new feature, coming tommorow, a writeup on the 2012 bs hype. I actually researched it back in 2005 and came up with little to nothing.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Friday, November 06, 2009
This was terrorism
Ok normally I have more light-hearted approach to the weekend but this is a sad exception. What happened yesterday at Fort Hood was sad, infuriating, and probably most likely preventable. I have heard a lot about how this guy held anti-American, anti-military views but since about 6-7pm last night a lot more has come to light, most notably this from the Guardian in the UK (because lord knows the MSM in the US would NEVER, EVER run this)...
A US army psychiatrist about to be deployed to Afghanistan allegedly shouted "Allahu Akbar", or "God is greatest", as he opened fire at a military base in Texas, killing 13 people and wounding 28.
The gunman, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, 39, shouted the Arabic phrase just before he began his shooting spree at Fort Hood military installation yesterday, according to the base commander, Lieutenant General Robert Cone.
Tell me this, if a christian went around shooting people at an army base yelling "I kill you in the name of God" or a jewish person went around shooting people yelling "I kill you in the name of Yahweh" you think that there's any chance that the MSM decides to not cover IT?!?!?!?! No... I think not. If the PC coverage of this wasn't bad enough PBO's reaction was at best callous and at worst disgusting and reprehensible. This is from NBC Chicago of all places. The title of the article? A disconnected President... WOW
President Obama didn't wait long after Tuesday's devastating elections to give critics another reason to question his leadership, but this time the subject matter was more grim than a pair of governorships.
After news broke out of the shooting at the Fort Hood Army post in Texas, the nation watched in horror as the toll of dead and injured climbed. The White House was notified immediately and by late afternoon, word went out that the president would speak about the incident prior to a previously scheduled appearance. At about 5 p.m., cable stations went to the president. The situation called for not only his trademark eloquence, but also grace and perspective.
But instead of a somber chief executive offering reassuring words and expressions of sympathy and compassion, viewers saw a wildly disconnected and inappropriately light president making introductory remarks. At the event, a Tribal Nations Conference hosted by the Department of Interior's Bureau of Indian affairs, the president thanked various staffers and offered a "shout-out" to "Dr. Joe Medicine Crow -- that Congressional Medal of Honor winner." Three minutes in, the president spoke about the shooting, in measured and appropriate terms. Who is advising him?
Anyone at home aware of the major news story of the previous hours had to have been stunned. An incident like this requires a scrapping of the early light banter. The president should apologize for the tone of his remarks, explain what has happened, express sympathy for those slain and appeal for calm and patience until all the facts are in. That's the least that should occur.
It continues...
Indeed, an argument could be made that Obama should have canceled the Indian event, out of respect for people having been murdered at an Army post a few hours before. That would have prevented any sort of jarring emotional switch at the event.
Did the president's team not realize what sort of image they were presenting to the country at this moment? The disconnect between what Americans at home knew had been going on -- and the initial words coming out of their president's mouth was jolting, if not disturbing.
It must have been disappointing for many politically aware Democrats, still reeling from the election two days before. The New Jersey gubernatorial vote had already demonstrated that the president and his political team couldn't produce a winning outcome in a state very friendly to Democrats (and where the president won by 15 points one year ago). And now this? Congressional Democrats must wonder if a White House that has burdened them with a too-heavy policy agenda over the last year has a strong enough political operation to help push that agenda through.
If the president's communications apparatus can't inform -- and protect -- their boss during tense moments when the country needs to see a focused commander-in-chief and a compassionate head of state, it has disastrous consequences for that president's party and supporters.
All the president's men (and women) fell down on the job Thursday. And Democrats across the country have real reason to panic.
I will be posting more on this as it comes in.
A US army psychiatrist about to be deployed to Afghanistan allegedly shouted "Allahu Akbar", or "God is greatest", as he opened fire at a military base in Texas, killing 13 people and wounding 28.
The gunman, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, 39, shouted the Arabic phrase just before he began his shooting spree at Fort Hood military installation yesterday, according to the base commander, Lieutenant General Robert Cone.
Tell me this, if a christian went around shooting people at an army base yelling "I kill you in the name of God" or a jewish person went around shooting people yelling "I kill you in the name of Yahweh" you think that there's any chance that the MSM decides to not cover IT?!?!?!?! No... I think not. If the PC coverage of this wasn't bad enough PBO's reaction was at best callous and at worst disgusting and reprehensible. This is from NBC Chicago of all places. The title of the article? A disconnected President... WOW
President Obama didn't wait long after Tuesday's devastating elections to give critics another reason to question his leadership, but this time the subject matter was more grim than a pair of governorships.
After news broke out of the shooting at the Fort Hood Army post in Texas, the nation watched in horror as the toll of dead and injured climbed. The White House was notified immediately and by late afternoon, word went out that the president would speak about the incident prior to a previously scheduled appearance. At about 5 p.m., cable stations went to the president. The situation called for not only his trademark eloquence, but also grace and perspective.
But instead of a somber chief executive offering reassuring words and expressions of sympathy and compassion, viewers saw a wildly disconnected and inappropriately light president making introductory remarks. At the event, a Tribal Nations Conference hosted by the Department of Interior's Bureau of Indian affairs, the president thanked various staffers and offered a "shout-out" to "Dr. Joe Medicine Crow -- that Congressional Medal of Honor winner." Three minutes in, the president spoke about the shooting, in measured and appropriate terms. Who is advising him?
Anyone at home aware of the major news story of the previous hours had to have been stunned. An incident like this requires a scrapping of the early light banter. The president should apologize for the tone of his remarks, explain what has happened, express sympathy for those slain and appeal for calm and patience until all the facts are in. That's the least that should occur.
It continues...
