Political Truth and Fact

Sunday's Web

Political Truth and Fact.Com

Neither fair nor balanced, but absolutely factual

Democrat politicians try hiding their party label

There’s an important tip for many voters – ordinary Americans wanting to make sure Republicans take the House and, if possible, the US Senate, as they contemplate for whom they will vote Tuesday, need to be certain they are not voting Democrat.

They may know Republican Candidates at the top of the ticket, but may not know the affiliation of a lot of down ticket candidates.  Some voters may have seen a commercial they like, but very much want to make sure they are backing the Republican, not a Democrat.  How can they tell? 

Lots of commercials these days don’t identify the party of the candidate running them. Those are Democrat commercials and materials. Count on it.

Democrats are trying to sneak into office in a lot of close elections, They are willing to do absolutely anything to succeed.* They probably know in their district that Democrats in general, and Obama specifically, are not popular with most of their voters.

No surprise.  Instead of dealing with real issues, Obama and his Capitol Hill majorities focused on government take-overs and bailouts for banks and auto companies, a specious concept claiming to be a “stimulus” bill, a cap and trade scheme concealing an incredibly huge tax increase and a gasoline price tag of as much as $8 a gallon, and a radical healthcare bill that nudges the nation toward socialized medicine.  The healthcare legislation is particularly telling in demonstrating the fact that Republican input was rudely rejected and the final bill was crafted totally in secret behind the closed doors of Democrat Senate Leader Harry Reid’s inner sanctum.

Obama then topped off that collage of extremism by challenging Arizona’s immigration law – a law supported by up to 70% of the American people.

Obama and Democrats welcome illegal immigrants and are doing all they can to support them – including the madness of allowing them to vote in some cases.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi openly demonstrated raw arrogance and high pressure intimidation resembling the mafia characters on “The Sopranos”.  Fittingly, Pelosi is from a family with Italian roots in a hotbed of mob culture.

Americans in general can be misled, convinced, and even cajoled into accepting new ideas and concepts, but get caught trying to force them to do something against their will and common-sense judgment, and they will fight you tooth and nail.

Liberal Democrats tried to govern from a basic concept of telling Americans to “shut up and sit down, we know what’s best”.  Pelosi said Congress needed to pass the radical health scheme before they could understand what’s in it.

Rep. Brian Baird, a six-term Democrat from Washington state is retiring this term. He was interviewed by WSJ’s John Fund.

Baird admitted to Fund that labor bosses were acting in much the same mob-like manner mentioned earlier.

He told Fund, “I had labor groups come to me and insist the (healthcare) bill was so important we couldn't wait to know what was in it," he recalls. "I asked them if they were handed a new union contract and told it was so important they had to agree to it without reading it, would they go along?" They continued to insist he vote for the bill and threatened him with a primary challenger.”

Tony Soprano take note.  Democrat union bosses are copying your method of operation on Capitol Hill.

Baird described his Democrat-dominated final class as “a Congress dominated by inertia and interest groups”.

The retiring Democrat claims tea party activists “raised false fears, but acknowledges the political harm that Democrats have done themselves."

“False fears”? High taxes and $8 a gallon gasoline, socialized medicine, bail outs and take-overs, and deficits that stagger the mind.  Democrats such as Baird (and their mainstream media) continue proving they have no remote clue about the tea parties – what that movement really is, and who is involved.  He expects the anticipated losses by Democrats will generate a huge number of retirements among the survivors at the end of the next session.

Comments one frustrated liberal pundit about Tuesday’s expectations:  “There is sort of a circus aspect to it …  it’s become comic and a kind of a dark way.”

A conservative sums up that sort of Liberal resentment: “Isn't it amazing how these same people that were thrilled by the idea of America electing as president a junior senator from Illinois with little qualifications for the most important office in the land are now scared to death about who may be going to Congress next January? Oozes with hypocrisy, doesn't it?”

When you vote, I suggest “No” as the best response to any and all amendments you have not read or don’t fully understand, and, most especially, avoid voting for any candidate whose commercials and campaign materials don’t mention his party affiliation.  Such a candidate is a Democrat trying again to fool you and all those other voters who want liberals out of government.

Tuesday’s outcome certainly won’t solve all the nation’s problems, but it seems to have a potential for giving us a pretty good start.

The full impact of what is labeled the “tea party movement” will go beyond ridding us of a lot of Democrats on Capitol Hill, but also bringing grass root level pressures that will force reform of Republicans as well.

Buddy

*Speaking of Democrats willing to do anything to win, the Florida Senate race has produced a raw example of personal ambition gone to new extremes.  Charlie Crist is an incumbent Florida governor who was elected as a Republican.  When his unpopularity among Republicans became obvious in polling, he switched parties and began running for Senate as an Independent.  Understand Crist did not even pretend he changed parties because of principle or any lofty reason – he escaped the GOP primary ahead of certain defeat (and after pledging several times on national TV that he would never, ever, leave the GOP ticket) While still bearing the Republican label as the incumbent governor, Crist is increasingly discovered to have serious Democrat ties – one  aide now confiding Crist, if elected, would caucus with Democrats.  The past week, Crist was caught conspiring with Bill Clinton in efforts to pursued the Democrat Senate candidate to leave the race and throw his support to Crist. Open chicanery, and again not a whiff of
higher principle or ethics involved in the actions of Crist.

• Charlie Crist is the embodiment of raw political ambition – ambition unencumbered by principle or higher motivations of any sort.

• At the end of the day, Crist has proven himself to be the sort of seedy, shady, greedy and sleazy politician we hear about in parodies.  He has neither honest shame nor concern for those he wants to convince to vote for him.

Real shame, in the end, attaches to the millions of Florida voters who mistakenly chose him to be their governor.

The day’s top political news:

Democrat Estate tax increase has some Americans planning earlier death

U.S. Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R) says some of her Wyoming constituents are so worried about the reinstatement of federal estate taxes that they plan to discontinue dialysis and other life-extending medical

Lummis says many ranchers and farmers in the state would rather pass along their businesses -- "their life's work" -- to their children and grandchildren than see the federal government take a large chunk.treatments so they can die before Dec. 31.

Republicans are fighting to renew the Bush-era tax cuts, which expire at the end of the year. The cuts exempt large inheritances as well as certain wage income, interest, dividends and capital gains. She said the estate tax would go from zero this year to a maximum of 55 percent next year.

http://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/article_d826231c-ae29-576b-b23a-13bb9c16dcdc.html

Poll: Dems split over handing Obama their 2012 nomination

Among Democrats, 47 percent say Obama should be challenged for the 2012 nomination and 51 percent say he should not be opposed. Those favoring a contest include most who backed Hillary Rodham Clinton's unsuccessful faceoff against Obama for the 2008 nomination. The poll did not ask if Democrats would support particular challengers.

That glum assessment carries over into the nation at large, which is similarly divided over whether Obama should be a one-term president.

A real Democratic challenge to Obama seems unlikely at this stage and his re-election bid is a long way off. But the findings underscore how disenchanted his party has grown heading into the congressional elections Tuesday.

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=213&sid=2099680

Democrats can’t ride Jon Stewart’s wave

Comedians attempt to ape Glenn Beck’s successful rally on the DC Mall – and fail. Democrats hoped Jon Stewart’s Rally to Restore Sanity Saturday would provide the kick in the pants needed to fire up unenthusiastic young voters just three days before the midterms. It didn't.

Stewart’s decision to avoid explicit partisan politicking denied the left a kind of galvanizing moment that might have driven to the polls his Democratic fans who weren’t already planning to vote or motivated previously apathetic liberals to grass-roots activities.

“I’m really happy you guys are here, even if none of us are really quite sure why,” Stewart told the crowd. “Some of you may have seen today as a clarion call for action. ... Clearly, some of you who just wanted to see the Air and Space Museum got royally screwed. And I’m sure a lot of you were just here to have a nice time, and I hope you did.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/44432.html#ixzz13x1zC5IQ

 

Saturday's Web

Political Truth and Fact.Com

Neither fair nor balanced, but absolutely factual

Carter, a failure as president -- a personal burden for me

Jimmy Carter has been a burden I have carried for far too many years.

To begin with, I was probably the first person to put him on TV (teeth, grin, and all) back in 1965 when he was a State Senator with something interesting to say about improving education in Georgia.  I was TV News Director of the ABC Affiliate in Columbus, Georgia, at the time. and produced a weekly news documentary program.

Jimmy and I both suffered defeat in separate races for governor of Georgia in 1966, then headed for politics at a higher level.

About ten years later, as I entered the famous Gridiron Dinner in Washington, Carter – not yet an announced presidential candidate – and I met.  I re-introduced myself – leading Carter to respond “Of course I remember you – you have been my role model for years”.

Talk about indictments!!

I have carried both burdens ever since, even though I certainly sought vindication through strenuous efforts to defeat his presidential bid.  Of course I failed, and the rest, as they say, is history.

