Friday, October 31, 2008

No Free Lunches?

So, did everyone have a good time trick or treating? It might be a lot different next year.
The Hubris of Barack Obama

I have never critiqued Barack Obama when news has leaked he has begun hiring for his administration and lining up his cabinet. That is a prudent move, not an arrogant one. I am certain John McCain’s transition team is ready to hit the ground running should he pull off an upset Tuesday. But Obama certainly has exhibited a mind numbing arrogance in other areas. A couple of his moves today are probably going to turn many voters off.

First, he kicked off reporters from his plane who were going to cover the last few days of his campaign. The official reason was Obama needed to make room for a documentary crew who wanted to film the last leg of his campaign. However, the reporters booted off were all from newspapers that endorsed John McCain. You cannot discount that as the deciding factor. Obama has already banned a couple television stations from interviews because they asked tough questions. There is a pattern of Obama shunning “disloyal” media. Imagine what it is going to be like in an Obama Administration.

Second, Obama is not hiding the fact he is going to raise taxes. His new meme is those who do not want to ‘spread the wealth around” are selfish. His words betray his belief government has the authority to decide who has too much versus who has to little and how the disparity ought to be remedied. Obama may not be a full blown Marxist, but he is friendly to the precepts of the ideology. He is going to force the country into baby steps towards an economy like many of the European Union states.

It pays to note two pints about European Union states. One, their tax rates push as high as 70% or more. Two, their populations have an inherently different political philosophy than ours. We believe all rights begin with the people. We reluctantly give up only those rights necessary to govern effectively. In the EU, people think all rights are graciously given by the government. The idea is an ill fit here, but I am afraid the electorate is going to realize that too late to stop Obama from becoming president.

No wonder he is so cocky. Look what he is getting away with.I am not all that optimistic they will, mind you.
The Ratings for Obama's Informercial

According to Nielsen, it was watched by 22 million. That is only slightly higher than kooky ross perot's infomercial earned in 1992.

Has Obama been overexposed? with ratings half that of the final, low rated debate, it appears voters are not all that interested in his closing statement for the election. Unfortunately, it does not reveal whether they have made up their minds already about Obama, pro or con.

My guess? The more voters have learned about Obama in recent weeks, the less they like him. It may not be enough to cost him the White House, but it may cost him enough undecided voters in swing states to give John McCain a fighting chance.
Christina Ricci


Because Halloween needs hot goth chicks.

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Al Qeada Endorses Obama

Wow, just like Colin Powell, Scott McClellan, Peggy Noonan, George Will, Christopher Buckley, and Francis Fukiyama.
The White Catholic Vote

Amidst all the gloom and doom regarding john McCain’s chances on Tuesday lies one interesting glimmer of hope. White Catholic voters have chosen the winning candidate in every election since 1972. They have historically been the most reliable voting bloc indicator of who will win the White House.

The good news is McCain has lead Barack Obama among white Catholics with as much as a 19 point gap. The bad news is that Obama has been closing that gap from 51%-46% five days ago to a within the margin of error lead of 48%-47% yesterday. You might consider that discouraging since Obama has made up so much ground insuch ashort period of time, but look at the vote totals the white catholic vote has wracked up over the last 36 years:

2004: George W. Bush 56 percent, John Kerry 43 percent
2000: George W. Bush 52 percent, Al Gore 45 percent
1996: Bill Clinton 48 percent, Bob Dole 41 percent
1992: Bill Clinton 42 percent, George H.W. Bush 37 percent
1988: George H.W. Bush 56 percent, Michael Dukakis 43 percent
1984: Ronald Reagan 57 percent, Walter Mondale 42 percent
1980: Ronald Reagan 52 percent, Jimmy Carter 39 percent
1976: Jimmy Carter 52 percent, Gerald Ford 46 percent
1972: Richard Nixon 57 percent, George McGovern 42 percent

The more liberal a democrat has been, the lower his vote total was. Al Gore topped out at a whopping 45%, but John Kerry, Michael Dukakis, Walter Mondale, and George McGovern could not top 43%. Note that Jimmy Carter could only muster 39% after four years in office revealed his policies were more leftist than advertised.

It has been true up until this point Obama has successfully convinced voters he is a moderate, in recent days his economic philosophy has been revealed to be more liberal than previously thought. Considering the preference for white Catholics for republicans and centrist Democrats,, one has to assume the white Catholic vote will eventually break for McCain. Keep in mind as well devout Catholics strongly oppose Obama’s abortion stance, so the more devout a Catholic voter is, the less likely he will support Obama.

Will white Catholics keep up their historical of always supporting the White House winner? We will know soon enough.
John McCain is Davros?

Out of all the candidate lookalike comparisons this presidential election, this one stretches credibility the most. John McCain as Saul Tigh I can see, but as Davros? It sounds more like unreasoned leftist derangement. Sure, they believe McCain and the Republicans in general are xenophobic warmongers like the Daleks. Embracing reality, though, the Daleks do not conserve anything. It is the same weak argument that the Nazis, on whom the Daleks are based, were rightwing when the ideology transcended the traditional political scale to mass insanity.

But two can play that game. The Cybermen are similar to socialists. They are all created perfectly equal, each has his own job to do and methodically does so without any sense of individuality, including no wants or needs. For them, the wealth has not only been redistributed, it has been eliminated. They have even managed Karl Marx’s utopian ideal of having no government at all.

I imagine Barack Obama would not approve of that “no government at all” point since he gets to be in charge of it otherwise, but I suppose that is why the Cyberen hypocritically have a Cyber Leader in spite of espousing universal equality and sameness. They even have even gotten some of the appropriate hand gestures down pat:
There you go. Obama is Cyber Leader.Have we discovered the truth too late?
Earth Shattering Development for McCain

According to the Weekly World News, the alien has rescinded his previous endorsement of Barack Obama and endorsed John McCain instead.

Good news for McCain--the alien has correctly predicted the presidential election winner for the last twenty-eight years.
Jenna Fischer

Continuing with our theme of hot chicks on television shows I do not watch, may I present the adorable girl next door Jenna Fischer from The Office.

I would feel dirty about saying much else. She looks kind of like that hot girl you met at Bible Camp who made you wary of lightning bolts because of the dirty thoughts you were having about her as a strict librarian and you being the errant pupil who lost the only copy of C. S. Lewis'' The Screwtape Letters.

Or is that just me?

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Official: David Tennant Leaving Doctor Who

After months of speculation, it can finally be officially confirmed; David Tennant is leaving Doctor Who. When the fifth season starts in 2010, there will be an Eleventh Doctor, making the show a nearly full reboot with Steven Moffat as the new head writer and an all new cast. It does not look like there will be any big connections to the first four seasons.

Expect a barrage of speculation as to who will play the Eleventh Doctor. Personally, I think james Nesbitt will wind up with the role. He has worked with Moffat before, was a fan favorite in early polls to name the next Doctor, and was awfully coy on the possibility when interviewed during the hype running up to “Journey’s End’ whether he would take the role. The second most popular rumor is that David Morrisey’s Doctor from “The Other Doctor” (pictured above) will resume the role as the real doctor after appearing in the Christmas special.

But all that will pan out in time. For now, we know Tennant will film four or five specials for next year and depart the role. I will confess I was never much attached to Tennant’s Doctor. I much preferred Christopher Eccleston’s Ninth Doctor. Both were war broken, melancholy types, but Eccleston played it believable. Tenant sort bounced back and forth. It was a shame because he is a fine actor. I was somewhat on the fence about him up until “Human Nature/The Family of Blood” two part episode in the third season. It was at that point, watching him play John smith, the Doctor’s alter ego, that I realized he really was not playing the Doctor with his full range of emotions. I felt short changed and soured on him quickly.

