James Taranto points out that maybe Obama could quit apologizing for America and start defending us. Well, he is a bit more gracious:
Obama's election was supposed to be a corrective to Bush's bellicosity. In a sense, Bush played against type by exhorting Americans to rise above their suspicions of Muslims. But the Nixon-to-China principle goes both ways. As Bush the cowboy had moral authority with Americans, Obama the conciliator has moral authority with Muslims. So far, he hasn't done much but pander to them--most notably at last month's iftar dinner, where he endorsed the right to build the Ground Zero mosque--further alienating Americans.
What if he made it his mission to understand Americans' feelings on the matter and challenged Muslims to respect those feelings by building the mosque elsewhere? That would be an act of reconciliation worthy of George W. Bush at his most admirable.
I'm not holding my breath. But I am remembering a comparable anecdote about Michelle Obama, back in her days directing the University of Chicago clinics:
In the mostly black neighborhoods around the hospital, Mrs. Obama became the voice of a historically white institution. Behind closed doors, she tried to assuage their frustrations about a place that could seem forbidding.
Like many urban hospitals, the medical center’s emergency room becomes clogged with people who need primary care. So Mrs. Obama trained counselors, mostly local blacks, to hand out referrals to health clinics lest black patients felt they were being shooed away.
She also altered the hospital’s research agenda. When the human papillomavirus vaccine, which can prevent cervical cancer, became available, researchers proposed approaching local school principals about enlisting black teenage girls as research subjects.
Mrs. Obama stopped that. The prospect of white doctors performing a trial with black teenage girls summoned the specter of the Tuskegee syphilis experiment of the mid-20th century, when white doctors let hundreds of black men go untreated to study the disease.
“She’ll talk about the elephant in the room,” said Susan Sher, her boss at the hospital, where Mrs. Obama is on leave from her more-than-$300,000-a-year job.
As I ranted at the time, one might have thought that she would put her high-priced education and street cred to work rebuilding trust between the white doctors and the neighborhood population. But she lacked the impulse, as does her hubby.
Senator O'Donnell, I would like to introduce you to
Never happen. She's unelectable.
Senator Coons, I'd like you to meet Senator Coakley, Senator Murkowski, and the rest of the Inevitability Caucus....
Posted by: bgates | September 14, 2010 at 10:19 PM
Will Castle announce that he is running as an independent before or after his concession speech?
Posted by: Publius from Idaho | September 14, 2010 at 10:20 PM
JMH, I have the highest esteem for Jay. I've been following him since he was a student. Let's hope that this is a rising tide beyond our poor powers of prediction.
Posted by: Clarice | September 14, 2010 at 10:20 PM
another very bad data point in the monetarization of European national debt. A interview in der Spiegel with former Finance Minister Steinbrueck:
"SPIEGEL: Is the euro crisis over?
Steinbrück: That question can't be answered yet. The underlying causes of excessive government debt and declining competitiveness have yet to be eliminated in some countries. It worries me that the European Central Bank is now buying up high-risk European government bonds on a large scale. I want to know when the markets will put the European bailout packages to the test again. Will the European Central Bank, in a roundabout way, become a bad bank for government bonds?"
Posted by: matt | September 14, 2010 at 10:20 PM
ISTM Rove would prefer the safest shot to GOP senate majority.
ISTM now is not the time to play safe. The GOP needs to move in the direction of the tea party and that's going to seem risky to a lot of them.
The "leadership" really don't have a clue how pissed people out in the countryside are. And, apparently, they aren't interested in getting a clue.
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 14, 2010 at 10:22 PM
"the Alaskan Republican Party was hijacked by the Tea Party Express, an outside extremist group."
Note that it specifically mentions the "Express," the one Tea Party group that Palin has spoken in front of the most (remember Nevada?). That was Lisa's whiny bitch coming out...with the full on frenzy of the DNCs talking points being channeled with the full throated endorsement of the establishment RNC.
Rove Krauthammer etal are not really happy with losing the keys of the R kingdom to Palin and the citizens at large. They expect to be the kingmakers and they are, right now just hanging onto the tail fins of Elvis' 57 Caddy with Palin and the voters at the wheel. And they don't like that - not one little bit.
Who will hire them when it is proven that you can win without them? What candidate in the future will give credence to anything that they say when you can't fathom whether it is self interest that is coming out of their mouths or a true interest in getting the candidate a win?
The nashing of teeth has begun. Rove is concerned "because the RNC is going to have to assist O'Donnell and others at a larger cost than the incumbent with the massive warchest at the expense of other candidates." WTF???
Does the tea party grass roots efforts not register with these fools... is the only good GOTV and fundraising the stuff that comes out of R national headquarters? How the fuck do these fuckers think their little sycophants got beaten? The Tea Party is the Republican Underground Railroad.
I'd bet the insiders think most of the tea party candidates with little to no experience came out of the Alvin Greene mold as did their voters... and they expected to just pat them on their heads and send them on their way. They better wake up fast.
It's not just the candidate, it's the EXPRESS train baby and it's coming to your town.
