John Hawkins says Meet Your Lords and Masters: Seven Democrats Who Run Your World:
“I’d rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University.” — William F. Buckley
At this point, I would go Buckley one better: I’d rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 254 people we could pull out of a minimum security prison rather than the Democrats who are currently in Congress.
Good point, John. But in my opinion, we can throw just about every Congressman into the mix.
For instance, John McCain. Johnny has claimed the “maverick” label his entire career and we were repeatedly hammered with it during his failed presidential run. What does he say now? From a recent interview with Newsweek:
“I never considered myself a maverick,” he told me. “I consider myself a person who serves the people of Arizona to the best of his abilities.”
Why is McCain trying to run from his record? Because even though McCain leads in the polls, he is (rightly) concerned about losing his job to challenger JD Hayworth. After all, he receives a pathetic 54% from the Club for Growth. But being a flip-flopping pantywaist never helped anyone’s image.
Go, Hayworth, Go!
The Army Times conducted a poll of military personnel. In summary:
|By Duty Status|
|Guard & Reserve||71||21|
A word from academia:
“The military has been perceived as a conservative Republican institution,” said Peter Feaver, a political science professor at Duke University and a special adviser to the National Security Council from 2005 to 2007.
“A lot of people thought that eight years of frustration with the Bush administration was going to undermine that,” he said. “This evidence suggests that it hasn’t undermined it as much as they thought, at least not yet.”
Indeed not. After all, the total lack of experience (and understanding) of B. Hussein Obama doesn’t bode well for a Democrat takeover.
But the interesting thing about this poll is the answer to this question:
What is the most important issue for you in deciding for whom you will vote for president?
|Character of the candidate:|
|War in Iraq:|
Note: percentages estimated from looking at a graph for anything
other than "Overall", but they are pretty darn close.
Who would have thought that the prosecution of the war would be third on the list of priorities for those charged with carrying the fight to our enemies? Could it be because they know they are winning, and thus other items take precedence? Or could it be because character counts, no matter what the issue? Well, for Whites, Hispanics, and "Other" anyway.
Anyone see any ACORN representatives staking out military bases? No? I wonder why . . .
Willie Brown of the San Francisco Gate (yep, the lefty rag in California) has this to say about how Sarah Palin has totally changed the dynamics of this campaign:
Suddenly, Palin and John McCain are the mavericks and Barack Obama and Joe Biden are the status quo, in a year when you don’t want to be seen as defending the status quo.
From taxes to oil drilling, Democrats are now going to have to start explaining their positions.
Whenever you start having to explain things, you’re on defense.
HT to AllahPundit at Hot Air, who also points out a Gallup poll that puts McCain/Palin ahead, outside of the margin of error, even though one third of the polling was conducted before McCain’s acceptance speech. In other words, there’s more post-convention bounce coming, although we all know those don’t last. Still, a McCain bounce on top of this Palin bounce may be significant after all.
According to Nielsen Media Research, Sen. John McCain’s acceptance speech drew the largest commercial TV audience in the history of televised political conventions.
John McCain 38.9 million viewers Barack Hussein Obama 38.3 million viewers Sarah Palin 37.2 million viewers Average for GOP 3 days coverage 34.4 million viewers Average for Dem 4 days coverage 30.2 million viewers Joseph Biden 24.0 million viewers
That’s right, while Sarah and John brought the average viewership for the GOP convention up, Joe Biden actually depressed the viewership average for the Democrats. Rethinking that VP choice there, Obama?
By comparison, 34.9 million U.S. television viewers watched the opening ceremonies for the Beijing Olympics in August and talent show "American Idol", the most watched TV show in the nation, averaged 28.1 million viewers last season.
Maybe Joe would have done better if he had tried singing his speech.
Interestingly, Obama’s historic acceptance speech was only the "fifth most-viewed, non-sports program among African American households in the last 11 years." What do African-Americans think is more important?
- Michael Jackson 30th Anniversary (2001)
- NBC Movie of the Week: The Temptations Part 2 (1998)
- Primetime Special Edition: Whitney Houston (2002)
- Oprah Winfrey Presents: The Wedding Part 2 (1998)
And there you go, a nice snapshot of the American voting citizenry.