Indeed, an argument could be made that Obama should have canceled the Indian event, out of respect for people having been murdered at an Army post a few hours before. That would have prevented any sort of jarring emotional switch at the event.
Did the president's team not realize what sort of image they were presenting to the country at this moment? The disconnect between what Americans at home knew had been going on -- and the initial words coming out of their president's mouth was jolting, if not disturbing.
It must have been disappointing for many politically aware Democrats, still reeling from the election two days before. The New Jersey gubernatorial vote had already demonstrated that the president and his political team couldn't produce a winning outcome in a state very friendly to Democrats (and where the president won by 15 points one year ago). And now this? Congressional Democrats must wonder if a White House that has burdened them with a too-heavy policy agenda over the last year has a strong enough political operation to help push that agenda through.
If the president's communications apparatus can't inform -- and protect -- their boss during tense moments when the country needs to see a focused commander-in-chief and a compassionate head of state, it has disastrous consequences for that president's party and supporters.
All the president's men (and women) fell down on the job Thursday. And Democrats across the country have real reason to panic.
I will be posting more on this as it comes in.
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
For all the talk about a GOP civil war...
There is a lot of discontent on the democratic side despite their stranglehold on Washington, they can get legislation passed in both houses without A SINGLE VOTE BY REPUBLICANS IN EITHER CHAMBER, but they are having trouble corraling the blue dog dems for obvious reasons. And that was BEFORE last night in which the dem got raped in VA (I had it almost exactly called). and NJ, a solid blue state if there ever was one, where a incumbent governor outspent his rival 3:1, ran a nasty campaign, and won only 44% of the vote. As a sidenote I might have been the only one out there to nearly get NJ exactly right (off by 2 points) but leaving aside my embaressing wrong prediction about NY-23 (hey that race, in my defense, was damn near impossible to predict) I did pretty good at calling races. Bring it fivethirtyeight.com there's a new predictor in town. The GOP has infighting yes, but its nowhere near as bad as this, you want to talk about idealogical purity? Read below
a quote from the front page of moron.org, excuse me, moveon.org
“If a Democratic Senator helps block an up-or-down vote on health care reform, there need to be consequences. We’ve launched the Health Care Accountability Pledge so that a primary challenge against any Democrat who filibusters would get off to a well-funded start.”
All I can say is go for it, it would turn voters off from having a electable moderate democrat to a psycho socialist dem versus a solid conservative candidate with the dem possibly pulling a Libermann and going independent, fracturing the democrat vote. Look at your own house ab before you go shooting your mouth off about how the GOP is throwing moderates overboard.
a quote from the front page of moron.org, excuse me, moveon.org
“If a Democratic Senator helps block an up-or-down vote on health care reform, there need to be consequences. We’ve launched the Health Care Accountability Pledge so that a primary challenge against any Democrat who filibusters would get off to a well-funded start.”
All I can say is go for it, it would turn voters off from having a electable moderate democrat to a psycho socialist dem versus a solid conservative candidate with the dem possibly pulling a Libermann and going independent, fracturing the democrat vote. Look at your own house ab before you go shooting your mouth off about how the GOP is throwing moderates overboard.
Tuesday, November 03, 2009
V:An anti-Obama show (seriously)
Ok normally when a show debuts in any month other than september on january it is almost doomed to fail. That doesn't seem to be the case with the "V" where visitors come to earth (they're really reptilians bent on world destruction) in our time of need. Granted this is technically a remake from 1983-84 miniseries but I (and others) feel it is somewhat of a shot across the bow of Obamamania that has died down somewhat but still out there. Some of my favorite quotes from the episode "The V's call it spreading hope" "comprimising your principals for the greater good is a noble act" and about a half dozen others feel like rimshots to punchlines of Obama jokes. Here's the opening paragraphs from an the, drumroll please, Chicago Tribune (link in title) has today...
Imagine this. At a time of political turmoil, a charismatic, telegenic new leader arrives virtually out of nowhere. He offers a message of hope and reconciliation based on compromise and promises to marshal technology for a better future that will include universal health care.
The news media swoons in admiration -- one simpering anchorman even shouts at a reporter who asks a tough question: "Why don't you show some respect?!" The public is likewise smitten, except for a few nut cases who circulate batty rumors on the Internet about the leader's origins and intentions. The leader, undismayed, offers assurances that are soothing, if also just a tiny bit condescending: "Embracing change is never easy."
And here's a comment that sums up the show perfectly...
The original V was an allegorical reference to Hitler's Nazi regime and the internment and total control of the Jewish people. They arrived with a message of good and rightousness. And then turned to tyranny.
Even down to the human sympathizers in V, who turn in their own kind to the the Visitors, the same was done to the Jews...rabble-rousers either sympathetic to the Nazi cause turned in their own kind to the Nazi's if they resisted 'change.'
While V is a commentary on Nazi Germany, the message is loud and clear today: Any entity that tries to take total control of society (government motors, government banks, government healthcare, government-owned or bailed-out media)leads that society further away from Democracy and closer to Tyranny.
Enjoy V for its Sci-Fi faire, but open your mind to the possibility of what happens when democracy gives way to liberal-facisim.
Leaving aside the fact he spelled fascism wrong good point.
Imagine this. At a time of political turmoil, a charismatic, telegenic new leader arrives virtually out of nowhere. He offers a message of hope and reconciliation based on compromise and promises to marshal technology for a better future that will include universal health care.
The news media swoons in admiration -- one simpering anchorman even shouts at a reporter who asks a tough question: "Why don't you show some respect?!" The public is likewise smitten, except for a few nut cases who circulate batty rumors on the Internet about the leader's origins and intentions. The leader, undismayed, offers assurances that are soothing, if also just a tiny bit condescending: "Embracing change is never easy."
And here's a comment that sums up the show perfectly...