Posted by: Stephanie | September 14, 2010 at 10:22 PM
Bill-
Rove actually laid out her weaknesses in a campaign, quite lucidly. Hannity was, in his defence, sticking to principle, but Rove was laying out where the land mines were.
Strategy versus tactics. Rove knows tactics.
Just my impression of the exchange.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | September 14, 2010 at 10:22 PM
NRSC will NOT support O'Donnell-Fox
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | September 14, 2010 at 10:23 PM
Much has been made of Palin's record of backing candidates. But, look who she's backing. Dark horses and folks no one has heard of against incumbents and career politicians. Her successes really are quite stunning.
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 14, 2010 at 10:24 PM
centralcal:
Support among independents is integral to tea party success -- and independents are the one group who didn't have a vote in the Delaware primary.
Posted by: JM Hanes | September 14, 2010 at 10:26 PM
She's got a 55-gal drum of common sense, which ought to be the primary requirement for public office.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | September 14, 2010 at 10:26 PM
My thought is that in recent decades the Reps have been acting as though their opponents were honorable people with whom they had disagreements on the edges. The Dems, however, have been pushed far to the left by their base and have not been playing by what have been the normal rules. There is simply not much choice here--on the one hand we have squishes liked Voinovich and Castle and the Maine ladies and on the other thugs and liars and elbow shovers like Schumer and Leahy and Kerry.
Compare the treatment Justice Ginsburg got by the Republicans with the treatment Clarence Thomas received.
Posted by: Clarice | September 14, 2010 at 10:28 PM
It isn't as if O'Donnell has never run statewide before. All she has to do is increase her take by 50% or so and she'll have an excellent chance.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | September 14, 2010 at 10:28 PM
Let the NRSC suck lemons. People are pissed enough at them as it is and have no inclination to trust their judgment. I've gotten dozens of calls from them that I've ignored. I'm giving directly to the candidates; that's it.
Posted by: Porchlight | September 14, 2010 at 10:30 PM
It seems the NSRC is questioning the voting public's judgement of them, and finds it lacking.
I would suggest that the reverse probably is the better question.
Wake up, theives.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | September 14, 2010 at 10:30 PM
Actually, last time she got 35% against Biden with no support when the Dems won the presidential race and both houses, Rick.
As for the NSRC-I thought they gave their last sou to Lincoln Chaffee.
Posted by: Clarice | September 14, 2010 at 10:31 PM
I must say that I have never yelled at Rove on T.V. before tonight but I just did.
He doesn't get it. He didn't get it with the nomination of Harriet Miers or the amnesty immigration bill either.
He says that now O'Donnell must answer questions like why it took her two decades to pay off her college tuition. HELLO, Rove! Who paid off Obama's loans? Why do we have to answer these inane questions when democrats do not.
He just gave the democrats a sound bite they did not need and I am starting to believe that he was badly counseling President Bush on many ideas. Hope I feel better tomorrow.
I totaly agree with Sandy, this is the last best chance of saving an America that we grew up with and leaving it to our children and grandchildren. This is not just another ordinary political discussion of laying bets on who wins. It is the ultimate decision of risking all you hold dear. I don't want charts and analysis of who is in the best place to win. I want hearts and minds that remember a childhood in our great nation and want the next generation to experience it, love it, fight for it and protect it.
Posted by: Ann | September 14, 2010 at 10:32 PM
Rick,
It's a different year. Things have changed. There is a chance, if the GOP rallies behind her. I don't know if that's possible but if the R by the winner's name is all that counts, why wouldn't they? I'm sure she would be grateful for the support.
Besides, I think we can take the Senate with or without Delaware. I know it sounds nutty, but nutty is the new normal.
Posted by: Porchlight | September 14, 2010 at 10:33 PM
Murkowski stinks. I already despised her for the write-in campaign, but sheesh.
Posted by: JM Hanes | September 14, 2010 at 10:34 PM
Mel... this ain't normal times. In normal times Rove is a great tactician, but he doesn't have a leash on this beast. Many of the current crop of voters are ones that have been, in the past, lackluster and hard to stir to the polls. People have gone from "it's the government or politics, whatcha gonna do" to OH HELL, NO... He has no way of predicting how those voters will react to anything that comes from anything with even a whiff of establishment attached to them.
NRSC will not support O'Donnell? Fuck em, she got this far without em. And that is the sabot in his tactics.
How many of the tweets for money came from the NRC or the NRSC? Very few. Most of these candidates $$ came from direct solicitations by Bob or Mary down the street or someone you follow in your twitter stream. That was where most of the $$ was raised. How many here have written checks to any establishment election groups vs the candidate directly... they are, to put it bluntly, elephants whose time is gone.
Posted by: Stephanie | September 14, 2010 at 10:35 PM
I never heard of O'Donnell until she was on the Mark Levin show! I think Mark has a lot more juice than anyone gives him credit for. Esp. the NYTimes which refused to review his book, even when it was Number 1 on their own best seller list for months.
