.
How ready are you for the general election campaign to start?
April 10th, 2012
03:45 PM ET

How ready are you for the general election campaign to start?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

So now what?

It’s no surprise that Rick Santorum is hanging it up. The only person who didn't acknowledge his campaign was over was Rick Santorum.

Newt Gingrich is toast. He even said over the weekend Mitt Romney is the most likely nominee. And Ron Paul doesn't have enough delegates to fill a phone booth.

Which means - ready? The general election game is on.

Romney and Barack Obama have already started taking shots at each other. But now, and for the next seven months, it turns into a blood sport.

Unlimited PAC money for vicious attack ads. Saturation bombing of the airwaves, especially in swing states, as the parties to try to persuade the electorate that theirs is the better path.

I think if I lived in Ohio I would be inclined to move - just until after the election.

The truth will be stretched and distorted and manipulated until it's no longer recognizable.

And all this will happen while Romney and Obama look us straight in the eye and solemnly swear that if we just elect them, all our problems will be solved.

The truth is, neither one of them can begin to solve our problems. The problems are too big and the mechanism for solving them - the federal government - is too badly broken.

But it won't matter. They'll both promise us anything if we will just vote for them.

Here’s my question to you: How ready are you for the general election campaign to start?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

Posted by
Filed under: 2012 Election • General Election
Instead of the Buffett Rule, why doesn't President Obama talk about cutting spending?
April 10th, 2012
03:40 PM ET

Instead of the Buffett Rule, why doesn't President Obama talk about cutting spending?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

President Obama's push for the Buffett Rule is nothing more than election year baloney.

And that's putting it nicely.

Fact is, if the proposal to raise taxes on the wealthy passes - which it won't - it will raise less than $5 billion a year in additional revenue - for the next ten years. This country, under Mr. Obama, is running $1 trillion-plus deficits annually. $5 billion a year is less than a drop in the bucket.

The so-called Buffett Rule is based on the idea that millionaires and billionaires, like Warren Buffett, shouldn't pay a lower percentage of their income in federal taxes than middle class Americans.

President Obama wants millionaires to pay at least 30% of their income in federal taxes. Senate Democrats are expected to vote on similar legislation next week.

This is all great politics if you're running for re-election. Divide the country along economic lines. Those nasty one-percenters versus the masses. Class warfare at its finest.

But there is no talk of cutting spending - spending which has added more to the national debt under President Obama in three and a half years than under former President George W. Bush in eight years.

A report out today says Obamacare will add $340 billion to the deficit over the next decade.

In a likely effort to get ahead of the criticism, the Obama Administration acknowledges that the Buffett Rule will do absolutely nothing to bring the deficit down and get the debt under control. They say it's all about fairness.

They're using it to talk about the wealthy - conveniently including Mitt Romney - paying their "fair share."
Republicans call it an election year stunt - which it clearly is.

Tax experts say the Buffett Rule would only further complicate an already complex tax code.

Here’s my question to you: Instead of the Buffett Rule, why doesn't President Obama talk about cutting spending?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 5pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.

Posted by
Filed under: President Barack Obama • Spending
How racially divided is the United States today?
April 9th, 2012
03:29 PM ET

How racially divided is the United States today?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

As the national debate over the killing of Trayvon Martin rages on, a new poll suggests that a majority of Americans believe the country is divided by race.

The Newsweek/Daily Beast poll shows that 72% of whites and 89% of blacks say the country is racially divided.

And almost four years after the election of the nation's first black president, majorities of whites and blacks say race relations have either stayed the same or gotten worse.

There continue to be fundamental disagreements about when blacks will achieve racial equality. Whites are much more likely to think blacks have the same chance as they do to get housing and jobs.

As for the killing of Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black Florida teen, there are more differences along racial lines. Blacks are more than twice as likely as whites to say Martin's death was racially motivated. African-Americans are convinced that Martin was targeted because he was a young black man, while whites are divided.

Blacks overwhelmingly approve of how President Obama has handled the controversy, while a majority of whites disapprove.

The differences go on and on. It’s a sad statement on race relations in the U.S. in 2012.

Meanwhile, in the latest from Sanford, Florida, the special prosecutor in the Trayvon Martin shooting case has decided not to take the case to a grand jury. She says that she's never used a grand jury in similar cases and that the investigation continues.

The attorney for shooter George Zimmerman calls it a "courageous move."

You can bet this decision will fan the racial flames even further. Already, thousands have joined the Florida protests calling for Zimmerman's arrest.

Here’s my question to you: How racially divided is the United States today?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

Posted by
Filed under: Race • Race Relations • United States
How can Mitt Romney overcome his huge deficit among women?
Members of the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL), Etch-A-Sketches in hand, call for a stop to the war on women and objected to Romney's proposal to stop federal support for Planned Parenthood.
April 9th, 2012
02:58 PM ET

How can Mitt Romney overcome his huge deficit among women?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Women may very well hold the key to the next election - and at least for now, President Obama is in the driver's seat.

In a dozen crucial swing states, the president holds a whopping 18-point lead among women over Mitt Romney. And Democrats are using every chance they can to accuse the GOP of waging a "war on women."

