Political Miscellania: 1/17/12

Tuesday, January 17, AD 2012

The first of our Political Miscellanias for 2012.

1.  Newt Gingrich v. The Food Stamp-President-Gingrich demonstrated at the debate last night why he was once in first place  in the race.  He is unwilling to let the media set the terms of the agenda;  in the cut and thrust of debate he is unmatchable;  and he is invincibly politically incorrect, at least on the stump.  As to the importance of early jobs, he is correct.  My high school job, scrubbing dishes and floors, taught me some valuable early lessons about work, money and savings that have stood me in good stead throughout my life.

2.  Santorum won IowaIt looks like Rick Santorum probably won the Iowa caucus.  I have heard that his margin of victory is probably about eighty ballots.

3.  Jon Huntsman drops out-Every Democrat’s favorite Republican has dropped out of the race.  Mandarin Chinese teachers in this country are devastated.  Huntsman’s campaign never took off, and his Waterloo arrived swiftly when he came in third behind Ron Paul in New Hampshire.  Although it obviously did not help him, Huntsman will always have a warm spot in my heart for this campaign commercial:

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

13 Responses to Political Miscellania: 1/17/12

  • Newt proved once again last night why he’s lower than scum. He captured the white supremacist vote last night. National Review was dead on. The only acceptable candidates were Romney, Huntsman, and Santorum. Huntsman competed with Perry for worst campaigner so it’s down to Romney and Santorum.

    I know some will say “That’s low to call Newt a racist. He just spoke the politically incorrect truth.” What Newt said was he doesn’t even understand why interchangeably using “those on welfare,” “those who don’t know the value of work,” and “blacks” could sound offensive. Forget, the policies. He says he doesn’t even understand why it can sound offensive! At the very least he’s ignorant.

    Had Santorum kept his mouth shut about homosexuality and birth control or if the public were wise enough to know that he was talking about constitutionality, not bans, he could’ve been the frontrunner. Across the board, he is the most moderate candidate. Yesterday, he advocated the highest taxes of all the candidates. 28%, the same as Huntsman. He went after Romney for not supporting the right of ex-cons to vote. He went after Newt, surprisingly, for not wanting to cut entitlement benefits for millionaires. He opposed the recent law, which the other candidates supported, that striped US citizens of hapeus corpus. He wants to keep foreign aid flowing. On no issue is he further to the right than the others (except for Paul on foreign policy). The debate was held on MLK Day and only Santorum and Paul even mentioned MLK. Santorum is intelligent, articulate, and understands how Washington works. I don’t agree with him on everything but I don’t agree with anyone on everything.

  • Newt proved once again last night why he’s lower than scum. He captured the white supremacist vote last night.

    And you just proved once again why your opinion is of little or no consequence.

  • I’m just speaking the politically incorrect truth. It’s time for you to join the Republican mainstream, Paul. Perry has a better chance of being elect president of Mexico.

  • I’m just speaking the politically incorrect truth.

    You’re being politically incorrect by repeating a politically correct trope? That makes sense to you how?

    Perry has a better chance of being elect president of Mexico.

    This is perhaps true, but also a non sequiter as I didn’t even bring up Perry in this comment.

    Seriously, do you have anything meaningful to contribute at all?

  • It’s evidence of how outside the mainstream of Republican thought you are. Republicans who find the following candidates unacceptable:
    Romney: 31%
    Santorum: 39%
    Gingrich: 46%
    Perry: 55%

  • “Newt proved once again last night why he’s lower than scum.”

    Are you saying, “If you disrespect welfare you are a racist.”? Or, is it “Free speech for me, but not for thee.”?

    Maybe the point is the entitlement society tends to reward evil.

    Newt’s point is the causes of inter-generational welfare dependency include absence of virtue, alcoholism, broken families, drug addiction, envy, fornication, gluttony, promiscuity, sloth, wrath, etc.

    If you call that “lower than scum”, it might be you are saying more about you than about Newt.

  • Let’s be realistic and listen to signs of hope and caring ideas for getting US citizens out of decline into ignorance and immorality. No one will be thrown out by consolidating programs and duplicated or overlapping entitlements that are becoming the engine of the economy.

    We can’t let tossing of accusatory, contentious, tiring, and hateful words blur or smear clarity for another four years. I hope these primary candidates stay strong and intelligently get their message through the smokescreens. (as Newt Gingrich did in the above video.)

  • “Newt proved once again last night why he’s lower than scum. He captured the white supremacist vote last night.”

    Thank you for giving us a preview of the Obama campaign strategy in the Fall RR. “My Republican opponent is a vile racist and only my re-election can stop the hate and restore civility to this great nation!” It certainly beats attempting to run on his economic record. Under Obama black unemployment is 15.8% and back in September it hit 16.7%, a 27 year high.

    What Gingrich understands, and what you fail to, is that the idea that anyone of any race can rely upon the government for their sustenance is a myth that is dissolving before our eyes. Obama is a reactionary paladin of the New Deal and the Great Society, and as his abysmal administration has amply demonstrated, those schemes simply no longer work.

  • “Thank you for giving us a preview of the Obama campaign strategy in the Fall RR.”

    Newt ain’t making it to the fall!

    What Newt understands and I don’t is how best to burn crosses.

  • The same tactic will be applied RR no matter who the Republican nominee is. If Cain were to have been the nominee, it would have made no difference, although hearing Democrat shills proclaiming that Cain really wasn’t black, as has been stated for the past 20 years about Clarence Thomas (whose nickname as a kid was ABC: America’s Blackest Child), would have been hilarious if not edifying.

    In regard to your bizarre attempt to paint Newt Gingrich as a Klansman, I suggest that you might wish to make that comment at Vox Nova where it will be taken as a sign of enlightenment, rather than derangement.

  • Mac,

    I keep thinking RR is short for “restrained radical” one of them credentialed morons over at VN.

    I apologize if that’s not you, restrained, er, RR. Actually, I need to apologize to both.

  • I keep thinking RR is short for “restrained radical” one of them credentialed morons over at VN.

    That is what RR is short for, though I do not believe he blogs for that particular site. After his, err, interesting display on this thread, he’s going to have to do all of his commenting there.

  • Pingback: South Carolina Surprise | The American Catholic

Political Miscellania 10\27\10

Wednesday, October 27, AD 2010

A roundup of recent political news less than a week before the election.

1.  Debbie Does Delusion-  Reason TV Porker of the Month is one of my favorite internet monthly videos.  Debbie Wasserman-Schultz , Congresswoman for Florida 20, is one of the more telegenic of the Democrat members of Congress, and one of the most eager to appear on television.  It is said that one of the most dangerous places to be in DC is between her and a tv camera.  Somehow though, I doubt if she will appreciate her Reason TV feature.  Her pro-life opponent Karen Harrington has been waging an aggressive uphill campaign.  It is an overwhelmingly blue district, but if it is a night for political miracles next Tuesday, I hope that Karen Harrington can free Debbie Wasserman-Schultz for a full time TV career.

2.  To Dream the Impossible Dream-Speaking of uphill fights, John Dennis, a libertarian Republican, has been going full bore against Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House, and fondly designated by me as The Lying Worthless Political Hack.  California 8 in San Francisco is the blue heart of liberalism in this country, and therefore it would take a political earthquake of biblical proportions for Dennis to win, but that hasn’t stopped him from campaigning with endless energy and humor:

If a candidate deserves to win simply due to energy, style and sheer brio, it is John Dennis.  May Saint Jude be paying attention to this race.

3.  How Low Can He Go?- Harris interactive poll had the President at 37% approval yesterday, a new low mark for him.  Coincidentally, on Monday our post-partisan President said that Republicans were welcome to work with him as long as they sit in the back of the bus.  “We don’t mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back.”  It’s a generous offer Mr. President, but after next Tuesday I think the Republicans will be sitting up front with you.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

Political Miscellania 10\20\10

Wednesday, October 20, AD 2010

A roundup of political news less than two weeks from the midterm elections.

1.  Kentucky Fried Political Suicide-Jack Conway decided to lose the Kentucky Senate Race with a bang not a whimper.  His video resurrects a college prank pulled by Rand Paul almost three decades ago and attempts to use it to brand Paul an apostate from Christianity.  I have seen lots of ludicrous attack ads over the years but this one takes the case.  And the woman who was tied up in the prank?  Here is her take:

The woman — who was made available to me for an interview by GQ reporter Jason Zengerle in response to the Paul campaign’s denunciations of his article — said she didn’t mean to imply that she was kidnapped “in a legal sense.”