Posted by: peter | September 14, 2010 at 10:35 PM
All she has to do is increase her take by 50% or so
I hope the electorate trends more Republican in 2010 than it did in 2008. Anybody know any reasons to think that might happen?
Posted by: bgates | September 14, 2010 at 10:36 PM
JMH: I asked the question about the Independents voice in DE earlier tonight. Thank you for answering the question. I agree with you about the Independent voter being the deciding factor.
None of us knows for certain how it will all shake out in November. Or, do we? Castle didn't do anything to float our boat, just as his Dem counterpart will not. I am tired of voting for, or, in this case, cheering on the lessor of two evils.
Sometimes, we get too much caught up in strategery.
Posted by: centralcal | September 14, 2010 at 10:37 PM
Clarice-
No offense, but it seems they got "sent" to DC and got sucked into the grievious torture of the Comfy Chair.
I don't feel sorry for them complaining about where they spend "their" money. Must be a "Hill" thing, because it sends my pulse up something good every time one of the "pro's" says it. Those Hill staffers must be the best indoctrinators...
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | September 14, 2010 at 10:37 PM
Stephanie:
A BIG chunk of the Republican money going into this election cycles is coming from the Rove/Gillespie Crossroads group.
Posted by: JM Hanes | September 14, 2010 at 10:42 PM
Robert S McCain was the one from who I came to know of her, some months ago, when it was
considered a fool's errand.
Posted by: narciso | September 14, 2010 at 10:44 PM
Porch-
I admire the spit, and I hope the cards go the way we both want.
But until the veneer is ripped off the theft of the Democratic Party by the Gramscians, I won't be satisfied.
Yes, that's how far I want to push it.
And I am sooo tired of this go-along-to-get-along carp, like Castle.
And Mark Kirk.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | September 14, 2010 at 10:44 PM
1994 was the last wave election. The "wave" had a height of 5-6% from the previous election. I think this one might go 8-9%. That would be historic but I don't believe that it will carry O'Donnell into the Senate. Neither candidate is an incumbent and the wave is anti-incumbent, it does not mark a shift towards conservatives, it's a convulsive reflex against progressive overreach.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | September 14, 2010 at 10:45 PM
NRSC will NOT support O'Donnell-Fox
They're stretched thin, with all the support they've given to Chaffee, Crist, Bennett, Murkowski, Specter, Scozafava....
Posted by: bgates | September 14, 2010 at 10:46 PM
Let the NRSC suck lemons. People are pissed enough at them as it is and have no inclination to trust their judgment. I've gotten dozens of calls from them that I've ignored. I'm giving directly to the candidates; that's it.
Porchlight,
I'm with you! Not long ago I received a call from the NRSC. The man on the phone was really upbeat about the Republican party's chances to take back the Senate in the fall. He also spoke about candidates that he'd like to see run for President in 2012. When I asked, "What about Sarah?" I was told she was a quitter who didn't have enough experience. I then informed him that I would be donating directly to the candidates that I preferred rather than the NRSC.
Posted by: Barbara | September 14, 2010 at 10:46 PM
Well, I have a feeling Palin and De Mint will find a way to round up some $$$.My friend and candidate from 2008, raised millions this year. He received no support last time from the party and I don't think much of it now comes from them either.
Posted by: Clarice | September 14, 2010 at 10:47 PM
F the NRSC. A few weeks ago I contributed to the Angle campaign. Around 15 minutes later I got a call from the NRSC (some 202 number). I immediately put that number on my Ooma (phone service) blacklist. Now they go straight to voicemail. Ah, modern technology.
I will never give to the NRSC, RNC, or NRCC again. I've contributed more to individual campaigns than I ever have to the national committees before.
Posted by: Telly S | September 14, 2010 at 10:48 PM
"or the amnesty immigration bill either"
had forgotten about that one.
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 14, 2010 at 10:49 PM
If she got 35% in 2008 against Biden, the winning VP candidate, with Obama at the top of the ticket, that's pretty encouraging.
She will get plenty of money, even without the NRSC. Lot of corporations in Delaware who do. not. want. cap and trade or Obamacare - and there's not a thing Coons can do about that.
Posted by: Porchlight | September 14, 2010 at 10:50 PM
I asked to be removed from the list of NSRC donors when Lott was elevated. It was a blatant self-destruct move at the time, and I feel it played out as expected, not the WAY I expected, but the ending was what I was thinking. Pascagoula Shipping will save the world, my ass.
Just like Archer Daniels Midlands' Dole Presidential Candidacy "The Last Honest Politician runs for the Presidency ( where "he stays bought").
But that's me.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | September 14, 2010 at 10:53 PM
I am going to go watch HGTV and put my political fires to rest. But not all heat is gonna be cooled.
I am hoping fervently that Collins and Snowe are feeling the sizzle of the flesh on their backsides as the brand of RINO is searing their skin.
Their day will come. God willing.
Posted by: centralcal | September 14, 2010 at 10:53 PM
c-cal-
Remember, they have a single-pay state medical insurance that needs bailing out, pronto.
