Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : I Will Continue to Continue, to Pretend.... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sully- who wrote (35164)	9/17/2010 4:45:20 PM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

Leading social conservative jabs Rove, GOP establishment: 'I want to increase their frustration' By: Byron York Chief Political Correspondent 09/17/10 2:04 PM EDT Greetings from the Family Research Council's Values Voter Summit, where Delaware Republican Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell is scheduled to speak later today. I ran into FRC head Tony Perkins a few minutes ago and asked him how O'Donnell came to be on the program. "Karl Rove helped me do it," Perkins said. "Huh?" "Karl Rove helped me do it," Perkins repeated. "When I saw him attack her on the night of the election, I decided I wanted to have her come and speak." Perkins says he was particularly interested in O'Donnell because the FRC was the first big national organization to endorse her. "That primarily was driven by her opponent," Perkins says, referring to Republican Rep. Mike Castle. "The establishment put such a bad candidate on the field, and she rallied conservatives." "The reason those in the establishment are coming unhinged over her election is that their political models don't work in this cycle, when you factor in the tea parties," Perkins continues. "They can't figure that out, and it's causing them consternation." A brief pause. "And I want to increase their frustration." Read more at the Washington Examiner: washingtonexaminer.com

To: Sully- who wrote (35164)	9/17/2010 4:57:54 PM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

Extremists have the nerve to call regular Americans 'extremists' By: David Limbaugh Examiner Columnist September 17, 2010 I'm surely not the only one who notices the persistent efforts of the leftist establishment and certain establishment Republicans to portray mainstream conservatives, especially those inhabiting the tea party movement, as radicals and extremists. The more they push this theme the more they marginalize themselves. You'll remember that President Obama's Department of Defense released a manual identifying "protests" as a form of low-level terrorism. His Department of Homeland Security issued a report characterizing protesters as potentially dangerous right-wing extremists and racists, being sure to slander disgruntled veterans returning from duty overseas as part of that frightful mix. Also unforgettable is Obama's categorical derision of small-town people as bitter clingers. We can learn a lot about people from their dislikes, as well as their likes. They reveal a great deal about themselves when they call "extremists" patriotic Americans who believe in the American ideal, lower taxes and fiscal responsibility, originalism, the rule of law, blind justice, equal protection under the law, strong national defense, limiting government to its assigned constitutional functions, the Second Amendment, the nondiscriminatory application of freedom of speech and expression, the free exercise clause, a reasonable -- not unduly expansive -- interpretation of the establishment and commerce clauses, protection for the unborn, judicial restraint, federalism, the separation of powers, the free market, racial colorblindness, the existence of good and evil in the world, equality of opportunity rather than of outcomes, law and order, immigration control and border protection, motherhood and apple pie. That's a fair summary of a typical tea partier's credo. By definition, then, in America at least, tea partiers are not extremists. For approximately two times as many American voters identify themselves as conservatives than as liberals, and conservatives mostly believe in those things I've referenced. Tea Party protesters are decidedly peaceful people -- so much so that the only time you'll see violence at any of their protests is when liberals bus in their union thugs to foment it or to masquerade as conservative participants. The only time you'll hear about racism at one of their events is when leftists trump up the charge and fabricate events. Nancy Pelosi -- speaking of extremists -- disagrees. She said she was "very happy" with this week's election results because they showed that extremists in the Tea Party movement are dominating Republican primaries. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs also feigns glee as he celebrates the apparent dissension in the Republican Party caused by the alleged wedge Tea Partiers are driving. Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski betrayed a similar misperception, saying in her sour grapes speech following her defeat that the GOP had been "hijacked by the Tea Party Express -- an outside extremist group." I wrote in my book that Obama is either tone-deaf or utterly contemptuous of the express will of the majority of the people. He is entirely cavalier about their strenuous, unambiguous objection to most of his agenda items. When they rejected Obamacare, he didn't go before the nation in his State of the Union address showing contrition for having ignored their wishes, nor was there the slightest indication he was willing to adjust his extreme plan to nationalize our health care to make it more acceptable to the people. No, he didn't say, "I hear you loud and clear, my fellow Americans." Rather, he shouted, "I want everyone to take another look at the plan." After his reckless $868 billion stimulus package -- with all its untraceable waste, redistribution and corruption -- failed to "jump-start the economy" and keep unemployment from rising above 8 percent as he had promised, he not only didn't take ownership of his failed prescription but also blamed former President George W. Bush again. Worse, he asked for $50 billion more with the promise that one-eighteenth of the amount of the initial stimulus would jump-start the economy and create jobs, when the initial stimulus did not. So who is more extreme? Is it the guy (and his enablers) who is driving us at warp speed into national bankruptcy, supports abortion on demand and the militant homosexual agenda, appoints judges who believe government has the right to "unskew" speech when it becomes "overabundant," Mirandizes terrorists on the battlefield, appoints one radical czar after another, apologizes every chance he gets for the country that we love, fires his inspectors general without notice for uncovering corruption among his friends involving stimulus money, takes over and then tries to restructure Chrysler and GM in a way that discriminates against secured creditors in favor of his union buddies, forces national health care on the nation when Americans told him they rejected it and on and on, or is it a typical Tea Partier? It's not even a close call, and the more tone-deaf that liberals (and establishment Republicans) are to this reality the worse their respective electoral futures will be. Examiner Columnist David Limbaugh is a writer, author and attorney. His book "Bankrupt: The Intellectual and Moral Bankruptcy of Today's Democratic Party" was released recently in paperback. To find out more about David Limbaugh, please visit his Web site at DavidLimbaugh.com. To read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page. Read more at the Washington Examiner: washingtonexaminer.com

