Cartoons

Here:





Here:



Hopefully that last one will turn out to be extremely iconic of election '08.

He's A Great Closer, That Obama

Jim Treacher:

Don't want your taxes to go up? Barack Obama thinks you're selfish

Seriously. If you think you have a better idea what to do with your own money than the government does, you should be ashamed of yourself. Obama is saying that. In public. After the events of the last three weeks.

And yet McCain is supposed to be in trouble?

Also, at Drudge:

ZOGBY: MCCAIN MOVES INTO LEAD 48-47 IN ONE DAY POLLING

ZOGBY SATURDAY: Republican John McCain has pulled back within the margin of error... McCain outpolled Obama 48% to 47% in Friday, one day, polling. He is beginning to cut into Obama's lead among independents, is now leading among blue collar voters, has strengthened his lead among investors and among men, and is walloping Obama among NASCAR voters. Joe the Plumber may get his license after all...

And some interesting comments at Ace Of Spades:

Never trust Zogby. Never. Not when ahead. Not when behind.

That said, this does eliminate the inevitability meme. Big time. Just because you can never trust Zogby, doesn't mean you can't use him.

Posted by: Lee at October 31, 2008 10:23 PM (Xb3DR)


I think you can trust this one. Zogby is the biggest p*ssy of all the pollsters. He wants to be the one that showed a McCain "Comeback" first. He's not waiting for the rest of them to do it. It's Friday night before the election and he knew it was the right time to strike for his reputation.

The other pollsters are pissed, right now.

Posted by: Editor at October 31, 2008 10:23 PM (p4YSL)

For Idolaters, Politics Absolutely Trumps Friendship

In case you were interested in the smarmy opinions of our superiors on the Upper West Side, here's all the man-on-the-street video you could possibly want.

A Touching And Heartfelt Endorsement From Michelle Obama

Wisdom:

WaPo, Meet Woodshed

A scathing post by Bill Dyer.

Not Man Enough

American Digest essay.

Tidbit:

Obama is intelligent, charming, good-looking, stylish, well-educated and slick. He's everything that other people who value such surfaces look for... not in a leader, but in an icon. And that's what they're buying by buying Obama, an icon. A glowing plastic post-modern Jesus for the dashboard of their Prius. They know, as we all know by now, that he can talk the talk. He just can't walk the walk...

Early Voting A Bad Idea

Just in case you have warm fuzzies about the concept (I never have) here are some reasons why it's not a good idea.

Obama Makes It Clear: Papers That Endorse A Candidate Are Hopelessly Biased And Dangerous

Thanks for the lesson, Obama.

Could Be Fake, But A Must-Read

From an Obama staffer who isn't going to vote for him. H/T Ace Of Spades.

"Deeze Is To Intimidate Colmes"

"I will not give my vote for 96 cents an hour."

Watch Tito the builder politely kick some ass on Hannity and Colmes.

The Story In Two Frames

Yup.

"This Is Not How Democracies Work. This Is How They Fail."

Good post by a new blogger.

excerpt:

When I started this blog about a month ago I wasn’t thrilled about Sen. Obama’s presidency, but it was hardly a grave concern. I didn’t like his track record, I didn’t like his lack of meaningful experience, I thought he had been flip-flopping too much on key issues, I was annoyed by open bias of mass media. Worst case, I thought, it’d be 4 years of a demagogue with strong left views. We can live through that. Countries swing from right to left and back — it’s a cycle. This is how democracies work. You can easily see this on my blog – just four weeks ago I wanted to keep it light and funny, pointing out things like the fact that the “change” VP pick had been a Senator for 35 years. But as I looked more and more into Sen. Obama’s past and his recent actions, I started to realize that we’ve been dealing with something entirely different — something that America has never seen, at least not on such scale.

It’s been almost like unclogging a sink — you open it, you take something out, then you take out more, and what starts coming out after that makes you wish you never opened that thing in the first place. Forget “change” VPs with decades of Senate history. How about close relationships with people involved in international terror? Or laser sharp focus on indoctrinating children? Or a laundry list of every modern-day tyrant openly expressing support? Or persistent suppression of free speech? Or going for twenty years (and bringing children) into a church that openly promotes hate of white people, just as openly supports Hamas and condemns our country on regular basis? Or campaigning for a radical with Islamic ties who threw a stable country into a bloody mess? Or close ties with people who led an organizaiton that unapologetically bombed the U.S. Capitol, the Pentagon and a police station and who were on the FBI Ten Most Wanted List? Or vote fraud of monstrous proportions? Or accepting a flow of donations from unidentified foreign sources? All of above — and more – is on Sen. Obama’s resume. It’s not in some classified files, it’s not locked in some FBI closet, it out in the open. I’m not talking about GOP sponsored books, I’m talking about media — the same media that’s been so curiously and unapologetically supporting him. Sen. Obama’s own actions and sentiments (especially those he made before running for President) speak louder than any Republican paid advertisement. A resume like this would’ve been a road block for someone running for a seat on a city council. Here we’re talking about the most powerful post in the world – and people choose to ignore all of this, lulled by the promise of change.

Facts are stubborn things. You can choose to ignore them, but you can’t make them go away. And all the facts point to the same simple conclusion: if elected, Sen. Obama and the people he represents would completely change the country. They WILL change it. In four year it won’t be the country we know. It will be something quite different. Call that state socialist or communist or Obamunist, apply any label you want, but the change that’s coming is the most dangerous change our country has faced in its modern history. And all you need to see it coming is just read what’s out there and think.

I’m just a regular guy with moderate views who has bothered to read enough. I’m by no means a hard core right and I would’ve been ok with another four—or even eight—years of a Democratic president. Again, this is how democracies work. But now I’m informed and I can see what anyone with unbiased mind can see after getting the facts: this election is no longer about choosing between Republicans and Democrats. It’s about choosing between our democratic system as we know it and a totally different state. In that state — which Sen. Obama and people behind him have been working hard to create, free speech will be not so free. In that state, tolerance will not be so tolerant. And in that state many things you’ve been taking for granted will slowly but steadily cease to exist. Many — too many people – don’t realize this. They will vote for Sen. Obama, believing they vote for a bright shiny future. But it’s just a matter of time. In a year or two many of them will say “This is not Barack Obama I thought I knew”. Today it takes a few facts and some knowledge of history to start seeing things the way they really are. In two years it would take way less than that.

...

Again, electing a Democratic president is not bad. But it has nothing to do with giving ultimate power to a smooth talker with a mile-long list of radical, racist, socialist and terrorist ties and proven record of supporting most radical changes in our society. This is not how democracies work. This is how they fail.

L'il Obama Cartoon

Amusing.

Trick Or Treat

Russ at Ace of Spades:

Enjoy the Upcoming Holiday

It's fall in Iowa, and since we can't enjoy the smell of burning leaves anymore here in our little Nanny State community, I have to look forward to a beloved holiday from my childhood. I have fond memories of watching people dress up and pretend to be something that they're not in order to scare people or fool them into handing over free stuff. It's also the night where roving gangs of thugs patrol the neighborhood and vandalize the property of anyone who dares put up decorations that displease them.

Oh yeah, and tomorrow's Halloween too. Too much candy and the same old bad jokes every year from the kids in costumes. It's not as big of a holiday as Election Day, but it's pretty cool.

I Bet A Woman Like That Has No Sense Of Reality

Grace Who?

Grace Jones says she 'can't stand' Palin

Jamaican-born disco diva Grace Jones said she was sorry Hillary Clinton had failed to make the cut in the US election and that she "can't stand" folksy vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin.

The 1980s style icon, now 60, told German magazine TV Spielfilm Wednesday that Palin stood for a backward vision of America laden with government restrictions of sexuality and social behaviour.

"I would have loved it if Hillary Clinton had pulled it off," Jones said, in an interview published in German marking the release of her new album.

"I can't stand Sarah Palin. I bet a woman like that has no sense of humour."

The androgynous Jones, who conquered dancefloors and runways from New York to Paris in the 1980s and had star turns in blockbusters alongside Arnold Schwarzenegger and Roger Moore, said she believed in her own form of sexual liberation.

She said she had fallen afoul of feminists for stunts such as "appearing naked in a cage" but insisted she had the right to determine what was artistic or simply exploitative.

"I believe a woman can present herself as a sex object if she has fun doing it," she said.

The statuesque Jones attributed her own dominant image to the influence of her grandfather, who served in World War I.

"He was strict, even frightening," she said. "Sometimes I think I am possessed by him."

Well, that's it, then. I'm changing my vote.

