Don't Ask, Don't Tell

In one of the most historic civil rights votes ever, the U.S. Senate has voted to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell. This policy forbids recruiters from asking if a person is gay, and the recruited may not admit to it, otherwise they will be discharged. The bill is to be signed next week, but it will take several months to implement, as there has to be a certification that the troops fighting ability will not be harmed, as well as a two month waiting period. The bill passed 65 to 31, with the support of eight Republicans. They are: Lisa Murkowski, Scott Brown, Olympia Snow, Susan Collins, George Voinovich, Mark Kirk, Richard Burr, and John Ensign. This is one of the greatest days in the history of these United States.

Presidental Tax Cut deal

The President has just proven that not only is he not "Change we can believe," he's also a political whore. He's struck a deal with the Republicans to extend tax cuts to all Americans, including the wealthy, but the Democratic Party is in open revolt to the idea. No kidding! After he gets done campaigning on ending that crap, he wants to turn around and approve it all. He flip flops more than John "Voted for funding before against it" Kerry. The deal has payroll cuts that would cut the Social Security tax rate by 2 percent. (So why are politicians complaining about the lack of funding for it?) Republicans, in exchange, will renew jobless benefits for 13 more months without paying. So, if the two year extension doesn't bankrupt us first, then we will have this debate in 2012, and he better not say the words "End Bush Tax Cuts." The president has portrayed it as a way to get middle class benefits while, of course, blaming Republicans. The truth is, at this point, the President is just enabling the Republicans.  He has  proven, once again, that the Democratic Party of the United States has no spine, that it isn't willing to fight for what it believes, much less what's right. If the President is so concerned with the deficit, if the Republicans are so concerned, then why is this going through?  It's almost as big as the Stimulus package, which wasn't paid for either. Among the Democratic Party's concerns: Senator Kyl's renewing of the estate tax at 35 percent, with the first 5 million dollars safely exempted. Businesses can write off all of next year's investments as business expense, and therefore not pay taxes on them. Meantime, House Democrats are very concerned about this deal, as are the Democrats of the Senate, and they should be. They have spent how long saying they would end the high end tax cuts? Thankfully, there is at least one Republican who is willing to vote against this monstrosity that, quite frankly, the President created in his capitulation to the  Republicans. So what happens now? Well, if you think like the CBO, and look to future effects, then you will find that the deficit is about to see another massive increase. Over ten years, the United States Treasury will lose 4 trillion dollars. It's honestly a wonder that the Chinese government doesn't own us yet. So if you are a sane individual, please, call and/or write your congressperson and ask them to vote against this plan.

White House's Korea Deal

As of Friday night, the U.S. government has announced a free trade agreement between us and South Korea. Hey, jobs may increase now! Apparently, the hold was in place over cars, but a deal has been reached on that front. Next, Congress has to clear it, which will probably happen. According to the President, this means an increase in American exports, by up to 11 billion, as well as support for 70,000 jobs. No surprise, the AFL-CIO will oppose it, but they oppose every free trade deal. Here's the deal, outlined by politico.com:

Under the original deal, U.S. import taxes would have disappeared immediately for most Korean autos, but the new pact keeps that 2.5 percent tax in place for four years before phasing out in the fifth year.

Likewise, the original plan to immediately start phasing out America’s 25 percent import tariff on small trucks was scrapped. That hefty tariff, which deters foreign competition for U.S. truck makers such as Ford Motor Co., will remain in place for seven years, and then be eliminated over the next three years.
“These are amazing protections for the auto industry,” said one business lobbyist who favors the deal. “This is seven years that Ford won’t have to deal with truck imports from Korea. That is real money.”
Korea also made auto trade concessions, agreeing to reduce its import tariff from 8 percent to 4 percent immediately and then eliminate it in five years.
Korean auto companies have seen their auto exports to the United States soar in the last decade to nearly 500,000 in 2009, while U.S exports to Korea remain less than 10,000 a year. Ford and other U.S. auto makers have complained that Korea uses high taxes, plus arbitrary and discriminatory environmental and safety standards to lock out imports.
Under the new agreement, 25,000 American-made autos a year will be admitted without having to meet Korean rules, and the changes to those rules will be phased in slowly and subject to more transparency.

Meantime, Ford is hesitatingly endorsing the deal. It might do some good. Now, if there had only been rules about worker's safety, and health.

Limiting the bake sale

Yes, you read that right. The most well known way of school fundraising may soon dry up, as a child nutrition bill that has made it to the president would give our government the ability to limit the number of bake sales. Because everyone knows that's a significant factor in obesity. Not really, but that's what some people seem to think. Never mind healthy food, never mind advocating for having kids outside, get rid of the evil bake sale! And the language is so unclear that, in theory, bake sales could be banned. Thankfully, that's not going to be done. While the bill does have good things, such as providing more healthy meals for students, including dinner, this fundraiser thing is just ridiculous.

DADT Repeal

How many of you have gay friends or relatives? Do they serve in the military? If so, then they probably shouldn't hold their breath about getting Don't Ask, Don't Tell repealed. This is the last month to get it done, the White House is starting to focus on other things. Now just think, if they hadn't challenged the court's appeal, it would've been overturned, because it was found unconstitutional. People on the Hill say there are two possibilities. The first is that enough Republicans cross over, thereby bringing cloture, or an end to debate, causing an immediate vote on the topic. Another possibility floating is that if, by some chance, the bill fails, due to the lack of time allowed on GOP amendments, if they are even allowed, then a vote on DADT by itself may be done, even though it isn't expected to pass. Things are not helped by the fact that two more military leaders have come out saying that they would not pass a repeal right now, but they would implement it if it did pass. The head of the Army and Marines have also said that they do not think recruitment would drop, or that many soldiers would resign. Obviously, John McCain has seized on this news like a bulldog that got a hold of the steak, saying that all the different opinions the military leaders have is a sign that more debate is needed, as well as saying that he and 41 others do not back repeal while there is still high unemployment and high deficits. Not that these things have stopped the White House from saying that the repeal is still on the table. All right, so if this is so important, why don't you muscle the Senate personally, Mr. President? Fear of losing the base and the moderates? Most likely. As much as I would like to see DADT repealed, I fear that it will not be. And it may be a long time before another chance comes up.

Kerry V. Romney

John Kerry has launched a jab at Mitt Romney, saying the former Presidential candidate's stance on a possible nuclear treaty with Russia was ill-informed, among other things. Romney has said in an op-ed that START would undermine the United States security by limiting our missile defense options. Kerry didn't take that sitting down. On the same down, he made a response that pointed to his committee's hearings. By the way, the criticisms of Mr. Romney are on both sides of the aisle, with Republican Dick Lugar making a statement criticizing Mr. Romney's stance, going so far as to offer rebuttals to Mr. Romney's comments.

Menendez's Dramatics

The head of the DSCC has made a comment that, frankly, comes out of nowhere. Robert Menendez has said that negotiating with Republicans over the tax deal is like negotiating with terrorists. What? Meantime, Claire McCaskell has said that if the wealthy tax breaks are passed, Americans might have to take up pitchforks. Only if it's the end of the world. Which, given how politicians spend, may yet occur. Obviously, Mr. Menendez's aides have said that he was not comparing Republicans to terrorists. Really, do they think anyone believes that? He was going to be replaced before this though, so it really doesn't matter too much.

Welcome to Greece, everybody!

Debt wise, that is, as well as a strong plan to make cuts. Today, the President's debt commettiee had a plan, but it didn't get the votes it needed to be considered by Congress. It was, unbelieveably in today's circumstances, bipartisan. While it did not get the nessecery 14 votes, it did get an 11-7 majority. The plan was made of tax increases, such as canning the child tax credit. Also up for consideration were entitlement cuts, and raising retirement age past 65. Really, raise the retirement age? Because the senior citizens don't work hard enough, obviously. The goal of the bill was to cut 4 trillion dollars off of the debt. However, there is a potential bright spot: Obama is considering putting some ideas from this bill into his 2012 budget, and has called for a two year freeze in federal worker's pay, while the debt comission's bill called for three years. One of the people against the plan was Andy Stern, former president of Service and Employees International Union, which covers people in health care, public service, and property service. He did have a proposel of his own, which called for even higher taxes and shifting the governments spending over to infrastructure. House Republican say they have a plan (probably tax cuts), but they have yet to release it. Both parties are claiming to look into tax reform. Let's see if that goes anywhere. (Hint: It won't.) Meantime, John Boehner has yet to say what he thinks about the bill. His exact words were that the bill "provided a sobering look" at the choices facing the country, as well as urging "an adult conversation." Yeah, sure. Eric Cantor, the number two, has not made an announcement yet either.

Economy resputtering?

Anyone who expected good news over the latest jobs reports were sorely disappointed today. The reports, which were expected to show gains of around 150,000, actually showed gains of around 40,000. Which means that unemployment went from 9.6 to 9.8 percent. Of course, economic advisors are saying that as these reports are volitile, plus the fact they can be revised,  people should not put too much stock into them, which, to me, is kind of an odd attitude to take, as these reports are probably the only things that inspire confidence in the markets. There are several other details that people say should be included, such as: there's an increase in holiday retail, and home sales are up. The only good thing about this is the fact that it may become easier to pass unemployment benefits, which are desperately needed at the moment. Republicans, of course, lost no time in blaming Obama's policies, saying that they are discourging businesses to invest. Like they were with the tax cuts theygot. Oh wait, they weren't. Here's my message to the GOP: the tax cuts for the rich did nothing. We cannot afford to leave them in place. Get rid of them. To the Democrats: We need the rich to start paying taxes, but we also need to find areas to cut spending. Then, maybe the confidence will return, and the economy will grow again.

Please call your congressperson, and tell them that the tax cuts for the wealthy need to be paired with spending cuts. It's the only way to show that the government is serious about lowering the deficit.