[Note: Nielsen, of course, fails to include non-commercial channels like PBS and CSPAN.]
John McCain’s acceptance speech last night was pretty good, at least for John McCain. He delivered it well (although his advisors should tell him to keep looking at the camera and crowd after delivering a resounding line rather than immediately ducking and looking down like he’s lying and doesn’t want to look you in the eye).
But it introduced McCain the man to a lot of Americans and explained his "Country First" motto perfectly. His Hanoi Hilton story was delivered masterfully.
[A quick aside on the prisoner of war story. One of McCain’s fellow captives was a man named Charlie Plumb, who, like McCain, emerged from that experience a better man. Plumb later became a motivational speaker. I highly recommend that you watch one of his talks on YouTube (parts 1, 2, 3 and 4), then go buy the video and show your family. It not only explains the profound formative effect the experience had on their character, but gives great insight on what McCain is talking about. It should also transfer some of that learning and understanding to you and explain why McCain says that he was "blessed by misfortune".]
The speech contained a lot of the usual soft rhetoric of "building better relations" and "changing the way things work". But I want to record for prosperity the actual hard promises that he made the American people when he accepted his party’s nomination, as well as a few of the topics that he avoided, by pulling excerpts from the text of his acceptance speech.
Ann Coulter rips the media for trying to invent scandals about Sarah Palin and pats McCain on the back for giving conservatives a reason to vote for him:
They claimed Palin was chosen only because she’s a woman. In fact, Palin was chosen because she’s pro-life, pro-gun, pro-drilling and pro-tax cuts. She’s fought both Republicans and Democrats on public corruption and does not have hair plugs like some other vice presidential candidate I could mention. In other words, she’s a "Republican."
As a right-winger, Palin will appeal to the narrow 59 percent of Americans who voted for another former small-market sportscaster: Ronald Reagan. Our motto: Sarah Palin is only a heartbeat away!
Yep, that describes me perfectly. Maybe she can pull Johnny back towards the right and maybe, just maybe, he won’t piss her off by trying to take our guns away. She doesn’t seem like the type of person to take that lying down.
Because of Palin, I’m voting McCain this fall. And I won’t be the only one. Can you say "President McCain"?
Billionaire and presidential race spoiler Ross Perot is back. During the 1992 race Perot was famous for making economic charts and graphs part of his political process as he attempted to explain in clear terms the economic trends of taxation, government spending, GDP and national debt, and why he thought we were headed towards disaster.
In a statement Monday, Perot said the nation’s debt reached $9.4 trillion in April and is rising more than $1 billion a day.
"We are leaving our children and grandchildren with debt they cannot possibly pay," he said. "The economic crisis facing America today is far greater than anything since the Great Depression."
There’s also a blog with some additional materials. I rather like this chart:
It clearly shows that the top 10 percent of earners pay an astounding 69.7 percent of the taxes in this country. Add in “earned income tax credit” and what we have here is wealth redistribution (can you say “socialism” children?).
Now we hear that Obama wants to eliminate the $250K limit on Social Security taxes:
The presidential candidate told senior citizens in Ohio that it is unfair for middle-class earners to pay the Social Security tax "on every dime they make," while millionaires and billionaires pay it on only "a very small percentage of their income."
This would be the largest expansion of FDR’s “New Deal” since LBJ’s “Great Society”. Obama would be turning something that was originally intended to be a pensioning program for retirees into yet another liberal wealth redistribution scheme. It’s bad enough that the government takes my money and returns it years later with a fraction of the interest that I could earn in the private sector. Now he wants to take money and flat out give it to people who didn’t earn it.
To further complicate matters, Obama is proposing a “Doughnut Plan” in which income between $102K and $250K would still be immune to Social Security tax. Any doubt that once in place, the hole of this “doughnut” would gradually shrink until it completely disappears?