Palin, no sense of humor? What planet is Grace Jones smoking?

Drudge has placed the story where it belongs. In the lower right corner, just above "Campus Cop Charged With Stealing Donuts..."

This Is What Worry Looks Like

Also, let's be honest, this is what should happen. McCain knows it, Obama knows it, and the American people know it.

Also, it's just plain good comedy. H/T The Corner.

Perfect Rant

One of the best yet:

Yup.

Bill Quick:

bury them

I cannot, in my lifetime, recall a time when the polls were as all over the place, and as contradictory, as they have been during the campaign.

It is, frankly, impossible that they can all be accurate, or even close to it. I think what we are seeing is the apotheosis of gimmicked polls as political propaganda. Which is a real shame, because it simply removes yet another tool that could help the average observer to figure out what is actually going on. You can’t trust the “analysis,” you can’t trust the “objective, unbiased reporting,” and now you can’t even trust the “accurate measuring methods.”

A free and healthy democracy cannot function when it has no way to determine reality. We have our corrupt, degenerate, dangerous mass media to thank for this situation. The solution is simple: Destroy them. Don’t read them, buy them, or support them in any way. As somebody else said, “Let them die. I’ll dance on their graves.”

Whatever replaces our current media cannot possibly be any worse, and most likely will be better. More transparent, at least.

It would be great after the election to have a mass boycott of their advertisers...

Music Video Slideshow

A couple of weeks ago with my wife at the Point Reyes lighthouse. The October sun was putting a gorgeous sparkle on the water...

Camera was my Nikon D-40, lens was the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8.

HD version here. 400MB of HD video, hosted for free!




Flickr link to the photos

The Last Of The Great Orators

Rush Limbaugh offers a prebuttal to Obama's campaign commercial. It is a 13 minute oratorical tour de force.

Link.

The Power Of The Rosary

Miracles of conversion come from this prayer.

Cartoons

Here:





Here:





Here:

Actually, 'Journalist' Is A Pretty Accurate Term

A tidbit from this excellent Jules Crittenden piece:

I figured out a long time ago that “journalist,” with the reek of [baloney] about it, already sounds like you’re trying to pull one over on people before you’ve even asked a question or written a word. What the f*** does a journalist do? Journalize?

That’s actually a word. It has nothing to do with news. It means to keep a personal record. Now that I think of it, maybe that does describe what large parts of this business have been doing in this election cycle. ”Dear diary … Obama looked so hot today.”

Motivational Posters For The Election

Some good ones.

Dr Sanity also features this:

Thus we will have a perfect crossover experiment set up when the messiah reigns. For 8 years the left have been wailing that Bush has stifled their free speech; or that he was imminently going to stifle their free speech and trample on their rights; shred the Constitution; that he was going to impose a theocracy etc. etc. etc. (lace of space restrains me from listing all the accusations hurled at the BusHitler). No evidence to support such accusations has ever materialized, and the sheer number of [unrestrained, unjailed] voices raised in this outcry would seem to detract from their essential point.

I have maintained all along that these accusations are primarily a psychological projection on the part of the left; i.e., that it is they who in their deepest hearts wish to silence all opposition to their agenda--but since they don't want to face that unpleasant little reality about themselves, they outsource it to the other side. I therefore predict that under an Obama adminstration, these leftist hitler-wannabees will feel completely psychologically free to impose their dictates on all of us. They will stifle free speech (and call it "human rights" as they do in the so-called "human rights panels" of our socialist neighbors to the north); they will subvert the U.S. Constitution (and call it "social justice"); they will silence all opposition (and call it "fairness") and so on. We have already seen how a supposedly "post-racial" candidate who is going to "bring us all together" has wonderfully succeeded in advancing his entire campaign on accusations of racism and bigotry; it should not be much of a surprise to discover that the same psychological dynamic will infuse his Administration.

In fact, I predict the greatest suppression of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in the history of our country.

The experiment is set to begin shortly after November 5th.

Welcome To The Future!

Amusing.

Polling Contamination

Ace of Spades:

Many pollsters don't just poll elections. They do "voter contact," which means pretty much what it sounds like. They call up likely voters for a particular candidate and tell them all the great things they should know about that candidate. It's not to get information -- it's to give it, and to encourage people to vote for the candidate hiring them to do the contact.

Here's the thing; Pollsters try to keep the callers doing voter contact away from also polling on the same race. Why? Because they find that often the callers doing voter contact wind up getting better results in their polling calls in favor of the candidate whose praises they've sung in the previous voter contact calls.

Why? Well, the suspicion is that after having repeated so many wonderful things about Candidate X, they've internalized those wonderful things (even if they never heard of Candidate X before making 200 calls on his behalf) and it comes through, when they call to poll someone, who they think is the better candidate. Whether through voice inflection or the like, they give subtle cues as to whom they believe is the better candidate. They tip to the interviewee what the socially desirable answer is to the polling questions.

How much of an effect does this have? Well, at minimum, it's enough of an effect that pollsters try to keep voter-contact callers from working on the polls they've done contact on -- so there is an effect.

Someone in the field tosses a number to me. This is anecdotal, based upon limited personal experience, and not a scientifically determined number. But in the experience of this person:

About half the time, such "cross interference" of praising one candidate and then polling on him results in a 6% rise in the polling results for the "socially desirable" candidate.

Gallup and etc. probably are pretty good about not using voter contact callers on polls. In fact, most of the big polling firms probably have so much polling work they don't ever do voter contact calls at all. Their phone banks are exclusively for polls.

But that doesn't mean there's not a socially desirable answer being suggested by the callers.

For one thing, if you walk into any polling firm phone bank, many of the callers are young. Probably not a majority, but a lot of them.

For another thing, all of the callers aren't making a whole lot of money. Calling people on the phone is not a high paying gig.

And, of course -- around half of the callers are themselves minorities. Yup, half.

Put it all together, and you have all of the nation's pollsters using interviewers who almost certainly skew in political preference to Barack Obama.

No, they probably didn't do any voter contact work for Obama, and hence get "poisoned" by repeating his virtues over and over again on the polling company's dime.

But a large number of them have probably done so, for free. On their own time. Not because they were paid to call people and tell them how swell Barack Obama is. But because they simply believe it in their hearts.

And I really don't think that I need to prove that Obama's supporters tend to be very enthusiastic supporters. Black supporters among the most enthusiastic of all.

Does this have an effect on polling? Well, once again: Pollsters are on alert for workers who may have been tainted by doing voter contact. They know such callers get too many positive responses for the candidate they have learned to prefer.

But what can they do when 80% of their calling staff walks in through the door with exactly that same taint?

They can't do anything.

Combine that with the fact that black callers, for example, tend to find more support for black candidates generally when polling. Same deal, really, except more pronounced. If a guy who sounds black asks you who you're voting for, your tendency is not going to be expressing a greater desire to see John McCain elected than you actually might have.

I don't know to what extent this impacts the race. But this sort of "contamination" of callers is something polling firms watch out for. And I don't see how they can avoid it when most of their callers are pro-Obama, and a significant fraction of such zealously so.

Barney Frank: Homosexuals Are Not Accountable

Barney Frank is playing the 'Gay Card'.

Former Democrat Speech Writer Says Sayonara To Her Corrupt Party

Great piece!

"We Are About To Make History. President Dewey Kind Of History."

AJ Strata has a rousing post.

Good Point

Link:

Religious Fundamentalism Is Pro-Science

That's the empirical finding of a study released by Baylor University, and I think it provides a useful antidote to the kind of nonsense found in the Slate article I linked below from Christopher Hitchens. This argument is made so frequently and lazily that it's surprising how decisively it can be discredited by a single survey. I'm here using "fundamentalism" in the sense a secularist like Hitchens would, to refer to any evangelical Christian with a predilection for invoking supernaturalism - I realize most evangelicals no longer find the word helpful.

A bit of careful reflections reveals why this is true. In order to have a theology that revolves around the exceptionalism of supernatural acts, one needs a strong conception of the sturdiness of naturalism in the absence of divine agency. If weird stuff happens all the time, then it's not nearly so remarkable when God does weird stuff too. So Protestant evangelicals, far from being credulous rubes ready to believe in ghosts, telekinesis, seances, astrology, and other assorted nonsense, are in fact highly critical and selective as believers only in a bare minimum of trancendent phenomena that explicity involve displays of divine power.

