Via Talking Points Memo:

She may, famously, not be a witch, but here’s a bit of money magic from former Delaware Republican Senate candidate and recent Mitt Romney endorser Christine O’Donnell: her political campaign gave $142,000 to her super PAC, which proceeded to buy copies of her book.

Federal Election Commission reports filed by her campaign and super PAC this week show that the money her campaign gave to her super PAC represents just under 62 percent of the $229,985 the PAC took in during 2011. $19,912.30 of that money went towards an August 20th purchase labeled “PAC Fundraising Non-Residual Books” from a book shop in Philadelphia.

O’Donnell’s book, “Troublemaker,” had a list price of $25.99. If the books were purchased at that price, the campaign would have gotten around 766 copies. It’s unclear how all those copies were used for fundraising purposes since O’Donnell only received contributions from 16 individuals in the second half of the year. If all of them received a copy, she would have 750 copies of the book on hand.

Look this happens all the time in politics. A book is bought and signed by said politician and used for fundraising. I got no problems with that. None. But a couple questions. Why didn’t she purchase the book from her publisher, you know at a discounted rate? Two, she is from Delaware, wouldn’t it make sense she buy the book from a store within her state? And finally, what the heck as she done with all these books? You know, just asking.

It seems that everyone who is online or has their own television shows seems to be of the opinion that Newt Gingrich did poorly in this latest debate. When now apparently “everyone” includes Newt and his campaign staff. Their excuse for his lackluster performance this time around, was that the auditorium was packed with Romney supporters:

“They definitely packed the room,” Kevin Kellems, one of Gingrich’s senior advisers, told the Huffington Post early Friday morning.

Did everybody catch that? So when CNN asked audience members to remain quiet during a debate, that was unfair to Newt. When CNN let people applaud, but they applauded for Mitt Romney, that also was unfair to Newt. Apparently the only way Newt will be satisfied is if CNN instructs the next debate audience that they are only allowed to applaud for Newt Gingrich. Come to think of it, I’d be surprised if the Gingrich campaign isn’t drafting that demand right now.

Oh, Newt, you’re such an idiot:

Mr. Gingrich, a former House speaker, on Tuesday morning threatened not participate in any future debates with audiences that have been instructed to be silent. That was the case on Monday, when Brian Williams of NBC News asked the audience of about 500 people who assembled for a debate in Tampa to hold their applause until the commercial breaks.In an interview with the morning show “Fox and Friends,” Mr. Gingrich said NBC’s rules amounted to stifling free speech. In what has become a standard line of attack for his anti-establishment campaign, Mr. Gingrich blamed the media for trying to silence a dissenting point of view.

“I wish in retrospect I’d protested when Brian Williams took them out of it because I think it’s wrong,” Mr. Gingrich said. “And I think he took them out of it because the media is terrified that the audience is going to side with the candidates against the media, which is what they’ve done in every debate.”

REUTERS/Larry Downing

Oh we’ve all heard this before? That’s the message, anyway, coming out of the House Republican caucus retreat that  took place last week: they’ll stop the infighting and extremist political battles that fractured the party and focus on jobs.

The 2012 GOP playbook is a poll-tested group of bullet points that seems to illustrate a fresh start for the majority. That means tackling issues that unify the party, such as the Keystone XL pipeline, domestic energy production, infrastructure spending and tax reform. It also means dodging the spending and deficit battles that hurt the party last year.In fact, much of the 2012 agenda will be the mirror opposite of 2011.

In 2011, Republicans talked about cutting spending, trying to convince the public that doing so would create jobs. That message—along with talk of the size of government—isn’t strong, Republicans were told in a polling briefing. They need to stick to the mantra of “Where are the jobs?”

The fact that they’re coalescing around a fresh set of principles shows that leaders are aware of the discontent in the conference and recognize that a fresh start is necessary to maintain their majority. It’s an attempt to scuttle the sense of crisis and improvisation that was the backdrop to governing in 2011. And it illustrates that Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) have settled on a set of answers for the coming year.

Right. Just to refresh your memory, here is what John Boehner said they would focus on in the first session of his term as speaker, in January 2009.

Part of our job is to work with the new administration, to work with our Democratic colleagues, when we think what they’re doing is in the nation’s best interest.”There will be disagreements, he said, but that doesn’t mean there can’t be discussion.

“Our job is not to be the party of ‘no,’ ” Boehner said. “We need to be willing to put our solutions out there— or what I would call our better solutions. And if we’re not willing to put our better solution out there, then we ought to reconsider the position we’re taking.

And what exactly did we get out of last session from Boehner’s House? Eight votes to restrict women’s reproductive health. They nearly unanimously adopted a budget that ends Medicare. They blocked President Obama’s jobs bill. Oh, and they saved the incandescent light bulb. But this session is going to be all about jobs. Really. No they mean it this time.

On Saturday in Somalia, the U.S. fired missiles from a drone and killed the 27-year-old Lebanon-born, ex-British citizen Bilal el-Berjawi. His wife had given birth 24 hours earlier and the speculation is that the U.S. located him when his wife called to give him the news  [....] El-Berjawi’s family vehemently denies that he is involved with Terrorism, but he was never able to appeal the decree against him for this reason:

Berjawi is understood to have sought to appeal against the order, but lawyers representing his family were unable to take instructions from him amid concerns that any telephone contact could precipitate a drone attack.

Obviously, those concerns were valid. So first the U.S. tries to assassinate people, then it causes legal rulings against them to be issued because the individuals, fearing for their life, are unable to defend daithemselves. Meanwhile, no explanation or evidence is provided for either the adverse government act or the assassination: it is simply secretly decreed and thus shall it be.

I’m already opposed 110% to assassinations of U.S. citizens, and not even OK with the assassinations of non-U.S. nationals either. So this doesn’t really change my mind, but it does make the whole thing a lot more Kafka-esque than I had imagined.

But from time-to-time it is important to recall the ugly underside to this guy’s worldview.

During a Fox News appearance this evening, Mike Huckabee suggested that Mitt Romney, who has come under fire for refusing to immediately release his tax returns, respond by challenging President Obama to release his college application materials in order to “show whether he got any loans as a foreign student.”

Speaking on The O’Reilly Factor, Huckabee said of Romney, “Let him make this challenge: ‘I’ll release my tax returns when Barack Obama releases his college transcripts and the copy of his admission records to show whether he got any loans as a foreign student. When he releases that, talk to me about my tax returns.’”

Really, he wants to go there? College transcripts? “Loans as a foreign student”? This right-wing hackery isn’t just cheap, it’s pathetic. Barely a step up from being a “birther.” It’s the kind of rhetoric one might expect from random crackpots, not a former governor and presidential candidate.