Not that they have that in the back of their minds.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | September 14, 2010 at 10:55 PM
The Washington Compost has already begun the assault. LUN
Posted by: Publius from Idaho | September 14, 2010 at 10:55 PM
From Dr Zero at Hot Air:
The Democrat, Chris Coons, is loony and Marxist enough to qualify for a position as one of Obama’s czars. As bad as Castle might be, it’s not difficult to make the case that putting Coons in the seat would be far worse. However, while putting that case together, bear in mind that Castle co-founded a group with George Soros.
Posted by: Clarice | September 14, 2010 at 10:56 PM
Steph fired up and bringing the F-bombs! You go girl! I'm down with any candidate who wants to dismantle obamacare and sundry fedgov. Hey, maybe we'll know who won the f**kin' election in NY by next week. Scanners? wtf?
Posted by: scott | September 14, 2010 at 10:56 PM
"it does not mark a shift towards conservatives, it's a convulsive reflex against progressive overreach."
Might want to rethink that statement a little. I think turnouts DO indicate this more of a conservative wave, PLUS polling shows that the anti incumbent wave leans more to the liberal than republican side of the isle. If this were merely an anti-incumbent movement, I don't believe you'd see the extremely sharp pickup in seats that most are predicting.
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 14, 2010 at 10:57 PM
They have bet wrong practically every single time, this season, I'll give them Brown. You would think with that track record they would skulk in the corner, trying not to be noticed.
Posted by: narciso | September 14, 2010 at 10:57 PM
Maybe some of you sharpies can help this nutso woman by doing a little oppo research on Coons..It looks to me like there's a lot more nutsiness in his corner than hers.
Posted by: Clarice | September 14, 2010 at 10:57 PM
Rove is so 2000 with his nerfball compassionate conservatism. I can't believe some of you still give fealty to that pudgy turd who's complicit in what we're in today. Every squish like Castle is his kind of useless earmark-loving Repuke because of which the country got rolled in 2006 and 2008. This is a great day for conservatism, the Tea Party and the USA. For RINOs, commies and quislings, not so good.
Ann, Tammy Bruce is on from 2-4 over the web every day and you can hear it through a link on her website. She goes two hours with only one break so get ready for a stream of consciousness. She and Levin are my two favorites on radio although I have to give Rush his due for backing O'Donnell.
Posted by: Captain Hate | September 14, 2010 at 10:59 PM
Rove is so 2000 with his nerfball compassionate conservatism. I can't believe some of you still give fealty to that pudgy turd who's complicit in what we're in today. Every squish like Castle is his kind of useless earmark-loving Repuke because of which the country got rolled in 2006 and 2008. This is a great day for conservatism, the Tea Party and the USA. For RINOs, commies and quislings, not so good.
Ann, Tammy Bruce is on from 2-4 over the web every day and you can hear it through a link on her website. She goes two hours with only one break so get ready for a stream of consciousness. She and Levin are my two favorites on radio although I have to give Rush his due for backing O'Donnell.
Posted by: Captain Hate | September 14, 2010 at 10:59 PM
Tea Party candidate Paladino is up 2-to-1 over establishment candidate Lazio in the NY GOP governor primary with 40% of precincts reporting. Lazio was miles ahead in the polls just a few weeks ago. There's something happenin' here...
Posted by: jimmyk | September 14, 2010 at 11:03 PM
A BIG chunk of the establishment Republican money going into this election cycles [sic] is coming from the Rove/Gillespie Crossroads group.
FTFY
Exactly... and the voters aren't voting as Crossroads and the big money donors hoped they would???? F em and the RINO they rode in on. Voters are wising up and smelling the BS by both establishments. The tea party has proven to be an effective Underground Railroad completely bypassing the conventional money and GOTV funnels.
How many grass roots groups are supporting tea partiers? Anystreet. TeaParty Express. Stand With Arizona. ALIPAC. There are many more, and they are doing their part outside of the conventional route.
Rove and friends only control a small part of the wave; because, this time it is more about people to people than money. The people have tuned out anything that reeks of old style politics, including their ads and editorials.
Posted by: Stephanie | September 14, 2010 at 11:04 PM
clarice,
Coons has been able to hide from the searchlight thus far with all the attention focused on the GOP primary. Not for long.
I tend to agree with Pofarmer that it's not just an anti-incumbent wave. Most incumbent Repubs appear to have little to fear. We'll have to see, but I think there will be some shocker pickups by the GOP. Why can't Delaware be one of them?
Posted by: Porchlight | September 14, 2010 at 11:04 PM
Just looking at this guy for the first time, in the LUN, 'Yeah he's going to blend' sheesh
Posted by: narciso | September 14, 2010 at 11:06 PM
"There is a chance, if the GOP rallies behind her"
Might be just as well if it doesn't.