Labels like "anti-science" seem downright nonsensical when applied without specificity to a given debate. A Christian who questions evolution isn't necessarily inclined to also question the validity of atomic theory, or Newtonian mechanics, or statistical thermodynamics. To the contrary, most Christians who express distaste for evolutionary biology are quite quick to contrast the poor quality of Darwinian dogma with the experimental groundedness of other fields of science. You can object that this is done in a biased way, or otherwise done poorly. But that doesn't alter the fact that, if every American knew approximately as much about science as Michael Behe, then the scientific literacy of the country would on average be vastly improved and surely not degraded.

Margin Of Error Equals Who The Hell Knows?

Entertaining Iowahawk post.

excerpt:

This is, for all intents and purposes, how political pollsters compute the mysterious "margin of error," which has everything to do (and only to do) with pure mathematical sampling error. If you look at the formula above and round it just a smidge, you get a simple rule of thumb for the margin of error of a sampled probability:

Margin of Error = 1 / sqrt(n)

So if the sample size is 400, the margin of error is 1/20 = 5%; if the sample size is 625 the margin of error is 1/25 = 4%; if the sample size is 1000, it's about 3%.

Works pretty well if you're interested in hypothetical colored balls in hypothetical giant urns, or survival rates of plants in a controlled experiment, or defects in a batch of factory products. It may even work well if you're interested in blind cola taste tests. But what if the thing you are studying doesn't quite fit the balls & urns template?

* What if 40% of the balls have personally chosen to live in an urn that you legally can't stick your hand into?

* What if 50% of the balls who live in the legal urn explicitly refuse to let you select them?

* What if the balls inside the urn are constantly interacting and talking and arguing with each other, and can decide to change their color on a whim?

* What if you have to rely on the balls to report their own color, and some unknown number are probably lying to you?

* What if you've been hired to count balls by a company who has endorsed blue as their favorite color?

* What if you have outsourced the urn-ball counting to part-time temp balls, most of whom happen to be blue?

* What if the balls inside the urn are listening to you counting out there, and it affects whether they want to be counted, and/or which color they want to be?

If one or more of the above statements are true, then the formula for margin of error simplifies to

Margin of Error = Who the hell knows?

Because, in this case, so-called scientific "sampling error" is completely meaningless, because it is utterly overwhelmed by unmeasurable non-sampling error. Under these circumstances "margin of error" is a fantasy, a numeric fiction masquerading as a pseudo-scientific fact. If a poll reports it -- even if it's collected "scientifically" -- the pollster is guilty of aggravated [nonsense] in the first degree.

HillBuzz Is On A Roll

Lots of good stuff:

Link

Link

Link

Link

An Analogy

From this comment:

Gary Ogletree:

If Dear Leader is elected there may be a silver lining. McCain might be lucky not to take office with such a severe recession developing. (Our country not so lucky.) This thing could easily last four years. Expect the new regime to screw up everything they touch. Their addiction to spending, taxing and borrowing will not be tempered by the dire economic situation. Expect the Obama cult thugocracy to be more vicious and the Constitution violated at will. After a few years of this a large majority of Americans will have had enough of wealth redistribution, oppression studies, reparations, indoctrination, unemployment, etc. Thus, we could see Americans vehemently reject Obama Socialism the way the tribes of Anbar rejected Al Queda style Sharia. Nothing beats experience when it comes to learning the hard truth. Then the question becomes, as it is in Venezuela now, can the emerging dictatorship be overthrown by the ballot box or will a rigged electoral system make it necessary to resort to armed resistance? So we could get a nasty case of socialism that acts like an innoculation, or we could be on the road to the gulag or to civil war. God bless America and keep us free, whatever the cost.

Cartoon

Here:

Here's Hoping This Is True

A rousing post at HillBuzz.

Good Cartoon

I just discovered Diversity Lane. Well done! It looks like it just started up recently...

A Teaching Moment

This is good.

Believing Her Own Lying Eyes

Former Ms. editor-in-chief makes her own judgment of Palin's intelligence, based on--get this--personal observation by spending time with her. Her assesment? Impressed.

But many of her commenters are having none of it. They know better.

According To His Campaign, Obama Being A Socialist Is A 'Trumped Up, Fake Controversy'

Megyn Kelly goes after 'em.

Roger Kimball

On the 2001 WBEZ tape.

Outrageous

It's never too late for some inbred cracker to come out with a column entitled "Black People Shouldn't Be Allowed To Vote".

Bill Whittle's Take

On the tape:

Mercifully shorter than the first, and simply this: I happen to know the person who found this audio. It is an individual person, with no more resources than a desire to know everything that he or she can about who might be the next president of the United States and the most powerful man in the world.

I know that this person does not have teams of highly paid professionals, does not work out of a corner office in a skyscraper in New York, does not have access to all of the subtle and hidden conduits of information … who possesses no network television stations, owns no satellite time, does not receive billions in advertising dollars, and has a staff of exactly one.

I do not blame Barack Obama for believing in wealth distribution. That’s his right as an American. I do blame him for lying about what he believes. But his entire life has been applying for the next job at the expense of the current one. He’s at the end of the line now.

I do, however, blame the press for allowing an individual citizen to do the work that they employ standing armies of so-called professionals for. I know they are capable of this kind of investigative journalism: It only took them a day or two to damage Sarah Palin with wild accusations about her baby’s paternity and less time than that to destroy a man who happened to be playing ball when the Messiah decided to roll up looking for a few more votes on the way to the inevitable coronation.

We no longer have an independent, fair, investigative press. That is abundantly clear to everyone — even the press. It is just another of the facts that they refuse to report, because it does not suit them.

Remember this, America: The press did not break this story. A single citizen, on the Internet did.

There is a special hell for you “journalists” out there, a hell made specifically for you narcissists and elitists who think you have the right to determine which information is passed on to the electorate and which is not.

That hell — your own personal hell — is a fiery lake of irrelevance, blinding clouds of obscurity, and burning, everlasting scorn.

You’ve earned it.

THE THIRD CIRCLE OF SHAME
This discovery will hurt Obama much more than Joe the Plumber.

What will be left of my friend, and my friend’s family, I wonder, when the press is finished with them?

Obama Speaks Of Constitution In Past Tense, Says It Was Fundamentally Flawed

"It was a remarkable political document."

Link

Obama Supporters In A State Of Shock?

Hillbuzz:

BREAKING: you know this audiotape is bad for Obama, REALLY bad, because Obama’s followers got dead SILENT all of a sudden

Posted by hillbuzz under Uncategorized

[22] Comments

We have not had a single nasty comment by an Obama follower on this site since Drudge ran the gigantic headline about Obama’s socialist agenda, and audiotape proof of it breaking.

Whenever Obama is in trouble, these people clam up.

The worse something is for Obama, the quieter his followers get.

It’s how we gauge the impact of something around here.

Not a single Obamabot comment in the last hour. We’d usually have 30 of them in our spam filter in that hour.

NOT A SINGLE ONE.

Where did they all go?

UPDATE: Seriously. Two hours now. Not a single Obama Kool-Aid Gang comment. And these people are up all night attacking us, telling us how Obama will win, and making fun of Hillary Clinton supporters or saying vile things about Hillary herself. They do this all night — but not tonight. They’ve done this nonstop since we started this blog back in February. But not tonight.

Know when the last time they just got really, really quiet like this was?

When Jeremiah Wright became a household name.

That, and right after Hillary Clinton won primaries the media all claimed she’d lose. There was silence for a day or so after each of those, especially after the clobbering Obama took in West Virginia. Dead quiet then.

But, this feels more like the Jeremiah Wright silence - maybe because it came right out of the blue like this. We never go over to Kos or HuffPo, so we have no idea what’s happening over there. Please fill us in if you visit those places and let us know how Obama’s followers are reacting to this tape...

Caught, Red Handed!

Saw it on Drudge, but Ace Of Spades has a good post with the transcribed quote:

If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court. I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order as long as I could pay for it I’d be o.k. But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendancy to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that.

Boy, oh, boy, we need to break away from those essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution!

The nice thing about this audio is that it is clean, since it is from a radio show and not recorded on the fly by an audience member at a speech. Quite useful for campaign commercials.

Also, since we can expect YouTube to do the bidding of its Obama lovin' corporate Google masters and pull the video, it is recommended that all interested parties download it and re-upload it. This tool can be used to download it. The Ace Of Spades post has an MP3.

I've also got the MP3:

Quip

From comment here. In response to atheist sophistry:

Oh, so you don’t believe in the God for the same reasons that you don’t believe in the tooth fairy? Because when you were 6 your mom told you she’d made it up?

