Items on this page are archived in
the order of discovery.
Obama Finds 4
Million More Votes
Drew Zahn reports
that Democrats in Congress are pushing for a new law that would allow
nearly 4 million people currently banned from voting to cast their
ballot, and most of those millions, studies show, will vote Democrat.
And where will these new voters come from? Why, from the
ranks of convicted felons.
Last week, a House subcommittee heard
testimony on H.R. 3335, the "Democracy Restoration Act." The bill
seeks to override state laws, which vary in how they restrict when
convicted felons released from prison can vote.
The bill,
sponsored by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), and sponsored in the Senate by
Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., states, "The right of an individual who
is a citizen of the United States to vote in any election for federal
office shall not be denied or abridged because that individual has been
convicted of a criminal offense unless such individual is serving a
felony sentence in a correctional institution or facility at the time of
the election."
Advocates of the bill trumpet it as a civil
rights issue and a matter of freedom, while pointing out that a
disproportionate number of black and Hispanic Americans have been
disenfranchised by laws restricting felons from voting.
Critics
call it another example of the federal government overstepping its
constitutional powers to squash state sovereignty and point out that the
laws don't discriminate against minorities, for the statistics simply
reflect the disproportionate numbers of black and Hispanic Americans
convicted of crime.
Critics have also hinted that the law is
politically convenient for Democrats.
Hans von Spakovsky, a
former Commissioner on the Federal Election Commission, explained in a
blog statement, "What is particularly revealing about this bill is that
it does not say anything about the other civil rights that a felon
loses, such as the right to own a gun or serve on a jury or in some
states, to work as a public employee.
"That is an interesting
comment given that the 'findings' in the bill claim that such state
felon laws 'serve no compelling State interest,'" he concluded. "I
guess this legislation would serve one compelling interest for the
sponsors -- it might get them votes they need to win in close
elections."
Michael Barone
says Democrats are reportedly planning to raise $125 million for a
campaign to sell ObamaCare to the voting public. Apparently the
idea is that what 50-plus presidential speeches and statements and
months of congressional debate could not do can be done by $125 million
spent on everything from TV ads to community organizers. Maybe,
but there seems to be a more fundamental problem here. The Obama
Democrats didn't set out to produce an unpopular stimulus package, an
unpopular health care bill and an unpopular cap-and-trade scheme.
They thought these initiatives would be popular. In their view,
history is a story of progress from small government to big government
and, as historians of the New Deal wrote, that progress is especially
welcome in times of economic distress.
The massive
unpopularity of the Obama Democrats' programs suggests that view of
history is defective. Let me propose another, starting with the
Founding Fathers.
The Founders believed there was a tension
between representative government and the right to life, liberty and
property. So they wrote the Fifth Amendment to insure that no
citizen was deprived of those rights without due process of law.
In Britain, that tension had been limited by allowing only property
owners to vote. That way, those without property could not elect
representatives who would steal from the rich and give to the poor.
In the early years of our republic, that precaution did not seem
necessary. We were a nation of farmers where land was plentiful
and labor scarce. The large majority of citizens then considered
relevant -- white adult males -- actually owned the land they farmed.
There was no danger in allowing all of them to vote, because the large
majority owned property. The definition of relevant citizens in
time expanded to include blacks and women. But as Americans and
immigrants increasingly clustered in enormous cities, and as large
industrial factories employed thousands of low-skill workers, the
percentage of property owners fell.
One hundred years ago, most
urban Americans rented rather than owned their homes. Many had no
bank accounts and few had significant financial assets. Elites
worried that this proletariat might rise in revolution.
In this
America, the Progressives argued that the Founders' vision was obsolete.
Property rights should be subordinate to human rights. Government
should regulate economic activity and "spread the wealth around," as
Barack Obama told Joe the Plumber. This view animated the New Deal
in the 1930s and appealed to the non-property-owning majority.
Franklin Roosevelt sowed the idea, harvested by the New Deal historians,
that an ever-expanding government was both good and necessary.
Democrats were referencing this when they said they were "making
history" by passing their health care bill.
Their problem is that
the America of the Progressives and New Dealers no longer exists.
Government home finance programs helped make us a nation of homeowners.
Technological progress and deregulation squeezed out transportation and
communications and made the necessities of life less costly, enabling
citizens to accumulate significant wealth in their working years.
True, we carried some of these things too far. Efforts to raise
homeownership over 65 percent resulted in a housing price crash.
Poorly understood financial innovations resulted in the financial crisis
of 2008.
But we still live in an America like the America of the
Founders, and unlike the America of the Progressives and the New
Dealers, in which a majority of citizens are or have every prospect of
becoming property owners. And a nation of property owners is less
willing to plunder the property of others in search of some promised
gain than a nation where most people don't and will never own
significant property. So when Susan Roesgen, then of CNN,
upbraided a Tea Party protester in 2009 by reminding him that he was
getting a $400 tax rebate thanks to the Democrats' stimulus package, she
was met with utter dismissal. You don't sell out your property
rights for a mere $400.
The polls and the post-2008 election
results show that the purported beneficiaries of the Obama Democrats'
programs are unenthusiastic about voting and people with modest incomes
are trending heavily Republican. The only enthusiasm for the Obama
Democrats' policies comes from David Brooks's "educated class":
people who are or identify with the centralized experts tasked by the
Obama Democrats with making decisions for the rest of us.
Unfortunately for the Obama Democrats, they, unlike property owners, are
not a majority in today's America.
Evidence -- Obama Stole Election
Against Hillary
Evidence of voter intimidation and fraud (06:15) YouTube
link
The Election Process Is The Left's Next
Target
Jerome Corsi is
reporting that Democrats have found yet another way to circumvent
the U.S. Constitution: Bypass the Electoral College and elect a
president by popular vote without first passing an amendment to the
founding document.
The Massachusetts Senate has joined five
other states in passing a National Popular Vote bill to do just that.
It approved the legislation July 15 by a margin of 28-10.
The
National Popular Vote, which already passed the Massachusetts House, is
within one final "enactment vote" in the Massachusetts Senate before the
measure can be ready for the governor's signature, the Boston Globe
reported.
"Under the proposed law, all 12 of the state's
electoral votes would be awarded to the candidate who receives the most
votes nationally," according to the report.
Critics fear the
movement, if successful, could turn the entire nation into a potential
"Florida 2000" battleground in close elections.
The Political
Left has been working on this for some time. Just Google FairVote.
These guys are busy, busy beavers. They have been actively
attempting to corrupt the American electoral process for years.
Hell, they even run
a workshop called "New Analysis on Fixing the Primaries" -- they
boldly use the phrase, "fixing the primaries."
And if that isn't
scary, check this out. Frances Piven, of
Cloward-Piven fame,
recently
joined the Project Vote board of directors.
It was Piven’s
strategy that served as the impetus for the creation of the National
Welfare Rights Organization, led by the radical George Wiley.
Wiley had a young protégé, named Wade Rathke, who was eventually
dispatched to Arkansas to establish a beachhead in the South for the
social justice movement. He founded, of course, ACORN.
The
strategy put forward by Piven and Richard Cloward, to overwhelm the
welfare system in the late 60s and early 70s, bankrupted New York City.
It was Piven who suggested that people losing their homes to foreclosure
should simply refuse to leave. ACORN had been following this
strategy to a T with its Home Defenders program.
And now Piven is
going to have a direct influence over the policy and direction of
Project Vote.
Perhaps Piven’s strategy of overwhelming the system
will now be applied to registering people to vote. As we saw in
Indiana, Florida, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Nevada, Ohio and many other
states, Project Vote created chaos for elections workers to sift
through. With Piven now guiding this ship, her success at
overwhelming the welfare system will now be applied to voter
registration.
What could possibly go wrong?
Obama Loses Campaign-Finance Fight
Greg Hitt and Brody Mullins are reporting that
Senate Democrats failed to advance the campaign-finance legislation that
had been a top priority of Barack Obama, falling short of the 60 votes
needed to end a GOP filibuster.
Tuesday's 57-41 vote broke along
party lines. It could signal the death, at least in the current
Congress, of legislation meant to blunt the impact of a landmark Supreme
Court decision striking down major portions of campaign-finance laws
that were intended to limit the influence of special interests in
political campaigns.
