I saw this video on Your World with Neil Cavuto. The video is by an organization called Citizens Against Government Waste. I think it drive home the point that all this borrowing and spending will not have a happy ending.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
It really is a bad year to be a Democrat incumbent. How bad is it you ask? Well, Steny Hoyer whose seat is usually so safe he uses his campaign cash to help other Democrats is now spending his money to run put ad on the airways.
The Hill: You know the Democrats are in trouble when Steny Hoyer hits the airwaves in his campaign to retain his seat in Congress. Hoyer, whose seat was generously drawn for him by Maryland Senate President Mike Miller, usually uses his campaign largesse to benefit his Democratic Party colleagues with little thought of himself.
That changed due to an aggressive campaign by first-time candidate Charles Lollar, who is making inroads into previous Hoyer strongholds in Charles, Prince George’s and St. Mary’s counties.
Lollar, who served in the Marine Corps, is taking the same no-nonsense approach to going after the previously unassailable Hoyer that has earned the U.S. Marine Corps worldwide respect and, yes, a little bit of fear. [MORE]
In 2008 Steny Hoyer won reelection with 73% of the vote, clearly that ain’t happening this time around. Lollar must be scary close for Hoyer to abandon helping other Democrats and spend his time and money on himself. If anyone had the latest polls on Hoyer-Lollar match up, please let me know.
Via: The Hill
As far as debate formats go, this one really stinks. There is absolutely no back and forth between West and Klein. How can anyone call this a debate without the two candidates engaging on the issues? The moderators stank too. They seemed not to ask any really controversial or tough questions to either candidate and did not follow up on anything. Given Ron Klein’s high support of the very unpopular Obama/Pelosi/Reid agenda, these moderators did very little to get Klein to explain those votes.
If the Ron Klein’s plan was to paint West as some rightwing whacko extremist, West’s appearance here certainly throws that out the window. West comes off well informed, principled and serious. Given that the room was packed with supporters from both sides, it is hard to tell just how effective each candidate was.
Watch the debate and share your thoughts.
Video h/t: The Right Scoop
The full video to the very contentious Rand Paul – Jack Conway Debate can be found here. Sorry I could not embed the video here, but CSPAN is being stingy
The first few minutes of this debate is really hot stuff. I would love to know who told Jack Conway to go down this road with Rand Paul. It seems like such a stupid idea to me. Rand Paul is a strong libertarian, as such; it would be relatively easy to corner Paul in a hard right position and then try to make him look “extreme”. Instead, Conway goes for these so called allegations from way back in the day.
Kudos to Rand Paul for making Conway look extremely stupid pursuing the issue and double kudos to Rand Paul for refusing to shake Conway’s hand. Conway stooped to the gutter and did not deserve to be treated with respect. We all claim to hate gutter politics, but we seldom punish those who practice it. Rand Paul’s refusal of a handshake is a good start at punishing those who practice dirty politics.
Overall, I think Conway came off as a walking talking attack ad. Conway leveled an attack on Rand Paul with every question he answered. Paul chose only to attack Conway just a tiny amount of times. Throughout the debate I could not help but think of the theme old vs. new. On one hand you had Jack Conway, the old style politician and guardian of the status quo. In the case of Rand Paul we had a glimpse of the new style politician who is willing to challenge everything about the status quo.
Video h/t: Gateway Pundit
Monday, October 18, 2010
Here is a little bit of eye catching news from The Weekly Standard.
TWS: THE WEEKLY STANDARD has obtained the results of a private poll conducted last night in Ohio-10, the Cleveland-area district held for seven terms by Democrat Dennis Kucinich. Kucinich has been widely viewed as safe—even though he fell short of 60 percent of the vote in 2008, and the district has a Cook PVI of only Dem +8.
The poll (based on a small but respectable 319 person sample, with a margin of error of 5.6 percent, weighted to eliminate gender bias) shows Kucinich ahead of his opponent, Peter Corrigan, by only 4 percent. The profile of undecided voters suggests they may break for Corrigan by about 3-2. And Corrigan's 4 percent deficit turns into a 4 percent Corrigan lead when voters are given information on Kucinich's ties to corrupt local Democratic leaders, and on Kucinich's support for illegal immigration. These are signs that undecided voters could be pushed to go Corrigan’s way. Furthermore, Corrigan is running even with Kucinich among those who've already requested their absentee ballot, as early voting has already started in Ohio. [MORE]
Even better news is the fact that Corrigan isn’t even advertising on television and is still that close to Kucinich. Just imagine what a money bomb to Corrigan could do!