Slogan Idea

Lifted from here (and reworded):

Embrace Diversity: Marry The Opposite Sex

Quote

From this Townhall piece:

John McCain will not be a perfect President. But it is not necessary for the leader of a free, righteous, and entrepreneurial people to be perfect. I can support John McCain because he asks only that I vote for him, not that I worship him. And I will vote for John McCain on November 4th, not because he would be a better king, but because he does not claim to be one at all.

SNL Parody

By the beard of Jupiter, gird your loins! (H/T Ace of Spades)

The Essence Of Polling During This Cycle

If you are a McCain voter, this is the implicit message you are receiving (due to the overall media climate): "Hello. This is a media polling organization calling. As such, we hate you and think you're a loser. May we ask you some questions?"

If you are an Obama voter, the implicit message is: "Hello. This is a media polling organization calling. As you know, we also worship The One. Do you have time to fellowship and share The Love?"

That's got to result in some selection effects.

Limbaugh Knows The Score

Link (from yesterday's show):

[C]onservatism is what it is. It doesn't need to be moderated. It doesn't need to be redefined. It doesn't need to be upgraded. It's based on personal liberty: individual freedom, a small state that functions for the express purpose of defending and protecting the population. The minute you say that conservatism includes people who are pro-choice, you've destroyed conservatism because conservatism stands for "life, liberty, pursuit of happiness." Without life, there is nothing else here, and if we're going to sit around indiscriminately deciding who lives and who dies based on our own convenience, that's not conservative. Individual liberty. The essence of innocence is a child in the womb who has no choice over what happens to it. Sorry. If we don't stand up for that person, if the government doesn't, then nobody will. And if we allow ourselves to get watered down by a bunch of people who are embarrassed over that position, they're not conservatives. Now, I'm not saying, "If you're not this, don't vote for us." We'll be happy for you to vote for us. I'm happy. Go ahead and vote for us. This is what got us into trouble that we're in today. The reason that we're in this mess today is because we had to start making this tent big, watering down what conservatism is. There's a blueprint out there, Justin, for how to win landslides! There's a blueprint for how you do it, and it does not include expanding the tent. Reagan got Reagan Democrats, but he moved them to the Republican Party, moved them to the right. He didn't go get them by pretending to be one of them.

Joe The Plumber Info Obtained Illegally

Welcome to the police state. But it was all done in good fun.

Link.

Property For Me, But Not For Thee. When Cops Are Not Useful As Targets, They're Useful As Protection.

Finally, the press attempts a Bill Ayers interview.

Blacklisted For Asking Real Questions

Details at Ace of Spades.

If you look at the video, pay attention to Biden's blinking rate during his answers. It's like a machine gun.

Slouching Toward A Declaration Of Dependence

Great Mark Steyn column.

A Journalist Has Become Ashamed Of His Profession

Good read!

This Is What Prop 8 Is All About

See also:

Stocks For The Long Haul

They always go up, yes? It's a no brainer. As long as you have good, innovative, efficient companies, and a strong work ethic you're bound to win!

Yup! But the Japanese market has made no net progress in over 25 years. If you'd gone all-in in 1982, you'd be breaking even. If you'd gone all-in in 1989, when the future was so bright you'd have to wear shades, and everyone knew it, you'd be down 80%.

Link.

The Barackapolis Cost 35 Times The Palin Family's Convention Wardrobe

Details.

The Reason

Why is it that the Democrat rank and file (and the media) simply don't care about the rampant and blindingly obvious corruption in their party? It all comes down to the abortion thing. They have made a deal with the devil. It's a matter of "you don't accuse us, we won't accuse you." In exchange for championing the crime of abortion, the Democrats are given a free ride.

Meanwhile, given that the Republicans are (at least rhetorically) against abortion, they are accused of every damned thing under the sun. Hurricanes. Liberating countries. 9/11 being an "inside job". Being the sole cause of the financial collapse. Being an "attack machine" even though they spend most of their time running from their own shadows. And on and on. In exchange for pointing out the crime of abortion, the Republicans effectively become the personification of pure evil.

UPDATE: National Review happens today to have an article touching on this very topic.

Wow, They Could've Had A V8!

Having fun with a visual cliche we've been seeing a lot of.

Obama Wouldn't Be Able To Hold Up For A Single Day Of Being Palin

Through the looking glass:

I have a dream for Sen. Barack Obama.

I have a dream that one day, for just 24 hours, he could be Sarah Palin.

OK, maybe that’s less of a dream and more a plot point from a bad Lindsay Lohan movie (redundancy alert!).

But imagine the Democratic nominee’s day as Barack Palin Obama:

He wake up and reaches for a secret cigarette and a copy of The New York Times [NYT]. Instead of the usual partisan puff pieces (“Obama Health Care Plan Pledges Miraculous Healings For All”), the Times is running exposes about his family.

Does his spouse have extremist political views? Who pays when his kids travel to Washington? And how do we know one of them isn’t really his grandkid?

Opening the editorial page Palin-Obama finds column after column filled with personal attacks and insults. Comments about his looks, how much his clothes cost, his speaking style - even suggestions that the radical teachings of his church might be a legitimate topic for discussion.

He clicks on MSNBC and sees the spittle-flecked face of Chris Matthews.

“Obama says he’s cutting taxes for 95 percent of taxpayers, but he’s not. He’s just sending them checks! No cut in their tax rate AT ALL! IT’S A LIE, A LIE! AAARRGGHHHH!

As the MSNBC medical staff fires yet another tranquilizer dart into Matthews’ thrashing body, Palin-Obama gets ready to face the day.

At the airport, Palin-Obama is under siege from the traveling press. “Why are you hiding, Sen. Obama? You haven’t taken questions from us since last month. Joe Biden hasn’t held a press avail since Sept. 7! Afraid he’ll make another ‘guaranteed crisis’ comment? How many more screw-ups before you dump the guy?”

A crowd of thousands gathers to hear him speak. When Palin-Obama mentions the “destructive foreign policy of George W. Bush,” someone shouts “murderer!” Another cries, “off with this head!”

By lunchtime, the cable news headline is: “Obama Whips Up Angry Mob, Some Fear Campaign May Inspire Violence.”

That afternoon, Palin-Obama sits down with a CNN reporter who spends the first half of the interview asking variations of the question, “How can a half-term senator with zero executive experience and no record of achievement be president? Shouldn’t you be ashamed of yourself for even running?”

“Let’s talk energy independence,” Palin-Obama asks hopefully. The reporter instead demands to know why Obama won’t release his medical records, his original birth certificate or the names of about half his contributors.

“You’re the most secretive candidate since Nixon,” the reporter insists. “And besides, the guy who plays you on ‘Saturday Night Live’ is way hotter.”

The day grinds on. False stories repeatedly corrected by the campaign continue to air. One Palin-Obama supporter - a plumber who asked John McCain a tough question at a campaign stop - had his private medical files hacked into, and found Candy Crowley hiding in his dumpster.

One more campaign stop, more questions about his wife’s politics, his children’s travel schedule and his clothing budget - and Palin-Obama finally reaches his hotel for a night’s rest.

His nightmare of misreporting, mean-spirited negative attacks and blatant media bias is over. For Gov. Sarah Palin, it’s going to last at least 12 more days.

Bolsheviks Of A Feather

Megyn Kelly kicks some commie Ayers-apologist a**. Good stuff.

Gingrich Takes A Two-By-Four To The Press

Making an articulate case for the obvious.

The Only Contest That Matters

A must-see. GOP stands for "Grand Old Posse".

But Come On, These Would Just Be Smokescreens Keeping Us From Focusing On The Real Issues, Like Palin's Wardrobe

The Corner:

New Party: Where's the Press? [Peter Kirsanow]

As Stanley notes below, despite the existence of documentary evidence that Obama was a member of the New Party, it appears that no one in the mainstream press has covered the matter.

Within days of McCain's selection of Sarah Palin the mainstream press was all over her purported membership in the Alaskan Independence Party — universally described as a fringe party.

The Alaskan Independence Party is no more fringe or radical than the New Party, the tenets of which are plainly redistributionist. Indeed, the New Party appears to have been an adjunct of the Democratic Socialists of America. In fact, a DSA newsletter refers to a speech given by Obama at the Young Democratic Socialists Conference.

A presidential candidate tells Joe the Plumber that the candidate wants to "spread the wealth." The candidate then denies that such statements betray socialist inclinations. Yet it appears that the candidate's statement is consistent with the philosophy of the party to which he once belonged. Questions abound. But the press remains incurious.

Stanley and Andy have strewn the breadcrumbs in plain sight of the mainstream press: Ayers, Dohrn, Klonsky, Wright, Davis, New Party. The press refuses to report on this pattern, except to accuse those who are curious about these alliances of being racist.

