The Pardu

The Pardu
Watchful eyes and ears feed the brain, thus nourishing the brain cells.
Showing posts with label Romney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Romney. Show all posts

Saturday, October 26, 2013

Romney Money-broker Adelson Says, "Bomb Iran!"

Shledon Adelson was one of Mitt Romney's top political campaign supporters during his run for the Oval Office 2010 - 2012.

Money-brokers wield power over candidates. Once the candidate wins office, the obligation to his/her major donors takes on a dynamic of beholding.   Mitt Romney proved a few thing during his run for the US Presidency.
A.)  He does not appear to a man of great independent thought.
B.)  He is a major corporatist who has taken a spoon feed childhood and inheritance to the level of uber wealthy.  A path unattainable by people who are not effective at schmoozing for "access and privilege."
C.)  He recognizes the value of giving his bakers what they want in return for their political necessary contributions.  We as a population know little of the shadowy contributions that may flow outside of pour purview.
D.) Major contributors can summons their recipients to phones, and other meeting forums. 
In an effort to be fair, we know that all politicians experience the every same dynamic. In fact, President Obama undoubtedly has the same tie to his major donors.  Although, Obama has been criticized for not "properly schmoozing and glad-handing" during his first five years in the Oval Office.

There are differences in how politicians service their donors. While the elected candidate may owe the donor access and certain favors, I have yet to read about a major donor with the level of insanity we are now reading about from Mitt Romney's Number one donor: Adelson. Even the Koch brothers with the scope of their attempts to earn billions from the Keystone XL Pipeline, their efforts to re-segregate schools in North Carolina, and other strategies to facilitate their desire for US plutocracy, have not gone where Adelson has ventured.  

Adelson For Romney....

The New York Daily News.....

No. 1: Sheldon Adelson, 79, owner of the Las Vegas Sands casino empire.

Total: $34.2 million

Adelson is the largest declared donor to the Romney campaign and supporting political committees, providing more than $34.2 million this election season. He and his wife, Miriam, a physician who heads the Nevada-based Adelson Drug Clinic, have given $10 million to the Restore Our Future, a super PAC backing Romney. Adelson also joined relatives to give $24 million to committees backing former GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich. And he has made public pledges vowing to give $10 million to Karl Rove's American Crossroads super PAC and as much as $100 million this election more broadly to the GOP. Worth an estimated $25 billion, Adelson oversees the Las Vegas Sands Corp., which runs casino and resort interests in Las Vegas, Singapore and Bethlehem, Pa., and Sands China Ltd., a cluster of casinos in the Chinese territory of Macau. He would benefit from loosened trade restrictions and a rise in the Chinese currency rate against the dollar. His company devoted $60,000 this year to lobby on tax issues, foreign tourist visas, travel and Internet gambling issues — and has spent $1.86 million lobbying on legislation dealing with China trade, gambling and travel since 2002. A staunch supporter of Israel, he also is a contributor to the Republican Jewish Coalition, which spent $920,000 since 2002 backing bills aimed at pressuring Iran and enhancing U.S. security cooperation with Israel. Adelson's casino company has advised shareholders that it was under investigation by the Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission. Investigators were said to be focusing on the Macau casinos and reports of missing money and possible violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
Read more

Huffington Post reported this week on Adelson's reported suggestions to drop a nuclear device in a remote region of Iran. I can only gather from the report the foolish and obviously senile billionaire feels the exhibition would frighten Iran into something. 

Sheldon Anderson, the billionaire casino mogul, said on a panel at Yeshiva University in New York City that an initial blast, targeted to hit only desert area, would kill “maybe a couple of rattlesnakes, and scorpions, or whatever,” according to video posted on the foreign policy news website Mondoweiss. 

“Then you say, ‘See! The next one is in the middle of Tehran. So, we mean business. You want to be wiped out? Go ahead and take a tough position and continue with your nuclear development.” (Skip to 5:15 Minute mark; Adelson with back to camera and seated on panel).

Read more

For sake of clarity, we in no way believe even Romney would jump to the 'Red Phone" and order an fake nuke attack on Iran, even if (heavens forbid) he was president.  However, we recognize the danger of plutocrats who via their wealth could wield power over money grabbing politicians. 

