Peggy Noonan now turns on The One

It seems that Obama's support is eroding faster than you can say incompetence. Peggy Noonan, a "conservative" columnist, was one of many "conservatives" that backed O last year in his presidential run. What I am surprised at most is not that his support is eroding fast among the public (RCP has the average at 49.9%, first time the AVERAGE has been below 50%) but among the media establishment and even members in his own party. Cap and Trade is dead, global warming just got exposed for the fraud it has always been thanks to ClimateGate, Health Care reform is at best on life support now, the Terror Trials are becoming a complete fiasco and Gitmo isn't and won't be closed anytime soon, and blue dogs are running scared all over because they can feel the tide building up against them. I have to say that this is the most scathing op-ed piece I have seen (from a former Obama supporter at least) criticizing the administration.

This week, two points in an emerging picture of a White House leaking support—not the support of voters, though polls there show steady decline, but in two core constituencies, Washington's Democratic-journalistic establishment, and what might still be called the foreign-policy establishment. From journalist Elizabeth Drew, a veteran and often sympathetic chronicler of Democratic figures, a fiery denunciation of—and warning for—the White House. In a piece in Politico on the firing of White House counsel Greg Craig, Ms. Drew reports that while the president was in Asia last week, "a critical mass of influential people who once held big hopes for his presidency began to wonder whether they had misjudged the man." They once held "an unromantically high opinion of Obama," and were key to his rise, but now they are concluding that the president isn't "the person of integrity and even classiness they had thought." She scored "the Chicago crowd," which she characterized as "a distressingly insular and small-minded West Wing team." The White House, Ms. Drew says, needs adult supervision—"an older, wiser head, someone with a bit more detachment." As I read Ms. Drew's piece, I was reminded of something I began noticing a few months ago in bipartisan crowds. I would ask Democrats how they thought the president was doing. In the past they would extol, with varying degrees of enthusiasm, his virtues. Increasingly, they would preface their answer with, "Well, I was for Hillary." This in turn reminded me of a surprising thing I observe among loyal Democrats in informal settings and conversations: No one loves Barack Obama. Half the American people say they support him, and Democrats are still with him. But there were Bill Clinton supporters who really loved him. George W. Bush had people who loved him. A lot of people loved Jack Kennedy and Ronald Reagan. But no one seems to love Mr. Obama now; they're not dazzled and head over heels. That's gone away. He himself seems a fairly chilly customer; perhaps in turn he inspires chilly support. But presidents need that rock—bottom 20% who, no matter what's happening—war, unemployment—adore their guy, have complete faith in him, and insist that you love him, too. They're the hard 20 a president always keeps. Nixon kept them! Obama probably has a hard 20 too, but whatever is keeping them close, it doesn't seem to be love. Just as stinging as Elizabeth Drew on domestic matters was Leslie Gelb on Mr. Obama and foreign policy in the Daily Beast. Mr. Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations and fully plugged into the Democratic foreign-policy establishment, wrote this week that the president's Asia trip suggested "a disturbing amateurishness in managing America's power." The president's Afghanistan review has been "inexcusably clumsy," Mideast negotiations have been "fumbling." So unsuccessful was the trip that Mr. Gelb suggested Mr. Obama take responsibility for it "as President Kennedy did after the Bay of Pigs."

He added that rather than bowing to emperors—Mr. Obama "seems to do this stuff spontaneously and inexplicably"—he should begin to bow to "the voices of experience" in Washington.

