It's Terrorism and Taxes, Stupid

Of course the stupid ones will never figure this out. Which is why the November elections will become a man-caused diaster for the Democrats.

In his upset Senate victory Tuesday, Brown emphasized two big issues overlooked by most political analysts: taxes and terrorism. Massachusetts voters ranked them as the third and fourth most important issues, behind only health care and the economy, according to a Rasmussen poll. Democratic challenger Martha Coakley actually did reasonably well among voters on health care and the economy. Brown's overwhelming victory came from voters who wanted lower taxes, stronger national security and a tougher stance on terror.

Those who considered taxes their top priority favored Brown 6-to-1 (87 percent for Brown). As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama understood that issue and promised not to raise "one penny of taxes" on the middle class. Unfortunately, he also promised health care reform would be self-financing, a feat that requires significant new revenues. These costs come on top of a large stimulus package and mounting deficits. Clearly, the public is worried, and Brown capitalized on it.

He also won big on national security: 67 percent to Coakley's 29 percent. Two themes stand out. One is that President Obama's efforts to befriend old enemies yielded little and conveyed a sense of weakness and equivocation. Iran is still building its nuclear capacity, insulting the U.S. and killing protesters. Venezuela is still nationalizing its economy and rallying the Latin American left. Russia is still bullying its neighbors and declining into a thuggish autocracy. North Korea is still North Korea. Obama's biggest foreign policy initiative, his conciliatory speech in Cairo, had little impact in the Muslim world.

With so few successes, the Obama administration must now re-evaluate its generous, multilateral diplomacy toward adversaries. That, at least, is one message from Massachusetts.

Another is that voters are unhappy with the administration's approach to terrorism, which downplays the threat and treats it mainly as a law-enforcement issue. The key officials here are Janet Napolitano, secretary of Homeland Security, and Attorney General Eric Holder. They have failed to convince the public that their approach is effective, or well executed.

Again, Brown capitalized.

Republicans would do well to follow the Brown model for success this fall.

Time for Holder to Step Aside and Appoint Special Prosecutor in ACORN Scandal

Charles Lipson lays out the case for an independent prosecutor in the mushrooming ACORN scandal. While I have my doubts Holder would ever do so considering his recent history there may soon be no choice, especially if more bombs keep dropping on ACORN and other Obama associates, as Andrew Breitbart suggests will soon be the case.

Independent prosecutors should not be appointed lightly. But in this case, there are good reasons why Atty. Gen. Eric Holder and other political appointees in the Justice Department should step aside. First, although no allegations have yet touched the Obama campaign, ACORN did have significant ties to the campaign and other progressive causes. Published reports show that ACORN and its subsidiaries received some $800,000 from the Obama campaign to get out the vote. Second, ACORN is intimately tied to the Service Employees International Union, one of President Barack Obama's most powerful and vocal supporters.

ACORN's close ties to the progressive movement and Democratic Party mean that there will be little public confidence if Holder decides not to pursue an ambitious investigation and ultimately prosecute.

Ironically, ACORN's chief executive officer, Bertha Lewis, strengthens the case for an independent prosecutor with her robust defense of the organization. FOX News, she says, is pursuing her group solely for political reasons. They oppose ACORN, she says, because it is associated with progressive politics, labor organizing and the Obama administration's health-care initiative. Unfortunately for ACORN, Lewis' charges also mean that if the Obama administration decides not to prosecute or to indict only low-level employees, the public will wonder if they are seeing a political defense by ACORN's friends, a coverup rather than a fair-minded, independent decision by the Justice Department.

Holder has compounded these concerns with two recent decisions. In New Mexico, federal attorneys apparently recommended high-level prosecutions in the pay-for-play scandal swirling around Gov. Bill Richardson. Holder's office overrode them and dropped the case. Holder also decided to drop the voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party in Philadelphia, where thugs were caught on tape brandishing clubs outside a voting precinct. In both cases, Holder has refused to explain his actions.

After these decisions and Holder's silence about them, there is simply no reason to hand him another high-profile case with political ramifications. What we have seen on tape cries out for a serious, independent investigation to determine if ACORN and its affiliates are a criminal enterprise, whether they have spent federal grants lawfully, whether they helped taxpayers file fraudulent returns, and whether they violated laws prohibiting tax-exempt organizations from engaging in partisan politics. These are big questions, and the public needs to know that Washington's answers are fair and impartial.

The left loved Patrick Fitzgerald when he went after Scooter Libby. It would be curious to see their reaction if he were to be the one probing ACORN.

Speaking of Bertha Lewis, check this out. Warning: Very disturbing image.

It'll be interesting to see if any of the media lapdogs query Obama about ACORN during his Sunday chat show marathon tomorrow. Somehow, I doubt it. It stands to reason why The Gutless One is avoiding Chris Wallace.