Among other things, the legislation would
force companies and labor unions to disclose more information about
their donors and their spending on elections. It is opposed by
many of the largest interest groups across the political spectrum,
including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the AFL-CIO.
Republicans said the bill would impose greater limits on corporations,
discouraging them from taking steps on behalf of GOP candidates.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) called it a
"transparent effort to rig the fall election for the Democrats."
"Unions are the ultimate victors under this bill," he said.
Remember the
State of the Union? Justice Alito
shook his head
when Obama lied about the effects of the campaign finance decision.
Obama wanted this one.
Related:Obama met with about 50 of the Democratic Party’s
biggest donors on Tuesday night at an upscale Washington hotel, but
aides excluded reporters from the event.
Serious Questions Raised About Obama
Tactics in 2008 Election
Recently, Accuracy In Media interviewed Gigi
Gaston, director of the documentary film, "We Will Not Be Silenced."
The film documents voter intimidation and corruption by forces working
for then-candidate Barack Obama at Democratic precinct caucuses and
state conventions during the 2008 Presidential primary. The
filmmaker is surprising in that she is a lifelong Democrat, whose
grandfather was the mayor of Boston and later the governor of
Massachusetts, and she is a Hollywood screenwriter.
She says that
after receiving a call from a former congressional investigator, she
went to Texas to look into charges of voter irregularities in the
Democratic caucus process to choose their presidential nominee. It
was down to Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. What she found, as
described on the website for the film, was "falsified delegate counts,
falsified documents, and other violations," and she describes the
"disenfranchising of American citizens by the Democratic Party and the
Obama campaign," and said that the "infamous campaign of 'Change' from
Chicago encouraged and created an army to steal caucus packets, falsify
documents, change results, allow unregistered people to vote, scare and
intimidate Hillary supporters, stop them, threaten them, lock them out
of their polling places, silence their voices, and stop their right to
vote."
Through interviews with people with a first-hand knowledge
of what was going on, including civil rights activist Helene Latimer, a
very disturbing picture formed of what the Obama campaign was up to in
order to "win" the nomination. Attorney Gloria Allred is shown
calling for the elimination of the caucuses.
Ms. Gaston described
how the Clinton campaign attempted to bring evidence of some of these
irregularities to the attention of the media, but they were largely
ignored.
You can listen to the full interview, or read the
transcript
here . . .
Strategists Advising Democrats To Walk Away From Obama
Flopping Aces
says most of us already knew this, but look where this advice is
coming from.
The advice from Democratic consultants and
strategists is almost unanimous: Run away from Obama, and fast.
A prominent Democratic pollster is circulating a survey that shows
George W. Bush is 6 points more popular than Obama in "Frontline
districts" -- seats held by Democrats that the Democratic
Congressional Campaign Committee sees as most vulnerable to
Republican takeover. That Bush is more popular than Obama in
Democratic-held seats is cause for outright fear.
"He is a
walking radioactive disaster," one senior Democratic operative said
of Obama, but any effort to seriously distance oneself from Obama is
dangerous for an incumbent -- go too hard against Obama and the
voters will think the candidate is faking it.
What will those Democrats who fell all over
themselves lapping up the ch-ch-change message do now? Are they
going to just walk away from the one?
Can’t see it.
Reid
reports that those same Democrat strategists seem to understand this
problem since the only advice he can give them is to stop talking about
the one and talk about yourself, the local politics, and their opponent.
All well and good but Obama is a professional candidate who
doesn’t know how to lead his way out of a cereal box. So instead
of leading he is out campaigning, giving his asinine "blame everyone
else but me" speeches. They can’t help but be seen with this guy.
No, after 2008 the Democrats own Obama. The Democrats are
Obama.
Ch-ch-changes!
A Perfect Example Of All That Is
Wrong
Warner Todd Huston
says we see a perfect
example of all that is wrong in both our immigration and electoral
systems in Cookeville, Tennessee.
In 2004, an illegal immigrant
voted illegally in Tennessee’s Putnam County. He showed false
identification and a stolen Social Security card, but in 2010 the federal
government is asking Tennessee officials to help smooth this illegal’s
way to citizenship by ignoring past crimes. (video)
Putnam County administrator of elections Debbie
Steidl seems pretty annoyed by the whole situation. This illegal
immigrant even went to her and signed an affidavit admitting that he
voted illegally, but he also presented the election official with a
letter from the Department of Homeland Security demanding that she purge
his name from the 2004 voting records.
You see, unless his name
is purged he cannot seek legal citizenship because he has this illegal
act on his record.
The frustrated County official said this
illegal immigrant, "is being enabled. And that’s what bothered me
more than anything!"
Naturally the court is siding with the illegal
saying that his illegal act has exceeded the statute of limitations for
vote fraud.
But here is the thing: it doesn’t matter if the
statute of limitations for vote fraud has been exceeded or not. No one
is prosecuting him for vote fraud. The question being considered is if
he should be allowed to become a citizen. The answer is no, and the
solution is immediate deportation of this long-time criminal, not
coddling and a free pass to citizenship.
This incident shows a
complete breakdown in our electoral system, our courts, and our
immigration system as well as the Dept. of Homeland Security -- not to
mention common sense.
The Anti-Obama Tide Hasn't Peaked
Dick Morris
says don't confuse the dramatic swell of the Republican tide that is
becoming increasingly evident to the pundits of the country with party
trend. Right before Election Day, the numbers will get even better
and presage an even larger Republican victory.
Party trend
usually indicates itself in the 10 days before an election when voters
who do not typically follow politics closely tune in and decide for whom
to vote. Until this window, they usually describe themselves to
pollsters as "undecided." There will be a huge Republican party
trend this year, but it hasn't happened yet.
The huge Republican
poll numbers these days do not reflect the last-minute switches typical
of less involved voters, but rather mirror the disappointment with
Barack Obama and with Congress among voters who do follow politics
closely that has accumulated over the past year and a half. It is
this reappraisal of their political opinions that is occasioning the big
swing toward Republicans in the 2010 election.
The ranks of
these disaffected voters who are now turning against Obama and the
Democrats will soon be joined by the less-involved voters who will come
around in the week or 10 days before the election.
From the
perception of the pollster, party trend is a bit like a curveball thrown
by a pitcher to a batter. The election statistics remain fairly
static for weeks, or even months, with little change as the race unfolds
through September and early through mid October. Like a fastball
that comes in straight and true.
Then, suddenly, as the election
nears, the vote swings wildly to one side or the other, akin to a
curveball that breaks as it approaches the batter -- usually too late
for him to make an adjustment.
Suddenly, the tied races show up
as decisive victories for the side that benefits from party trend, and
the unwinnable races come into play.
2010 is a year like no other
in the magnitude of the partisan shift going on. It dwarfs 1994,
and even 1974, in its order of magnitude. But we haven't yet seen
the full impact of the last-minute party shift that will take place.
Plenty of voters who are now undecided are yet to be heard from, and
when they are, they will impact the results decisively.
In which
direction? Most likely they will transform a massive Republican
win into an even more massive victory. The uninvolved voters who
will decide late in the process are likely to break the same way the
rest of the country is breaking -- toward the Republicans.
Surveys suggest that they share the disenchantment of the participating
voters with the economy and Obama's performance. They have just
not focused on the coming election.
Democrats hope that the less
involved voters are also less educated and more likely to be the young
or minority voters on whom their party depends, but the lack of
enthusiasm among Democrats for Obama indicates that these voters are
likely to decide by staying home. In the most recent Fox
News/Opinion Dynamics study, 54 percent of Republicans said they were
"very enthusiastic" about voting in the 2010 elections, while only 28
percent of Democrats felt the same way
So the net result is that
for those who anticipate a major Republican win in 2010, you ain't seen
nothin' yet!
Democrats Face Midterm Meltdown
Edward Luce says Barack Obama’s Democratic
party faces a series of dramatic defeats at every level of government in
Washington, and beyond, in the November midterm elections, according to
leading analysts and opinion polls.
The University of Virginia’s
widely monitored Crystal Ball will on Wednesday forecast sweeping
setbacks on Capitol Hill and the loss of a clutch of state governorships
on November 2.
It follows a Gallup poll that showed the
Republicans with a 10 percentage point lead over the Democrats -- the
widest margin in 68 years. Separately, a University of Buffalo
paper has predicted a 51-seat gain for Republicans in November.