To: Sully- who wrote (35164)	9/17/2010 6:26:34 PM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35834

RINO Tea Party Chip Bok creators.com

To: Sully- who wrote (35164)	9/17/2010 6:33:51 PM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

The Original "Extremist" Tea Party Activists Bob Gorrell creators.com

To: Sully- who wrote (35164)	9/17/2010 6:41:41 PM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

Better now than Later Michael Ramirez creators.com

To: Sully- who wrote (35164)	9/21/2010 11:31:58 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

Help for the Tea Party Unwashed Masses By Stuart Schwartz American Thinker -Satire- The elites have spoken: You're dumb. And not just ordinary dumb -- you're Tea Party dumb. This is the kind of dumb that causes life to imitate art (the boob tube, naturally) and pushes Republican insiders Karl Rove and Charles Krauthammer to join hands with Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and offer their best imitation of The Simpsons Mayor Quimby: "Stop, you idiots!" But the Tea Party idiots won't. As Clarice Feldman notes, the Tea Party has become "damned good" at organizing and will be around for a while, challenging the ruling class. Some will find themselves living and working among the political and media elites, strangers in a strange land where Christmas is déclassé and country music is something the Obama FCC is targeting for elimination after conservative talk radio. Tea Party members and sympathizers may be passionate, but lack education. As one Harvard professor lamented in a conservative publication that takes up an entire row of the Mayor Quimby chorus, Tea Party favorite Glenn Beck is representative of a portion of this movement in that he may be "quick-witted" but he "is not an educated man." New Yorker magazine is not as charitable, saying the Tea Party and its sympathizers live in the land of "unreason," wholly unable to understand "evidence, knowledge, argument, proportionality, nuance, complexity" and other "tools" of the educated class. The Tea Party needs the wisdom that comes with education. Republican strategist Karl Rove is today the toast of insider Washington -- with even Democrats describing him as "the voice of reason and rationality" -- because he clearly outlines the need for those whom a Bloomberg news columnist describes as "delusional nobodies" to get educated and learn how to live among the nation's elites. Failing that, we will see more conservative insiders join Rove and Krauthammer to form what Lee Cary of American Thinker calls a Republican "axis of disdain." Therefore, as a public service, American Thinker begins an occasional series of articles devoted to helping the nation's latest and greatest crop of idiots, the Tea Party, acquire wisdom. We offer this to assist Tea Party types in becoming more worthy of rubbing shoulders with what David Brooks of the New York Times calls the "educated class." It is alright to sit back "happily chewing on a Twizzler," Brooks says, because the ruling class has life figured out for us by virtue of its superior intellect and education. But once we decide to get in the game, Brooks points out, we have to put down our Twizzlers and get serious. Leaving aside the question of how familiar he is with life west of the Hudson River ("Ladies and Gentlemen, please put down your Twizzlers and stand for the national anthem..." or "Yeah, I'm thinking of going out with him -- I just love the cut of his Twizzler"), Brooks has a point: Tea Partiers, ordinary Americans all, need to become more like the political, media and cultural elite. It doesn't happen overnight; hence, our series "The Tea Party Guides to Insider Wisdom." Our hope is that this will ease the transition of Tea Party newcomers to the corridors of power. For example, we will teach you how to cling less to guns and religion, as President Obama so elegantly described those who have never shaken down a lobbyist for a living. You will learn the essentials of dining on the taxpayer dollar, the etiquette of sexually harassing government interns, and what to wear on taxpayer-financed vacations. American Thinker guides will help you overcome the extraordinary disadvantages of a background steeped in family values, love of God and country, and belief in personal responsibility. It is recognition that those cheering Palin, watching Beck, or voting for Delaware upstart Christine O'Donnell are not part of insider Washington, don't live on Manhattan's Upper West Side, and have never lifted a venti triple-decaf no-whip Mochachino paid for by grandpapa's trust fund in salute to Che. Much as we hate to admit it, PBS-stamped "mastermind" Karl Rove, David Brooks and the New Yorker are right -- there is more to life than chewing on Twizzlers, reading with your lips, and Rush Limbaugh. Our upcoming "Tea Party Wisdom" guides to Washington values and New York Times opinion writing will help "delusional nobodies" not just gather in Washington but become part of it, assisting Rove and Republican party insiders in making real American government work. And make no mistake about it: Rove's Washington works. The Washington Post lauded his "realigning the relationship between government and citizen" by "architecting" amnesty for illegal aliens, expansion of the federal bureaucracy, and ballooning budgets during the Bush years. Our guides will educate Tea Party participants, helping them join Rove on the inside. It will understand the mistake it has made in defeating Republican candidates who would join Senate Republicans -- Rove Republicans -- who have already helped the Democratic majority pass the original $1 trillion dollar stimulus. These Rove Republicans borrowed from the earnings of future taxpayers to finance, for example, worthy projects such as sending a UCLA team to Africa to teach uncircumcised African men how to wash their genitals after having sex -- a "penis-washing" program. American Thinker guides will ensure that the wisdom of taxpayer-funded "penis-washing" remains appreciated as more and more "delusional nobodies" work their way into Washington and elite media. Our "Tea Party Guide to Contemporary Sex" will help create a common understanding of the need for government involvement in all aspects of sexual relations, and the multiplier effect on the American economy of washing genitals in Africa. In Washington, taxpayer supported sex is good politics; hence the Rove Republican support for stimulus dollars funding studies on "hookup" techniques on college campuses, proper condom use, and masturbation. This last, especially, is a key area for Rove, who has been especially critical of O'Donnell's opposition to government initiatives during the Clinton years to teach masturbation techniques to public school children. Rove says her "nutty" ideas about abstinence and sex education will condemn Republicans to irrelevance inside the Beltway, where all things relating to sex are considered functions of the federal government. Our "Tea Party Guide to the Art of Compromise" will allow Tea Party activists and supporters to understand why, as late as last week, Rove Republicans gained in influence by joining President Obama and Democrats to pass the $30-billion "Small Business Jobs Act." Tea Partiers reading our occasional pieces will understand why it is the height of naiveté to consider this another colossal waste of taxpayer dollars. They will look at Karl Rove with new eyes, as our "Tea Party Guide to Governing" will help them understand the Rovian strategy of having Republicans like the now-defeated Mike Castle of Delaware put their mark on Democratic bills. Republicans like Castle help to refocus Democrats, Rove explains, nudging them closer to the principles he "architected" with such Beltway stalwarts as Senators Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) and Olympia Snow (R-Obama). Tea Partiers will understand how Rove Republicans, for example, have refocused the small business stimulus, ensuring that future "penis-washing" dollars stay home as part of the legislation's loan programs for the private sector. Once the details of the new small business stimulus are known, we may find that Rove Republican involvement resulted in an entire new industry being born, with taxpayer financed "penis-washing" entrepreneurs springing up in every city and town. Our series will educate Tea Party "idiots," helping them understand that it is the height of irresponsibility to dismiss the strategic effectiveness of the "penis-washing" wing of the Republican Party headed by Rove. Yes, we need change in Washington; but an educated Tea Party will recognize that there's no sense in throwing out the Roves with the genital wash water. Stuart Schwartz is on the faculty of Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia. .

