can’t do anything right. Arianna Huffington thinks the problem maybe sleep deprivation. Maybe. I think it might be just plain stupidity.

Here in Massachusetts, the right wing Boston Herald reports that

Massachusetts voters have turned against Mitt Romney with a vengeance, leaving the former governor as a political pariah in his own home state, according to a new UMass Lowell/Boston Herald poll.

Sixty percent of Bay State voters now have an unfavorable view of Romney, and the GOP nominee is headed for a Bay State drubbing in the November election, the poll of 524 registered voters shows.

Just 35 percent of voters say they plan to vote for the Romney/Ryan ticket, while 60 percent say they are backing President Obama. That margin is roughly the same as the 2008 election, when Obama trounced Arizona Sen. John McCain.

Bwaaaahahahahahahaha!!

I loved this story. Romney was down in Miami at a Univision forum, trying to scrape together a few Latino voters, and Move on.org hired a plane to fly overhead with a banner reading “HEY MITT: WE’RE VOTERS, NOT VICTIMS.”

I do have some non-Romney news for you.

From The Nation: PA Supreme Court Doubts the State Can Comply With Its Own Voter ID Law

Yesterday, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decided to vacate a lower state court’s ruling that allowed Act 18, the photo voter ID law, to commence as planned. Problem being: the law as planned appears so burdensome that—putting voters aside for a moment—the state itself can’t comply with its own law. As stated in the Court’s order, “the Commonwealth parties have candidly conceded, that the Law is not being implemented according to its terms.”

The Supreme Court ordered per curiam—meaning unsigned by the six justices—that the Commonwealth Court must re-examine the implementation of certain provisions of the law. Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson, who ruled in August in favor of the law, must decide if the way the state presently administers free photo voter ID cards to those who can’t get regular state-issued id cards is in compliance with the law—something the state already conceded in court that it doesn’t, and can’t for good reasons.

Another PA story from The Nation is truly shocking and heartbreaking: Will Pennsylvania Execute a Man Who Killed His Abusers? It’s the story of Terrance Williams, who was horrifically abused in his home from at least age 6 and later by men who were supposed to be helping him. He is now scheduled for execution. I’m not going to post an excerpt. It’s important to read the whole thing.

This is a fun one: The New Republic has a post on The Top Three Heresies in the Gnostic Gospels

Yesterday the world learned of a newly-discovered early Christian text that depicts Jesus as a married man. Jesus’ wife may be big news today, but striking and unusual variations on Christian faith have been around for a very long time. Whether you call them the gnostic gospels, the heretic gospels, the apocrypha, or Dan Brown’s raw material, early Christian texts can make for pretty interesting reading. Here are three particularly surprising heresies from outside the canon.

Check it out!

OK, I can’t resist–one more Romney item. Have you heard the one about Romney’s dad being on the government dole?

George Romney’s family fled from Mexico in 1912 to escape a revolution there, and benefited from a $100,000 fund established by Congress to help refugees who had lost their homes and most of their belongings.

That fund may have been what Lenore Romney, George Romney’s wife and Mitt Romney’s mother, was referring to in a video that was posted online earlier this month but has received renewed attention in the wake of Mitt Romney’s comments.

“[George Romney] was on welfare relief for the first years of his life. But this great country gave him opportunities,” Lenore Romney said in the video, which apparently dates back to George Romney’s 1962 run for governor of Michigan.

What would Lenore Romney think of her son now?

What are you reading and blogging about today?  I look forward to clicking on your links!


Tuesday Reads: Media Reactions to Romney Revelations and Other News

Good Morning!!

This is going to be mostly a link dump with little commentary, because I have a lot of news to share and I’m still tired from last night.

Yesterday was a day that will very likely go down in presidential campaign history along with the day Mike Dukakis posed for photos wearing a silly-looking helmet and riding in a tank. In a series of surreptitiously recorded videos/audios, we heard the real Mitt Romney–a man who truly believes that he and other wealthy people got where there are on merit alone and that those pathetic Americans who are not so “successful” are worthless, lazy drones who have the nerve to think we are entitled to food, shelter, health care.

Late last night, Romney finally responded to the firestorm over the leaked videos at a hastily called press availability. He looked desperate–his hair mussed and bags under his eyes, his expression sheepish yet defiant, but he stood by his statement at the May 2012 fundraiser that 47% of Americans are dependent on the government and pay no taxes.

For your reading pleasure, I’ve gathered some of the media reactions to yesterday’s stunning events, but before I get to those, there’s even more from David Corn this morning. After yesterday’s big scoop and his appearances on MSNBC last night, Corn released another episode from the Romney fundraiser bootleg videos: SECRET VIDEO: On Israel, Romney Trashes Two-State Solution

During the freewheeling conversation, a donor asked Romney how the “Palestinian problem” can be solved. Romney immediately launched into a detailed reply, asserting that the Palestinians have “no interest whatsoever in establishing peace, and that the pathway to peace is almost unthinkable to accomplish.”