On November 2nd if left wing whacko Kucinich was shown the door, it would be sweet justice for man who sold his vote on health care reform for a lousy ride on Air Force One. It would also help to guarantee that the 112th Congress would be nothing like the current one.
Via: The Weekly Standard
Via: The Daily Caller
Saturday, October 16, 2010
I am playing catch up and have just finished watching the Coons-O’Donnell debate. Good Lord, this was a long debate. Basically this was a three on one debate, Chris Coon, Wolf Blitzer and Nancy Karibjanian vs. Christine O’Donnell. I am hard pressed to think of a more lopsidedly moderated debate. Again Blitzer and Karibjanian should take note of how Mitch Fox moderated the Reid-Angle debate. Mitch Fox was only in the tank for the people of Nevada and not for any candidate.
The moderators seem to constantly nudge Coons to go after O’Donnell’s statements. They repeatedly reminded him that this was the “discussion portion” and he could discuss (i.e. attack) what O’Donnell just said.
Chris Coons could not have been more condescending and dismissive of O’Donnell if he tried. Just look at the 52 minute mark to see what I am talking about. Ouch, how rude!
What I thought was funny was that Coons, Blitzer and Karibjanian treated O’Donnell like she was some crazy space alien, even when she continually turned in a sane and thoughtful performance. If they were banking on everyone thinking she is nothing more than a rightwing wacko, they will be mistaken, because O’Donnell was nothing but credible and sane.
Despite, O’Donnell being able to hold her own and come off as a credible candidate, I think what was needed here was for to eviscerate Coons with a killer sound bite or set him back with a series of awkward moments. That did not happen, so it will be interesting to see how if O’Donnell improves her numbers between now and November 2.
I do have to ask, who picked those God awful student questions? Those student questions were so far behind the times it was ridiculous. Are we to believe that college students who are just about to enter the job market are more concerned about stem cell research than the economy? Puleeeeeze!
I think O’Donnell’s best moment came when she answered the education question (see the 36:30 mark). O’Donnell gave a well delivered jab at Coons and a clear explanation of what is wrong with the system.
Second best O’Donnell moment was this:
“I would argue there are more people who support my Catholic faith than his Marxist belief.”
So very feisty!
I also think O’Donnell did a better job than Sharron Angle at delivering charges against her opponent. Clearly, O’Donnell was not afraid to go at Chris Coons.
Video h/t: Breitbart TV
I just got through watching the Harry Reid and Sharron Angle debate. I agree with the consensus that Harry Reid lost this one. I think Reid lost it because he was up against two challengers. First was Sharron Angle who despite not being a polished debater, appear sane and competent and spoke with conviction. The other opponent was Reid himself. For someone who has been in Washington for 30 years, Reid turned in a very armature performance. From convoluted answers to shuffling papers, Harry Reid did little to make the case for the status quo in a year where people are looking for real change.
Reid poor performance was evident from the get go. His opening statement was an awkward combination of his personal history and a questionable laundry list of Democratic accomplishments. Compare and contrast with Sharron Angle whose opening statement was smoothly delivered by identifying with the everyday man.
I think after this debate, thing will start moving in Angle’s direction. Reid and the Democrats spent a lot of time and money trying to paint Angle as a crazy extremist. There was nothing in her performance that lends credence to that. Reid on the other hand, did very little to showcase his experience and thus left Nevada voters little reason not to change senators.
Below are some notes I jotted down throughout the debate. They are in no particular order.
Man up: Did Angle say this in reference to Reid’s opening remarks that he was not as big a man as his father? If so, that was very slick on Angle’s part.
Angle’s performance: My major criticism of Angle is the smiling. I understand she might have been nervous, but some of the things she discusses are dead serious and a smile is so inappropriate. I am glad she addressed this in her closing remarks. My other criticism is more of a nitpick; Angle seemed to struggle to deliver some of her remarks almost like she had committed some of it to memory. I suspect as she gains more experience she won’t have that problem again.
