The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger). The ramblings within may or may not offend, shock and awe you, but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) think.
WCPO-TV in Cincinnati reports that ACORN canvasser Shari Bell was arrested for prostitution and drug paraphenalia possession Wednesday night. What is truly priceless is ACORN’s reaction to Bell’s unannounced absence from her ACORN job Wednesday (prior to her arrest) – they assumed she quit.
I almost turned this into an NRE poll, but discretion is the better part of valor cheap blogging.
Folks,
This is a long video, nearly an hour, but well worth the time invested to watch it. If you want to speed read, you can do so here.
After extensive literary analysis and similar conclusions from four different analysis, Jack Cashill claims that Barack Obama did not write his first book “Dreams From My Father.” Cashill goes on to claim that Bill Ayers was responsible for writing and editing significant portions of Obama’s book.
Bill Ayers? Yup, that Bill Ayers! The Bill Ayers who Obama describes as “Just a guy in the neighborhood.” Interesting thing here, if Bill Ayers did write portions of the book it would seem like he was more than just “A guy in the neighborhood.” Pretty hard to ghost write a person’s memoirs without spending a whole lot of time with them.
Update: The link to Breitbart.TV was hosed. I’ll relink once I see that it actually works
We all know that the Barack Obama we see on the campaign trail is not the real Barack Obama. We clearly see through his writings and associations someone who does not believe America, in it’s current state to be a great hope to the world. However, with this revelation it would seem that Barack Obama may not even know the Barack Obama he supposed to be just a few short years ago.
Ok, I know….So what’s new?
Last spring on the heels of the 35W bridge collapse and as the Minnesota Legislature wrestled with their budget, the Democrats decided to politicize the bridge to get the largest single tax increase in the state passed. The Dems claimed that the 35W bridge proved that we weren’t spending enough on our infrastructure. The claimed we needed more money to fund roads, bridges and, oh yes, transit.
With the help of 6 RINOs, the Dems overrode a veto by Governor Pawlenty and passed the gas tax increase. Included in that bill was the ability for metro counties to increase their sales tax by 1/4% so that they could take care of their deteriorating infrastructure.
Today’s Star and Tribune reports that the first projects to be paid from the new taxes are now receiving their funding. The Strib reports that the following projects have received funding:
Tens of millions of dollars from the new transit tax will bring a commuter-rail stop to Fridley, build a park-and-ride station in Apple Valley and help stretch light-rail transit from Minneapolis to St. Paul.
and if that wasn’t bad enough:
The biggest chunk of money — nearly $31 million — goes to the Metropolitan Council so it can address Metro Transit’s operating deficit.
Can you help me find the bridge replacements in there? Can you help me find road repair? How about new road lanes, did you see any of those paid for from those funds?
Just like Paulson’s bailout, the Dems were caterwauling about our crumbling infrastructure and how maintenance had become so bad and they didn’t want another 35W bridge incident. THEY NEEDED MONEY FOR THE CHILDREN!
Yeah. All we got was more places to put money so we could set ourselves up for even higher taxes to support the ongoing subsidies that each of these efforts will further need.
Oh, and did I tell you that the whole “bridge crashed because it wasn’t maintained” theory was busted?
(H/T – LadyLogician)
The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reports that Anita Moncrief, a former staffer for Project Vote, a sister organization of ACORN, testified in court that Project Vote received a “donor list” from the Obama campaign in late 2007 for fundraising efforts. Further, she claims to have a copy of a “development plan” that outlines how maxed-out Obama contributors would be targeted to give to Project Vote, and that she had taken a call from a campaign working asking whether it was the same organization that Obama had worked with in the 1990s.
Guess the acorns definitely don’t fall far from the tree.
Of course, this wouldn’t be complete without an ObamiNation In Your Face moment – Moncrief stated she received repeated warnings to “back off” from testifying in the hearing in a lawsuit brought by the Pennsylvania GOP against ACORN and the Secretary of the Commonwealth to make the voter registration process more transparent and less-prone to fraud.
…maybe others can.