Pelosi Stepping In

Former Speaker and House Minority Leader hopeful Nancy Pelosi has decided to get involved in the race between Steny Hoyer and James Clyburn for Minority Whip, and is apparently decided to organize a compromise. Sources saying she is doing what she can in order to avoid The House having to cast dividing votes. One idea that seems to be making the rounds is that one would get Minority Whip, which means one person would be in charge of making sure that the party members vote along party lines, and the other would head the House Caucus Chairman. An issue that has come up is the fact that Clyburn is an African American with support from the Congressional Black Caucus. Both men are saying that they have all the support they need, and the upper hand. Aides to both have claimed that even behind the scenes, it is calm and relatively peaceful between the two.

Can the Economy Save Obama?

Democrats will tell you that the economy was what really hammered them in this election cycle. But will the conditions be the same in 2012? Economists say, not really. While slow growth is the main expectation of 2011, economists say that there will be better growth and job market improvements in 2012, which may help the president's reelection. Unemployment is at 9.6 percent, and is expected to just be over 9 next year. The long term outlook is better: at least 8.1 percent on Election Day 2012, with some going so far as to say 7 percent by then. That, to me, is kind of a stretch. I  think you are far more likely to see it in the 8 percent region during the election, I would say around 8.5 or higher. Although, that still may be no help to him, in my mind. He has presided over an anemic economy so long that by this point there's nothing he can really say or do. It would take a miracle, friends and neighbors.

The death Of Liberalism?

Wisconsin is normally a very Democratic state. So it came as a big shock, to me anyway, when Russ Feingold, the man who opposed Iraq and Afghanistan, opposed the Patriot Act, supported the health care bill, among other liberal's ideas, lost to Ron Johnson. A conservative victory in Wisconsin has triggered the talk that liberalism is dead, or at least very injured. If you had asked people a year ago, they would have told you that there was no way Russ feingold could lose, barring a big mistake or a major scandal of some kind. But then the Tea Party showed up, and we started going down the rabbit hole. While some are saying that liberalism is dead, however, there are others saying it'll be back. After all, Wisconsin elected another conservative republican fifty years ago. His name was Joe "The Mad Communist Hunter" McCarthy, who was only taken down after a question of decency. Liberalism is gone, yes, but it will be back in time. And it will start in one of the most liberal states in history: Wisconsin.

Republicans For Limited Government

But really, what else is new? They are feeling emboldened, obviously, because they have also vowed to rool back the health care reform. The President said that he accepted responsibility for not providing economic security, as well as not changing the hyper-partisan, closed room deals. At the same time, he also said that the health care reform was the right thing to do. And while the president has said that he is willing to try to work with the Republicans, the Republicans are obviously not too keen on the idea of working with him. Republican leaders have achieved their goal of removing a majority leader who actually got things done, and will replace her with John Boehner, of whom no one has a freaking clue about. In the meantime, some Republicans are warning their party, saying that the party has to build trust with people and actually produce results, in a time when people are very unhappy with both parties.

Meg Whitman loses, despite heavy spending

It's amazing to hear: Meg Whitman, the former CEO of eBay, the woman who has poured more than $142 million into her campaign, the woman who bought many ads saying she would scale back state government and fix the state, has lost her race. Voters picked Jerry Brown, who has spent over thirty years in politics. Even more amazing is that he spent only $30 million of his own money on the race. It could be fair to say that it didn't help that she had so many ads running. After all, a year of saying the same things over and over, people might get tired of it. Brown served from 1975 to 1983, and the only reason he could run this time was because he was governor before term limits were introduced.

Pennsylvania Match Could End In Court

And it wouldn't be a freaking surprise. After all, there are already allegations by both sides that the other is trying to steal the elections. It seems that allegations of absentee voter fraud have started cropping up. The Eighth district is currently represented by Patrick Murphy, who beat Mike Fitzgerald by 1,500 votes. And now they are facing off again. The struggle between the two have been started by two things. The first is a mailer that was sent by the state Democratic Party. It was sent in order to increase absentee voting. And while such a mailer is not illegal, it has been labelled as misleading, as the state office it's supposed to be from doesn't exist. Republicans have accused Democrats of tampering with these ballot applications. The second match was that the GOP elections board has set aside ballots to be challenged, most of which are from Democrats. We will probably not see any winner here for months: think Al Franken and Norm Coleman months.

End Of Tax Breaks?

Not if you listen to the GOP and the Democrats. They are both promising extensively that there won't be tax raises. (Can anyone say, Ronald Reagan?) But with the economy to recover, switch promises are foolish. Most tax experts are saying that the government should rethink the more than two hundred tax breaks that are in the code. Yes, that includes all those really popular ones. These breaks make up one trillion dollars. To give you an idea, basically, this is about one third of our budget. The Bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget have a plan (thank heaven that someone does.) put out a paper of ideas that could raise 1.7 trillion dollars over ten years. The problem, however, is not getting everyone to agree that tax cuts need curbing. the problem is getting agreement on which should be ended, or at least trimmed. I don't know, how about all of them? We may finally get back to having a surplus. Either that or cut some services.

Lisa Murkowski Caucus

After reports started surfacing saying that she might decide to break with her party, Lisa Murkowski has told Politico.com that she will, without a doubt, stay with the Republican caucus. The stories started after Joe Miller accused Ms. Murkowski of considering switching parties, going so far as to issue a press release. Ms. Murkowski pushed back, saying that she would stay a Republican, which she has been since she was 18. I kinda wish she had switched, just to mess with the party who had dumped her like an old chair on the side of the road.

No Double Dip Seen On Horizon

From the Economic Cycle Research Institute, (No, I have never heard of them before this.) the leading economic indicators show that we are not headed for another recession. In fact, according to this group, we are on the track that all recessions and recoveries have made since World War Two. That's the good news. However, we're not out of the woods just yet. the lack of growth we saw in 2010 will continue in 2011. And so, the Fed will continue quantitative easing, or creating more money in the hopes of improving the economy. This could create many more problems than it would solve, as it would be based on past economic performance factors and hard to measure variables. Because of this, as well as poor timing on the Fed's part, and their giant sheets, we may seeing bigger booms and busts with more frequent recessions.

Sharron Angle hiding out

At least, that's how it seems to anyone who tries to question her about anything. But now, as it turns out, she's even going so far as to avoid her own supporters. And it's not the first time. As a matter of fact, ever since her debate with Harry Reid, in which he failed to go for the throat, no one has seen hide nor hair of her. Of course, you have people in her campaign who says she goes door to door, and she does private fundraisers. Of course, who could blame her, after she put her foot in her mouth AGAIN by saying that the group of Hispanics she was talking to looked " a little more like Asians." So far, her non-appearances have been blamed on schedule conflicts. But what do you expect from a woman who avoids press like the plague as well as public events. you know what, this lady, god love her, is like a crazy, right-wing version of Joe Biden. Except Joe can be found. Here's my message for her: Sharron, if you are going to run for a high office, or any office for that matter, at least have the balls to make an appearance and talk to people. It might help turn things around.

Clarence Thomas

He's baaaaaaaaaack! No, seriously. News was recently released that, after nineteen years, Clarence Thomas's wife placed a call to Anita Hill in order to get an apology for what she said in the confirmation hearings of 1991. What she should have realized it would stir up everything, again. For those of you who have no memory of what happened, or just weren't around to see it, back in 1991, Clarence Thomas was nominated to the Supreme Court of the United States. A woman named Anita Hill charged him with harassing her, among other things. He was confirmed, 52 to 48. Lillian McEwan has, for the first time, given an interview, none other to the Washington Post. And in this interview, she appeared to confirm what Ms. Hill said all those years ago. And just what was said? That Mr. Thomas was obsessed with pornography and that he made suggestive comments to his female colleagues, both of which he has denied. McEwan then went a step further, saying Mrs. Thomas may not have known the full facts when she demanded an apology from Ms. Hill. So why didn't she say something back then? Well, according to Ms. McEwan, there are a couple reasons. First, even after they broke up, she was friends with Mr. Thomas. Secondly, she said, she suspected that neither Thomas nor Hill was being completely honest in their testimonies. People who believed Ms. Hill said that this is her vindication. Some have even gone so far as to say if Joe Biden hadn't restricted the testimony to just those who worked with him, but had instead expanded it to people who were social with him, Thomas would never have been confirmed. Look, it's too late to get rid of him, it's old history. Let's just let things be. He'll be there until he dies or retires, and to me, death is more likely.

GOP hope in PA.

Joe Sestak may be catching up in the overall polls, but the GOP thinks they may still pull the win. Why? Because in absentee ballots, Pat Toomey holds an edge. the gap starts with those requesting ballots: 8 percent favor the GOP here. Among those returned, they hold a nineteen point advantage. Now, that seems a bit odd to me. Maybe we should investigate those, ya? However, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the absentee ballots are only four percent of voters. Sestak, I think, still has a chance, with a massive get out the vote operation being performed in his favor.

FEC called against....

...two people, actually. The first is a bit of a surprise. It's none other than John McCain. Yes, THAT McCain. Feingold-McCain, which was recently shredded. Failed presidential candidate. Anyway, national Dems are saying that he may have violated laws when he paid to run ads for two House candidates, as well as the group, Friends Of John McCain. Democrats have also asked for an investigation into the candidates, Jesse Kelly and Ruth McClung. the commercials say who's paying, and feature John McCain saying he approves the message. But, Democrats say, Johnny Mack may still be breaking the law if he is spending $4,800. The big question, to me, is if he did, was it known by these two campaigns, and even planned that way? If not, they count as independent expenditures, which means that he may spend as much as he wants. The other is Linda McMahon. She is accused of using her company, WWE, to answer questions, first of all. How would that work, exactly? Secondly, by scheduling events close to the election, she is "coordinating with and using the corporate resources of her family's company. Democrats are accusing Mrs. McMahon's "fan appreciation day," which is scheduled three days before the election, and taping an episode in a heavily Democratic area on election day as being designed to affect turnout. WWE says the fan appreciation is to thank them for sticking with WWE and her, despite the things that were said about both. Democrats say that is proof of coordination. And the filming? According to Dems, because of her and her husband's financial stakes, it is an illegal campaign expenditure, plus an attempt to keep those not supporting Mrs. McMahon from voting. She is not expected to be at either event. All right, how much has she spent, $40 million? And she's still down, according to a new poll, by as much as nine points. I don't think either one will have a significant effect on the race. As for McCain, an investigation is warranted, but I don't think he has done anything wrong.