A Newsweek reporter provided the best insight into the real Carter. During a conversation during the Georgia governor’s race in 1966, he told me.  “Watch that guy, he smiles a lot, but never with his eyes”.  Carter seldom lets his true feelings show.  These days, however, its quite evident that he is a bitter old man who is not a big fan of his own country as it exists in the world today.

That bitterness showed a bit recently when in an appearance on MSNBC, Carter told Chris Matthews that the reason he lost the White House in 1980 was John Anderson.  Hogwash, Jimmy.  Hogwash.

Anderson was a Republican Congressman from Illinois, a liberal, Anderson was the sort of politician who has led me to understand the fact that no moderate can ever be a dynamic leader.

Anderson is a vague footnote in history.

But Carter’s claim that Anderson cost him the race is totally specious.  A grasping for straws as excuses for being rejected.  As a writer in The American Thinker blog notes, “If every one of Anderson's votes had gone to (Carter), Reagan would still have won by 2.7 million votes.”  The Thinker article continues explaining to Carter: “By contrast, you beat Ford in a two-way contest in 1976 by only 1.6 million votes. We cannot, however, assume that those Anderson votes would have gone to you if he had not run.” 

Actually, Carter may not have really won against Ford.  My office at the RNC received convincing word that a challenge of voting results in southern Ohio, would result in that state’s going to Ford.  Ford ordered us to shut down the suggestion.  Reflecting on Watergate and the fiascos it produced, Ford said “the nation has been through enough.  Shut it down”.

For his part, Carter has long been given to bitterness.  When he failed to win the Democrat primary for governor in 1966, he was so bitter (he thought he had been cheated) his evangelist sister, Ruth, had to urge him to embark on a retreat with his wife, Rosalind, and get his act together.

The result of that retreat was Amy – the daughter with whom Carter says he frequently discussed nuclear disarmament.

Of late, however, Carter has been letting his bitterness show again.  He even openly supports the pro Islamic Palestinians such as Hamas, in their struggle against the Jews in Israel.

Of course, anti Semitism has been a regular sentiment of liberal Democrats for some years. (Yet, strangely, Jews continue voting heavily Democrat)

Carter’s brother Billy, an iconic redneck, was always more likeable, and had a far greater grasp of common sense.  Had he won the White House, the state of the Union today could be 180 degrees different.  A mess, probably, but different for sure.

Now Carter sits and muses.  He has become the measurement for presidential failure.  That has to really chafe someone with his inclination to bitterness.  Now, some suggest Obama may exceed Carter and become the new symbol for failure.

I wouldn’t be surprised to learn Carter voted Republican this Tuesday, just to make sure Obama sinks a bit lower.  Vindication eludes him otherwise.

Buddy

The day’s top political news:

Crist Would Caucus With Democrats, Advisor Says

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist would caucus with Senate Democrats if he wins Florida’s three-way U.S. Senate contest on Tuesday, a close advisor told Washington Wire Friday.

That’s a big “if.” Mr. Crist is trailing Republican candidate Marco Rubio in most polls. But the declaration by Florida trial lawyer John Morgan sheds light on one of the many mysteries in the Bill Clinton-Charlie Crist-Kendrick Meek imbroglio.  Democrats, desperate to maintain control of the Senate, have been caught maneuvering unethically behind the scenes in order to help Crist.

 Such a move on Crist’s part would constitute the ultimate betrayal to the hundreds of GOP donors who sent him campaign dollars when he was still running in the GOP primary.  Crist switched parties (after pledging on national TV not to do so) when he realized most Republicans preferred Rubio.  Now Crist is about to learn most of Florida rejects him as well – his openly demonstrated lack of integrity being a major factor in his result.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/10/29/crist-would-caucus-with-democrats-advisor-says/

As Reid Falters, Schumer Subtly Stands in the Wings

Senator Charles E. Schumer shipped $500,000 to Nevada in recent weeks to help Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader and Mr. Schumer’s political patron and close friend, as he fights for his political life. Mr. Schumer, a New York Democrat, made out a smaller check, for $20,000, to the Democratic Party in Vermont, where the gift earned him the good will of Senator Patrick J. Leahy, even though Mr. Leahy is not believed to be in any serious re-election jeopardy.

The two donations underscore the excruciatingly delicate position Mr. Schumer finds himself in these days. He is doing everything he can to help his friend Mr. Reid fend off a challenge from the Tea Party candidate Sharron Angle and prevent the embarrassing ouster of the party leader.

Mr. Schumer is very carefully laying the groundwork to move on a moment’s notice to try to secure the top Democratic job if Mr. Reid is defeated on Tuesday.The situation for Mr. Schumer is further complicated by the fact that his partner in the Senate leadership and Capitol Hill housemate, Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, is also positioning himself in the underground campaign to replace Mr. Reid, though both men have made it clear they would greatly prefer that Mr. Reid return.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/29/us/politics/29schumer.html

Pelosi, Among Others, Could Exit if Dems Lose House

If Democrats lose control of the House of Representatives next week, as most political observers expect, there is a good chance that Speaker Nancy Pelosi will decide to retire.rather than toil in the relative obscurity of the minority. Even if she wanted to stay on, it's not at all clear that she would win the position of minority leader within her own caucus.

Wednesday, North Carolina Representative Heath Shuler suggested he might challenge Pelosi for the Speaker’s position. Pelosi is more likely to leave gracefully. That would leave the caucus in the hands of majority leader Steny Hoyer

Other Democrats are sure to follow Pelosi out of the Capitol. In the case of Pelosi's Democratic cloakroom, the exodus could be deeper. Rules Committee chair Louise Slaughter and Judiciary Committee chairman John Conyers, both 81, know that life in the minority holds less appeal for octogenarians. The average age of Democrat House chairs is nearly 70, while top Republicans are, on average, a decade younger. Democrat chairs have spent an average of 13.5 terms, or 27 years, in office, compared to Republicans who average 9.5 terms, or 19 years, in office.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,2028212,00.html#ixzz13qeouTKa

 

 

Friday -- The Referendum on Obama

Political Truth and Fact.Com

 

Neither fair nor balanced, but absolutely factual

Obama’s name isn’t on Tuesday’s Ballot – but his administration is the issue

Democrat candidates nationwide realize that no matter what they have done, they will still be found wanting by a substantial number of their voters.  That’s why some total unknowns are successfully challenging incumbents.

Even Barney Frank faces a serious threat.

Many voters are focusing on a single element of the background of the candidate they support – he or she is not an incumbent, is not a Democrat, and is not a part of the Obama team.

That’s 180 degrees out of phase with voter mood two years ago.  In those days, Bush was the rejected candidate and Obama was carrying Democrats with him to an overwhelming victory that would leave them with dominating majorities in both Houses of Congress.

Two years ago this January, liberal Democrats seem poised to do what they want, whenever they wanted. Then came bailouts and what voters saw as irresponsible spending.  They felt betrayed by the “stimulus” scam, then grew even angrier over Democrat takeover of their health care.

Of course cap and trade didn’t help Democrat fortunes, and that was before Obama ordered his DOJ to challenge the Arizona immigration law that is supported by a huge majority.

No wonder Obama’s record isn’t popular.

That brings us to Tuesday’s vote.  According to pundit Dennis Prager:

“The reason is that unlike all previous elections, this one is actually a referendum on the direction of the United States of America.”
 
Says Prager: “If the Democrats win:
 
— The American people have announced, consciously or not, that they support the Democratic Party's "fundamental transformation" — those were President Obama's words when he campaigned, and he has lived up to them — of America from a liberty-based state of limited government into an equality-based welfare state with an ever-expanding government.
 
— America will change from a country that emphasizes producing wealth to a country that emphasizes redistribution of wealth.
 
The left has never been primarily interested in creating wealth. Its primary goal always and everywhere has been to redistribute it. That so many businessmen and much of Wall Street are only now awakening to this fact is only a testament to the staggering lack of wisdom in big business.”
 
Prager makes other points, but these suffice.

Of course, the lesson Republicans should take from this is the volatile nature of today’s electorate. With access to the Internet and Fox News, attitudes can develop quicker and waves of support (or opposition) rise quickly.

When they take power in January, their planning should embrace that very fact.

Buddy

The day’s top political news:

Bill Clinton pushed Kendrick Meek to quit Florida race in a conspiracy to help Charlie Crist

Bill Clinton sought to persuade Rep. Kendrick Meek to drop out of the race for Senate during a trip to Florida last week — and nearly succeeded. Meek agreed — twice — to drop out and endorse Gov. Charlie Crist’s independent bid in a last-ditch effort to stop Marco Rubio, the Republican nominee who stands on the cusp of national stardom.

Christ has repeatedly demonstrated a total lack of principle or personal integrity…even switching promises regarding Obamacare.  Crist has been identified as the one who suggested the conspiracy and tried to put it together.