John McCain has said that he will not use Jeremiah Wright as an issue in this campaign. He believes that it is a “religious issue” and outside the bounds of political discussion. I’m not sure how someone who Obama himself said was a “mentor,” someone who believes that the US purposely distributed AIDs to African Americans and has openly supported Kadhafi, Louis Farrakhan and Hamas isn’t a political issue but…
If McCain won’t pick up Wright as an issue himself, he now has help. the National Repulican Trust PAC has picked up advertising time in a number of states and will be running this ad:
If you’re interested in aiding the funding of the buy for this ad you can go here.
First, watch this:
I feel like the duck at the end of the commercial after he hears Yogi explain that “they give you cash which is just as good as money!”
Yes I feel like the duck after reading this article.
The article is an interview with Nancy Pelosi. In it, she explains why having an “All Democrat, all the time” Congress would be a good thing. It’s mostly typical drivel from Pelosi until she gets to this pearl of wisdom:
“Elect us, hold us accountable, and make a judgment and then go from there. But I do tell you that if the Democrats win, and have substantial majorities, Congress of the United States will be more bipartisan,” said Pelosi.
AAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCK?
Having Democrat majorities in both chambers will make Congress more “bipartisan?” Pelosi proved this session, by shutting off debate and not accepting amendments, what she believes “bipartisan” to be. The only way you could consider a lopsided Democrat control of Congress as “bipartisan” would be that there would be no effective means to argue with any of Pelosi’s halfwit ideas and petulant demands.
Bipartisan, my butt! Dictatorship, despotism, authoritarianism, autocray, totalitarianism and tyranny, maybe!
And I mean that in a stinky way. Jim Geraghty did the the math on Pew’s latest poll (which has Obama up 53%-38% among likely voters), and found that Pew’s bias is 38.83% Democrat, 32.57% independent, and 28.61% Republican. Jim also notes that Pew’s spread was only off by one percentage point in their end-of-the-race 2006 poll bias (they had it at +4 D, it was +3 D).
Given that Gallup’s tracking polls have Obama up by 2 with the traditional model and 7 with the “expanded” one, something is seriously hosed.
This just came in to the mailbox from my friends at Empower Texans.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zaGQdWOcbc[/youtube]
Do vote responsibly.
On the first business day after the Anchorage Daily News endorsed “The One” for President, the McClatchy news bureau does a hit piece on Sarah Palin:
Of course, McClatchy owns the Anchorage Daily News.
While the hit piece isn’t unsuspected, the conclusions they attempt to draw are humorous at best, most likely intended to slant or flat out lies at worse.
Of course, McClatchy relies on the same RINO assessments that we’ve been hearing since Palin was selected:
Prominent Republicans have echoed that idea. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., one of McCain’s closest friends, suggested that Sen. Joseph Lieberman, an independent Democrat from Connecticut, would have brought independents to the ticket. Last week, former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge said that had McCain picked him, the Republican Party would have had a better shot at winning his state.
Ah, no! Had McCain chosen Lieberman or Ridge for that matter, conservatives would have either stayed home on election day or just voted the down ticket races.
Beyond Graham and Ridge, McClatchy trots out a host of other unknown, local RINOs who complain that Palin has been an embarrassment. What’s McClatchy’s definition of “embarrassment?”
She also unabashedly identifies herself with the party’s conservative wing, alienating moderates.
“It reinforced the notion that John McCain cared little about people like me,” said former Maine state Rep. Sherry Huber, a Republican who backed McCain in the primary but now supports Obama. “She clearly does not share the values I and other moderate Republicans do.”
I’m trying to figure out which plank of the Republican platform that Palin violates which causes people like Ms. Huber to find her offensive? Prolife? Lower Taxes? Smaller government?
The only part that McClatchy got right on Palin was their begrudging admission that she does invigorate the Conservative Base:
The Republican base loves Palin.
“So many people can relate to her. She really appeals to everyday housewives, people who go out and hunt, and people who have done great things in their life,” said Bob Dodge, a retired communications engineer in Sarasota, Fla.
Whether McCain wins or not it’s clear that Palin has cut a clear line between what RINOs and Conservatives look like. The question will be whether the Conservatives will choose to fight for the party or allow it to further drift towards the Democrat Lite position.
