Tyler Cowen on immigration - you want them coming over that wall.
Frank Rich may be overestimating his influence with his target audience, but he hopes to drive a wedge between Tea Partiers and Republicans. It is hard to square his months of fear-mongering about the Tea Party with this:
But whatever Tuesday’s results, this much is certain: The Tea Party’s hopes for actually affecting change in Washington will start being dashed the morning after. The ordinary Americans in this movement lack the numbers and financial clout to muscle their way into the back rooms of Republican power no matter how well their candidates perform.
And he just noticed?
Finally, some Times coverage of Jon Stewart.
Frank Rich's column is his way of throwing in the towel. If Frank Rich has given up, all hope is lost for the progs!
Posted by: Thomas Collins | October 31, 2010 at 09:59 AM
Yo Frankie; how's that hope and change working out for you?
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 31, 2010 at 10:00 AM
Simply great Pieces today Clarice.
Posted by: Jane | October 31, 2010 at 10:03 AM
Pick your favorite Mass. Guv. candidate and play the game at LUN!
Posted by: Thomas Collins | October 31, 2010 at 10:05 AM
Thanks, Jane and a group hug in advance..
Posted by: Clarice | October 31, 2010 at 10:09 AM
Great Pieces today, Clarice! The last paragraph is a gem! The Twelve Days of Christmas have nothing on the Obama entourage. LOL
Posted by: MaryD | October 31, 2010 at 10:17 AM
Clarice, I was going to try to give you a break from the Sunday morning effusive praise session by finding something in your column with which to quibble. But it is so lucidly written and persuasively argued that I have come up short. Maybe next week! :-))
Posted by: Thomas Collins | October 31, 2010 at 10:17 AM
No break from the effusive praise will come from me: Clarice, this is your best one yet. Beautifully done.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | October 31, 2010 at 10:22 AM
With an actual hard copy of today's WaPo op-ed section in my lap (delivered to my brother's house in Arlington), I can share with you all some of their predictions:
--Harry Reid squeaks to victory (Chris Cillizza);
--GOP gains 44 house seats (Candy Crowley);
--GOP wins house majority, but barely (Ken Rudin);
--In Colorado, Bennett beats Buck by one-tenth of one percent (Harris/VanDenHai).
Make of this what you will.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | October 31, 2010 at 10:32 AM
--Make of this what you will.--
You should start getting the Examiner? :)
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkywatzky | October 31, 2010 at 10:36 AM
keeping hope alive
Posted by: Extraneus | October 31, 2010 at 10:38 AM
Minus 13 at Raz today, confirming to me that I have no idea what's going on.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | October 31, 2010 at 10:38 AM
I wouldn't read too much into that. this kind of index, the difference between 2 other indices, is inherently volatile. Trend shows no letup in red, green support still hovering below 30. (I bet that dives after tuesday.)
Posted by: Extraneus | October 31, 2010 at 10:47 AM
Count me in,Clarice - best Pieces yet. That bit about the redistricting is especially tasty...
Posted by: Porchlight | October 31, 2010 at 10:48 AM
DOT, I'll bet that many who are joining the GOP wave won't tell a pollster (even a robopollster) that they are turning against Obama. I suspect it is easier for many to view their vote as an anti-Pelosi/Reid vote than an anti-Obama vote.
Does anyone remember another election in which a party's candidates have either ignored or turned away from that party's most prominent legislative victory prior to a mid-term election? If I didn't know better, I'd say that ObamaCare was dropped on us from aliens in the sky as opposed to being the centerpiece of the Dems' continuing effort to emascuprogging America.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | October 31, 2010 at 10:53 AM
Minus 13 at Raz today, confirming to me that I have no idea what's going on.
DoT,someone smarter than me explained that Barry does better on weekends, due to various slices of Dem voter demographics tending to be at home. I would say especially this weekend as everyone with kids is supremely busy.
Posted by: Porchlight | October 31, 2010 at 10:53 AM
"Make of this what you will."
Mix it with straw - but will it work better as a frost cover for the dahlia beds or as supplemental nutrition for the rose bushes?
Narciso linked a good piece on results from early voting in Florida which matches well with lowball generic (add 3 to the +10R). Anyone puzzled by Clarice's reference to internecine warfare on the basis of the 1975 extension of the Voting Rights Act should peruse the Census Bureau's Strength in Numbers gargle where Redistricting Must Aim at
Equality is ballyhooed as a primary goal.