The original V was an allegorical reference to Hitler's Nazi regime and the internment and total control of the Jewish people. They arrived with a message of good and rightousness. And then turned to tyranny.
Even down to the human sympathizers in V, who turn in their own kind to the the Visitors, the same was done to the Jews...rabble-rousers either sympathetic to the Nazi cause turned in their own kind to the Nazi's if they resisted 'change.'
While V is a commentary on Nazi Germany, the message is loud and clear today: Any entity that tries to take total control of society (government motors, government banks, government healthcare, government-owned or bailed-out media)leads that society further away from Democracy and closer to Tyranny.
Enjoy V for its Sci-Fi faire, but open your mind to the possibility of what happens when democracy gives way to liberal-facisim.
Leaving aside the fact he spelled fascism wrong good point.
Monday, November 02, 2009
Ben nerds it up with polls...
Ok, being already an amatuer political scientist (it is my major after all) I have a love/hate relationship with polls. I will be crunching some numbers from polls from the last week that I found on realclearpolitics.com that represents the fluid, if not bizzare, data set I have to work with here. Note ***=important poll/most weight **=somewhat important poll/semi-biased/some weight *=biased poll/little to no weight. Weight means due to poll's circumstances and factoring in how many undecided voters there are in the poll and the MoE (margin of error) which for the sake of my sanity I will put at +/-3, I will adjust the poll according jto my formula after crunching the raw data and compare the unaltered data to my altered data. This should take most of my afternoon but I have nothing better to do
Monday, November 02
New York 23rd District - Special Election
Poll: **Siena Hoffman 41, Owens 36, Scozzafava 6 (undecided
Hoffman +5
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:*PPP(D) Christie 47, Corzine 41, Daggett 11 (undecided 1%)
Christie +6
Virginia Governor - McDonnell vs. Deeds
Poll:*PPP(D) McDonnell 56, Deeds 42
McDonnell +14
New York 23rd District - Special Election
Poll:*PPP(D) Hoffman 51, Owens 34, Scozzafava 13
Hoffman +17
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:**Quinnipiac Christie 42, Corzine 40, Daggett 12
Christie +2
Sunday, November 01
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:**Monmouth/Gannett Christie 43, Corzine 42, Daggett 8
Christie +1
Virginia Governor - McDonnell vs. Deeds
Poll:**Times-Dispatch/MD McDonnell 53, Deeds 41
McDonnell +12
Saturday, October 31
New York 23rd District - Special Election
Poll:**Siena Hoffman 35, Owens 36, Scozzafava 20
Owens +1
Friday, October 30
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:***Rasmussen Reports Christie 46, Corzine 43, Daggett 8
Christie +3
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:**Stockton/Zogby Christie 39, Corzine 40, Daggett 14
Corzine +1
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:*Neighborhood Research (R) Christie 42, Corzine 35, Daggett 8
Christie +7
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:***Fairleigh Dickinson Christie 41, Corzine 39, Daggett 14
Christie +2
Thursday, October 29
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:*Democracy Corps (D) Christie 38, Corzine 43, Daggett 12
Corzine +5
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:**SurveyUSA Christie 43, Corzine 43, Daggett 11
Tie
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:*Daily Kos/R2000 Christie 42, Corzine 41, Daggett 14
Christie +1
Virginia Governor - McDonnell vs. Deeds
Poll:*Daily Kos/R2000 McDonnell 54, Deeds 44
McDonnell +10
Virginia Governor - McDonnell vs. Deeds
Poll:**Suffolk University McDonnell 54, Deeds 40
McDonnell +14
New York 23rd District Special Election
Poll:*Daily Kos/R2000(D) Hoffman 32, Owens 33, Scozzafava 21
Owens +1
Virginia Governor - McDonnell vs. Deeds
Poll:**Roanoke College McDonnell 53, Deeds 36
McDonnell +17
Wednesday, October 28
Virginia Governor - McDonnell vs. Deeds
Poll:***Rasmussen Reports(NP)McDonnell 54, Deeds 41
McDonnell +13
Virginia Governor - McDonnell vs. Deeds
Poll:**VCU McDonnell 54, Deeds 36
McDonnell +18
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:***Quinnipiac Christie 38, Corzine 43, Daggett 13
Corzine +5
Tuesday, October 27
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:***Rasmussen Reports(NP) Christie 46, Corzine 43, Daggett 7 (undecided 4%)
Christie +3
Virginia Governor - McDonnell vs. Deeds
Poll:**SurveyUSA McDonnell 58, Deeds 41
McDonnell +17
New York 23rd District Special Election
Poll:*Minuteman/Neighborhood (R) Hoffman 34, Owens 29, Scozzafava 14
Hoffman +5
New Jersey Governor Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:*PPP(D) Christie 42, Corzine 38, Daggett 13
Christie +4
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:**Suffolk University Christie 33, Corzine 42, Daggett 7 (undecided 18%)Corzine +9
***Generic Congressional Vote Rasmussen Reports Democrats 38, Republicans 42 Republicans +4
This is BIG because usually the generic ballots underpoll republicans by 2-4% so that could actually be a +6-8% which is devestating to democrat hopes to hold on to House leadership
Monday, October 26
New York 23rd District Special Election
Poll***CFG/Basswood Research(R) Hoffman 31, Owens 27, Scozzafava 20 (undecided22%)
Hoffman +4
Breakdown
NJ Governor
10/27 Corzine +9, Christie +4,+3
10/28 Corzine +5,
10/29 Corzine +5, Christie +1, tie
10/30 Corzine +1, Christie +1,+7,+3
11/1 Christie+1
11/2 Christie+2,+6
So since 10/27 there have been 14 polls taken, 4 have Corzine leading by an average of 5%. 9 have Christie leading by an average of 3.3% and one tie. Right now it looks like it SHOULD be a virtual tossup thanks to Daggett siphoning off votes from Christie, unless he pulls a Scozzafava and drops out Christie is going to possibly have to sweat it out until the early morning hours Wednesday. My prediction
Christie 49%, Corzine 43%, Daggett 7% with the remaining going to fringe candidates. The PPP poll today is huge because it leans democratic in its idealolgy so Christie may have a 8-10% point lead which could cause some of his supporters to get overconfident and stay home on election night.