President Obama hosted a forum on women's issues at the White House - touting his administration's achievements on equal pay and workplace flexibility, saying "Women are not an interest group. You shouldn't be treated that way."

Republicans have traditionally faced a gender gap when it comes to women voters, but it looks like Romney faces a particularly steep uphill battle.

The Obama campaign says Romney's promise to "end planned parenthood" and his stance on contraception in employer health care plans will hurt him in the general election.

Some say Romney missed a golden opportunity to sway women voters by not taking a stand when Rush Limbaugh called a Georgetown law student a "slut" for her position on birth control.

Republicans insist the gender gap will disappear once the contentious GOP Primary ends. one of the ways Romney might ease the gender gap is by naming a woman as his running mate.

Meanwhile, the battle over women comes as the debate rages on over the refusal of the Augusta National Golf Club to admit them. First President Obama - and then Romney - called on Augusta to accept women.

Maureen Dowd writes that Augusta should "stop emulating the Saudis;" and "You know you're in trouble when Rick Santorum is urging you to be more progressive on women."

Here’s my question to you: How can Mitt Romney overcome his huge deficit among women?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

Posted by
Filed under: 2012 Election • Mitt Romney
Rick Santorum for president? Seriously?
April 5th, 2012
03:32 PM ET

Rick Santorum for president? Seriously?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

For a conservative Christian, Rick Santorum is rapidly becoming a candidate without a prayer.

In fact, there is so much handwriting, you can hardly see the wall.

Pennsylvania, his home state and the place he said he was counting on to get the second half of his campaign off to a rousing start, is the same Pennsylvania that voted him out of the United States Senate by a margin of 18 points.

Well, guess what? Apparently the feelings of the voters in that state haven't changed much when it comes to Rick Santorum.

Mitt Romney is now surging in the polls in the Keystone State. And Santorum - who once led there by double-digits - is rapidly losing ground.

Santorum is going from serious candidate for president of the United States to the butt of jokes.

CNN political contributor James Carville says Santorum is like "a chicken with his head chopped off. The chicken is dead. The only person that doesn't know it is the chicken."

Senator John McCain is calling Santorum "irrelevant" and a growing number of Republicans say he should go.

Now we find out Santorum is taking four days off from campaigning. Wonder what that's about. Do you suppose a little soul-searching is in order?

There is absolutely no way Rick Santorum is going to be the Republican presidential nominee. You know it, I know it, the voters know it, and on some level Rick Santorum knows it, too.

So why stay too long at the dance and see what little credibility you might have left ripped to shreds as folks watch you refuse to accept reality?

Here’s my question to you: Rick Santorum for president? Seriously?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

Posted by
Filed under: 2012 Election • Rick Santorum
Why is there so much interest in a 2016 Hillary Clinton run?
April 5th, 2012
03:30 PM ET

Why is there so much interest in a 2016 Hillary Clinton run?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

The 2012 presidential election is still seven months away but perhaps not surprisingly many are already eyeing 2016 and Hillary Clinton.

The Secretary of State, former New York Senator and former First Lady is generating plenty of buzz even though she insists it's not happening.

Nancy Pelosi became the latest to weigh-in on Hillary's future, saying it would be "so exciting" to see Mrs. Clinton run in 2016. New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, Donald Trump and even her husband, Bill Clinton, have been talking about it too, along with the chattering class of pundits.

The co-author of "Game Change" recently said there's a 99.4% chance Hillary will run for president in four years.

Pulitzer Prize winning columnist Maureen Dowd has suggested that maybe President Obama isn't a strong enough advocate for women, and that Hillary Clinton might benefit from renewed focus on issues like abortion and birth control.

Ever the politician, the former president is leaving the door open for his wife to run. Bill Clinton says "I believe she's being absolutely honest... when she says she doesn't think she'll go back into politics," but he adds that if Hillary changes her mind and decides to run for president, he'd be "happy."

For her part, Hillary Clinton has said she doesn't want to serve a second term in the Obama Administration. She says she wants to finish up as Secretary of State and then take time to reconnect with family and friends, hit the writing and speaking circuit, etc.

Hillary Clinton says all the talk about running for president is flattering, but that she's "not at all planning to do that." Hillary says she has no "desire or intention" to run.

Here’s my question to you: Why is there so much interest in a 2016 Hillary Clinton run?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

Posted by
Filed under: Hillary Clinton
Why does President Obama continue to refuse to enforce the nation's immigration laws?
April 4th, 2012
02:55 PM ET

Why does President Obama continue to refuse to enforce the nation's immigration laws?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Just in time for the election and courting the Hispanic vote, the Obama Administration is out with another way to ignore the nation's immigration laws.

The Department of Homeland Security now wants to issue so-called "unlawful presence waivers."

These are meant for illegal aliens who are relatives of U.S. citizens.

The way the law works now, these aliens must return to their native country and request a waiver of inadmissibility.

But the federal government says the proposed changes would "significantly reduce" the length of time U.S. citizens are separated from their immediate relatives.

Critics are slamming the proposal, calling it "stealth amnesty" and another attempt at backdoor amnesty. Which is exactly what it is.