“The whole thing has been blown out of proportion,” she told me. “They didn’t force me, they didn’t make me. They were creating this drama: `We’re messing with you.'”

The woman said that much of the subsequent coverage of her allegations missed a key nuance: As a participant in a college ritual, where lines between acquiescence and victimization are often blurry, she was largely playing along with the notion that she was being forced to follow Paul’s orders.

“I went along because they were my friends,” she said. “There was an implicit degree of cooperation in the whole thing. I felt like I was being hazed.”

By all accounts the ad is backfiring big time on Conway and will probably ensure a double digit Paul victory.  Most voters understand that college students are young and often immature, at least I was,  and can act in fairly foolish ways at times as a result.  Besides, attempting to turn this into an attack on Paul’s religious faith is misplaced.  I am as confident as I can be that when Paul was tying up the coed the last thing on his mind was religion.

2.  Ohio Fried Political Suicide-Steve Driehaus is the Democrat Congressman for Ohio 1.  He doesn’t want you to see the ad above.  He is desperate because he trails his opponent Steve Chabot by double digits according to a recent poll.  He is one of the incumbent Democrat Congressmen who have been cast adrift by the Democrat party because their re-election races appear hopeless.  He is also one of the “pro-life” Democrat Congressman who voted for ObamaCare.    The Susan B. Anthony List paid for a billboard to remind the constituents of Driehaus that ObamaCare allows for public funding of abortions.  Driehaus complained to the Ohio Election Commission, claiming that the ad is misleading.  A hearing is scheduled for the end of October.  The attorneys for Driehaus strong armed the owner of the billboard not to allow the ad until the Commission has issued a ruling.  The President of the Susan B. Anthony List Marjorie Dannenfelser has stated in regard to Driehaus and his lack of familiarity with the first amendment:

The Ohio Elections Commission has allowed Steve Driehaus to achieve his strategic objective of preventing constituents from learning the truth about his vote in favor of taxpayer funding of abortion in the health care reform bill. We are disappointed and surprised that the complaint was not immediately dismissed. The fact that the health care reform bill allows for taxpayer funding of abortion has been agreed upon by every major pro-life group in the country, including National Right to Life, Americans United for Life, Focus on the Family, and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. The larger problem here is a public official’s attempt to use a criminal statue to silence legitimate debate on his record. The proper place for public policy debate is in the public square, not in an Elections Commission or criminal court. The SBA List will see this process through to the end and vigorously defend our position that the health care reform bill, supported by Steve Driehaus, allows for taxpayer funding of abortion. Moreover, we will use every vehicle possible within our First Amendment rights to communicate this message to the people of Congressman Steve Driehaus’ district between now and the hearing.

Of course by attempting to suppress the billboard, Driehaus has ensured that it has been seen by far more people over the internet and in newspaper and television stories than would have ever seen the billboard.  Brilliant.  Desperate and stupid is a poor combination in politics.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

35 Responses to Political Miscellania 10\20\10

  • I’m guessing the Seavey-Rittelmeyer relationship didn’t last because it’s awfully difficult to carry on an adult relationship with a 40-year-old guy who still lives in his mother’s basement.

    As I’ve noted on other occasions, libertarianism is an ideology for the unserious and the childless. Most serious people “graduate” from libertarianism roughly about the same time they graduate from college.

  • “didn’t last because it’s awfully difficult to carry on an adult relationship with a 40-year-old guy who still lives in his mother’s basement.”

    Words for women to live by Jay!

  • “I’m guessing the Seavey-Rittelmeyer relationship didn’t last because it’s awfully difficult to carry on an adult relationship with a 40-year-old guy who still lives in his mother’s basement.”

    Such family values! Such respect for the traditional family!

  • Karlson a 40 year old guy, of at least normal intellect and health, living in his mom’s basement has nothing to do with family values and everything to do with pathetic.

  • Among desperate (for re-election) statesmen truth, facts, realities, history are weapons. And they are putty in their hands. They use them to assassinate the opposition, or to construct a fabrication, to win at all costs and do good as they see it. And whatever they need to distort or omit is justified by their purity of intentions – and they always have the purest of intentions!

    From ‘Epitaphs of the War; 1914 – 1918’; R. Kipling

    A DEAD STATESMAN
    I could not dig: I dared not rob:
    Therefore I lied to please the mob.
    Now all my lies are proved untrue
    And I must face the men I slew.
    What tale shall serve me here among
    Mine angry and defrauded young?

    2. There is no such animal as a pro-life democrat.

  • Thankfully not all libertarians are like Mr. Seavey. After listening to the C-SPAN panel, I caught this episode of Blogginheads (cause there’s not a lot to do in my Mom’s basement) with socially conservative libertarian Tim Carney. Here is a relevant excerpt.

  • There is no such animal as a pro-life democrat.

    I am related to and friends with many of these “animals”, many of whom are deeply involved in pro-life work as well as political issues (such as assisting the Prop 8 campaign in California.) So, yes, they do exist.

  • There are pro-life Democrats. What are rare to the point of extinction are Pro-Life Democrat politicians, at least at the national level.

  • According to this, Conway has cut Paul’s lead in half since the “Aqua Buddha” ad started running. While I think the ad is preposterous and infantile, it doesn’t seem that was political suicide. In fact, in may end up being political homicide.

  • We shall find out soon enough MJ. With all due respect to Rasmussen, I stand by my prediction of a double digit Rand win. He was in a very strong position prior to the ad, and I stand by my contention that the ad has blown up in the face of Conway.

  • As a former resident of California, I am very interested in how the Boxer/Fiorina race plays out. I would like to see Boxer ousted (and everyone can tell Deb that I am biased in this case!).

  • Donald

    Once again, you mock the traditional family.

  • Karlson, you are beyond parody.

  • Donald

    You seem to ignore traditional family values. You mock them.

  • (Guest comment from Don’s wife Cathy): RE: “Ohio Fried Political Suicide” above, Rush Limbaugh mentioned on his show Wednesday (10/20) about Cincinnati high school students being taken by vanloads to early voting during school hours, handed sample ballots for Democrat candidates only, and then taken out for ice cream afterwards. Apparently the students were also escorted into the early voting area by operatives for Rep. Driehaus. Go here http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/AB/20101018/NEWS010702/10190308/ for the full story from the local Cincinnati media.

  • Once again, you mock the traditional family.

    To my knowledge, it is quite traditional to look askance at a grown (indeed, middle-aged) man who despite no disability lives off his parents rather than being a support to them. Indeed, this is all the more the case among those who have maintained that traditional understanding that just as it is the duty of parents to be a support to their children in their youth, it is the duty of children to be a support to parents in their old age.

    Living with one’s relatives as an active support is certainly not to be mocked, but having a hobby rather than a job at age forty is — except among the idle rich, who can be mocked for that instead.

  • having a hobby rather than a job at age forty is — except among the idle rich, who can be mocked for that instead.

    I think the video identifies Seavey with the American Council on Science and Health, an advocacy group. One might raise the possibility that his current living situation is intended to be temporary and derived from a recent dismissal. (From looking at him I would guess his age is closer to fifty than forty, but perhaps my vanity requires that).

  • Art,

    I don’t think Seavey actually lives in his Mom’s basement. That’s just a stereotype about libertarians in general.

  • DarwinCatholic

    What was mocked is that he lived at home with his mother. Living in the same home as one’s parents is quite traditional — many families have been known to live together in a multi-generational home until modern times, where the family has been deconstructed. Again, it is rather peculiar for people who claim to be “pro-family” mock people who are with their family (in whatever capacity).

  • Two points.

    First, I don’t care about Paul’s infantile behavior. I do care that he is an acolyte of Ayn Rand, which is msot certainly not compatible with Christianity.

    Second, Donald’s liberalism comes through again. Living with one’s parents is a sign of virtue, a sign of real family values, not the atomistic nuclear family (a recent invention of the individualistic west) that are held to such esteem around here.

  • What was mocked is that he lived at home with his mother.

    Not “with his mother.” In his mother’s basement. It’s not mocking the family or inter-generational living arrangements to point out that middle-aged men should generally be financially self-sufficient (and ‘living in his mother’s basement’ in our culture is short-hand for ‘still financially supported by his parents’). This ideal of course can be modified for unfortunate economic circumstances or short transition periods (for example, I moved back in with my parents for about six weeks – with a wife and child, no less – several years ago. And that’s when I started blogging…(j/k) ). In any case, the ideal of middle-aged financial independence from one’s parents is hardly an attack on the family.