Col West's victory Tuesday ensures one of the more interesting redistricting battles that I've ever seen. It also provides a partial basis for understanding Meeks' decision to leave a "safe" seat behind to engage in a futile quest for governor. Meeks knew which way the wind was blowing.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | October 31, 2010 at 11:06 AM
"ABC’s Jonathan Karl is reporting that a “high-level GOP source” told him that the Republican party had “essentially given up” on Republican senate candidate Joe Miller and consider Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who has said she will caucus with the GOP if elected, as the party’s best chance of keeping the seat."
Source: National Review Online - 10/31/10 (LUN)
Posted by: P Baer | October 31, 2010 at 11:09 AM
Blood is in the desert in Nevada.
Bookies are circling for Harry....the election "is lost".
InTrades at 73% for Angle.
Posted by: Army of Davids | October 31, 2010 at 11:11 AM
That POS Murkowski.I hate her with the fire of a thousand suns.
Posted by: Porchlight | October 31, 2010 at 11:13 AM
a “high-level GOP source” told him that the Republican party had “essentially given up” on Republican senate candidate Joe Miller and consider Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who has said she will caucus with the GOP if elected, as the party’s best chance of keeping the seat."
Translation: Per Rove we've torpedoed this intraparty threat to the good ol' boys. We can now concentrate on undermining the new guys that get elected and cement our country club bona fides. Next up: McCain/Murkowski 2012.
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 31, 2010 at 11:26 AM
Gee, Tyler Cowen goes way out on a limb in favor of immigration.
Except for a few weirdos, who is against legal immigration, where people generally establish they are abandoning former allegiances, will abide by the law, accept the culture and speak the language?
It's the illegals who do none of the above that are the problem, Tyler.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkywatzky | October 31, 2010 at 11:29 AM
Usually 3 day tracking polls have a lot of variability. But my observations over several years cause me to believe that Friday and Saturday samples during the fall (high school and college football season) underpoll Republicans and skew the numbers a few points to the left. DISCLAIMER: I have absolutely no statistical data to reinforce this. It is just an impression.
Posted by: bio mom | October 31, 2010 at 11:31 AM
Actually, Capt'n, Rove doesn't buy the story. 1 unnamed source after the rncc has spent major money in AK helping Miller, Rove says he doesn't believe it.
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 11:32 AM
How did Rove go from being the Magnificent Bastard to just bastard?
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 11:34 AM
Rove also said that Murcokeski will lose points when the actual votes are counted. For her to have a shot at winning, she has to be way up in the polls, and she isn't.
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 11:35 AM
well I don't take anything without a name to it, very seriously , but the NRSC have been
in Leeza's pocket as far as I remember, and
the brought the fireaxe against Christine, not so much against Coons
Posted by: narciso | October 31, 2010 at 11:37 AM
How did Rove go from being the Magnificent Bastard to just bastard?
When he badmouthed O'Donnell and Palin.
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 31, 2010 at 11:39 AM
"How did Rove go from being the Magnificent Bastard to just bastard?"
The elevation of feelings over the examination of results would be my guess. He and Bush just didn't press the muddle hard enough to effect an everlasting shift to an enduring embrace of conservatism. You remember the good old days when the muddle clasped conservatism to its breast in overwhelming numbers, right? All Rove and Bush had to do is return us to those days - it's as easy as elevating the entire population to above average status and they couldn't even do that.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | October 31, 2010 at 11:42 AM
Well, I'm not ready to call him a bastard just yet. He is working hard to get Angle elected and has been behind Rubio from the beginning.
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 11:43 AM
I too am enjoying Clarice's Pieces de resistance. Today's discussion of the POTUS with the TOTUS and his rumored intellectual virtuosity leads me to suggest the following question be put to him as a wee trial: "Do you think the mid-term will reprove your leadership?"
Posted by: Elliott | October 31, 2010 at 11:44 AM
You remember the good old days when the muddle clasped conservatism to its breast in overwhelming numbers, right?
Just barely. Since that same muddle clasped liberalism to its breast in overwhelming numbers to elect Obama. And that same muddle is turning on Obama just as fast as it turned on Bush. That's why they call them the muddle.