John McCain

He's like a punch-me clown: you just can't keep them down. After what many thought would be a tough primary fight, he's sticking up his head again. But this time, it is to declare intent to filibuster any attempts to end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." Never mind the fact that it has been ruled unconstitutional, and would have ended if the Department of Justice hadn't stuck it's long nose into things. Of course, he did explain that he would during a lame duck session and until there had been a complete review on effect in morale and battle effectiveness. OK, let's think about this: if they are not allowed to say they are gay, and they are trained, then they are effective, and they will not become less so just because they admit to being gay. Unfortunately, there is currently a split between the members of the military. I do think it should be repealed, and no, I do not think there will be disastrous consequences.

Unexpected Chance

Ben Quayle, the man once thought to be the prohibitive favorite in the race for Arizona's 3rd district, looks like he may be starting to lag. Now, I'll be the first to admit that this poll was done by a liberal group, the Daily Kos. But with 10 percent undecided, and Mr. Quayle down, 44 points compared to Jon Hulburd's 46, in a heavy Republican area, it is still interesting. It's even more interesting considering that, while only 7 percent of Dems will support Mr. Quayle, 19 percent of Republicans will support Mr. Hulburd. Independents back Hulburd 50 to 36. And it may all be because Mr. Quayle has been accused of writing for an adult site, called Dirty Scottsdale, under the name Brock Landers. So far, 52 percent have an unfavorable view of Mr. Quayle.

Reporter arrested

But it would appear that it is not because he broke the law. No, this reporter was detained after he tried to ask the nominnee a question. Because that is so dangerous, you can't have reporter's doing their jobs. the man's name was Tony hopfinger, who has been accused of trespassing and assult. So far, Hopfinger has not been charged, but Mr. Miller had this to say has accused Mr. Hopfinger of using the Town Hall to stage a publicity event. Ok, town Halls are open to the public, last I knew. Or did we just lose our civil rights and I missed it? Lisa Murkowski and Scott McAdams have both leveled charges of hypocrisy at Miller, with Mr. McAdams going so far as to tweet (my favorite line): "In case you didn't know it, the Constitution also applies to reporters." I would also like to add that Mr. Hopfinger was trying to ask a question that Miller has said he will no longer discuss: his past employment history. Miller is being viewed very unfavorably. Maybe he'll lose.

Environment won't hurt Dems

Which goes against what you would expect for a GOP tidal wave. 23 districts were polled where the Dems were in a tough fight, and the 21 who won't be hurt too badly for their vote are:

Jerry McNerney (Calif.); Betsy Markey (Colo.); Alan Boyd (Fla.); Suzanne Kosmas (Fla.); Alan Grayson (Fla.); Leonard Boswell (Iowa); Debbie Halvorsen (Ill.); Phil Hare (Ill.); Frank Kratovil (Md.); Mark Schauer (Mich.); Carol Shea-Porter (N.H.); Dina Titus (Nev.); John Hall (N.Y.); Steve Driehaus (Ohio); Mary Jo Kilroy (Ohio); John Boccieri (Ohio); Paul Kanjorski (Pa.); Patrick Murphy (Pa.); John Spratt (S.C.); Tom Perriello (Va.) and Steve Kagan (Wis.). The ones in a dead heat for their votes are Zach Space in Ohio and Harry teague of New Mexico.This is just another sign that Democrats should not be running from their accomplishments. We need to talk about health care, and energy, and the other good things we've done. Of course, Republicans say that this would kill jobs and the economy, but they've been wrong about things before. Although, if anyone knows how to kill the economy, it's a Republican. And now I ask that if there is someone in one of these 23 districts who reads this, please go make calls on behalf of the Democrat.

The End ....

...of the drilling moratorium, which is simply not a good idea. but have the effects been overstated? There are 9,600 jobs in the industry, and only 2,000 were expected to be laid off or quit due to this. Now, someone may say, "ONLY 2,000 jobs?! How dare you?!" Well, I dare in the fact that compared to the number of jobs we've already lost, 2,000 is just a drop in the bucket. As it so happens, according to industry officials, only a small number were laid off. The good news, however, is that we did get tighter regulations. Maybe the people laid off could be transferred to researching alternative energy.

Democrat hope?

Is there hope for the party after all? According to a recent survey, around eighty percent of African American Democrats said that they were just as interested in the midterms, if not more so, as they were about the 2008 presidential election. According to David Bositis, a senior political analyst, said that if the African American vote comes out in the same high numbers, there would not be as much damage done as is currently being forecasted by the pundits. There are twenty districts where they make a significant portion of the voters. He went on to say that even though the Republicans are fielding African American candidates, it wouldn't work because they vote along party, not racial, lines. My thought: the twenty districts that are labeled competitive, where a majority are African Americans? They are not as competitive. That narrows it down to, sixty, eighty seats, somewhere in there. I think Democrats will still lose the house, by twenty seats or less.

Is Dino Rossi "The One?"

Republicans are starting to pin their hopes on Dino Rossi. The NRSC has pledged $4 million for his campaign, while outside groups, such as the NRA and Karl Rove's American Crossroads have cut ads either trashing Patty Murray and/or supporting Rossi. So far, it would seem that the odds are against them: the state hasn't had a Republican governor or voted a Republican president in twenty-five years; there is also strong support for the president and Ms. Murray. According to the math, this seat is absolutely necessary for them to take over again. Several polls are placing Murray in the lead, but things may change within the next twenty days or so. Do I think they will succeed? At this point, no. My vote is for Patty Murray.

Sam Brownback's hold

It is time to tell Senator Brownback to end the hold on confirming Francis Ricciardone, Jr. as an envoy to Turkey. Why does it even matter? Because back in 2002, he wrote a letter to Ricciardone. Big deal, right? Well, as it turns out, this letter thanked him for his dedication and service as an envoy to the Philippines, for trying to  obtain the release of a missionary and his wife. He went on to say that he knew Ricciardone would "do a good job representing America's interests." The missionary was killed, his wife was freed. And why was the hold placed? Former Bush advisor Elliot Abrams said that he did not push hard enough to obtain democracy while serving as an ambassador to Egypt from 2005 to 2008. To be fair though, neither did the Bush administration. It is currently unknown if the hold will be lifted after the election or not.

Arizona Dems take on the RGA

Tomorrow, early voting ballots are being mailed out to Arizona voters. And the Arizona Democratic Party is claiming that the Republican Governor's Association violated state election laws trying to keep Jan Brewer in. Republicans obviously are calling it politics, noting that Terry Goddard, her opponent, is losing. Badly. Democrats are claiming that the RGA failed to register as a personal action committee, which is a committee that is designed to spend money to elect or defeat a canadite. They are also accused of soliciting money for Ms. Brewer on their website and improperly gave corparate money to a state committee. I'm not sure how that last one would work. a complaint was filed with the Secretary of State, also a Republican, so you know it's not going to go anywhere. And frankly, with the timing, I'm not so sure anything should happen.

Chris Coons leads

For once, the GOP establishment might be right. Remember, before the Deleware primary, they were saying she had no chance at being elected? Well, a poll has come out showing that Chris Coons holds a double digit lead over O'Donnell, a 19 point lead. What could possibly explain such a substantial lead? How about the 85 percent of Democrats who are going to vote for Mr. Coons, as compared to only 68 percent of Republicans who will vote for Ms. O'Donnell? She just comes off, in my mind, as too extreme and too odd. She's claimed trying witchcraft, asked why monkeys aren't still evolving, and claims that homosexuals suffer from an identity crisis, among other things. Just think, if Mike Castle had won, I wouldn't be writing this right now. There'd be no point, because he'd probably win, by at least 11 points. Oh well. Elect Chris Coons in 2010!

Democrats and California

New polls show that the Democrats have a small lead in California. Meg Whitman, has has spent  $119 million dollers against Jerry Brown, is down by seven points, 50 to 43.  But in my mind, we may attribute this to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's leadership. It would take a major mistake by former Governor Brown for her to be able to come back. Meantime, Barbara Boxer leads Carly Fiorina, 49 to 45. And the leads may widen, with more Democrats saying that they are energized, that they are more likely to vote. It went from 75 percent, up from 60. Also, frankly, there are more democrats in California. Now, if we could spend that energy all over the country...

GOP goes against food stamps

Yes, you read that right folks. Uncle Newt, the man who brought the republicans back from the desert in 1994, has been advising Republicans to hit Democrats for letting the food stamps assitance program grow. You have to admit, this is kind of a strange play. A lot of the focus on this election has been over tax cuts for the rich, not food stamps for poor people. But it is a very shrewd calculation. It makes the Dems look like socialists, and the Repubs like good little capitalists. However, this move is also a bit, um, cruel and assish. Given that we are suffering a recession that started because the Republicans had to deregulate EVERYTHING, it is no freaking wonder that food stamp use went up. People are poorer now, hello? 1 in 8 adults are on it, as well as 1 in 4 children. This is just a way to highten the class division. And frankly, doing this to avoid looking like the party of rich, white people is kind of like having Virg Bernero drop the nomination and supporting Rick Synder. It doesn't work. We need Democrats to keep everything working right.

Hillary VP?

That's the story that has been going around lately. However, the White House has been saying that such rumors are "absouletly untrue." Meanwhile, Secretary Clinton has claimed "no interest" in switching with Vice President Biden. The rumor was started when Bob Woodward said that "possible" that Mrs. Clinton would see the deal as a "precursor," a kickoff, if you will, to the election of 2016. Mrs. Clinton still claims to have no intention of running again after her 2008 loss. She has also said that if Obama wins again, she will not serve another term as secretary of state, preferring to have a private life. Things change, however, and six years is a long time. I have a feeling she may reconsider.

New York Governor Race

A race that was once mildly interesting just got more so, with the announcement that Rick Lazio would not continue his run. However, Lazio will not put his endorsement behind Carl Paladino, who won the Republican's nomination. With Lazio ending his run on the Conservative ticket before Tuesday, the Conservatives need to choose someone quickly. And because Lazio is dropping, the only way that's legal is if he is nominated to be a judge. With the edge in registered voters that New York has, there is no way Andrew Cuomo can lose. None.