  • Really guys? An otherwise self-reliant 40-year old man living with his parents – not because he’s assisting them or because has some traditional concept of the nuclear family – but because he’s incapable of making it on his own, is a “sign of virtue?”

    There is a reason there’s no parody site of Vox-Nova. It provides the self-parody in spades.

  • And here you see, folks, the promotion of individualism instead of interdependence, how everyone must make it on their own, instead of as families. This is an incredible assault on traditional family values.

  • “First, I don’t care about Paul’s infantile behavior. I do care that he is an acolyte of Ayn Rand, which is msot certainly not compatible with Christianity.

    Second, Donald’s liberalism comes through again. Living with one’s parents is a sign of virtue, a sign of real family values, not the atomistic nuclear family (a recent invention of the individualistic west) that are held to such esteem around here.”

    Paul is fiercely pro-life Tony which is not in accord with the pro-abort views of the late Ayn Rand, although her views on that issue are in accord with the Democrat politicians who you usually vote for.

    In regard to a 40 year old man of normal intellect and health living in his Mommy’s basement, if it is liberal to consider that to be a disgrace, then just call me bleeding hemophiliac heart Don!

  • I will note that, to echo what John Henry said, sometimes stuff happens and people are forced into temporary living arrangements due to short-term economic setbacks. I’m sure Seavey wasn’t thrilled to have move back home (assuming he had to move back and hasn’t been there all along). But to act like he’s a paragon example of the traditional family for so doing is a bit farcical.

  • BA wrote: I don’t think Seavey actually lives in his Mom’s basement. That’s just a stereotype about libertarians in general.

    I think the stereotype is as amusing as the next guy, but Jay was joking, right? Seavey obviously has some emotional maturity issues – the clip was painfully awkward – but I also assume he doesn’t actually live in his mom’s basement (uh, not that there’s anything wrong with that per se, for our more sensitive readers).

  • I think the stereotype is as amusing as the next guy, but Jay was joking, right?

    Wow, so we’ve basically been debating something which isn’t an actual fact. Yikes.

  • Yeah, I think perhaps this is what happens when we take things a bit too literally. Jay, this is all your fault. 🙂

  • Well, I think Jay made a joke. Then Henry took the joke seriously, and suggested it was an attack on the traditional family and all that is right in the world. Then we’ve basically been responding to Henry by saying that criticizing someone for living in their mother’s basement =/ criticizing the family. As usual, we haven’t really gotten anywhere, but, yeah, we’ve been debating whether Henry’s criticism of Jay’s joke was valid.

  • In regard to a 40 year old man of normal intellect and health living in his Mommy’s basement, if it is liberal to consider that to be a disgrace, then just call me bleeding hemophiliac heart Don!

    There are bachelors in this world. It is a truncated life, but not a dishonorable one. It is also correllated with, but not identified with, antecedent personal deficiencies.

    There are also problems in this world in the realm of eldercare, and when you do not have a family and your siblings do, the hands on tasks are yours, like it or lump it. The most practical solution may involve living in a piece of real estate on which the mortgage has been paid off because the house was purchased in 1970.

    I have not a clue as to what Todd Seavey’s domestic situation actually is and there came a point in that graceless exercise of his where I could not watch anymore. That having been said, it does not require much imagination to conceive of circumstances where a middle-aged man might be living with his mother because it was necessary for them both. I have known men who had to live that life.

  • Yikes.

    Anyway, the nuclear family is atomistic? Compared to the old (sadly passed) Italian model maybe it is (and I do want grandparents and cousins around my kids as much as possible), but it is not inherently atomistic. In fact, the nuclear family is a reflection of the Trinity itself, as many become one in spirit and flesh. The nuclear family is the very foundation of a good society.

    The concept of one man, one woman, and children for life is our greatest shared heritage, and a source of spiritual health, wealth, and cultural continuity.

    This “Western invention” deserves to be held in high esteem, and it is not opposed at all to close relationships with other family members.

  • Yes, it was joke. LOL!

    I was dogging the guy on both his obvious emotional immaturity and on his libertarianism. As BA points out, libertarians are often stereotyped as guys living in their mom’s basement smoking pot and reading porn.

    But reading the comments in response has been a riot. LOL! Literally, LMAO! Please keep it up.

  • Amazing. Simply amazing. Beyond words.

  • And here you see, folks, the promotion of individualism instead of interdependence, how everyone must make it on their own, instead of as families. This is an incredible assault on traditional family values.

    Whether you live in a stem family or not or whether your cousins are around the corner or on the other side of the continent, generally it is the middle-aged men in a nuclear, stem, or extended family who bear the brunt of doing the earning, not septuagenarian women.

  • This thread now goes into the TAC Hall of Fame. I would like to thank Henry Karlson, without whose able assistance this would not have been possible. Time to call on the TAC Hall of Fame cockatiel for a fanfare:

Political Miscellania 10\14\10

Thursday, October 14, AD 2010

A roundup of recent political news.

1.  O’Donnell-Coons race- Christine O’Donnell takes aim in the above video at the major weakness of Chris Coons in the Delaware Senate race:  he does have a history of being in favor of tax increases.  Saturday Night Live mocks O’Donnell’s “I am not a witch” ad here.  Polls show O’Donnell some 16-20 points behind Coons.  In a normal election year I would assume that she had no chance, but this is far from a normal election year.  Additionally Mike Castle had a substantial lead over O’Donnell in the polls until a few days before she beat him in the Delaware primary.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

31 Responses to Political Miscellania 10\14\10

  • From Gateway Pundit:

    Ms. O’Donnell said, “I would argue that more people would support my Catholic beliefs than his Marxist beliefs.”

    Gateway: “No wonder the state-run media hates her. She keeps bringing up the facts that they do not want disclosed.

    “Wow!

    “Coons then lied about his “Bearded Marxist” essay. He said it was satire when clearly it was not.”

    “The Caucus reported:

    “‘A feisty, aggressive Ms. O’Donnell called Mr. Coons a Marxist whose beliefs came from a socialist professor and said he would “rubber stamp” the policies of the Democrats in Washington. Mr. Coons raised questions about whether Ms. O’Donnell’s faith would drive her positions on social issues like abortion, prayer and evolution.'”

    In other words he said, Faithful Catholics shouldn’t be elected. Like: “Irish need not apply.”

    I’d vote for her in a heartbeat.

    PS: Keep moderating my comments. Every so often I feel the need to let you know what I really think.

  • I hope the GOP is gunning for 100 seats in the House and 13 in the Senate. Nov. 2/3 are going to be fun!!

  • What are your thoughts on the GOP getting the Senate? What I read at the NYT’s blog (the only one I’ve been following) says GOP a little short at 47-48, with 50 in a best case scenario, but I don’t know if you’ve seen info to make you think differently.

  • based on everything I’ve seen, here’s how it looks for the Senate pickups-

    Mortal locks: North Dakota, Indiana, Arkansas
    Close to mortal lock: Pennsylvania
    Very likely: Wisconsin, West Virginia

    So that’s six that are just about sure things. Real Clear Politics also have Buck in CO and Angle in NV in the pickup category, but those are closer. But I think both will win.

    That basically means the GOP has to pick up two of the following: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, New York (Gillebrand), and Washington. DE and NY are probably going to be held, and I’m starting to thing Fiorina is a longshot in CA. That one, though, might hinge to some degree on the governor’s race. I think Rossi pulls it out in WA, leaving CT and IL as the key races. Don and Elaine might have some better idea about the IL race, but I have no idea. Blumenthal probably wins in CT, but that is going to come down the wire.

    So I see a minimum 9 seat pickup, leaving it at 50/50, with technical control by the Dems because of Biden. (I should note that no GOP seat is really in any danger. The closest is Paul in Kentucky, and he’s up 6). Right now I lean towards the GOp picking up that 51st seat.

    As for the House, I don’t even think anyone remotely believes the Dems will retain control The question is really just a matter of how large the GOP majority will be. The way things are going it looks like the only safe Dem seat is going to be the one in my district with Van Hollen, naturally.

  • Of course “GOP” control in the Senate does not necessarily translate into legislation you may want to see (or see reversed), as long as RINOs remain.

  • As a registered Republican, I wish I could say that I would be happy if the GOP re-took the legislature. But on what could I base such hopefulness?

    Oh joy, the top marginal tax rate will drop by 3%. Yay.

    Meanwhile, poor and working people of faith will be expected to stay on the GOP plantation like good little house crackers while homosexual marriage and federally-funded abortion are rammed down our throats and we’re forced to send our kids to be educated in the secular cesspool that is modern Fox Media culture. I’m so excited.