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 11:46 AM
Clarice, smartly packaged.
Posted by: MarkO | October 31, 2010 at 11:48 AM
It was Rick's contribution--the redistricting angle--and today's comment by him about Meek is especially brilliant. I had not considered either of these things until he mentioned them.
I hope everyone is right about Reid. It would be soooo nice not to watch that brothel piano player's face on tv ever again except perhaps for a concession speech.
Posted by: Clarice | October 31, 2010 at 11:49 AM
"as easy as elevating the entire population to above average status and they couldn't even do that"
It will be much easier now that the Obamian dimorats have lowered the curve so "average" is now underwater.
Posted by: boris | October 31, 2010 at 11:55 AM
Rove never believed in conservatism. He was quite happy to have a bunch of squishes like Castle voting for garbage like cap and tax and earmarks out the wazz as long as they had an R after their names. That's pretty much what drove the car into the ditch and why the muddle wanted a change.
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 31, 2010 at 11:58 AM
David Horowitz has a tweet for TM and JOM.
http://twitter.com/newsrealblog
Posted by: glasater | October 31, 2010 at 12:07 PM
I don't know if Rove believes in conservatism or not, but I do know he is supporting tea party candidates to the tune of millions of dollars he has helped raise for them. The muddle always wants a change. Rove wasn't driving the car, Bush was. And Bush was never a true conservative. Which is what I said from the beginning. If people had been paying attention, prior to 9/11, he was Clinton on the right of center. Just like he was here in Texas. He had core beliefs, right to life, etc., but he was always a squishy conservative.
Like I said, I'm not ready to call Rove a bastard. He is working hard to get republicans elected. And what he said about Palin, if I heard it all, I sort of agree. She really doesn't need to be doing reality shows if she really wants to run for president.
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 12:09 PM
To hear Carl Cameron the stunt to find a child molester at Miller's rally is causing a lot of agita.
Posted by: Jane | October 31, 2010 at 12:10 PM
You know years ago, when Rush talked about the Country Club Republicans, and when I read of Thatcher's rivalries with the wet Tories, ,who after nearly a dozen year of service, stabbed her in the back. I didn't take it seriously,
Posted by: narciso | October 31, 2010 at 12:13 PM
Jane,
It should. The people of Alaska should be up in arms that their media is attempting to smear a candidate.
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 12:14 PM
I think Rove's job has been to help his candidates' win. Period. I never considered him a political philosopher and I don't see why anyone would. If you want those with a set point of view, it really should be the candidates, not the operatives, who get them elected, you should be looking at and people like Rubio, Cantor, Christie and Palin are the models.
Posted by: Clarice | October 31, 2010 at 12:18 PM
And what he said about Palin, if I heard it all, I sort of agree. She really doesn't need to be doing reality shows if she really wants to run for president.
You agree with that: Fine. I don't care; it's your opinion and you have a right to it. My problem with what Rove did is that he did it to a newspaper during a campaign when we're all supposed to be on the same team. I don't want somebody I don't trust on my team. It's that simple.
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 31, 2010 at 12:19 PM
I am with Sue 100% in her comments about Rove. I, too, saw his interview on FNC this morning and he was pretty adamant that this "anonymous source" is bunk.
I am amused (no, not really) at how the MFM has kicked in to overtime in its smears, fake polls and prognostications, etc. this last weekend.
Palin is right. They are ALL bastards.
Posted by: centralcal | October 31, 2010 at 12:23 PM
Capt'n,
And that is your opinion and you have a right to it, too.
I'm not really pro or anti Palin. If she is the nominee, I'll vote for her, and do it happily, not just a McCain hold my nose and vote, vote. She is an amazing woman. Gutsy is my definition of her. But I am not ready to pull the lever for her in the primary, just yet. Depends on who else runs. She might be my choice and she might not be. But appearing on a reality show doesn't help her win my vote. And Rove pointing that out isn't helping or hurting those of us who are still willing to give her a shot. Of course, there are those who won't vote for her no matter what Rove says. I still trust Rove to help get Republicans elected.
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 12:26 PM
An effort is being made by the left (Robert Reich, TIME) and Mayor Bloomberg to paint Tea Party folks as anti-business.
I guess if you say a lie enough times someone on the left is bound to believe it.