If the Republican party goes down in flames this election there’s going to be a lot of focus on what went wrong. You can bet there will be a lot of focus on whether the messaging was right, distinguished from the Dems. Until then, RINOs of all shapes and sizes are working to make sure that Sarah Palin disappears like The Hollywood Argyles. Coincidence? I think not!
Shoebox already gave his answers to John Hawkins’ latest poll of right-of-center bloggers. Answering that was one of the last things I did on the desktop before it bricked (no, not the last, and I’ll put up more on that in a bit). I may as well put up my answers, with the answers bolded and expansions in italics.
1) Who do you think is going to win the election?
A) John McCain – I had to flip a coin here, and it came up heads.
B) Barack Obama
2) Do you think Sarah Palin has been a plus or a minus to the ticket?
A) Minus
B) Plus – Let me put it this way; had McCain picked just about anybody else, he would be down 10 in the non-cooked polls as well.
3) How do you feel about Sarah Palin as a candidate?
A) I really like her! – Even though she does show a bit too much populism, she has shown a willingness to go RINO-hunting.
B) She’s so-so.
C) I’m not a big fan!
4) The Republican Party did poorly in the 2006 election and even if McCain wins is on track to do poorly again in this years Congressional races. If you had to choose between these two options, do you think that’s because they were
A) Too conservative
B) Not conservative enough – I’m a firm believer in Rush Limbaugh’s maxim that conservatism wins when it is actually tried and implemented. That is something singularily not done over the last 3 years by the GOP.
5) Do you believe the mainstream media’s coverage has been"¦
A) Relatively fair and even handed.
B) Slightly biased in favor of Barack Obama.
C) Slightly biased in favor of John McCain.
D) Heavily biased in favor of Barack Obama. – No, really? I could give example after example, after example, but Jon Ham already has.
E) Heavily biased in favor of John McCain.
6) Do you think Barack Obama is"¦
A) Honest (Yes or no?) – I don’t know where my “depends” ended up, but I also noted Obama’s unguarded slip of his one-party Socialism (nee Communism) wishes to Joe the Plumber was brutally-honest.
B) Patriotic (Yes or no?) -I don’t question what is plainly not there.
C) Qualified be President (Yes or no?) – Too bad there wasn’t a “Oh Hell No!” option.
OK, everyone else will have this up on their site and I’m sure it will spin through chain emails. While I would normally pass on this due to it being “everywhere,” this one just can’t go without comment. In fact, I’m even going to use my new flashy light thingy to draw more attention!
In case you’ve just returned from several years on a deserted island, next Tuesday is election day. We can go back and forth between the policy differences between the two candidates but that is wasted time at this point. If you are at all ambivalent on who to vote for or if you have decided to vote for Barack Obama yet believes that the United States is a light to the world, consider that the next President will get to decide the makeup of the Supreme Court for at least a generation.
Our choice comes down to a candidate who believes the Constitution of the US is the supreme law of the US and should be followed. Our other choice is a candidate who in the attached piece, states that he believes the Supreme Court should not be bound by the Constitution. He intimates that it is only the Court’s lack of desire, not their Constitutional ability, to fundamentally interpret the Constitution to reflect one of any of a number of European countries.
Listen to the piece.
John Hawkins at Rightwingnews.com has put up another poll of Right-of-Center bloggers. You’ll find the poll here and my responses below:
1) Who do you think is going to win the election?
A) John McCain
B) Barack Obama
2) Do you think Sarah Palin has been a plus or a minus to the ticket?
A) Minus
B) Plus
3) How do you feel about Sarah Palin as a candidate?
A) I really like her!
B) She’s so-so.
C) I’m not a big fan!
4) The Republican Party did poorly in the 2006 election and even if McCain wins is on track to do poorly again in this years Congressional races. If you had to choose between these two options, do you think that’s because they were
A) Too conservative
B) Not conservative enough
5) Do you believe the mainstream media’s coverage has been…
A) Relatively fair and even handed.
B) Slightly biased in favor of Barack Obama.
C) Slightly biased in favor of John McCain.
D) Heavily biased in favor of Barack Obama.
E) Heavily biased in favor of John McCain.