  • One addendum: I should probably put West Virginia in the same category as Nevada and Colorado. It’s a little tighter than I thought.

  • Unexpectedly, new unemployment insurance claims were reported at 462,000 (above the 455,000 dem propaganda media expectation).

    Added Obamonomics bonus: the inflation rate (including food and fuel you must have to live) is 4.8% annualized.

    Misey Index: 14.4 (9.6 + 4.8).

    I would argue that more people support economic opportunity and prosperity than dem/socialist myths.

  • But, at least the GOP will hopefully stop Obama’s assault on America. If the GOP can stop another huge bill from being passed like Obamacare was, then I’ll be happy for now.

  • I predict the GOP will take the Senate by flipping the following seats: Pennsylvania, North Dakota, Indiana, Arkansas, Nevada, Wisconsin, West Virginia, Washington, Illinois and Colorado. That will give them 51. I also predict that Lieberman will caucus with the Republicans and that Ben Nelson will switch parties. There may be more Democrat switchers. This election is going to be a cataclysm for the Democrats, especially after they achieved what many of them perceived as political dominance for the foreseeable future in 2008, and some Democrat office holders are going to decide that it is better to switch than fight in 2012.

  • Re IL Senate race: I think it will go to the GOP but not by much, due to the fact that Mark Kirk is about as RINO as they come, plus he has run a rather lousy campaign marked by repeated gaffes and misstatements/lies about his voting record and even his military record. He is about as inspiring as a wet noodle IMHO, but if the alternative is “mob banker” and lib Dem/Obama buddy Alexi Giannoulias, some (not all) GOP voters may be able to hold their noses long enough to vote for him.

  • As usual I agree with my colleague from the Land of Lincoln. The pro-abort Rino Kirk has been running an atrocious campaign, but running against a mobbed up banker, Kirk will win it, barely. I will not vote for Kirk however. I will leave that space blank on my ballot.

  • Ach. There are three competitive U.S. House races in the broadcast zone of my local television stations. These characters + my local state Senator + Andrew Cuomo and all the ads are repulsive. The only one making an attempt to present herself as something resembling a human being is Tracy Flick Kirsten Gillibrand. I think I have found a solution.

  • Will she tell us Glenn and Bill are commies?

  • I don’t know Karlson, did they ever call themselves Bearded Marxists? O’Donnell’s point, which obviously sailed right by you, is that what is laughingly referred to as the mainstream media keeps harping on witchcraft with her, while giving her opponent a complete pass on his self-description of becoming a Bearded Marxist while in college. She is of course correct on this. Note Wolfe Blitzer “helpfully”, when she brings up the subject, asking Coons about it and saying that it was “a long time ago”, being completely unconscious that O’Donnell’s reference to witchcraft was in 1999 and referred to her teen years, also a very long time ago, and after attempting to body slam O’Donnell for a comment she made on evolution 12 years before.

  • Well, Karlson, maybe the deficit would be down if the “poor” who aren’t so poor here in America in comparison to third world countries paid there “fair” share of taxes instead of being funded by the taxpayers so they can buy fancy jewelry and other luxury items? I think everyone in America should pay there fair share of taxes ( including the poor) and just maybe we’ll get the deficit under control.

  • But, at least the GOP will hopefully stop Obama’s assault on America. If the GOP can stop another huge bill from being passed like Obamacare was, then I’ll be happy for now.

    Well, we might have some harmony and concord here. For me, if we have to go the next two years with no substantial social progress, it is worth it given we now have health care reform.

    Add to that the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection bill, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, the bill controlling Credit Card companies cheating consumers, student loan reform, and DC Budget Automony — none, including health care reform, whch will be repealed — I’m not too worried about a two year rest.

  • “There are three competitive U.S. House races in the broadcast zone of my local television stations”

    This is one time of year when I am eternally grateful that I no longer have a TV and just watch everything online — I am spared the constant barrage of political ads that tube watchers suffer through. Yes, there are political ads online and I do see them quite often but they aren’t nearly as annoying or obtrusive. (FWIW, the political ad I see most frequently online is for GOP gubernatorial candidate Bill Brady. Whether that’s due to his targeting the online audience, the fact that I gravitate to more news-oriented and conservative blogs, or both, I can’t say.)

    Normally I only watch TV when I am somewhere like a doctor’s office, oil change place, etc. where there happens to be a TV on. The day before the Illinois primary in February I happened to be in one of those places for about 2 hours. The incessant pummelling of political ads just about drove me nuts.

  • “Well, we might have some harmony and concord here. For me, if we have to go the next two years with no substantial social progress, it is worth it given we now have health care reform.”

    Apparently someone still believes in the tooth fairy. 🙂

    That aside, it would be interesting to know how Kurt believes those things mentioned are necessarily “social progress.”

  • We need to keep this fresh in everybody’s mind until Nov. The justice and peace cadre thinks we peasants will forget about it by Nov.

    Let’s prove them wrong.

    THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION IS FUNDING TWENTY FOUR MILLION DOLLARS–LET ME REPEAT THAT AMOUNT…*

    24,000,000 DOLLARS

    SO YOU UNDERSTAND IT $24,000,000.00 DOLLARS FOR NEW ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORDS PROCESSING FOR YOUR CONGRESSMEN** AND SENATORS !!**

    THEY ARE OBTAINING THESE FUNDS . . .

    QUOTE DIRECTLY FROM THE SOCIAL SECURITY WEBSITE… “THIS MONEY WILL BE COMING FROM THE SAVINGS TO BE GENERATED FROM WITHHOLDING “COST OF LIVING INCREASES FOR 2010 & 2011 IN SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS FOR THE ELDERLY AND A $2.00 INCREASE ON ALL MEDICARE RX BENEFIT CO-PAY”

  • I guess the one good thing about living in the People’s Republic of Maryland and the absence of competitive elections is that I am not inundated with ads as is Art. The only thing getting any play is the Ehrlich-O’Malley race.

  • Donald

    When she explains what communism is, it’s “raising taxes.” Seriously. Glenn Beck is a commie! Who knew?

  • No Karlson what she was doing was mentioning that one of the “Marxist beliefs” of Mr. Coons is his affinity for raising taxes which elides into her theme that he is a tax raiser. Once again, however, her main point was the rank hypocrisy of attacking her for the witchcraft remark and giving Coons a complete pass on his Bearded Marxist self-description.

  • Add to that the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection bill, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, the bill controlling Credit Card companies cheating consumers, student loan reform, and DC Budget Automony — none, including health care reform, whch will be repealed — I’m not too worried about a two year rest.

    Of which component of the Democratic Party are you on the payroll?

  • I would not mind the ads, Paul. But most of them are of the ‘my opponent tortures puppies’ variety. The Republican ads do tend to focus more on legislative votes than personal history, so the unpleasantness is not uniform.

  • Yeah, the few ads I have seen are by O’Malley, and they’re all just pretty much of the “Bob Ehrlich wants you to suffer and die” variety. In fact, between this election and the 2006 election I don’t think I have seen one positive ad for either Governor O’Malley or Senator Cardin. Unfortunately I also get the Virginia ads as well, and least year I got to hear all about how Bob McDonnell was going to enlist the Taliban to aid his administration. As you say, the unpleasantness has not been uniform as both McDonnell and Ehrlich are able to actually say what they want to do.

  • As usual (is this thing on?) I look forward to not voting for a single candidate from my own party, a lot of write-ins and perhaps checking the box for a few Constitution Party candidates.

    The Consumer Protection and Financial blah blah blah Act…heh, that was a good one. I hear Helicopter Ben plans on dropping another stadium full of greenbacks onto the peasants pretty soon, to make sure inflation goes up as quickly as possible.

    Cahn’t have food and energy prices going too low now, cahn we?

  • The Social Security administration is funding $24,000,000 dollars”

    Before you get all panicked about that, check out this link:

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/socialsecurity/cola.asp

    Long story short: the $24 million in question is NOT — repeat, IS NOT — coming from withholding Social Security COLAs. It’s coming from stimulus funds. The “withholding” of the Social Security COLA is due to the fact that it is tied to the rate of inflation and other factors and those factors did not compute an increase being necessary for this year.

  • Elaine, et al,

    I know! The situation is more tragic, and our politician/ostriches have their collective heads in the sand.

    The $24MM is an infinitessimal part of the $1.4 trillion ($1.2 trillion last year) 2011 federal deficit.