Posted by: Army of Davids | October 31, 2010 at 12:27 PM
the Republican party had “essentially given up” on Republican senate candidate Joe Miller and consider Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who has said she will caucus with the GOP if elected, as the party’s best chance of keeping the seat."
Whoever comes out for Merkillwitsky tells us more about THEM. We will know who the crap Republicans are (if we don't already know).
Posted by: Janet the tea-vangelist! | October 31, 2010 at 12:29 PM
Janet,
Someone elsewhere made a good point. The source, who didn't want to be named, is probably a pro-Mercokeski republican.
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 12:33 PM
Appearing on a reality show doesn't do too much positive for me either but JMH and Jane don't mind pointing out how out of touch I am with popular culture and younger mores; so WTF do I know. I don't like to engage in identity politics (I prefer to leave that to the other side) but it hasn't escaped my notice that Rove has chosen two women who've bucked the Repub system to target his ire.
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 31, 2010 at 12:34 PM
I still like Rove,though I would have preferred a little more 11th commandment discipline from him this election cycle.I like to get Republicans elected,too,after all,and trashing them on national TV is not my idea of smart GOTV strategy.
Unless...it was a secret move to elevate said candidate in the eyes of moderates? ;)
Posted by: Porchlight | October 31, 2010 at 12:37 PM
Capt'n,
I don't' want to keep defending Rove, but I think he is looking at getting republicans elected. O'Donnell is a long shot. Castle wasn't. Palin is a long shot. And pointing out the obvious, that a presidential contender shouldn't be appearing on a reality show, shouldn't hurt Palin one way or the other.
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 12:37 PM
About Illinois. Here's a report from my Hyde Park friend again:
"I think Kirk wins, in a very tight race. It’s all about turnout. The joker is that there is a governor’s race here, and the Democrats really hate the Republican candidate (who is no friend to the unions and has taken prominent positions on social issues like abortion and gay marriage during his years in office). The turnout for that race will have effects on the Senate race.
Kirk is very competent but a flawed candidate because (a) he is so bland, and (b) he has exaggerated his résumé.
Giannoulias is even more flawed, and I think independent voters know it. He’s a better campaigner than Kirk, but his real claim to fame is that he’s very good at finances—just what we need in tough time. The problem is that he not actually good at finances. His record at his family bank is atrocious, and he lied about it. So he lied to hide a bad résumé while Kirk lied to embellish a good one—a distinction that nobody in the media seems to make. Anyway, after Alexi was elected state treasurer, he set up a college savings fund for parents and managed to lose most of it. He’s young, and those are his only accomplishments. Not good for him.
Kirk advertises himself accurately as “a social moderate and fiscal conservative.” He’ll be similar to the Maine senators but very focused on foreign affairs—a possible replacement for Lugar over the longer term."
Posted by: Clarice | October 31, 2010 at 12:38 PM
That is the point, when dealing with Spilius, he should have redirected the question, as he at leasrt tried to do, in Spiegel and put the dagger in Coon's rather then in O'Donnell's back, and only lightly quibbled
about Mazzugiorsky (sic)
He has admitted he overestimated Obama like his protege Schmidt, forcing the latter to give up something Sarah never did
Posted by: narciso | October 31, 2010 at 12:41 PM
Rove's badmouthing of O'Donnell AFTER she had won the primary was stupid and destructive.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkywatzky | October 31, 2010 at 12:44 PM
After Bammy got tooled by Jon Leibowitz, I don't think anybody could degrade the office even more.
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 31, 2010 at 12:45 PM
Ig,
Apparently. It took him from Magnificent to less than ordinary.
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 12:45 PM
Capt'n,
After Clinton, I didn't think anyone could degrade it more either. I was wrong in that one too.
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 12:47 PM
Slick sure got the ball rolling, Sue; we can definitely agree on that.
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 31, 2010 at 12:51 PM
Did anyone hear Obama's radio address this weekend? I would like to find a transcript of it. Where do I look? I think I heard him admit that republicans will be the winners on Tuesday and asked them to put aside partisanship and work with him. Kind of ironic, if he did say that, considering how he has described us as the "enemy" and didn't want any part of us for the last 2 years.
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 12:52 PM
I think, if you can bear going there to look for it, there is usually a transcript posted on the WH site.
