where are the fact-checkers? team obama isn’t telling the truth about their iran record

Who is going to fact-check team Obama? Their statements on Iran aren’t true.

The simple fact is that team Obama has passed ONE UN resolution on Iran. They got only 12 votes of support in that ONE resolution (12/15 votes for a failure rate of 20% on Iran votes at the Security Council). The Bush team got FIVE resolutions on Iran (THREE with Sanctions). In those FIVE resolutions, team Bush lost just 2 total votes (73/75 votes for a failure rate of 2.6% on Iran votes at the Security Council). Additionally, team Obama hasn’t produced a UN resolution on Iran since June 9, 2010 (almost 2 years ago).

One only needs to look at the growing list of countries that have said they will ignore our request to stop buying Iranian oil to understand that Obama’s diplomatic requests are being ignored. I see India, Russia, China, South Africa and many European countries publicly saying they will buy Iranian oil and ignore the U.S. requests. While team Obama thinks the world is united, the world is enjoying the comfort of a weaker U.S. government that no longer pressures them to take action.

It is disheartening but the world is less united since Obama has been in office.

Team Obama says: “Iran is weaker and more isolated today precisely because of actions that President Obama has taken. Through sustained diplomacy, the president forged unprecedented international consensus to pressure Iran — far greater consensus and pressure than the previous Republican administration achieved through its go-it-alone, my-way-or-the highway approach. President Obama secured the toughest unilateral and multilateral sanctions on Iran to date, and they’re having a devastating impact on its economy. The Iranian nuclear program has been slowed, and Iran’s leaders have signaled their willingness to resume talks, in which the United States will seek to ensure Iran lives up to its international obligations. At the same time, the president has firmly and consistently said that all options are on the table, including military action, to prevent the Iranian regime from obtaining a nuclear weapon.”

romney wins michigan, daily kos loses relevancy

In the last few days leading up to the Michigan primary yesterday, the liberal and once popular website Daily Kos, started to encourage its readers to get involved in the open Michigan primary by doing something they wouldn’t normally think of doing. The Daily Kos told its all-liberal readers to pick up a Republican ballot and vote for Rick Santorum. The Daily Kos’ idea was to give Rick Santorum a primary victory in Michigan, deny Mitt Romney a win and cause chaos in the Republican primary. Readers responded with enthusiasm at the thought of helping Rick Santorum win the Republican nomination because they believed he was the weakest candidate to take on President Obama.

The Daily Kos went into a full out campaign – even sending out an email blast to its’ Michigan readers. The day before the Michigan primary, Jonathan Martin of Politico tweeted: @jmartpolitico: The 8500 MI’anders on Daily Kos email list got note today: “Please vote for Rick Santorum…”

While most all of the main stream media journalists ignored the Daily Kos’ campaign, some on Twitter questioned just how effective the Daily Kos could be. After all, as Martin pointed out, they only had 8,500 supporters in Michigan?

Immediately, the power of the Daily Kos and its’ uber liberal founder Markos Moulitsas was on display. Political strategists were wondering if the Daily Kos still had any power or if the liberal class has moved on to David Brock’s Media Matters for America.

Markos’ campaign for Santorum went into over-drive. He tweeted and re-tweeted messages all day Monday encouraging and celebrating his supporters’ missives about supporting Santorum.

But the media’s prediction that Santorum would make Michigan a race or possibly even win it turned out to be spin. Romney easily won the state despite Markos’ campaign. And we learned that the Daily Kos’ power isn’t what it used to be.

reagan library debate showcases romney, perry fight

Simi Valley, CA – Former First Lady Nancy Reagan and The Ronald Reagan Presidential Library played host to eight GOP Presidential candidates Wednesday night in Simi Valley, California. It was Texas Governor Rick Perry’s first debate after announcing he would run for President and many Republican activists were eager to see how he would perform. The early debate centered on Mitt Romney and Rick Perry who jabbed at each other’s records as Governors. Perry, who leads in national polls, tried to criticize Romney for implementing Romneycare, the Massachusetts healthcare insurance reform law that many conservatives think is too similar to Obama’s healthcare reform initiative. But Romney forcefully defended his record and turned the conversation to jobs and his private sector experience to turn the economy around.

Perry went after Romney’s accomplishments on creating jobs. “He (Romney) had one of the lowest job creation rates in the country,” Perry said. “As a matter of fact, we created more jobs in the last three months in Texas than he created in four years in Massachusetts.” Romney quickly shot back noting that Texas has no state income tax, a Republican supreme court and a Republican legislature. “George Bush and his predecessor created jobs at a faster rate than you did, Governor,” Romney said.

While Rick Perry didn’t make any gaffes, he didn’t impressive the hundreds of Republican activists who came to watch either. Perry survived.

“I was really waiting for Perry,” said one long time Republican fundraiser who flew in from New York. “He came in very confident, kind of cocky, and finished deflated. I think he is realizing this is going to be a long and hard road to the nomination.”

Jon Huntsman, Jr. out-performed himself from the last debate and gave his campaign a much needed boost. Huntsman, whose previous debate performance was roundly criticized as weak, surprised many activists by displaying never before seen confidence. Huntsman easily spoke of economic issues and the American spirit and seemed comfortable this time. But Michelle Bachmann struggled to get noticed. Fresh off the announcement that campaign guru Ed Rollins would be stepping down from running the Bachmann campaign’s day to day operations, Bachmann surprised the crowd when she criticized President Obama for supporting NATO’s Libya mission.

“Bachmann started to sound more like Ron Paul,” one California Republican said. The question and answer on Libya was one of the only foreign policy questions and answers of the night.

NBC News, which co-hosted the debate with POLITICO, was roundly criticized by bloggers and pundits for the moment in the debate where they invited a Telemundo reporter onto the stage to ask a question about immigration. Mary Katherine Ham of the Daily Caller tweeted, “NBC: “Thank you, Anchor w Hispanic Surname. We are now finished with the immigration portion of this debate. You may leave.” And Matthew Hurt of Arlington, Virginia tweeted, “Connie Chung will be on later to ask a question about China. #reagandebate #subtleracism”

Newt Gingrich demonstrated why he was elected Speaker of the House in 1994 by uniting the Republican presidential candidates against a common enemy – President Obama. Gingrich also got the applause line of the night from those in the debate hall when he proclaimed that English should be the official language of the United States. Gingrich also went after Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke saying, “I think he’s been the most inflationary, dangerous and power-centered chairman of the Fed in the history of the Fed.”

But at the end of the evening it was clear that the Republican nomination for President is between Mitt Romney and Rick Perry. Unless someone else enters the race.