    Robert’s Rule, Point of information: the fed gov has spent almost all the surplus $$$$ that we the people paid into the SS Trust Fund; and replaced it with IOU’s (non-public US Treasury debt instruments). All taxpayers will need to poney up general fund taxes to repay to the SS Trust Fund so it can pay benefits when (in a precious few years) the SS tax receipts are less than the current benefits obligation payables due to the rapidly expanding 65-plus portion of the population.

    Or else, Ben Bernanke will have to print $50 trillion in crisp $1 million bills (Michelle’s face on the front) to pay poor, old pensioners. Our Chinese financiers will NOT like that. They may foreclose . . .

    Linus, help me out here!

Political Miscellania 10\6\10

Wednesday, October 6, AD 2010

A roundup of recent political news.

1.  I am not a witch!  Christine O’Donnell’s “I am not a witch” opening salvo in her ad campaign.  Normally an ad from a candidate denying she is a witch would be the last thing heard from a campaign doomed to defeat and oblivion.  However, these are far from normal times.  O’Donnell does two things with this ad.  First, she shows the public that she is a real person and not the cartoon character created by the mainstream media and the denizens of the Left, and she begins to position herself as what she is:  the ultimate outsider.  Not a bad strategy in a political year that will be kind to outsiders and cruel to insiders.

2.  Gallup Poll-Gallup for some reason has been late this year applying a likely voter screen in their polls.   The closer you get to an election the more reliable likely voter polls get, and the less reliable registered voter polls are.  In a high turnout election, Gallup predicts a 13 point Republican advantage among likely voters and in a low voter turnout election Gallup predicts an 18 point Republican advantage among likely voters.  Go here to read the results of the poll.  For comparison’s sake, in the 1994 election when the Republicans took both the House and the Senate, in the Congressional elections the GOP had a six point advantage on election day.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

11 Responses to Political Miscellania 10\6\10

  • Couldn’t the alleged “Democrat comeback” simply be what is known among pollsters as a “dead cat bounce” — a blip upward in the polls that takes place because the disfavored party has hit bottom and has nowhere to go but up, albeit briefly? The phenomenon has occurred often enough that it has a name (borrowed from stock market parlance referring to a brief rally in the price of a stock sliding toward oblivion).

  • It could be Elaine. A party that is on the receiving end of a “taking to the woodshed by the voters” usually does have a mild improvement in the polls close in to the election as some of their disaffected core voters rally to them out of party loyalty and fear of what the opposing party will do in power.

  • A genuine dead cat bounce wouldn’t have to be “invented” by the MSM, but it could easily be misinterpreted by them.

  • Willful misinterpretation would be my guess Elaine, since this is a well-known aspect of politics among those who follow elections, but I certainly do not underestimate the amount of ignorance possessed by some members of the mainstream media.

  • Donald nailed it! The mainstream media is going to try and “paint a picture”. More then any poll, I can’t believe how the Obama’s appointee’s/czars are jumping ship. This is a sure sign that they believe he’s a 1 term president and they need to stay employed. I for one believe both the House and Senate will go RED!!!

  • Don,

    Let me take a wild guess that you’re dyslectic?

    I only say this because the title of your post has the “slash” pointing in the wrong direction.

    If not, then I’m dyslectic.

  • Not dyslectic Tito. I simply usually do date slashes in that manner.

  • The Washington Post front-page, above-the-fold headline for the poll story was pretty funny. A paraphrase:

    Big letters: “DEMOCRATS GAIN IN POLL”
    Little letters: “GOP still leads”

    As for the “I am not a witch” opening salvo, Hillary must be kicking herself. (I kid! I kid!)

  • Translation: “I am way too young to be a witch.”

  • the MSM is a part of the Democrat party. period.

  • The situation with the GOP in Delaware reminds me of this:

    O’Donnell’s part is obvious. The rest of them are the GOP establishment in DE. Burn her! 😉

Political Miscellania 8/31/10

Tuesday, August 31, AD 2010

A roundup of recent political news:

1.  GOP Takes Unprecedented Lead On Gallup Generic Congressional Ballot– Gallup has been running the generic Congressional ballot since 1942.  Yesterday it showed Republicans ahead by 10 points.

The Republican leads of 6, 7, and 10 points this month are all higher than any previous midterm Republican advantage in Gallup’s history of tracking the generic ballot, which dates to 1942. Prior to this year, the highest such gap was five points, measured in June 2002 and July 1994. Elections in both of these years resulted in significant Republican gains in House seats.

2. The Senate Is In Play– Albert Hunt is a political reporter who has been around forever.  He is also a political liberal.  That made his column yesterday especially interesting:

Forget conventional wisdom: Republicans have a real shot at taking control of the Senate, as well as the House, in the U.S. midterm elections.

Go here to read the entire column.   I of course have been predicting since last December that the GOP would take both the House and the Senate.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

Political Miscellania 7/14/10

Wednesday, July 14, AD 2010

A roundup of recent political news. 

1.  Deficit Cancer-Erskine Bowles, co-chairman with Allan Simpson, former Republican senator from Wyoming, of President Obama’s debt and deficit commission, is Bill Clinton’s former chief of staff.  Therefore I was somewhat surprised at how forthright he was recently when he made this statement: 

Bowles said that unlike the current economic crisis, which was largely unforeseen before it hit in fall 2008, the coming fiscal calamity is staring the country in the face. “This one is as clear as a bell,” he said. “This debt is like a cancer.” 

The commission leaders said that, at present, federal revenue is fully consumed by three programs: Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. “The rest of the federal government, including fighting two wars, homeland security, education, art, culture, you name it, veterans — the whole rest of the discretionary budget is being financed by China and other countries,” Simpson said. 

“We can’t grow our way out of this,” Bowles said. “We could have decades of double-digit growth and not grow our way out of this enormous debt problem. We can’t tax our way out. . . . The reality is we’ve got to do exactly what you all do every day as governors. We’ve got to cut spending or increase revenues or do some combination of that.” 

Statements like this help keep spending and the national debt at the forefront of the issues confronting the nation and that is not good news for Obama and the Democrats in November. 

2.  Obama 40-On January 5, 2009 I made the following prediction here:  “8.   Obama’s popularity rating will be around 40% by the end of 2009.”  The latest ABC-Washington post poll here indicates that is about the amount of support the President currently enjoys: 

Public confidence in President Obama has hit a new low, according to the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll. Four months before midterm elections that will define the second half of his term, nearly six in 10 voters say they lack faith in the president to make the right decisions for the country, and a clear majority once again disapproves of how he is dealing with the economy. 

A CBS poll released yesterday also shows Obama at 40% 

 
3.   Hurricane GOP– Charlie Cook is one of the best political prognosticators in the business.  Personally his politics lean in the port direct, but I have always found his analysis to be very accurate.  Here is what he thinks is ahead in November in an article entitled Hurricane GOP On The Way:
 

Among all voters, there has been a significant swing since 2008 when Democrats took their new majority won in 2006 to an even higher level. But when you home in on those people in this survey who are most likely to vote, the numbers are devastating. The NBC/WSJ survey, when combined with a previously released NPR study of likely voters in 70 competitive House districts by Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg and Republican Glen Bolger, point to an outcome for Democrats that is as serious as a heart attack. Make no mistake about it: There is a wave out there, and for Democrats, the House is, at best, teetering on the edge.
To be sure, things could change in the four months between now and November 2. The GOP’s failure to get Republicans to vote in the May 18 special election in Pennsylvania’s 12th District underscores that the party can’t just sit back and await spontaneous combustion in terms of turnout. Still, the potential is here for a result that is proportional to some of the bigger postwar midterm wave elections. These kinds of waves are often ragged; almost always some candidates who looked dead somehow survive and others who were deemed safe get sucked down in the undertow. That’s the nature of these beasts. But the recent numbers confirm that trends first spotted late last summer have fully developed into at least a Category 3 or 4 hurricane.
Given how many House seats were newly won by Democrats in 2008 in GOP districts, and given that this election is leading into an all-important redistricting year, this reversal of fortune couldn’t have happened at a worse time for Democrats.
Go here to read the rest at the Cook Report.
Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

4 Responses to Political Miscellania 7/14/10

Political Miscellania 6/24/10

Thursday, June 24, AD 2010

A roundup of recent political news.

1.  Nikki Haley, see the above video, crushed her opponent in the runoff 65-35.  She survived bizzare accusations of infidelity, attacks on whether she is a Christian, her parents are Sikh immigrants, and outright racism.  She is only 38 years old, her youth being something she has in common with the new generation of conservatives running and winning this year.  She has a 20 point lead on her opponent in the general election and is the odds on favorite to win in the fall and be the next governor of South Carolina.