6) Do you think Barack Obama is…
A) Honest (Yes or no?)
B) Patriotic (Yes or no?)
C) Qualified be President (Yes or no?)
Probably no real big surprises in the poll’s answers. Yes, I want McCain to win and while I think it can still happen, if I had to put money down today I’d have to say he won’t. That’s not defeatism, just an assessment.
I had problems answering the honesty question. There have certainly been things I would consider dishonest answers from Obama. However, I don’t know that they were in his mind and if I were honest I’m sure I could find equally equivocated answers from McCain that if I was partisan left, I would find dishonest.
I do like Sarah Palin. She strikes me as genuine. I don’t get the smarmy meter running to extremes when I hear her talk, unlike nearly every other politician I’ve ever met, left or right.
Jim Geraghty reports that Strategic Vision is getting death threats for daring to report that the McCain/Palin ticket has pulled ahead of the Obama/Biden ticket in Florida and Ohio (48%-46% and 48%-45% respectively).
Let’s take a look at the three messages that David Johnson, CEO of Strategic Vision, shared with National Review Online:
My goodness, your polls stinks. There are 3 polls that have Obama by double digits and only yours has Obama down. WOW!. How come your poll is the only one giving Palin high favor ratings? I think you nee dto be careful tonight when you get in your car and might want to check underneath your car. SCRAP YOUR IDIOTIC POLLS OR ELSE!
A poll that gave Sarah Palin and Barack Obama the same favorability rating is wrong off the bat. Be careful going outside tonight because you might not see tomorrow.
Why would your presidential election poll results be so drastically different from every other reputable poll taken over the same time period? Are they that dumb or are you guys that smart? Smart guys wind up dead.
Notes Johnson, “It’s probably just a bunch of nut cases, but this is first time we’ve ever experienced something like this. It’s highly, highly unusual. We get messages in the vein of ‘your numbers are wrong, the other guy’s numbers are right’ all the time. But this has never happened before.”
George Orwell was only 24 years off.
Investors Business Daily is now putting out a daily tracking poll of the Presidential race. They were the most accurate poll of the 2004 race. As of today, IBD has McCain down just 1.1 points. The poll has McCain having closed from a 7 point deficit just since last weekend. As interesting as that gap close is, I’m more interested in another stat.
I thought the MSM has been telling us about all of the excited, first time to vote college students. People who were part of the millions that were newly registered Democrats. People that were already standing outside of polling places to make sure they would get a chance to vote for “The One.” Isn’t that what the great wildcard is for Barack; whether the youth, who have never come out in droves before, will turn off their Wiis, put down their beers and vote?
If the youth are the great hope for Barack, can someone explain how the IBD poll shows 18-24 year olds breaking for John McCain 74% to 22% for Barack Obama?
Watch the next 10 days folks. The MSM story lines don’t seem to always be aligned with the poll internals. There is something that just isn’t smelling right across most of these polls. It could be a wild 10 days.
First things first; if you haven’t read Shoebox’s post, go read it now, then come back for some expansion on that.
I briefly noted the disappearance of the PUMAs in a different poll (specifically, the Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll) near the end of last month. Since we’re talking about the Gallup weekly aggregate of the daily tracking poll, I’ll use Gallup’s numbers to expand on that.
Gallup has been running the weekly aggregate since the week of June 9-15. That week, Barack Obama’s support was 78% of Democrats/43% of Independents/9% of Republicans, while John McCain’s support was 13%D/39%I/84%R. In terms of Democrats, 22% didn’t support Obama, with 13% specifically supporting McCain and the other 9% either supporting a third-party candidate or “undecided” (which includes not voting).
That held rather steady until the Democratic convention. Pre-convention Democratic support of Obama topped out at 82% the week of 7/7-7/13, and returned to 78% the week prior to the convention (8/18-8/24) when he announced Joe Biden as his running mate. Meanwhile, the Democratic support for McCain never dropped below 10% in that time frame (with the low point 7/7-7/13) and topped out at 14% just before the Democratic convention, while the “undecideds” remained between 8% and 9% (the lower just before the Democratic convention). That tracks rather well with Shoebox’s estimates that, had the PUMAs stuck to their guns instead of party, McCain could have had somewhere around 15% of support from Democrats, though I would have been happy with the 12% average that he did get between June and mid-August.