I cannot say I did not enjoy his enthusiasm for the role. That he was overjoyed to play his childhood hero was obvious. It is hard to dislike someone who is so obviously enjoying what he is doing. But I am ready to see someone else stretch the role. Tenant must haverralized it was time for achange, too. We will still have him for 2009, too. Hopefully he will get a glorious send off.
Barack Obama's Infomercial

There is not much to comment on. I was not the target audience. I felt like it was thesame kind of short film shown at the convention to sell the candidate. I figured it would be since it was filmed a week ago. there could be be much timely or substantive in it considering how fast events change in a week during a campaign.

In short, it was trite. hardly any commentary, pro or con, has appeared on the internet. Does that mean most people ignored it? Obama has been running the risk of overexposure. he might have just pushed his luck a little too far.

We will know quickly enough how effective the show was. From the sound of crickets chirping, I have a hunch it did not garner a whole lot of excitement among those who were previously sitting on the fence.
24's Seventh Season Trailer

Jack Bauer, how I have missed thee.
Richard Dawkins Latest Dud: End Fantasies for Kids

I got pretty sick of Richard Dawkins a few months ago when he was all over the place promoting his book, The God Delusion. He and Christopher Hitchens, who was pushing his book, God is Not Great, at the same time, carried on a deranged vendetta across television sets and the written press for months. At least Hitchens had a blustery entertainment value to him. Dawkins was just an arrogant idiot.

Now he is at it again. Dawkins is warning against letting your children read fantasy books. He considers it a form of child abuse because it retards the development of rational thinking.. He explains:
"I think it is anti-scientific – whether that has a pernicious effect, I don't know"...

"I think looking back to my own childhood, the fact that so many of the stories I read allowed the possibility of frogs turning into princes, whether that has a sort of insidious [e]ffect on rationality, I'm not sure. Perhaps it's something for research."
He argument is weak enough, particularly considering he admits he has not researched the issue, but later in the article he admits his rationale is nothing more than a pet theory that reading fairy tales leads to the acceptance of religion:
He went on: "I plan to look at mythical accounts of various things and also the scientific account of the same thing. And the mythical account that I look at will be several different myths, of which the Judeo-Christian one will just be one of many.

"And the scientific one will be substantiated, but appeal to children to think for themselves; to look at the evidence. Always look at the evidence."
For Dawkins, reading a story in which a princess kisses a frog and turns him into a prince is the first step towards introducing children to theology. I have always considered this the atheist "outside looking in" view of religion. In other words, Dawkins is one who has never taken religion as a serious field of study never bothers to differentiate it from, say, Harry Potter, as fantastical fiction. Whereas one who has practiced a religion—any religion—can immediately tell the difference.

I do not just blast atheists for this, either. I am certain most Christians who learn anything about Scientology’s core beliefs thinks it sounds like a bad science fiction novel. But there are still people who swear by it. Is it because they indulged in too many fairy tales as kids? I tend to doubt it, even though it is Hollywood types, those who play act for a living, who are the most famous adherents. Of course, they are also the only ones who can afford to fork over the cash for the required enlightenment. The Church of Scientology does know how to market to a target audience.

It pays to note how many Christians despise Harry Potter. The more fundamentalist among us believe it promotes magic and witchcraft rather than makes a child more interested in Christianity.

Dawkins is also being a hypocrite. During the summer, he had a cameo in the season finale of the BBC science fiction show for children, Doctor Who. For the unfamiliar, the show features a time traveling alien who battles monsters and other such phantasmagoria. In other words, fantasy aimed at a young audience.

Ah, but wait. The show is currently under the management of Russell T. Davies, an outspoken atheist who is openly contemptuous of Christianity. Under his direction, the show has featured a number of themes which have subtly and often not so subtly critiqued the religion. One assumes Dawkins is not so dead set against fantasy that openly mocks the same beliefs he despises.

The big problem here is that Dawkins is talking about things that are out of his realm of expertise. Child psychologists note that a childhood full of a rich fantasy life and play is a necessary part of life. People who are denied childhood at the proper time will take one later in life. Witness Michael Jackson as a prominent example. It is unhealthy andcold,frankly, to not let children be children.
Catherine Bell

Can you believe Catherine Bell is forty? I always enjoyed how they managed to show off her..uh...assets throughout the three thousand episodes of JAG in spite of the fact it was a military legal drama. She has since moved on to Army Wives, a show I confess to never having watched, but have heard rave reviews about her acting. army wives is, by all accounts, a meatier drama than Jag. I am curious why it does not get more attention.

Well, maybe because it does not feature enough scenes with Bell in her underwear, like this clip from JAG:

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Tower of Babel


Variety reports a new film is in the works entitled Skyscraper. it is said to be reminiscent of the ‘70’s disaster flick, The Towering Inferno. This time around, a developer is building a monstrosity in the middle of Chicago (No Obama jokes, please) when it begins to falter. Rescue crews work feverishly to rescue an all star cast that will not quite measure up to Paul Newman, Steve McQueen, Charlton Heston, Robert Wagner, OJ Simpson, and Susan Flannery in her underwear.

I will bet my bottom dollar Samuel L. Jackson will star in it. A less sure, but still decent bet is Billy Bob Thornton. Is there a particularly ubiquitous actress out there who might parade around in her underwear for the camera? Charlize Theron might qualify. Kate Hudson, perhaps? Naomi watts may have had enough of this sort of thing after the dud of a King Kong remake we all suffered three years ago.

One thing is for certain, I want a nickel for every person who draws parallels between the movie and 9/11. Does the fact that Skyscraper is even being made prove the sting of the world Trade Center has completely faded or that public heartstrings can still be plucked by it? Rudy Giuliani already suspects the answer is the former. So do i.

But there has always been a fascination with building tall structures. I would be inclined to say it is Freudian, but looking back to the story of the Tower of Babel, I would guess instead building skyscrapers is man’s way of attempting to conquer heaven. Remember how that turned out?

There is a real aversion to building skyscrapers. It is more than just people being afraid of heights. You lock people up in a concrete sardine can surrounded by nothing but other glass and cement sardine cans and they will go completely nuts after awhile. I understand I am prejudiced, since I am writing this from the perspective of a Jeffersonian from a small town in the South, but from the admittedly small time I have spent in big cities, the “urban jungle” description is apt. Too much artificial surroundings make people crazy. It is no coincidence the people who built the Tower of Babel scattered into a cacophony while the biggest cities are nihilistic dystopias.

We cannot forget, however, why Al Qeada targeted the Twin Towers to begin with. They were a symbol of modernity. Fundamentalist Islam is not the most forward thinking of religions. If they hate modern, towering metropolises, then tall city skylines cannot be all that bad. The cultural implications are certainly fascinating, though, no? I am just glad there are other people willing to cram themselves into those buildings instead of me.

Will moviegoers show up for Skyscraper? Disaster movies have been hit and miss for quite a while now. It has been over a decade runaway asteroids, perfect storms, and twisters were big box office The happening, The Poseidon Adventure remake, and The Day After Tomorrow were all flops. But Skyscraper may take more after Die Hard than natural disaster flicks of recent years. The exciting claustrophobia of being trapped in a tower is just frightening enough to lure audience in.
The Wrath of Cindy McCain?


I keed, I keed.
"Tokyo" Peggy Noonan: Obama's Press Secretary?

Oooo, oooo! I get to blast “Tokyo” Peggy Noonan yet again! Oh, happy day!

You may recall I have been critical of Noonan since her slip up with a hot mic on MSNBC in which she revealed her contempt for the choice of Sarah Palin as John McCain’s running mate. This came after she had written a glowing column about Palin but before she fawned over palin ‘killing’ Joe Biden in the Veep debate. I not only dislike Noonan’s idea that McCain should have chosen a RINO as his running mate, but her two faced cynicism in communicating to the public about it.