What will the press do once Obama's in office?

Biden's Latest

Over the top. It just never ends with this guy.

Spending Big Campaign Money On A Greek Temple? Not A Scandal. Spending Campaign Money On Quality Threads? Scandal!

The Corner:

The Palin Wardrobe [Lisa Schiffren]

So now we learn that the RNC shelled out $150,000 for clothing, hair, and make-up for Sarah Palin since her surprise nomination. Scandal! Gotcha! Such hypocrisy! If she wants the Joe Six-pack vote, the "logic" goes, why isn't she wearing clothes from Target? Huh? While everyone seems to get that Palin had to have an emergency make-over for prime time, this particular number offends — as does the fact that she didn't pay for it herself.

Was a new wardrobe neccessary? Clearly. Last winter, when she posed for Vogue, Governor Palin wore a big, army green parka, (partly to hide her pregnancy), which looked great — but perhaps not entirely vice presidential. No one wears that sort of thing to, say, National Security Council meetings in D.C. In pre-September pictures, she wears inexpensive, perfectly appropriate but not ready for prime-time black suits, or the kind of outdoor clothing that Alaskans, and others who spend a lot of time in harsh elements, require. Her biggest sartorial luxury seems to have been fancy running shoes, as she told the Wall Street Journal weekend section, just before being nominated.

But then, a few days before Labor Day, lightening hit. The governor of Alaska turned into a vice-presidential candidate, who had to show up in front of the nation for the next 60 days, several times a day, always looking camera-ready, and impeccably turned out. She also had to project that new, somewhat amorphous thing: female power. We, as a nation, have not yet been led by a woman, and we aren't sure what it looks like. It will, of course, vary from woman to woman, depending on her personal needs and style, but not so much. Can't be too sexy, too severe, or too casual. For sure it requires perfectly fitted, constructed jackets, with a serious shoulder line, in good quality fabrics. Nowhere are those cheap. Palin had to look at least as good as the women we see on TV all the time. You may not realize it, but you don't see Katie Couric or Diane Sawyer or any of the on-camera female talent at the networks, CNN or Fox in off-the-rack stuff from Macy's. It is all upscale designer stuff, and at the low end it costs a couple of thousand per outfit. Always. Hair and make-up is done, professionally, any time you see them, at the cost of much time and money. That is the visual standard women at the upper end of politics must meet. Condoleezza Rice, who needed to project power, figured it out. Others have not. If Palin hadn't bothered with any of it, we would have heard about that too.

Had she been a creature of Washington, Palin would have had closet full of suits, unexciting, perhaps, but appropriate. Had she been a former First Lady running for president, whose husband has raked in $109 million in the last 8 years, she could have called Oscar de la Renta, and and had him come for a fitting. He did well with Hillary's jewel-toned pantsuits, (at a few grand a pop?). She might already have collected some of those great Gurhan necklaces, which accentuated Hillary's suits all election season. (Look up for yourself what they cost.) Were she Speaker of the House, and the wealthiest Democratic lawmaker, she could have called Georgio Armani himself — and worn the Pelosi pearls that cost more than the Palin's house.

Instead, she had zero time and no personal fortune. And she faced the terrible hurdle of being young and attractive — the very sort of woman who most desperately needs wardrobe cues to make her look authoritative. If she had had to pay for it herself, she could not have run. The bill would have been ruinous to a genuinely middle class person. So the GOP did what it had to do in order to put a non-rich woman on a national ticket. Whatever one thinks of the choice — and I am a supporter — it's nice to see that someone was thinking about the details. The difference between Palin at the announcement in Dayton, and Palin at the convention was a subtle but impressive transformation. Subtle always costs more. As a sometime GOP donor, I begrudge her none of it.

Because I like Sarah Palin, and want her to succeed, I would be really happy to know that, should she find herself back in Alaska for the next four years, (or, for that matter, in D.C.) she chose to spend a little of the money that would otherwise go to her clothing budget on a personal library of conservative classics. Going upmarket intellectually will complete the transformation, and make her truly prime-time ready.

He Was Joe The Plumber Before Joe The Plumber Was Cool

I've linked it before, but it has even more resonance now:

Can't We All Just Get Along?

Mark Shea:

Gay Brownshirts on the March!

After a San Jose family hung a Yes on 8 banner on their house, someone parked an SUV out front, then painted an arrow on the back window and the words: "Bigots Live Here."

Of course, this being California media, you have to present an, 'ow you say? "fair and balanced" story when gay thugs use brownshirt tactics such as harrassment, intimidation, vandalism and property destruction. But how do you do that when supporters of Prop 8 aren't engaging in similar thuggery?

First, you present a false equivalence between the thuggish acts of the gay brownshirts (actual vandalism and property destruction) and the *feelings* of gay people when somebody disagrees with them:

For many gay and lesbian people, the rhetoric of television ads and even the everyday things people say during a political campaign like Proposition 8 can carry a heavy emotional toll as normally buried feelings of prejudice are revealed, a group of researchers in San Francisco said Tuesday while releasing the results of two national surveys. Many gay and lesbian people are feeling stress, depression and alienation as the campaign intensifies.

Erik Martinez, a 26-year-old openly gay man, said he felt like he'd been punched in the stomach when a life-long friend told him in front of a group at a friend's wedding: "You don't have the right to get married."

"I felt," Martinez said, "every single word."

You see? Disagreeing with proponents of gay marriage is just as bad as harrassment, intimidation, vandalism and property damage. When people who oppose gay marriage express their views, it *feels* just as if they were vandalizing property and committing theft.

Then, instead of titling your piece, "Proponents of gay marriage harrass, intimidate, vandalize property and steal yard signs in bid to crush free speech" title the article "Same-sex marriage debate growing ugly in San Jose and beyond".

There! Now *everybody* is equally guilty and the solution is obvious: we all need to get along and just leave poor harmless gay people alone to alter the definition of the fundamental building block of our culture!

Next stop: Human Right Commissions for the crime of saying things about marriage that make gay people feel bad.

There Is Every Incentive To Skew The Polls

Incentive 1: Self fulfilling prophecy. Demoralize Republican voters and create an Obama victory.

Incentive 2: Deligitimize McCain if he wins. Far too many people in this country take the polls as gospel and the actual election results as mere confirming evidence. The amount of leftist outrage should all of the polls have been wrong will be unfathomable. We'll never hear the end of "Racist Republicans stole 2008".

Incentive 3: A score card for propaganda. It just makes the media bias game more fun to play, seeing the "narrative" reflected in polls, even if the polls are themselves biased propaganda. Simple, corrupt pleasures for simple, corrupt minds.

So, if it succeeds it wins, if it fails, it wins, and it is fiendish good fun while it is being done. What is there for the unregenerate and hopelessly dishonest not to like?

Apropos of all this is a post entitled "Gallup and New Coke".

How Constantly 'Doing Something' To Restore Liquidity Destroys Liquidity

Link:

This pattern has happened repeatedly over the last couple of months - every time "The Fed" is uttered on CNBC there's a 1+% spike followed by an instantaneous dump as the market discerns that whatever was announced was total crap, resulting in stops being blown on both sides for traders who held a position with some sort of conviction on a move either way (long or short.) Those traders wind up with a maximum-risk-loss on the trade even if they were right and the market then reverses out from under them.

This is how you destroy market liquidity Ben.

I know that in your ivory tower view all these things mean "you're doing something" and in your view "doing something" means its all working to the good.

Well, you got the "doing something" part right.

What you're doing is trashing any attempt to analyze fundamentals, any attempt to trade on technicals, and any attempt to provide liquidity to the market by churning people's accounts on both the long and short side, creating losses for those traders that should not occur.

These traders then say "screw you" and take their ball (money) and head to The Bar, where they know what the maximum risk is (they'll get drunk and spend $100 on booze) instead of playing in your casino where the rules change literally second-by-second and it is flat-out impossible to trade on any sort of technical or fundamental analysis.

This sort of mouth-breathing crap is a big part of why we had a 20% collapse in days after The House passed your and Hank's bill, and if you don't cut it out you're gonna get another one within days, if you haven't already sown the seeds of that collapse in an irretrievable fashion already...

Nearing The Event Horizon For The Bond Market

Some great analysis. Those with ears ought to hear.

Government Doing What It Does Best: Making Any Particular Problem Much, Much Worse

Peter Schiff:

Just stop paying your mortgage

By Peter Schiff
October 10, 2008

If you are a mortgage holder who is either struggling with crushing payments, bitter for having overpaid for your home during the bubble, or who has extravagantly refinanced when prices were rising, the government's landmark $700 billion bailout package has an important message for you: stop making your mortgage payments . . . immediately. Furthermore, if you believe that with some planning and sacrifice you may be able to meet your mortgage obligations, the government's message is clear: relax, don't bother.