Meek, a staunch Clinton ally from Miami, has failed to broaden his appeal around the state and is mired in third place in most public polls, with a survey today showing him with just 15 percent of the vote. His withdrawal, polls suggest, would throw core Democratic voters to the moderate governor, rocking a complicated three-way contest and likely throwing the election to Crist. The former president’s top aide, Doug Band, initially served as the intermediary between Meek and Crist, and Clinton became involved only when Meek signaled that he would seriously consider the option, Clinton spokesman Matt McKenna confirmed to POLITICO.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/44337.html#ixzz13l9zKzTU

Democrats increasingly going negative in midterm campaign adsBy

Many Democratic candidates, faced with running on accomplishments that haven't been embraced by voters, are using a tested, if unsavory, tactic: attacking their opponents' character, according to data provided by a new study. The strategy of these Democrats is to turn the election from a referendum on their record into a choice - one where the other side is "too extreme," a label that has become a common refrain in TV ads across the country.

An analysis of advertising by the Wesleyan Media Project shows that Democratic candidates are running a higher percentage of negative ads and they are more likely to go after their opponents' personal characteristics instead of their policy positions.

The data show that Republican candidates have been able to run more positive ads because they've received help from parties and outside groups that are attacking on their behalf. Once outside spending by parties and interest groups are factored in to the candidate spending, both liberals and conservatives are running the same share of negative ads. Ads on the left are still more focused on personal characteristics over policy, however.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/28/AR2010102804044.html

Concerns grow about election fraud, voter intimidation

With control of Congress in the balance, both political parties are gearing up for a possibly wild and woolly Election Day around the country."Legal war rooms," roving teams of lawyers, hot lines and poll challengers are all part of the strategy that Democrats and Republicans will employ Tuesday to handle suspected fraud or to help voters whose right to vote is questioned.

The issue is also on the Justice Department's radar. It will post federal monitors at selected polling places around the country, and prosecutors, civil rights attorneys and the FBI will be tasked with handling election-related complaints that day. A special toll-free number — 1-800-253-3931 — will be available for complaints about ballot access.

A lot is just precautionary and not out of the ordinary. What's different this year is that candidates and others also are getting into the act. Tea party groups plan to use "surveillance squads" at polling places to record possible voting misbehavior. Some tea party groups already have questioned voter registration records.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/10/28/102804/concerns-grow-about-election-fraud.html#ixzz13lCC1ilt

From the Reader's Digest, July 1979

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r104:1:./temp/~r1046y1gVO:e8227:.

A Constitutional Amendment To Balance the Budget?

EUGENE H. METHVIN

In Ollie Mohamed's Belzoni, Miss., department store, a group was discussing federal spending, inflation and Congress's perennial inability to balance the budget. State legislator David Halbrook spoke of his new grandchild: `That baby is going to have to pay for the things I'm enjoying. It ought to be the other way around. I ought to leave the world a little better for him.'

That gave Mohamed, a former legislator, an idea. He found a copy of the Constitution and began to read from Article V: `The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case shall be valid * * * when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States. * * *'

That day in 1974, a national crusade was born to compel Congress by constitutional amendment to balance the federal budget. (An exception would occur in national emergencies, when both houses could agree by two-thirds vote to permit deficit spending.) A few months later, Representative Halbrook got the Mississippi state legislature to pass a resolution calling for a constitutional convention. Acting independently, lawmakers in Maryland, Delaware and North Dakota passed similar resolutions. The National Taxpayers

Union, a feisty new citizens' lobby, took up the cause, and by April 1979 convention-call resolutions had been passed by 30 states. If four more act, Congress will be required to call a constitutional convention.

The pressure is growing. CBS and the New York Times interviewed voters last November and found that 82 percent of Democrats and 86 percent of Republicans favor a balanced-budget amendment. Five Presidential contenders (Republicans Reagan, Connally, Dole, Baker and Democrat Brown) have endorsed it. Observed Oregon senate president Jason Boe, `This thing is coming like a 100-car freight train at Congress, and they haven't done a thing about it.'

The realization that the budget-balancers are only four states away from a constitutional convention has startled and disturbed many Washington politicians. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Edmund Muskie (D., Maine) growled that if state legislators continued their rebellion, Congress might balance the budget by cutting the $83 billion in grants and revenue sharing it gives states and localities. House Speaker Tip O'Neill's son Thomas, the Massachusetts lieutenant governor, took the lead in organizing an anti-amendment coalition of the special-interest groups that benefit most from deficit spending, including the AFL-CIO, the National Education Association and other public employee unions. President Carter assailed the proposition as `political gimmickry' and formed a White House task force to lobby state legislators.

Washington mobilization had effect. The Montana senate bowed to lobbying efforts and in March defeated an amendment resolution. And the Administration has promised an all-out fight in each of the 15 state legislatures that have yet to act.

Clearly, the battle lines are drawn between the Washington establishment and a disillusioned grassroots groundswell. Never before in the nation's history has so widespread a movement for constitutional change developed over such fundamental

issues as the proper size of government and the way our elected representatives wield the powers to tax and spend. If the convention drive succeeds, says The Wall Street Journal the people would be saying that they have finally decided Congress can't be trusted with their money.'

Few even on Capitol Hill dispute that there is genuine ground for wondering these days. Between 1946 and 1961, Congress managed seven deficits and seven surpluses, with an overall approximate balance--and low inflation. But in the 19 years since, Congress has balanced the budget only once, in 1919, and the net deficit over those years has been a aggering $377 billion. Washington has continued the deficits in boom times as well as bust. This year, President Carter offered a 1980 budget with a $29 billion deficit--plus $12 billion more in `off budget items--and called it `austere.'

Two decades of Congressional and White House profligacy have helped produce severe inflation that threatens to halve the value of every dollar in five and a half years. Obvious victims include the poor and the elderly, but in the end, everybody suffers. The average family last year paid almost $800 interest on past government deficits, and inflation robbed another $800 from its purchasing power.

In 1976, running against the Washington establishment, candidate Jimmy Carter promised to balance the budget by 1979. Now that President Carter has proffered a $29 billion deficit, the public is turning to the constitutional amendment as a solution. The Associated Press found in a poll last February that `distrust of policitians is so deep that Americans do not believe their elected officials will act. Seventy percent said politicians will not work to wipe out the deficit.'

Even without a constitutional convention, the budget-balancers may get what they want. State legislatures have used the convention call in the past to lever balky Congresses into proposing needed amendments. In fact, no amendment has ever come

directly from the convention approach. State convention calls have helped prompt Congress to submit amendments to provide for direct election of Senators, repeal Prohibition, limit a President to two terms and provide for Presidential succession in case of disability.

In this session of Congress, 203 Representatives and 39 Senators support a wide variety of amendment proposals which they want Congress to submit directly to the states, circumventing a convention call. (Three-fourths of the state legislature, 38, are required to ratify an amendment.) One group would require a `super-majority' of either two-thirds or three-fourths of the members of Congress, in an emergency such as war or deep depression, to vote for a deficit budget. Otherwise, the legislators would have to match outlays with revenues. If revenues fell short, Congress would have to slash spending or impose a surtax. Knowing they would have to go on record in favor of higher taxes, the legislators would be certain to look harder at some of their spending ideas.

Another proposal has come from Senators Richard Stone (D., Fla.) and H. John Heinz (R., Pa.). Their amendment, drafted by a group including Novel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman, would limit federal spending increases to the growth in the Gross National Product. If inflation is greater than three percent, the proposal would impose an even tighter limit on spending.

President Carter and Democratic leaders in Congress protest that any constitutional amendment would `tie the hands' of the nation in time of crisis, since a determined minority of either house could block needed appropriations. Proponents respond that a stubborn minority blocking obviously needed action would be swiftly punished at the polls. Congress could still act by majority vote in an emergency by levying taxes to finance needed spending; a minority could only block deficit spending.

Whatever the outcome of these proposed amendments, and the call for a constitutional convention, the balance-the-budget movement has triggered a mighty debate. Says the National Taxpayers Union's Jim Davidson: `As people see their real spending power decline, this issue will not fade away.' Adds Sen. Gary Hart (D., Colo.), `It's a sorry state of affairs when the American people are demanding a constitutional convention because they don't trust us, and Congress is saying, `No, you can't have one because we don't trust you.'

This contentious scene would not faze the men who wrote the Constitution, for the debate has focused public attention once again on some eternal verities about public power, its exercise, abuse and safeguards. What healthier way for Americans to celebrate the approaching 200th birthday of their Constitution.

 

 

Thursday -- Obama arrogance dooms Democrats

Political Truth and Fact.Com

Neither fair nor balanced, but absolutely factual

Polls continue with optimistic data for Republicans

The day’s news brings encouraging word.

Most polling shows a continuing prediction that Republicans will enjoy a bountiful result Tuesday night as votes are tallied in the Mid-term elections.  In fact, Gallop’s data projects a stronger GOP result in this election than in Newt’s revolution in 1994.  That means the results may not just be good, but actually “fantastic”. 

But winning is one thing, governing is another.