Mr. Obama promised federal immigration reform when he was running for president in 2008, but it never happened.

Instead of reform it looks more like bending of the rules for some of the estimated 12 million illegal aliens. Gee, just in time for the president's reelection campaign.

Last year the administration started cutting back on deportations of illegal aliens without criminal records - and reviewing all existing cases.

That resulted in a big drop in deportations even though one study shows that immigrants with criminal records don't necessarily make up a larger portion of those deported.

President Obama told Univision in February that the administration is re-emphasizing its focus "on criminals and at the borders" and not on "hard-working families."

All designed to get enough Hispanic votes to win a second term.

Here’s my question to you: Why does President Obama continue to refuse to enforce the nation's immigration laws?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

What does it mean when you have to work 107 days just to meet your tax bill?
April 4th, 2012
02:45 PM ET

What does it mean when you have to work 107 days just to meet your tax bill?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

With less than two weeks to go until taxes are due, think about this:

It's estimated Americans need to work 107 days just to earn enough money to pay their taxes.

A research outfit called The Tax Foundation says Americans will spend an average of 29% of their income on federal, state and local taxes in 2012.

That's more than what an average family spends on food, clothing and housing combined.

Nationally, the so-called Tax Freedom Day arrives April 17, which just happens to be the same day taxes are due.

But it comes earliest in states like Tennessee, Louisiana and Mississippi. Tennessee is the earliest at March 31.

States with higher average incomes - like Connecticut, New Jersey and New York - aren't free of their tax burdens until later in the year. Connecticut is the latest at May 5.

It goes without saying that not every situation is the same, but a lot of people are fed up with our current tax structure.

Billionaire David Rubenstein calls America's tax system a "disgrace."

The co-founder of the private equity firm Carlyle Group says the government needs to change the law if they want the rich to pay more in taxes. Rubenstein adds that he's paying what he's supposed to pay under the current law - and it's unfair for people to say he's not kicking in his "fair share."

President Obama has been calling for the rich to pay their "fair share" in taxes. He wants to change the law so that people who make more than $1 million pay at least a 30% tax rate.

Here’s my question to you: What does it mean when you have to work 107 days just to meet your tax bill?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

Posted by
Filed under: On Jack's radar • Taxes
How big a threat to the U.S. is Russia?
April 2nd, 2012
04:00 PM ET

How big a threat to the U.S. is Russia?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Top Democrats are jumping all over Mitt Romney for comments he made about Russia.

Both Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton paint the likely Republican nominee as stuck in the days of the Cold War.

This all goes back to President Obama's so-called hot-mic controversy - when Mr. Obama was heard asking Russian President Dmitry Medvedev for some "space" on a European missile defense system. The President said he would have more "flexibility" after the November election.

Romney slammed Mr. Obama after that incident, calling Russia "our number one geopolitical foe."

But now Biden and Clinton are going after Romney for his limited foreign policy experience - and for calling Russia enemy number one.

Biden says it's not the Cold War 1950s. Although we have disagreements with Russia, he says they're "united with us on Iran" and that Russia is one of only two ways the U.S. is getting supplies into our troops in Afghanistan.

Hillary Clinton calls Romney's views on Russia "dated" and says there are more pressing foreign policy issues.

Romney's campaign shot right back at these criticisms, pointing out Russia's "opposition to crippling sanctions on Iran, its obstructionism on Syria and its own backsliding into authoritarianism." Romney insists that President Obama is too open to concessions when it comes to Russia.

The missile defense system has been a prickly issue between the two nations. The U.S. and NATO insist it would be used to protect Europe against an Iranian strike.

But Russia worries it would violate its sovereignty.

Here’s my question to you: How big a threat to the U.S. is Russia?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

Posted by
Filed under: Russia • United States
If Obamacare falls, what's next?
April 2nd, 2012
03:55 PM ET

If Obamacare falls, what's next?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

The fate of the Affordable Care Act now lies in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Although no one knows for sure which way the landmark case will go, last week's oral arguments did not seem promising for the Obama administration. Experts said they believe the individual mandate - and perhaps the whole health care law - is in jeopardy.

Supporters tell Politico that if the law goes down there could be significant ripple effects. They say that other federal laws could be on the firing line - including environmental one such as the Endangered Species and Clean Water acts as well as federal regulation of the labor market and laws preventing employment discrimination.

But opponents of the health care overhaul say liberals are just using "the sky is falling"-scare tactics.

Plus, they suggest if the Supreme Court upholds the individual mandate that could lead to future mandates, such as requirements to buy health food or gym memberships.

The Supreme Court decision is expected in June. And whichever way the court rules, there's no doubt it will be a political lightning rod for both parties coming just a few months before the presidential election.

Meanwhile, as Americans wait for the Supreme Court to decide, health care costs just keep going up.

It's estimated the cost to cover the typical family of four under an employer plan will top $20,000 this year, according to CNNMoney. That's up 7% from last year and would be the fifth year in a row health care costs rose 7% or 8%.

And even though employers pick up much of that tab, you can bet they're passing on their rising costs to the rest of us.

Here’s my question to you: If Obamacare falls, what's next?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

newer posts »