Ok back to work...
Breakdown
VA Governor
10/27 McDonnell +17
10/28 McDonnell +18,+13
10/29 McDonnell +17,+14,+10
10/30 N/A
10/31 N/A
11/1 McDonnell +12
11/2 McDonnell +14
Pretty depressing for Deeds considering Obama actually won this state last year and has had a Democratic govenor for the last 8 years. Since 10/27 8 polls have been released all showing McDonnell with at least a double-digit lead (average 14.5% lead). "Bold" prediction by me, McDonnell wins by a minimum 60-40 due to strong GOP turnout and democratic indifference, leaving the fact that Deeds was probably the worst that the state dems could do for a nominee of the 3 contenders there were. This thing was over before it started. Even Obama essentially gave the middle finger to the Deeds camp. He never stood a shot.
And finally
NY-23 Special Election aka crazy race
10/26 Hoffman +4
10/27 Hoffman +5
10/28 N/A
10/29 Owens +1
10/30 N/A
10/31(Scozzafava drops out) Owens +1
11/1 (Scozzafava endorses Owens) N/A
11/2 Hoffman +17 (from a D poll!) and Hoffman +5
My jaw nearly hit the floor this morning when I saw that Hoffman showed a 17 point lead from PPP. I can't discount it because its a self described democrat poll. My theory is that Scozzafava endorsing Owens turned some of her possible, lukewarm supporters, to switch alligence to Hoffman. She is seen as a turncoat and probably was bribed to do this. My prediction,
Hoffman 57% Owens 38% Scozzafava 5%
Monday, November 02
New York 23rd District - Special Election
Poll: **Siena Hoffman 41, Owens 36, Scozzafava 6 (undecided
Hoffman +5
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:*PPP(D) Christie 47, Corzine 41, Daggett 11 (undecided 1%)
Christie +6
Virginia Governor - McDonnell vs. Deeds
Poll:*PPP(D) McDonnell 56, Deeds 42
McDonnell +14
New York 23rd District - Special Election
Poll:*PPP(D) Hoffman 51, Owens 34, Scozzafava 13
Hoffman +17
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:**Quinnipiac Christie 42, Corzine 40, Daggett 12
Christie +2
Sunday, November 01
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:**Monmouth/Gannett Christie 43, Corzine 42, Daggett 8
Christie +1
Virginia Governor - McDonnell vs. Deeds
Poll:**Times-Dispatch/MD McDonnell 53, Deeds 41
McDonnell +12
Saturday, October 31
New York 23rd District - Special Election
Poll:**Siena Hoffman 35, Owens 36, Scozzafava 20
Owens +1
Friday, October 30
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:***Rasmussen Reports Christie 46, Corzine 43, Daggett 8
Christie +3
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:**Stockton/Zogby Christie 39, Corzine 40, Daggett 14
Corzine +1
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:*Neighborhood Research (R) Christie 42, Corzine 35, Daggett 8
Christie +7
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:***Fairleigh Dickinson Christie 41, Corzine 39, Daggett 14
Christie +2
Thursday, October 29
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:*Democracy Corps (D) Christie 38, Corzine 43, Daggett 12
Corzine +5
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:**SurveyUSA Christie 43, Corzine 43, Daggett 11
Tie
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:*Daily Kos/R2000 Christie 42, Corzine 41, Daggett 14
Christie +1
Virginia Governor - McDonnell vs. Deeds
Poll:*Daily Kos/R2000 McDonnell 54, Deeds 44
McDonnell +10
Virginia Governor - McDonnell vs. Deeds
Poll:**Suffolk University McDonnell 54, Deeds 40
McDonnell +14
New York 23rd District Special Election
Poll:*Daily Kos/R2000(D) Hoffman 32, Owens 33, Scozzafava 21
Owens +1
Virginia Governor - McDonnell vs. Deeds
Poll:**Roanoke College McDonnell 53, Deeds 36
McDonnell +17
Wednesday, October 28
Virginia Governor - McDonnell vs. Deeds
Poll:***Rasmussen Reports(NP)McDonnell 54, Deeds 41
McDonnell +13
Virginia Governor - McDonnell vs. Deeds
Poll:**VCU McDonnell 54, Deeds 36
McDonnell +18
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:***Quinnipiac Christie 38, Corzine 43, Daggett 13
Corzine +5
Tuesday, October 27
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:***Rasmussen Reports(NP) Christie 46, Corzine 43, Daggett 7 (undecided 4%)
Christie +3
Virginia Governor - McDonnell vs. Deeds
Poll:**SurveyUSA McDonnell 58, Deeds 41
McDonnell +17
New York 23rd District Special Election
Poll:*Minuteman/Neighborhood (R) Hoffman 34, Owens 29, Scozzafava 14
Hoffman +5
New Jersey Governor Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:*PPP(D) Christie 42, Corzine 38, Daggett 13
Christie +4
New Jersey Governor - Corzine vs. Christie
Poll:**Suffolk University Christie 33, Corzine 42, Daggett 7 (undecided 18%)Corzine +9
***Generic Congressional Vote Rasmussen Reports Democrats 38, Republicans 42 Republicans +4
This is BIG because usually the generic ballots underpoll republicans by 2-4% so that could actually be a +6-8% which is devestating to democrat hopes to hold on to House leadership
Monday, October 26
New York 23rd District Special Election
Poll***CFG/Basswood Research(R) Hoffman 31, Owens 27, Scozzafava 20 (undecided22%)
Hoffman +4
Breakdown
NJ Governor
10/27 Corzine +9, Christie +4,+3
10/28 Corzine +5,
10/29 Corzine +5, Christie +1, tie
10/30 Corzine +1, Christie +1,+7,+3
11/1 Christie+1
11/2 Christie+2,+6
So since 10/27 there have been 14 polls taken, 4 have Corzine leading by an average of 5%. 9 have Christie leading by an average of 3.3% and one tie. Right now it looks like it SHOULD be a virtual tossup thanks to Daggett siphoning off votes from Christie, unless he pulls a Scozzafava and drops out Christie is going to possibly have to sweat it out until the early morning hours Wednesday. My prediction
Christie 49%, Corzine 43%, Daggett 7% with the remaining going to fringe candidates. The PPP poll today is huge because it leans democratic in its idealolgy so Christie may have a 8-10% point lead which could cause some of his supporters to get overconfident and stay home on election night.