Noonan has since written a definitive column against Palin. She has also wavered on revealing who she is going to vote for, leaving anyone with two brain cells to rub together to know for certain she supports Barack Obama. Today comes word why that might be:
…one of my sources, who is very well connected, tells me that Noonan was at first rumored to be looking to write a regular column for the New York Times. Why she’d want to work for a paper that is spiraling further down the economic sinkhole, with stocks that are near junk status, is beyond me. But the rumor has escalated beyond the Times and gone straight to the White House: my same source says now the word is that Noonan may be being courted for the job of press secretary for an Obama administration.

Bread meeting butter?
Noonan pulling an Arianna Huffington sounds plausible. There were rumors circulating around this time in 2004 Noonan was being considered for Bush’s press secretary. When that did not pan out, Noonan soured on Dubya. Granted, a lot of former supporters bailed on him starting around about that time, but in light of the new revelations about Noonan’s character and careerism, she may very well have been pouting.

There are two arguments regarding Noonan’s motivations. One, she is self-interested more than partisan. The winds are blowing in the democrats’ direction. She does not want to be shut out. She may even fear the conspiratorial rumors the return of the Fairness Doctrine mayrun conservative pundits out of business. If so, she is being wishy washy, but at least I can understand why.

But when I look at her past work, I notice a couple things. She is a fantastic writer, no doubt. But she uses very few statistics or solid facts to prove her points. She is amazingly articulate, enough so you can get lost in her words, but has little substance. Just like Obama, actually. The two are a perfect fit when you think about it.

Two, Noonan was a speechwriter for Ronald Reagan. She still idolizes him. There is a decent suspicion she dislikes Palin because she has been compared to him. Even I am not sure how fair the comparison is, but I do understand the allure of Reagan is alive and well nearly thirty years after he was elected.

Does Noonan see some of Reagan in Obama? Perhaps in his charisma. But Obama is a far left, pseudo-Marxist into redistributing wealth, allowing near infanticide, and appointing radical judges across our justice system to pursuer an extremely liberal agenda. I cannot comprehend why conservatives who may be enamored with Obama personally cannot look passed that and realize what a disaster his administration is going to be. Unless, in Noonan’s case, she does see that and thinks it is perfectly fine.
Sarah Palin's Power Play

Sen. Ted Stevens, Alaska’s dominant political figure for more than four decades, was found guilty on Monday by a jury of violating federal ethics laws for failing to report tens of thousands of dollars in gifts and services he received. Stevens has no intention of resigning or dropping out of his current reelection bid. With only seven days to go, I think that is the lesser of two evils choice. He would rather be defeated by an electorate that thinks he is crooked than resign and confirm it.

But there is buzz surrounding the whole affair which centers around none other than the left’s favorite object of contempt, Sarah Palin. It started yesterday when Palin told the press Stevens was the kind of corrupt politician she had been working to get rid of in state government. She subsequently refused to say she would not vote for him, leaving some to think she would just as soon have him win his reelection bid.

A logical mind would say she is motivated by party loyalty. It would be unbecoming for the republican Veep candidate to openly abandon a party member who is not very likely to go to jail even though he has been convicted. He has the biggest political stick in the state, to boot. However, the loony left is not none for its logical minds, particularly when in the throes of conservative derangement syndrome. There is a conspiracy afoot!

It goes like this: Stevens is reelected to his seat, but is then expelled because of his conviction. The governor of Alaska—sorry, fellow conservatives, but it will still be Palin, will have to appoint a replacement. Who better to replace Stevens than a young, solid conservative with national ambitions like herself?

The odds of all that falling into line are incredibly wild, but if it all goes down that way, remember you read it here first.
This World Series is a Disaster

There. I said it.

I am a baseball nut, but I am enjoying the NFL season, with all its strange injuries taking out star players that emotional breakdowns and the criminal justice system did not get to first. I do not even particularly care for football, at least not beyond the college level, but I have to get my sports fix and baseball just is not delivering.

What happened? I will admit I do not care much for either the Philadelphia Phillies or the Tampa Bay Rays. I opted to pull for the Phillies because I still have fond memories of the scruffy, tobacco spitting America’s team that took on the Toronto Blue Jays in 1993. True to form as the most losing team in professional sports (10,000+ losses in franchise history) they bombed out in spectacular fashion with a Joe carter, game winning home run off Mitch Williams. Williams was never the same and wound up off the team halfway through the next season.

You would think they could muster some excitement. The Phillies are up three games to one. That they will defeat the hapless rays is all but inevitable. They have even had the first home run hit by a pitcher in 35 years in game three. Yet, the World Series is nothing but a disaster. The games are starting too late in the night, rain has destroyed the vibe, and Rays fans could not care less their team has a chance to win it all.

The aforementioned game three, which started at ten o’clock because of a rain delay, set the record for lowest watched World Series game. One would have been tempted to breathe a sigh of relief if Bud Selig had decided to call last night’s game five an official game and hand the championship to the Phillies just so we could put the series out of its misery and hope for better things next year.

No such luck. Rain postponed the game in the sixth inning tied at two. No one knows when it will resume or even what the real score should fairly be considering the blatantly bad umpiring and unsuitable for playing field because of the constant downpour. I hope when circumstances improve enough to play, the series takes a turn for the better, but I have my doubts. It is ashame for the season to end onsuch a downer.,
Anna-Lynn McCord

I never watched the original Beverly Hills 90210 back in the day. Unlike Friends or Party of Five a few years later, you did not have to watch the show in order to hold up your end of a semi-coherent conversation the day after a new episode aired. I think it was the implausibility of the premise. Beverly Hills is full of rich, old people, not hip teenagers--even if said teenagers were played by thirty year old actors with receding hairlines.

It was worse than Archie and the rest of the gang at Riverdale High attending their senior prom fifty-two years in a row.

I have never seen the new, updated version, either. But if anything other than the prospect of shoving bamboo shoots under my fingernails as the alternative could get me to watch, it would be Anna-Lynn McCord. It goes double if she promises to wear that outfit when I tune in.

The photo can be greatly enlarged should you deem it necessary.

Monday, October 27, 2008

Jose Canseco & Danny Bonaduce to Box

Offering up further proof people will pay to watch just about anything, former Partisge family star Danny Bonaduce has agreed to box former American League MVP Jose Canseco for the Celebrity Boxing Federation.

At first glance, the matchup sounds like David verses Goliath. Bonaduce is 5’6” 160lbs while Canseco is 6’4” 240 lbs. do not forget Canseco has spent his entire career shooting steroids through his eyeballs to the point he even refers to himself as the Godfather of Steroids. One would guess the CBF has pretty low standards who they allow on their cards. Bonaduce is probably going to be pounded into toothpaste, no?

Not so fast. Canseco had his first fight three weeks ago. He was knocked out in the first round. A few weeks later, he was chased out of the ring like a little girl during a fight with former Power ranger Jason David Frank. Too bad it was not the Pink Power Ranger. That would have been totally cool.

Bonaduce has been with the CBF for a while racking up an impressive record. Check out the video below. Canseco is probably going to get his roided up keister handed to him—assuming he does not run and hide before the second round bell:
Mitt Romney v. Sarah Palin

Continuing our theme of the rumbling battle for the republican nomination for president in 2012, fingers are now being pointed at former Mitt Romney aides as the source of the "Sarah Palin is a diva" meme:
Former Mitt Romney presidential campaign staffers, some of whom are currently working for Sen. John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin's bid for the White House, have been involved in spreading ant-Palin spin to reporters, seeking to diminish her standing after the election. . . .
Some former Romney aides were behind the recent leaks to media, including CNN, that Governor Sarah Palin was a "diva" and was going off message intentionally. The former and current Romney supporters further are pushing Romney supporters for key Republican jobs, including head of the Republican National Committee.
i am now growing skeptical this is actually happening. Last night, it seemed as though loyalists to Jeb Bush were spreading these rumors in order to pave the way for his potential White House bid. Now it sounds like the press is switching names to someone more in the public's conscious.