While angry voters have labeled the package as a bailout for Wall Street, it is more akin to a “Get out of Jail Free” card for anyone who acted irresponsibly during the boom. Here's why.

Nobody likes foreclosure, least of all politicians. The new law clearly indicates that the government will make major efforts to reduce foreclosures through “term extensions, rate reductions and principal write-downs” of the troubled mortgages that it buys from the private sector. In other words, your new landlord will bend over backward to keep you in your home. The legislation telegraphs this by including a provision that extends until 2013 the exclusion of loan reductions from taxable income.

When a financial institution holds a mortgage, homeowners must live with the fear of foreclosure. Private institutions only have obligations to shareholders. In the case of a defaulting borrower, they will look to recover as much of their principal as possible. If foreclosure is their best option, they will take it in a heartbeat.

The government has no such obligations. Its only goal is to keep voters happy. After supposedly bailing out the fat cats on Wall Street, no politician wants to be accused of evicting struggling families. Once you understand this, all of your anxiety should melt away. Why pay your mortgage if foreclosure is off the table, and if you know that lower payments, and possibly a reduced loan amount, would result? A tarnished a credit rating is a small price to pay for such a benefit.

Unfortunately, this boon will not extend to those foolish individuals who either made large down payments or resisted the temptation of cashing out equity. The large amount of home equity built up by these suckers, I mean homeowners, means that in the case of default foreclosure remains a financially attractive option. As a result, these loans will be much less likely to be turned over to the government.

If your mortgage does become the property of Uncle Sam, the growingly popular impulse to “just walk away” should be replaced by “just stay and stop paying.” No one will throw you out. After a few months, or years, of living payment free, you will get a call from a motivated government agent eager to adjust your loan into something affordable.

To bolster your bargaining position it will help to be able to claim poverty. As a result, if you have any savings, spend it soon, before they call. Buy a bigger TV, a new wardrobe, or better yet, take a vacation. After the hardship of spending all of your refi cash, you probably deserve it. If you have any guilt just remember, Washington argues that consumer spending is the best way to stimulate the economy. Living beyond your means is a patriotic duty.

If you do get the opportunity to live for a while with no mortgage payment, don't make the tragic mistake of using your extra cash to pay down your credit cards. As the growing level of credit card defaults will soon push credit card companies into bankruptcy, we can expect a similar bailout plan for American Express and Discover Financial. When that happens, expect massive balance reductions for Americans who can demonstrate the inability to pay. The bigger your balance, the greater the benefit.

...

A Cartoon For Our Times

Link

If There Is Any Justice, The Most Fooled By The Media Will Be The Media Itself

My intuition is that McCain is going to win this thing. There is nothing remotely resembling truth coming from the MSM this election, and the (self-)deception probably washes over to the polls. Hopefully these jackals will learn a hard lesson: you simply cannot convince people that up is down and black is white (oops, that's racist!) via an utterly transparent propaganda onslaught.

To see the propaganda solidly defeated would be glorious.

We'll also probably get a nice lesson in the real nature of leftism without having to live under four years of it. If they lose, the resultant riots and Weather Underground style terrorist acts will speak for themselves.

Sorry Folks, But There Are A Great Deal More People Praying To The True God Regarding The Election

More idolatry. Who are they addressing with their visualizations? The ruler of the power of the air?

Again, Republicans Are Undeniably Linked With Hate

Proof.

Sarahcuda!

Rips Obama and Biden to shreds. Video link.

This lady says more "real stuff" in 3 minutes than The Anointed has said in his entire career.

If Dan Rather Thinks You're Biased, Then It Is Safe To Say You're Biased.

Link.

Uhhh, Actually, You Know, 'Socialist' Is A Code Word For 'Socialist'

Does it get any more inane than this?

Aphorism

Just ran across this idea here (in reference to plunging back into stocks as Warren Buffet is doing):

"While it is true that that the early bird catches the worm, it is also true that it is the second mouse that gets the cheese."

Good Credit And Bad Credit

Outstanding essay on the real financial problem and its real solution. If only our "leaders" weren't hellbent on repeating all the mistakes of the thirties...

Orson Scott Card

Has a superbly written open-letter-style chiding of the press.

Of Course None Of It Matters

Lileks:

But I suspect this line may have thrilled some:

Low dishonesty and craven cynicism sometimes win the day but not inevitably. The attempt to link Barack Obama to an old radical in his neighborhood has desperation and deceit written all over it.

Let us now examine his reasons:





Sorry, there aren’t any. You’ll have to take him at his word that it’s low, dishonest, craven, cynical, desperate, and deceitful. And if you weren’t paying any attention, you might believe that the entire affair can be accurately described as “an attempt to link” Sen. Obama to “an old radical in his neighborhood,” as if some harmless old Bolshie lived down the street, and they’d occasionally nod while taking out the recycling.

It’s possible that Keillor has no idea of the connections between Sen. Obama and Bill Ayers (and his wife, she of the famous endorsement of starlet-stabbing), in which case it’s proof that his column slides unedited down the gullet of modern journalism. This would not make him the most uninformed columnist in the country, but he would certainly be above average. If he does know, though, and chooses to regard discussion of the relationship as beyond the realm of civilized political discourse, well, the standards have certainly changed. Or rather the old standards are being selectively applied.
Here are the curious facts of modern politics:

1. Ayers was dedicated to killing American soldiers to ensure that Vietnam was ruled by Communists.

2. Ayers is unrepentant, and proudly posed for a photo standing on an American flag.

3. This is irrelevant. It is irrelevant to then, because the cause was just, if the execution was irrationally exuberant; it is irrelevant to today, because Ayers is now an educator, and a respected member of the intelligentsia.

4. This says nothing about education or the intellegentsia, except to attest to their broad-mindedness.

5. There is nothing wrong with Ayers, but nevertheless his associations with Sen. Obama – the fund-raising at his house, the Woods Foundation, the Annenberg Challenge, the book blurb – are circumstantial, tenuous, and meaningless, because A) Obama was 8 when the crimes occurred, and thus unable to give the full-throated condemnation he later felt, but managed to suppress while coming up the ranks of Chicago politics; B) one could not avoid Ayers in Chicago, which is a very small city; C) if Obama did feel deep distaste, there was never really a good time to bring it up, and D) many other respectable people had no problem associating with the fellow, and E) Ayers is not advising him now, any more than, say, Louis Farrakhan is. The last point is important, because it means we should trust Obama’s judgment. He’s the kind of fellow who turns out not to seek Ayers’ advice when running for national office. And that's enough.

Now. You have to ask yourself how the media would cover a long-standing association between John McCain and a fellow who, in the hurly-burly-mixed-up-folderol of the Civil Rights Era, went a little too far and burned some Black churches, or led a group devoted to blowing up abortion clinics. Mind you, he was never convicted – technicalities, which was ironic, because Conservatives hate those – but he went on to serve on school boards and charity foundations that advocated for States’ Rights, an issue dear to conservative hearts. Imagine the deets are the same – cozy fundraisers, serving on the same boards, McCain’s name on Bomber Bob’s memoir. Add to that some other parallels – say, McCain attended a church that praised a fellow who believed black people were descended from the devil, and believed Jesus was an Aryan.

John McCain wouldn’t be the nominee, and if by some chance that happened, this association would be draped around his neck every day.

You may disagree with this, but I don’t think I’ve attempted any deceit here. Deceit would entail lying about what Ayers did, and insisting they had a connection when there was none. You could say it’s almost deceitful to say there’s nothing there whatsoever, but that’s up for debate. But you can imagine Keillor writing 14 pre-election columns that never mentioned the McCain friend who tried to blow up a Planned Parenthood clinic. I think it would matter, and it wouldn’t be “desperation” to point it out.

I don’t think Obama shares Ayers’ views now, if ever; he strikes me as an intellectual Zelig. But it’s interesting how nothing matters. No, amend that – the small things matter, which is why Joe the Plumber has to be vetted, and Biden’s gaffes ignored. The big things are in the past, and the past is irrelevant. The past matters only if it has a sin that proves the stain inherent in the culture, a stain that will be washed out in the coming reign of goodness and light. The past is a stone, and you can’t run towards the sun unless you drop it, and tell yourself you’re starting anew with every step you take.