Ok back to work...
Breakdown
VA Governor
10/27 McDonnell +17
10/28 McDonnell +18,+13
10/29 McDonnell +17,+14,+10
10/30 N/A
10/31 N/A
11/1 McDonnell +12
11/2 McDonnell +14
Pretty depressing for Deeds considering Obama actually won this state last year and has had a Democratic govenor for the last 8 years. Since 10/27 8 polls have been released all showing McDonnell with at least a double-digit lead (average 14.5% lead). "Bold" prediction by me, McDonnell wins by a minimum 60-40 due to strong GOP turnout and democratic indifference, leaving the fact that Deeds was probably the worst that the state dems could do for a nominee of the 3 contenders there were. This thing was over before it started. Even Obama essentially gave the middle finger to the Deeds camp. He never stood a shot.
And finally
NY-23 Special Election aka crazy race
10/26 Hoffman +4
10/27 Hoffman +5
10/28 N/A
10/29 Owens +1
10/30 N/A
10/31(Scozzafava drops out) Owens +1
11/1 (Scozzafava endorses Owens) N/A
11/2 Hoffman +17 (from a D poll!) and Hoffman +5
My jaw nearly hit the floor this morning when I saw that Hoffman showed a 17 point lead from PPP. I can't discount it because its a self described democrat poll. My theory is that Scozzafava endorsing Owens turned some of her possible, lukewarm supporters, to switch alligence to Hoffman. She is seen as a turncoat and probably was bribed to do this. My prediction,
Hoffman 57% Owens 38% Scozzafava 5%
Saturday, October 31, 2009
#1-Puddle Of Mudd - Psycho
Heres my winner folks. It wins because of the title, lyrics and the almost half dozen horror movie refrences. From what I can gather it refrences, I know what you did last summer, Halloween, Psycho, The Ring, Scream (possibly), and I think Friday the 13th. Great tune, great band. Also the Kid Rock/Pamela Anderson/Tommy Lee fight, Kayne West being a douche and Paris Hilton refrences are thrown in for good measure too.
Friday, October 30, 2009
#2-Rob Zombie - Living Dead Girl
Once again Rob makes the list. Who will be #1? Check back tomorrow to find out.
#3-Rob Zombie - Dragula
No explaination needed again, its Rob Zombie, what else can you say? What will the top two be? Stay tuned to find out. And don't be surprised if you see Rob again
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
The Shake Weight for Men Workout: aka the funniest infomercial EVER...
Good god, who was the genius that let this get through. "30-45 seconds and I'm already covered in sweat " yea... no sexual innuendo there. Seriously unless the (painfully) obvious sexual puns/innuendo was part of the marketing strategy. Ellen found it first and it was just for women (infomercial wasn't as funny as this one) then these people called her back and said they were making a bigger, longer... (no I'm not making this up, how could I) version for men. Jon Stewart showed it on the Daily Show last night and I nearly choked to death on my pasta from laughing so hard. Worst, or best infomercial ever depending on how you look at it.
#4- Seether- Remedy
one of the creepiest music videos EVER made. Fire coming from the end of a guitar, guy looking like a psycho carnie (oxymoron I know). Its a nice headbanger tune and thoroughly nasty all throughout.
#6-Marilyn Manson -The Beautiful People
Best Manson song out there. I thought about using sweet dreams but seeing as how its a cover (albeit arguably better than the original) I chose some original work by him. Too bad he sold out. Even Trent Reznor regrets to a certain extent making him hit it big. Creepy video though
Monday, October 26, 2009
#7-Animal I Have Become Three Days Grace
Animal I have become, as in werewolf sort of? Not exactly but still kickass video and the last one I have to explain why its "halloween" related. The top 6 will be pretty self-evident
#7 Duality-Slipknot
I'm not explaining this one. Print out the lyrics and you'll understand. Plus they always, and I mean ALWAYS wear those masks in public. They showed up to the grammies in tuxedos and still had the fucking masks on! They get on the list for that reason alone
Saturday, October 24, 2009
#9-Lithium (Nirvana)
The reason I've put this up on my list is because it is a downright creepy song. For those of you who don't know Lithium is used to treat bipolar disorder, in 1992-3 its all they really had. Kurt was painfully bipolar as am I so this song has special meaning to me, plus it shows his fall into madness here. Doesn't get much creepier than that.
Friday, October 23, 2009
#10 scary music video- Halloween "Meet the creeper Rob Zombie" Music Video,
Ok a thing I'm doing for halloween coming up a top 10 list of the 10 best/scariest music videos. #10 is "Meet the Creeper" by Rob Zombie
Monday, October 19, 2009
Remember Hamid Karzi? Yeah...