Crazy Quotes

You know what, I have started finding all sorts of strange quotes online, through about.com. If you find any that i haven't covered, please leave a comment. In the mean time, I leave you with:

''I don't like the idea of telling private business owners -- I abhor racism. I think it's a bad business decision to exclude anybody from your restaurant -- but, at the same time, I do believe in private ownership.''


—Kentucky GOP Senate nominee and Tea Party favorite Rand Paul, arguing that government shouldn't require private businesses to serve customers of all races, interview with Louisville Courier-Journal, April 25, 2010

Rand Paul

Has anyone in Kentucky subscribed to Details magazine. If so, are they talking about Rand Paul's interview in August? It involved this:

"That means repealing President Obama's health-care plan and establishing high-deductible insurance plans that would force medical providers to compete on price, since patients would be paying much of the bill out-of-pocket. ("It sounds funny, but you need to be paying more for your health care," he says.) "  While deploring racism, he took umbrage at the provision that forced private businesses, like the infamous Woolworth's lunch counter, to desegregate. He illustrated his argument this way: "If you decide that restaurants are publicly owned and not privately owned, then do you say that you should have the right to bring your gun into a restaurant, even though the owner of the restaurant says, 'Well, no, we don't want to have guns in here...because people might drink and start fighting and shoot each other'? Does the owner of the restaurant own his restaurant? Or does the government own his restaurant?" Replace guns with black people and his point becomes clear.

So, is this the first time in a long time that Democrats win in Kentucky?




Read More http://www.details.com/culture-trends/critical-eye/201008/rand-paul-kentucky-senate-republican-campaign?currentPage=2#ixzz10s9i3MYe

Christine O'Donnell

Ok, Deleware voters, this little snippet of work is from a conservative news group called "The Weekly Standard." On September 2, Christine O'Donnell gave an interview. This is a taste of how paranoid she is:

"They’re following me. They follow me home at night. I make sure that I come back to the townhouse and then we have our team come out and check all the bushes and check all the cars to make sure that—they follow me.

That’s what’s disgusting, as you can see from the YouTube videos. They knock on the door at all hours of the night. They’re hiding in the bushes when I’m at candidate forums. In 2008 they broke into my home. They vandalized my home. They wrote nasty notes on my front door, on my front porch. They jeopardized my safety. They did the same thing to our campaign office. They broke into our campaign office. They vandalized our campaign office. They stole files. My campaign signs that had my picture—they put a spear in my mouth poked out my eyes, and cut out the part of my heart, and wrote nasty names all over those campaign signs.

I would be a fool to be pressured into disclosing where I live, when I know that the stakes are even higher this time. What makes me think they wont do the same distasteful things they did in 2008 when the stakes are even higher, when we’re even more viable. I mean come on, John, you’re a class act. You don’t want to—you know that this is a security issue. You know what they’re capable of."

This was her talking about her opponents. Serious?

Tax Cuts

People are very divided on whether or not to extend the Bush Tax cuts for everyone. And in another example of how true this is, economists are saying it would be good to extend the cuts. At least, 18 out of the 31 who were interviewed are saying this. And then you have some who are saying that no one's taxes should stay cut, because the U.S. just can't afford it. Of the economists surveyed, this is a terrible idea, because it would cause what's known as a double dip recession, in which one rescession, or downturn of economic activity, follows another recession. Other ideas included were helping small businesses, drilling in the gulf again, and stopping foreclosures, as well as letting the Reserve extend credit without going through banks. I say it again: raise taxes on the rich, who don't normally spend their savings, and let the rest be, for now.

Michael Steele Road Trip

On the road again, he just can't wait to get on the road again...Sorry. Anyway, Michael Steele has started a road trip, from Washington state, all the way to Maryland. And almost half the stops along the way are in districts considered non-competitive. The tour has drwan accusations that Mr. Steele is trying to better himself and not to win districts for the party. Further questions are issued when the RNC has reported only five million dollers to campaign with, as compared to 13 million for Democrats. The RNC didn't let that one slide by; they issued a statement saying that since '09, the chairman has made it a habit to focus on those ignored by the national party. State party officials are also saying this was far too much at the last minute, and in some cases, an interference in campaign scheduling. This guy, in my mind, has no business leading the RNC, and this is just one more reason. He's misspoke, he's spent a lot of money where it shouldn't go. The Republicans need to pick someone else, or Democrats might have an easier time winning their seats.

Republicans Pledge

On Thursday, the Republicans announced the Official "Pledge To America." The claim is that it will create jobs, cut the spending, and put the people back in charge. It also serves to end the rumors that they are the Party Of No. So, it's a failure on one count. And the jury is still out on how these would be implemented, or if they would even work. Forty Five pages. That's it. Forty five pages, less if you count the pictures on the American ideal, some quotes. Some of the most specific things in this "brand new plan" sound awfully familiar, such as permanent tax cuts. Because wealthy people have to have money. There are other ideas, however, such as repealing ObamaCare (because people need to be screwed), canceling TARP, AKA the bank bailouts (which actually worked), and canceling unspent stimulus cash (we have some money left?). The problem is, some of the ideas just don't go far enough to bringing down the defecit. In the cases of the tax cuts, the defecit might even be added to. Same with repealing the health care reform law, according to the Congressional Budget Office, which is a nonpartisan group that studies if and how much bills add to the defecit. Health Care reform is expected to take off 140 billion over ten years. And by sticking with national security, you just know the defense budget won't be trimmed (because war makes money). Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security reforms are also very vague. But not every Republican says it goes far enough. Boehner, for the most part, has said that missing specifics are nothing to worry about, that it was not a "party platform." So, why was it released at all? Isn't the point of something like this to tell what you would do? The Tea party has not been too keen to jump on board with the plan. For one, it lacks specifics. But also, partiers doubt whether Republicans will actually follow through on it. Some say it doesn't go far enough and is just PR to get them elected. It may be enough to hand power over to the Republicans, but it doesn't do enough to show why that should be. And in 2012, everything goes back to the Democrats.

Ethics Spending in Deleware

The group known as the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington has said it plans to have an investigation started into Christine O'Donnell's campaign spending. They are claiming that in the years of 2009 and 2010, $20,000 was spent that was, in fact, illegal. The executive direcrtor, Melanie Sloan, has claimed that Ms. O'Donnell has used campaign funds for rent, gas, meals, and a bowling outing. The plan is to get the FEC and the State of Deleware's Attourney General to investigate. In case you're curious, this is the same group that called for Charles Rangel to step down, so it isn't nessecerily partisinship. There should be an investigation, for sure. If she is found guilty, what happens next? I would imagine Mike Castle taking her place. All because she's possibly an embezzler.

GOP sniping

The GOP's euphoria is starting to fade. Christine O'Donnell has backed out of scheduled appearences and the GOP is going to civil war over just what a conservative REALLY is. Lisa Murkowski has issued claims of smears by the Tea Party and Jim DeMint's undermining of the Republicans. DeMint struck back, saying that he has helped the Republicans gain control of the Senate. There are fears that these people that he has supported are so conservative and so unprepared for scrutiny that they have no chance of winning. And there are people who fit this bill: Sharron Angle for one, and Christine O'Donnell for another. While some are sniping though, Karl Rove is dampening his earlier thoughts, that O'Donnell could not be elected. However, he is also joining the shooting against Lisa Murkowski. At the same time, he is calling the idea of a GOP civil war "false." Really? False? I don't know what to say, other than there may yet be a chance for the Dems to hold the Senate.

Christine O'Donnell

Politicians always say things that are a little goofy. Who could forget the Howard Dean scream, or John Kerry's voting snafu? But we need to remember that Republicans are just as guilty of these mistakes. Christine O'Donnell is getting noticed for comments that she made a decade ago. She has said that when she was in high school, she dabbled in witchcraft. You cannot make this up. She made the comments on an episode of Bill Maher's Politically Incorrect. There are some who believe that this is just a cynical ploy to stop Ms. O'Donnell's campaign in its tracks, but let's be real here: she never had a real chance anyway. I believe her confidence is misplaced, but we shall see.

Lisa Murkowski

It seems she isn't done just yet. On Friday, she announced giving up her Senate leadership post. This was just a leadup to the next big thing: her launching a write in campaign to get her seat. A person, if unhappy with the other two nominees, may substitute a person's name. Spelling doesn't count, as long as what the person meant is clear. Republicans are making it clear that they support Mr. Joe Miller, who unexpectedly nailed the nomination. Republicans may hold the voting edge, but Mrs. Murkowski has made it clear that she will try to get voters from both parties, by featuring Democrats who asked her to stay in. Writein campaigns are notoriously difficult: only one person has ever had success in doing so. That one is South Carolina's Strom Thurmond, who would later become a Republican. Republicans obviously fear that her staying in will give Democrats the edge to win. It's possible, but not probable. I think it far more likely that she will win in the write in slot.

Ethical Trials For Dems On Hold

Democrats obviously have problems with Charles Rangel and Maxine Waters. They are both facing charges on their ethical conduct, which wasn't expected, as Nancy Pelosi was promising to drain out the House swamp. But with both winning their primaries, and with no trial date set by the House, it may now be assumed, in fact, expected, that there will be no trial until next year. The Republicans have certainly lost no time on the issue, saying that any money given to campaigns by the two should be returned, and sending notices in 35 other races. And while polling says jobs is number one at the minute, there are still problems. At this point, with two heavily Democratic districts, they will probably be reelected. However, what happens if they are convicted? Hopefully, an impeachment, and special election. But only time will tell.

End Date

Due to lack of viewership and commentary, this blog will be shut down on January 1, 2011. Thank you for reading.

GOP looking better and better

We all knew it would be tough for the Democrats to hold the majorities. History and lack of enthusium made that a certainty. But now it may be getting worse. According to the Associated Press, the number of people saying the country is going the wrong way is higher now than when the primaries had started. Also add in the fact that even more people disapprove of the president and want to see the Republicans in charge. We are now seven weeks away from the election. And for those seven weeks, it appears that Nancy Pelosi is predicting that Democrats will hold the House majority, which, ironically is the one most at risk. Still, Newt Gingrich is telling House Republicans not too confident. Several Republicans have been putting pressure on member to donate, in order to catch up with the amount Democrats have.