The Democratic convention week (8/25-8/31), which was immediately followed by McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin, provided a boost to the Obama/Biden ticket for Democrats, but not a decisive one. The Obama/Biden ticket saw support from 85% of Democrats that week, with a 9% support to McCain and 6% undecided. Democratic support for the Obama/Biden ticket actually dipped in the next couple weeks: the 9/1-9/7 aggregate saw it drop to 83%, with 11% supporting McCain/Palin, and the 9/8-9/14 aggregate saw McCain/Palin pick up another percent from the “undecideds” to bring that back to the average between June and mid-August.
However, there has been a steady march back to the roost for the PUMAs since then. The Obama/Biden-to-McCain/Palin splits among Democrats have been, in succession, 85%/10%, 86%/10%, 87%/8%, 87%/9% and now 89%/7%.
Shoebox’s reminder back in August that there wasn’t much of a difference between Obama and Hillary Clinton, and specifically his concerns that the PUMAs would remember that before the election, are coming true.
Shhhhhhhhhhhhhh. Be wery wery qwiat! I’m hunting PUMAs!
Do you remember back to the end of the primary season? That wonderful, wistful time when we had coalesced behind our candidate and were watching Hillary and Barack clawing at each other?
Do you remember towards the end, before the conventions, after it was clear that Barack was going to be the Dem’s nominee? Do you remember how many of the Hillary supporters, after her shabby and sexist treatment by the DNC and Obama, vowed that they would never vote for Obama? Do you remember how they formed a little group and became known as PUMAs?
With apologies to Pete Seeger:
Where have all the PUMAs gone?
Long time passing
Where have all the PUMAS gone?
Long time ago
Where have all the PUMAS gone?
Became conforming everyone?
When will they ever learn?
When will they ever learn?
Where have the PUMAs gone? In late August there were polls showing that 21% of Hillary supporters were committed to vote for McCain, 52% would vote for Obama and 27% were still undecided. Hillary and Barack pretty much split the primary vote. If 21% of Hillary supporters were committed to McCain, that should translate to at least 10.5% of Democrat support for McCain. With 21% still uncommitted, it wouldn’t be too hard to imagine that if the PUMAs held together, the Democrat support for McCain could be around 15%. If those numbers make sense, why does the most recent Gallup poll only show 7% of Democrats support McCain?
I wrote at the end of August, during the height of Republican PUMA giddiness, that the PUMA’s disgust with Obama was entirely based on emotion with no substance; the policy differences between Hillary and Obama were “Change you could Xerox!” I was concerned then, that once some time elapsed, the emotion would wane and the PUMAs who had vowed fidelity to John McCain would regain their senses and return to feast at the table of “Hope and Change.”
It appears that while the PUMAs entered the final phase of the election season as lions, they will exit as lambs. Unless of course, they’ve managed to pull off a brilliant deception on all of the pollsters. In that case the adage “Revenge is a dish best served cold,” comes to mind. I can’t imagine anything colder than allowing Obama to believe he has the Democrat vote sown up, only to find that the “Bradley effect” will forever more be known as the “PUMA effect!”
(H/T – Charlie Sykes)
The McCain campaign has unleashed an ad that ought to be somewhat familiar to those of us who are John Doe.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWSEcL9xFQk[/youtube]
Just because I can, and because the original is THAT GOOD, I’ll bring back the original.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfguzjUoCoI[/youtube]
With the Barack Obama Spend-o-meter now near $1.3 trillion and Barney Frank doubling down on Obama’s call for excessive taxing of the rich, it seems like it may be time to start looking at options for deficit reduction. A story out of Rochester, MN provides a viable solution.
As reported in this story, a Rochester woman was arrested after stealing $10K-$15K from a Casey’s General Store. According to the story, the woman was taking the money and wiring it to Nigeria. No, she wasn’t sending it to family, she was sending it because she had received an email from Morgan Smith of Nigeria saying that the woman was to receive $10 million from investments gains on oil and diamonds. All the woman had to do was send money to Nigeria for plane tickets and a transfer certificate. The woman was just planning to “borrow” the money and had full intention of returning it after she received her $10 million.