This guy was supposed to be the "savior" of Afghanistan. Frankly I'm amazed he's still alive because of all the assassination attempts there have already been on his life it also turns out he's a corrupt little bastard too. Seems that he has learned the Chicago style of voting, stealing votes. According to the UN (yeah they did something useful, I'm stunned too)
A UN-backed election watchdog has declared invalid hundreds of thousands of votes for Afghanistan's president in the disputed August election, apparently stripping Hamid Karzai of outright victory and setting the stage for a second round.
After nearly two months of investigations, the Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC) – controlled by a majority of non-Afghans – found Karzai's total had fallen to 48.3%, according to an independent analysis. He needed 50% to clinch another term in office.
A separate election commission that backs the president will have to endorse the findings and call for a second-round vote to be held in the next few weeks.
I wonder if the UN monitored our election how many votes would have found out to be stolen by either side. Just food for thought. Just what we need now...
A UN-backed election watchdog has declared invalid hundreds of thousands of votes for Afghanistan's president in the disputed August election, apparently stripping Hamid Karzai of outright victory and setting the stage for a second round.
After nearly two months of investigations, the Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC) – controlled by a majority of non-Afghans – found Karzai's total had fallen to 48.3%, according to an independent analysis. He needed 50% to clinch another term in office.
A separate election commission that backs the president will have to endorse the findings and call for a second-round vote to be held in the next few weeks.
I wonder if the UN monitored our election how many votes would have found out to be stolen by either side. Just food for thought. Just what we need now...
Friday, October 16, 2009
Song of the week #1 A Town Called Hypocrisy
eh, maybe its the fact that I've been sick or just lazy updating my blog but I thought I'd give this a try. A song each weekend that captures my current mood.
Story of Stuff, Full Version; How Things Work, About Stuff aka indoctrination...
ok the reason I am posting this to my blog is that I really believe in a debate an exchange of the ideas that are out there. No matter how batshit crazy they are. I am in a critical thinking class this semester at the U of M where I will either have to debate for (god forbid), against this video and the statements this crazy bitch puts forth, without much citation mind you or be a mob and go after both sides. I hope I get to debate against the video, for obvious reasons. I actually saw this on Glenn Beck about a month ago and I plan on also posting the video that debunks this. The biggest problem I have with this video is that its being used like "An Inconvient Truth" was. That is that this is fact and there is no debate about this, the issue is settled. This is being used in schools as an indoctrination method for young school children. This is disgusting propganda that Gobbles and Pravda (look it up) would be very proud of. First tool in taking over a society, indoctrinate the children (see: Hitler youth), it might already be too late.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Fox vs.Obama
It has seemed to me that ever since MSNBC/NBC have essentially went into the tank for Obama after Super Tuesday 2008 FoxNews has been in an interesting position. Faux, as the left likes to call it, is seemingly the only opposition voice left in the TV media. I can't believe how far the other networks have fallen, I used to watch MSNBC and I literally can't anymore. I do try but the seething liberalism soaks through on everything, except their weekend series where they interview prison guards and prisoners (a lot of whom I bet voted for Obama, including the dead ones but I digress). I might just be viewing it through partisan glasses but Fox actually tends to have balanced views and has liberals on, Maddow and Olberman on the other hand take people from DailyKos and AirAmerica and treat them like objective observers. Hint to MSNBC, if you want more viewers stop sucking Obama's dick and have people on that are critical of him. Fox has great debates from respectable liberals (Juan Williams and Maria Liason from NPR come to mind) and MSNBC needs to have more than just Bill Bennett as a token every now and then. Here's the article from the NYT of all places...
“We’re going to treat them the way we would treat an opponent,” said Anita Dunn, the White House communications director, in a telephone interview on Sunday. “As they are undertaking a war against Barack Obama and the White House, we don’t need to pretend that this is the way that legitimate news organizations behave.”
Attacking the news media is a time-honored White House tactic but to an unusual degree, the Obama administration has narrowed its sights to one specific organization, the Fox News Channel, calling it, in essence, part of the political opposition.
Her comments are only the latest in the volatile exchange between the administration and the top-rated network, which is owned by the News Corporation, controlled by Rupert Murdoch. Last month, Roger Ailes, the chairman of Fox News, and David Axelrod, a senior adviser to President Obama, met for coffee in New York, in what Politico, which last week broke that news, labeled a “Fox summit.”
While neither party has said what was discussed, some have speculated that a truce, or at least an adjustment in tone, was at issue. (Mr. Ailes and Mr. Obama reportedly reached a temporary accord after a meeting in mid-2008.) But shots are still being fired, which animates the idea that both sides see benefits in the feud.
Fox seems to relish the controversy.
“Instead of governing, the White House continues to be in campaign mode, and Fox News is the target of their attack mentality,” Michael Clemente, the channel’s senior vice president for news, said in a statement on Sunday. “Perhaps the energy would be better spent on the critical issues that voters are worried about.”
Fox’s senior vice president for programming, Bill Shine, says of the criticism from the White House, “Every time they do it, our ratings go up.” Mr. Obama’s first year is on track to be the Fox News Channel’s highest rated.
One Fox executive said that the jabs by the White House could solidify the network’s audience base and recalled that Mr. Ailes had remarked internally: “Don’t pick a fight with people who like to fight.” The executive asked not to be named while discussing internal conversations.
Certainly, Fox continues to aggressively bolster its on-air talent, most recently with the hiring of John Stossel, the libertarian investigative journalist from ABC News, for its spin-off channel, Fox Business. The business channel is also keen on another administration critic, Lou Dobbs, who met for dinner with Mr. Ailes last month, according to two people with direct knowledge of the meeting.
The shift for Fox News — the favorite network of the Bush administration, now the least favored one of the Obama administration — has financial implications for the News Corporation, especially given the network’s status as a growth engine in a perilous time for media companies.