Reid’s poor performance: I think the reason Reid did so poorly is because he had the harder job. He had to defend policies that the American public is forcefully rejecting. As such, he had to pick and choose his words and was forced to make arguments for a define set of parameters. Angle on the other hand could speak much more freely and forcefully because she is working with simple commonsense solutions that the public has been asking for.
Moderator Mitch Fox: All the major networks should take note of this guy. Fox knows how to moderate a debate. He pressed both Reid and Angle hard when they tried to avoid answering questions. I got the distinct feeling that Mitch Fox was on the side of all Nevadans rather than a party hack masquerading as a newsman. Too bad Christine O’Donnell did not have a moderator like Fox for her debate.
Palin Red? Have any of you notice that a slew of female Republican candidates are now sporting red jackets like Sarah Palin did in 2008? Is Angle sending a Mama Grizzle message?
Another Reid gaffe: Reid called the Department of Education the Department of Energy (see 42:45 mark)
About those Benjamins, Harry: To me this was Sharron Angle’s best moment (see 51:30 mark). Every politician on the public dime, who has a huge increase in their line 23, should be asked this question. How did you get so rich on the government dime?
Closing statements: Reid digging for papers? Are you kidding me? Angle’s use of the word “angle” was rather cute.
Video h/t: Left Coast Rebel
Sunday, October 10, 2010
We have come a long way from the days of people falling into rapture over Obama.
UK Daily Mail: This is the astonishing moment a book was apparently hurled at the head of U.S. President Barack Obama during a campaign rally in Philadelphia.
The flying missile narrowly missed hitting the President today.
It is not clear what the book was, where it came from in the crowd, or why it was thrown at Mr Obama - who did not appear to notice the danger.[…]
The rally was clearly an eventful one - other images showed a naked man being led away in handcuffs by police.
It is not clear if the man was involved in the book-throwing incident - or why he was not wearing any clothes.
The bizarre incident recalled the moment in 2008 when an angry Iraqi journalist hurled a shoe at then-U.S. President George Bush during a press conference in Baghdad.
Obama could use some of George Bush’s bobbing and weaving skills. In the video below, Obama doesn’t even notice the book (see the 4:38 mark). Compare and contrast with Dubya who was acting like a master Dodgeball champ.
Be sure to check out the UK Daily Mail story, there is a picture of a sister reacting to the naked man that is absolutely priceless!
Via: UK Daily Mail
Saturday, October 9, 2010
If Connecticut is serious about job creation, they would do well to avoid Richard Blumenthal like the plague. This guy would not know how to create a job if you gave him a step by step manual and a YouTube video.
Remember how he struggled during the debate with this simple question from Linda McMahon.
Blumenthal’s cluelessness leads Ace of Spades to thinks Linda McMahon may have all the raw materials she needs for her next campaign ad.
Oh, Dear: Blumenthal Does Know How To Create Jobs
And he's created them -- through his lawsuits.
"Businesses welcome them."
Linda McMahon, your next commercial is waiting.I agree!
Via: Ace of Spades
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
I just got through saying that MSNBC would do well to ditch Ed Schultz. This kind of delusional BS is exactly why I said that. Aerial photos show without a doubt that the One Nation rally was significantly smaller. Yet, here is Ed trying to pull a Crooks and Liars.
Sorry Ed, but with BS like this you are not ready to take on the big boys at Fox.
Video h/t: The Right Scoop
ABC News: ABC's Michael Falcone reports:
“I'm not a witch," Delaware Senate candidate Christine O'Donnellassures voters, who may be concerned that she once "dabbled" in the dark arts, in a new ad released by her campaign on Monday.
"I'm nothing you've heard," O'Donnell continues in the 30-second spot -- the first of the general election -- "I'm you."
The ad features a spare background, quiet piano notes and O’Donnell, the GOP candidate who has sparked controversy for her past statements on witchcraft, abstinence and evolution, among other things, speaking directly into the camera.
“None of us are perfect, but none of us can be happy with what we see all around us,” she says. “Politicians who think spending, trading favors and back-room deals are the ways to stay in office. I’ll go to Washington and do what you’d do.”
O'Donnell defeated Rep. Mike Castle, R-Del., to win the Republican Senate nomination and is facing off against Democrat Chris Coons in the general election. Her campaign has gained notoriety from a steady stream of video clips released by television personality Bill Maher, whooften featured O'Donnell as a guest on the show he hosted for nearly 10 years, "Politically Incorrect."