The Democrats have a 39-seat majority in the House of Representatives.
Many believe Democratic control of the Senate is also at risk.
"Voters are going to deliver a big fat message to President Obama, which
he will not want to hear," said Larry Sabato, who runs Crystal Ball.
"The Republican base is at least 50 degrees further to the right than
where it was when Newt Gingrich took control of the House in 1994, so we
would be looking at two years of absolutely nothing getting done on
Capitol Hill."
Shane D'Aprile
says that in a last-minute fundraising appeal, Democratic Senatorial
Campaign Committee Chairman Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) warned that
capturing Obama's former Senate seat would be the "ultimate political
trophy" for Republicans in 2010.
"Nothing would give them more
bragging rights than winning this seat," Menendez wrote in a fundraising
e-mail Tuesday. "Polling shows we're in a dead heat, and your gift
now will help level the playing field in this and other important
races."
Campaign committees are in the midst of a last-minute
flurry of fundraising appeals to get as much in their coffers ahead of
the monthly fundraising deadline.
Polls show Rep. Mark Kirk
(R-Ill.) and state Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias (D) locked in a tight
battle for Obama's former Senate seat. The latest Rasmussen poll
has the race tied 45-45.
Obama held a fundraiser for Giannoulias
earlier this month to help cut into the financial lead Kirk held at the
end of the second quarter. The Republican raised $2.3 million
during the second quarter to the $900,000 raised by Giannoulias.
Only in Obama's Chicago can a
mob banker and out-and-out crook, like Giannoulias, even run for the
United States Senate, much less be tied in the polls.
You’re a Bigot, Now Vote for Me
Derek Hunter asks, are you opposed to ObamaCare
or illegal immigration? You’re a racist. Are you opposed to
gay marriage? You’re a homophobe. Did you oppose Elana
Kagan’s appointment to the Supreme Court? You’re a sexist.
After less than two years of complete Democrat control of government,
there aren’t many Americas progressives haven’t accused of some sort of
bigotry for simply having an opinion different from theirs. The
politics of "hope" and "change" have devolved into exactly what those
espousing them claimed they would end. Is this really Democrat’s
plan to win votes in November?
Barack Obama campaigned under the
banner of unity and ending the "politics of division." But that
banner was swiftly furled and the true banner of progressive politics
began flying over our country. Progressivism leaves no room for
debate or disagreement. To paraphrase former President Bush, to
progressives you’re either with them or you’re with the enemy.
During the ObamaCare debate, opponents were compared to opponents of
civil rights legislation. The ethically challenged Congressman
from New York, Charlie Rangel, said "The group that were in Washington
fighting against the health bill and fighting against the President,
[they] looked just like and sounded just like those groups that attacked
the civil rights movement in the South." Left-wing blogs ran with
this mantra and agenda-driven media outlets like MSNBC dutifully
followed. They still advance the lie that African-American Members
of Congress were pelted with racial slurs as they walked to cast their
vote, something even the New York Times has acknowledged there is zero
evidence of.
The ends justify the means, no matter how sickening
and divisive the means.
When a homosexual judge in California
overturned Proposition 8, a ballot measure that defined marriage as
being between one man and one woman which was passed by voters, these
self-appointed champions of democracy cheered its undermining.
Whatever your opinion on the issue, it was a rather ironic turn for
people who use the word "democracy" as though they respect it.
When Elena Kagan was nominated to the Supreme Court without much of a
record, opposition to this life-time appointment was called sexist all
across the left-wing echo chamber. Blogs were replete with this
unfounded charge, with headlines like "Not-So-Subtle Sexism at the Kagan
Hearings" from the blog at Ms. Magazine.
The bigotry arrow has
become the default weapon in the progressive’s quiver, only it’s lost
its sting.
Michael O'Brien
says Senator Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) decried what he said was a
"systematic, conscious" effort by groups to "destroy" Obama.
Feingold, who's facing a tough reelection effort this fall, blamed
coordinated opposition to Obama and the Democratic agenda in Congress
for some of the political and electoral woes facing his party this fall.
"A conscious decision was made by certain groups to destroy this
presidency the minute it started," Feingold said in a
question-and-answer session with The New York Times published Tuesday
evening.
"People say it was the healthcare bill -- no, it
wasn’t. I go to every county every year and hold a town meeting,"
he added. "Within days of the president being sworn in, I had people
showing up at my town meeting with hats on, with tea bags coming out,
saying this is going to be socialism."
snip...
"I
started coming back and telling my staff and my friends -– way back in
spring of '09 -– that something is going on out there that is pretty
deadly and pretty harsh even before we had any idea what the healthcare
bill was going to be," he said. "There appears to be a systematic,
conscious attempt to dismantle this president, so I’m less surprised
than other people."
Boo,
freakin-hoo! If we don't destroy Obama, he'll destroy America.
He gives us little choice.
Man Campaigns Against Obama From The Grave
Jon Bershad
says, no. That headline isn’t a snide joke about voters’ ages
(you know what they say, when you’re young and poor you’re a Democrat
and when you’re rich and a dead person…), the deceased are actually
coming after Democrats; rising from their graves and advancing on
Washington while growling "SMALL GOVERNMENT! SMALL
GOOOOOVERNMENT!" through their rigor mortis-afflicted mouths. Ok,
not exactly, but their obituaries are sure leaning right. A few
months ago, a Nevada woman’s obituary called out Harry Reid, and now, a
recently departed man from Georgia is borrowing the tactic to attack
President Obama from beyond the grave.
The National Review
Online’s Jonah Goldberg scanned in this treat from the obituary of the
late Donald Charles Unsworth:
"The family respectfully asked in lieu of
flowers that memorial contributions be made to the American Cancer
Society, or to the campaign of whoever is running against President
Barack Obama in 2012."
When the Reid story hit last July, many people
complained about the family using the memory of their loved one for
political purposes. I’m not sure I agree with that. For all
we know, these people actually used their last available strength to ask
their family members to help turn their entire life into a quirky,
quickly dated cable news anecdote. Still though, if this was the
family’s doing in this case, it’s even more disturbing. It’s one
thing to exploit a loved one for politics. It’s quite another to
exploit a loved one for politics, and do so in a wholly unoriginal
fashion.
Obama's Desperate Assault On The TEA Party
Nile Gardiner
says The New York Times has a major piece this morning outlining the
White House’s response to last week’s dramatic surge in Republican
primaries by TEA Party candidates. After months of mocking and
sneering at the TEA Party movement and largely ignoring its rising
success, Obama’s advisers are now contemplating a major campaign against
it. According to The Times:
Obama’s political advisers, looking for ways
to help Democrats and alter the course of the midterm elections in
the final weeks, are considering a national advertising campaign
that would cast the Republican Party as all but taken over by TEA
Party extremists, people involved in the discussion said.
That is among a range of options and plans under consideration at
the White House for energizing dispirited Democratic voters over the
coming six weeks, in hopes of limiting the party’s losses and
keeping control of the House and Senate.
…. "We need to get
out the message that it’s now really dangerous to re-empower the
Republican Party because the people who have taken over the party
are radical," said one Democratic strategist who has spoken with
White House advisers but requested anonymity to discuss private
strategy talks.
This is the clearest sign yet that the Obama White
House fears the tremendous energy the TEA Party movement has brought to
this November’s Congressional race. What the Obama administration
once dismissed as an inconsequential, rag tag organization has evolved
into a full scale political revolution that threatens to storm Capitol
Hill six weeks from now. But if it thinks it can quell the
rebellion by painting the TEA Party as a bunch of "extremists" it is
sadly mistaken.
Poll after poll shows that the TEA Party’s anger
over the rise of Big Government, the mounting budget deficit, excessive
government spending, and spiraling entitlement programs are now shared
by a clear majority of the American people. If the Obama team
believes it will make political capital out of slandering the views of
the TEA Party it is hugely misreading the general mood of the country.
The grassroots organization’s stunning success is symbolic of a
deep-seated rejection across the United States of Barack Obama, who is
making America poorer, weaker, more indebted and significantly less
free.
The White House’s planned assault is yet another example of
an elitist presidency that is spectacularly out of touch with the
American electorate, and increasingly digging its own political grave.
Unfortunately for Obama, it is his own policies, rather than the ideals
of the TEA Party, which the American public increasingly view as
extreme.
This is too rich!