Fox’s programs have drawn record numbers of viewers this year. Through last week, Fox averaged 1.2 million viewers at any given time this year, up from one million viewers through the same time last year. Previously, the channel peaked in 2003, the year the Iraq war started, with nearly 1.1 million viewers.
But controversial comments by the host Glenn Beck have also prompted an ad boycott. And the perception of Fox News as an opposition party has also affected its news correspondents, including Major Garrett, its chief White House correspondent, who Ms. Dunn says is a fair reporter. Mr. Garrett and other Fox correspondents have been directed by Mr. Clemente not to appear on the channel’s most opinionated programs.
Still, Paul Rittenberg, who oversees ad sales for Fox, said the channel existed in a climate where viewers choose cable news channels based on affinity. His channel, he said, stresses in its pitch to advertisers that “people who watch Fox News believe it’s the home team.”
To many Democrats, of course, the “home team” is conservative, a view only compounded by Fox’s at times skeptical coverage of Mr. Obama this year.
“I’ve got one television station that is entirely devoted to attacking my administration,” he said in June, though he did not mention Fox by name. He added, “You’d be hard pressed if you watched the entire day to find a positive story about me on that front.”
The White House has limited administration members’ appearances on the network in recent weeks. In mid-September, when the White House booked Mr. Obama on a round robin of Sunday morning talk shows, it skipped Fox and called it an “ideological outlet,” leading the “Fox News Sunday” anchor Chris Wallace to appear on Bill O’Reilly’s prime-time show and call the administration “the biggest bunch of crybabies I have dealt with in my 30 years in Washington.”
Ms. Dunn called that remark juvenile and stressed that administration officials would still talk to Fox, and that Mr. Obama was likely to be interviewed on the network in the future. But, she added, “we’re not going to legitimize them as a news organization.”
In an interview, Mr. Clemente suggested that there was an element of “shoot the messenger” in the back and forth. “Sometimes it’s actually helpful to have an organization or a person that you can go up against for whatever reason,” he said.
Fox argues that its news hours — 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. and 6 to 8 p.m. on weekdays — are objective. The channel has taken pains recently to highlight its news programs, including the two hours led by Shepard Smith, its chief news anchor. And its daytime newscasts draw more viewers than CNN or MSNBC’s prime-time programs.
“The average consumer certainly knows the difference between the A section of the newspaper and the editorial page,” Mr. Clemente said.
The White House rejects the news and editorial page comparison, and officials there can rattle off any number of perceived offenses. They date to the month before Mr. Obama formally started his presidential campaign, when one of the network’s morning hosts falsely claimed that he had attended a madrassa, an Islamic school. (The incident happened on what Fox calls an entertainment show, “Fox and Friends”; the mistake was corrected on the air later.)
More recently, Fox hosts have promoted tea party rallies against big government and steered attention toward a number of White House czar appointments. Mr. Beck, in particular, was credited with forcing Van Jones, a low-level White House adviser for environmental jobs, to resign last month. Mr. Beck devoted numerous segments to Mr. Jones and called him a “communist-anarchist radical.”
“If it wasn’t for Fox or talk radio, we’d be done as a republic,” Mr. Beck said in the wake of the resignation.
Mr. Beck, whose 5 p.m. program consistently draws three million viewers, is a “cultural phenomenon now,” Mr. Shine said. But this success has come at a price: he is the source of considerable discomfort for Fox’s journalists, especially for false statements on his program. In August, for instance, Mr. Beck claimed that Mr. Garrett was “never called on” at White House press briefings, but Mr. Garrett had asked a question that day.
Weeks earlier, Mr. Beck labeled Mr. Obama a racist, leading to an advertising boycott by ColorOfChange.org, an advocacy group that Mr. Jones helped found. Dozens of advertisers have distanced themselves from Mr. Beck’s show, causing headaches for Mr. Rittenberg’s advertising team, although he said Fox “hasn’t lost a dime” because the ads were moved to different hours.
Fox has made the channel’s tensions with the White House a story. In August, the network’s top-rated host, Mr. O’Reilly, dispatched one of his opinion program’s producers to ask why the administration seemed “so thin-skinned” at a White House briefing. The deputy press secretary disagreed, and said that Mr. O’Reilly had interviewed Mr. Obama during his candidacy last year. The administration’s aggressive stance suggests that it does not view Fox’s audience as one that can be persuaded. During the presidential campaign, Ms. Dunn said, it booked campaign representatives on Fox to try to reach undecided voters, but by mid-October, the campaign had mostly withdrawn them from the channel’s programs.
“It was beyond diminishing returns,” she said. “It was no returns.”
“We’re going to treat them the way we would treat an opponent,” said Anita Dunn, the White House communications director, in a telephone interview on Sunday. “As they are undertaking a war against Barack Obama and the White House, we don’t need to pretend that this is the way that legitimate news organizations behave.”
Attacking the news media is a time-honored White House tactic but to an unusual degree, the Obama administration has narrowed its sights to one specific organization, the Fox News Channel, calling it, in essence, part of the political opposition.
Her comments are only the latest in the volatile exchange between the administration and the top-rated network, which is owned by the News Corporation, controlled by Rupert Murdoch. Last month, Roger Ailes, the chairman of Fox News, and David Axelrod, a senior adviser to President Obama, met for coffee in New York, in what Politico, which last week broke that news, labeled a “Fox summit.”
While neither party has said what was discussed, some have speculated that a truce, or at least an adjustment in tone, was at issue. (Mr. Ailes and Mr. Obama reportedly reached a temporary accord after a meeting in mid-2008.) But shots are still being fired, which animates the idea that both sides see benefits in the feud.
Fox seems to relish the controversy.