New Time

Starting in October, this blog will recieve new posts once a week. I want to tahnk you for your continued reading, and if you wish to leave a comment, you may.

Brand New Arms Deals

It's the largest arms deal that the United States has ever done. And if the Congress oks it, 60 billion dollers worth of aircraft will be sent to the Saudis. You know, it's not enough we buy oil off them, now they get our planes? It is also being said that the Obama administration is also discussing updating their navel and missle defenses. The idea is to protect our Arab allies (ha-ha, what Arab allies?) against the wrath of the big, bad, Iranians. The 60 bilion is the most that the Saudis are willing to pay for fighter jets and helicopters. So what can you get for 60 billion? Well, how about 84 F-15s, upgrades for 70 more F-15s, as well as purchuseing 70 Apaches, 72 Black Hwaks, and 36 Little Birds? The deal is not expected to be blocked, for whatever reason. However, there may be changes and or conditions. What don't we sell them some drones, at a higher price? I'm sorry, but for what we paid for gas? I think that makes sense.

Deleware Upset?

If the election were today, probably. As of today, a poll is out showing Christine O'Donnell ahead of the establishment backed Mike Castle. She is leading 47 to 44, and while that is just outside the margin of error, it is enough to give many a pause. In one month, Mike Castle went from 60 percent favorability to 43. Why? Because in one month, he was constantly attacked as being too liberal, and he has not fought back. There is still four days for things to change, however, I do not think that this will be the case. Even if Mr. Castle, who is seen as a moderate, were to go on offense, it might not be enough to save him. His only hope is if Ms. O'Donnell loses support among conservatives. And really, how likely is it?

Linda McMahon Bomb Scare

Yesterday afternoon, Linda McMahon was one of sixty people inside the home of Tom Banisch, the head of the town's GOP commetiee, when, at 4:30 pm, a bomb threat was called in. State police did an hour long inspection, but have determined that the threat was a false one. No one was injured in the evacuation. All right, this person should face charges for filing a false report, among other things.I would like to ask that we all keep our rationality, think before we act. And whatever we do, if we don't support someone, do not threaten them. Just show up at a town hall, and ask questions, and debate them. There is never a need for violence.

New War On Terror Weapons

How long have we been in Afghanistan? Has it really been nine years? It took us nine years to come up with new technology, which may help us in the long run. The number of drone strikes, or strikes made by unmanned planes, have gone up, but the number of civilians killed has started to decrease. How was this done? Well, five defense sources say that it is due to better intelligence (So where's Bin Laden?), being more careful about the strikes, and better weapons. As it turns out, the drones may now carry smaller, better made weapons. This new weapon, according to sources, is called the Griffin, a thirteen pound warhead, which is just the front of the missle, which contains the explosieve meterials. It is so small that for every one of the traditional, twenty pound Hellfires, which have a wider range, you can get three Griffins. Also, the Griffins have less range, which means less destruction, and only things immidately nearby are killed. It will get the terrorists, and leave the rest, which is good news for all. I think, anyway.

Ad Wars

Here's just one more issue for nobody to agree on. On Thursday, the National Republican Congressional Committee wrote a letter to stations all across the country, saying that they, the stations, have the right to block ads by Democrats if the station believes that the contents are false. Democrats were quick to strike back, accusing the Republicans of urging people to break the law. According to Democratic counsel, there is a law that prevents censorship over the airwaves. The other thing is that, according to the FCC, stations do not have the right to block ads, even if they have "libelious remarks," or pictures/ads that are false. Meantime, NRCC counsel claims to have added a part, saying to only reject in accordance with FCC law, which appears to mean none. Democrats have a money advantage, but Republicans attack the ads as false. Will it help? It might help a little, but probably not enough to give the GOP more gains then they were already going to make.

Sharron Angle ...Again

You know, she almost wasn't the nominee, but then Sue Lowden just had to say that if we bartered with our doctors, using chickens, that would keep healthcare costs down. Boom, one giant eyebrow lifted, and Sharron Angle ended up taking Harry Reid. But her erracticness may end up saving what was once one of the most politically vunerable Democrats imaginable. Comments that she made on a radio show appear to support the idea of an armed revolution. And those aren't the only things that she's done that has people going, "Huh?" It seems that she makes it a point to avoid reporters except for the more conservative ones, imaginably out of fear of being questioned on why Social Security, The Environmental Protection Agency, and IRS, among other things, should be phased out. She's not done yet though; she has also said that she would counsel a hypothetical thirteen year old girl, raped by her father, that the girl should keep the baby, and make "lemons out of lemonade." Um, what? She's also critized a football team who wanted to wear black jerseys, saying black is satanic. Yes, because everyone knows that football teams worship the devil. And now she's been noticed for something else, it seems, canceling a debate. Sharron Angle recently agreed to a debate on Jon Ralston's TV show. He also has his own newspaper column. As it would happen to turn out, after Harry Reid agreed to the debate, she backed out. This has led to a lambasting of Ms. Angle, as well as it should. This lady is far too extremist, and frankly, just too strange for the job. Vote Harry Reid in 2010.

Homegrown Terrorism

Well, this is just great. According to a panel of experts of Friday, the United States not only has a harder to predict, more homegrown threat today than nine years ago, but we are not even prepped enough to deal with it. What we are likely to see is more small scale attacks. Not that any terrorist attcak is small. Lee Hamilton, of the 9-11 Commission, and a Democrat, has said that there are "other things that still need to be done to make the country safer." Perhaps the most troubling thing was the Time Square Bombing. While it was a failure, it has also proven that the old sterotype of the terrorist being a loner, being poor, being uneducated, these beliefs no longer hold up. All we can hope is that, with time, our defense gets ramped up, starting with extra training and funding for police, an expansion of how many are in the service.

Republican cockiness

Republicans seem very sure of themselves: so sure, in fact, that today, even Karl Rove has said the Republicans will take the House, as well as eight or nine seats in the Senate. This is quite amazing, considering that only a few months ago, so few Republicans wanted to make a prediction. Rove said in a half hour speech to target the undecideds, and to have a vision. Odlly enough though, Rove spent so much time attacking, he didn't lay out any outlines, and he knew it. At this point, I would say it'll be a split: GOP takes the House, with a majority of less than ten, and stays in the Senate minority, by only a couple of seats.

Cornyn's warning

That would be Texas Senator, John Cornyn, who has said that if Lisa Murkowski launches a third party bid, she will have to resign as the vice chairman of Republican Senatorial committee, saying that "it's hard to see you...as part of Republican leadership if you're not a Republican." Murkowski has been signaling a consideration of running as a third party member, the concern being that if she does, the seat may go Democratic. I think the only way that seat is going Democrat is if Joe Miller pulls a Ted Stevens, rest his soul, and if Lisa Murkowsi screws up. Neither of those two things are likely, with Miller being new to the game and Murkowski as being an expierienced professional.

Recovery the Republicans hostage?

Yes, if you believe Barack Obama. Among the accusations that have been made by him, the Republicans are holding the middle class hostage, while at the same time playing defense on his policies. I think we are at the point where no matter what the president does, there will not be a pickup in the economy until next year, at the earliest. Now, anyone who has read this blog before will tell you that I have supported the first stimulus pack. I believe, however that we did not spend enough, but with the little progress that we've seen, it might be better to switch tacks, and start paying our defecit. And the first way that I can think of doing that is cutting NASA out of the budget, coverting it into an Rand D department, and cutting their budget to 10 million for one year.

Don't Ask, Don't Tell

Don't Ask, Don't Tell has taken a significant hit yesterday: It was declared unconstitutional in a federal court in California. Judge Virginia Phillips said in her ruling that that the plaintiff has "demonstrated that it is entitled to the relief sought by it's members," as well as a "decleration that it violates the fifth and first amendment rights," and a "permanent injunction," or permanent ban, in this case, on its enforcement. "The reach in the act is far broader than needed to protect government interests." After hearing witness testimony, she also concluded that it also lowers military readiness, as well as the bonds of the group. Having been given a great victory, protesters have started pushing even harder for the end of the ban. Democrats want to, but without Republican support, they don't wish to deal with it. The House approved it's removal in a vote over a general bill, but John McCain has blocked in the Senate, pending a complete review in the Pentagon, due in December.  I don't think we'll see an end to this before the Supreme Court, personally. I would support a repeal of don't ask, don't tell, in the thought that it may actually bring up the effiency of our troops.

Heatlh Care Spending

It is always a tad aggravating when new reports on health care spending comes out. It always seems like the people can not make up their minds for anything. Well, here's one more report to confuse you. Before the overhaul, it was expected to spending was to go up 6.1 percent a year over the next ten years, now it's expected to go up 6.3 percent a year. And that oh so slight spending increase will mean that it will cost about 71 billion to implement everything by 2019, compared to 143 billion in savings. Which means, less defecit is paid for then was originally planned. However, that's not to say there aren't some savings: spending in Medicare will go down by about 1.4 percent each year, due to cutting in areas where overpayment was found. Enrollment in Medicaid, which covers medical costs and hospital costs, as well as Children Health Insurence enrollments will go up. While there are things i would like to change about this bill, this isn't one of them.

2010 is no 1994? No kidding, man.

At, least, that's if you listen to some of Bill Clinton's former aides. Harold Ickes and Dee Dee Myers are claiming that 2010 will not be as good for the Republicans, even though there is an obvious lack of enthusiasm among the democrats. Ms. Myers said that this was because Republicans haven't been out of power for very long, so everyone remembers what they did and what they will do. However, she said the President should stay out of the governors races, which isn't likely. Paul Begala said that Democrats still have a shot because voter anger isn't just toward them, but both parties. He also believes that Democrats have a chance of winning in Florida and California senate seats, as well as the Texas governership. They'll probably win in California, they might in Florida, but I don't think the democrats have a prayer in Texas. Voters may be winnable, but this time, they won't be won to Democrats.