The real radicals want to paint Mom and Pop America and the Kids as
"radicals." These people can not even conceive of the notion of
free and open elections. Everything is dirty tricks. The end
justifies the means. It's who they are. It's in their DNA.
And it's why they have to go.
Obama Can’t Even Fill A 650 Seat Room
Warner Todd Huston
says that over at the left-wing Daily Beast, Gail Sheehy has a story
that should make every Obot tremble in fear of November 2. As
Sheehy reports it, in New York Barack Obama couldn’t even fill a room
that holds 650, even though they slashed the ticket prices from $500 to
$100 a person to get in, and there are
reports of some paying $50.
On the 22nd Obama appeared in New York
for a fundraiser but gay rights organizers found that attendees were
harder to come by than ever. As Sheehy points out, this is six
weeks before the elections. Less than two months and Democrats
can’t garner enough enthusiasm to sell 650 tickets to see Obama up close
and personal.
Initially tickets were priced at $500 a person but
as the event neared, panic set in and emails began to gush from the
organizers offering bargain basement, slashed ticket prices in order to
fill the room. Sheehy paid just $100 to stand in the same small
room with The One and she only anted up after half a dozen emails
pleading that she come.
Then there were the protesters. I
guess the lowball ticket prices didn’t serve to keep the riff raff out
as Obama faced
sudden chants taking him to task for the military’s don’t ask, don’t
tell policy.
Sheehy makes one last interesting point about those
"Filene’s Basement" prices. Later that night, she says, supporters
paid $15,000 a person to have dinner with the Obammessiah. But
even that is a cut-rate price from the recent past. "Think that’s
a lot?," Sheehy asks. "It’s a 50 percent markdown from a recent
invitation to dinner with Obama at the home of Linda Douglass and John
Phillips, costing $30,000."
The bloom is off the rose and thorns
are all that’s left for Obama.
Big Daddy B.O. Tries To Excite Young
Obamunists At Hip-Hop Concert & Rally
The AP
is reporting that Barack Obama addressed supporters at a hip hop
concert and rally Thursday night, seeking to re-energize the youth vote
that helped propel him to the White House,
The Democratic National Committee enlisted hip hop
artist B.o.B to perform for a sold-out crowd of 3,000 at DAR
Constitution Hall. The crowd also was hearing from Obama’s 2008
campaign manager, David Plouffe, and DNC Chairman Tim Kaine on the
importance of the youth vote to the November elections, which are
expected to be tough on Democrats.
The event was organized for
the DNC’s gen44 group, which
tries to cultivate [indoctrinate]
young leaders. It was expected to raise $750,000.
Beforehand, Obama spoke at a small fundraising dinner at the home of
John Phillips and Linda Douglass, where guests paid $30,400 each to
raise $1 million for the Democratic Party.
"We’re going through a
very tough time. … So people are feeling it," Obama said, reflecting on
what he heard from the public this week during a trip to four states.
He said people are anxious and, "This election cycle’s going to be
tough because of that reality."
His message to those people:
"That hope you were feeling when I came in, there’s no reason to lose
it."
The kids come for the
music, just like they did at the
University of Wisconsin -- and the media pretends they're coming to
hear Obama's tired, old sloganeering.
Obama is
going to need to put a band at every polling place in the country to get
these kids to come out to vote.
Delusional Liberal Elites Are In Denial
Nile Gardiner says
in early Septemberhe wrote a piece
discussing how The
Washington Post, widely viewed as a
flagship of the liberal establishment, was now acknowledging the scale
of the collapse facing the Left in this November’s mid-terms. As The Post
put it,
"Democrats in Congress are no longer asking
themselves whether this is going to be a bad election year for them
and their party. They are asking whether it is going to be a
disaster."
Three weeks later, there is no evidence to
suggest the political landscape is getting any better for Obama and his party. If anything, it’s getting even worse according to
some polls, as a recent
CNN survey showed. According to the CNN/Opinion Research Corporation
survey, a striking 56 percent of
Americans now believe Obama has fallen short of their
expectations.
The latest RealClear Politics
poll of polls has Obama at just 45 percent approval,
and the Republicans currently with a 17 seat advantage in the House of Representatives race, with a
further 38 seats in contention. The Senate race remains extremely tight,
with RealClear Politics
giving the Democrats a projected slim 51 to 49 seat lead,
which would mean an eight seat gain by the GOP. At the Governor level,
RCP
has the Republicans with a nearly two to one advantage in terms of the
race for State Houses.
Over at The New York Times
however, the message doesn’t seem to have sunk in. The Times,
generally regarded as the most powerful and elite liberal media entity
in America, has a major piece this evening with the headline: "In Fluid Race, House Majority is Uncertain, GOP
Says." The article goes to extraordinary
lengths to talk about a Democratic fight back in November, yet without
citing any independent polling evidence to back it up. As The Times
puts it:
Republicans carry substantial advantages as they
move into the final month of the fall campaign, but the resilience of
vulnerable Democrats is complicating Republican efforts to lock down
enough seats to capture the House and take control of the unsettled
electoral battleground.
By now, Republicans had hoped to put away
a first layer of Democrats and set their sights on a second tier of
incumbents. But the fight for control of Congress is more fluid
than it seemed at Labor Day, with Democrats mounting strong resistance
in some parts of the country as they try to hold off a potential
Republican wave in November.
While acknowledging "the chances of a Republican takeover in the House
remain far greater than in the Senate",The Times
bullishly declares that
"enough contests remain in flux that both parties head into the final
four weeks of the campaign with the ability to change the dynamic before
Election Day."
I haven’t come across a single major poll which
supports this conclusion, and as for the GOP "declaring a house majority
is uncertain" the piece merely cites unnamed "Republican strategists" as
its source. And this view is completely contradicted in the same article
by Senator John Cornyn of Texas, chairman of the Republican Senatorial
Committee who, according to The Times, "said
Democrats were delusional if they believed an upswing was under way."
The Washington Post,
to its credit, has offered a realistic assessment of the scale of the
political revolution that is likely to sweep Washington this November.
The New York Times,
on the other hand, remains in a state of denial, and still seems to be
living in November 2008. My guess is that on November 2nd 2010, The Times
and the diehard liberal elites that continue to cling to
it’s archaic left-wing vision will be given a wake-up call that will
reverberate across the United States.
Although he won’t be on the ballot, the
mid-terms will largely be a referendum on Barack Obama’s leadership. And
by all accounts, The New
York Times aside, Obama is
almost certainly heading towards a massive humiliation at the polls, no
matter how hard his supporters try to put a positive spin on it.
Ah, but The New York Times also recognizes the
powerful ability of the Democrat Party and its leftist allies to raise
the dead, and rally the foreign on election day. Just
look at what ACORN was able
to accomplish in 2008.
Obama Makes Supporters Ill
WTOP.co
is reporting that three dozen people
were treated for illness during an Obama at Bowie State University.
Prince George's County Fire and EMS spokesman Mark Brady tells WTOP
numerous ambulances were sent to the rally after people started fainting
and became dizzy.
The problems could be related to warmer
temperatures Thursday. Brady says crowds at the rally were outside and
packed shoulder to shoulder.
Two people were taken to the
hospital, Brady says. The rest have been treated at the scene.
Officials set up a triage area inside the gymnasium at Bowie State.
Obama was scheduled to appear in an effort to rally Maryland
Democrats for incumbent Gov. Martin O'Malley prior to November's
elections.
Obama still spoke despite the health issues
in the audience. He implored voters to be ready to fight in the upcoming
elections.
Pot Calls Kettle . . .
Michael Barone
says Glenn Reynolds nails this one: the Obama Democrats’ campaign
riff against foreign donations to Democrats is bogus -- and according to
the New York Times, no less. This looks like a matter of
projection, since it’s well documented that the 2008 Obama campaign did
not put in place address verification software that would have routinely
prevented most foreign donations. In effect they were encouraging
donations by foreign nationals.
Here’s the Washington Post on this back in October 2008: Sen. Barack
Obama’s presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely
untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade
limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a
contributor’s identity, campaign officials confirmed. Faced with a
huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign has also chosen
not to use basic security measures to prevent potentially illegal or
anonymous contributions from flowing into its accounts, aides
acknowledged."