There’s a major question of whether the GOP has learned its lesson – or whether it will go back to the bad old days when they joined Democrats in issues such as spending too much.  Of course, those were days of more accommodating Republicans – when Newt left, it seemed he took GOP Senate Leader Trent Lott’s backbone with him.  Lott was overly cooperative with Bill Clinton – to an extent that bothered many conservatives.

No more.

According to “The Hill” newsletter, “Republicans aren't in the mood for compromise, especially on repealing healthcare reform, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said Wednesday.”

The Hill continues “Boehner, the party leader who would likely become Speaker in a GOP-controlled House, distanced himself from a senior senator's suggestion last week that trying to repeal the new healthcare reform law wasn't in Republicans' best interest.”

Good.

The Obama health scheme has been unpopular from the start, primarily because many Americans saw it in broad terms they bitterly resent.  Among other things, Obamacare constituted a specific effort to destroy existing health care quality by moving the country toward socialized medicine.  Socialized medicine always offers lesser quality. Democrats imposed the healthcare legislation against the wishes of a majority of Americans.  In doing that, they proved they deserved to be removed.

It’s strange Obama and Pelosi were so rabid about passing that particular bill – one crafted in secret behind the closed doors of Democrat Senate Leader, Harry Reid.  Republicans were denied participation, and the measure never had wide spread popularity.  The same can be said of another Obama – Democrat obsession: cap and trade.

Beside making a few people – such as Al Gore – rich beyond imagination, it did nothing for ordinary Americans other than increase their taxes by $3,000 a year and bringing with its passage, a potential for prices of gasoline to rise to $8 a gallon.

The question that intrigues most observers is how liberal Democrats managed to squander immense political power in so short a period of time.  Within weeks of Obama’s inauguration, spontaneous opposition erupted.

In “the Daily Beast”. Howard Kurtz offers some answers:

Kurtz notes “Obama has several problems. The worst is he's the Real Good Talker.

“That's how he made his first national splash at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, as the Real Good Talker. That's been his strong suit, thanks to Teleprompters that enable him to read the words while focusing more on delivery. Like some MLB pitcher going to his trademark fastball way too often.

“To put it bluntly, it's arrogance. Prof. Obama is so sure that he's right -- and, therefore, so is his insular staff -- that he keeps on talking full speed because if he just explains his thinking one or two or 30 more times using the same metaphors and jokes, even the dimmest of his pupils is bound to get it. And to realize that what they thought they wanted isn't really what their president knows they need.

“That's why last year Obama wasted 59, as in nearly five dozen, town hall meetings selling his colossal healthcare bill to the public and to dozens of Democratic House members, who are now inching fatalistically forward in the sad line toward Tuesday's political firing squads.”

Kurtz may not have all the answers to this question, but he is certainly on target in many of them.  Obama has projected arrogance, and his mode of speaking has made it seem as if he was lecturing to his audiences, rather than communicating with them in a manner made famous by Ronald Reagan.

That’s a real lesson future presidents and all national leaders should heed.  The difference lies in the implications of “to” and “with”.  It’s good to see Republicans heading in that direction.  So far.

Buddy

The day’s top political news:

2010 Electorate Still Looking More Republican Than in the Past

Gallup's latest figures on the composition of the 2010 electorate suggest that, consistent with an earlier Gallup report, those voting in this year's congressional elections across the country will be similar in gender, age, and education to 2006 voters. At the same time, they will be substantially more Republican in their party orientation, and more conservative than has been the case in the past several midterms.

The current and historical likely voter data reviewed here assume an approximately 40% turnout rate among national adults for each election, close to the typical turnout rate recorded in recent midterm years. (Gallup has also calculated the 2010 congressional vote using an assumption of higher turnout.)

Specifically, 55% of likely voters in Gallup's Oct. 14-24, 2010, polling are Republicans and independents who lean Republican. This is higher than the Republican showing in the past four midterm elections, although not too dissimilar to the 51% found in 2002. The corollary of this is that the 40% of likely voters now identifying as Democratic is the lowest such percentage of the past several midterms.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/144053/2010-Electorate-Looking-Republican-Past.aspx

Republicans Plan Budget Cuts as Early Act If They Take Power

U.S. House Republicans plan to try to slash $100 billion from the federal budget as early as January if they wrest power from Democrats in this year’s midterm elections, setting up possible early showdowns with President Barack Obama on taxes and spending.

A Republican House takeover would thrust new committee heads, such as Representative Dave Camp on the Ways and Means panel, into the spotlight within weeks -- or days -- of seizing their gavels in early January. They would confront quick political tests that could alienate independent voters and Tea Party activists alike, analysts said.

Carrying out spending cuts that Republicans have pledged to seek -- which would amount to 21 percent of the government’s so-called discretionary money pot -- could prove politically difficult. Reducing funds for programs such as college loans for low-income students or medical research at the National Institutes of Health is harder than promising to do that on the campaign trail.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-27/republicans-plan-100-billion-budget-cut-as-early-act-if-they-take-power.html

Poll: Independents Drive GOP Midterm Advantage

With the midterm elections less than a week away, a new CBS News/New York Times poll finds that Republicans continue to hold an advantage over Democrats in the generic House ballot. Forty-six percent of likely voters say they plan to vote Republican, while 40 percent say they will vote Democrat.

The advantage can be attributed in large part to independents, who are breaking hard for the GOP. Forty-seven percent of independent likely voters say they plan to vote Republican, while just 32 percent plan to vote Democrat. Seventeen percent haven't made up their minds.

More than four in five Democrats and Republicans, meanwhile, say they are sticking with their party. Congress continues to suffer from abysmal approval ratings: Just one in ten likely voters say they approve of the job Congress is doing, and four in five say most members should be replaced.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20020976-503544.html

Boehner: 'Not a time for compromise'

Republicans aren't in the mood for compromise, especially on repealing healthcare reform, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said Wednesday.

Boehner, the party leader who would likely become Speaker in a GOP-controlled House, distanced himself from a senior senator's suggestion last week that trying to repeal the new healthcare reform law wasn't in Republicans' best interest.

Whether — or to what extent — Republicans will look to compromise with President Obama and congressional Democrats is a major issue for the party on the verge of Nov. 2's elections. Republicans are within striking distance of winning the net 39 seats they need to take back the House, and are expected to win back seats in the Senate. Boehner seems to cast his lot with some of the more aggressively conservative members of his party by vowing not to compromise.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/126153-boehner-this-is-not-a-time-for-compromise

 

 

Wednesday's Web

Political Truth and Fact.Com

Neither fair nor balanced, but absolutely factual

Obama – a politician in search of a message he can sell

When political historians muse about the current political scene, sure they will likely feel compelled to focus much of their writing on, the rhetorical disintegration of Barack Obama.

Obama swept into office less than two years ago with an image of a smooth speaker who could entrance crowds and inspire dispirited people – especially those who felt afflicted one way or the other by the actions of the Bush Administration.

Far left pundit Chris Mathews admitted he felt a tingle down his leg when Obama spoke.  As a professional Democrat, what Mathews feels running down his leg these days, is not a tingle.  It’s a reflection of fear and dejection.

Obama has lost it.  His banks of teleprompters have betrayed him.  His message is cluttered, fragmented, and void of effective theme or impact.  Obama’s rhetorical loss is catching.  Just the other day, Bill Clinton – the former President who Democrats were seeing as a knight astride a white charger who could rescue them by merely showing up, laid an egg.  Big time.

Clinton arrived an hour late, to a Chicago auditorium that was only about a third filled, then he droned on for another hour.  The crowd began wandering away.  So much for the knight’s bringing salvation.  Stable the white charger – the fervor is lost.

Obama still draws a crowd, but he wanders from point to point, desperate to find a theme, position, or direction in order to craft a winning message – one that can prevent an outcome November 2 that research predicts will be personally humiliating for him.  If predictions hold, Obama will face Nov. 3 amid the ashes of his administration to date – a massive rejection of all he had done and tried to do.

As one writer noted, Obama’s name is not on the ballot, but he is the “grey eminence” hovering over the political process.  The magnitude of the predicted GOP wave, is a clear message of rejection of the record of the Obama Administration.

It’s no wonder.  Americans are increasingly resentful of Washington – as masses of people are willing to travel to the nation’s capitol to stand in protest to what they see as the extremism of liberal Democrats.  For their part, Democrats struggle to insist the voters are mad at all incumbents, but that’s not what the data says,

The equation is quite clear: most Americans don’t just not like Democrats and their  proposals and positions, they absolutely detest them, resent the way Pelosi and others imposed them, and are demanding repeal and rejection. These are not sentiments of well organized groups of voters demonstrating simple unrest.  The actions of the far left Democrats of Obama are deeply resented by bed rock American citizens – most of whom joined the opposition spontaneously and most of whom have never before been moved to political activism of any sort.