2.  Tim Scott handily won his runoff against Paul Thurmond for the Republican nomination for Congress from South Carolina 1.  This is a heavily Republican district, so Mr. Scott, who many consider to be the most conservative member of the South Carolina legislature, will now almost certainly be the first black Republican congressman from South Carolina since Reconstruction.

3.  The bad news for the Democrats for November just will not stop.  Gallup released a poll this week which shows a huge enthusiasm gap in favor of the GOP.

The current average is based on four measures of this enthusiasm question since February, including the recent June 11-13 USA Today/Gallup poll. In that poll, 53% of Republicans said they were more enthusiastic than usual about voting and 39% were less enthusiastic, while 35% of Democrats said they were more enthusiastic about voting and 56% were less enthusiastic.

Republicans’ net score of +14 more enthusiastic in the latest poll compared with the Democrats’ net score of -21 represents the largest relative party advantage Gallup has measured in a single midterm election-year poll. More generally, Republicans have shown a decided relative advantage in enthusiasm throughout 2010, averaging a net score of +28, compared with Democrats’ net score of 0.

(Gallup instituted a separate enthusiasm question in March on its Daily tracking survey, which asks voters to say how enthusiastic they are about voting this year as opposed to comparing their current enthusiasm to their enthusiasm in prior elections. This new enthusiasm question lacks a historical trend but has also shown a consistent Republican advantage throughout the year.)

The 28 percentage-point party difference in net scores on the “more enthusiastic than usual” question in 2010 is the highest Gallup has measured in a midterm election year, with 1994’s 17-point Republican advantage the only other midterm election-year gap coming close. (See the table at the end of the article for full data by party.)

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

One Response to Political Miscellania 6/24/10

  • Re: Patty Murray’s challengers… Akers is solid, but he just doesn’t have much of a following among folks here in WA. He’s a businessman from Bellingham, who intends to streamline or LEAN out the bureaucracy.

    Rossi is (in my mind) a Johnny-come-lately to the race, and is the supposed establishment choice. He has name recognition, but he has yet to win a statewide race. In my time here, he’s the guy that lost to Christine Gregoire (governor) twice.

    Clint Didier is the man who has won my support. He’s a former tight end for the Redskins, and even caught a TD pass in the Superbowl. He’s a farmer, and a football coach back in Easter WA. By no means is he a polished politician, he admits quite frankly that he is not a polished politician.

    The Washington State Republican Party recently held their convention. Terra Mork, a local activist and pro-life conservative gives her take on the convention here and here. Additionally, Michelle at “Life of the Party”, another local local activist and pro-life conservative gives her endorsement to Didier as well.

    Anecdotally, the signs you see around town for Senate candidates are primarily for Didier. I have not seen one for Rossi. I’ve only seen one for Akers and one for Murray. WA is typically a blue state, but the enthusiasm seems to be falling mostly behind Didier, as Terra’s report of the straw poll seems to indicate. It should be interesting to see how the top two primary plays out to see who really will be on the ballot in the general.

Political Miscellania 6/16/10

Wednesday, June 16, AD 2010

1.  As the above video indicates, Congressman Bob Etheridge (D.NC) does not realize that he is living in the age of video cell phones and Youtube.  His GOP opponent, Renee Ellmers, reminds him of the current facts of political life.

2.  If you are a Democrat, you know that political times are bad for you if National Public Radio runs a poll which indicates that your party is going to be creamed in November.

Democrat Stan Greenberg and Republican Glen Bolger conducted the first public battleground poll of this election cycle. They chose the 70 House districts experts regard as most likely to oust incumbents this fall. What they found was grim news for Democrats.

For this poll, Bolger and Greenberg chose the districts where incumbents are considered the most vulnerable, and, in the case of open seats, the ones most likely to switch party control in November. Sixty are currently held by Democrats — many of whom won these seats even when voters in the same district preferred Republican John McCain for president in 2008. The other 10 districts are the flip side — held by Republicans in the House, even though their voters went for Barack Obama in 2008.

These are this year’s swing seats — the political terrain where the battle for control of the House of Representatives will be won or lost. In this battleground, voters are choosing Republicans over Democrats 49 percent to 41 percent.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

One Response to Political Miscellania 6/16/10

  • Nothing like speaking in clicks and grunts then grabbing a juvenile by the scruff of the neck. Cavemen everywhere are embarrassed by Bob E. who obviously left his large club behind in the bar, or perhaps the bordello.

Political Miscellania 5/25/10

Tuesday, May 25, AD 2010

A roundup of recent political news.

1.  Rule one of a sex scandal:  Do not have your mistress interview you on the topic of abstinence education as Congressman Mark Souder (R.Ind) did in the above video.  Souder had the common sense to resign , and the Republicans should be able to hold the seat.  As for Mr. Souder, when you preach social conservatism, the first person you must convince is yourself.

 2.  Republicans lose Pennsylvania 12 special election.  I always thought this one was a long shot.  The Democrats enjoy a 2-1 voter advantage, and the corrupt Jack Murtha who had held the seat since 74 won re-election in 2008 in spite of being under investigation and calling his voters racist.  Perhaps there is some truth in this old Saturday Night Live video from 2008.

3.  Republicans win Hawaii 1.  Charles Djou is going to Congress as the first Republican congressman from Hawaii in 20 years.  Djou got in because the Democrats fielded two candidates and neither one would bow out.  The Democrats are confident that they will take the seat back in November.  I am not so sure.  Djou is a formidable campaigner and the Democrat vote may still be fractured come November with all the bad blood that has been generated, with a fair amount of Democrats deciding to sit out the vote or crossing over to vote for Djou.

4.  Best political campaign ad thus far in this cycle:

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

17 Responses to Political Miscellania 5/25/10

  • The Pennsylvania Senate race may be one of the worst in recent history. Neither party’s candidate is that impressive – Sestak has a reputation of sticking his foot in his mouth and Toomey has been called “a conservative Rick Santorum”. This one may be worth watching just to see a train wreck.

  • Actually Mr. Smith Toomey is far less conservative than Rick Santorum, much to my regret. However, he is strongly pro-life in stark comparison to his adversary, and that of course is a deal maker for me.

  • Toomey has been called “a conservative Rick Santorum”.

    And the problem with that being what exactly?

  • “And the problem with that being what exactly?”

    Yeah, I have my issues with Santorum (cough … Specter endorsement … cough), but the U.S. Senate would be a lot more welcoming to the unborn and a lot more family friendly if it were filled with more people like Rick Santorum (as opposed to the fake “pro-lifer” Casey Jr., who seems to always find a way to subordinate his allegedly “pro-life values” to the will of the Democrat leadership).

    We could do a lot worse than to have someone elected, in Toomey, whose allegedly shortcoming is that he’s similar to one of the more pro-life members to have served in the Senate in the past 40 years.

  • 4. People like Michael Moore have been peddling the idea that Congressmen should be reading bills. They really don’t have the time. Some don’t even have the expertise to understand them. They get summaries. You’d do the same thing.

    5. Also from the poll: “Those who earn less than $20,000 per year express far more confidence in Congress’ economic wisdom than those in any other income bracket.”

    6. What does it say about Tea Parties when they boo facts?

  • Toomey is far less conservative than Rick Santorum, much to my regret.

    How is Toomey less conservative than Santorum?

  • “How is Toomey less conservative than Santorum?”

    The latest example last year was when he wrote an editorial in the Philadelphia Inquirer saying he would vote to confirm Sotomayor.

    http://www.pa2010.com/2009/08/toomey-leans-left-i-would-vote-for-sotomayor/

    Toomey started out as a pro-abort RINO when he was first elected to Congress. On abortion he had a heart felt conversion and I do not doubt his pro-life creds. He is usually conservative on most issues today, but he is not in Santorum’s category who has the rare distinction of being one of the very few members of Congress past or present, who I regard as more conservative than I am.

    A good overview of Toomey’s career is linked below:

    http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10097/1048353-178.stm

  • On point No. 5, what, exactly is that supposed to prove? That those who have less success in economic matters trust Congress more on them?

    Doesn’t surprise me.

  • I’m just sharing what politically active Pennsylvania Republicans I know have said about Mr. Toomey, many of them conservative. They are less than thrilled with his candidacy.

    And Bob Casey is certainly a pro-life Democrat. He actively works with Democrats for Life and had inserted into the health care bill provisions of the Pregnant Women Support Act.

  • And Bob Casey is certainly a pro-life Democrat.