To: Sully- who wrote (35164)	10/22/2010 10:06:49 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

Tea Party Neophytes Outshine the Dems' Old Pros Michael Barone One of the constant refrains of the so-called mainstream media is that tea party candidates are blithering incompetents and weird wackos. They may do well this year, the refrain goes, but when voters come to their senses, the Republican Party will pay a big price for embracing them. This meme is part of a pattern. As longtime Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz, now writing for The Daily Beast, puts it, "News organizations were late to the tea party phenomenon and are still grappling to explain it." As on so many points, I think the mainstream media have gotten it nearly upside-down. What strikes me about so-called tea party candidates — those with little or no political experience who have won Republican nominations by opposing the Obama Democrats' vast expansion of government — is not that some of them are bumblers but that so many of them seem to have terrific political instincts. Consider the performance of Nevada Republican Sharron Angle in her single public debate with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Longtime Nevada political reporter Jon Ralston, no admirer of Angle, said that Angle clearly won. Reid, wrote Ralston, "looked as if he could barely stay on a linear argument, abruptly switching gears and failing to effectively parry or thrust." If Angle could do better than Reid, first elected to statewide office 40 years ago and a veteran of 28 years in Congress, the Senate Democratic leader for six years, maybe she isn't such a dog after all. Similarly, Delaware Republican Christine O'Donnell held her own against Democrat Chris Coons in their debate. O'Donnell has some significant political baggage and is trailing in what has been a heavily Democratic state since the mid-1990s. But she didn't embarrass her party in debate. Mainstream media have paid less attention to Wisconsin Republican Ron Johnson, a plastics manufacturer from Oshkosh, who has surged to a nearly double-digit lead over three-term incumbent Russ Feingold in a state that voted 56 percent to 42 percent for Barack Obama. Johnson has no political experience, but he seems to me to have perfect political pitch, articulating anti-government-spending themes with precision and generally avoiding statements that would put him on the defensive. That wasn't initially true of Rand Paul, the libertarian-minded Senate nominee in Kentucky, who after winning the May primary dismayed Republican insiders by questioning the public accommodations provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. He has avoided such gaffes for months and is now capitalizing on his Democrat opponent Jack Conway's ad questioning his religious beliefs. Conway has much more political experience but looks more amateurish at this point. It's hard to keep up with all the seriously contested House races around the country — more seem to show up on the radar screen every week. But it's interesting to me that some of the candidates who have risen from entirely apolitical backgrounds to challenge Democrats everyone considered safe even a few months ago seem to have good political instincts. Take Ilario Pantano in North Carolina 7, a district Democrats have held since Reconstruction. Pantano is the son of Italian immigrants, who left Goldman Sachs to re-enlist in the Marines after 9/11 and was entirely vindicated of charges brought against him by a disgruntled subordinate. Pantano has taken on 14-year incumbent Mike McIntyre, a pleasant man with deep local roots, and has wisely not attacked him personally. Instead, he's targeted the policies of the Obama Democrats. Or consider Chip Cravaack, former Navy and Northwest Airlines pilot who says he's spent several years as a stay-at-home dad. He's taken on 36-year veteran Jim Oberstar, chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, in Minnesota 8, a district Democrats have held since 1946. Cravaack has shrewdly targeted some local issues and may capitalize on the fact that Oberstar received only one contribution from a district resident in the last quarter. Polling indicates that these two Republicans, tea party types if not tea party products, are making serious challenges in districts where Democrats received 69 percent and 68 percent of the vote in 2008. Not all such challenges are successful. But some are, and they can change the political balance in Congress. The tea party movement today, like the peace movement 40 years ago, has brought many new people into politics — and many with sharper political instincts than their detractors in the press have been able to understand. Michael Barone, senior political analyst for The Washington Examiner (www.washingtonexaminer.com), is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a Fox News Channel contributor and a co-author of The Almanac of American Politics. To find out more about Michael Barone, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com. .