If it is true, though, then I dislike Romney even more than I did before. I thought he was a dull, wishy washy RINO. he could not excite the party base whether palin disappears into the Alaska wilderness or not. Plus, the GOP certainly does not want a Mormon against a sitting African-American president even if Barack Obama turns out to be Jimmy Carter Ii, as I believe he will. the Church of Latter Day Saints did not change its racist theology until 1979, well into Romney's adulthood. We certainly do not want to interject that into a presidential race.

I am curious whether this vendetta against Palin will continue or if it is merely a way of attacking the McCain campaign now. it is way too early to be thinking about the 2012 race. At this point in 2004, conventional wisdom was Hillary Clinton was angry at the prospect of John Kerry winning. otherwise, she was a shoo in for 2008 running against Bill frist, George Allan, or Condi Rice. oh, and would that new guy, Barack Obama, not make a good Veep? if only he were more experienced...
Is Obama California Dreaming?

Conservatives have been skeptical of polling, both national and state, because of the large lead Barack Obama currently enjoys. Chalk me up as one who thought most of them were just in the denial phase of the grieving process and would eventually snap out of it. I knew people who voted for Bob Dole in 1996 who swore he could win in a recount if we could force one because there was absolutely no way the country would vote for Bill Clinton after the last four years. So I know of what I speak when talking about partisan delusion.

I may have to backtrack a bit. I never would have believed it until I saw it, but contrary to polls which have Obama leading John McCain by as much as 18%, California may be competitive.. In early voting, 99,000 Republicans have cast ballots compared to 96,000 Democrats. Mail-in ballots have it with 9,000 democrats and 5,000 republicans. In all, 210,000 votes have already been cast. Assuming early voters are likely the most partisan, I will take the liberty of assuming all Republicans voted for McCain and all Democrats voted for Obama. That gives Obama a mere 1,000 vote advantage in astate that has been dramatically uncompetitive for republican presidential candidates for twenty years.

I am certainly not claiming McCain will win California. Once all of that blue strip from los Angeles up to San Francisco has its say, Obama will take California’s 55 electoral votes. He will win California in spite of the fact Hillary Clinton won during the primaries and a sizable number of her supporters, the PUMAs, have adamantly refused to vote for him.

But all that said, this is the third in a series of bad news for him about “Get Out the Vote Efforts.” First, there was ACORN’s admission they feel 80% short of their original claim in registering new voters in Ohio. Second, there came news the number of ballots cast in early voting in Colorado was evenly split between Republicans and democrats in spite of a double digit lead for Obama. Now comes word about California.

Two caveats. One, Republicans could be voting for Obama in significant numbers. I have doubts, but it could be happening. Two, independents Johnny come latelies, and the dreaded uninformed vorers who vote anyway heading to the polls on Election Day may break heavily for Obama. The best chance of that happening is in California.

But there are signs it is not. Arnold Swartzenegger is campaigning for McCain. Sarah Palin drew a large crowd in Los Angeles of all places a couple weeks ago where she received the endorsement of the president of the NOW Chapter of Los Angeles. That is no mean feat considering Palin’s staunch pro-life stance. More interestingly, Obama continues to air advertisements in the pricey large markets throughout California. Why would he do that for a state that should be in the bag?

Other developments have been puzzling in the last week or so. Ed Rendell has urged Obama to return to Pennsylvania soon in spite of polls showing a double digit lead there. McCain campaigned in Iowa this weekend even though polls show he is losing there by double digits. Candidates tend to send their spouses to states they are most likely going to lose, but do not want to completely abandon. In that regard, Jill Biden is campaigning in Florida in spite of an Obama lead.

Are you concerned about obama drawing crowds of 100,000+ in Missouri and Colorado? do not be. John kerry drew 80,000+ in both states and did not win either. democrats have a habit of trekking in followers who travel with them from place to place just like the Grateful Dead. never take the crowd numbers too seriously. A good portion are the same people over and over again.

Campaigns have internal polling which is much more pointed and accurate than the ones commissioned by the media or academia. The public is not privy to those polls, but we can judge by candidate behavior, their travel, and the early balloting how things are really going. It does not look like Obama is in as good a shape as we are lead to believe.
Obama's on Wealth Redistribution in 2001

Here is the audio of a radio interview Barack Obama gave a Chicago radio station in 2001. In it, he laments the Constitution has not been interpreted widely enough to allow for the redistribution of wealth. he further discusses the redistribution of wealth as reparations to African-Americans for Jime Crowe laws, Separate But Equal, etc.

Note he never discusses the morality of the issue. His entire answer is an argument as to whether redistribution should go through the courts or the legislature. To Obama, it is not a matter of whether this should be done, but how it is going to be done.

This interview could be a bombshell if enough people get a chance to hear it.

Sunday, October 26, 2008

Jeb Bush v. Sarah Palin; A Sneak Peek

It has been a while since I said it, but if Barack Obama wins the election, the Republican Party will crawl down to Florida on its hands and knees to beg Jeb Bush to run in 2012. The notion there will be a civil war in the party over John McCain’s absolute failure as a presidential candidate is hogwash. The only thing that happened after Bob dole’s disastrous 1996 run, which also took quite a few members of the GOP freshmen class of 1994 with him, was the party turned to a conservative who appealed to both the business and social conservative wings of the party. Then it was Bush 43. Starting November 5th, it will be Jeb Bush.

James Carville was the first pundit I recall saying it. He actually predicted Jeb Bush would be this year’s nominee as late as October 2007. I have a hunch he was giving the GOP too much credit. Surely we would not be stupid enough to nominate John McCain, would we? He has spent most of the last eight years bashing his own party. He wanted to choose the 2000 Democratic Veep candidate to be his running mate! Heck, he even flirtedwith becoming a democrat himself. No way, right?

Carville was onto something even if he was a little too early with his prediction. The GOP will correct its mistake and nominate a solid conservative next time. Obama and his cronies in what will likely be the most left leaning Congress in American history will help that along.

But here is where it gets interesting. As Robert McCain points out, there are early rumblings from probable Jeb Bush backers’ fear over Sarah Palin. At this point, it is McCain aide and former Jeb Bush aide Nicolle Wallace who has an outspoken axe to grind with Palin. Look for a lot more political operatives to follow suit. For all I know, it could be what is already motivating pundits like Peggy Noonan and Mike Murphy who area lot more outspoken on their dislike for Palin than their concerns about McCain.

It pays to note this is incredibly in the game and I do not believe Jeb bush has been anything but dismissive about a run for the White House. It was not until the Iowa primary that Hillary Clinton’s air of inevitability showed any sings of weakness. How would have thought a young, inexperienced upstart like Barack Obama could defeat her? It is ridiculously premature to assume a nomination battle between Sarah Palin and Jeb Bush four years from now.

She may very well slink back to Alaska and fall into obscurity. The professional consultant class of the Republican Party may shoot her out of a cannon over the Klondike if she does not. Sadly enough, they may have a point to make way for Jeb Bush. Sadly enough, they may have a point. Every winning republican ticket since 1980 has had a Bush family member on it. I doubt McCain/Palin will break the tradition.
Is Sarah Palin a Diva?

I am going to address the latest jabs at Sarah Palin without making any further mention of the shrived old walking corpse that is Peggy Noonan. Well, I will not make any more after the Amen-Hotep crack in the preceding sentence. It will be a nice change of pace for the Eye.

The one thing that has shocked me the most about this election is the brutal treatment Palin has received from the left. I will confess I am young and have therefore only really paid attention to elections since the 1992 contest. I was drawn to that one because it was kooky. Bush 41 was Nero fiddling while Rome burned, Bill Clinton was an aging hippie, while Ross Perot and Pat Buchanan were two entertaining nut jobs who frightened you they had gotten as far as they did in the presidential process. Dan Quayle was pretty hated by the left back then, but aside from the Murphy Brown brouhaha and the lingering idea he could not spell, he got off pretty easy as far as I can recall.