So I’m thinking….I’ve received 10’s of dozens of letters from Morgan Smith and other envoys trying to deliver an inheritance, income I’ve made on some investment I’ve forgotten about or by helping them get their fortune moved, entirely legally, from some third world country to the US. In each case, I could receive $10 Million or better.
If Barack Obama just got 1,050,000 people to forward the emails they’ve received from Mr. Morgan Smith, to the Federal Treasury, they could collect on them and get enough to retire the $10.5 Trillion debt!
Seriously, did you ever think there was anyone so stupid that they would actually follow up on one of those emails? Yeah, you’re right, there do seem to be plenty of people who think that Obama’s plan can actually reduce taxes for 95% of taxpayers and increase taxes on only 5% and none of that will have any reprecussions.
Yeah, you’re right, there are a lot of stupid people!
(H/T – Jon Sanders)
Where, oh where do I go with this story about a dead goldfish named Princess registered to vote through a third-party voter-drive effort from Lake County, Illinois? I could go with the whole FISH angle, but that isn’t exactly family-friendly (FISH is one of the vulgar acronyms we on the good side of the toll booths apply to those on the far side of them).
I could go with the fact that the owner of the dead goldfish, Beth Nudelman, is a registered Democrat, but according to The News Organization That Cannot Be Quoted™, she’s the one that blew the whistle. Wait a minute – I will start there. From the article…
She said she wrote election officials a humorous note explaining why the fish was ineligible to vote.
I’ll bet the letter read something like this: “I really would like to register Princess to vote, but she’s worm food, and this isn’t Chicago where the dead are 110% ‘Rat voters.”
I could, and will, also point out that the tactics of the third-party group, Women’s Voices, Women Vote, are quite similar to sometimes-partner ACORN’s tactics. Indeed, Steve Strum, legal counsel for the Illinois State Board of Elections, notes that this particular effort, which used a mailing list purchased from a vendor, has generated numerous complaints. Also, this particular episode has attracted the attention of the Lake County sheriff’s and state’s attorney’s offices.
Now, how did Princess the dead fish end up on that list? The Nudelmans used her name on a second phone line for a computer modem. That in itself raises a question; why did they feel the need to do that? Ameritech and its follow-on companies SBC and AT&T, didn’t prohibit one from having 2 lines.
The more-observant may ask, “Why are they targeting Illinois when no Republican will likely ever win a statewide election again?” Lake County is, or at least was very-recently, a Republican area marked for takeover. Indeed, there was once a barn on the north end of the Tri-State that was essentially a GOP billboard.
Mary Katharine Ham and Guy Benson put together a very lengthy case against Barack Obama over at Hot Air, edited by Ed Morrissey. From abortion and especially the “punished by a baby” line (pursued by mostly Shoebox here), to taxes, to radical associations, to lack of foreign policy judgement (which was not at all cured by his running mate, specifically Biden’s inexplicable like of Iran’s Mad Mullahs), to a distain of American life, to the race card, to a lack of accomplishments, they make the case far better than I can.
I saw Colin Powell’s endorsement on “Meet the Press” as I waited for a flight home on Sunday. I had other focuses yesterday so didn’t get a chance to put my comments up on the endorsement.
After reading the transcript, I note that Powell did not address any policy issues that he liked of Obama’s. Rather, his entire endorsement appeared to come from a drinking of the “Hope and Change” kool-aid.
Powell tried to use his observations of how the two candidates addressed the last few weeks of economic debate as his deciding factor:
On the Obama side, I watched Mr. Obama and I watched him during this seven-week period. And he displayed a steadiness, an intellectual curiosity, a depth of knowledge and an approach to looking at problems like this and picking a vice president that, I think, is ready to be president on day one. And also, in not just jumping in and changing every day, but showing intellectual vigor. I think that he has a, a definitive way of doing business that would serve us well.