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 14, 2010 at 11:06 PM
candidates need money to get their message out and get voters to the polls. They used to get this help from the parties who could exact some discipline in exchange but McCain Feingold changed that..And then Palin with her use of free, quick communications like twitter-expanded considerably what other less deft candidates had begun. And enthusiastic voters who really can organize themselves very well when motivated handled a lot more of the stuff all on their own without officious and incompetent staff or precinct capts and union officers directing their work..
I once had the pleasure of working with coal miners who took over their union this way with very little outside (mostly legal ) help.
Posted by: Clarice | September 14, 2010 at 11:07 PM
Rick:
"[I]t does not mark a shift towards conservatives, it's a convulsive reflex against progressive overreach."
I think I'd say it doesn't mark a shift toward Republicans. The reflexive rejection of progressive overreach is, almost by definition, a conservative impulse, don't you think?
Posted by: JM Hanes | September 14, 2010 at 11:09 PM
15 September 2010
Baghdad
G'Morning JOMers,
Beautiful mornign here, 77F and 39% humidity (high) and clear. No incoming and no VBIEDs (so far).
But the great news is the good success yesterday--what a great front page story.
48 Days remain till the election. I encourage all local JOMers to spend time in Delaware helping to encourage the vote and then get out the vote. Cold calls are the hardest. I'm sure there are some on this list who know that very well.
But there's not a moment to lose, time is of the essence.
No retreat, no surrender.
If not you, whom? If not now, when? If not there, where?
I'd rather lose in a tough fight, having given my all, then sacrifice my beliefs to achieve an ephemeral result.
The future is in our hands. Now is the time for all good men and women to come to the aide of their country.
If we're not having fun, we're not doing it right. It is critically serious and important, but also we must move with a song in our heart.
Our cause is just, the saving of America.
NO RETREAT. NO SURRENDER.
Take good care,
Sandy
Posted by: Sandy Daze | September 14, 2010 at 11:09 PM
Cap'n-
From your lips...
If this is really the conservative time, I will be grateful. The complicity in all things "squish" happened once they got into DC, so where did that advice come from? Some place local methinks?
Swamp water. Skeeter donuts, and flood it over the last flood levels to kill the nastiest of the flood skeeters.
And I fade.
G'night all.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | September 14, 2010 at 11:10 PM
"Rove is concerned "because the RNC is going to have to assist O'Donnell and others at a larger cost than the incumbent with the massive warchest at the expense of other candidates."
I'm asking this for info, since I don't know the answer. Lisa has a campaign chest of 1.4 million. If she wanted to could she give that to the NRSC, so the RNC or whoever had enuff money to fund O'Donnell, instead of her blowing it on spite attack ads against Miller? I don't know, but boy does it piss me off that that cash is probably going to be used to try to destroy Miller.
And up here just before the Primary the slime came out that the Tea Party was all bankrolled by 2 big money lower 48 guys. That was proved false when Local Talk guys had the head of the Tea Party money fund from I think South Carolina on and she said since they were a PAC their max incoming donations were not allowed to exceed $5,000. She said the great majority of the (I think $580 K) given to Joe Miller were small donations of between 25 to 150 dollars. They then tried to beat Miller by saying most of his money was from lower 48'ers, wheres 80 percent of lisa's 1.4 million was from out of State.
Simply makes me angry the lies and disingenuousness of this whole thing. Maybe we'd have more NRC cash if we hadn't dumped it on goofballs like ScozzaFaza. Arghhhhh.
Posted by: daddy | September 14, 2010 at 11:10 PM
Stay safe, Sandy!
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | September 14, 2010 at 11:12 PM
"
Tea Party candidate Paladino is up 2-to-1 over establishment candidate Lazio in the NY GOP governor primary with 40% of precincts reporting. Lazio was miles ahead in the polls just a few weeks ago."
Holy cow.
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 14, 2010 at 11:13 PM
And when we get back to it, sounds like it was a very good day of oral arguments for the good guys in front of DoT's old Navy Judge buddy, re: overturning Obama care as Unconstitutional.
Am standing by for that good discussion and legal education from you guys.
Posted by: daddy | September 14, 2010 at 11:13 PM
Niters, and good to see you posting, Sandy.
Posted by: Clarice | September 14, 2010 at 11:13 PM
So what if O'Donnell loses? How can you vote for a man who supports Cap and Trade?
Can you imagine seeing yourself in a mirror after voting for that? You'd have to avoid mirrors for days.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | September 14, 2010 at 11:17 PM
Might be just as well if it doesn't.
Good point. How about "if the GOP doesn't actively fight against her" instead?
Posted by: Porchlight | September 14, 2010 at 11:17 PM
I wrote a piece shortly after I began posting here that was a "buck up the dems are going to go too far" piece that I posted shortly after Obama was sworn in and it seems apropos for the times, but I can't find it on the wayback machine (google archives).
I wish I could find it and repost it from time to time when the GOP gets all wonky-wobbly-wussified because it got such a good reaction when y'all were feeling so down back then. OH, well, I can't find it, so I'll just say Stay positive, y'all - We Can Do This.
/cheerleader mode off...