“Instead of governing, the White House continues to be in campaign mode, and Fox News is the target of their attack mentality,” Michael Clemente, the channel’s senior vice president for news, said in a statement on Sunday. “Perhaps the energy would be better spent on the critical issues that voters are worried about.”
Fox’s senior vice president for programming, Bill Shine, says of the criticism from the White House, “Every time they do it, our ratings go up.” Mr. Obama’s first year is on track to be the Fox News Channel’s highest rated.
One Fox executive said that the jabs by the White House could solidify the network’s audience base and recalled that Mr. Ailes had remarked internally: “Don’t pick a fight with people who like to fight.” The executive asked not to be named while discussing internal conversations.
Certainly, Fox continues to aggressively bolster its on-air talent, most recently with the hiring of John Stossel, the libertarian investigative journalist from ABC News, for its spin-off channel, Fox Business. The business channel is also keen on another administration critic, Lou Dobbs, who met for dinner with Mr. Ailes last month, according to two people with direct knowledge of the meeting.
The shift for Fox News — the favorite network of the Bush administration, now the least favored one of the Obama administration — has financial implications for the News Corporation, especially given the network’s status as a growth engine in a perilous time for media companies.
Fox’s programs have drawn record numbers of viewers this year. Through last week, Fox averaged 1.2 million viewers at any given time this year, up from one million viewers through the same time last year. Previously, the channel peaked in 2003, the year the Iraq war started, with nearly 1.1 million viewers.
But controversial comments by the host Glenn Beck have also prompted an ad boycott. And the perception of Fox News as an opposition party has also affected its news correspondents, including Major Garrett, its chief White House correspondent, who Ms. Dunn says is a fair reporter. Mr. Garrett and other Fox correspondents have been directed by Mr. Clemente not to appear on the channel’s most opinionated programs.
Still, Paul Rittenberg, who oversees ad sales for Fox, said the channel existed in a climate where viewers choose cable news channels based on affinity. His channel, he said, stresses in its pitch to advertisers that “people who watch Fox News believe it’s the home team.”
To many Democrats, of course, the “home team” is conservative, a view only compounded by Fox’s at times skeptical coverage of Mr. Obama this year.
“I’ve got one television station that is entirely devoted to attacking my administration,” he said in June, though he did not mention Fox by name. He added, “You’d be hard pressed if you watched the entire day to find a positive story about me on that front.”
The White House has limited administration members’ appearances on the network in recent weeks. In mid-September, when the White House booked Mr. Obama on a round robin of Sunday morning talk shows, it skipped Fox and called it an “ideological outlet,” leading the “Fox News Sunday” anchor Chris Wallace to appear on Bill O’Reilly’s prime-time show and call the administration “the biggest bunch of crybabies I have dealt with in my 30 years in Washington.”
Ms. Dunn called that remark juvenile and stressed that administration officials would still talk to Fox, and that Mr. Obama was likely to be interviewed on the network in the future. But, she added, “we’re not going to legitimize them as a news organization.”
In an interview, Mr. Clemente suggested that there was an element of “shoot the messenger” in the back and forth. “Sometimes it’s actually helpful to have an organization or a person that you can go up against for whatever reason,” he said.
Fox argues that its news hours — 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. and 6 to 8 p.m. on weekdays — are objective. The channel has taken pains recently to highlight its news programs, including the two hours led by Shepard Smith, its chief news anchor. And its daytime newscasts draw more viewers than CNN or MSNBC’s prime-time programs.
“The average consumer certainly knows the difference between the A section of the newspaper and the editorial page,” Mr. Clemente said.
The White House rejects the news and editorial page comparison, and officials there can rattle off any number of perceived offenses. They date to the month before Mr. Obama formally started his presidential campaign, when one of the network’s morning hosts falsely claimed that he had attended a madrassa, an Islamic school. (The incident happened on what Fox calls an entertainment show, “Fox and Friends”; the mistake was corrected on the air later.)
More recently, Fox hosts have promoted tea party rallies against big government and steered attention toward a number of White House czar appointments. Mr. Beck, in particular, was credited with forcing Van Jones, a low-level White House adviser for environmental jobs, to resign last month. Mr. Beck devoted numerous segments to Mr. Jones and called him a “communist-anarchist radical.”
“If it wasn’t for Fox or talk radio, we’d be done as a republic,” Mr. Beck said in the wake of the resignation.
Mr. Beck, whose 5 p.m. program consistently draws three million viewers, is a “cultural phenomenon now,” Mr. Shine said. But this success has come at a price: he is the source of considerable discomfort for Fox’s journalists, especially for false statements on his program. In August, for instance, Mr. Beck claimed that Mr. Garrett was “never called on” at White House press briefings, but Mr. Garrett had asked a question that day.
Weeks earlier, Mr. Beck labeled Mr. Obama a racist, leading to an advertising boycott by ColorOfChange.org, an advocacy group that Mr. Jones helped found. Dozens of advertisers have distanced themselves from Mr. Beck’s show, causing headaches for Mr. Rittenberg’s advertising team, although he said Fox “hasn’t lost a dime” because the ads were moved to different hours.
Fox has made the channel’s tensions with the White House a story. In August, the network’s top-rated host, Mr. O’Reilly, dispatched one of his opinion program’s producers to ask why the administration seemed “so thin-skinned” at a White House briefing. The deputy press secretary disagreed, and said that Mr. O’Reilly had interviewed Mr. Obama during his candidacy last year. The administration’s aggressive stance suggests that it does not view Fox’s audience as one that can be persuaded. During the presidential campaign, Ms. Dunn said, it booked campaign representatives on Fox to try to reach undecided voters, but by mid-October, the campaign had mostly withdrawn them from the channel’s programs.
“It was beyond diminishing returns,” she said. “It was no returns.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