To: Sully- who wrote (35164)	10/27/2010 9:35:06 PM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

Tea Party Movement Is A Game-Changer By SCOTT S. POWELL IBD Editorials Posted 10/26/2010 06:19 PM ET The hostility and jaded news coverage that the Tea Party movement evokes suggests that it must be onto something really big — beyond anti-incumbent attitudes or current-issue debates of Democrats or Republicans. The Tea Party is animated by powerful enduring ideas expressed in the nation's founding through the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution: freedom, the natural law of inalienable rights and the sovereignty of the people that requires limited government. Remarkably, the Tea Party movement has gained national prominence with unpaid volunteers in just a year and a half. Its people come from every walk of life from all over the country. What has brought them together is an acute awareness that Washington has been tone-deaf to the voices of the people. They've had it with the posturing of both Democrats and Republicans. Through the Tea Party, the silent majority now has a giant megaphone. The Tea Party movement provides a fresh and unvarnished combination of candor, authenticity and idealism. In the age of YouTube, politicians are having difficulty in managing their image or their audience through a largely supplicant news media. Courageous Citizenry Something more fascinating and real is taking place in town-hall meetings rather than in staged press conferences. In fact, it would appear that average citizens have more courage to play hardball with politicians than do too many in the Washington-centric media. Conventional news reporting has become increasingly passe in a digital age where pervasive recording devices and Internet distribution have empowered average people to cut through political double-talk and denial. Lawmakers can no longer hide in smoke-filled rooms or deflect with mere press releases. Spontaneous responses with common-sense zingers from people like Joe the Plumber are a lot more lively and revealing. The Tea Party folks don't stand in the line to genuflect before an adoring media. Perhaps that's where the conflict begins. Even so, in spite of Democratic strategists who seek to discredit or belittle the Tea Party as a speed bump rather than a roadblock, there's no denying that this movement is a game-changer. Taxed And Spent Many drawn to the Tea Party say they fear for the first time that the country is in secular decline, with future generations facing a financial collapse from Washington's narcissistic spending and borrowing binge. For them, the Tea Party represents the most effective way to halt the corrupting spending practices of many in both parties that add trillions to the national debt. This corruption became embarrassingly obvious in the Democrats' unconstitutional maneuvers to force passage of ObamaCare. There, on display before the nation, was the ruling party's corruption and violation of the people's inalienable rights in a most personal area of their lives. Tea Party activists not only have tax-borrow-and-spend liberals in their sights. They are equally fed up with country-club Republicans who have enabled large corporations — such as General Electric and Goldman Sachs — to game the system and obtain loan guarantees and preferential treatment. Titans of finance and industry need to recognize that competitive free markets always provide more reliable and abundant prosperity than the rigged game of corporatism and liberal fascism built on ever-shifting political sands. For too long, silence has been consent. Corporate leaders need to speak out and defend the system that produces wealth and upward mobility. Economic discussions within the Tea Party start with recognizing that free-market capitalism has not failed in the U.S., because it has not really been sufficiently tried. What failed in 2008 was the result of distorted and overextended crony capitalist housing and finance markets that were largely created through easy money and credit by the Fed, Fannie and Freddie — all centered in Washington. The Tea Party believes separation of the economy and state is as vital to the country's future as separation of church and state. Going into the elections, Tea Party activists are more likely to support candidates of substance within the two-party system than third-party candidates. With the Democratic Party having become one whose naked interests now revolve around maintaining and enlarging the prerogatives and power of the state, Tea Party affiliates have little choice but to favor Republicans. Incumbents or new-entry candidates who distance themselves from the Tea Party message do so at their peril. Anyone sent to Washington now needs to be resolute on three things: deficit and debt reduction, getting the government out of the way of private-sector job creation, and repealing ObamaCare. Back To Basics Many Tea Party activists believe they have a historic calling to realign the Republican Party around the nation's founding ideals. That vision has helped elect a number of Tea Party candidates against better-known and better-funded establishment Republicans in recent primary races. It's also likely to find broad support with independents and traditional Democrats who put patriotism above special interests and entitlements. The majority of Americans still know by experience and instinct that it is the character, initiative and ingenuity of people that are keys to restoring the nation's greatness, not wealth redistribution and regulatory spoils arrangements undertaken by faceless government bureaucrats. As for the November elections, the Tea Party folks say: "Bring it on, baby." • Powell is a visiting fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution and a director at RemingtonRand and Alpha Quest. .