Democrats such as Nancy Pelosi did, so much, want to find symptoms of violence among the crowds dubbed “tea parties” and Black Democrat simply assumed such groups would just have to be racist.  Both Democrat assumptiond were dead wrong,

Now, the once smooth-speaking Obama is in a real panic.  He tried his best to blame the nation’s problems on his predecessor, but, these days, Bush is more popular than Obama – and by significant numbers.

Next Obama swung his rhetorical axe at GOP House leader, John Boehner.  Boehner is unknown to most Americans, so the attack fell as flat as Joe Biden’s announcement that he will be on the 2012 Democrat ticket.  The Boehner attack strategy revealed serious political disarray within Obama’s inner circle.  It had no viable punch.

Pollsters showed voters’ top concern to be jobs and the economy, yet Obama insisted in trying to defend his radical health care scheme – one long ago rejected by a majority of Americans.  Incredibly, Obama credited that failure to his not having worked hard enough to sell it.  A ridiculous analysis since he made one speech after another for months on end trying desperately to put lipstick on the legislative pig that was his healthcare bill.

Last week, Obama opened up a new front, accusing Karl Rove and the US Chamber of Commerce of using foreign money for GOP political commercials – a violation of federal law.  That attack went nowhere either, since its very premise was ridiculous and seen as such by most Americans.   Now, in his final week, Obama is becoming downright insulting – invoking shades of racism in recent oratory – saying Republicans will be allowed in the governmental “car”, but not “allowed to drive” and members of the GOP will have to “sit in back”.

Shades of Rosa Parks.

With six days remaining, Obama will likely continue thrashing about – a politician in search of a salable message.  Obama’s total lack of experience and background is showing once again, and fewer and fewer Democrats whose names are on the ballot Tuesday are willing to join with him.  A Democrat gubernatorial candidate even told Obama to “shove it”.  No doubt there are other Democrat candidates who share the sentiment.

The American people seem poised to send Obama a similar message on Tuesday.

Be sure to vote.  Remain ever alert for Democrat theft and fraud.

Buddy

The day’s top political news:

Angle campaign attorney:Reid “intends to steal this election if he can’t win it outright”

So says Cleta Mitchell.

She writes: “Two days ago, the Democratic Secretary of State announced that voters can be provided "free food" at "voter turnout events." Harry Reid has been offering free food and, according to other reports, some Democratic allies such as teachers' unions are offering gift cards in return for a vote for Reid.

“Before we were even able to document the reported infractions to report to the authorities, the Democrat Secretary of State slammed the door shut on preventing this behavior and issued a public statement permitting these ACORN-style tactics. THESE are the kinds of shenanigans that can turn this race.

“Harry Reid intends to steal this election if he can't win it outright. As a result, we need to deploy literally dozens of election law attorneys and poll watchers to combat these tactics at a cost of nearly $80,000. That's over and above our current budget. We need to raise $80,000 and we need to do it RIGHT NOW, because even as I am writing this, Harry Reid and his Machine are trying to steal this election. I'm sorry that we have to come to you yet again and ask for you to reach deep and contribute, but we must. What Harry Reid is doing is clearly illegal.”

 http://www.lasvegassun.com/blogs/ralstons-flash/2010/oct/26/angle-campaign-attorney-reid/

Union Spends $91 Million on Midterms

The giant union of government workers, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, is lengthening its lead as the biggest spender in the midterm elections, reaching a total of $91 million, its president, Gerald W. McEntee, said on Tuesday.

Mr. McEntee said in an interview that his union had spent an additional $4 million over the last week, on campaigns in Ohio, Florida and elsewhere, increasing its lead over the second-largest spender in this year’s campaign, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The chamber has said it plans to spend $75 million on the midterm elections.

After The Wall Street Journal reported last week that Mr. McEntee’s union was the largest campaign spender, several union officials sought to clarify its spending. One official said that the union, which has more than 1.4 million members, had spent $66 million on the campaign this year, as of last week, and $21 million last year. That meant, he said, that the chamber would still be No. 1 in spending this year — although the union would be largest over the two-year election cycle.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/26/union-spends-91-million-on-midterms/

New Obama money appeal warns that opposition to him 'is a threat to our democracy'

The guy who got the Oval Office for only $750 million would settle for just $3 this time if that's all you've got, though more would be better, of course. Because he's got some unidentified donors who will match your $3. In the last few weeks Obama has made the same plea. And he's had his wife do that. And also Joe Biden, who recently announced he'd be on the 2012 Democratic ticket again because no one had asked.

There's a harsher note in this message, a rhetorical escalation.

With Halloween approaching, the Democrat conjures those evil "special interests" again, not the bankers that gave so generously to his 2008 campaign or the British oil company whose lobbyist put up Obama's chief of staff in a rent-free apartment for years and not the public employee union that's spending way more millions than any other group in this campaign to fight for more government jobs.

Obama presumably means the special interests working for the shadowy, sinister Republicans whose minuscule congressional minorities these last four years have so clearly confounded even the leaderly legislative likes of Harry Reid and even Nancy Pelosi.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/10/obama-fundraising-midterms.html

 

Tuesday's Web

Political Truth and Fact.Com

Neither fair nor balanced, but absolutely factual 

Democrats reflect despair – a result of their own doing

Nothing reveals the despair of a majority of Democrat campaigns, more than the extremes to which they are going trying to hold back the Republican tide.  While lying is not rare within political circles, Democrats have taken such tactics to new highs.

 

Among the most radical lies are accusations by the President himself as he rails against Republicans with claims the GOP is using money from foreign contributors, Such contributions would be violations of federal law.

 

Republicans deny the charges, of course, and even the White House admits it has no shred of evidence to support Obama’s frantic charges. 

 

The sight of a President of the United States standing at a podium amidst carefully vetted and chosen participants – spouting what he and all informed witnesses know are bald faced lies – is quite  depressing.  However, it illustrates the degree to which liberal (“progressive” if you buy into liberal verbiage) political fortunes have sunk.

 

It’s downright embarrassing having to admit being a liberal these days – and such sentiments are shared by some candidates running under the seriously sullied Democrat banner. 

Case in point: West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin's (D) remarks over the weekend demonstrated just how far Democrats in competitive races are willing to go in severing ties with their own party.  In an interview with Politics Daily, Manchin not only refused to say whether he'd support Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) -- assuming that Reid wins re-election -- he also declined to back President Obama for a second term.

Manchin, however, has proven quite slippery as he wavers back and forth on whether he supports Obama’s radical health scheme.  The old admonition to voters of “lie to me about one thing, and you probably will lie to me about everything” is very much in play with Manchin.  He just cannot be trusted.

National Public Radio, the only liberal radio talk program that survives – only with  government funding unwilling tax payers – has provided liberal politicians their lowest point of all this campaign season.

TV personality, Juan Williams, an NPR commentator for a decade, who also appears from time to time on Fox News, got the axe early in the week for his failure to toe the party line during an appearance on Bill O’Reilly’s Fox program.

Williams was accused by NPR leader, Vivian Schiller, of violating the liberal network’s guidelines.  Schiller fired Williams without so much as a face-to-face discussion.   Unfortunately, Schiller’s intemperate act came in the midst of fund raising efforts by public radio – millions were lost.

NPR has suffered immense criticism, and Schiller, herself, has been accorded particular assault.  Her demands for obedience by NPR pundits, mirrors the sort of thought control  typical of  the far left.  Such groups were common within the old Soviet Union.

That’s a coincidence, since research reveals Vivian Schiller once worked for the Societs.  She worked as a “tour guide” for the Soviets. 

Someone who was also once employed as a “tour guide” explains what the job actually entailed.

“One of my functions," explains the other former guide, "was to keep foreign guests permanently intoxicated from the moment they landed at Moscow airport." Tour guides managed "groups of so-called 'progressive intellectuals' -- writers, journalists, publishers, teachers, professors of colleges. ... For us, they were just a bunch of political prostitutes to be taken advantage of."

Nuff said.  No wonder Ms Schiller is biased against Williams, and no wonder she exploited an opportunity to be rid of him.  Many American voters will go to the polls on Tuesday, thinking of today’s Democrats being quite similar in philosophy to far left governments and societies.

Such an imagery is highly offensive to ordinary Americans, and when coupled with the radical policies, proposals, and pronouncements of a Democrat administration headed by Obama, Pelosi, and Harry Reid,  the result is likely to be predictable.

More than GOP rhetoric, Democrat despair is a direct result of Democrat actions.  They have only themselves to blame…but blame them we will…blame them we should.

Buddy

The day’s top political news:

Florida Democrat gubernatorial campaign caught cheating during CNN Debate

Florida’s Democrat candidate for Governor, Alex Sink’s campaign violated rules Monday evening at the CNN/St. Petersburg Times Florida gubernatorial debate when her make-up artist delivered a message during a television break.

Sink, the Democratic nominee, was shown a two-sentence message on a cell phone that offered her advice during the debate. Republican nominee Rick Scott who was sitting next to her in this nationally televised debate, noticed the violation and notified a CNN official, who approached the make-up artist and Sink and confiscated the cell phone.