I would say it is because the Bush/Quayle ticket was an obvious loser, but then I would have to say that about the McCain/Palin ticket, too, yet Palin is still a target. So I feel comfortable saying I have never seen the Veep candidate period, much less on a sure fire losing ticket, attacked as savagely as Palin. It is almost deranged. McCain is well on his way to a drubbing worse than bob dole’s in 1996, yet Palin is being destroyed as though the left believes she might be able to pull out a win on November 4th.

The media has addressed every single aspect of her life. When that was not satisfying enough, they created scandals. Does anyone in their right mind believe Trig is not her child? There are photos of her eight months pregnant, for heaven’s sake! This week we have heard plenty about the $ 150,000 wardrobe the RNC purchased for her, much of which she refused to wear because it just was not her. Meanwhile, Barack Obama is spending $ 293,000 an hour on his campaign—a good bit of which came from illegal online donations and foreign donors. I could bring up a load of other examples, but all you need to remember is that Palin has been more examined by the press in eight weeks than Obama has been since 2004.

Everyone sees the writing on the wall, from McCain to the MSM. They are going to lose, but palin wants to keep her political career on the national stage rolling. I am confident she wants to be president. She may even fancy herself the American Margaret Thatcher for 2012. She is not quite Ronald Reagan in 1976, but I doubt she will fade off the scene. She will give it a shot in 2012. She certainly is not going to purposefully do anything to damage her shine. With that in mind, she knows her best shot is to run as a sitting Veep in 2012. Therefore she is not going to screw McCain for some future power grab.

The prospect of her having a future in the GOP appears to scare both the MSM and professional GOP operatives. Occasionally they form a strange alliance to pursue common goals like getting rid of Palin. For example, today’s word from an unnamed McCain advisor:
“[Sarah Palin] is a diva. She takes no advice from anyone. She does not have any relationships of trust with any of us, her family or anyone else." Also she is playing for her own future and sees herself as the next leader of the party. Remember: divas trust only unto themselves as they see themselves as the beginning and end of all wisdom."
I love the implications of this. First, Palin takes no advice from career professionals who have thus far run the worst Republican presidential campaign in twelve years? Good for her. Wise woman. Second, she is thinking about her own future? I already addressed that. Her future lies best in being a team player which I am certain she is. She is just not part of the establishment team. I do not blame her for that, either. It is the new York/Washington GOP operative crowd that has run the McCain camp into the ground. Finally, she does not trust anyone—even her family? No one with two brain cells to rub together believes that.

Here is what I find most amusing—the source of this article is anonymously stabbing Palin and McCain in the back, yet is complaining about not being trusted? All this guy has done is prove Palin is wise not not to trust her handlers. They are going to whine to the press at the drop of a hat. Have you noticed as well anonymous sources are fine for the MSM when the story is about tension with Palin but not when a anonymous source suggest Bill Ayers used to babysit the Obama children? \the MSM is so biased and unprofessional these days, it is no wonder it

here is the bottom line: the candidate is the boss. The consultants serve at their pleasure. It is not the other way around, no matter how big a god complex campaign staff develop over their king making. It is not that she is a diva, guys. It is that she is the boss.
Travis Barker & Shanna Moakler's Animal Instincts

Travis Barker, singer (I use the term loosely) for Blink 182, and Shanna Moakler, his model/actress/reality shoe div ex wife, are both adamant PETA supporters. Recently, barker tried to copy our Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer by seeing if surviving a small plane crash in South Carolina would boost his career. So far, Bauer was reelected in 2006, but all Barker got was severe burns and a new reason to reflect on beliefs he once held dear.

Barker has given up on his strict vegetarian diet of twenty-five years in order to aid in his healing process. By all accounts, Barker is uncomfortable with his new set of circumstances, but has realized that some personal principles have to take precedence over others. The cynic in me says it is proof the world is much more shades of grey than black and white, but I will leave that for you to explore to your comfort level.

So has Moakler ever had to face such a tough choice between her staunch animal rights activism and her personal survival? It is hard to say, but she was photographed for a recent magazine spread bikini clad and draped in an animal fur. Shall we give her the benefit of the doubt she really, really needed the money?

Saturday, October 25, 2008

Joe Biden Gets Tough Questions

Joe Biden runs into a real reporter who asks tough questions about ACORN's voter fraud, Barack Obama's connection to the organization, and the similarities between obama's 'spread the wealth around' and Marxism. Biden becomes visibly angry. today, he canceled an interview between the television station and his wife, Jill, because of the tone.

It is not as much fun when a media outlet is not in the tank for you ticket, is it,Joe? If only there were more journalists out there like Ms. west here, the presidential race might be an honest contest.

by the way, Biden is lying when he says they never gave ACORN a penny in their get out the vote effort. They actually gave ACORN $800,000 on top of Obama's past affiliation with the organization as a community organizer and attorney. Oops.
On Barack Obama's Reading List

Oops.
The Obama Effect

Now that the election is almost certainly a done deal for Barack Obama, I want to cast aside partisanship for at least one post and put on my political scientist hat. There has been a hefty amount of discussion regarding the Bradley effect, the reverse Bradley effect, and whether either even exists. How could the Bradley Effect or its theoretical reverse be a factor in this election? I researched the topic over the last couple days without coming up with anything definitive or, at the very least, something knowable until after November 4th.

Here is what I do think. It is next is illogical to compare polling between other political offices and the presidency. The president of the United States has a certain majesty to it in many people’s minds. There are candidates of all colors, creeds, religions, and both genders voters would have no problem electing as mayor, Congressman, senator, or governor but will completely do a 180 turn and question that candidate’s qualifications for POTUS. At the same time we elevate the presidency, we also like to keep the idealistic notion that anyone young child can go up to be president. If a candidate is an inspiration because of color, creed, religion, or gender, voters might be inclined to voter for him out of idealism. I am going to elaborate on both possibilities. If either turn out to be true, the bradlet effect as you know it will cease to be. Political scientists and pundits will refer to the results of the 2008 election as the obama Effect.

First, the Bradley Effect. For a little background, tom Bradley was the longtime mayor of Los Angeles. He ran for governor of California in 1982. Most polls showed him winning right up until election day. Based on exit polling, several media outlets projected Bradley as the winner over his opponent. However, when the final vote was tallied, Bradley lost. The problem in predicting the winner was that in both pre-election and exit poling, respondents claimed they were going to/had voted for Bradley when they were not/had not. Respondents lied to pollsters in order to avoid appearing bigoted.

The Bradley effect has occurred subsequently, but did not cause the African-American candidate to lose. Harold Washington (Chicago mayor), Douglas Wilder (Virginia governor), David Dinkins (New York City mayor), and Carol Moseley-Braun (Illinois senator) all enjoyed substantial double digit leads in polls leading up to their respective elections, but eventually won by significantly smaller margins. Several came down to absentee ballot squeakers. But the fact is their support was overstated because of white voters who said they weresupporting the candidate, but ultimately did not.

To be fair here, I am not accusing any voter of racism, although I am certain some voters had that motivation for voting against a certain candidate. The Bradley Effect is about isabout white voters who do not want to vote for a non white candidate for any number of legitimate reasons, but is afraid to say so because campaigns are racially charged. Take Bradley, for instance. He is famous for being the first African-American mayor of Los Angeles, but in his twenty years in office—nine before running for governor—he never was a particularly effective mayor. He just was not Samuel Yorty and that was good enough. He did not have much of a record to run on and voters saw that. One thing that is not often noted is Bradley ran again for governor in 1986 and lost badly. Race did not appear to be much of a factor then. After he had lost once, whites were now aware it was okay to vote against Bradley without looking racist.