McCain, on the other hand, would not consider an increase “under any imaginable circumstance” (something Obama would never promise). Then again, he is mangling the presentation of his Social Security plan to the point of appearing to be flip-flopping on the word that frightens liberals so much: “privatization”.
Hey McCain, when you allow younger workers to choose the accounts they want to put their retirement savings into it is in fact partial privatization, so don’t be afraid of calling it that. Old people will understand as long as you guarantee their retirement income too. We have to get out of this hole. Lead us there, and maybe even libertarians like me will follow.
The Politico has a poll up that asks what will happen with the Ron Paul supporters. Not too many responses yet, but the trend is undeniable.
I have to admit that I was one of the 82%.
After all, if McCain can’t get mainstream conservatives to support him, what hope does he have of gaining the support of Libertarians?
Personally, I’m starting to take a hard look at Bob Barr.
Even Jay Leno is commenting on the story, with this quip tonight:
And today Hillary Clinton’s camp said she is not actively seeking the vice-presidential nomination. And then her pantsuit caught on fire.
Personally, I think even the naive Obama will be too smart to allow Hillary into his political bed, especially after the hard-fought 13-month campaign of debates and sound bites. As the Delta Democrat Times says:
Young Mr. Obama has sought to cast himself as something of a lamb, a warmer, fuzzier member of the political herd, and as such I think he’d do well to remember the always relevant advice of one Woody Allen in such matters as this: “The lion and the lamb may lie down together, but the lamb won’t get much sleep.”
But the American Spectator is jovially begging liberals to "throw us into the Obama-Clinton briar patch":
It might even be easier to run against Billary at the bottom of the ticket than it would be to beat them at the top. It was bizarre enough to imagine Bill Clinton as "First Gentleman" (or First Lout: "Better put some ice on that"). But trying to imagine him as the Second Fiddle to a Second Fiddle is enough to make any sane voter run away screaming. Not only would we have a frighteningly angry, priapic narcissist trying to butt in on presidential decision-making, but we would have a frighteningly angry priapic narcissist trying to butt in past a vice president who herself is trying to butt in on presidential decision-making. And all while both of them will surely again be dodging real subpoenas and imaginary sniper fire.
AND CAN YOU imagine how easy it would be for John McCain to contrast himself with Obama-Billary? He’s already going to be erasing Obama’s image as a change agent and replacing it with the truth of Obama as a conventional liberal. With Billary beside Obama, though, Obama’s whole slogan goes out the door: From "Change you can believe in" to "Conventional liberalism you can’t trust." After all, an exit poll from one of the recent primaries showed that just two-fifths of Democrats thought that Sen. Clinton is trustworthy. (How even those two-fifths can be so deluded is a matter for psychologists, not columnists, to explore.)
But as the UK Telegraph points out, the differences between Obama and McCain have a lot in common:
In fact, one of the deeply weird things about this already extremely weird campaign is that the two candidates have, both, in the past, appealed to precisely the same group of people: moderates, independents, non-partisan voters, whatever you want to call them. Whereas the past two or three presidential races have pitted Establishment Republicans (Bush, Dole) against Establishment Democrats (Gore, Kerry), both McCain and Obama have made their names by being something different.
True, McCain is not exactly a man of the Left. He doesn’t object much to guns, opposes abortion, and has a Vietnam vet’s way with swear words that would be unacceptable at most liberal dinner parties.
But he has nevertheless defied his own party’s mainstream on a number of issues, putting his name on legislation designed to deal with campaign finance reform (together with Democrat Russ Feingold), climate change (together with Democrat Joe Lieberman) and, most defiantly of all, immigration reform (together with very liberal Democrat Teddy Kennedy).
So even with stories like Angry Clinton Supporters Start Rallying for McCain Online (check out their website), a lot of conservatives are going to refuse to vote for McCain — not to mention virtually every Ron Paul supporter.
And this will only get worse if Bob Barr gets his way and is included in the debates between Obama and McCain. And with the liberal MSM in charge of the debates, do you think they will pass up the opportunity to split the "conservative" vote and guarantee their Obama a sweeping victory?
No doubt about it, the fun is going to continue right up through November.