Sharron Angle's DC Trip

Anyone who knows me knows that one of the things that I can't stand is hypocrisy. And so I pass this information on, in the hopes that it bothers you as much as it does me. K Street is very well known in Washington. It is a place where many of the offices belong to the lobbyists, you know, those guys who influence how laws work. Sharron Angle has often roasted Harry for taking lobbyist money, but she'll be headed out to D.C. to get some for herself. Hey Sharron, how does it feel to sell your soul? Or are you just untrustworthy? It's especially galling after you find that she's been bashing the bailouts. What's the problem with that, you ask? Shouldn't someone have their own opinions? That's fine, unless some of the people who voted for it are at your fundraising. Namely, Jon Kyl and Mitch McConnell.  What does that tell you, Nevada?

Obama Out of The Picture?

The ad picture, to be specific. Time is funny. If you'd been here two years ago, you would see many ads of Democrats running for office, with Obama front and center. Not anymore. With so much of the public against him, Democrats are using what may be considered a tactic that, in my mind, is unlikely to work. They are trying to distance themselves from the president, after two years of sticking with them. There are so many ways that this will hurt them instead of helping them. They will be seen as a flipflopper, a liar, an opprotunist, or all three. And being painted as even one is enough to get you screwed over. The exception seeming to be Charlie Crist.

Democrats Spilt On The Taxes

It's always interesting to hear the president say that the tax cuts for middle class people is being held up by the Republicans to get the tax cuts for the rich extended, especially since its other Democrats who are also involved. And who are the naysayers? Only the usual suspects: Joey Lieberman, Ben Nelson, Even Bayh, and Kent Conrad. They are all saying that the cuts should be extended temporarily. You, conservatives said the tax cuts would help spur grwth. Here we are, eight years lateer. Where's the growth? It is nonexisitant, and thank god there are still some Democrats who have the spine to take the stand to end them. We are trillions in debt, and this will help to pay some of it down.

New Round Of Tax Cuts

You know, for being a guy above partisan politics, supposedly, you got to admit that this is a pretty smooth move. The president is calling for tax breaks, for the ability to allow businesses to write off, or deduct any expenses on new plants or equipments, from their returns. Republicans are such tax cutters that you'd think they'd be on board, at the risk of being hammered for hypocrisy. You'd be wrong, of course. Unfortunately, there has been no specifics on how such cuts would be paid for, but there are several things under consideration. Among them are: targeted tax hikes on businesses, as well as closing loopholes. The idea is that this will cause investing, expanding, and, hopefully, an increase in jobs. Now, given the environment, they are not likely to pass until end of the midterms, and it will proably take Republicans brining them up in order for them to go anywhere.

Lisa Murkowski...A Libertarian?

Yes, you heard it right, folks. But perhaps I should explain Libertarianism. It is the basic belief that all people should have the right to do what they will. Now, the nominee for the Libertarians, David Haase, obviously doesn't have a hope in hell: for the most part, independants have one only a few points in their area. But if he leaves the ticket, and the Libertarians do pick her, which is unlikely, according to the heard of the party, she will see a massive pickup in votes. However, this is importent. If she were picked, her name recognition and popularity could drain votes from Joe Miller, letting the Democrat, win. The race is close enough, with Miller leading 50 to 44. But if she doesn't run, then Miller will proably with, by 10 points or less, I'd say.

Outsourcing of Ethics

And I'm sure you all thought, "This is news? We knew about this for a long time." Well, all I can say is, there's a story to it. Back in 2006, Nancy Pelosi and Democrats made a claim. That claim was that if handed the reins of power, they would drain the swamp of corruption in the House. All very eloquent, or well spoken, and very effective. They were elected, and they created a committee designed to weed out the corruption. They were obviously very busy people. A report has just come out that shows that the Office of Congressional Ethics has sent out half a million dollers worth of work. The company is called Navigant Consulting, and it was not involved ith the more sensitive features that come with investigating the congress. In fact, the reason it happened was due to a large amount of work, not enough people, and a lack of time. But what caused this to happen? Well, as it turns out, there were limits put on the office, such as only three months to carry out the investigations. Also, it cannot force someone to testify. And now it appears to be in danager. Represenitives, unhappy with certain investigations, has started calling for its dismissal, or a weakening of what it can do. This is a disappointment. Progress has been made towards removing corruption, but we should realise that the moment the OCE dies, we will start to see corruption climb. We need to give the Committee more time, more people, and more money to get its work done. Please call your congressperson, and prevent the gutting of this importent group. Every voice counts.

Outside Groups' Campaign Expenditures Have Doubled

This story has come from cqpolitics.com. Do you know whose buying your election?

Outside organizations have shelled out twice as much on ads and other electioneering activities to affect Congressional races so far during the 2010 election cycle as they did two years ago.
Unions, political parties and advocacy groups have spent more than $34.2 million on independent expenditures so far during this election, compared with less than $16.2 million at this time in the 2008 election, according to a CQ MoneyLine study of Federal Election Commission reports.
"It's staggering amounts of money," said David Vance, spokesman for the Campaign Legal Center. "People have made big promises to spend, but so far they are keeping pace with those big promises."
Through the third week of August, these organizations doled out more than $18 million on independent expenditures for and against Senate candidates, which is 10 times more than the amount spent on Senate races during the same period two years ago.
The race that attracted the most money was the May 18 Democratic Senate primary in Arkansas, in which incumbent Sen. Blanche Lincoln defeated Lt. Gov. Bill Halter. More than 82 percent of the nearly $9.5 million spent on independent expenditures favored Halter. But he only received 48 percent of the vote, giving Lincoln the victory.
Independent expenditure spending does not always determine the winner of a Congressional race, but this spending can supplement a campaign enough to tip the scales in some races.
Outside funding helped tea party favorite Joe Miller unseat Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski. Even though Miller was outspent 7-to-1 by Murkowski's campaign, outside groups spent 94 percent of their $565,000 to help him pull out a narrow victory for the Republican Senate nomination.
"When we get involved, we could make a difference between winning and loosing," said Sal Russo, chief strategist for the Tea Party Express, which was the source of nearly all of Miller's outside money.
This election cycle, the Tea Party Express, through its Our Country Deserves Better political action committee, has come out of nowhere to become the fourth-largest source of independent expenditures with $2.7 million.
"Whether it is Sharron Angle in Nevada, Joe Miller or getting Bart Stupak to quit in Michigan," Russo said, "I think those are all places where we have made the difference."
Other Senate contests leading in independent expenditures so far during the 2010 election cycle include:
- Massachusetts, where more than two-thirds of the $2.7 million spent favored Democrat Martha Coakley, but she lost to Republican Scott P. Brown in January;
- Nevada, where virtually all of the $1.7 million spent has supported Republican candidate Sharron Angle or gone against Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid;
- Missouri, where 90 percent of the $1 million spent favored Democrat Robin Carnahan, who is running against Rep. Roy Blunt during the fall.
A contentious primary season and recent special elections have also bolstered spending to affect the elections for House candidates. So far, outside groups spent $16.2 million on these contests -- an increase of 11 percent over a similar period during the 2008 election.
The House races that have attracted the most money since January 2009 include:
- New York's 23rd district, where nearly $3.5 million was spent by outside groups to influence who would replace Republican John M. McHugh, who resigned to become secretary of the Army. Ultimately, Democrat Bill Owens defeated Conservative Doug Hoffman in November 2009.
- New York's 20th district, where 72 percent of nearly $2.5 million in independent expenditures were spent to try to elect Republican James Tedisco to a seat vacated by Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand. But Democrat Scott Murphy won the seat in April 2009.
- Pennsylvania's 12th district, where outside groups spent more than $2.2 million to help determine who would succeed Democrat John P. Murtha after his death. The outside spending narrowly favored Democrat Mark Critz, who defeated Republican Tim Burns in May.
It is still early in the election season for independent expenditures, and such spending is expected to increase dramatically in upcoming weeks. At this point during the 2008 election cycle, groups had shelled out just one-tenth of the $152 million ultimately spent to affect Congressional races.
One of the key factors that could increase spending over the 2008 cycle is the Supreme Court's ruling earlier this year in a case called Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, in which the court ruled that corporations, nonprofits and labor unions can use their own treasuries to fund political ads and influence federal elections.
"With the number of races in play and the amount of money that has been unleashed on the system by Citizens United," Vance said, "it's not going to slow down."
Such spending does have to be reported to the FEC, but the means for disclosure remain murky until the agency issues final rules on the subject after the election.
Some of the organizations spending the most on independent expenditures so far during the 2010 election cycle are the Service Employees International Union, with more than $6.4 million, and the AFL-CIO, with nearly $3.7 million.
As expected, party committees also have played a large role in these elections. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has spent more than $2.8 million, while the National Republican Congressional Committee has doled out nearly $2.7 million so far. Those numbers are fractions of what they will ultimately spend.

Sharron Angle

One often wonders just how Sharon Angle managed to win her primary. In any other year, she would be gone out of our site, and Harry Reid would be getting his but kicked. But not this time.  I find myself in the extrodinary position of wanting Mr. Reid to win. I'll admit that I would've preferred to see Mr. Reid removed for incompetancy, but this lady makes me nervous. First things first: Repeal and Replace ObamaCare. Hm,I support our reform, up to a point. For example, she and I agree on dumping the individual mandates. She also advocates for tort reform, which is basically just a limit on how much money you can sue for. She believes that it would not be a good idea to stop offshore drilling, and to just enforce the laws already passed. If you read between the lines, this means no new regulations, which we obviously need, in order to stop companies from cutting corners when they build refineries, and platforms, so on. She has constantly voted against tax increases. I hate to be the one to tell you all this, but I support tax increases. And some spending cuts might not be a bad idea, such as cutting out NASA altogether. Write me and tell me what you think should be done. Anyway, she supports, among other things, sanctions. The problem with the sanctions idea is that it just isn't working. We need to go a step further. We're already in one hopeless quagmire, we might as well start another. Or, after a civilian evacuation, we bomb the entire offending country. Again, write me. She has called for making the Bush Tax Cuts permanent. For my thoughts, please see that post. In the end, I just believe she is not right for our country, and I'm not the only one. The Mayor of Reno, a Republican from Angle's hometown, has said she is just too far right, and he won't support her. I urge all voting residents in Nevada to vote for Harry Reid.