Posted by: Stephanie | September 14, 2010 at 11:19 PM
I have to vote for a http://www.voteforvernon.com/>Batman villain on Nov. 2nd in order to get rid of my incumbent congressman.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | September 14, 2010 at 11:20 PM
Hi Sandy,
Ditto's Clarice. Keep keeping us honest from long distance.
Posted by: daddy | September 14, 2010 at 11:23 PM
Repeal ObamaCare.
Posted by: Army of Davids | September 14, 2010 at 11:27 PM
Here's Obama's book if you want to get in your orders ahead of time. ">http://www.amazon.com/Thee-Sing-Letter-My-Daughters/dp/037583527X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1284516434&sr=1-1"> Of Thee I Sing: A Letter to My Daughters:
"In this tender, beautiful letter to his daughters, President Barack Obama has written a moving tribute to thirteen groundbreaking Americans and the ideals that have shaped our nation."
Posted by: daddy | September 14, 2010 at 11:28 PM
Stephaie:
"Exactly... and the voters aren't voting as Crossroads and the big money donors hoped they would????"
Good question to which I presume you don't know the answer? But are perfectly will to F em and the RINO they road in on regardless? Sure, the tea parties have certainly proved just how potent a real grass roots movement can be, but let me know when you hear Sharon Angle complaining about Crossroad's anti-Reid ads, or when tea parties reject Crossroads help with their GOTV efforts because they want to reinvent that wheel all on their own.
Posted by: JM Hanes | September 14, 2010 at 11:30 PM
Insty links to Doctor Zero's take yesterday. He reluctantly saw Castle as the better choice, but also perfectly described why others might not:
"Supporters of O’Donnell fear the prominence “reasonable, moderate” Republicans like Castle would gain through the media, after the GOP takes control of Congress. The ghost of Jim Jeffords rides through their backyards each Halloween, tossing its severed head between its hands. Cleansing the party of people like Castle isn’t just a mindless obsession with purity. It’s part of presenting a coherent message to voters, and offering a real contrast with the bankrupt lunacy of the Democrats. It will be tough for the party to deliver a rousing St. Crispin’s Day speech to voters while the media’s new favorite Republican capers in the background, waving his Strange New Respect award and calling them extremists."
Hard to argue with that.
Posted by: DebinNC | September 14, 2010 at 11:31 PM
"The reflexive rejection of progressive overreach is, almost by definition, a conservative impulse, don't you think?"
In the sense of "conserve the staus quo ante", sure. 1988-2007 is not exactly the "conservative" era that I have in mind when I use the term. '81-'87 more closely fits my template and the Muddle is not stampeding towards Reaganism.
They're sure stampeding away from Obamanism though and I'll take that for the moment. As to turnout - it's not at all extraordinary for the minority party generate much higher turnout in primaries. The carry over to the general is usually fairly thin. I really do expect a low Dem turnout though. The centrist Dems just don't have much reason to vote and watching Blue Dogs get the DNC bayonet isn't improving morale.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | September 14, 2010 at 11:32 PM
"Anti-incumbent" is msm drivel to hide what the real problem is. They are not allowed to say anti-Zero.
Posted by: Bill in AZ | September 14, 2010 at 11:37 PM
daddy-
Good luck untangling the money mess. It would be controlled by state law and federal law. She could probably give it to the Alaska Republican Party or the RNC but would run into limit amounts giving it to the Miller campaign or other PACS. It would depend on state law as to whether she could just keep it. But really, I'm not sure, and it seems that she'd rather sink the official nominee than exit the stage gracefully.
Posted by: RichatUF | September 14, 2010 at 11:37 PM
JMH, I'm not advocating for eschewing their money. I'm advocating for taking their money and relegating them to the backseat. They think that since they represent the "Big Money" [with finger quotes and sarcasm] they are entitled to drive the candidate's car or at the very least side seat drive.
Part of the problem voters are railing against is politics as usual... and "Big Money" represents just that. To relegate "Big Money" to just one voice among many and killing off the 'unique access' that access has bought in the past is a vast improvement and motivator for people to stay involved.
Rove and Crossroads expect a Reserved placard in the front seat of all R cars and feel as entitled as the party incumbents do about their "rightful place" and breaking that mindset is A GOOD THING.
Posted by: Stephanie | September 14, 2010 at 11:47 PM
It will be tough for the party to deliver a rousing St. Crispin’s Day speech to voters while the media’s new favorite Republican capers in the background, waving his Strange New Respect award and calling them extremists.
Very nice catch, DebinNC. It is indeed hard to argue with.
Posted by: Porchlight | September 14, 2010 at 11:56 PM
The title of the Coons book is "The response of colleges and universities to calls for divestment". Investor Responsibility Research Center, 1986. ISBN 0931035082, 9780931035081 (?). The book was updated by another author later in 1986. It is about the South Africa divestment movement.
Posted by: RichatUF | September 15, 2010 at 12:02 AM
As if he wouldn't do that anyways, that is the lesson of Jeffords, you couldn't placate
him, much like Dean in his sense of overweening self regard
Posted by: narciso | September 15, 2010 at 12:03 AM
Glad Sandy got the good news early. Do we need to help O'Donnell the way we did Scott Brown?