After the debate, the Sink campaign released a statement from the candidate announcing that the advisor who sent the message has been removed from the campaign. The advisor was not named in the statement, but a campaign spokesman confirmed it is Brian May, who signed the rules agreement before the debate on behalf of the Sink campaign.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/10/25/florida-debate-foul/

Poll: GOP voters far more fired up than Democrats

One week before Election Day, Democrats face a record-setting "enthusiasm gap" that positions energized Republicans to score sweeping victories in next week's congressional elections, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds.

Despite across-the-country rallies by President Obama and get-out-the-vote efforts by his allies, only 37% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning registered voters report more enthusiasm than usual about voting, a decline from early in the year.Meanwhile, 63% of Republicans and Republican-leaning registered voters say they are more enthusiastic than usual, the biggest advantage for either party on this key measure in any midterm election since Gallup began asking the question in 1994. Then, Republicans had a 9-point enthusiasm advantage in a year Democrats lost control of the U.S. House and Senate.Now, the enthusiasm gap is 26 points.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2010-10-26-1Apoll26_ST_N.htm

Gas prices rise, breaking pre-election pattern

Gasoline prices haven't gotten much attention amid all the other bad economic news for Democrats heading into a final week of campaigning, but the price per gallon has climbed nearly 15 cents since Labor Day - a surprising jump, given that prices usually plummet before an election.

The cost of a gallon of gas has eclipsed the $3 mark in several parts of the country and clocks in nationally at $2.82, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA). That's up from $2.68 on Sept. 6, and overall about $1 higher than the week of Jan. 26, 2009, when President Obama took office and the per-gallon price was $1.81.

Analysts say the surge in pump prices defies historical trends that call for a drop-off after the Labor Day holiday, which signals the end of the summer driving season and the traditional dip ahead of the November election season.  Democrat cap and trade proposals would drive gasoline prices to $8 a gallon.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/oct/25/gas-prices-rise-breaking-pattern/

 

 

 

 

Monday's Web

Political Truth and Fact.Com

Neither fair nor balanced, but absolutely factual

Among Democrats, desperation is spawning new levels of political dishonesty

Here in Panama City, Florida, Blue Dog Democrat Alan Boyd is in serious trouble.  He should be.  He voted for the radical Democrat health care scheme, and for the cap and trade bill – one that would raise taxes on all families and which would likely produce $8 a gallon gas prices.

Boyd knew he was in trouble when he was ambushed last Spring by about 300 angry voters as he arrived for a speech here.  Boyd had to sneak out a back door in order to escape the crowd.

Boyd failed to heed the warning, made numerous speeches throughout the district pledging a new approach, but betrayed his constituents again by voting for the Obama health care take over in March.  He remained quite loyal to Pelosi, despite the sentiments and wishes of those he is supposed to represent.

Now Boyd is running seriously behind, and the Democrat Party has dispatched their own pros from Washington, to try saving Boyd.  Massive amounts of TV spots are being run by the Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee, and these spots are struggling mighty to totally distort Boyd’s opponent: Steve  Southerland’s positions. Currently, however, Southerland is ahead of Boyd by double digits.

“There’s a lot of lying going on” summarizes the DCNC effort, not only in Florida’s Panhandle, but all across the nation.

The truth is, those far left Democrats the people in Boyd’s district so dislike, distrust and totally despise, are precisely the ones now feverishly working to save Boyd.  They are doing so through the clever use of bald faced lies.

Far left politicians are the order of the day with the Democrat Party – especially among its political practitioners in Washington.

However, the Democrat Congressional Committee isn’t allowing ethics or integrity to get in the way of their campaign activity.

In the Congressional campaign for Democrat Congressman John Adler, the Democrat Congressional campaigners didn’t even bother denying their scam in running a totally bogus candidate -- hi-jacking the “tea party” label in order to fool voters.  The “Tea Party” candidate in the Cherry Hill, NJ area is a Democrat ploy, with zero ties to legitimate tea party groups.

Putting up bogus candidates by stealing the Tea Party label, is not limited to Cherry Hill, however.  Harry Reid, the beleaguered Democrat Senate Leader has craftily set up a “Tea Party” third candidate in his own race – hoping it will siphon off enough conservative votes from his Republican opponent, to allow him to scrape by again.

There are other bogus candidates being put up by Democrats all across the nation.  The tactic is dishonest, of course, but Democrats – especially liberal Democrats – don’t let ethics or the truth get in the way of their campaigns.

Democrat dishonesty is not limited to the upper levels.  New highs in lying and dishonesty are being demonstrated even in a State School Board race in Alabama.

The AEA teacher’s union is the last political refuge of Democrats these days in Alabama.  The union has been the most powerful political force in that state for years.  It’s head, Paul Hubbert, has wielded enough raw power that he could sit in the balcony of the legislative chamber and signal up and down on votes he favored or opposed.

Such power has, of course, fostered corruption.   In Alabama, massive corruption and downright thievery was uncovered in the state’s two year college system.  The cover was ripped off the scandal by two Republican Board of Education members, Betty Peters and Stephanie Bell.  As a result of the efforts of Peters and Bell, a number of AEA union members were caught in the college scandal and have pleaded guilty, are being prosecuted and are headed to prison.

No wonder AEA politicians have a vendetta against Betty Peters.

As a result, they have dumped a massive $50,000 contribution into the coffers of Peter’s opponent, and are running radio commercials and robo-calls, accusing  Peters of doing nothing to stop the scandal – a scandal involving the AEA and one Peters uncovered.

Lying is no barrier to the AEA – as is the case with other Democrat groups facing the anger and outrage of voters who feel they have betrayed.  Obama himself is a major object of rejection.

Bald faced lies, bogus candidates, and other deceptions, will be matched with potential voter theft and fraud, of course.  Obama’s own ACORN has already faced prosecution for voter registration fraud in more than a dozen states – and all of this is probably only one tip of a huge iceberg of election corruption and outright theft.

This election is crucial to America’s future.  It is one in which the party label is of utmost importance.  Efforts must focus on removing as many Democrats as possible and replacing them with Republicans.

Be alert and be aware, honesty in politics is job one for all Americans these days.

Buddy

The day’s top political news:

Debt Has Increased $5 Trillion Since Speaker Pelosi Vowed, ‘No New Deficit Spending’

When Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) gave her inaugural address as speaker of the House in 2007, she vowed there would be “no new deficit spending.” Since that day, the national debt has increased by $5 trillion, according to the U.S. Treasury Department.

At the close of business on Jan. 4, 2007, Pelosi’s first day as speaker, the national debt was $8,670,596,242,973.04 (8.67 trillion), according to the Bureau of the Public Debt, a division of the U.S. Treasury Department.  At the close of business on Oct. 22, it stood at $13,667,983,325,978.31 (13.67 trillion), an increase of 4,997,387,083,005.27 (or approximately $5 trillion).

Pelosi, the 60th speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, has added more to the national debt than the first 57 House speakers combined.The national debt first topped $5 trillion on Feb. 23, 1996, more than a year into Gingrich’s speakership.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/debt-has-increased-5-trillion-speaker-pe

Even Clinton is failing Democrats in crowd generation

The turnout at the Clinton rally was anemic. More than 500 people came to the rally, but the gym at Renaissance High School was only about one-third full, even though Clinton used to command full houses wherever he went, especially in Detroit.

Professional staffers such as those advancing Clinton into these political gatherings, never allow such a sparse showing.  But, these days, even professional crowd generation tactics are failing Democrats. At the Clinton rally, politician after politician exhorted the crowd to not let the polls keep them from voting on Nov. 2.  Response is less that enthusiastic.

Clinton also went to Ann Arbor for a rally with U.S. Rep. John Dingell, D-Detroit, who is facing a challenge from Republican Rob Steele, and Battle Creek for a campaign stop with U.S. Rep. Mark Schauer, D-Battle Creek, who is locked in one of the most competitive races in the state against former U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg, R-Tipton.

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20101024/NEWS15/101024006/1318/Clinton-Bernero-is-best-choice-to-lead-Michigan&template=fullarticle

 

Sunday's Web

Political Truth and Fact.Com

Neither fair nor balanced, but absolutely factual

Republican Challenges AFTER Nov 2

Republicans are on track to win the mid term elections – maybe even to enjoy “a wave” election in which there are major numbers shifted and the power on Capitol Hill switched.

Before the celebration begins, there is an obligation for a bit of sober reflection on where the GOP leads the country from there.  There are challenges that boggle the mind, but the decision making on the part of Republican leaders goes even deeper.  The GOP must chart an entirely new era.

What some incumbents may not yet grasp is the impact tea party freshmen will have on Republican policy, and the amount of real voter power they will yield.

Buddy

Rush Limbaugh’s brother, David, poses an intriguing question:

What Should a Republican Majority Do?