When longtime political observers start calling for wise men, a president is in trouble. It also raises a distressing question: Who are the wise men and women now? Who are the Robert Lovetts, Chip Bohlens and Robert Strausses who can came in to help a president in trouble right his ship? America seems short of wise men, or short on those who are universally agreed to be wise. I suppose Vietnam was the end of that, but establishments exist for a reason, and it is hard for a great nation to function without the presence of a group of "the oldest and wisest" who can not only give sound advice but help engineer how that advice will be reported and received. Mr Obama is in a hard place. Health care hangs over him, and if he is lucky he will lose a close vote in the Senate. The common wisdom that he can't afford to lose is exactly wrong—he can't afford to win with such a poor piece of legislation. He needs to get the issue behind him, vow to fight another day, and move on. Afghanistan hangs over him, threatening the unity of his own Democratic congressional base. There is the growing perception of incompetence, of the inability to run the machine of government. This, with Americans, is worse than Obama's rebranding as a leader who governs from the left. Americans demand baseline competence. If he comes to be seen as Jimmy Carter was, that the job was bigger than the man, that will be the end. Which gets us back to the bow. In a presidency, a picture or photograph becomes iconic only when it seems to express something people already think. When Gerald Ford was spoofed for being physically clumsy, it took off. The picture of Ford losing his footing and tumbling as he came down the steps of Air Force One became a symbol. There was a reason, and it wasn't that he was physically clumsy. He was not only coordinated but graceful. He'd been a football star at the University of Michigan and was offered contracts by the Detroit Lions and Green Bay Packers. But the picture took off because it expressed the growing public view that Ford's policies were bumbling and stumbling. The picture was iconic of a growing political perception. The Obama bowing pictures are becoming iconic, and they would not be if they weren't playing off a growing perception. If the pictures had been accompanied by headlines from Asia saying "Tough Talks Yield Big Progress" or "Obama Shows Muscle in China," the bowing pictures might be understood this way: "He Stoops to Conquer: Canny Obama shows elaborate deference while he subtly, toughly, quietly advances his nation's interests." But that's not how the pictures were received or will be remembered. It is true that Mr. Obama often seems not to have a firm grasp of—or respect for—protocol, of what has been done before and why, and of what divergence from the traditional might imply. And it is true that his political timing was unfortunate. When a great nation is feeling confident and strong, a surprising presidential bow might seem gracious. When it is feeling anxious, a bow will seem obsequious. The Obama bowing pictures are becoming iconic not for those reasons, however, but because they express a growing political perception, and that is that there is something amateurish about this presidency, something too ad hoc and highly personalized about it, something . . . incompetent, at least in its first year. It is hard to be president, and White Houses under pressure take refuge in thoughts that become mantras. When the previous White House came under mounting criticism from 2005 through '08, they comforted themselves by thinking, They criticized Lincoln, too. You could see their minds whirring: Lincoln was criticized, Lincoln was great, ergo we are great. But of course just because they say you're stupid doesn't mean you're Lincoln. One senses the Obama people are doing the Lincoln too, and adding to it the consoling thought that this is only the first year, we've got three years to go, we can change perceptions, don't worry. But they should worry. You can get tagged, typed and pegged your first year. Gerald Ford did, and Ronald Reagan too, more happily. The first year is when indelible impressions are made and iconic photos emerge.

Bowling for Soup - 1985 Happy Thanksgiving!

Not a thanksgiving song but whatever. I'm on vacation in Illnois so screw it. FML/Failblog Friday might return tomorrow but might not.

Politically Incorrect Cartoons #1, Looney Tunes rips Japs and Nazi's

You gotta love this stuff. To think at one time this was acceptable is amazing. I wonder if posting this will prevent me from getting in the MOB, eh oh well.

46 years ago today...