Such talk from a major GOP money-broker when consider along with the actions we are seeing from the Koch brothers, should provide validation of the dangers of these plutocrats. Their actions comprehensively appear outside the realm of decency and appear to indicate the mindsets of people who are Deranged conservative-moneyed elites.

Additional Source Information:

Monday, September 23, 2013

Park Ave: In America,The Rich Are Getting Richer.


We doubt you can watch an internet documentary that runs 60 minutes in one setting. I thought same as I sat and watched the Inside Job on a desktop personal computer. The Inside Job was one of the most enlightening documentary exhibitions I have seen in over a quarter century. We offer another exposition that all of middle American and lower income America should watch: Park Avenue.

Alex Gibney should be complemented for his work in developing Park Ave.  

Now, remember a few things.  First, it is obvious the US is fractioned into a "we have the don't have" nation. Mitt Romney reminded of such as he secretly (or he thought so) spoke with a group of wealthy elitist in Boca Ration, Florida during the 2012 campaign. 

".....entitled to housing, food and healthcare..." 

Well, there is something about human nature that really does leave the "being" with the thoughts of housing food and healthcare. I wonder how many times Romney delivered that same speech among conservative elitist.

One additional example: The Raw Story.
Kevin Cramer screenshot

“2 Thessalonians 3:10 English Standard Version (ESV) 10 For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat,” Congressman Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) posted in reply Friday afternoon to an inquiry from Kevin Tengesdal, a Bismark-based actor and activist.
The elitist Republican spewed scriptures while standing with cohorts; one with a silly smirk.

The documentary is not a quick view. I finished the exposition in three settings.

Park Avenue: Money, Power and The American Dream.....
Directed by: Alex Gibney
Produced by: Blair Foster

Production company: Jigsaw Productions & Steps International
Published on Jan 5, 2013
How much inequality is too much? To find out more and get teaching resources linked to the film, go to 740 Park Ave, New York City, is home to some of the wealthiest Americans. 
Across the Harlem River, 10 minutes to the north, is the other Park Avenue in South Bronx, where more than half the population needs food stamps and children are 20 times more likely to be killed. In the last 30 years, inequality has rocketed in the US -- the American Dream only applies to those with money to lobby politicians for friendly bills on Capitol Hill. 
Director Alex Gibney Producer Blair Foster Produced by Jigsaw Productions & Steps International Why Poverty?
Income inequality is unsustainable.


Sunday, June 2, 2013

GOP Talking-Point Machine Blackburn, Paycheck Fairness, Per Research Study And Conservative Regressivism

Marsha Blackburn (R) TN. (Small image of the Day)

During a week when Michelle Bachmann stated she would not seek a 5th Term in the US House of Representatives, we get another blast of a GOP lost.

Representative Marsha Blackburn (R) TN, joined a panel on Meet The Press earlier today.  The conversation apparently segued from discussion of Syria to the Pew Research study indicating women are becoming the major earner in an increasing number of households.


SDT-2013-05-breadwinner-moms-1-3 SDT-2013-05-breadwinner-moms-1-4

Two points before we listen to Blackburn. First The Congresswoman for Tennessee is the epitome of a "talking points machine".  Rarely, do I hear her speak without the ever-present: "the American People", jargon from the GOP.  How can the GOP speak for the "American People" when it is composed of 92% whites and little diversity beyond that census.  Are we to believe that congressionals and surrogates like Blackburn go into African-American, Latino, and Asian communities for interaction and dialog about their opinions, wants and in some cases needs? Personally, I have never experienced a case where the woman as partner in heading a household did not work.  Second, it seems the issue evolves around a matter of perspective.  I have never lived in or know anyone who lives in a world where the income was so high the mother was not forced to work. Better, yet many women have professional careers and it is almost a natural that after decades they have begun to show as major bread winners.  Women are attending college at a higher rate than men, and women generally attain higher grade levels than men. Therefore I ask, why is the Pew Research study generating alarm in conservative America and in the media.  

As I completed the last sentence, I initiated a quick Google search of  "women Vs. men" in college.  In .58 seconds Google returned 165,000,000 hits. Of course, most are not directly related to the search, but the salient point is the topic is well archived and readily available for review.  The first four  Google links are posted below.  