West Virgina GOP ad

Let me ask you a hypothetical question. Lets say that a family member or friend, someone you knew and loved had died. Now, lets also say that  their funeral is used for an ad.. An ad attacking another person or their product. Pretty tacky, right? For the family of the late Robert Byrd, this is not just a hypothetical. This is real, and they immidately fought it. The candidate for the GOP, John Raese, used an ad to attack Joe Manchin as an Obama tool. He used footage of them at the Capitol funeral for Robert Byrd. A spokesman said that they had no idea it was from the funeral, that it was a stock photo. A stock photo is a picture that can be liscensed for use, but not by any one group. Instead, it may be used by any one who can think of a use.  The Byrd family has called for the ad to be pulled, and who could blame them? I don't know, wouldn't it be standard practice to include captions, even if they are for review, or espiecially if they are for viewing? I would suggest a comprimise: namely, keep the ad, but find a different photo to put in its place.

Bush Tax Cuts

How many of you support the Bush Tax Cuts? Okay, put your hand down. I'm just kidding. But in all seriousness, the cuts will soon be up for a revote. And, unfortuantely, but not surprisingly, Democrats don't have the spine or the balls to end them. The thought is that by letting them end, the economy will be harmed, and they'll lose their job. If the Republicans get their way, the cuts will be permanent, meaning a loss for the government of about 4 trillion. Obama's plan isn't much better: he would let the ones for the rich expire and keep the ones for lower and middle classes. This would still mean a loss, but only about three trillion. Was our economy any better when the cuts for the rich went through? No, it wasn't. And people have so little now, we need to keep the lower tax breaks. What do you think? Leave me a note, or e-mail at thegodfather1.2010@gmail.com.

Joe Arpaio

Normally, I would not dedicate a post to just one person, but this is a very interesting exception. The U.S. Department of Justice is suing a shariff from Arizona, named Joe Arpaio, on the grounds of failure to cooperate in an investigation. And what was being investigated? His department was accused of violating Hispanic people's rights. And on the heels of that, he is being called out for possible abuseing of his power. Namely, pushing bogus charges/investigations and and intimidation of county workers. Someone even went so far as to compare him to a character in the movie "Machete." This character kills a Hispanic woman to prevent her from giving birth in the U.S. Joe is very well known it seems. Among his other actions, he has brought back the chain gang. The chain gang is a group of prisoners shackled together to do menial labor. Sexually explicit meterials were banned after complaints from female guards, who claimed harrassment by the prisoners. Apparently, they would compare the guards to the models and make comments. There is an in house radio station, which is, in all honesty, something that I have never even heard of. But perhaps the biggest thing is his "Tent City." People have criticized it because a majority of the people in the tents, outside, next to the building, are not yet convicts. Critics say that his comment that the people there should shut up because it's "hotter in Iraq, have to wear armor, and didn't commit any crimes." All righty, let's see. How should I put this? First, he should be declared innocent until proven guilty. All people have this right. He did well to can the jailhouse pornography, although the idea of inmates having Playboys to begin with is kind of odd. Let's wait and see how this ends, now.

Can the Tea Party take Delaware?

One can understand why this would be a fair question. After all, we just saw a popular Republican, Lisa Murkowski, get taken down by the Tea Party. It was all vey unexpected, until you realize that it seems like the Republicans are purging all their moderates. Now the Party wants to do it again, by securing the nomination of a lady by the name of Christine O'Donnell. This is not Ms. O'Donnell's first rodeo: in 2008, she won the nomination to take on Joe Biden. A newbie taking on a popular senator? Do you need those particular results? She was defeated, and constantly plagued by money troubles while campaigning. She was cited eight times for her seeming lack of ability to send in reports on her contributions., and she still owes people money from 2008. The Tea Party, when asked about these debts, said that when they endorsed her, they had no idea. Why wouldn't you? You'd think they'd look before they start namining names, right? Now, the fact that she wasn't doing her job, those forms, makes me nervous about if she will do her job if elected. Also, if she's in debt herself, she shouldn't be complaining about the federal deficit. As Confusius would've said, don't complain about the snow on your neighbor's roof if you have snow on your step. The Tea Party might have a difficult time with her nomination, because independants will be unable to vote, and registration to vote has ended in Deleware. You want my opinion? If Ms. O'Donnell picks up the nomination, the seat will go Democrat. With the current wave of anger, I will say she'll lose somewhere between 5and 7 points.

September

Hello Again! No, I have not stopped, I just went a a three month sabbatical, or vacation, before my schooling starts. I will write if I have time, and I welcome any comments that are not deemed offensive or insulting. This is meant to be a site of polite discussion and debate. To new friends, welcome! To old ones, welcome back! Enjoy!

Gay rights in military

For all the people out there who are gay, I have good news just for you: Ben Nelson of Nebraska has said he will vote to repreal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." This, along with Evan Bayh, Susan Collins, and Bill Nelson, makes the needed fifteen votes to attach this to a defense authorization bill. Also included are Joe Lieberman and Carl Levin. Congragulations on your victory! (No sarcasm was used when writing this.)

Obama/GOP meeting

Sorry to say, it's not all quiet on the front. Obama recently met with Republican senators, who described the meeting as testy, and the president as thin skinned. However, a White House spokesman who was there said the meeting wasn't as bad as the GOP would claim. (Are you surprised? Me neither.) Bob Corker of Tennesee accused Obama of using Republicans as props for the election year after calling the meeting only to submit a reform bill supported mostly by the Dems. In the end, the Republicans believe that Obama wants to do too much too fast. And that may very well be true. Think about it, what would be left if Obama got every thing he wanted in his first term? It's time to slow down and see what's going to happen next.

Idaho, 1st District

Just when I think that a paticular group, or person, has way too much power, and whomever they nominate will win, I always find myself proven wrong. Meet the women no one thought could make a wrong pick: Sarah Palin. I found myself slightly surprised that her nomination of Carly Fiorina in California caused a backlash of criticism, and I was very surprised to find that her pick lost in Idaho. Vaughn Ward is a veteren of Iraq, served on John McCain's 2008 campaign, was greatly outraising his opponent, and was picked by Sarah Palin. Oddly enough, he was beaten by Raul Labrador, or perhaps not so oddly.  Ward was damaged after allegations of plagerizing Obama's 2004 address at the DNC surfaced, as well as saying Puerto Rico was a country. Labrador will face Walt Minnick, a first term Democrat, who barely won in 2008, by two points. In a normally Republican state, I think Congressman Minnick should pack and be ready to go.

Do The Hawaii Shuffle!

This is not your normal midterm season. The latest evidence of such an obvious statement has come from the Hawaii 1st district, which went Republican after neither Democrat could pull a plurality, or majority, of votes. Having leaned GOP because no one could solve a fight between the Democrats, it is now moving, according to CQ, a tossup. I believe that this is an incorrect evaluation. This time, there will be only one Democrat for Charles Djou to face off against, and with Obama picking up many of the votes in Hawaii, it could be a tougher fight. The only thing that may help Djou is being a moderate or liberal Republican. Then again, what are the odds?

Second thoughts

We've all seen news articles or reports saying it's a bad time to be an incumbant, and an even worse time to be a Democrat. Let me be honest, even I thought this was the case; please see earlier posts. Having seen the latest primary results, I have to say this: We could be wrong. In Illinois, Pat Quinn was renominated. In Idaho, the winners were the incumbants. Now, it's fair enough to say that we haven't hit the election yet, and that's when things will change. And also, the May 18th primaries saw incumbant removal. Fair enough. All I can say his, there's still time. As Liam Neeson said in The Chronicles of Narnia: Things never happen the same way twice. Espicially when dealing with people.

The Senate Finance reform

We are one step closer to a long overdue reform on just how Wall Street and other financial institutions do their jobs. The Senate passed a bill last night, 59 to 39, with Chuck Grassley, Scott Brown, Susan Collins, and Olympia Snow all voting with most of the Democrats. Now, with the House one passed, a new bill must be put together, the differences between the two fixed. The Democrats are hping for something signable by the Fourth of July. If this succeeds, he will be a very compelling reason on why he, and other Democrats, should be reelected. Harry Reid might be helped too, and let's face it, he could use it. Republicans, meantime, are lining up the same arguments: too much government, jobs killer, growth slows, etc. There are things in it to prevent another crash, such as a resolution authority, which would allow a group of regulators to watch for signs of trouble all across the board, and let the government take over and shut down failing institutions, such as the FDIC does now. There is a consumer protection agency and an order to spin derivitives into a seperate area. Maria Cantwell and Russ Feingold say the bill doesn't go far enough, however. And I must agree. An amendment offered by Carl Levin and Jeff Merkley, which would have limited how much of their own money banks can spend on risks, was thwarted after it was attached to Sam Brownback's amendment, for strategy reasons. It still has a shot though; on Monday, the Brownback amendment, which would exclude auto dealers, will be voted on. Fifty minimum to pass it; if it does pass, Levin-Merkley wil pass too. If it does not, I urge you to call your senators and congress people to kill the bill.

First Gaffe Of The Season

You know, the beautiful thing about politics is not just the idea of our next leaders, not just the thrill of the trials of running, but also because a canidate may say something that no sane person who's actually thinking would say. Yes, I am looking at you, Joe Biden. The great thing about a rookie is that they are more likely to say something that looks bad. Yes, I'm looing at you, Rand Paul. Mr. Paul is in troubled waters, after expressing unease with a part of the Civil Rights Act, the part banning discrimination by businesses. And while he did say that the CRA was nessecery, and that he opposes rascism... Maybe it's just me, but I would find that hard to believe after what he said. He seems as libertarian as his father as well, calling for the dissolution of the Department of Education, plus term limits for senators. While this probably won't destroy his campaign (Kentucky is very Republican in national elections), it just goes to show how careful one should be when they talk, not just politicians.