But like I claimed above, this is apples and oranges. Electing someone governor is a lot less of a deal than electing someone president. We hold candidates to a higher standard because of the office. Look at the grief Sarah Palin is getting from all corners of the political spectrum even though she has been a mayor and governor—and she would only become president if something happened to John McCain. She is not even running for the office of POTUS! It is more than just experience. Voters take into account personal characteristics, often to the point of brutality. Opponents of Bill Clinton have said he was too corrupt to be president. Opponents of George W. Bush havesaid he is too stupid to be president. Those are highly personal criticisms, but the POTUS is considered something special.

Again, I am not accusing lots of voters of thinking Obama is too black to be president, even though I suspect there are many that feel that way. That racism will be more of a factor, too, since this is a nationwide race encompassing voters of all sorts of backgrounds. I am going to go out on a limb here and say that blatantly racist voters have already been reflected in the polls from the very beginning, so there will not be a surprise there. We have already seen those who use his middle name to scare people, speculation he is a Muslim, etc. these people are not hiding their views. It is the other voters who are having race interjected into it I am concerned with.

This has been, particularly in the last six weeks or so, a racially charged election. A lot of it has been falsely manufactured. I do not believe McCain is using code words to call Obama uppity, I do not believe he is comparable to segregationist George Wallace, and I do not believe there is a large conspiratorial plot to steal the election by either side because of racial fears. However, all this serves to scare the bejebus out of whites who do not want to vote for Obama because he is too inexperienced or they just plain do not like his politics. It is a situation ripe for the Bradley Effect to come into play.

The fear is evident. McCain had to disavow John Hagee’s endorsement because of his anti-Semitic beliefs, but no one wants to bring up Jeremiah Wright for far more inflammatory beliefs. Louis Farrahkan endorsed Obama, but no one brings it up because of fear they will be accused of painting Obama as a closet Muslim. People are testy about bringing up what Bill Ayers truly means, but I am certain if McCain were associated with unrepentant Timothy McViegh years after the Oklahoma City bombing, all quarters would demand he be dumped from the ticket, much less lose the election by an unprecedented landslide. It is fear that motivates all that avoidance.

I suspect people really do care about Wright, Farrahkan, and to a lesser extent Ayers. They ought to be the kiss of death considering how flimsy some scandals which brought down presidential candidates have been. I think they matter here, too, we are probably just not going to know until after the election. I am also willing to entertain the notion the current economic downturn has surpassed any of them regardless of how important they are.

There has already been evidence of the Bradley Effect in the primaries, so it could still happen. Obama had a substantial, double digit lead in both New Hampshire and California, but lost both. However, it must be noted there was a reverse Bradley Effect evident in a number of other primaries where Obama over performed the polls. Which brings us to the counterpoint.

Second, we have the reverse Bradley Effect. This is the idea that voters secretly want to cast their ballot for Obama, but are afraid to say so because they are Republicans or otherwise fear social pressure to vote for McCain. Evidence is pretty slim, but one may argue the recent endorsements of Obama by Colin Powell, William Weld, and Scott McClellan may be indicative that some Republican loyalists are keeping secret intention to vote for Obama Then again, in this pro-Obama environment, why bother? It is cool to say you are voting for Obama and dangerous to say you support McCain.

I am very skeptical of a reverse Bradley Effect, but I am not skeptical there are a large number of voters out there who want to help elect the first African-American president just to say they were a part of it. The MSM has certainly done its part. Obama remains the most unexamined presidential nominee in the modern era by media largely because they want to cover the historic occasion of the first African-American POTUS. I have said a number of times how I hate claiming there is a liberal conspiracy afoot in the MSM, but I believe there is at least until Obama is elected. I suspect the gloves will come off after Obama has taken office, but we will not know that until long after the election is over.

What I think we have here is the external factor of race which is either hurting Obama or elevating him. I think you can make a better argument there is a Bradley Effect in play and it will ultimately tighten the race. If not for the economic situation, it might have even been enough for McCain to win. The troublesome part is how either the effect or its reverse will stick in certain quarters no after the election’s outcome. The only thing I can comfortably assume true is that only the office of the POTUS would inspire such strong feelings one way or the other. Hence, if even the slightest evidence of either circumstance is found in post election studies, it will be called the Obama Effect.
Sarah Palin Cheered at St. Louis Blues Game

Sarah Palin dropped the ceremonial first puck at the game last night between home team St. Louis Blues and the Los Angeles Kings. unlike in Philadelphia a short time ago, she was cheered by the crowd. the youTube video is below.

I would call fans in St. Louis classier than fans in Philadelphia, but it would I loathe to offend leftists, I shall refrain. But if I must engage in skepticism, I should note the Flyers went on a six game skid after booing Palin, so blues fans could just be prudent here.

Best not to tempt fate with a candidate the religious right adores, no?
Caturday


Sometime today, my Sitemeter is going to roll over 400,000 visitors. I want to thank everyone who has dropped in on me, either on a regular basis or just the occasional Google searcher for celebrities in various states of nudity. I am glad I could be of service these five-and-a=half years.

Good Lord. Has it really been that long?

I go through incredibly obsessive spells with themed posts. Right now I have been in the presidential campaign after a long dry spell in which I avoided politics like the plague. I am close to crashing and burning with the subject about as much as the McCain campaign is crashing and burning out on the trail. In a way, it has made me relieved I was not destined for a career in politics, either as The Man or The Man Behind the Man. It surely would have gotten old even faster than it has.

We have a little over a week to go before we hand over the country to Barack Obama and the Democrat supermajority in Congress. I doubt there will be much interesting to talk about political wise up until we get to the summer of 2010 or so when the incredibly liberal policies they try to ram down our throats spur on a republican landslide like 1994, forcing Obama to move to the center, and become just as popular as Bill Clinton was for the remainder of his presidency because of the glories of divided government. Too bad the country does not see said glories now or McCain would be far ahead.

Hopefully I will have found something better to do by then than blog, so you will probably be on your own. But until then, I am going to need a new obsession on or about November 5th. I have no clue what it is going to be yet, but lightning always strikes when I need it to. It will all be in line by then, but I am sure I am for the most going to drive a stake through the heart of politics by then.

Friday, October 24, 2008

The Mad Prophet Speech from Network

Even more relevant today than in 1976, methinks.
The 1.3 Million New Voters Registered?

ACORN admits it was a lie.
Allegations of Obama Caucus Fraud in Nevada

You gotta love the PUMAS. They still are not going to let Barack Obama's dirty tricks go. Here is a letter they have discovered with allegations of Obama supporter's shenanigans in the Nevada caucus:
Systematic Corruption of the Party’s Caucus Procedures
The Committee received substantially similar reports of improprieties of such a number as to leave no conclusion but that the Obama campaign and its allies and supporters engaged in a planned effort to subvert the Party’s caucus procedures to its advantage. For example:

þ Preference cards were premarked for Obama.

þ Clinton supporters were denied preference cards on the basis that none were left, while Obama supporters at the same caucus sites were given preference cards.

þ Caucus chairs obviously supporting Obama:
o Deliberately miscounted votes to favor Senator Obama.
o Deliberately counted unregistered persons as Obama votes.
o Deliberately counted young children as Obama votes.
o Refused to accept preference cards from Clinton supporters who were at the caucus site by noon on the ground that the cards were not filled out fast enough.
o Told Clinton supporters to leave prior to electing delegates.

þ Clinton supporters who arrived late were turned away from the caucus, while late Obama supporters were admitted to the caucus.
Too bad Hillary Clinton cannot say anything about at this point out of party loyalty.
S & P Slashes The New York Times to Junk

Maybe if the Grey Lady goes bankrupt, it will serve as a wake up call to the "objective" media we would like a return to old fashion, just the facts journalism.
Jessica Biel in a Bikini

Because it is turning colder even here in South Carolina. I need something to warm things up a bit. The photo can be enlarged should you deem it necessary.