Obama's new book? Now I know why Billy Ayers retired.
What does Coons mean when he claims O'Donnell has "an extreme social agenda"? Isn't that what the Democrats are wreaking?
Posted by: Frau Lehrerin außer Dienst | September 15, 2010 at 12:31 AM
Stephanie:
"I'm advocating for taking their money and relegating them to the backseat."
Biting the hand that feeds you; good luck with that winning strategy.
"Rove and Crossroads expect a Reserved placard in the front seat of all R cars and feel as entitled as the party incumbents do about their "rightful place" and breaking that mindset is A GOOD THING."
They dove in and picked up the slack when Michael Steele was driving Republican donors away, and thank goodness they did. Crossroads has kept a relatively low profile, and has been doing a lot of the basic, unglamorous work that goes into winning elections, not just primaries. Unlike single candidate based electioneering, they can throw money & media & GOTV crews where they are needed most, anywhere in the country -- and they will. You can bet your ass they'll throw money behind tea party nominees too. They've earned a place at the table with a lot more than just money.
Democrats are not the only ones who can suffer for arrogance and overreach..
Posted by: JM Hanes | September 15, 2010 at 12:32 AM
In other news:
Ron Johnson walked away with the nomination for Russ Feingold's in Wisconsin, although somehow "walked away" doesn't quite do justice to 84.5%.
Ovide Lamontagne (tea party backing) eked out a win over Kelly Ayotte (Palin endorsement) in New Hampshire. I liked Ayotte and hope that NH is small enough for Lamontagne overcome the name recognition bar.
Eric Wargotz, of Insidersaurus fame, won in Maryland.
Posted by: JM Hanes | September 15, 2010 at 12:33 AM
And Beilat won the right to challenge Barnet Frank
Posted by: narciso | September 15, 2010 at 01:07 AM
((Democrats are not the only ones who can suffer for arrogance and overreach..))
Yeah, whatever. I think the establishment is suffering from extreme shock over some of the results this year. FWIW I don't mind them having a place at the table, it just rankles many folks that they expect to benefit from it and that it is an expected seat. It's not only the economy, it's the entitlement mindset...
And
Lamontagne... not so fast. Ayotte has just moved ahead. For a small state, they sure have difficulty counting votes.
Posted by: Stephanie | September 15, 2010 at 01:15 AM
From many sources the Big Muddy flows. Hey, Daddi-O, Bishop Hill, AKA Andrew Montford has his elegant expose of the ClimateGate whitewashes out just yesterday. Parliament is getting a little bit interested in the travesty right under their noses.
===============
Posted by: Watch Graham Stringer, a MOP from Manchester who is a chemist. | September 15, 2010 at 01:52 AM
Heh, Graham Stringer has apparently called what was going on at the University of East Anglia 'literature, and not science'. I think this is a also a joke on the fact that one of the things that that University is justly famous for is its creative writing program.
====================
Posted by: GS is on the Parliamentary committee with oversight. | September 15, 2010 at 02:30 AM
I forget who called what Republicans are facing as a hostile takeover, but they were correct.
I don't think Sarah Palin has forgotten how party central threw away the last election, or how Republicans in Congress for the last decade frittered away their integrity trying to imitate Democrats to stay in power.
I think Rove faces a threat to his coalition, but the party will be better off for having to face its shortcomings.
Posted by: sbw | September 15, 2010 at 04:11 AM
Here's a suggestion for the RNC.
If you want to stop the bleeding and start the healing and rebuild your own credibility, then the first thing you guys do tomorrow is you get Lisa Murkowski in a room and you convince that selfish princess to immediately announce she's not doing a Write-in candidacy. That's Priority number 1.
That'll save countless dollars and animosity and bad press that this party can ill afford. Do that immediately. It'd also be nice if you could get her and this Castle guy to endorse their opponents who beat them fair and square in the Primary's though I'm not holding my breath and thats secondary. But you have to control Lisa Murkowski and her runaway ego and you need to do that immediately. That'll demonstrate you have some control over these squishy rogue agents you've been trying to get us to support all these years---otherwise, what control did you have over them in the first place that would justify us continuing to give you our money and support in the future, as opposed to giving it to Tea Party candidates?
Posted by: daddy | September 15, 2010 at 04:38 AM
Kim,
Am still a wanna' be heretic as his book is still unavailable at my Library and my favorite local bookstore. They'll both probably have Obama's latest on the shelves before Lord Montford's "Hockey Stick Illusion" shows up.
But I enjoy the thrill of looking for it!
Can you please tell me exactly where to look for his latest which you mentioned above in your 01:52 am. I'm so clobbered with walrus's up here I don't exactly know where to look.
Posted by: daddy | September 15, 2010 at 04:47 AM
Really very nice informative post, and thanks for sharing this info.