Well first off I obviously wasn't there. I have seen countless documentaries about the assassination and it is still interesting to talk to my mom and dad about that day because it truly is one of those things where you will always remember where you were when you first heard the news about it. The only events that are similar to that that have happened recently are the fall of the Berlin Wall and 9/11. The one thing that is interesting about the JFK assassination though is how many people believed (and still believe) that there was some conspiracy behind it. Unlike the 9/11 truth nutters there is some validity to this. JFK had A LOT of enemies. Castro for one, who he authorized to have killed multiple times (you don't hear that a lot in the history books, funny...) and of course the horribly botched Bay of Pigs invasion. The entire Soviet Union hated him because they were handed a major embaressment to their pride after the Cuban Missile Crisis. The CIA supposedly hated his guts and this is the favorite of some conspiracy theorists that the CIA offed him but I just don't buy that. If some rouge element in the CIA did this, someone, somewhere at sometime would have come forward by now because lord knows no one can keep a secret. Well, maybe one group; and thats where I put my chips on for a conspiracy theory. That would be the Mafia. Joe Kennedy had massive ties to organized crime because he was a bootlegger during prohibition and thats how the Kennedy fortune was amassed (once again, you don't hear much about that) and it has almost been accepted fact that there are still a bunch of Nixon votes (and sprobably some Nixon poll-watchers) at the bottom of Lake Michigan. People forget that the only reason Kennedy won in 1960 was because Illnois was pretty much thrown his way by the Mafia. So what does he do when he gets in office? He appoints his little brother, Bobby, as AG (nepotism at its finest) who decides to do a full-court press against organized crime. Apparently he didn't get the memo. Obviously the mob doesn't like this so they most likely hire Oswald as a fall guy and have Ruby take him out before he can talk to the press and police. Ruby dies in jail and we will never know exactly what happened that day but I think my theory will be proven right one of these days. Me and my dad have a saying that sums up our opinion of the JFK assassination, "The Mafia put Kennedy into office and the Mafia took Kennedy out of office."

32% Inflation in UCLA Tuition Causes Near Riots (my gerneation blows)

My generation sucks, they assault cops and protest tuition hikes? Are you serious? Colleges have to do this because they are getting less monies from the state, its simple economics. Maybe if the professors took a pay cut they could reduce the increase. I'm glad 14 of these turds got arrested. I apologize on behalf of my generation. I'd like to say that this isn't representative of us as a whole but I'm afraid it is.

It would be funnier if it wasn't true

Apparently someone FINALLY got through to at least one MSM outlet. ABCNews (not exactly a right-wing shill organization, see:Charlie Gibson) decided to ACTUALLY DO ITS FUCKING JOB FINALLY and analyzed the 'claims' about 'jobs created' at recovery.org. Here is a sample of what they found (entire article in link)

Here's a stimulus success story: In Arizona's 15th congressional district, 30 jobs have been saved or created with just $761,420 in federal stimulus spending. At least that's what the Web site set up by the Obama administration to track the $787 billion stimulus says. Discrepancies on government web site call into question stimulus spending.There's one problem, though: There is no 15th congressional district in Arizona; the state has only eight districts.
Oops, well anyone can make one mistake, surely there isn't anymore embaressing data on that site...

recovery.gov says $34 million in stimulus money has been spent in Arizona's 86th congressional district in a project for the Navajo Housing authority, which is actually located in the 1st congressional district.
Once again, embaressing but hey at least the district is actually REAL they just had a typo, because we all know that the 8 and 6 key on the computer is right next to the 1 key... it can't get anymore embaressing than that right? Well...

In Oklahoma, recovery.gov lists more than $19 million in spending -- and 15 jobs created -- in yet more congressional districts that don't exist.

In Iowa, it shows $10.6 million spent – and 39 jobs created -- in nonexistent districts.
...
In Connecticut's 42nd district (which also does not exist), the Web site claims 25 jobs created with zero stimulus dollars.
Oh God...
The list of spending and job creation in fictional congressional districts extends to U.S. territories as well.
Great...

$68.3 million spent and 72.2 million spent in the 1st congressional district of the U.S. Virgin Islands.

$8.4 million spent and 40.3 jobs created in the 99th congressional district of the U.S. Virgin Islands.

$1.5 million spent and .3 jobs created in the 69th district and $35 million for 142 jobs in the 99th district of the Northern Mariana Islands.

$47.7 million spent and 291 jobs created in Puerto Rico's 99th congressional district.
Ok I'm debating if I should laugh, cry, or get up and throw my laptop against the wall (don't worry Dad I'm not really thinking that last one). Once again, these idiots can't figure out how to spend this Payoff to Obama's cronies I mean Stimulus Package and we want to put them in charge of healthcare? 1/6 of the fucking economy in the US?!?!? Do you people have a deathwish? Shit at the rate he's going 2010 might be too late.