Thursday, October 23, 2008

Al Qeada Endorses John McCain?

Of course they do. They want to die in a holy war and know John McCain is the only candidate willing to send them straight to Allah.

But seriously, it was pointed out to me today that al Qeada likes to test new presidents. i had not thought about it until then, but the 1993 World Trade Center attack occurred in the first few months of Bill Clinton's presidency. We all remember the 9/11 attacks in George w. Bush's first year in office. Odds are, Joe Biden is right. they probably will try again.

I am still in the mindset the next president's test will be a conflict between Israel and iran, but either way, I would feel much better with McCain at the helm than Barack Obama.
The Weathermen's Post Revolution Plan

So what was Barack Obama's BFF Bill Ayer's plans after the communist revolution in the United States? Dysatopia:
The Weathermen’s plans included putting parts of United States under the administration of Cuba, North Vietnam, China and Russia and re-educating the uncooperative in camps in located in the Southwest. Since there would be holdouts, plans were made for liquidating the estimated 25 million unreconstructable die-hards.
Have a listen:Scary stuff.
Remember, Obama knows all of this about Ayers and his group. he also knows Ayers has not disavowed any of it.
Chuck Todd Psychoanalyzes McCain & Palin

Speaking of unlicensed psychologists offering analysis of other people’s minds, here is a short video of a segment on last night’s Hardball in which MSNBC political analyst Chuck Todd explains to Chris Matthews what is going on inside of the heads of John McCain and Sarah Palin during an interview with Brian Williams. No word on whether Chris Matthews got a tingle down his leg. I think this segment was a strange hatchet job. What is Chuck Todd doing psychoanalyzing two interviewees? He is a journalist who covers politics. It is MSNBC, so I pretty much shrug off the anticonservative hatchet job as business as usual, even it was incredibly peculiar. All that said, there was tension on the part of McCain and Palin during the interview. I chalk it up to three reasons, none of which I think are all that Freudian, but you mat consider me a hypocrite if you so desire.

First, McCain wears his emotions on his sleeve. I do not just mean his alleged hellfire rages, but good feelings, too. When he is happy, it is obvious. When he is angry, you know that, too. He is troubled, you know that, too. You could see it obviously in his second debate with Barack Obama. He came in excited and chipper, hoping to score some points. As the debate went on, you could see his demeanor change as he realized he had not landed a knockout blow.

McCain is losing the election and he knows. There are only twelve days left with no apparent opportunities to reverse the tide. He knows. He cannot hide it. It has to be a great source of tension. He lost his first chance at the White House in 2000. In the interim, he has been transparent about his dislike for Bush and his impatience over over his lost opportunity. Now he sees it slipping away tet again. McCain knows there will not be another chance for him in 2012. The pressure of his nearly inevitable loss is weighing on him.

Want more evidence? Take a look at Hillary Clinton. It just struck me the other days watching her stand next to Joe Biden how old she looks. She has aged much since the primaries. It is all because she has lost something she waited at least eight years for and may have to wait another eight years to have another shot at, even she even has one then. That kind of sorrow has a physical effect. It is happening to McCain, as well.

Second, McCain and Palin are in enemy territory here, particularly since it is NBC. Conservatives have a distrust at best, a hatred at worst for the MSM. Considering how openly pro-Obama the press has been and at the same time brutal to them, it is no wonder they would be on edge. Past interviews with Palin in particular have unfairly provided fodder for those who want to paint her as unintellectual. The stereotypes have stuck with members of both the left and right. Yet they cannot hide from the press. It is a catch-22.

Finally, I have to admit I have kicked around the notion McCain does not particularly like Palin. I am absolutely certain he would rather have run with Joe Lieberman. His resentment over not being able to shows. I even suspect in his heart of hearts McCain would liked to have pulled a Bull Moose like his hero Teddy Roosevelt, and formed an independent run for president with Lieberman.

He might have wanted that, but McCain is pragmatic. He knows that would not work. He needs Palin to shore up the GOP base whether he likes her or not. She has done that splendidly. There is no any other Republican he could have picked he would have drawn seventy million viewers to the Veep debate or draw crowds as large as she has. No one else would have so much as scored points by sitting down for an interview with Dr. James Dobson. If McCain wins Colorado, it is because the Focus of the Family and Promise Keeper evangelicals came out to vote for her. Mitt Romney would not have pulled that off.

But McCain still does not show much warmth for Palin. The best he can do is say he is proud of her, like she is his granddaughter he just got straight A’s on her junior high report card or that she is a maverick like him, only much, much less so. It is not unusual for running mates to have poor chemistry. Bill Clinton and Al Gore pretty much hated each other. Bob Dole wound up stuck with Jack Kemp, a rival, no less, because no one else would join his sinking ship. John Kerry and John Edwards got along so well their relationship was unusual enough to be the butt of late night comedian jokes. The high stakes poker gambles that put running mates together do not necessarily translate to warm fuzzies even on winning teams.

Much less losing teams. I do believe in some ways Palin knows the ticket is losing, but her star still has potential to shine. She wants to be part of a comeback in 2012, so in some ways she is campaigning for herself then rather than McCain now. Promoting his Veep choice for a later run is part of the job of a losing candidate. As a loyal party man, McCain should notwant to drag his running mate down with him when she has a political future. That cannot be a pleasant situation to be in particularly when he has not lost yet, but has spent eight years at least trying to put on a happy face in supporting Bush.

In short, I do not necessarily believe the McCain/Palin ticket is about to implode becayusethe two do not like each other. There are much more obvious external factors at work. I doubt they are even blaming each other for things going badly. McCain would have been worse off with his base without her and she would not be a presidential contender in 2012 without him. Those are two realities realistic politicians accept when they play the game.

It pays to mention, perhaps most importantly of all, Obama and Joe Biden do not make much of a pair, either. You have not seen them sit down for an interview, either. Do you think some statements made during the primaries and gaffes made on the campaign trail by Biden have created tension that would be even more evident than anything between McCain and Palin should they sit down together for an interview? I imagine so.
Dr. Phil Being Sued by OJ Simpson Accomplice


Dr. Phil, the unlicensed television therapist who illegally passes on medical advise unethically to people in front of millions of television viewers, is being sued by Thomas Riccio, the memorabilia dealer involved in OJ simpson’s hotel robbery in Las Vegas last year.

Riccio filmed a segment for The Dr. Phil Show a few days after Simpson was convicted on twelve counts in the robbery and kidnapping case. Riccio used the segment to explain his involvement in the matter, but claims Dr. Phil edited the tape to make it look as though he was taking responsibility for the robbery. The suit is seeking damages for fraud, defamation, trying to paint him in a false light, and the ever popular emotional. We are a nation of weenies, after all.

We willl also do just about anything to get on television—like implicate ourselves in an armed robbery and kidnapping case just for a chance to appear with Dr. Phil.

This is not the first time Dr. Phil has gotten into hot water. He was accused once of editing interview tapes regarding the disappearance of Natalie Holloway to make it appear one of her friends might be confessing to her murder. He has also endorsed diet pills which turned out to be dangerous, then denied any association with them. We all remember his attempt to cash in on Britney Spears’ emotional breakdown last year. All while, remarkably to me, being completely unlicensed as a therapist.

From what I know of Riccio from interviews, he is a crooked scumbag, but I hope he prevails on this one. It is about time knocked Dr. Phil around a bit.
A Lingerie Moment with Kelly Brook

The photo can be greatly enlarged should you deem it necessary.

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Lost Fifth Season Promo

Pretty cool.
San Francisco May Allow Prostitution

San Francisco may become the first major American city to tolerate prostitution if Proposition K passes next month.

(Am I the only one who thought it should have been named Proposition KY Jelly? Just asking.)