May 19th results

It's the day after, and people seem to have a hangover from the imcumbancy that they elected. It's the only thing that can explain these results. At 7:16 AM, with most of the districts in, here's what I've got: In Arkensas, there will be a runoff between Bill Halter and Blanche Lincoln. I think he'll pick this one up, provided that he gets at least 8.5 percent of the people who voted for D.C. Morrison. On the Republican team, John Boozman rides to victory with 53 percent. In Kentucky, Rand Paul has rode anger and discontent to beat Trey Grayson for the GOP nomination, with 58.8 percent of the vote. Running against him will be Jack Conway. Kentucky, though heavily Democrat, votes Republican nationally. I don't see that changing much with this. And in Pennsylvania, Joe Sestak beat Arlen Specter, by a slightly wider margin than I predicted. Finals are 54 to 46 percent. Mr. Sestak will run against Pat Toomey. This will be a closer race. In Oregon, however, the rule didn't seem to hold: Ron Wyden picked up over 90 percent of the vote. He will run against Jim Huffman.

Blumenthal again?

Yes, again. Word has come out that Richard Blumenthal, who was busted for misrepresenting his war record, will still be endorsed by the DSCC. (Obviously he didn't learn anything from Hillary and her Bosnia trip.) Robert Menendez has not said whether he talked to Blumenthal, and has said it is up to him (Blumenthal) to adress concerns on the record. Meantime, Linda McMahon reportedly leaked said information, and is now taking a few swipes for it. This may put the Conneticut Seat back up for grabs, if Blumenthal wins. But people don't care for liars, and I think we will see his campaign sunk.

Arlen's troubles

Arlen Specter isn't having a whole lot of luck, so it would seem. A very recent poll puts Sestak at 42 percent of the vote, compared to 41 for for Specter. Now just add to that the idea that, although the presdident "loves" Arlen, it isn't enough to warrent an 11th hour trip. In this, among a dozen intraparty fights, it seems that the president just can't seem to bet on the right horse. The only thing that could possibly pull Specter out of the fires is a massive turnout by African-Americans. And let's face it, without Obama, or even with him, minority turnout may be quite low indeed. Now, compared to an earlier statement, saying Sestak would win, I decided, that with 20 percent still out, it might be a good idea to hedge into a possible runoff.

Senate Into Play

A New York Times report has found that the favored Democrat for Chris Dodd's old seat has misled the voters about his record in Vietnam. Current polling shows that he is still beating Republicans, but if this is true, then Richard Blumenthal may see his numbers drop from fifties on down. Because if he's willing to lie about that, what won't he lie about? This will be a major issue in the days to come, just watch.

Happy May 18th!

Today, four major primaries are in the works. In Pennsylvania, Arlen Specter, once thought the presumptivve nominee, is now tied with Joe Sestak. I fully expect Sestak to pick it up, with the same narrowness we have now. In Arkensas, it's between Halter and Lincoln. A guy named Morrison is the wild card, with six percent of the vote, he may end up forcing a runoff. If that happens, Halter may come out on top. But will he be stronger in the general election? Not according to recent polls. In Kentucky, the favored son, Trey Grayson, is being whipped by the libertarian's son, Rand Paul. Paul's victory would call into question how much power McConnel really has. Paul may very well pick it up, polls show him with a double digit lead.

Nancy Pelosi still safe?

We've all heard stories on how powerful Nancy Pelosi is. But can she hold her seat as long as the Dems hold the house? Quite possibly, as it turns out. 24 House members were interviewed, and none said she should be removed or challanged for her seat if the Democratic majority holds. Call it the flush of winning. It's always natural that the strong one should stay unless something major (saying, losing a chamber) happens. And the Republicans who have constantly predicted winning the House may have accidently kept her in. Think of it this way: by keeping majority, she  will seem to be a fighter, a survivor. In other words, someone much stronger then previously thought possible. History also has something to contribute: since the start of the 20th century, no majority has held the House but replaced the speaker. There are, at this point, anywhere from 25 to 60 House Seats up for grabs.

Wall Street Reform

We are seeing what might be the rarest of events in the life of a senate bill. It is actually getting stronger, not weaker. Now, here comes a unique problem for the GOP. If the GOP votes against it, and they probably want to, it looks like they are for Wall St. Judd Gregg is saying that it could pass as soon as early this week. However, according to Republicans, there are several weak spots in the bill, such as an amendment about Fanny and Freddie. An amendment to audit the fed has passed, 96 to 0. The bill has forced a division in the Republicans. One side wants to end debate before the bill gets "worse," while the other side wants it to go so the bill can be further shaped. A vote to end debate may come as soon as Wendsday.

Health Reform Nonprofit?

Just when you think you've heard everything, I go and prove you wrong. Several interset groups on both sides of the debate for health reform, pro and con, aye and nay, etc., have raised $450,000 to look into the idea of forming a nonprofit that would implement certain parts of the law. The idea to this would be to track HHS while they write the rules, hoping to make them make them simple. For instance, make an online application to enroll for insurence so people don't have to miss work. Another goal would be trying to make things so that those who get such benefits as food stamps could extend the benefits to health. The goal is to get it up and running by 2011. I can't see this working, there would be too much disagreement. Although, if this does by some miracle work, this could lower government costs in the end.

The McCain team shakeup

John McCain, who seems to be facing a tough primary of his own, has seen his campagin manager and deputy campaign manager leave to join the Republican's efforts to fundraise so GOPers can win all across the ticket. This comes shortly after he ran a campaign saying that the fence should be completed. But J.D. Hayworth has already taken up arms, showing McCain as a flip-flopper. As of right now, he leads by 12 points, 48 to 36. I think that the last time we saw a campaign shakeup like this, McCain lost in the 2008 presidential race. Do I think he will win? Certainly, but it will be, in my mind, much closer than a twelve point difference.

Back...And Kagen Again.

First of all, I apologize for a lack of posts during this past week. I don't really want to get into the House races, that was pretty much the only thing holding me back. That, and an uncertainty on what to talk about. But that doesn't matter now. What does is that there is another story to deal with Elana Kagen. And here it is: Jon Kyl, second in command for Senate Republicans, and from Arizona, has said that it is very unlikely that the GOP will filibuster on Elana Kagen, saying that she is not the extreme circumstances that are needed for a filibuster. (Like everything else was?) Anyway, Patrick Leahy of Vermont is saying that it is very likely that she will be confirmed. To me, this is counting the eggs a litle too soon. Liberals are afraid she might be too conservative, conservatives that she's too liberal. That might translate to a loss of votes over time. Another problem that might come back is the constant reference to Kagen barring recruiters because of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Personally, I do not see a need for such a law, the only thing that might come in handy is a discharge if sexual harassment starts. Barring of recruiters because of this is odd, wouldn't it make more sense to try to get the president to repeal it. All told, I am willing to bet that she recieves less than fifty votes. Let the games begin.

2010 midterms surprise (or not)

As perhaps anyone could have told you, there is a lot of anger towards lawmakers, especially ones that have seen multiple terms. Incumbants are in trouble, and it may be dangerous for you politically. Just ask Bob Bennett. Utah used to love Bob Bennett. He was likable, contantly playing defense for Utah, and obtaining them millions of dollers. This was not a big help to him; on Saturday, he lost his second ballot vote. Those of you who have been there a while, you have a strong headwind. Same to Democrats. If you're both, pack now and get out of town. The mood against Congress is even worse then in 1994, which saw the Senate go back to Republicanism. And if that's how it's going now, what's going to happen to the rest?

May Ninth

The latest news to come out of the U.K. shows that Gordon Brown is stepping down from his post. yesterday he announced that he would resign by September. This comes out as word leaked out that the Libs were in talks with the Conservatives, which stalled due to the inability to find common ground on key issues. Meantime, Nick Clegg has been attempting to open talks with Labour, on the very likely condition that Brown stays down. So which way will it go? Even if it happens that Labour and Libs join together, they will still be 11 seats short, which means a relience on the defection of some tories or third party groups. Again, we may see major concessions in order to pullo ut a working government. At the time of this writing, the tories are offering a deal on voting reform.

Supreme Court Choice

The President has announced his choice for the next opening in SCOTUS, and it is none other than Elena Kagan, solicitor general sine 2009. Miss Kagan has also worked as the White House associate council, and has been Harvard's Law Dean. Now, we have agruments for and against this nomination. The first pro is that she has no real paper trail of opinions, which means that she may be able to avoid those hot button issues that trip up so many. She is also seen as a pragmatist, someone who prefers to see both sides and reach across aisles to work out solutions. However, this lack of experience may also be a thorn, as no one has any real idea of which way she'd go, which has many on the left nervous. Liberals are also nervous because she has been seen, as solititor general, of protecting many Bush-era policies on terror. All right, for those of you who were good enough to subject yourselves to this, I have my opinion. Here it is: I would wait a little while, or at least move here to a court of appeals. I do value a willingness to listen, to reason, and to reach out to make a deal. However, the fact that we have no idea how she'll react makes me nervous, as a slide to either extreme won't be good for the country. Now, I do support the Patriot Act, with one major requirement, and that is that there be conclusive purse that the person being monitored is a terrorist. All I ask.

Making a reply

I recently recieved a comment from devil dog, who read my post about the jobless rate, asking how a spending spree to pull us out of the recission was justifiable? This is a fair point you bring up. It is of my opinion that the spending was to finance more jobs. These jobs are paying, and the hope was that they would start spending, and bingo bango, you've prevented a Hinderburg explosion. Now, many in economics will tell you that we spent too little. That is neither here nor there at this point; what we need to do now is work on paying our national debt. Thank you, devil dog, for reading, and I hope to hear from you again.

The day after...

Happy May 7th to you all. It's the day after, and the returns are in. Labour is out, and no surprises there. The Conservatives, know as Tories, have the most seats, but they don't have enough for David Cameron to lead as Prime Minister. The Liberal Democrats are seen as the wild card; if the throw in with the Tories, Cameron will have won the day. There is still one seat to declare, but due to a canidate's death, it will not be voted on for a few more months. This is the first hung parliment since 1974. I think you are about to see a lot of consessions made to the Lib Dems in order to get their support.