Posted by: Porchlight | October 31, 2010 at 12:55 PM
I heard Rove speak a few years ago in a small setting where he was comfortable and open. His genuine admiration for George Bush comes through clearly in a way that made him unlikely to try to change Bush's instinct for the "compassionate conservatism" nonsense.
Posted by: rse | October 31, 2010 at 12:56 PM
President's radio address LUN
warning it is some sleazy Dem site
Posted by: peter | October 31, 2010 at 12:57 PM
LUN for a Halloween treat as the Great Eggplant from Moo U bashes Leibowitz.
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 31, 2010 at 12:59 PM
No doubt rse, and it's a little hard to blame him for things he didn't promise. I'm just a little surprised that the likes of Cornyn, don't challenge a statement like that proffered by Karl, who did you talk to, even if true, you don't let the 'talking point'
get traction.
Posted by: narciso | October 31, 2010 at 01:03 PM
At first this may have been unwitting,but after the fact may be true.Jane will ask him about it when they have dinner in two weeks.
Posted by: caro | October 31, 2010 at 01:10 PM
caro,
Rove already responded. He was answering a question in his role as political analyst for Fox. I was on vacation and have never really heard what he said about her in its entirety. All I know is he is working hard to get Angle and Rubio elected, so his angst isn't tea partiers, but the actual candidates.
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 01:14 PM
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/10/30/weekly-address-president-obama-calls-gop-leadership-put-aside-partisan-p>Weekly Radio Address
He doesn't actually say republicans are going to win next week, but it is implied. He does actually say
From Mr. I Won.
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 01:19 PM
Sue,
I wonder if anyone else is carrying the Alaska reporter slime. Palin called them "Bastards" today (I forget the adjective) and boy do they deserve it. They of course deny any ill intent. No one should let this go.
Posted by: Jane | October 31, 2010 at 01:23 PM
Narciso,
If you consider "ground taken must be defended" as a political axiom, it tends to clarify certain decisions. Gillibrand and Mikulski could have been taken out just about as easily as taking the Delaware seat with Castle (a probable one termer, given his age) but the location and registration imbalance in all three cases do not fit the '12 GOP strategy.
The Dems inability to defend the ground taken in '06 and '08 due to the sharp left turn taken to satisfy the proglodytes is going to result in the majority of their remaining members being a part of either the Blue Hell Commie Caucus or the Black Caucus (with a number of them being members of both).
That's definitely a B+ outcome.
For the GOP.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | October 31, 2010 at 01:23 PM
From Mr.I Won,who is always seeking common ground. HA.
Sue,we can call Rove the Bastard much the same way Joy Behar calls her friends the b-word.I think Rove has done an excellent job in supporting Rubio and Angle.Others,too.
Posted by: caro | October 31, 2010 at 01:26 PM
Jane,
I haven't checked to see who else is carrying it, but they usually don't ignore Palin, so that should get the story out there. I still think Rove is right about Miller winning. Mercokeski has to have a large lead to beat him and she doesn't.
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 01:29 PM
I'm noticing the Bocking when I'm not looking for it. What a great guy he was.
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 01:32 PM
--Ig,
Apparently. It took him from Magnificent to less than ordinary.--
Well, I never subscribed to the Magnificent part, nor the bastard part either, for that matter.
Before, I considered him a pretty canny guy with feet of clay like the rest of us. That's pretty much how I see him now.
I think the problem he now has is the one you alluded to, the wearing of two quite different hats that he might need to take off and on in one conversation; a political analyst and a political activist.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkywatzky | October 31, 2010 at 01:33 PM
Jane: Palin called the media "corrupt bastards."
Looks like the General Manager is offering a very lame defense of his reporters per Megyn Kelly.
Posted by: centralcal | October 31, 2010 at 01:33 PM
""ABC’s Jonathan Karl is reporting that a “high-level GOP source” told "
IMO, ABC, CBS and the other leftist controlled media can be counted on 100% to publish what the Democrats want you to hear, and only what the Democrats want you to hear.
The CBS people have already told you they are committed to defeating Miller. Why are we listening to these people?
Posted by: Pagar | October 31, 2010 at 01:34 PM
Happy PUK's Day,all.Let the wild Bocking begin.
Three cheers for the Pieces Gal who made me smile with "Obama's passage to India."Will Barry pull out *his* secret hat for his Indonesian mosque visit?Time will tell.And what new garments will grace our FLOTUS?Psychedelic jilbabs?