Odd how the sun always seems to be the same distance away, no matter how light you travel. Well, there must be a shadowy group that's pushing it out of our grasp. Find them!

Great Rejoinder

Link:

Here's how to answer "Did you know the Annenberg Challenge was funded by a Republican and included many Republican leaders?"

"Well, how about that. Did you know the planes used on 9/11 weren't built by terrorists?"

Hear, Hear

Outstanding Kevin McCullough piece.

Joe The Plumber Is An Absolute Disgrace For The McCain Campaign

He seemed pretty cool at first, but man, there's some real problems with the guy. Thank heavens the press is on this.

Well Said

Link:

The whole "He's not a licensed plumber!" non sequitur is really fantastic. So, if you happen to be standing in front of Obama when he publicly reveals his socialism, what does the media do? Demands to see your papers. That's just delicious, is what that is.

No, You Can't

Completely out of touch with the common man:

"How many plumbers do you know makin' a quarter million dollars a year?"

(Guest Post by Bill Dyer a/k/a Beldar)

The title to this post is the mocking, disdainful question that Barack Obama slung at "Joe the Plumber" from a campaign rally on Friday. He thereby proved the aptness of Sen. McCain's Freudian slip when he called Sen. Obama "Senator Government" in the third debate.

Joe Wurzelbacher has never claimed that he makes $250k now. But if Barack Obama thinks there aren't any plumbing business owners in America who do, then that shows how out of touch he is. Mr. Wurzelbacher said he hopes to become successful enough to be in that tax bracket; especially if he ends up growing his business and employing more plumbers to work with and for him, that's entirely plausible.

Why would Barack Obama think that someone running a successful small plumbing business might not be able to make as much as the $273k salary his wife made as an administrator for the University of Chicago Hospitals?

The question isn't what Joe the Plumber makes now, it's what he aspires to make. So he wants to know what incentives for success he'd have under the tax scheme imposed by an Obama Administration working hand-in-glove with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Will they justify the hard work, the increased risk? Or will he be looking at a return to the days of confiscatory marginal tax rates, in which every additional dollar he earns is taxed at a steeper and steeper rate, until finally each bit of extra income benefits the government and its welfare recipients more than the man or woman who earned it? Should he reach for his dreams, or should he just content himself to be a 21st Century wage slave, and genuflect toward Washington for the occasional extra government handout he gets in exchange for voting away his dreams?

...

Cartoon

Here:

A Wicked Sense Of Humor

Some ruthless and spot-on comedy by John McCain at the Alfred E. Smith dinner:

Link

A Lot Of People Are Probably Feeling This Way

Keep it up lefties!

Link:

RE: Well That Didn't Take Long [Mark Hemingway]

Getting a lot of emails along these lines:

I don't know why I'm e-mailing you, except that I just need to vent to someone on The Corner. Pass this around to the others if you like — I bet I'm not the only one.

I really don't like McCain. I'll probably vote for him just as a vote for divided government. I'm far too libertarian in my leanings to be comfortable with McCain (or Obama, for that matter).

That said, the way the pro-Obama media and bloggers, and Obama himself, have responded to Joe has got me nearly shaking with rage. They are attempting to destroy a man — a private citizen — who had the audacity to ask The One a question. Mind you, Joe was on his front lawn playing football with his son when Obama strolled up to give him his hopenchange spiel. Obama approached Joe, not the other way around. And Joe asked Obama an honest question. And Obama gave him an honest — and very, very revealing — answer. Again, mind you, the embarassment was on Obama's end, not Joe's. It wasn't a gotcha question.

And yet, for that Joe is being pilloried, every aspect of his private and professional life being sorted through and exposed. To prove ... what? What does that have to do with Obama's answer? What does Joe's situation have to do with Obama's philosophical answer — that he wants to "spread the wealth"? Obama's answer goes down the memory hole while the nation concentrates its fire on obliterating Joe the Plumber.

It's sickening, it's maddening and it's downright chilling.

Sorry for the length. But I am just SEETHING.

And:

I was at LSAT class tonight and the instructor had the audacity to state that Joe the Plumber is a "lunatic" fit to be paralized because he allegedly questioned the merits of social security. The instructor then went on to construct a sample question in which Joe the Plumber is confined to a wheel chair because he has been run down by McCain's 'straight talk express' bus.

Mind you, this professional "educator" graduated from Georgetown, Harvard Law, and Harvard Business. And I'm supposed to be worried about Sarah Palin's lack of an "elite" education?

And:

I could care less about Joe's background, whether he's legit, or whether he is a McCain operative. What I do care about is that I could be attacked like a public figure simply for asking a question, like Joe. I am chilled. No longer undecided either.

Joe The Plumber Derangement Syndrome Could Be The Gift McCain's Been Waiting For

Some elitist disparagement from The One. Post contains this statement from the McCain campaign:

“It’s an outrage that the Obama campaign and the media are attacking Joe the Plumber for asking a legitimate question of a presidential candidate. This is why voters still have so many questions about Barack Obama. Instead of answering tough questions, his campaign attacks average Americans for daring to look at the reality behind his words, said Tucker Bounds, spokesman the McCain-Palin campaign. “John McCain will continue to fight on behalf of all hardworking Americans like Joe for policies geared toward increasing prosperity and reducing the burden on taxpayers — not ’spreading the wealth around’ for Senator Government to distribute as he sees fit.”

It's interesting. When the real issues cannot gain any traction on a rational basis, sometimes something symbolic makes all the difference.

Joe The Plumber Now The Target Of Hope. And Change.

Several posts at Ace of Spades.

link

link

link

See also Ed Morrissey.

Folks sometimes complain that Republicans don't play hardball like the Democrats do. But if we were those kind of people we'd already be Democrats, yes? But what would it profit us to gain the whole world, etc?

Now This Was A Debate!

Link

Our Mr. Sun

Cool photos and animations.

Declaring Victory Before The Game Is Over Can Be A Bad Strategy

Via The Anchoress (the whole post is a great read):

The Obama team is sending the media marching band out to the field before the game is won (H/T Bookworm):

The Anchoress

Has a good post re: Joe the Plumber.

excerpt:

To my way of thinking, Joe the Plumber - singing the psalm of the common man, and representing the views of the middle class and what we once used to call “the Silent Majority” - has completely terrified the left, the Obama camp and the press.

And so…he must be destroyed.

I’ve had dozens of emails from folks on the left spouting the “Joe the Plumber Talking Points” which I had already received earlier - the “he’s not licensed” (gasp - how scandalous even though he doesn’t have to be to buy a plumbing business), “he’s not registered,” (So? I recall a few years ago Ben Affleck telling everyone to “Rock the vote” while unregistered?) “he has a lien!” (Oh, my word!) etc…

But here’s the thing: what or who Joe the Plumber is does not matter. What matters is what Barack Obama said to him. The focus on Joe the Plumber - the obsession on him, and the need to somehow discredit him in the eyes of the nation - is meant to distract you from what Barack Obama said, and nothing else.

And what Barack Obama said was:

[video]

Those words are what matters. It does not matter whether Obama said them to Joe the Plumber or Booby McBoobadoob. Don’t allow yourself to become distracted by the media swarm/feed. Stay focused on Obama’s words. THOSE are what matters.

The Winner Is The One Who Comes Up With The New Paradigm

In last night's debate, we got some powerful new symbols/phrases:

"Spread The Wealth Around".

"Joe The Plumber".

"Senator Government".

These are the only things that are memorable from the debates. And they are all to McCain's advantage.

The Media Is Finally Giving A Ruthless Vetting To The Guy Who Deserves It!

Link:

I think this subhed from a NYT front-page headline r on Joe Wurzelbacher says it all:

‘Joe the Plumber’ Is Under Scrutiny

Yes, I'll be he is.

Joe Wurzelbacher's purported distant relationship to Charles Keating is newsworthy, the left is telling me, while Barack Obama's friendship and protoge relationship with terrorist William Ayers is not.

I'm sorry - - what's Joe Wurzelbacher running for again? As far as I know he hasn't declared for Congress.

Yet.

Note that the story isn't really Joe -- it's Barack Obama's answer about spreading the wealth.

Note however the NYT chooses to focus on denigrating and attacking the man who elicited the remark, rather than the remark itself.

What is the object here? If you can prove that Joe Wurzelbacher, say, is consistently late paying his Columbia Record House subscription, that means Obama didn't say what he said?

Is that how it works?

Obama endorses socialism, so the game is to personally destroy the man who inadvertently elicited Obama's endorsement of socialism?

Let's say Joe the Plumber kills hobos, as I do. What the hell does that have to do with the fact that Obama said he wanted to "spread the wealth"?