To: Sully- who wrote (35164)	11/4/2010 3:32:47 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

WE'RE ALL BIGOTS NOW! ANN COULTER November 3, 2010 After Tuesday's election, the fresh new faces of the Democratic Party are ... Harry Reid and Jerry Brown! (Who had the worst election night? Chuck Schumer, who's been waiting in the wings to replace Reid as Senate majority leader. Who had the second worst election night? The people who live below Barney Frank's apartment.) With the addition of new Republican senators Ron Johnson (Wisconsin), Rand Paul (Kentucky) and Marco Rubio (Florida) -- among others -- the average IQ of Senate Republicans has just increased by about 20 points. Also, liberals won't have Sharron Angle to kick around anymore. Now that Angle, Christine O'Donnell, Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina are gone, Keith Olbermann is indefinitely suspending his "Worst Persons of the World" segment. Republicans added two magnificent new black faces to the Congress with Allen West in Florida, who beat sore loser Ron Klein 54.3 percent to 45.7 percent (with 97 percent counted, Klein wouldn't concede), and Tim Scott in South Carolina, who crushed Democrat Ben Frasier, 65-29. Republicans also launched two new Hispanic stars this election: Sen.-elect Marco Rubio from Florida and the new governor of New Mexico, Susanna Martinez. And we got a bonus Sikh -- Nikki Haley, the new governor of South Carolina. MSNBC is still searching for the "Republicans are racist" angle in all of this. The most important outcome of this week's election is that Republicans clobbered the Democrats in the state gubernatorial and legislative races. Next year, state lawmakers draw new congressional districts, determining the congressional map for the next decade. In the past, Democrats have had a 2-1 advantage in congressional redistricting. Not anymore. Tuesday night, Republicans won governorships in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Tennessee, Alabama, Nebraska, Kansas, Texas, Georgia, South Carolina -- pause, deep breath -- New Mexico, Nevada, Wyoming, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Alaska, Maine, Iowa and Florida. They also swept the state legislatures. Meanwhile, the Democrats won governor's races in California, New York, Massachusetts, Arkansas and Maryland. Not only are all the Democrats' states losing population, which isn't as important for redistricting, but the Democrats' biggest plum, California -- losing congressional seats for the first time since the '50s -- also approved a ballot measure that will take redistricting out of the hands of the California legislators and turn it over to a Citizens Redistricting Commission. So the Democrats got nothing out of this election. Worst of all, now they're stuck with Harry Reid. Democrats' congressional redistricting dreams weren't the only thing that died Tuesday night. A slew of election myths died -- though I'm sure they'll have to be killed off again in every future election: (1) Election predictions are interesting and give us valuable information. We may as well listen to people on TV give us their guesses on how many jellybeans are in the 10-gallon jar. The only prediction that came true was my prediction that most predictions were worthless. Last week, Charles Krauthammer predicted a pickup of 55 House seats and eight Senate seats -- which, weirdly, was the exact polling average given by Real Clear Politics. For months now, Dick Morris has been assuring Fox News viewers that Republicans were going to take both houses. If only some of that precious airtime had been spent interviewing the great Bill Brady, he would not now be locked in an election recount for governor in Illinois -- Obama's home state and the sixth most populous state in the nation. (2) A "wave" election would give the victory to Republicans in all close Senate races. We had a wave. We had an enormous wave, a tidal wave, a wave that produced more than 60 seats in the House in the biggest party turnover since 1948. But Democrats still won all Senate races that were tied in the polls. The fact that the close races were all in solidly Democratic states had more to do with the outcome than the "wave." Demographics matter, not "waves." (3) Newt Gingrich engineered the 1994 Republican sweep of Congress. All Newt did was avoid standing in front of a runaway freight train in 1994, when Republicans picked up a comparatively paltry 54 seats. We would have done that if Pee-wee Herman had been the face of the Republican Party. This year, with absolutely no Republican or Tea Party leader, Republicans picked up 60-plus House seats. Republican landslides are apparently inevitable whenever Democrats try to turn our health care over to the Department of Motor Vehicles. (4) Tea Party candidates like Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell were bad for the Republican Party. Au contraire! Every Republican who won a tightly contested election should be sending a thank-you note to Angle and O'Donnell for taking all the fire from the mainstream media and keeping the heat off of them. Republicans never had a chance to take the Senate, and anyone who knows the difference between California and Tennessee knew that. Most of the Senate seats up this year happened to be in very, very "blue" states. Short of a Republican invasion of the body snatchers, Republicans weren't going to be electing senators from California, New York and Oregon. Acting as if O'Donnell's primary victory dashed Republican dreams of taking the Senate was always absurd -- particularly coming from the people who supported a World Wrestling Entertainment impresario in Connecticut and did nothing to help a Republican who could have won that race. (5) The Republican landslide in the House will lead to a bitterly divided Congress with unimaginable gridlock. The fact that this year's crop of Senate elections was bad for the Republicans means the Senate elections two years from now, and then again four years from now, are going to be fantastic for Republicans. Do you think Claire McCaskill, Jim Webb, Sherrod Brown and Jon Tester of Montana -- all of whom will be facing the voters in two years -- noticed that popular, long-serving Democrat Russ Feingold just lost an election in a much more liberal state than their own? Even Lindsey Graham is going to start voting with the Republicans! (6) Connecticut voters wouldn't mind a World Wrestling Entertainment impresario. Connecticut isn't Minnesota. Anyone with the slightest familiarity with Connecticut knew WWE owner Linda McMahon never had a chance against Dick Blumenthal, a Democrat so repulsive even The New York Times attacked him. Republicans had the ideal Connecticut candidate in Rob Simmons, who lost the primary to McMahon. He had won in liberal districts before, was a graduate of Haverford College and Harvard University, was an Army colonel who served in Vietnam and teaches at Yale. He also never kicked a man in the groin for entertainment. But Simmons didn't have McMahon's money, so Republicans went with McMahon. If, instead of listening to pundits guess how many jellybeans are in the jar, the conservative media had showcased Simmons, he would have won the primary, and today conservatives and liberals would be united in joy over the defeat of Dick Blumenthal. . .