I'm concentrating on silly stuff because elections make me nervous.I have voted for so many who have lost but who were not losers.I hope there will be victories for the many Republican "upstarts" running this time.
Posted by: Frau Kürbis | October 31, 2010 at 01:36 PM
I have voted for so many who have lost but who were not losers.
Great line Frau!
Posted by: Janet the tea-vangelist! | October 31, 2010 at 01:43 PM
Happy PUK's Day - Frau and all! Great reminder. Sorry not doing the PUKuation in his honor - I have a hard enough time typing.
Posted by: centralcal | October 31, 2010 at 01:45 PM
What is this? Accurate but fake?
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 01:45 PM
Sue: Megyn read that and then read the transcript from the voice mail. It is quite apparent they were not discussing "what if" scenarios, except of course, those they were going to initiate.
More will come on this, I am certain.
Posted by: centralcal | October 31, 2010 at 01:46 PM
c-cal,
There is no way to read the transcript other than the way we are reading it.
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 01:51 PM
I'm noticing the Bocking when I'm not looking for it. What a great guy he was.
Peter was so on my mind this morning too. I lost two blogging friends since the last election. My other friend (Alan Kelly of Barking Moonbat Early Warning System) was much like Peter with his biting wit and commentary that got right to the heart of a matter in just a few words. I can't help thinking how much both would have "enjoyed" the rise of the tea party movement and the fall of "the Won" and this crazy election cycle and how sad it is for all of us that neither is here to comment and/or enjoy the total disarray of the dems.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | October 31, 2010 at 01:53 PM
Troo dat, Sarah; PUK would've found the chaos of the donks a very target-rich environment for humor.
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 31, 2010 at 01:58 PM
Last 48 hours.
Senate seats are the most important battles for ObamaCare repeal in years ahead. West Virginia, Colorado, Washington, Illinois.
They all matter.
Posted by: Army of Davids | October 31, 2010 at 02:31 PM
"First to speak was poll watcher, Shirley Andries, who said she saw clerks at her polling place literally showing hundreds of voters how to vote by “assisting” them, mainly how to vote a straight Democratic ticket. She mentioned one incident where a clerk aggressively questioned one voter over their choices then ordered them back into the booth to change their ballot selections to a straight Democratic Party ticket."
Nothing else is going to matter if we can't stop the voter fraud and control of the election fraud.
" he admitted to this reporter that dodging bullets in Iraq was less frightening than being a poll watcher in Houston."
When you have Americans telling you that a war zone is less frightening than a Houston polling location, this country is serious trouble.
Does anyone plan to do anything to stop these crimes? It is obvious that the DOJ does not intend to stop it.
Posted by: Pagar | October 31, 2010 at 02:33 PM
--Does anyone plan to do anything to stop these crimes?--
These shenanigans will only stop when Republican state AGs make a point of going into the blue hells of the cities and sending a significant number of these undemocratic Democrat slime balls to considerable prison terms.
Presently there is very little risk to election fraud.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkywatzky | October 31, 2010 at 02:44 PM
It's the illegals who do none of the above that are the problem, Tyler.
Ignatz, when my great-grandfather Anton came over in 1900, he kept speaking Hungarian (and German, and Czech, and Slovak -- the Austro-Hungarian Empire was pretty durn polyglot) and planned to go back to Szalgotarjan as soon as he got rich on the amazing wages in the US.
Five years later great-grandmother and their 8 kids were coming through Ellis Island.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | October 31, 2010 at 02:58 PM
Sue-
And what he said about Palin, if I heard it all, I sort of agree. She really doesn't need to be doing reality shows if she really wants to run for president.
Getting to this a bit late, but my 2 cents. Sand down the sharp edges of Rick's "muddle" and "herd" thesis. She is doing the show to soften her image in a format that she can control, in a format that shows her at her best, and in a format that will get wide distribution in the demographic that Dems are phobic about losing-single white women. It may also help her in Alaska as a way to boost travel and tourism (I wouldn't be surprised to see Holland America and Alaska Air as sponsors). We'll see-it is only 8 episodes and more of a travelouge format than "reality" format.