Xtreme NO
Posted by: Xtreme NO | September 15, 2010 at 05:11 AM
Hi Daddy, followed Kim's link to WattsUp and found this article for us :)
Posted by: BR | September 15, 2010 at 05:57 AM
Does the Xtreme NO supplement really work?
Unless you care enough to risk a virus, leave that link alone. (It probably doesn't work anyway.)
Posted by: Extraneus | September 15, 2010 at 05:58 AM
Here is Jack Cashill's latest at Am. Thinker.
Really interesting as usual.
Posted by: Janet | September 15, 2010 at 07:19 AM
OT
I was getting my haircut yesterday. My barber is a wonderful guy; he's a Jewish emigrant from the former Soviet Union--Uzbekistan. He was drafted into the Soviet army as a young man. He is not well educated but is extremely smart. He had the TV on, and Katie Couric's blather fest was on. When they mentioned that Obama had a new book out, but don't worry, folks, it was written before he took office, my barber smirked that he didn't think that Obama wrote any of it. People are starting to get it.
Posted by: peter | September 15, 2010 at 07:26 AM
Here's another reason we need new people in Washington.
Just running these Offices that do nothing will cost 58 million.
"Dodd-Frank requires at least 29 federal bureaus to open Offices of Minority & Women Inclusion, involving ten branches of the Treasury Department, the Federal Reserve and its 12 regional banks, the Securities & Exchange Commission and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp."
Posted by: pagar | September 15, 2010 at 07:47 AM
Mark Tapscott Washington Examiner:
I question the conventional wisdom that Delaware is now a lock for the Democrats. Despite Scott Brown, Rand Paul, Sharon Angle, and Joe Miller, the talking heads in Washington and New York obviously still cannot comprehend the depth or intensity of anger among voters or the fact that anger is far from limited to conservatives.
O'Donnell may win in November. And that's what is scary because, given the implications of the ISI suit and questions about her financial record, an O'Donnell victory in the general election could be the start of embarrassing problems for the Tea Party movement and damaging distractions for Republicans in the new Congress at the worst possible moment.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Two-lessons-to-be-gleaned-from-ODonnell-victory-102922539.html#ixzz0zbCjH21t>O
Posted by: Clarice | September 15, 2010 at 08:05 AM
Castle will not endorse O'Donnell but he will not wage a write in campaign wither.
Posted by: Clarice | September 15, 2010 at 08:12 AM
I think liberal Republicans who are scolding O'Donnell supporters this morning have mistaken them for people who give a damn whether Coons or Castle got the seat.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | September 15, 2010 at 08:18 AM
In MA there was a write-in campaign for a guy named Jim McKenna who wants to face Martha Coakley on the ballot. He needed 10,000 write-ins complete with full name and address, and according to his website, they got them.
I'm not sure how he knows, but if anything signals how closely voters are paying attention, that does.
Posted by: Jane (sit on the couch or save your country) | September 15, 2010 at 08:18 AM
A number of Rep Senators have publicly announced to Lisa M that they will not support any write in effort of hers and will not caucus with her should she win. They urged her to follow her primary pledge to support the winner.
Posted by: Clarice | September 15, 2010 at 08:28 AM
Liberal Repukes are the reason we have the jugeared goof in the White House by abandoning "My Friends" after he picked that icky Sarah Palin as a running mate. I'm tired of hearing that conservatives like me were the problem; I held my nose and voted for that grey-haired confused guy with teh Sarah as I'm sure just about all of my ilk did. It's the RINOs like Castle that stab the party in the back when they don't get their way; illustrating the wisdom of the voters who rejected them.
Posted by: Captain Hate | September 15, 2010 at 08:33 AM
I understad and respect DoT and JMH's views, and those of Rove and others. Had it not been for Jeffords and Voinpvich and their ilk the issue would have been clearer than it is to me. I cannot see casting a vote for someone who has the R after his name but has proven unreliable on the main issues of interest to me. Had he been a crucial vote, the media would have flattered him, the Dems would have bribed him and the R would have been meaningess.
Posted by: Clarice | September 15, 2010 at 08:42 AM
given the implications of the ISI suit and questions about her financial record, O'Donnell might not be fit for a chamber that has seen public servants like Chris Dodd, Senatrix Barbara Boxer, Stuart Smalley, and Teh Sherriff Himself Joe Biden.
But by all means, let's fess out the mystery of how a woman who graduated from a New Jersey private school around 1990 (Fairleigh-Dickinson, so keep an eye out for Peggy's attacks on her academic credentials) could still have student loan debt almost 20 years later. If she were any kind of Republican she could have had daddy just write a check, right, Karl?
Posted by: bgates | September 15, 2010 at 08:43 AM
Had he been a crucial vote, the media would have flattered him, the Dems would have bribed him and the R would have been meaningess.
Exactly. And they'd be the Republican representative on every Sunday show, tut-tutting about their brethren, a la McCain and Gramnesty. The only reason we've been spared sad-eyed Chuck Hagel lately is because he took a job with the Obama regime.
Posted by: DebinNC | September 15, 2010 at 08:50 AM