3 Doors Down - When I'm Gone: My tribute to the fallen at Ft.Hood

Of course the lyrics speak volumes, and sadly these 13 are gone and never coming back. This was not a tragedy, it was an attack on US military persons training to go overseas by a cowardly, fucked up, jihadi who couldn't even die to get his "72 virgins". Justice will be served but nothing can bring those brave men and women back. But ending the sickening and now deadly political correctness in our military, media, and culture would be a good way to honor them and hopefully prevent anything like this from happening again. May Hasan's soul burn in the fire of hell with the devil cornholing him.

Did Doug Hoffman win NY-23

The answer is a surprising maybe. Looking at today's Drudgereport from a Syracuse newspaper...

Washington -- Conservative Doug Hoffman conceded the race in the 23rd Congressional District last week after receiving two pieces of grim news for his campaign: He was down 5,335 votes with 93 percent of the vote counted on election night, and he had barely won his stronghold in Oswego County. As it turns out, neither was true.

cough, cough, voter fraud. Sorry I had something in my throat..

But Hoffman’s concession -- based on snafus in Oswego County and elsewhere that left his vote undercounted -- set off a chain of events that echoed all the way to Washington, D.C., and helped secure passage of a historic health care reform bill.
woo-hoo...

Democratic Rep. Bill Owens was quickly sworn into office on Friday, a day before the rare weekend vote in the House of Representatives. His support sealed his party’s narrow victory on the health care legislation.

Hmm... think they might have possibly known something?

Now a recanvassing in the 11-county district shows that Owens’ lead has narrowed to 3,026 votes over Hoffman, 66,698 to 63,672, according to the latest unofficial results from the state Board of Elections. In Oswego County, where Hoffman was reported to lead by only 500 votes with 93 percent of the vote counted election night, inspectors found Hoffman actually won by 1,748 votes -- 12,748 to 11,000. The new vote totals mean the race will be decided by absentee ballots, of which about 10,200 were distributed, said John Conklin, communications director for the state Board of Elections.
Great, absentee ballots again... I wonder if they will use the Franken tactic.

Under a new law in New York that extended deadlines, military and overseas ballots received by this coming Monday (and postmarked by Nov. 2) will be counted. Standard absentee ballots had to be returned this past Monday. Conklin said the state sent a letter to the House Clerk last week explaining that no winner had been determined in the 23rd District, and therefore the state had not certified the election. But the letter noted that Owens still led by about 3,000 votes, and that the special election was not contested -- two factors that legally allowed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to swear in Owens on Friday.
Hmm... hasn't been certified but Hoffman did concede :( let this be a lesson to future potential pols, NEVER CONCEDE UNTIL IT IS MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR YOU TO WIN.

"We sent a letter to the clerk laying out the totals," Conklin said. "The key is that Hoffman conceded, which means the race is not contested. However, all ballots will be counted, and if the result changes, Owens will have to be removed."
WOW. How very interesting. Being a political science major this is fascinating and you can bet I will be watching this and keeping you updated.

Before Owens was sworn in Friday, Rep. John Garamendi, a Democrat who won a special election in California, was sworn in Thursday. The two gave Pelosi the votes she needed to reach a majority of 218 and pass the historic health care reform legislation in the House.
So let me get this straight, if Owens wasn't sworn in the health care bill would have been killed in the House? This all sounds a little too convinent, and coincidental. And there are no coincidences in politics trust me.

The bill passed 220-215 late Saturday with the support of only one Republican. The Republican, Rep. Anh "Joseph" Cao of Louisiana, said he voted for the legislation only after seeing that Democrats had the 218 votes needed for passage.
Wait, apparently not true you subtract Owens (219) and Ahn (218) it would have passed 218-217. Uhh... someone needs to go back to grade school cuz this math doesn't add up.

Now Hoffman, who campaigned against the health care reform bill, is carefully watching as the 23rd District race tightens and he is left to wonder if he conceded too soon.
No shit, Sherlock so are a lot of people...