In the ad's finale, O'Donnell repeats one of her opening lines: “I’m you."
I think this ad is going to be extremely effective. I said in an earlier post, that Christine’s O’Donnell’s (and Carl Paladino’s) greatest strength is that they have clean hands as far as the mess in Washington is concerned. This ad plays nicely to those strengths. O’Donnell confronts the rumors and points out the very poignant fact Washington is broken. She speaks as a true outsider (i.e. one of us) looking in.
Graphically speaking though, I am not sure why they chose to put O’Donnell in a black dress with a dark blue background. Those colors scream Halloween and witches. If I had shot the video, I would have chosen to put O’Donnell in a Palinesque red jacket against a white background. This would have evoked thoughts of Christmas rather than Halloween, thus giving some more distance from the witch meme. At any rate, I still find the ad is still highly effective.
Via: ABC News
This is the other disturbing video featured on Glenn Beck’s show yesterday. The Greenie movement tipped their hand with this one. What is the message here? Get Green or else?
I cannot image a brainstorming session where the idea of blowing up children would come out a winner. I think for the Ghia first crowd, the lack of love for the human race is starting to show. Yes, it is wonderful to save the planet, but if there are no human beings there to appreciate it, does it really matter? Chew on that, Greenies!
Via: The Blaze
The Blaze: Advice columnists in Britain are known as “agony aunts” (or uncles). Virginia Ironside is one. Her latest bit of advice has drawn outraged reaction from television viewers who caught her comments on the BBC yesterday. She appeared during a segment called, “Can abortion be a kindness?” Here’s the Daily Mail account of her :
Miss Ironside said: ‘If a baby’s going to be born severely disabled or totally unwanted, surely an abortion is the act of a loving mother.’
She added: ‘If I were the mother of a suffering child – I mean a deeply suffering child – I would be the first to want to put a pillow over its face… If it was a child I really loved, who was in agony, I think any good mother would.’
I saw this video yesterday on The Right Scoop. Then Glenn Beck highlighted it on his TV show. This is what happens when you take abortion one step too far. It is the same flawed line of thinking that believes it is better to abort children born to disadvantaged parents than to raise them in a life of poverty. Nonsense! Without a100% accurate crystal ball, there is absolutely no way of knowing which children will rise above their circumstances. Only a chance at life can determine that.
One of my clients is a nonprofit pediatric cancer organization. I have met many of the parents and their inflicted children. From firsthand knowledge I have seen parents forfeit their physical, emotional and financial well being to extend LIFE for their inflicted children. Euthanasia is the furthest thing from their minds. So I have no idea what this woman is talking about when she says; “I think any good mother would”.
I wish the story at The Blaze included whether or not Virginia Ironside has any children. I would love to know if she is speaking as a real mother or as just another BS academic talking hypothetically about real world issues.
Via: The Right Scoop
Via: The Blaze
New York Times: MSNBC, once the also-ran but now the No. 2 cable news channel, has a new tagline that embraces its progressive political identity.
The tagline, “Lean Forward,” will be publicly announced Tuesday, opening a planned two-year advertising campaign intended to raise awareness of the channel among viewers, advertisers and distributors.
The tagline “defines us and defines our competition,” said Phil Griffin, the president of MSNBC, his implication being that the Fox News Channel, which is No. 1 in cable news and a home for conservatives, is leaning backward. Fox’s best-known tagline is “Fair and Balanced.” […]
Ms. Otterman’s lesson from that research: “All we have to do is tell our story to more people.”
She added in an interview, “It’s not that the look is changing. It’s not that the programming is changing. It’s that we’re going out and telling people about it now.”
The resulting ads are not day-and-date promotions for specific programs; rather, they are emotional set pieces about the national debate that moves America forward. The MSNBC brand “is about ideas and change and making the country a better place,” Mr. Griffin said.
“It’s an umbrella that’s pretty wide, but that does have a progressive sensibility,” he continued. “We’re confident. We’re strong. Let’s not live in the past, let’s not live by fear.”
Believe it or not I say “Bravo”! One of the most insulting and maddening things about the media is the silly game they play about being impartial. I don’t care whether they lean left or right, for God’s sake be upfront about it!