  1. 25% Fewer Men Than Women Graduate College; Obama: It's 'A ... › News

    Jun 24, 2012 – According to the Census Bureau, 685,000 men and 916,000 womengraduated from college in 2009 (the latest year for which statistics have ...
  2. - College gender gap widens: 57% are women
    Oct 19, 2005 – Not only do national statistics forecast a continued decline in the ... of 154 women for every 100 men in the state's colleges and universities in ...
  3. At Colleges, Women Are Leaving Men in the Dust -

    Jul 9, 2006 – Men also get worse grades than womenAnd in two national studies,college men reported that they studied less and socialized more than their ...
  4. College Enrollment and Work Activity of 2012 High School Graduates

    Apr 17, 2013 – Recent high school graduates not enrolled in college in October 2012 were ... rate was 71.3 percent for young women and 61.3 percent for young men. ....U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics | Division of Labor Force Statistics, PSB ...
I again ask, why is this even an issue? It is a rhetorical question, but would you like an answer anyway?  Women working outside of the household is yet another issue born of conservative regressivism and their desire for a society with only the white heterosexual male as beings of true relevance and significance

Would conservatives expect the graduating women, and women who are forced out of the household due to poor economic policy to refrain from earning money to sustain life for their families?  On the other hand, the GOP has well worn mantra related to SNAP food programs for the needy (AKA food stamps).

There is yet another dynamic related to the increasing number of households headed by women.  It is hard to imagine the huge number of job losses in 2007, 2008 and early 2009 are not having impact on the number of women as major bread winner.

Media Matters may have addressed the issue long ago, as part of deeper discussion of Mitt Romney's claim that women disproportionately lose jobs under Obama.  As is the case with all Romney comments, the words were yet another campaign lie.  And of course, FoxPEN's Steve Doocy (Linked via Media Matters) would follow suit by matter of network policy.  As you read this short excerpt from the Media Matters piece, think about the number of men who may never have recovered jobs at the levels of their previous employment, if they have actually secured a job. 
CNN: "Since February 2010, Women Have Actually Gained 863,000 Jobs." CNN reported that employment among women has actually increased by 863,000 jobs since February 2010:
[T]he statistic does not reflect that men constituted a much larger chunk of the job loss pie in the year leading up to Obama's inauguration. 
In the 2008 calendar year, men lost a total of 2.7 million nonfarm jobs, compared with 895,000 jobs lost for women. Men made up 75.4% of the 3.6 million jobs lost that year. 
Romney's claim also does not reflect that the job losses for women began in March 2008, almost a full year before Obama took office. At that point, women held a total of 67.3 million nonfarm payroll jobs, the highest level of female employment of the Bush administration. 
From that high point, the number of women with nonfarm payroll jobs fell for 23 consecutive months, spanning from the final 10 months of the Bush administration and first 13 months of the Obama administration. Since February 2010, women have actually gained 863,000 jobs. [, 4/11/12]

The image is very revealing in many ways. It seems to be an  imaged reality of the mindset for the regressive GOP and conservative America.

Marsha Blackburn?  The Meet The Press panel discussed n the topic from a somewhat light-hearted perspective. I will ad appropriately so as the topic should not warrant deep societal and psycho-conservative dogma. 

During the Meet The Press segment, Blackburn moves through her talking-points as if a spokesperson for women.  After a brief introduction into the reality of the Paycheck Fairness Act, Blackburn seems to turn her rhetorical dogma to issues of affirmative action. 

Her soliloquy starts at the 1:00 minute mark of the 2:23 minute segment. While she relinquished the dialog for a moment, she reverted to her usual non-stop talking-points dominance about topics that were not part of the dialog.  The Pew Research Study did not focus on vestiges of affirmative action, nor did anyone ask Blackburn her thoughts of 'nonrecognition' of women in the workplace. 

By the way, didn't Blackburn join all members of the GOP House in voting against the Paycheck Fairness Act? Alas, the reason she may have wanted to deflect the dialog away from paycheck fairness and women as primary "breadwinners." 


Sunday, April 28, 2013

Income Inequality Part I: A Worldwide Problem With Major US Fissure
Income inequality is not a economic phenomenon restricted to the United States.  It is a worldwide reality with inequality in some countries sitting at the high-end of the scale; surpassing indicators of other countries. In all cases except the nations of  Scandinavia and a few other nations, the less fortunate denizens of nations live vastly different lives from the wealthy.  The spectrum spans lavish opulence to overwhelming poverty and death, the numbers are stark and revealing.