Many are preoccupied speculating about the magnitude of the impending Republican electoral victory, but I don't think it's putting the cart before the horse to caution that we also ought to be concerned -- now -- about what Republicans will do if they do recapture control.

The Republicans' power will obviously be limited, even if they emerge with majorities in both chambers, because Obama will remain in charge of the coequal executive branch.

So how should the GOP proceed?

The reflexive Beltway response is that it ought to compromise with Obama to produce legislation. But there are a number of problems with that premise.

Contrary to his self-portrayal as post-partisan, Obama is a dogmatic ideologue who is so determined to "fundamentally change" America that he will remain on point, even if it means relegating himself to one term. He might pretend to move to the center, but his life's mission, from which he will not be deterred, is to move America way leftward.

But assume, for argument's sake, that Obama will approach the new Republican majorities in an authentic spirit of compromise. What then?

Well, how does one compromise with a statist without moving the country further toward statism? Take health care, for instance. We were already well on our way to a government-controlled system before Obama came along, and previous government intervention mostly mucked things up. So was there any compromise from the left to implement free market reforms?

No, liberals set about to fully nationalize it.

Try the welfare state. Everyone acknowledged the system needed to be reformed. Black childhood poverty and illegitimacy were soaring, and the welfare reform measures of the '90s began to curb those trends.

But Obama would have none of it. He slipped provisions into the stimulus bill reversing welfare reform. That's compromise Obama-style. If socialism is messing things up, give us more of it. If market forces are ameliorating problems, give us less of them.

Compromising with a statist yields, at best, statism light, which will eventuate in statism stout.

It's also not necessarily true that passing legislation -- just any legislation -- is healthy for the republic. Washington doesn't have to be busy in order to improve the lives of American citizens.

Unfortunately, though, Washington has wrought such destruction that remedial legislation is imperative to fix the damage.

Who says conservatives oppose change? Of course we demand change when the status quo spells national suicide.

Seeing as Republicans presumably won't be able to pass such remedial legislation while Obama's president, what should they do? Inquiring minds demand an answer.

I believe they should initiate comprehensive reforms -- along the lines of Rep. Paul Ryan's road map. I don't mean to endorse his road map in toto without thoroughly studying it; I mean to say that we need big reforms rolling back government, severely cutting discretionary spending and seriously tackling entitlement reform.

Republicans should do this even anticipating Obama will veto their legislation.

They will then have remained true to their mandate and to conservative principles and kept faith with their base. They'll be able to go into the 2012 elections with their heads held high and offering a clear alternative to Obamaism. Besides, complete legislative gridlock is infinitely superior to compromise en route to Obama-statism-light, which would not only advance statism but also unleash the righteous wrath of the conservative grass roots, who might then form a third party, possibly reducing the GOP to permanent irrelevance.

Conservatives' concerns about what Republicans will do if they emerge victorious are not idle fretting.

The American Spectator's estimable Jeffrey Lord reported this week that Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., told "high-dollar donors" that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and his colleagues have no intention of repealing Obamacare, only repealing the "bad parts" of the law -- as if this monstrosity can be sanitized of its pernicious elements.

Corker also told the donors they needn't worry about the incoming class of "crazier Republicans." If these reports are true, we know all we need to know about the ruling class, including many establishment Republicans.

Meanwhile, Sen. McConnell told the National Journal that even after their victory, Republicans will not control the government. True enough, but he continued. "We need to have a humble, grateful response about this election," he said. "Incidentally, there is no polling data that suggests (the voters) love us."

Well, let me humbly suggest to the senator that a humble, grateful response would be to attempt to govern according to the tidal wave that brings the GOP back to the dance.

Humility suggests conformity to the nation's wishes, not abject compromise with the president, who has agitated them into street activism to a historically unprecedented degree.

Yes, senator, be humble and govern in accordance with the people's will and they might just begin to love you after all. At least, it will be a start.

David Limbaugh, brother of radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, is an expert in law and politics and author of new book Crimes Against Liberty, the definitive chronicle of Barack Obama's devastating term in office so far.

The day’s top Political news:

Barack Obama puts Harry Reid in the spotlight

Of all the races in the country this year, none is as important to President Barack Obama as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s reelection campaign. The race carries unrivaled symbolism for Obama, who would emerge even more politically wounded than anticipated if Republicans defeat his top Democrat in the Senate.

Reid is locked in a tight race against Republican Sharron Angle, a tea party favorite who has continued to be a force despite several high-profile campaign missteps. Obama made his fourth trip to Nevada Friday for a week-before-the-election rally and fundraiser to help Reid squeak out a victory despite low popularity in his home state and an adverse political climate.

The president vouched for Reid, whose opponent is running ads suggesting he got rich off of his position in the Senate, as an advocate for the middle class.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/44055.html#ixzz13HSkRjlB

Debate Audience overrides League of Women Voters Moderator to recite Pledge to the Flag

At a U.S. congressional debate this past week, the crowd of approximately 300 in attendance drowned out the moderator's objections, not to protest over government policies or to argue some candidate's comments, but to insist upon reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.

(Illinois' 8th Congressional District were to participate in a debate moderated by Kathy Tate-Bradish of the League of Women Voters.)

During opening comments, an audience member stood to ask if the Pledge of Allegiance would be recited. "No, we are not," the moderator responded, "That is not part of the proposal tonight."

When it became clear the moderator was not going to allow the Pledge to be recited, the audience stood and said it anyway. The moderator further irked the crowd afterward, saying she felt "disrespected" by being "forced" to include the pledge "in presumably a planned way."

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=219097

Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi gearing up for the mother of all battles after the election

The three Democrat leaders are planning a counter attack. Instead of taking to heart the unmistakable message the American people are expected to send Nov. 2.In fact, they're moving, full steam ahead, in the opposite direction.

Digging in with unprecedented and arrogant defiance, they've planned a legislative blitzkrieg during the coming lame-duck session of Congress in order to shove as much of their radical agenda, as humanly  possible, down your throat before the new Congressmen and Senators can be sworn into office.

 Barack Obama says there's going to be "hand-to-hand combat." As DavidKarki with The North Star National writes: "He [Obama] is not going to make like President Clinton in 1995 and move to the center to survive.He will force upon us everything else he can, whatever way he has to."To put it in the words of columnist Charles Krauthammer: "How then to prevent a runaway lame-duck Congress? Bring the issue up now --applying the check-and-balance of the people's will before it disappears the morning after Election Day."

 http://frontpagemag.com/2010/10/19/obamas-post-election-attack/

 

 

 

 

Saturday's Web

Political Truth and Fact.Com

Neither fair nor balanced, but absolutely factual

Americans must remain alert for political conspiracies from the left

The recent dust up over NPR reminds us all what a bigoted operation its news operation is and always has been.  Firing Juan Williams is only its latest outrage from “public radio”. To add insult to injury, we are all picking up the tab for thst left wing operation. 

This is said without noting the almost two million dollar contribution recently provided by far left conspirator-in-chief George Soros.  In terms of political conviction, Soros is, of course, hardly mainstream.

NPR is tax funded. At least for now.  Efforts are already in motion now to end that particular element of its funding.

Fortunately, NPR and Public Radio in general remain boring enough that its Juan Williams escapade brings it more attention and notice than any of its normal programming.  Fortunately.

But NPR’s bigotry – as flagrant as it is, constitutes only one of many assaults we, as ordinary Americans, constantly face and one that should renew alerts for vigilance.  There are many elements in today’s society that don’t mean us well.

To begin with, The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (parent company of PBS and NPR) ripped off American taxpayers for an incredible $420 million in 2010.  It is demanding $608 million for the funding cycle beginning 2013. Thus taxpayers are funding political efforts contrary to their wants and needs.

NPR enjoys unrestricted first amendment rights, of course, but as long as it received a dime of tax money, it should be restrained from actions against the interests of a majority.  If they sever taxpayer dependence, they are totally free to do the bidding of such extremists as Soros.

The nearly $2 million donation from Soros is more dire than simply backing the far left communications operation.  Soros targeted his bountiful giving specifically for the hiring of “journalists” assigned to cover state legislatures in all states.  Talk about “scary”!  For $2million, Soros is expecting to get a lot more than nifty news stories.  Just what the real Soros intent is can be left to speculation.  No positives are likely to be found in such a process.

Don’t think for a moment that Soros’ interest in the intimate operations of state level American government, is at all innocent and pure.  Such would run quite contrary to what we have gleaned from the politics of Soros to date.  He has existed as a walking slush fund for Democrats and for far left political scams such as the infamous “Media Matters”, and the equally infamous “Moveon.org”.

No wonder Obama and his Democrats could outspend Republicans seven to one in the 2008 campaign.  With the help of Soros and union bosses, Obama was suspected of acquiring millions in campaign funds from foreign sources – against US law.  It is incredible to see recent attempts by Obama’s cohorts trying to sell the idea the US Chamber is funneling foreign money to Republicans.  No evidence os such exists, and none will be found.  It’s another case of Obama lying his head off to Americans he thinks he can fool.