To: Sully- who wrote (35164)	11/11/2010 5:37:54 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

11 Senate GOPers, including six newcomers, to propose earmark moratorium; Cornyn, DeMint working together By: Mark Tapscott Editorial Page Editor 11/09/10 10:45 AM EST Even as some in the liberal mainstream media appear determined to spark a civil war among Senate Republicans, 11 of them are planning to move next week that the entire caucus join the House GOP caucus in an earmark moratorium for the 112th Congress. The group includes Jim DeMint, R-SC, Tom Coburn, R-OK, John Ensign, R-NV, Mike Enzi, R-WY, and John Cornyn, R-TX, along with Senators-elect Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, Marco Rubio of Florida, Rand Paul of Kentucky, Mike Lee of Utah, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, and Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire. "Americans want Congress to shut down the earmark favor factory, and next week I believe House and Senate Republicans will unite to stop pork barrel spending," DeMint said. "Instead of spending time chasing money for pet projects, lawmakers will be able to focus on balancing the budget, reforming the tax code and repealing the costly health care takeover." And in a related development, DeMint is co-sponsoring an amendment Cornyn plans to offer that would put the Senate GOPers on record in support of a constitutional amendment requiring the federal budget to be balanced and thereby force Congress to put the brakes on government spending and require a supermajority to raise taxes. "Senator Cornyn's amendment is critical to stopping the runaway spending that is mortgaging our children’s' future,” DeMint said. “Republicans should fully support a Balanced Budget Amendment that would require us to end the skyrocketing debt without raising taxes on American families." Funny, Cornyn and DeMint working together to stop earmarks, require a balanced budget and prevent future tax increases without a congressional supermajority. DeMint was the major force behind the Senate Conservative Fund that contributed mightily the victories of many of the incoming GOP senators, while Cornyn headed the Senate Republican Campaign Committee that made some moves earlier in the 2010 campaign that were strongly criticized by conservatives. Read more at the Washington Examiner: washingtonexaminer.com

To: Sully- who wrote (35164)	11/11/2010 6:03:48 AM
From: Sully-	1 Recommendation Respond to of 35834

Keep One Earmark Bob Gorrell from Creators Syndicate creators.com

To: Sully- who wrote (35164)	11/11/2010 6:11:42 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