"I don’t know if we would have conceded on election night," Rob Ryan, Hoffman’s campaign spokesman, said Wednesday while discussing the latest results of the recanvassing. "I’m someone who doesn’t like to look back. But would we have taken longer to make a decision on election night? Probably, if we knew it was only 3,000 votes making the difference."
And to think that the US Senate race came down to hundreds of votes. This is a Congressional race and were still talking 3,000 votes. Man that Franken/Coleman race was something huh?

Ryan, while acknowledging that Hoffman’s chances of pulling off a come-from-behind victory are still remote, said the campaign is looking at its legal options. "We’re basically watching and waiting," Ryan said. "We’ve been looking very closely at the recanvass. We’re going to see how this week shapes up, and then we’re going to determine what to do." Ryan said an important factor in the decision to concede was the unexpected -- and erroneous -- close vote in Oswego County, where polls had Hoffman with a double digit percentage point lead heading into Election Day. "That’s the thing that threw us off," Ryan said.
Voter fraud... I wonder how many ACORN offices there are in NY-23...

Oswego County elections officials blame the mistakes on "chaos" in their call-in center that included a phone system foul-up and inspectors who read numbers incorrectly when phoning in results. Of 245 races in the county -- not including the congressional and court races -- 84 had incorrect totals reported election night.
Ok, either this was calculated or people are that incompetent. I'd say this one is a coin flip

In the congressional race, more votes were cast in Oswego County than any other in the 11-county district. The district’s second biggest voter turnout was in Jefferson County, where Hoffman also has benefited from a turnaround since election night, gaining about 700 votes. Owens led Hoffman by 300 votes on the final election night tally. But after recanvassing, Hoffman now leads by 424 votes, 10,884 to 10,460. Jerry Eaton, the Republican elections commissioner for Jefferson County, said inspectors found a problem in four districts where Hoffman’s vote total was mistakenly entered as zero.
Yeah, mistakenly...

"Hoffman definitely gained votes where he didn’t have them," Eaton said. Jefferson County, home of Fort Drum and the Army's 10th Mountain Division, distributed 2,299 absentee ballots for the special election. As of this week, 1,303 had been returned but not counted, Eaton said. He said the county will begin counting the absentee ballots earyl next week. Conklin, of the state Board of Elections, said officials did not have updated absentee ballot totals from the other counties. When asked about the tightening race, Owens spokesman Jon Boughtin released a statement without directly addressing the election. "Since being elected, Congressman Owens has remained focused on the issues at hand: working with local leaders to address the Champlain Bridge closure, meeting with commanders at Fort Drum and continuing the work to strengthen Upstate New York," the statement said. Ryan said the absentee ballots are likely to favor Hoffman because most were likely mailed before Republican Dede Scozzafava suspended her campaign three days before the election.
"For Doug to win, we needed a three-way race," Ryan said, adding that the campaign’s internal polls showed Hoffman would win with all three candidates. "Given the majority of these ballots are from a three-way race, we think the ballots are going to break Doug’s way," Ryan said. Ryan declined to say what percentage of the absentee vote the campaign believes Hoffman would need to win the race. Nevertheless, Hoffman’s campaign is optimistic. "When people look back at this race, it was a remote possibility that Doug Hoffman would be a contender," Ryan said. "But miracles do happen."
And I believe this district includes, appropriately enough, Lake Placid. Where the US amatuer hockey players beat the USSR pro team.

We Didn't Start the Flame War (NSFW!!!)

I'm bored, so I shall post another thing from youtube (I know I know, I need more original material, ill make up for it). This song is funny as hell and NSFW (not safe for work for you n00bs) it's done to the Billy Joel tune 'We Didn't Start the Fire' (great tune by the way. This is funny as hell but be sure to turn down the volume or put headphones in before you play it. Unless you have a really cool non-PC boss.

Song of the Week#1-Puddle Of Mudd - Spaceship

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.

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.

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.

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.

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%