If MSNBC wants to be the premiere "progressive" cable news station, they would do well to bring in some more credible on air personalities. Aside from Rachel Maddows, the lineup is full of clowns. If I were a lefty, I still would not like Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews or Ed Schultz. Instead, I would much rather see personalities who had their act together and who had a certain sense of credibility. Keith Olbermann's, Chris Matthews' and Ed Schultz's numerous on air faux pas have rendered them complete clowns.
I think if MSNBC is serious about improving their standing in the cable news war, they will eventually realize a new lineup is in order. Rich Sanchez need not apply.
Via: The New York Times
Former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has started his campaign for the Mayor of Chicago. It looks like he is in for a bumpy ride.
First, his kick off video ended up projecting the word; “carpetbagger”!
Ben Smith, Politico [emphasis mine]: Rahm Emanuel kicked off his campaign for mayor of Chicago with a homecoming, filmed in front of a bookshelf with a vase and a family photograph.
"I was born here, and my wife Amy and I raised our three children here," he says. "I'm glad to be home."
But an Emanuel spokeswoman, Lori Goldberg, confirms that the video itself was actually filmed in Washington, D.C., in the offices of AKPD Message and Media, the firm founded by David Axelrod.
The fact that Emanuel's use of the word "here" wasn't accurate is an amusing footnote to what may be a serious legal problem: Rivals are challenging Emanuel's residency, and his right to run will hinge on where his "home" actually is. Emanuel in detail Monday to a question on the subject. [MORE]
Residency is problem number two. It appears in all the excitement poor Rahm forgot the read the fine print on the qualifications for Chicago Mayor.
Chicago Sun Times: CHICAGO--The first question isn't: Can Rahm win? It's: Can Rahm run?
Sunday, Rahm Emanuel announced in a video posted on a website that he is preparing to run for mayor of Chicago. But two of Chicago's top election lawyers say the state's municipal code is crystal clear that a candidate for mayor must reside in the town for a year before the election.
That doesn't mean they must simply own a home in the city that they rent out to someone else. They must have a place they can walk into, keep a toothbrush, hang up their jacket and occasionally sleep, the lawyers say.
Another three election lawyers say Emanuel could be thrown off the ballot on a residency challenge. None says Emanuel will have it easy. […]
Ironically, President Obama would have no problem coming back to Chicago to run for mayor because he never rented out his home and has come back to stay there on rare occasions.
"He has a physical location that he owns and has exclusive right to live in," said attorney Jim Nally.
But Emanuel's problem as he prepares to run for mayor is that he rented out his house, and the tenant refuses to back out of the lease. [MORE]
It is ironic that Obama, who has been dogged endlessly about his eligibility for President, has a stronger claim to run for Mayor than Rahm does. While there is a little wiggle room in the law that will help Rahm’s case, I expect other mayoral candidates to push this issue hard.
Finally, Rahm Emanuel seems to be having a little trouble gaining support from his Jewish brethren.
Chicago Tribune: Some might assume that the idea of a Rahm Emanuel candidacy for mayor would be cause for celebration alongDevon Avenue, the longtime rialto of Chicago's Jewish community.
After all, Emanuel attended an Orthodox synagogue before going from Chicago to the White House, and his family is highly respected in West Rogers Park, where his father, Benjamin, was a pediatrician. The numbers of those who say Dr. Emanuel took care of their kids is roughly similar to the legion that claimed to have witnessed Babe Ruth point to theWrigley Field bleachers and hit that famed home run.
But Rahm Emanuel, who begins his Chicago "listening tour" this week, is about to discover that all politics aren't local.
In the Jewish neighborhoods on the Far North Side, Rahm Emanuel is more associated with what he did in Washingtonthan what he might do in Chicago's City Hall.
"There are questions about his positions on Israel," said Chesky Montrose, 32, who was wearing a skull cap and pushing one child in a stroller while keeping an eye on two others bicycling down Devon. "It's not logical that international policy would influence a race for mayor. But there is some resentment here, no doubt." [MORE]
Despite these troubles and rocky start, I would not count Rahm Emanuel out yet. The Chicago machine is legendary and Rahm comes from that machine. I am quite sure he knows where all the bells and whistles are located.
Via: Chicago Sun Times
Via: Chicago Tribune