And
here’s our own Washington Examiner editorial from the time: "Then
there’s the question of whether foreign nationals are contributing to
the Obama campaign. There is more than enough evidence to warrant
a full-scale investigation by the Federal Election Commission, including
the $32,332.19 that appears to have come from two brothers living in a
Hamas-controlled Palestinian refugee camp in Rafah, GA (that’s Gaza, not
Georgia). The Palestinian's $31,318 cash was part of a
flood of illegal foreign contributions (click
for larger image) accepted by the Obama campaign."
The Obama campaign was happy to encourage mass illegal donations from
foreign nationals. Now it’s making baseless charges that its
opposition is doing the same thing. Hope and change!
Where Is Obama Going?
Jennifer Rubin
says Obama is now politically toxic in many states. So where
is he going on the campaign trail? The White House schedule is
telling. He’s going to Delaware, where the Democrat is already
running away with the race. He’s going to Massachusetts, the
bluest state until the voters disregarded his advice and elected Scott
Brown. He’s going to California and Nevada, but for fundraisers,
not big public events. He’s going to Rhode Island (Rhode Island?),
where one supposes he can do no harm.
The number of competitive
races in which he is holding public events is limited to Washington
(Patty Murray), Minnesota (gubernatorial candidate Mark Dayton), and
Ohio (Gov. Ted Strickland). That’s it. And he better be
careful in both Washington (where a large plurality think his economic
policies have hurt more than they’ve helped) and Ohio (where his
approval rating has plummeted). Oh, and he’s going to Oregon for
the Democratic gubernatorial candidate, who had this to say:
Oregon’s Democratic candidate for governor
said Tuesday that President Obama’s health care reform bill will be
a "toxic" issue in 2012 unless states are given the opportunity to
address the problem of rising medical costs. …
"I supported
the passage of the bill but I think we need to recognize that this
was really health insurance reform and not health care reform," he
said in an interview over coffee at a Portland diner. "What
it’s done is provided most people in the country financial access to
medical care by 2014. The problem is it didn’t deal with the
underlying cost drivers, and those are embedded in the delivery
system."
Should be a fun campaign trip.
It’s tricky
finding places where Obama won’t do damage to the candidates he’s
supposed to be helping. The White House seems to think
gubernatorial races are "safer" for Obama than the Senate contests,
where all those unpopular votes on the stimulus, ObamaCare, etc., are
sure to come up. But the reality of a 24/7 news environment is
that wherever Obama goes, he makes the news -- and Republican Senate and
House candidates have the benefit of free media to remind voters across
the country whose agenda they are opposed to and who has been making all
those silly promises (e.g., ObamaCare will save money).
Unfortunately for the Dems, you really can’t hide the president of the
United States.
Billboard Targets Obama And Democrats
A "racist" billboard attacking
Democrats and
President Obama is getting
burned from both sides of the political aisle.
The
massive sign, erected along the I-70 Business Loop
in Grand Junction, Colo., depicts four caricatures
of Obama, one as a suicide bomber, another as a gangster, the third as a
Mexican revolutionary and the fourth as a homosexual.
The four cartoonish men are playing poker, surrounded
by rats with words written on them such as Trial Lawyer and
IRS, and two vultures bearing
tags that say Soros and
U.N.
Across the top is written "Vote DemocRAT, Join the
game."
"It's beyond disrespectful,"
Mesa County Democratic Party
Chairwoman Martelle Daniels said,
according to the Grand Junction Sentinel.
"You would like to think that we all would show respect for our
commander-in-chief, but this is just beyond that. It's racist,
it's homophobic, and it's really cowardly."
Her
GOP counterpart, Mesa County
Republican Party Chairman Chuck Pabst, also called it offensive.
"That kind of political positioning and statements, I
think, are in bad taste," he said, the Sentinel reports. "To
ridicule somebody in this manner is juvenile."
It is unclear who is behind the billboard. The
artist,
Paul Snover, refused in an
e-mailed statement to say who paid for its creation.
"I am not allowed to say who (paid for it) at this
time," he said.
Dennis Lucas, the Grand
Junction businessman who owns the billboard, took a similar stance.
"I cannot tell you who it's rented to," he told AFP.
This isn't the first time a billboard attacking
President Obama and the Democratic party has drawn fire.
Here's a
whole page full of them . . .
Controversial Obama Billboard Pulled Amid
Death Threats
Kelly Asmuth,
reporting from Grand Junction, CO, says the emotion–stirring
Obama billboard on I–70B stood
over the highway for its last day Friday. The sign was taken down
after causing national outrage since it was put up Monday.
Those
who know the owner of the billboard say he and his wife were receiving
violent threats. Meanwhile, the person who commissioned the artist and
the use of the billboard is still anonymous. Those who know the owner
say their friend decided to take the heated Obama cartoon down
after a flood of harassing calls.
"He got a lot of calls out of
his place of business that he said he was fine with. When things got out
of hand and people started calling his wife, that's when he decided to
go ahead and take it down," says Blake Brueggeman, owner of Integrity
Auto Repair. Brueggeman leases property from the billboard owner.
The sign's artist says it's meant to convey a message. It showed
Obama as a terrorist, gangster, Mexican bandito and a
homosexual. "It's got a lot of symbolism in it, in that all of those
characters are issues being mishandled by presidency," says creator of
the sign, artist Paul Snover.
Some consider the work political
satire. "Lighten up people. Have a sense of humor," says Brueggeman.
"We had cartoons of George W. Bush with gorillas," says Jamie Lee
Smith, who is angered that the sign was taken down.
Others are
enraged at what they say is hate and disrespect. "Where do you draw the
line? It just causes hatred and racism if you ask me," says Cory
Caldwell, who is offended by the billboard.
Regardless of the
emotions conjured by the cartoon, the anger has now shifted to First
Amendment rights. "It is sad that people have to go so low as to
threaten somebody's life because they don't like a sign," says Dennis
Patton, who stopped by the sign to see that it had actually been taken
down.
"Political correctness is a suppression of free speech,"
says Brueggeman.
Some argue that the image was not appropriate
for public display. "If it offends people, you do have a certain
obligation to take it down because little kids see that," says Crystal Kitzman, who says she thought the sign was lewd.
"The billboard
is an expression or statement. I don't think it's intended to be
hateful. It's intended to get across a message," says Snover.
GJ
Result, the Tea Party in Grand Junction, has been accused of
commissioning the sign. The group denies this, but says they do support
the right for it to be there. GJ Result is holding a rally Saturday
afternoon at the old Mesa County Court House over the sign situation. A
leader of the group tells 11 News that he is outraged that someone's
First Amendment rights have been trampled on.
Another demonstration of
progressive intolerance, and rage -- they have no respect for the 1st
Amendment rights of anyone they disagree with -- they will kill you --
it's no different than the Muslim fanatic that will cut your head off
for drawing a picture of Muhammad -- don't draw graven images of Obama
-- they will kill you.
Everyone Is At Fault Except Obama
Carol Lee,
reporting
from West Newton, MA, quoted Barack Obama as saying that Americans'
"fear and frustration" is to blame for an intense midterm election cycle
that threatens to derail the Democratic agenda.
"Part of the
reason that our politics seems so tough right now and facts and science
and argument does not seem to be winning the day all the time is because
we're hardwired not to always think clearly when we're scared," Obama
said Saturday evening in remarks at a small Democratic fundraiser
Saturday evening. "And the country's scared."
Obama told the
several dozen donors that he was offering them his "view from the Oval
Office." He faulted the economic downturn for Americans’ inability
to "think clearly" and said the burden is on Democrats "to break through
the fear and the frustration people are feeling."
"You can
respond in a couple of ways to a trauma like this," Obama said,
referring to the economy. "One is to pull back, retrench and
respond to your fears by pushing away challenges, looking backwards.
Another is to say we can meet these challenges and we are going to move
forward. And that’s what this election is about."
Obama blames Americans' fear and
frustration for the state of things. His push to install socialism
has nothing to do with it.
If Dems Lose, Obama Will Blame Everyone But
Himself
Byron York
says to assume the polls are correct and Republicans win control of
the House, and perhaps even the Senate, in next month's elections.
What lessons will the White House learn? Will Barack Obama
interpret the vote as a repudiation of much of his agenda, or will he
conclude that he made a few tactical errors but was still right on the
big issues?