    If by pro-life you mean “mouths platitudes about the sanctity of life and supports toothless provisions to be inserted into bills that are otherwise anti-life and votes to confirm pro-Roe Justices,” then yes, he is most definitely pro-life by that definition.

  • 4. Restrainedradical, the Arizona bill is ten pages in length. Obama officials have been pontificating that they think it might be unconstitutional. If I were arguing that a bill may be unconstitutional, rest assured that I would read the bloody thing first.

    5. People on the public dole apparently know who their paymasters are.

    6. I do not believe they were booing facts, rather they were booing a professional politician who did his best to bring about the current mess.

  • Paul, are you referring to Bob Casey or Rick Santorum, who supported publicly pro-choice politicians like Arlen Specter because of political expediency? Isn’t it better to support politicians who try and vote pro-life rather than tearing them down? I don’t think it’s really pro-life to question Bob Casey, especially when he has proven he is pro-life.

  • Actually I misspoke. I should have said it is not really productive to the pro-life movement to question Bob Casey…..

  • Paul, are you referring to Bob Casey or Rick Santorum, who supported publicly pro-choice politicians like Arlen Specter because of political expediency?

    This is basically a form of a tu quoque argument, and frankly it’s not worth my time. Next.

    Isn’t it better to support politicians who try and vote pro-life rather than tearing them down?

    So we should refuse to criticize people who pretend to be pro-life when they constantly vote in a manner that is decidedly not pro-life? Is it better to bury our heads in the sand and ignore the myriad ways a so-called pro-lifer votes against the interests of the pro-life movement? Or do we only ignore these mis-deeds when the politician has a (D) next to his name?

    it is not really productive to the pro-life movement to question Bob Casey

    This is truly a bizarre statement, even amended. So now Bob Casey has achieved near Pope-levels and is above criticism? And why? Because he claims to be pro-life and tries really super duper hard to vote the right way when it suits him or when it isn’t altogether inconvenient for him or when Harry and Barack tell him it’s okay because he’s been a good little boy and he gets to cast his one little token vote this time?

    Bob Casey is not his father, and he is not meaningfully pro-life in any sense of the term, unless we’re going by the Doug Kmiec school of political terminology.

  • By all means, don’t question the sacred name of Casey, Jr. Yet, it’s okay to call into question the REAL pro-life bona fides of Santorum? Why? Because he’s an evil rethuglican? Please.

    The real record of FAKE “pro-lifer” Bob Casey:

    Opposed reinstating the Mexico City Policy after Obama revoked the executive order implementing it
    http://proecclesia.blogspot.com/2009/01/only-6-of-24-catholic-senators-vote-to.html

    Voted to rescind the Mexico City Policy while Bush was in office
    http://proecclesia.blogspot.com/2007/09/senate-democrats-including-allegedly.html

    Fails to press pro-life differences with his party during speech to Democrat National Convention
    http://proecclesia.blogspot.com/2008/08/casey-jr-disappoints-glosses-over-life.html

    Praised by Planned Parenthood for his votes in favor of federally funded “family planning efforts
    http://proecclesia.blogspot.com/2007/12/pro-abortion-group-praises-casey-for.html

    (As our friend Paul Zummo asked at the time, if you were a pro-lifer and Planned Parenthood lauded you with praise, what would your reaction be? Do you think Planned Parenthood EVER had anything positive to say about Santorum?)

    I can come up with other instances, including the health care debate, in which Casey Jr. undermined Ben Nelson’s efforts to get Stupak-like language into the Senate version of the bill:
    http://www.creativeminorityreport.com/2010/01/great-pro-life-outing.html

  • Sorry, that was Regular Guy Paul, not Paul Zummo.

    Getting my “Pauls” mixed up. But since they’re both usually right on the money, I don’t think either will object.

    😉

Political Miscellania

Thursday, May 6, AD 2010

A round up of various political items of interest:

1. We lead off with the above video.  Contessa Brewer, MSNBC’s representative journalist for the empty-headed bimbo demographic, is just so darned ticked off that the Time’s Square Would Be Bomber turned out to be a jihadist and not, presumably, some more politically correct villain.  This perhaps is of limited political significance, other than to demonstrate yet again that MSNBC should only be viewed for purposes of unintentional humor.

2. David Obey (D. WI.) announced his surprise retirement.  When Obey was first elected to Congress in 1968 I was 11 years old.  Needless to say, it is long past time for him to be moving on to other things after 42 years, but his retirement this late in the campaign season indicates to me that this was not planned far in advance, and probably was due to the fact that he was facing a tough race and the prospect of the House flipping to the Republicans. This is bad news for the Democrats as it puts one more Democrat seat in play and is yet another sign of the political disaster awaiting the Democrats in November.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

19 Responses to Political Miscellania

  • I do not rejoice over Obey’s retirement because I have not yet seen who the most likely replacement is. LifeNews.com rates Obey as “pro-abortion” (http://www.lifenews.com/state5071.html), which may be accurate, but not terribly precise.

    An issue-by-issue analysis (http://www.ontheissues.org/House/David_Obey.htm) showed he had a mixed voting record on the issues of abortion and embryonic stem cell research. Far from perfect, but for me, it’s important that his replacement be better on the issue of abortion and a large number of pro-life issue. The pro-life voters in that district need to step up early and make sure that at least one candidate on the ballot in the general election will be a pro-life voice in the House.

  • Go Colonel West!

    Does this mean I can be a patriot without being a racist now, if I like this guy? Is that acceptable? Or is he a self-hating black, so if I like him, that means I hate blacks?

    I need a thought cop to tell me what to think! Preferably someone who does the freshman initiation at the dorms of the state universities.

  • The likely Republican candidate for Obey’s seat is Sean Duffy, a pro-life Catholic.

  • The seat is likely safe for the dems. I’m not sure how much Duffy’s MTV celebrity will help him, because the district trends older. The bigger disadvantage is that he is an unknown in Wausau, Stevens Point, and Wisconsin Rapids, cities in counties that make up 170,000 of the district’s 650,000 people. Douglas County (Superior) is the other big county with 43,000, and I don’t think a Republican has every carried the county. Obama carried it 63/32.

  • “The likely Republican candidate for Obey’s seat is Sean Duffy, a pro-life Catholic.”

    A pro-life Catholic with a fine-looking pro-life Catholic wife.

    http://www.rachelcamposduffy.com/

    😉

  • She, I mean he has my vote.

  • I like Duffy. Since I’m a Chicago native I don’t see why the fact that I don’t live in Obey’s district should impair my abilty to vote for him. He has my votes.

  • Colonel West, has admitted to torture and says he’d do it again.

  • Colonel West, has admitted to torture and says he’d do it again.

    That strikes me as an example of how “torture” has come to be treated as a generic political bogeyman rather than a serious moral or humanitarian issue. There’s a wide gulf between West’s actions and the sort of things rightly condemned in regards to Guantanamo, etc. The NY Times piece of West actually gives a very balanced view of the incident:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/27/politics/27WEST.html?ex=1400990400&en=71d7b26fe2922d57&ei=5007&partner=USERLAND&pagewanted=all

    I don’t know enough about West and his positions (much less his opponents in the primary) to know if I’d vote for him if I were in his district, but the increasing mis-use of torture as a political football only serves to cheapen a real humanitarian issue, probably making real torture more rather than less likely.

  • From the NY Times article:

    “one soldier punched him several times”
    “the translator kicked him in the shin and told him he needed to confess before Colonel West showed up to kill him”
    “Colonel West cocked his gun”
    “Soon, the soldiers began striking and shoving Mr. Hamoodi”
    “They were not instructed to do so by Colonel West but they were not stopped, either”
    “Eventually, the colonel and his soldiers moved Mr. Hamoodi outside, and threatened him with death. Colonel West said he fired a warning shot in the air and began counting down from five. He asked his soldiers to put Mr. Hamoodi’s head in a sand-filled barrel usually used for clearing weapons. At the end of his count, Colonel West fired a shot into the barrel, angling his gun away from the Iraqi’s head, he testified.”

    Oh, yes. Critics of Col. West deserve all the scorn we can heap on them.

  • The parts of the article that struck me were:

    In August, Colonel West learned from an intelligence specialist of a supposed plot to assassinate him, which would endanger the soldiers who traveled with him, too. The plot reportedly involved Mr. Hamoodi, a police officer who occasionally worked for the Americans. Although Mr. Hamoodi is a Shiite Muslim, and most attacks against Americans were carried out by Sunnis loyal to Saddam Hussein, some police officers do cooperate with the insurgents and several have been accused of attacking foreigners.