Gfmag Dot Com published an interactive world map of income inequality.  The map is supported via use of the the GINI Index.

GINI index

Gini index measures the extent to which the distribution of income or consumption expenditure among individuals or households within an economy deviates from a perfectly equal distribution. A Lorenz curve plots the cumulative percentages of total income received against the cumulative number of recipients, starting with the poorest individual or household. The Gini index measures the area between the Lorenz curve and a hypothetical line of absolute equality, expressed as a percentage of the maximum area under the line. Thus a Gini index of 0 represents perfect equality, while an index of 100 implies perfect inequality.

Wealth Distribution and Income Inequality by Country Data is from the World Bank Development Indicators.
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution Share Alike
Other widely used measures of economic inequality are the percentage of people living with under US$2 a day (at 2005 international prices) and the share of national income held by the wealthiest 10% of the population.
According to World Bank data, income inequality tends to be lower in Northern Europe, with countries such as Sweden, Norway and Finland showing some of the world's lowest GINI coefficients. It is also surprisingly low in much less affluent countries like Afghanistan and Ethiopia. 
The highest levels of income inequality were found, in the last decade, in countries such as the Central African Republic, Honduras, Angola, Haiti, South Africa and Namibia.

In the late 2000s, Chile had the highest GINI coefficient, after taxes and transfers, among OECD member countries. The United States, Turkey and Mexico came right before it.
The highest levels of income inequality were found, in the last decade, in countries such as the Central African Republic, Honduras, Angola, Haiti, South Africa and Namibia. 
In the late 2000s, Chile had the highest GINI coefficient, after taxes and transfers, among OECD member countries. The United States, Turkey and Mexico came right before it.
Read more
(Posted Under Creative Commons License: Attribution Share Alike)
Huffington Post recently published an infographic depicting "the mind blowing" reality of US income inequity.

Pay special attention to the bottom 90 percent of Americans, who collectively held just a little more than half of the nation's wealth in 2010, all while the wealthiest 0.01 percent held nearly five percent. It's a stark divide many too easily forget.
income distribution

The infographic a very basic, yet effective exposition of information that will follow. It provides a quick reference message and it delivers the message effectively.   For those who are not averse to data and charts, there is more to come. Much of what's to come is poignant in delivering a message, "Income inequity is a problem that will eventually boil-over like an overflowing pot of your mother's Oatmeal."

There is one glaring message from the infographic that relates to current budget deliberations. We suggest among other more drastic recommendations, removal of the Social Security Cap for the Top 20% to 30% income earners. The 2013 social security (payroll tax) maximum is $113,700. The maximum has been increased annually for many years. Why are people who earning at the higher income levels 'excused' from paying a tax most of us pay throughout the year?

Why are these income earners exempt from 

payroll taxes when their 
income reaches $113,700?
Basically, income earners on left side of the infographic could pay Social Security taxes throughout the year in support of maintaining solvency of Social Security well into the 22nd Century. Higher income tax rates for the top income earners is another fair way of leveling the disparity 'playing field' while maintaining a hands-off the actual reality of income inequity. The vast majority of Americans do not resent the earnings of the uber wealthy, Those same people, however, may find the current tax rates somewhat offensive and unfair. 

Speaking in terms of fairness is not a viable option for the GOP as it smacks against its unwritten, but existential role of guardians of all things wealthy and majordomo (P) of any measure that facilitates conducting business in America. If you need an example consider Eric Cantor's persistent attacks on the Fair Labor Standards Act. (Cantor would sponsor a bill to lessen the need for companies to pay Overtime work at tine and one-half). US Citizens contribution via income taxes to Cantors $194,000 plus House Leader congressional; compensation. Do you actually believe such a measure would work for the betterment of the family, as Cantor claims? Is it possible many companies will abuse such law? I posit such law will actually work to widen American income inequity. How about a bill to improve job creation or job development. 

We are committed to our position that income inequity is a metastasized economic cancer from political policy of the early 1980s.


An unavoidable digression.
Who was president in the early 1980s?

Another consideration of 'life' handed to the middle and lower income strata: spending leading to our current debt and deficits. 

Which US Presidents contributed most to our current financial woes?
Excuse the digression, let's get back to income "trickle-down" economics.