Bet on the latter. All indications coming out
of the White House suggest that if Democrats suffer major losses, Obama
and his top aides will resolutely refuse to reconsider the policies --
national health care, stimulus, runaway spending -- that led to their
defeat. Instead, they will point fingers in virtually every
direction other than their own. Come November, it's likely the
D-for-Democrat that Obama refers to so often will actually stand for
"denial."
The White House has given us plenty of clues in recent
days as to how Obama will react to a possible Democratic drubbing at the
polls. Here are five:
1. Obama will blame voters, not
himself. At a small fundraiser in Massachusetts Saturday, Obama
suggested Democrats are in trouble because recession-weary Americans
simply aren't thinking clearly. "Part of the reason that our
politics seems so tough right now, and facts and science and argument do
not seem to be winning the day all the time, is because we're hard-wired
not to always think clearly when we're scared," Obama said. "And
the country is scared." If Democrats lose, Obama is likely to
fault voters' irrationality, and not anything he has done.
2.
Obama will spin the outcome as an illegitimate GOP victory. In
recent weeks, Obama and top administration officials have accused the
Chamber of Commerce of illegally using foreign contributions to fund ads
critical of Democrats. There's no evidence to support the charge,
but Obama has laid the foundation for a simple explanation of Democratic
defeat: Republicans cheated.
3. Obama will blame a broken
process. In a recent New York Times article, reporter Peter Baker
asked a number of White House aides about mistakes Obama has made in
office. "The biggest miscalculation in the minds of most Obama
advisers," Baker writes, "was the assumption that he could bridge a
polarized capital and forge genuinely bipartisan coalitions." By
that standard, a post-defeat Obama will be guilty more of overestimating
Republicans and the culture of Washington than of making mistakes on his
own.
4. Obama will reaffirm, not reconsider, his
achievements. Obama says he has already kept about 70 percent of
the promises he made in the 2008 campaign. Now, his main task will
be to shield those accomplishments from GOP challenge. Aides
constantly tell reporters that Republicans intend to roll back ObamaCare
and Wall Street reform, and Obama plans to spend as much time as it
takes fighting those efforts. "There's going to be a lot of work
in [the next two years] just doing things right and making sure that new
laws are stood up in the ways they're intended," Obama told Baker.
5. Obama will resist real change inside the White House.
He has lost several top aides in recent months: Rahm Emanuel, James
Jones, Lawrence Summers, Christina Romer, Peter Orszag and others.
So far, Obama has preferred to replace departing insiders with other
insiders. His reluctance to bring in a high-level adviser from
outside his circle suggests he wants to keep doing what he's doing.
Tie all those threads together, and in the wake of a Republican
victory in November you can virtually guarantee the White House will not
concede that Obama hurt himself by pushing an unpopular national health
care program through Congress; by pushing nearly a trillion dollars in
stimulus spending that failed to reduce unemployment as predicted; by
pushing a costly cap-and-trade agenda; or by advocating any number of
other initiatives that flew in the face of voter sentiments.
In a
recent campaign ad, Colorado Republican Senate candidate Ken Buck says
the public tried to tell White House and Democratic leaders not to go
ahead with those unwelcome measures. "They heard us, and yet they
ignored us," Buck says, adding: "And folks, on Nov. 2 they will ignore
us no more."
Republicans no doubt hope Buck is right. But
so far Obama is sending signals that even if he loses big in November,
he'll make excuses, point fingers, and try to keep going just as before.
I'm With The Band
Obama would be talkin' to himself, Axelrod and
Plouffe, if it were not for the band. There's a featured music act
at every Obama event. 12,000 came out in Philly -- 11,650 came to
hear the hip-hop band, "The Roots" -- the rest came to hear Obama.
Now, the Daily Caller
is reporting that Grammy nominee
Sara Bareilles, singer of the pop
hit "Love Song," will open for Barack Obama at a Las Vegas rally
designed to rouse Democratic voters before the midterm elections.
Bareilles performs Friday at a Las Vegas middle school, where Obama
will host his latest "Moving America Forward" rally.
Nevada is
prime battleground for Democrats, who face losing Senate Majority Leader
Harry Reid if Republican Sharron Angle’s TEA Party bid is successful.
Republicans have painted Reid as the face of Obama’s sweeping social and
economic policies, including the federal health care law and the $787
billion stimulus.
Bareilles is a White House favorite. She
performed before world leaders at the G-20 summit in 2009 and during the
First Family’s 2010 Easter Egg Roll.
NewsMax.com
is reporting that Barack Obama is taking his campaign message to
"The Daily Show" with Jon Stewart.
White House spokesman Dan
Pfeiffer says Obama is taping an appearance on Oct. 27, just days before
the Nov. 2 elections. Stewart is coming to Washington next week
for the "Rally to Restore Sanity" he is holding three days later on
Saturday, Oct. 30, on the National Mall.
The host of the Comedy
Central show says the rally is for people who think the loudest voices
shouldn't be the only ones people hear.
Obama recently endorsed
Stewart's event. It will be Obama's first appearance on Stewart's
program.
Obama's Bribe-A-Thon
Ed Lasky
says Barack Obama is facing plummeting popularity and many Democrats
are going to be washed away by the coming red tide. What to do
when Obama demagoguery and stoking divisiveness and paranoia is no
longer working? When insults to the Tea Party and baseless smears
against critics being funded by foreigners just don't work anymore?
Well there are always bribes -- and those are coming fast and
furious.
Obama has been busy giving away goodies to special
interest groups to get them to come out and vote for Democrats.
This is money from our pockets and the piggy banks of our children, as
well as money borrowed from the very foreigners he has been using as
straw men. Christmas has come early for people who need a little
pocket money to nudge them to pull the lever for Democrats. We
have seen the crudest and most disgraceful types of payoffs in the last
week as November 2nd approaches.
We have bribes to ethanol
beneficiaries up and down the ethanol chain, tax breaks for college
students and their families, bribes to seniors with money America does
not have and money seniors are not entitled to by Social Security
funding formulas (even eliciting a negative Washington Post editorial),
and bribes to unions who get a special waiver from onerous ObamaCare
rules so at least they get to keep their current healthcare plans --
even if the rest of us do not.
Now the Cook County style of
"governing" that has left Chicago a fiscal mess has come full bore to
Washington. The latest attempt to gin up the base to come out for
Democrats? Obama has again brought out executive orders to rule by
fiat, as is his and fellow demagogues wont. After all the rest of
us are just too reptilian and dumb to say Thank You to him so he will
have to go out and buy some more votes with our money. The latest
group to get the gift? Hispanics.
Politico reports:
President Obama will focus on Hispanics as
he signs an executive order aimed at meeting his goals. The ceremony
for the Executive Order on the White House Initiative on Educational
Excellence for Hispanics "follows a National Education Summit and
Call to Action hosted by the U.S. Department of Education that began
on Monday, bringing Administration officials together with experts
in education and Hispanic community leaders from around the country
on issues ranging from early childhood learning to higher
education," the White House said in guidance to reporters. "The
revised executive order will place a high priority on action
designed to reach the ambitious education goals President Obama has
set for our nation...
Well...at least sometimes Barack Obama is
transparent. But he is always disgraceful.
Related:Crazed Democrats in Ploy to Buy Senior Votes
Obama Brands Republicans As Extreme
Radicals
(AFP)
– On Friday, Barack Obama branded Republicans as extreme and
reactionary, in campaign appearances for high-profile Democratic
senators under threat in November's mid-term polls.
Obama rallied
crowds in Los Angeles, California, and was to move on to gambling
paradise Nevada in a bid to rescue wobbling Democratic Senate majority
leader Harry Reid, on the third day of a four-day campaign blitz.
He charged that the first Republican president, his political hero
Abraham Lincoln would not be able to win the opposition party's
presidential nomination in the modern age.
"Seriously, can you
imagine him trying to run with these folks?" Obama said, in a bid
to portray the Republican Party as outside the mainstream ahead of
November 2 congressional polls in which his Democrats fear heavy losses.
Obama accused Republicans of sitting on their hands while he saved
the economy from a second Great Depression and of wanting to go back to
the same lax regulatory regimes that caused the crisis in the first
place.
"This agenda that poses as conservatism is not
conservative. It resulted in a radical shift from record surpluses
to record deficits, allowed Wall Street to run wild, nearly destroyed
our economy," Obama said.