Posted by: RichatUF | October 31, 2010 at 02:58 PM
VDH is on fire today:
Vote on Tuesday with a passion as if you have never voted before
Happy PUK Day to all! Bock like you've never bocked before! :)
Posted by: Porchlight | October 31, 2010 at 03:02 PM
"A man in a fleece jacket held a sign that said, “I can see the real America from my house.” "
I wonder how he likes looking at "the great unwashed Middle of America"? Probably pretty threatened.
Posted by: jorgxmckie | October 31, 2010 at 03:22 PM
Rich,
I can't see it from the muddle. I can't see how anyone can be in the muddle. And as one who can't see it from the muddle, I see it as something I definitely want to watch, but not sure I want to see my future president doing the "reality" thing.
Posted by: Sue | October 31, 2010 at 03:34 PM
"Szalgotarjan"
Charlie!You're Szalgotarjan?Funny, you don't look it.Great story.
I'm late in getting around to reading Fischer's Washngton's Crossing and am moved by the descriptions of the "diverse" Americans who came together and learned to understand each other's English and learned to work together for a common cause.Even though I know the outcome,the odds were much,much worse than Christine O'Donnell's.How did those men and women do it all?
Posted by: Frau Kürbis | October 31, 2010 at 03:46 PM
rather than a Presidential candidate, i like the idea of Sarah as a free-floating weapon, a loveable Ann Coulter who can say the things an "acceptable Presidential candidate" can't say, who can call crooks crooks and lameballs lameballs right to their faces and then laugh in their faces. Somebody who can get right in there with the Behars and Olbermanns of this world, and whip them silly. A great big gorgeous media bomb. She's already excelled herself at that job; it's clearly her forte. I think she should go the whole hog with it, have her own show like Larry King or Rush, start a media empire where she could grow a dozen governors and thirty new senators.
Posted by: macphisto | October 31, 2010 at 03:49 PM
Sue:
"How did Rove go from being the Magnificent Bastard to just bastard?"
When armchair Kamikazes on the right decided that his antipathy to a deeply flawed Christine O'Donnell cancels out a lifetime still dedicated to getting Republicans elected.
Posted by: JM Hanes | October 31, 2010 at 03:50 PM
I blame Nixon's "Sock it to me?" gig on Laugh-In. He and Obama have the same sense of humor.
Posted by: MarkO | October 31, 2010 at 03:52 PM
Oh, I see,I must be one of those armchair Kamikazes because I thought it was stupid for someone who claims to be all about getting Republicans elected to go out of his way to publicly trash the duly elected Republican nominee in a crucial Senate race.
Gotcha.
Today is Halloween. Guy Fawkes (which involves the erecting and burning of straw men) is next Friday.
Posted by: Porchlight | October 31, 2010 at 04:05 PM
deeply flawed Christine O'Donnell
Deeply flawed how? As in winning debates against the real deeply flawed bearded Marxist candidate, who proved to be the real dunce? Armchair Kamikazes? Nice; maybe you should lecture me on how it was conservatives like me that cost McCain when in reality I sucked it up and voted for him and how the likes of Rove are superior for trashing conservative candidates because they weren't the electable weather vanes who vote however the wind blows. Am I supposed to be crying because a squish like Castle wasn't good enough to win a primary? Again, the Mike Castles are what got us Obama.
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 31, 2010 at 04:22 PM
RichatUF:
"We'll see-it is only 8 episodes and more of a travelouge format than "reality" format."
The "reality show" trope strikes me as a deliberately dismissive formulation -- which will probably net Palin a extra bevy of viewers, per usual. Thank goodness the left never seems to learn. As with her resignation, there's really no way to tell whether it will hurt or help her, till we see what she does with it.
After the elections, which clearly center on domestic concerns, I'll be waiting to hear her address international issues. Beyond making her support for Israel clear, she's had almost nothing to say on foreign policy that I'm aware of.
Posted by: JM Hanes | October 31, 2010 at 04:23 PM
Frau: reading Fischer's Washngton's Crossing
An excellent book! I recommend it.
Posted by: sbw | October 31, 2010 at 04:28 PM
Rove is the only ">http://www.peoplesworld.org/uncovering-the-real-arnold-schwarzenegger/"> Kamikaze I know of that flies into his own ship and lives!
Back to my armchair.
Posted by: Threadkiller | October 31, 2010 at 04:35 PM