Monday, March 4, 2013

Ann And MItt Romney Grace the Fox News Cameras: Part II

Mitt and Ann Romney speak for the first time since Mitt Romney loss in the Fall General Election.  While I have commented my thoughts the interview as strategically timed to pave the way for a bewildering CPAC appearance, the interview reveals much in validation of his election loss.

Romney was asked by Chris Wallace about (according to a Fox News by-line), the hardest thing about losing".  Former candidate Romney stepped right into the path of a moving 'Mack Truck".  He went straight to the "sequester", while spewing pie-in-the-sky gibberish about "the waste."

Linked (1:00)

The former candidate and Fox News had apparently decided to answer the question with comment about the 'sequester'. The sequester was used to 'slam' (as the press lies to call it) the president without regard for perspective.

First, Romney wills his mind free of any rationale for the 'sequesters' being based in pure GOP obstruction in 2011 and 2012. Obstruction via protectionism for higher income earners and the opposite strategy of disproportionately cutting human services programs.  OK, we all know that earned benefit programs (e.g., Medicare) are placing an undue burden on federal budgets and the deficit. President Obama has signaled his base and democrats that they will not like some modifications resulting from deficit reductions.  That leaves some with the impression the Right is completely unwilling to even entertain tax increases related to opulence.

The "undue deficit burden" did not pop-up on January 20, 2009 (President Obama's first inauguration day)  as some Jack-in-the-Box surprise.  The problem has developed over decades and was known to become exacerbated with the aging Baby Boomers. Where was the fix throughout the decades? The problem was also ever-present during years when George W. Bush waged two wasteful wars while cutting taxes (against any known rational theory of economics and fiscal management). How about Romney ignoring the fact that the ill-advised, ill-planned and ridiculous fiscally irresponsible Bush Tax Cuts were damaging to the US economy? What rationale should we use to assimilate that wrongs (GOP protectionism of the initial wrong (The Bush Tax Cuts) makes any logical fiscal sense?   The country has a spending problem, but the problem is also compounded by obtuse protectionism regarding revenues.

Next, Romney via his lament signals that he would follow the Ryan Budget Plan and simply hack away at human services programs without any regard to revenue.  And, there-in lies a major problem. Voters and poll respondents expressed their wishes last Fall. By nature of Obama landslide victory,  the majority deficit reduction sentiment was diametrically opposite the Romney/Ryan plan.   Recent survey data provides dramatic movement even farther towards a balanced approach to deficit reduction.

So, his implication of 'wastes' simply tells me he would devote copious effort in hacking benefits for the elderly, the unemployed, health services and cutting services to our young. Yet, he sits on Fox News entertaining his base and Fox News viewers with what could have been.

               "I coulda been a contender"

As stated in Part I and earlier in this piece we feel Romney's Fox News appearance was pure theater to avoid CPAC as their first public appearance post November 6, 2012.  


Friday, February 22, 2013

Obama: Data, Information, Leadership And The Right Side Of Issues


"No war is won without effective INTEL." The Pardu

"If you know the enemy and know yourself you need not fear the results of a hundred battles."
Sun Tzu , The Art of War (Read more) 

Do you think the Obama Administration knows the value of public preferences, inclinations and likes/dislikes (e.g., public opinion)? 

Do you think President Obama and his staff are 'dim-witted' enough to simply wing-it on issues, or more seriously not know, or ignore,  public opinion?

Remember, this is the Administration that eliminated Osama bin Laden to close a strategy-based plan ordered,  "to his (Obama's) desk within 90 days of his Inauguration".  Your answer to the questions above should be a resounding, "No and No."

Since Obama's first inauguration, we have witnessed, almost without fail, decision making that has moved the nation forward.  And, that decision-making has been undertaken, executed and analyzed for effectiveness  despite major obstruction from Republicans and the nation's conservatives.

During the 2013 SOTU Speech, President Obama threw the nation a curve ball unanticipated by all, but his inner staff.  