"This is a choice between the past and
the future, between fear and hope, between moving backwards and moving
forwards. And I don't know about you, but I want to move forward," Obama
said, at a campaign event for under-fire Democratic Senator Barbara
Boxer.
"They are clinging to the same worn-out, tired, snake-oil
ideas that they were peddling before."
Republicans need to win 39
seats to take back the House after four years of Democratic control -- a
task well within their reach with some analysts judging up to 90 races
in the 435-seat chamber as competitive.
In the Senate,
Republicans need a 10-seat swing, a result that may be beyond them after
several races tightened in favor of Democrats in recent days, and a
scenario of six or seven seats changing hands seems more likely.
Obama was later to head to Nevada to take part in a Democratic National
Committee rally alongside Reid, who is the top Republican target in the
election, and is locked in a close race with "Tea Party" conservative
favorite Sharron Angle.
He was due to finish up a campaign swing,
which has also taken in Oregon and Washington state, in Minnesota on
Saturday.
Related:Angle: "The only word for
Obama, Reid… delusional"
More delusions:Valerie Jarrett says,
"We completely understand this voter anger."
Second largest
dhimmicratic city in the country, on the USC campus (30,000 students)
and all Obama can get to show up is 35,000 -- and 32,000 of those came
for the band.
Obama is clearly delusional if he believes he saved the economy from a
second Great Depression created by those evil Republicans.
Granted, they didn't help, but his entire speech demonstrates he is
delusional -- or he is consciously lying his ass off -- neither is
appropriate for an alleged leader.
Obama Post-Racial? You Decide
Weasel Zippers
says this is leftist demagoguery at its finest.
In a radio
interview that aired on Univision on Monday, Obama sought to assure
Hispanics that he would push an immigration overhaul after the midterm
elections, despite fierce Republican opposition.
"If Latinos sit out the election instead of
saying, 'We’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our
friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us,' if
they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then
I think it’s gonna be harder and that’s why I think it’s so
important that people focus on voting on November 2."
Referring specifically to Republicans such as
Senator John McCain, who are stressing border security and supporting
strict immigration laws like Arizona’s anti-illegal immigration measure,
Obama said, "Those aren’t the kinds of folks who represent our core
American values."
Related:Obama Tells Latinos That
Officials Who Support Border Security "Aren’t the Kinds of Folks Who
Represent Our Core American Values"
Related:Obama the Uniter -- Republicans
"Gotta Sit in Back"
This guy
is all about dividing and conquering. He's vile.
Democrat Election Fraud Openly Running
Rampant
Sher Zieve
says
Arizona and Colorado are reporting massive voter fraud perpetrated by
the Marxist groups Mi Familia Vota and One Vote Arizona. Arizona
State Senator Russell Pearce writes: "I also understand that these 2
groups have signed up 20,000 states wide and they have requested that
45,000 be put on the permanent early ballot. If 65% of these last
minute registration forms in Yuma are invalid, which may be more as they
are still checking the rest, then what is the percentages of invalid in
Maricopa, Pima and other counties?"
Aided by Socialist Democrat
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) and a George Soros funded group, poll
watchers are being threatened with, amongst other things, Obama's DOJ:
"Houston Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, who was seen inside the polling
location electioneering and threatening to turn a poll-watcher's name to
the Department of Justice for voter intimidation." Note: It
appears that Michele Obama is not the only Marxist Democrat who is now
allowed to illegally electioneer.
Kelly Shackelford of Liberty
Institute says "All these attacks are clearly an attempt to bully and
silence a group of volunteer citizens who are just trying to keep the
election process honest."
Voting machines in Nevada are being
reported for automatically checking Harry Reid's name. The
Washington Examiner reports: "Voter Joyce Ferrara said when they went to
vote for Republican Sharron Angle, her Democratic opponent, Sen. Harry
Reid's name was already checked. Ferrara said she wasn't alone in
her voting experience. She said her husband and several others
voting at the same time all had the same thing happen.
"Something's not right," Ferrara said. "One person, that's a
fluke. Two, that's strange. But several within a five minute
period of time -- that's wrong"." Note: Oh and by the way, guess
who is the official technical organization for the voting machines?
Why, it's Obama's bought and paid for SEIU. I was very serious
when I wrote my column "Obama & Co Election Fraud may be Worst in US
History." With even members of the now Marxist-run Congress
illegally and openly intimidating voters, this is worse than it has ever
been. Myriad other reports of early voting fraud are coming in
from across the country.
Again folks -- and I cannot stress this
enough -- We-the-People MUST vote in unprecedented numbers in order to
counter the all-out attack now being waged against us by
Dictator-in-Chief Obama's government. Our would-be slave masters
are proving the point -- beyond any and all doubt or question -- that
they WILL do anything and stop at nothing to stay in power in order to
bleed every last drop of resources, blood, freedoms and liberty from us.
It's now or never.
"If once the People become inattentive to
the public affairs, you and I, and Congress and Assemblies, Judges
and Governors, shall all become wolves. It seems to be the law
of our general nature, in spite of individual exceptions" --
Thomas Jefferson
I've started a
page containing instances of the Democrat's voter shenanigans.
I'll be updating it over the next week.
Obama Warns Of Progress Reversed
The Obama-friendly AP reports Barack Obama
implored voters on Saturday to resist a Republican tide, warning that if
the GOP prevails in Tuesday's midterm elections all the progress of his
first two years in office "can be rolled back."
That would be
just fine, said Rep. John Boehner, in line to become the new speaker if
Republicans take the House, as expected. He declared, "Americans
are demanding a new way forward in Washington."
Embarking on a
four-state weekend campaign dash, Obama acknowledged the difficulties
Democrats face -- the distinct chance of losing their comfortable
majority in the House and possibly the Senate, as well as several
governors' seats.
All four weekend stops are in states Obama
carried in 2008 -- Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Illinois and Ohio.
But Democratic candidates for the Senate, House and governorships are
struggling in these places and elsewhere, and Obama is making a
last-ditch plea for the party's core supporters not to abandon them.
"It is difficult here in Pennsylvania, it is difficult all across
the country," Obama told several hundred campaign volunteers at Temple
University in Philadelphia, a Democratic-leaning city he has visited
often.
The weekend tour marks the president's last campaign swing
of the campaign season, with Republicans expecting big victories on
Tuesday. Obama's sagging popularity has limited his ability to
save Democratic candidates, and his legislative agenda may be deeply
complicated if the GOP takes over the House, as many expect.
Unless Democratic voters turn out in big numbers, Obama said in a
seven-minute talk, all the progress made in the past two years "can be
rolled back."
"...all the
progress made in the past two years can be rolled back." -- Now that's
an encouraging assessment.
Obama and Pelosi's Agenda Down In Flames
Hugh Hewitt
says it takes a powerful collective repugnance to propel a national
political rebuke.
Obama and Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., have
accomplished an extraordinary thing. Tomorrow they will enter the
history books as the most spectacularly failed partnership in modern
American political history. Never in the last 100 years have two
American politicians squandered so much political capital and achieved
so complete a rejection as this duo. (I omit intentionally the
hapless Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who is very much the Lepidus
in this triumvirate.)
The Obama-Pelosi record contains hugely
significant actions, but negative ones. They are to the Democrats
of this century what Hoover was to the Republicans of the last: a
complete platform for the other party in proper names. How far in
the future will it be when a Republican convention does not prominently
feature warnings to the public of a return of the era of Obama-Pelosi?
The myth about "off-year" elections is already being spun out by the
left as a threadbare cover for their leaders' collective collapse.
These observations overlook 1934, 1954, 1962 and 2002 as examples of
elections following a new president's entry into office when he managed
not to get clobbered at the polls. FDR saw the Democrats add nine
seats in the House of Representatives in 1934. Dwight Eisenhower's
GOP lost 18 House seats and JFK's Democrats lost four in '54 and '62
respectively. George W Bush's Republicans actually added eight
House members in 2002. Two other parallels are exact: Presidents
Reagan in '82 and Clinton in '94 were also both new presidents taking
office after an administration of the opposite party and who had
governed for 22 months when the public got to deliver a verdict.
Reagan watched the GOP lose 27 seats to the Democrats, and Clinton
witnessed the rise of Newt Gingrich as the GOP added 54 seats.