The Palins, and a 125 Pound Halibut, Coming Soon To Your TV Jim Geraghty The Campaign Spot In Sarah Palin So what are we to make of the new Learning Channel (I'm told it's just "TLC" these days) series, "Sarah Palin’s Alaska"? There’s an odd split aim in this program, the first docudrama – TLC doesn’t like the term ‘reality show’ – to feature a figure widely considered a potential, and perhaps even front-running presidential candidate. TLC insists it is not political. Of course, they reached out to other political bloggers and me to tout the show before Sunday's debut. "Regardless of what I say or what TLC says, people will apply a political lens to this program because of the title instead of the content of the series," says Brian Reich, the chief strategist for the network’s extensive and detailed web page for the series, SPAlaska.com. "Instead of ignoring the elephant in the room, our approach was to be involved in the discussion. Political bloggers have just as much reason to be talking about this program as anyone else. Typically, TLC and other cable networks don’t engage the political blogosphere." The site will even feature a political blog, entitled "Not Taking Sides," which calls itself the "home of the non-political political discussion about Sarah Palin’s Alaska." "TLC is not political, we’re not political, we’re not trying to poke at the beehive of the political conversation," Reich says. "People who come to the show because of the politics will find information that feeds their political interests, but hopefully they'll find something else that also elevates the conversation. Ultimately, this is a family show about Alaska." So what does Sarah Palin hope to achieve through this program? (Besides, of course, the rumored $1 million per episode in pay?) "I wouldn’t pretend to know," Reich admits, but notes that the program aims to showcase Palin and her family "touring Alaska, showing off the state, showing viewers what is unique and interesting about life there. It shows her at home, in a spectacular, picturesque environment that people from the lower forty-eight cannot truly appreciate until they see it. When you combine Sarah Palin with Mark Burnett, a man who knows a thing or two about highlighting the environment where his programs they’re set, you get a program that is not like anything else they’ve seen on television." First up in episode one: The Palins go salmon fishing and encounter brown bears. (And with that, a million “Mama Grizzly vs. Mama Grizzly ” headline puns were born.) A clip of this is already on YouTube: Sarah Palin's Alaska- The Mama Bear Love it or hate it, consider it brilliant marketing or egregiously un-presidential, the program does seem set to reveal the personality of a major political figure in a truly groundbreaking manner. Reich notes that besides the bear encounter, the opening episode features the Palin family going camping on Mount McKinley and mountain climbing. "She admits that she’s never been a real mountain climbing person, when she’s up there, she gets a little scared, and it’s a really honest, really revealing moment. It makes for something people will not typically see as a politician." A portion of this is revealed in another promo: Sarah Palin's Alaska- Rock Climber or Rock Star? Either way, TLC is fully aware that the "is she running?" speculation will drive viewership, and perfectly comfortable with touting that angle. "Will people see that as presidential? My job is to give them data points to make that decision on," Reich said. "I hope people discuss this ad nauseum. I hope people watch the show in order to scrutinize it, and determine whether this is a show featuring someone who’s running for president." The program debuts this Sunday, and runs for eight weeks through January 8. All of the episodes were taped in July and August, but only the first episode is finished editing. “It is the Palins’ adventures," Reich says. "You see them at home, dog-sledding, hunting, they have a great trip Halibut fishing, with crazy stuff. You’ll see Willow hacking up a halibut with her bare hands." Hacking? Come again? “They catch a halibut and then gut it. This fish must weigh as much as I do, maybe 125 pounds. It’s a big fish.” Reich says it is unknown whether TLC and Palin have had discussions about a second season. Then again, Palin may have other plans for the coming years. .

To: Sully- who wrote (35164)	11/11/2010 7:27:30 AM
From: Sully-	1 Recommendation Respond to of 35834

“Our oath is not to friendship. Our oath is to a Constitution. and there’s a reason we take that oath because if we don’t believe it, if we don't adhere to it, we're going to run our country into the ground,” Jim DeMint Earns His Stripes as Tea Party Power Broker FoxNews.com Published November 09, 2010 Senator Tea Party, as Jim DeMint is sometimes known, is a moniker the first-term senator began wearing before the Tea Party became a household name. It's also a description that has pushed the South Carolina Republican out of the shadows and into the forefront of electoral politics. "I'm proud to be called Senator Tea Party. I feel like I'm giving a voice to people who are very frustrated that Washington's not listening,” DeMint told Fox News. This fall, DeMint, who was just re-elected to his second term in the Senate, took his commitment to making Washington listen out on the campaign trail – and not merely in his own race. He endorsed high-profile conservatives and donated millions from his political action committee to failed Senate candidates Ken Buck of Colorado, Sharron Angle of Nevada and Christine O’Donnell of Delaware as well as successful contestants Marco Rubio of Florida and Rand Paul of Kentucky. It’s a success rate that has made people wonder whether the GOP could have done better had DeMint not been so stubborn, but it’s also one that has compelled people to keep a close eye on the Tea Party hero. Elected to the House in 1998, then to the Senate in 2004, DeMint already had a reputation as a pork buster. In 2008, he stepped forward to vote against the Troubled Assets Relief Program, which turned out to be President Bush’s bank bailout -- a vote many now cite as the moment of conception for the Tea Party movement. Three months later, DeMint unsuccessfully led the crusade against President Obama’s $814 billion stimulus package, but DeMint remained undaunted. “It's like blasting rock. It's not graceful,” he said. DeMint acknowledges the blowback he’s gotten from some colleagues. “Change comes hard and I have found that the power here is so ingrained, it's so built around the earmark system, we've got a few people throwing out bread to urchins is the way the place looks to me. And I'm just committed to changing it,” he said. DeMint says despite the strain, friendships are very important to him. But they don’t interfere with his objectives. “Our oath is not to friendship. Our oath is to a Constitution. and there’s a reason we take that oath because if we don’t believe it, if we don't adhere to it, we're going to run our country into the ground,” he said. Exit polls last week showed that voters believe the economy is job one for Congress, which he agrees to a point. “You can't be a fiscal conservative and not be a social conservative. A large part of the expansive government is to take, make up for a dysfunctional society because our culture's falling apart. The family's falling apart,” he said. As for foreign policy, DeMint cites missile defense and a modernized military as key. But the Tea Party fiscal issues remain the impetus to DeMint’s momentum, and his positioning for a ride on the 2012 presidential wave. “He probably didn't enter this race or this election year thinking that he would run for president. But you look at how this Tea Party has taken off in America, and he's got to be thinking, ‘I'd be crazy not to think about becoming a candidate myself,’” said David Yepsen, senior political correspondent for The Des Moines Register. DeMint says he has the management and leadership skills to take the helm, but it is not a job he’s interested in pursuing right now. “It's going to be a painful job for the next president if they do it right. Taking apart this huge bureaucracy, fighting the government unions, doing the things that have to be done to cut spending and cut the size of the federal government and restore some physical sanity,” he said. .