The president actually proposed a Minimum Wage of $9.00 per hour; an increase to the federally required minimum by $1.75 per hour.  Did you notice in the video above, as soon as Obama spoke of CEO pay, Boehner took that ever-present GOP 'perfunctory' and often fake sip of water?  We assume Boehner's sip was H2O. The Minimum Wage speaking point, surprised the nation.  We feel that Boehner's timely sip (?) was all he could do to provide moisture for what must have been a Richter Scale sphincter contraction and the largest of 2013. Actually, we suspect a major sphincter attack via the 291 Republicans in the 113th congress; we could only observe Boehner. Of course, you and I noticed no Republicans stood nor dared applaud at the mention of the $9.00 per hour Minimum Wage.  Sphincter attack?

"Raise the Minimum Wage?"

Do you think Obama knew the win-win of raising the Minimum wage?  Win one, polling data indicating wide support for upping the Minimum Wage.  Win two, past history of support for raising the rate and the fact raising the rate doe snot kill jobs. 

Rachel Maddow Blog (Steve Benen) Pew Research Poll

Huffington Post: Minimum Wage public opinion

Minimum Wage aside, the Obama Team is aware of public polling for contraception, for gun control, and against changes to Medicare/Social Security. Lawrence O'Donnell, The Last Word, is reporting on a new poll that (on certain issues) shows the majority of Republicans support President Obama.  The Administration is as good as its ability to seek and assimilate information and its cache of information is good.

The following is a bit detailed, but relevant in understanding the significance of a competent president who is smart enough to use data and public opinion to advance a fair and advance agenda.  Information is critical as we consider the basic serious need for a President, Commander-in-Chief, and Leader who can competently manage a vast management team including supportive and committed software engineers as well as polling professionals in the information trenches. 

Let's go back and explore how the Obama Team uses data and public opinion for 21st Century decision-making and politicking. 

Within weeks of the November 2012 General Elections a number of articles about campaign backroom technology, software geeks, Information/polling specialists and voting system hacking popped-up like white "high-end (aged)" Baby Boomers at early Tea Party rallies.  

As I perused many of mid-November 2012 articles, I was a bit surprised at the true extent of polling effectiveness or the opposite ineffectiveness.  As Rasmussen, NPR, Gallup TrackingABC/WAPO, PPP/Daily KOS & SEIU, Gallup Tracking  and few other polls completely missed the mark. The "other polls" link shows comprehensive poll data is much more representative of 2012 election results.  

Other articles explored the business of electoral college predictions.  Two noted examples included the highly effective Nate Silver (Obama 313; Romney 225) and the completely blown-out (allegedly accurate since 1980) Colorado University professors Ken Bickers from CU-Boulder and Michael Berry from CU-Denver (Romney 320; Obama 218).  Even Nate Silver blew a state! Neither public voter polling or electoral college predictor truly represented the backroom battles of what I call "deep voter" polling.

Of the articles read in Mid-November, none intrigued as much as Obama's Narwhal Team.

Three of the 40 Narwhal Engineers. 
The President hugging Harper Reed as shown on his Instagram feed.

Out of the 2008 election, very smart Obama campaign staffers realized an abundance of voter related data deserved serious attention and deeper scrutiny. (Details linked via  article 
Narwhal Team link above)Karl Rove (Romney's) ORCA system was literally gored by the Obama Team's (Narwhal).  article Link
The Horror of a Loss!

The NARWHAL Team contributed battle winning support for the Obama Campaign.  Conversely, Romney's campaign (the ramble keystone cops) and Rove's ORCA system failed in its mission with a specific failure (crash) the evening of November 6th, while we awaited Ohio poll results.

The Hacktivist group Anonymous has taken credit for allegedly crashing the Rove ORCA.  It is impossible to verify the Anonymous claim, as all things hacking has a cover of secrecy. We do know the Rove's ORCA crashed the evening of November, 6th.

The NARWHAL system and team was vital to and effective in contributing to an Obama Campaign (Axelrod, Cutter, et al)  level of confidence that became clear as election results came-in and electoral votes declared.  The "ground game" technology system yielded a landslide victory.  

We have no way of knowing if the NARWHAL Team was disbanded or still contributes to the president's decision-making data resources.  What we do know is the Obama Administration is rarely, if ever, on the wrong-side of polling majorities. 

Conversely, Mitt Romney campaigned on electing someone who has run a business.  Hell, did the man even effectively run a two year campaign  His campaign did absolutely nothing right throughout the entirety of 2007/2008.

Additional resource: 
Communitiesdominate  (ORCA Vs. NARWHAL direct comparison and analyst)