If passed, the measure will forbid local authorities to arrest anyone involved in the city’s illicit sex trade. According to the article linked above, the rationale is two-fold. One, it will free up the $ 11 million a year the city spends to enforce laws against the sex trade. Two,--get this—it will allow hookers to form collectives.

Karl Marx would be so proud.

The measure would not technically legalize prostitution since it is still forbidden by state law. It would take away the power of the police to arrest those involved in the sex trade. I cannot imagine the measure would last. California is bound to take measures to over rule the results if it passes. If for no other reason, the measure is bad because it limits the ability of authorities to investigate the drug dealing and human trafficking that often accompany the sex trade.

All this assuming Proposition K passes at all. I am curious if Nancy Pelodi has weighed in on it yet. The far left has an interesting habit of fighting crime by decriminalizing it so they do not have to. San Francisco is about as far left as you can get in the United States. Pelosi has to have been walking a fine line thus far. If democrats take an overwhelming amount of power on November 4th, how far left can she feel at ease to go? Her constituents have probably been demanding it for years.
Obama Loses 6 Points Among Likely Voters

Barack Obama now leads John McCain by only one point, 44%-43%.

According to the extremely reliable Investors Business Day tracking poll, the race has tightened<
"McCain has picked up 3 points in the West and with independents, married women and those with some college. He's also gaining momentum in the suburbs, where he's gone from dead even a week ago to a 20-point lead. Obama padded gains in urban areas and with lower-class households, but he slipped 4 points with parents."
It is incredibly difficult to believe those double digits leads Obama allegedly has in many national polls considering how close the last two elections have been. Obama is still in the lead and may very well defeat McCain, but I do not believe it will be a blowout.
William Shatner & George Takei Have Issues

So it seems, anyway:
“The whole thing makes me feel badly. The poor man, there’s such a sickness there. It’s so patently obvious that there’s a psychosis there. I don’t know what his original thing about me was; I have no idea. I didn’t read his book that was printed many years ago but apparently I didn’t let somebody have a close -up.

“I literally don’t know him. I didn’t know him very well on the series; he’d come in for a day or two… but he’s continued to speak badly about me for all these years. You’d think there would be an epiphany at some point where George might have said, ‘Poor Bill Shatner, he is such a lonely, desperate, unhappy man that he did all these terrible things to me…’ when I said hello or something… but instead what he does is he makes this big deal about not inviting me to his wedding.

“There must be something else inside George that is festering, and makes him so unhappy that he takes it out on me, in effect a total stranger.

“It’s sad the man can’t find enough peace in his life to either be positive and say ‘I forgive him for whatever those hurts were,’ or to shut up about it… I feel nothing but pity for him.”
Rumors are not to many of Shatner's Star Trek costars like him very much because of his alleged overblown ego. it is hard to gauge. Takei did show up for Shatner's roast a couple years ago, but then again, it was a roast. maybe he was not joking when he blasted Shatner then.
Miss Louisiana Loses Her Crown

Miss Louisiana, Lindsey evans, was forced to give up her crown after taking part in a dine-and-dash scam at a local restaurant.

What is worse: that she had eleven days to go, the bill was only $ 46, or thatshe made such a cute mugsot photo:

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Tithing the One True Obama

Barack Obama is selling election night coverage to the media.

They will most certainly pay for it, too. Not only are they so certain Obama is going to win, they have done everything they can to make it happen. I believe the press seesa chance to make history happen and they want to be a major part of it. Unfortunately, journalistic integrity has died in the process.

What is going to happen when an Obama administration is in full swing? Will the press cover it honestly, warts and all, or continue to beat the dead corpse of Edward R. Murrow?

I am guessing press coverage goes in cycles. Surely there have been periods of honest journalism between William Randolph Heart's yellow journalism of the Spanish-American War, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein's Watergate coverage, and virtually every MSM outlet's apotheosis of Obama?
Daily Kos Blogger: Is Obama Jesus?

You can joke the left considered the One true Obama to be the Second Coming, but apparently some are kicking around the idea as fact. i will spare you a link and paste the whole post here:
I'm not a religious person however I'd like to point out a funny irony that would be better suited for a cartoonist.

What if all of the religious nuts were bashing the second coming of their Christ and they didn't even know it? Fathered by a Kenyan Muslim profit who left after his task was done. To seed a woman who in the heartland of America(a country who "is losing its way"). Then takes him on a journey of awaking across the world, then back home to spread the word of the lord through a process of education an then actions in the community.

The bible says "the lord shall come as a man whom blind followers will not see".

So next time you run into a religious nut and they start talking about all of this deep mystical Muslim / African non-sense. Just remind them where Jesus came from, and where the human race came from.
It is pretty obvious this guy is extremely contemptuous of religion in all its forms. i am sure he would hate for obama's rise to power to have any religious overtones, either. but then again, he writes for Daily Kos, so Jeremiah Wright's "God d*mn America" is probably right up his alley. It must be torturous to suffer such internal, infernal conflict.
Britney Spears Gets a Mistrial

The Britney Spears DWL case was declared a mistrial by the judge because the jury was hopelessly deadlocked at 10-2 in favor of acquittal. The jury foreman explained to the press:
“We felt deadlocked from the beginning, there were lots of questions about lack of evidence, whether Spears had a Louisiana license or not, what the definition of residency was. We felt we were never given all the facts in the case. Some jurors felt their time was wasted.”
Well, that is what juries do--and often worse.

Outside the courthouse, the prosecutor whined a second trial was unlikely and how difficult it was to convict a celebrity in Los Angeles. I guess he thought a conviction was going to make his career. Quick quiz: who prosecuted Paris Hilton or Lindsay Lohan?

yeah, not exactly Johnnie Cochran busting Lenny Bruce.
Colin Powell Agrees with Biden

Barack obama will be tested early with an international crisis. with friends like these...

Seriously, the issue is is Israel. The Israelis are likely to strike Iran shortly after Barack Obama becomes president because they do not trust him to use a firm hand with their nuclear program. I imagine they view him as weak willed and inexperienced to walk all over him. You may recall they even allowed the already lame duck Bush to prevent them from attacking Iran earlier. The One True obama will probably not get that much consideration.

If you do not want a war between Israel and Iran, do not vote for Obama.
David Frum on Sarah Palin

Another red on the outside/blue on the inside republican weighs in on Sarah Palin and finds her wanting:
"The people who defend [Sarah Palin] have already given up any serious thought of Republicans' wielding governmental power anytime soon. . . . They have already moved to a position of pure cultural symbolic opposition to a new majority. The people who criticize her do so because we have some hope that we could be in contention in 2012, and there's some risk that she could be the party's nominee, and she'd probably lose -- and even if by some miracle she won, she'd be a terrible president."
Frum spent a bit of time earlier this year as a senior policy analist for Rudy Giuliani, a candidate who received a half million fewer votes in the primaries than Ron Paul. The experience did not teach frum anything about who is a winning candidate, much less who would make a good president.

If the Republican intelligentsia, such that it is, continues to hold onto the notion the party must nominate northeaster RINOs in order to survive, it is going to take two or three election cycles out of power to straighten the GOP out.

I am not looking forward to that.
Faith Hill in a Bikini

Looking good at forty.

Monday, October 20, 2008

Ken Adelman Endorses Obama

True confession: I had to look the guy up. Not to dismiss his clout in the endorsement. Just because I honestly did not know who he was.

Turns out he is the guy who said the US invasion of Iraq was going to be a cakewalk and we would be greeted with flowers and candy. Famous last words, no?. usually, when someone presents flowers and candy, he is looking to get screwed. I will let you mull on that one for awhile.

I doubt Barack Obama will shout this one from the rooftops quite like he did Colin Powell's endorsement. Adelman is a much hated neoconservative who helped sell the war in Iraq to the American people. i imagine obama will pretend he did not hear it.