Romney spoke of “the Palestinians” as a united bloc of one mindset, and he said: “I look at the Palestinians not wanting to see peace anyway, for political purposes, committed to the destruction and elimination of Israel, and these thorny issues, and I say there’s just no way.”

Romney was indicating he did not believe in the peace process and, as president, would aim to postpone significant action: “[S]o what you do is, you say, you move things along the best way you can. You hope for some degree of stability, but you recognize that this is going to remain an unsolved problem…and we kick the ball down the field and hope that ultimately, somehow, something will happen and resolve it.”

Romney did note there was another perspective on this knotty matter. He informed his donors that a former secretary of state—he would not say who—had told him there was “a prospect for a settlement between the Palestinians and the Israelis.” Romney recalled that he had replied, “Really?” Then he added that he had not asked this ex-secretary of state for further explanation.

Video at the Mother Jones link.

Also at Mother Jones, a list of likely guests at the Romney fund-raiser.

Joe Coscarelli at New York Magazine: How Jimmy Carter’s Grandson Helped Leak the Secret Romney Fund-raiser Video

The damning video of Mitt Romney telling a room of wealthy donors how he really feels about the freeloading 47 percent of Americans “who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it,” among other candid things, has been floating around online in bits and pieces for three months, but didn’t hit the big time until it was published by David Corn at Mother Jones today. Credited as a “research assistant” on the story is James Carter IV, the grandson of former President Jimmy Carter, who has been toiling online as an opposition researcher and is “currently looking for work,” according to his Twitter bio. “I’ve been searching for clips on Republicans for a long time, almost every day,” said Carter this evening. “I just do it for fun.” But by connecting Corn with the mysterious uploader of the clip, Carter has uncovered his biggest story yet, one that could potentially affect the outcome of the election. (And get him a job.)
Carter told Daily Intel that he first noticed a portion of the video in which Romney discusses using Chinese labor while working at Bain Capital. That clip, uploaded by a YouTube user named “RomneyExposed” in late May, and then again in late August by an account called “Rachel Maddow” that has since been deleted, eventually made it to Buzzfeed and Daily Kos.*

Additional pieces of the tape were then added to a YouTube account called “Anne Onymous” starting three weeks ago. “There was a minor uproar about it on Twitter when I found [the first clip], so I kept doing research on it and that eventually led me to be able to narrow down who it originated from,” said Carter. Via Twitter, he contacted the person who claimed to have secretly taped and uploaded the video, and then sought to help publicize the remarks. “That seemed to be the purpose of [the filming] — to get it to a larger audience,” Carter said.

Now for those reactions…

Charles Pierce: The Worst Thing Romney Has Said About Americans Yet

Joan Walsh: Mitt Romney insults half the country. Walsh repeats her previous prediction that Romney “will never be president.”

Chris Cillizza: Mitt Romney’s Darkest Hour. Chris transmits what is probably the reaction of most Villagers–that the videos are just a distraction and won’t spell the end of Romney presidential campaign.

Jonathan Chait finally faces the reality that Romney is not a moderate Rockefeller Republican: The Real Romney Captured on Tape Turns Out to Be a Sneering Plutocrat

The New Republic staff: Three things we learned from the secret Romney video.

Right wing nut blogger Erick Erickson announced that he has given up on Romney winning the election.

Dave Wiegel: We Are the 47%: The Lousy Math Behind Romney’s Gaffe

Brad Plummer at the Wonkblog: Mitt Romney versus the 47%. Plummer explains why Romney is wrong about half of Americans being shiftless louts who contribute nothing to society.

David Graham at the Atlantic: Where Are the 47% of Americans Who Pay No Income Taxes?

Ezra Klein: Romney’s theory of the “taker class” and why it matters.

Ben Smith at Buzzfeed: The Long Strange Leak Of Mitt Romney’s 47% Video

The Guardian: Mitt Romney ‘victims’ gaffe: key players

In Other News…

The Nation: What’s Behind the U.S. Embassy Protests in Egypt

Reuters: Chicago teachers meet Tuesday to decide whether to end strike.

LA Times: ‘Innocence of Muslims’ doesn’t meet free-speech test

PBS News Hour: David Souter Gets Rock Star Welcome, Offers Constitution Day Warning

WaPo: US Aid to Egypt Stalled

WaPo: National Zoo welcomes baby panda

Now it’s your turn. What are you reading and blogging about today?