    Colonel West said he initially thought “the information was a joke.” But a week later several of his officers were ambushed when he was supposed to be traveling with them. A roadside bomb sheared off the back panel of a Humvee, and a firefight ensued. None of his men were seriously hurt, but Colonel West began taking the risk of an assassination seriously.

    Intent on foiling a reported plot to ambush him and his men, Colonel West, a battalion commander, made a calculated decision to intimidate the Iraqi officer with a show of force. An interrogation under way was going nowhere, Colonel West said in an interview, and he chose to take the matter into his own hands.

    “This could get ugly,” he told his soldiers. But, he said, he imposed limits: “This man will not be injured and he will not have to be repaired. There will be no blood and no breakage of bones.”

    Still, Colonel West wanted the Iraqi policeman, Yehiya Kadoori Hamoodi, to think “this was going to be the end” if he did not divulge what he knew. So Colonel West presided over what he considered a time-sensitive interrogation that grew steadily more abusive until he himself fired a pistol beside Mr. Hamoodi’s head.

    “There are rules and regulations, and there’s protecting your soldiers,” Colonel West said, sitting by a man-made waterway behind his family’s new home in a Florida subdivision. “I just felt I’d never have to write a letter of condolence home to a `rule and regulation.’ ”

    “The fact is, I made a choice, the choice had consequences and I accept that,” he continued.

    But, he added, the events of that hot, dusty night still disturb him: “I’m not some bully who goes around threatening men’s lives. Certain things we have to do in war are outside our character.”

    Mr. Hamoodi said he did not really blame the Americans for “arresting and torturing me.” Obviously, someone had informed on him, he said, and they had to act on the information they obtained. Still, he trembles now when he sees a Humvee and he no longer trusts or works with the Americans.

    Soldiers testified that they felt safer when Colonel West was in charge. The interpreter, who works for a private contractor, said that “the American soldiers were protected by the tribes” in the area because of Colonel West’s good relationship with the community, and that the situation became more dangerous and chaotic after he left.

    The military decided against court-martialing Colonel West. He was fined $5,000, and he submitted his resignation, which becomes effective this summer, when he will retire with full benefits.

    Colonel West said he had spent many months grappling with disorientation, wondering, “What is my purpose now, my reason for being?” Shortly after he arrived back in the United States, he got a lucrative job offer from a private contractor to return to Iraq, he said, but he was not interested. Instead, he decided to start again in the world of education.

    He is awaiting placement in a high school in Broward County and, he said, he prays that God will see to it that he gets a spot in one of the low-performing, predominantly black schools, where he can try to make a difference. Ever the striver, he plans to begin studying for a master’s in education so he can advance into administration “within five years.” he said. [the article is from 2004]

    I’m not prepared to say whether West was right in his actions, but if someone reads the whole article and simply comes out with a 2D portrait of “that guy is a torturer”, it strikes me that person is reading more through an ideological lens than a human one.

  • Contessa Brewer,

    Another self-loathing American.

    Thank goodness for the Internet because stuff like this would have never been shown for what it is, garbage.

  • It’s not political. I watched the video Don posted and I was honestly impressed so I googled him and found out he’s an unrepentant torturer. I too don’t know if he’s any better or worse than his opponent but that kind of killed the enthusiasm.

  • Colonel West first came to my notice when he sacrificed his career to save his men. I completely support what he did, and I admire his willingness to take his punishment without whining about it. Of course, a man can be a hero and lack any political skills. However, West has since demonstrated that he possesses such skills in spades. Oh and to short circuit the parade of horribles: no I would not have supported West shooting the suspected terrorist. However, frightening him, in order to foil a possible ambush, although against regulations, strikes me as a moral act.

  • Thanks for watching MSNBC (as penance, I presume), Don, so I don’t have to. I’ve never watched it, nor had I ever heard of Contessa Brewer before your post. Things are worse than I thought.

    Donald R. McClarey for SCOTUS.

  • “Donald R. McClarey for SCOTUS.”

    Thank you Cathleen, although I have as much chance of being nominated for SCOTUS as I do of being elected Miss America. Besides, I’ve thus far successfully resisted all efforts to get me into a black robe at the trial court level, since I enjoy simply being an attorney. (Also, as I remarked on one occasion, me being on the bench might be one of the seven signs of the Apocalypse!)

  • Maybe not a sign of the Apocalypse, but it sure would be fun to read your opinion of something like the “sweet mystery of life” passage.

  • Yeah j. christian, Kennedy has a bad case of Black Robitis. Too many people after they put on a black robe forget that, at best, they are smart attorneys and begin to consider themselves Platonic Guardians called upon to make decisions for everyone else.

    Of course the best comment in regard to this type of judicial buffoonery was made by Scalia in his magnificent dissent in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the decision which reaffirmed Roe:

    “What makes all this relevant to the bothersome application of “political pressure” against the Court are the twin facts that the American people love democracy and the American people are not fools. As long as this Court thought (and the people thought) that we Justices were doing essentially lawyers’ work up here–reading text and discerning our society’s traditional understanding of that text–the public pretty much left us alone. Texts and traditions are facts to study, not convictions to demonstrate about. But if in reality our process of constitutional adjudication consists primarily of making value judgments; if we can ignore a long and clear tradition clarifying an ambiguous text, as we did, for example, five days ago in declaring unconstitutional invocations and benedictions at public high school graduation ceremonies, Lee v. Weisman, 505 U. S. ___ (1992); if, as I say, our pronouncement of constitutional law rests primarily on value judgments, then a free and intelligent people’s attitude towards us can be expected to be (ought to be) quite different. The people know that their value judgments are quite as good as those taught in any law school–maybe better. If, indeed, the “liberties” protected by the Constitution are, as the Court says, undefined and unbounded, then the people should demonstrate, to protest that we do not implement their values instead of ours. Not only that, but confirmation hearings for new Justices should deteriorate into question and answer sessions in which Senators go through a list of their constituents’ most favored and most disfavored alleged constitutional rights, and seek the nominee’s commitment to support or oppose them. Value judgments, after all, should be voted on, not dictated; and if our Constitution has somehow accidently committed them to the Supreme Court, at least we can have a sort of plebiscite each time a new nominee to that body is put forward. Justice Blackmun

    not only regards this prospect with equanimity, he solicits it, ante, at 22-23.

    * * *

    There is a poignant aspect to today’s opinion. Its length, and what might be called its epic tone, suggest that its authors believe they are bringing to an end a troublesome era in the history of our Nation and of our Court. “It is the dimension” of authority, they say, to “cal[l] the contending sides of national controversy to end their national division by accepting a common mandate rooted in the Constitution.” Ante, at 24.

    There comes vividly to mind a portrait by Emanuel Leutze that hangs in the Harvard Law School: Roger Brooke Taney, painted in 1859, the 82d year of his life, the 24th of his Chief Justiceship, the second after his opinion in Dred Scott. He is all in black, sitting in a shadowed red armchair, left hand resting upon a pad of paper in his lap, right hand hanging limply, almost lifelessly, beside the inner arm of the chair. He sits facing the viewer, and staring straight out. There seems to be on his face, and in his deep set eyes, an expression of profound sadness and disillusionment. Perhaps he always looked that way, even when dwelling upon the happiest of thoughts. But those of us who know how the lustre of his great Chief Justiceship came to be eclipsed by Dred Scott cannot help believing that he had that case–its already apparent consequences for the Court, and its soon to be played out consequences for the Nation–burning on his mind. I expect that two years earlier he, too, had thought himself “call[ing] the contending sides of national controversy to end their national division by accepting a common mandate rooted in the Constitution.”

    It is no more realistic for us in this case, than it was for him in that, to think that an issue of the sort they both involved–an issue involving life and death, freedom and subjugation–can be “speedily and finally settled” by the Supreme Court, as President James Buchanan in hisinaugural address said the issue of slavery in the territories would be. See Inaugural Addresses of the Presidents of the United States, S. Doc. No. 101-10, p. 126 (1989). Quite to the contrary, by foreclosing all democratic outlet for the deep passions this issue arouses, by banishing the issue from the political forum that gives all participants, even the losers, the satisfaction of a fair hearing and an honest fight, by continuing the imposition of a rigid national rule instead of allowing for regional differences, the Court merely prolongs and intensifies the anguish.

    We should get out of this area, where we have no right to be, and where we do neither ourselves nor the country any good by remaining.”

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-744.ZX4.html

  • I should have said thanks earlier to Blackadder for the information he provided.