To: Sully- who wrote (35164)	12/17/2010 1:13:48 AM
From: Sully-	1 Recommendation Respond to of 35834

GOP Should Slam on the Brakes David Limbaugh December 16, 2010 05:39 PM Conservatism and responsible government won a resounding victory in November's elections, and yet just a month later, we're witnessing legislative arrogance on a scale you wouldn't expect if voters had ratified the ruling class' sprint toward national bankruptcy. Can you imagine how it would be acting if it hadn't received a "shellacking"? It seems that Washington is embracing all the principles and practices the voters soundly rejected, without the slightest indication it either received the message or cares. Are we seeing any evidence of greater transparency, a rejection of earmarks, budgetary restraint or legislative deliberation? To me, it looks more like defiance from lame-duck Beltway elites who have again created a false climate of urgency to pressure disunited and disorganized opponents to make damaging concessions that are not worth what they're receiving in return. There is no real urgency here, and those saying otherwise are crying wolf. This is the first Congress in the history of the budget process that failed even to vote on a budget for the next year. They've known all along this moment was coming. On the omnibus spending bill, they can still pass a continuing resolution for another three months and avert a government shutdown. There is no excuse for them to be legislating from the political grave a full year beyond the date congressional control changes hands. It's outrageous they would even try it, and it's discouraging that Republicans are considering being rolled like this. This bill violates every conceivable mandate the voters issued in November, including a bill too long and complex even to read, let alone digest, in this artificially accelerated time frame. It contains almost 7,000 earmarks, totaling some $8 billion, and includes egregious new spending provisions that constitute another monumental slap in the face to an electorate that emphatically said "no" to further deficit spending. And it's not just the spending bill. Just consider the other important bills they are also trying to shove through in crisis mode, which has now been firmly established as the default legislative mode. We're told they have to pass the following measures in the next few days, lest the world come to an end: --A so-called tax bill full of extraneous provisions that is being marketed as a tax cut for the wealthy when it is not a cut at all, but an extension of existing rates, and is not just for the "wealthy" (who aren't all wealthy), but for all income groups. Not being a "cut," but a continuation of existing rates, it would not "cost" a dime. But if the linguistic distorters insist on saying it would "cost," then they must acknowledge that the bulk of the cost would come from continuing the rates for all other income groups, a fact that's too inconvenient for the left to concede because it doesn't fit their template of demonizing the "wealthy." Plus, the rate extensions would only continue for two years, injecting great uncertainty into an already unstable economy and working against entrepreneurial investment and economic growth. The bill also would reinstate the estate tax and further extend unemployment benefits in the name of compassion, with no one making the case that it's not compassionate to implement policies that do more harm than good by exacerbating unemployment and retarding economic growth. --An enormously important arms deal with the Russians known as New START, which they're trying to rush through without full and thorough hearings. Despite support for the treaty, many troubling issues remain, such as verifiability and implications for conventional warfare. Also, the dangerously volatile North Korean and Iranian regimes are not affected, and there is ambiguity over the treaty's language concerning missile defense. There are discrepancies between the administration's and Russia's interpretations, and the administration refuses to clear those up by releasing its negotiating records. Some have pointed out that the proposed treaty is a product of this administration's fundamentally flawed approach to arms control, in that it is based on the goal of global nuclear disarmament when even the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States says the global elimination of nukes is not presently possible. --Congress is also trying to cram through the DREAM Act, the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" and other controversial measures with far-reaching consequences. This is no way to conduct the nation's business -- ever -- but especially not when the overwhelming majority of the people sent a clear signal they'd had enough of such recklessness. Those who fear backlash to the GOP from another perceived GOP-caused government shutdown are misreading the electorate's mood. This process is out of control, and it's time for Republicans to slam on the brakes. Now. Enough is enough. .