Now I know that Powell has always been at best, a moderate Republican. He firmly believes in abortion and affirmative action. However, what is Powell referring to when he says that Obama is “not just jumping in and changing every day?” Is Powell really that obtuse not to see the numerous position changes that Obama has taken in the past two years? For example, I’ll bet that Colin Powell would label the Iran Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization but Obama has been on both sides of the issue in June alone.
What is Powell thinking when he says that Obama “has a definitive way of doing business that would serve us well.” If he ever held Republican views, Powell would have aligned on fiscal values. Can Powell actually believe that Obama’s admitted redistribution of wealth aligns in anyway with what “would serve us well?” Can Powell believe that spending an additional $1 trillion each year “serve us well?”
I’m sorry. I had a great deal of respect for Colin Powell. I believe him to be an honorable man. However, is endorsement of Obama leads me to conclude that Powell never was a Republican and registered as such only for personal attention or gain or, he is now being intellectually dishonest about his reason for endorsing Barack.
I will continue to honor Colin Powell’s service. However, from this day forward, this blogger will view all of what Mr Powell says with an enormous amount of skepticism.
In case you missed it:
According to Newsmax.com, the Obama Campaign scratched the National Anthem at one of their rallies:
to make room for another speaker.
Let’s see, this is the guy who quit wearing the flag lapel pin because:
it has become a substitute for “true patriotism” since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
Later he began wearing it when it made the political statement he felt was appropriate for the moment….like when he visited US car manufacturers or military bases.
Looks like just one more example of where Barack comes first, Country comes second. Maybe we should start getting used to it.
The Vikings won’t be winning a Superbowl this year,
The Cubs aren’t winning the World Series,
Thing 1 and Thing 2 haven’t cleaned their rooms without being asked
Dang, I can’t figure out why my feet are cold!
Wait, maybe this is it; both the Star and Tribune and the Pioneer Presshave taken positions against increasing Minnesota’s state sales tax via a Constitutional amendment. They even have solid logic for their opposition!
As the Democrat dominated House and Senate worked to develop a budget last year, they groped to find ways to not only spend a $2 Billion dollar surplus but to add additional taxes to support their never ending greed. In one of the most notable events of last session, they increased the gas tax by $.05 (and more to come) and created the largest single bill tax increase in Minnesota history. They were abetted in this act by several RINOs in the House, all of which have either decided to “retire”, have been unendorsed or look like they will be beaten.
One item that the Dems weren’t able to get through last year was an increase in the sales tax. Unlike Pelosi, they were able to count heads and, knowing that Governor Pawlenty would veto an increase, knew they couldn’t get the override done in the House. So, they took the back door. In Minnesota, the Legislature can bring Constitutional issues directly to the voters without going through the Governor. The Dems gathered darn near every constituentcy they could find, hunter, clean water, arts, parks, wetlands, fisherpersons and park enthusiasts, lumped them in a pot and said “let’s get an increase in the sales tax in the Constitution that you all can fight over how to spend.”
So here comes the two daily newspapers. Editorial sections that haven’t met a tax that they didn’t like. In fact, I can’t remember one that they have opined against, they like big government. But on this issue they say nyet. The reason both of them give is that while they support the desire to improve and fund all of the items included, they don’t believe doing it in the Constitution and tying leglislator’s hands, is the right way to do it. They believe that Legislators should be accountable for the State’s budget.
While I can’t agree with their support of the various issues (Don’t the “Arts” have patrons anymore?), I do agree with their conclusion and the reason for it! Congrats to the Star and Tribune and Pioneer Press for getting one right!
Excuse me while I go and find my insolated socks!
I decided that with all the bad news today, I need a lot of stiff drinks. The fun will start about 7:45, and because Shoebox is still out of town, I invited Josh Schroeder to cohost. In fact, if this place goes down (again; I had a server outage around 5 pm), Josh does have the CiL window embedded on his site.
If I can remember to stick to the conventions; the questions will be in italics, the answers (you’ll know because I will stick either McCain or Obama in front of them) will be in plain text, and my comments inline with either a question or answer will be in italics.
I may be a bit later than 7:45; I have a meeting at my church at 7.
I see you guys started without me. The CiL is now open!
[No Runny Eggs is proudly powered by WordPress.]