Thanks to Andy the Squirrel.

Soooo... The media sleuths have now ferreted out that Joe the Plumber voted in a Republican Primary.

Meanwhile, they do not bother to report that Barack the Presidential Candidate was a member of the radical ACORN political bloc, the New Party.

I'm so glad the MSM has its priorities straight.

No Pledge Drives! No Tote Bags!

Amusing parody ad.

This Would Be Some Great Jiu Jitsu

Comment:

When the Obama Regime re-implements the Fairness Doctrine, here’s a suggestion for Rush, Hannity, et. al. In order to provide balance, they should devote one hour of each program to reading the posts and comments on left-wing blogs like Kos, HuffPo, and D.U.M.B.

Found In A Comment

Here:

He is more polished, more intelligent, a better speaker, just all around on such a higher level that its almost unfair. Second, even though I really dont care for many of his views and proposals, Id rather have the Obama family as my neighbors than the McCain family, even though Mrs. Obama is clearly a racist.
-----------------------
So you'd rather live next to a racist than an idiot?

What, exactly makes Obama so smart?

Here is a moderator question:
Mr. Obama, does 1 + 3 = 4 ?

Obama: I'm glad you asked that question, one is a lonely number, and three, well that is the result of 2 plus 1, and 2 as we all know is the next lonliest number since the number one. Now, to answer your question, it is quite possible that you are correct, the sum of two numbers could equal 4,as well could the difference between two numbers, and the product of two numbers. I think we need to spread the wealth around and say that 4 could also be the sum of three numbers. I will say that for John McCain, he could not answer this question because he is so negative, and as we all know the addition of negative numbers is all together unfair and should not be a part of this campaign.

Moderator: Mr. McCain?

My friends, if it were up to me 3 + 1 would equal 2 because I have promised to cut earmarks, and there is no need for 4, when 2 will do just fine. And I've just learned that 4 is Mr. Ayer's favorite number, that washed up terrorist Obama supporter likes this number, but that is besides the point.

Steyn Sums It Up

Link:

The Good Old Days

One thing I liked about the Bush/Gore debates is that it was obvious both men loathed each other and they didn't care who knew it. That liberated them, for good and ill.

By contrast, for all the characteristically ponderous huffing from Bob Schieffer about "negative campaigns", McCain was never able to cast aside the Senatorial collegiality and really stick it to Obama. Why couldn't he have used the s-word - "socialism"? Why couldn't he have said that his opponent is a perfectly pleasant fellow but he has an all but blank resume so all we have to go on is his votes and his associations and both suggest a doctrinaire liberal well to the left of, say, Bill Clinton? Why couldn't he have pointed out that Barack Obama would be the most left-wing president ever elected in the United States?

McCain lacked the killer instinct. A man who cheerfully crashes planes and survives years of torture appeared nervous that clobbering his opponent might dent his image as Mister Bipartisan. You look at the way he sneered at Romney in the primary debates and compare it with his tentativeness toward Obama. His reluctance to whack the Democrat wound up, by default, elevating Obama. When a veteran Republican who's been on the national scene for a quarter-century and a Democrat whom nobody had heard of 20 minutes ago appear to be equal in stature, then by definition the Democrat wins.

And that, Kathryn, explains those insta-polls. McCain has no one to blame but himself.

There Are Only Two Genuine People In This Whole Election Cycle. Sarah Palin And Joe The Plumber.

Great MSM interview with Joe the Plumber. This guy talks more sense in a couple of minutes than almost all of the politicians in the last two years.

How Odd. MoveOn.Org Has Put Out A Strong Pro-McCain Ad

The ad suggests sure-fire tactics to strongly shore up McCain support amongst middle-aged voters.

The Reactor Works Just Fine 99.99% Of The Time. The Other 0.01%, It Blows Everything To Kingdom Come.

Insightful article about Misesian vs Bagehotian banking.

But, I Thought Leasing Was A Can't-Lose Proposition!

There are an awful lot of turkeys in this homecoming flock:

Another kick in the nether regions is about to befall Detroit -- in the form of hundreds of millions of dollars worth of imploding resale values of leased trucks and SUVs.

These vehicles -- leased 2-3 years ago when it was still possible to fill up a V-8 SUV for $40 or so and when people's homes were still worth something and they had reasonably secure jobs -- are about to come home to roost. Hundreds of thousands of them, most not worth anywhere near what the finance guys who wrote the leases thought they'd be worth today.

Remember: With a lease, you're paying the difference between the vehicle's sale price and what the lease issuer estimates it will be worth at the end of the lease (the so-called "residual value"). So, if you leased, say, a new Escalade with a sticker price of $60,000 that the finance guys doing the lease contract figured would be worth $39,000 three years down the road, your lease contract is based on the $21k.

Assuming that the value of that Escalade holds, everyone wins.

The person taking out the lease gets to drive a much more expensive vehicle than he could otherwise afford to buy ($21,000 divided into three years' worth of monthly lease payments is a helluva lot more manageable than a five-year loan on $60k). And he gets to drive a new vehicle every three years or so.

Sweet!

The automakers are happy, too -- because their expensive products are more accessible. People who might not buy -- or be able to buy -- can lease. That helps "move product" and keeps the production lines humming.

And the lease people (and dealers) enjoy a nice turnaround when the off-lease vehicles come back to be resold.

That is, when everything works like it's supposed to.

But what happens when assumed residual values crash through the floor? When that $60k Escalade isn't worth $39,000 three years later -- but only $25,000?

That's what is happening right now. Residual/resale values of big SUVs and pick-ups are tanking. But the (much higher) anticipated residual values were locked in 2-3 years ago, when the leases were issued. The people bringing their suddenly worthless trucks and SUVs back at lease end are not left holding the bag, though.

The industry is.


HOW MUCH LIABILITY are we talking about? No one has an exact number, but when a brand-new Dodge Ram 1500 is being "sold" for 40 percent off MSRP sticker, you get a sense of the magnitude of the financial tsunami that is breaking...

So leases are a fatal deal for the car companies, who are selling product that cannot be afforded without a lease. This is one "deal" that consumers actually made out on (for a short few years): by leasing instead of owning, they were not exposed to the massive capital losses that have taken place. Not directly, anyway.

The Bank Rescue Plan

Or perhaps the McCain/GOP campaign:



Ripped off from here.

The Choice We Face

One candidate is treacherous and unprincipled, with a notable lack of proven leadership ability, who would seek at long last to put an end to the threat of a robust conservative movement. His choices for the Supreme Court will most probably bedevil the Republic for a generation. The policy positions he will actually take when in office bear no relation to what he says on the campaign trail, and indeed, are a complete mystery to the electorate. What he might try to pull when given power is scarily unpredictable.

The other candidate is Barack Obama.

When Politics Is Your Religion, You Play To Win

Of course, you lose your soul in the process, but you do get a short term gain. Stephen Green:

If (when?) Obama is elected, by my estimation there’s an at least even chance that the newly-reconstructed FCC will reverse course and attempt to apply the New Fairness Doctrine to blogs.

...

Libertarians/Conservatives like “Jay” and myself underestimate liberals/progressives — and what we’re guilty of is projection. But when we’re drunk and honest, we have to admit: We’re effing pikers. To restate more plainly: We don’t want power, and don’t know how to wield it. We’re pikers.

Progressives have no such qualms. Given power, they’ll take more and they’ll exercise it ruthlessly. Look at the Democrats in Congress these last two years. In not even 24 months, they’ve sunk to depths it took the Republican Congress six or more years to sink to. Their unpopularity levels are even worse than the Republicans’ in 2006. And what will happen in November? The Democrats will win seats — because they know how to wield their power to deliver the goods to please their corrupt, greedy, grabby, needy base.

And don’t you forget it. And I can prove it.

Run my pet theory past your favorite progressive. If they’re less than honest, they’ll deny it. If they’re honest, they’ll answer you with a smug little smirk — smuggier and smirkier even than my best smug smirk — so smug and so smirky that it will make you want to punch them with a cinder block.

Try it. I dare you. And once you’ve seen the results, you’ll understand: When it comes to real power, we’re the pikers and they’re the masters…

…and their time is coming.

Prepare to fight.

P.S. For my hipster Libertarian friends out there, you need to get this through your thick skulls. Republicans, given the kind of power the Democrats are about to accrue, would maybe take away your right to get a completely totally naked chick to grind on your lap in a publicly licensed bar. The Democrats will do their damnedest to take away your right to speak. There’s the First Amendment, and then there’s the First Amendment. Be careful what you wish for.