Until Nov. 2, 2010, Clinton was the gold standard for botched opening
presidential acts. How the Man from Hope must be laughing at the
Man of Hope and Change. Obama won't erase Clinton's stain of
impeachment, but he will replace 42 with 44 in the annals of political
failure in America.
Pelosi is in a class by herself. Her
particular style of leadership -- arrogant, humorless, imperious and
dense -- will guide by negative example many generations of future
legislative leaders. "Don't go Pelosi on us," consultants and
colleagues will chide their leaders. And what a caution that will
be: Do you want history to know you as a wholly, completely, irrefutably
rejected failure?
But for the condescension these two have
displayed toward their fellow citizens and citizen-legislators, their
fall might even elicit some sympathy. But "I won, you lost" and
"we'll have to pass the bill to find out what is in it" are not
predicates on which much empathy can be built. Obama and Pelosi
were handed unique majorities and a chance to establish a very
long-lasting domination of American politics had they only governed from
the center-left and not chosen the agenda of the hard left. (The
noise from the bloggers and Jon Stewart may be a balm to lefties that
Pelosi and Obama failed for want of going far enough left, but
Republicans can only pray that Democrats run on "the stimulus was too
small and ObamaCare insufficiently radical" in 2012 and beyond.)
The epic loss on Tuesday will launch a thousand op-eds and who knows how
many dissertations. But the explanation is very simple.
Never have two modern American leaders been so utterly bereft of
graciousness. Americans do not particularly value humility in
their politicians, but arrogance and disdain are poison to the public.
Obama gets a second chance. Pelosi does not. And that is at
least some consolation for Democrats on Tuesday.
Thousands Of Empty Seats
Shane D’Aprile
says the arena where Obama and Biden made their final appeal to
Democrats to get out and vote in Tuesday’s midterm elections was far
from capacity Sunday afternoon.
The crowd estimate stands at 8,000 in the arena
that seats just over 13,000 and a couple thousand empty seats are
visible above the stage where Obama and Biden rallied supporters.
The event is the final one in a series of "Moving America Forward"
rallies aimed at ginning up enthusiasm with the party’s largely deflated
base ahead of Tuesday.
The crowds are undoubtedly too confused
and afraid to show up.
Related:Obama makes final pitch to
voters, says Republicans getting "cocky"
The Obama Agenda Is Dead
On the Fox News Channel’s
early morning coverage, Charles Krauthammer said, "I think that the
message is unmistakable that the Obama agenda is dead. The
question is how much of it is going to be repealed and how much will
Obama be willing to concede. It’s clear as you projected the house
is going to be Republican. I think what is going to happen is the
Republicans are not going to win the Senate."
"But I think
they're going to have de facto control of the Senate in the sense that
there were going to be several Democratic senators that are going to be
up for re-election in two years," he continued. "I'm thinking of a
Jim Webb from Virginia. I’m thinking of some of the others.
There are going to be more Democrats up for re-election than Republicans
in two years in the Senate, and they’re looking at the fate of those
Democrats who went with Obama with his agenda and walked the plank and
are now gone, and they're not going to go. And I think there will
be great resistance in the Senate to any advance of the Obama agenda."
The Observer At His Own Funeral
George Neumayr
says that at his post-defeat press conference, Barack Obama worked
hard to project an air of somber reflection, even as his remarks
revealed that he had learned nothing from the defeat.
Amidst the
practiced pauses and detached narration of the crash came a litany of
excuses, evasions, and arrogant denials. He more or less cast
himself as the victim of a "bad economy," as if two years of sending
anti-business signals to employers had nothing to do with the high
jobless rate. He made sure to note that other presidents had
gotten similarly clocked after two years. And he essentially
blamed the American people for a lack of perception and patience.
But since he couldn't say that directly, he had to couch his
self-justification in the form of patronizing blather about how he could
have "accomplished" more, made better "progress," and "communicated"
more effectively with the American people. He tried to make some
sort of phony distinction between his "policy decisions" and his "policy
outcomes," implying that the people objected to the latter but not to
the former. Never mind that the exit polls demonstrated that they
repudiated both.
Obama couldn't bring himself to admit the
obvious, that his liberalism leaves the American people unafraid of
alternatives, so instead we got the usual self-serving nonsense about
how the American people like the content of liberalism but just resist
it in times of distress when Democrats fall down at salesmanship and
implementation. In one answer, he even had the audacity to suggest
that the American people were too dumb to realize that his bailout-style
socialism was only temporary and not a permanent policy. Where
could they have possibly gotten that idea?
Obama was in effect
saying at the press conference what Joe Biden said on the campaign trail
(that liberalism is hard "to explain," but somehow wonderful to behold
over time in its results) and what Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid said
after the passage of the health care bill (that a patient people will
learn to love all the goodies contained within it if they just wait a
decade or so).
Obama received praise after the press conference
for his "pensive" demeanor, but what's stunning about him is his utter
lack of reflection. He either has no capacity for critical
thinking or what little he once possessed has dissipated in ideological
reliance upon mindless cliché and sophistry. In any case, it is
scary. At the end of the day, he is nothing more than a shallow
pol with little interest in or knowledge of governing. He backed
into the White House through effortless luck (he ran against one of the
worst Republican presidential candidates ever), and apparently assumed
that running the White House would be just as easy.
His
shallowness also makes him obtuse, even from a rawly political and
self-interested standpoint. He suffered one of the worst defeats
in decades because of his environmental, socialist, and Brave New World
dilettantism, yet spent much of the press conference talking about
"electric cars," gays in the military, and 26-year-olds who, thanks to
his largesse, will get to stay on the health care plans of their
"parents."
Obama's metaphorical "car in the ditch" is apparently
an electric car which, if it ever gets out, will drive America into a
glorious future by picking up 26-year-olds and depositing them at job
interviews for work made possible through the "Stimulus" package.
Obama admitted that he lives in a "bubble," but that too was the
fault of others. He presented himself as the passive victim of his
own presidency. Near the end of the press conference, he allowed
himself a particularly absurd and maudlin moment, complaining that
because of the presidency's inherently insular character no one can see
the depth of his concern for the people. He said that "no one is
filming him reading those letters" from them which leave him so
anguished and inspired.
Perhaps Obama needs his own reality
show.
The End Of Obama’s Legacy
Skookums
asks, will arrogance and narcissism
toll the end of Obama’s legacy?
The midterm elections are
basically over and has left the Democrat Party shaken and demoralized.
That is
everyone except the leadership. Reid and Pelosi see their individual
wins as an endorsement of their leadership, an attitude that is shared
by Obama. They the Undaunted Triumvirate of Marxism feel that
the only failing on their behalf was to push forward without adequately
explaining to the people of America the benefits and advantages of
increased governmental control of their lives and how we will benefit
from the dissolution of our national sovereignty. Thus with the
flimsiest of mandates that relies on arrogance and narcissism rather
than substance, they intend to forge ahead with their Marxist-Leninist
policies and continue implementing the Obama/Soros policies of Open
Society and Open Borders as if the American people and their opinions
are inconsequential and the election didn’t happen.
I think
that’s a fair argument. I think that, over the course of two years we
were so busy and so focused on getting a bunch of stuff done that, we
stopped paying attention to the fact that leadership isn’t just
legislation. That it’s a matter of persuading people. And giving them
confidence and bringing them together. And setting a tone."
"Making an argument that people can understand," Obama continued, "I
think that we haven’t always been successful at that. And I take
personal responsibility for that. And it’s something that I’ve got to
examine carefully … as I go forward."
"I think that, over the
course of two years we were so busy" playing golf and vacationing, I
neglected my duties as a war time president trying to impose Marxism on
an unsuspecting electorate; there simply wasn’t enough time to do
everything.
Never even admitting in the slightest that Americans
might be reluctant to join the Obama/Soros march toward International
Marxism, he is driven towards his final goal like any true despot.
Instead, it is the ignorance of Americans that prevents them from seeing
the wisdom of his genius and the only reason why they want to repeal his
plan for Socialized Medicine.
The Great Unifier that was going to
unite America has created an even larger chasm of political polarity in
America, a void so immense that he hasn’t even begun to realize its
width or depth. At some point the stark realization will set in, he no
longer has the support of America except for the unions, entitlement
classes and minorities; a coalition that may have seemed powerful as a community
organizer, but will be a disaster in 2012, despite the
billions of Soros and his direction.