However, far too many Americans recognize Obama’s claims, proposals, and pronouncements as absurd for him to enjoy the sort of success he enjoyed in the last campaign season.  The American people are onto Obama and his people.  They oppose his radical health scams, his cap and trade huge tax effort, and his challenge to Arizona’s immigration law.

That’s why a GOP “sweep” is expected next month.

Americans may be too trusting, too often.  But sooner or later we do catch on – and when we do, effective response is a given.

Buddy

The day’s top Political news:

Biden claims GOP placing $200 Billion in Ads

For the record, Conservative groups have not dumped $200 billion in political ads on the heads of Democratic candidates. But VP Joe Biden is trying to claim they are.

In an interview with Al Hunt of Bloomberg News Biden reprised the attack by the beleaguered White House against conservatives and corporate groups contributing to conservative candidats and causes.  The White House is trying vainly to claim foreign money finds its way into the process – a claim for which Obama spokesmen have been totally unable to provide a shred of evidence.

Biden professed amazement at the spending of “$200 Billion” more than once.  His point seemed to be not knowing the source of the money.  Strange, Biden has no such concern about the millions of dollars Union bosses pour into Democrat campaigns without restraint or accountability.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/22/200-billion-in-ads-mr-biden-thats-real-money/?ref=politics

Democrats using phony third party candidates in an attempt to water down GOP voting

Phone candidates are popping up.  Their primary goal: to siphon off potential GOP votes to stack the deck for Democrat Congressional incumbents.  The phony candidates often even use tea party-like rhetoric to compound the deception.

Democrats are working behind the scenes in a number of tight races to bolster long-shot third-party candidates who have platforms at odds with the Democratic agenda but hold the promise of siphoning Republican votes. Liberals are seeking any advantage in their effort to retain control of Congress,

The Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee was caught and openly confessed to using a bogus candidate in a frenzied attempt to save a New Jersey seat.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/23/us/politics/23dems.html?_r=1&partner=MYWAY&ei=5065

Dispute over New Black Panthers case causes deep divisions within DOJ

The clash between black nationalists and a white DOJ lawyer has mushroomed into a fierce debate over the government's enforcement of civil rights laws, a dispute that will be aired next week when the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights unveils findings from a year-long investigation.  Now the Justice Department's internal watchdog is investigating allegations that its civil rights division enforced voting laws in a racially discriminatory manner, officials said Monday.

The review by Inspector General Glenn A. Fine is an outgrowth of the political controversy over a 2008 voter intimidation case against members of the New Black Panther Party. Some conservative lawyers, politicians and commentators have said that the civil rights division improperly narrowed that case, part of their broader allegations that the Obama Justice Department has failed to protect the civil rights of white voters.

The department's Office of Professional Responsibility is looking into the matter, and two Republican congressmen, Frank R. Wolf (Va.) and Lamar Smith (Tex.) asked Fine to also investigate the department's handling of the case, according to letters the congressmen sent Fine over the summer.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/22/AR2010102203982.html

 

Friday's Web

Political Truth and Fact.Com

Neither fair nor balanced, but absolutely factual

The Democrat plight: caught with no accomplishment on which to campaign

It’s a politician’s worst nightmare: having to run a campaign and having no issues to brag about – at least no issues a majority of voters embrace.

Pelosi, Clinton, and others promised Democrats in Congress that if they just went ahead and passed the radical healthcare bill, all would be well.  Clinton went so far as to suggest voters would accept passage, and forget it by the time polling places opened. Pelosi said much the same thing – going so far as to say “you can find what’s in the bill after you pass it.”…or something similar…something just as ridiculous.

They were all wrong of course.  These days, a majority of voters say they not only don’t accept Obamacare, demand it be repealed if – as  expected – Republicans take control of things.

Then there is Obama’s infamous “stimulus” bill – a trillion-dollar slush fund that has so far primarily provided benefits to a limited few.  Democrats demanded the bill be passed immediately, even making reading and analyzing the huge mass of radical legislation impossible. Preventing reading proposed legislation became a Democrat strategy in fact.

Democrats used their dominating majorities to limit reading time, and produced massive globs of legislative gobble-de-gook – tangled “legaleze” designed to make eyes glass over. 

Liberals didn’t want debate, they demanded passage.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi even strong-armed Democrat House members to pass the Cap and Trade scheme that would have amounted to a huge tax increase for all American families, and mean probable gasoline prices of $8 a gallon.   The Senate was wise enough to allow the bill to avoid a vote.

So, as a Democrat incumbent Congressman, what is a viable theme of TV commercials, or even stump speeches?

Surely not the “stimulus” fandango.

The “stimulus” was promoted as a jobs creator.  It has failed, big time.  An old political rule holds that if legislation has to be explained, it’s not one on which a savvy candidate is likely to run.

Thus the plight of Democrats today.

What’s more, the far left slant of the Obama administration – along with the obnoxious natures of Senate Leader Harry Reid and Pelosi, is not what a majority of Americans want or are willing to accept.  Not many ordinary Americans are ready for socialism…or even worse.   Democrats threaten socialistic outcomes.

As voters head to the polls in about 12 days, Democrats are left with two hopes: voting habits leading people who voted Democrat in the past, to simply pull the Democrat lever this time as well, plus the raw power of Democrat groups such as Obama’s own ACORN, OFA, and labor unions such as the NEA Teachers, and the SEIU which spawned violence against conservatives at town hall meetings last summer.

Those groups have histories suggesting Republicans must be prepared to mount significant efforts to guard against vote fraud and theft.  Voters matter only AFTER they have been counted. 

For its part, the GOP has something else going for it too – enthusiasm.  Those who study such things find Republican voters far more likely to actually pull the lever for their candidates. Some predict turnout alone gives Republican candidates an additional five to eight points on current polling results.  If they are correct, it means the GOP should win all those races in which things are pretty much even, or within the range of error in the polling.

That means winning a lot of races not that many predict Republicans will win, based only on polling.

Democrats certainly had their chance, but a far left frenzy led to their squandering political power, and it may ultimately lead to permanent minority status for Democrats. 

Buddy

The Top Political News of the Day:

The new political map: Republicans retake lost areas

After consecutive elections marked by big gains in Republican territory, the Democratic Party of 2011 is poised to shrink back to its form before the GOP’s downward spiral: more coastal and urban and less Southern, Midwestern and rural.

Based on the state of the political map two weeks out from the elections, the famed red vs. blue model that followed the 2004 presidential race appears to be returning to shape, with enough grave threats to Democratic officeholders to suggest that the party — as it is expressed in Congress, at least — could end up even narrower than that.

Even if Democrats are able to prevent a total wipeout, it’s likely that this year’s elections will mark a return to the familiar political universe that characterized the decade before 2006, when the GOP controlled swaths of politically conservative and moderate parts of the country.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43993.html#ixzz135ulFihj

Congressional hopefuls avoid media, events at 11th hour of elections

Congressional hopefuls from California to Delaware are shunning the traditional trappings of campaigns, avoiding public events, debates and other venues where they can't control the action. Many are keeping their schedules secret and limiting their in-person appearances and have canceled interviews on national television in favor of smaller, friendlier venues.

The most high-profile instances have involved tea party favorites running for the Senate - including Rand Paul in Kentucky, Joe Miller in Alaska and Sharron Angle in Nevada - whose political inexperience and unorthodox positions have sometimes led them to say impolitic things. Over the weekend, private security hired by Miller went so far as to handcuff a reporter who was seeking to ask the Republican about his time as a government lawyer.

Several Republican candidates have also declined invitations or pulled out of debates. In Florida, debates for governor and Senate races were canceled this month after organizers could not get commitments from the Republican contenders or Gov. Charlie Crist, who is running for the Senate as an independent. The move may reflect the open bias and left wing preference of many reporters and media outlets.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/21/AR2010102106598.html?hpid=topnews

Peggy Noonan: The Tea Partys saved the GOP from itself

The tea party is not a "threat" to the Republican Party, the tea party saved the Republican Party. In a broad sense, the tea party rescued it from being the fat, unhappy, querulous creature it had become, a party that didn't remember anymore why it existed, or what its historical purpose was. The tea party, with its energy and earnestness, restored the GOP to itself.

The broadly based, locally autonomous movement seems to have made a rolling decision, group by group, to take part in Republican primaries and back Republican hopefuls. (According to the Center for the Study of the American Electorate, four million more Republicans voted in primaries this year than Democrats, the GOP's highest such turnout since 1970)

The tea party did something the Republican establishment was incapable of doing: It got the party out from under George W. Bush. The tea party rejected his administration's spending, overreach and immigration proposals, among other items, and has become only too willing to say so. In doing this, the tea party allowed the Republican establishment itself to get out from under Mr. Bush: "We had to, boss, it was a political necessity!" They released the GOP establishment from its shame cringe.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304023804575566503565327356.html