Liberal racemonger

For some reason I am sensing some doubt in the Collective Left. The majority of polls have Obama leading, way ahead of McCain. But then there's some eye-catching news about some polls -- ones with a better history -- in a statistical tie between the two candidates. Not to mention that the gap continues to narrow as election day closes in. Let's not ignore the fact that the undecided voters still consist of a big chunk of voter bloc, and a lot are leaning McCain. Also, "Joe the Plumber" has become an effective narrative in outing Obama as a liberal.

But the biggest indicator that the Collective Left has lost some confidence is when they turn into racemongers. Susan Estrich trusts the Obama-positive polls so much that she decides if her candidate still loses the election then it must be caused by -- gasp! -- racism:

The only way all these polls could be that far off is if people are lying in numbers never before seen in American politics.

Why would they do that?

You tell me it has nothing to do with race. I'll laugh. What else could it possibly be?

Here's the problem though. Obama has been elevated to uber-celebrity status by the media and has a cult-like following. It's sort of like how Bush-hating has become hip. If you like Bush, you're labeled a right-wing nut, Nazi, or worse. Well, turn that around and apply to Obamamania. If you don't love Obama, there's something wrong with you and you're an idiot. It's hip to endorse Obama. He'll save us from everything bad in life and should star in the next 007 movie.

I won't be surprised if there are people who will lie when being polled. That will always happen and there is no way to prevent it. People lie for various reasons, too. Maybe Joe Smith just want to be left alone by pollsters. Maybe Joe Smith is really undecided and leans Obama for the moment. Maybe Joe Smith just wants to screw around with the poll numbers. Who knows?

But please, it is insulting to assume that such a poll liar is a racist. Stop with the racemongering already...

"Aunti Zeituni" lives in Boston public housing

Obama's aunt, Zeituni Onyango, is found to be living in South Boston's public housing and have lived there for five years. She's believed to be the "Aunti Zeituni" in Obama's memoir, Dreams From My Father.

Which other U.S. senator you know has a brother living in a slum and an aunt in public housing?

The purge begins...

The headline this morning on Drudge: The Big Purge... The NY Post, Dallas Morning News, and Washington Times were given the boot off the Obama plane. Interestingly, these three newspapers endorsed McCain a few days ago.

Well, there's really nothing wrong with that. The Obama campaign can invite and kick out whoever it wants. It's just funny that they did this soon after the publications endorsed the opposing candidate.

Murtha in trouble

The race for PA-12 is now tied. Democratic incumbent Rep. John Murtha now has to put up a fight against Republican Bill Russell in order to keep his job. Maybe some folks forgave him for lying about heroic Marines in Iraq. But it looks like Pennsylvanians don't appreciate the fact that their elected congressman would call them "rednecks" and "racists."

Drinking the polling Kool-Aid

How incredible is this: Andrew Kohut, the president of the Pew Research Center, has a piece in the NYT that Obama leads McCain 52 to 36%.

No. Friggin'. Way. Look at Pew's track record and it's not that accurate.

Counting down...

In less than a week will Americans cast votes for their next leader in the most important job in the world. The race is still close according to polls with better track records. Other media-sponsored polls have Sen. Obama leading many points. The media has already picked its winner.

But most polls have Obama still under 50%, and that means a good 10% or more are still undecided. These are the folks that'll decide the outcome of the Electoral College and determine which candidate reaches the magic 270 electoral votes.

It's been said that America is a center-right country. Obama's surge and consistency in polling numbers certainly question that. Here is a community-organizer-turned-politician from Chicago with an affinity to Marxism and calls left-wing nut Bill Ayers a friend. Without a doubt Sen. Obama is the most left-leaning presidential candidate in U.S. history. But he's probably also the most charismatic and eloquent -- a celebrity in the media's eyes -- and one of the youngest. More importantly, he made history by becoming the first black presidential candidate of a major political party. That's something all Americans should be proud of.

However, Americans should also be proud of their unique heritage in the context of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, two of the most important documents in Western democracy. The Declaration tells the truth of our "unalienable Rights... Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness." The Consitution starts in its preamble with "We the people..."

Which candidate offers us a closer ideology to what our Founding Fathers had in mind? Right to life -- denied by pro-choice activists. Right to liberty -- limited by leftist lawyers and judges. Pursuit of happiness -- something the government is more than happy (no pun intended) to take its share with taxation.

So ask yourself: Which candidate cannot bring himself to acknowledge that life begins at conception, even though he's a Christian? Which candidate desires a court with activist judges? And which candidate thinks taxes, not opportunities, are a way to achieve fairness in society?

We the people... have we lost sight of the principles this great nation was founded on? Have we been caught up in the celebrity culture of modern day? Have we become so selfish that we no longer care for the devastation we could cause to our children and grandchildren? Yes, we the people...

Slate staff picks Obama for president, thankfully they've been wrong for the past two elections

In a meaningless exercise to further pay homage to The One, Slate asks its staff members who their pick for president will be and why. Well, Obama/Biden wins in a landslide of 55 out of 57 votes.

The good news is that in 2000 the staff picked Al Gore and 2004 John Kerry. So that leaves a 0-3 record for this fine publication.

Redistribute THIS!

The Obama campaign doesn't like its candidate being called a socialist (yes, the truth hurts), even though Obama himself said he'd like to "spread the wealth around" and in a recently uncovered interview favored wealth redistribution. Of course, the liberal media is ready to rescue and spin Obama out of this disturbing ideology. Here we have Cass R. Sunstein's defense in The New Republic:

It is true that Obama supports the Earned Income Tax Credit (an idea pioneered by Republicans). It is also true that Obama supports the minimum wage. It is true too that Obama is centrally concerned with decent education for all -- and the right to education was at stake in perhaps the most important case that Obama is discussing. It is true, finally, that Obama wants to make health care available for all. But it is truly ridiculous to take Obama's remarks in 2001 as suggesting that the nation should embark on a large-scale redistributive scheme.

Sorry, but education isn't a "right"... Neither is health care and housing, for that matter. The Constitution is very clear about our rights: free speech, bearing arms, just trial, etc. What Obama and liberals call "rights" are really just privileges we can enjoy should we take advantage of the opportunities in this free society.

Refuting Biden's view on Catholic Church and abortion

On the subject of abortion Sen. Joe Biden has said that "my church has wrestled with this for 2,000 years." But this is simply untrue. Bishop W. Francis Malooly of Catholic Diocese of Wilmington points out:

...The teaching of the Church is clear and not open to debate. Abortion is a grave sin because it is the wrongful taking of an innocent human life...

Many liberals like to avoid the issue of abortion because they know deep in their hearts that it is, as Bishop Malooly says, a sin of murder. Worse yet, they will falsely accuse the Church of being indecisive or flip-flopping. And that is an unfortunate perversion of their faith.

Newspaper looks into the future, declares Obama president but sees no readership

The New Mexico Sun News wants to claim the first newspaper to declare a winner in the presidential election: Sen. Barack Obama. It's no wonder so many liberal newspapers are losing readership... Death of journalism indeed.

One party to rule them all...

DNC Chairman Howard Dean is looking forward to complete domination of Washington politics. This is the most scary outcome of this election.

Death of journalism

Many has said that 2008 is the year journalism died. The media bias in this campaign season has been too apparent, and thanks to it Sen. Obama has a celebrity cult following. The bias has been so obvious that even a seasoned journalist, Michael Malone, cannot stand it any longer.

Donating to Obama is easy... (too easy)

Evidently it's a little bit too easy to donate to Obama's campaign...

The United States of Europe

That's what American will become should Obama enter the White House. Writing in the WSJ, Pete Du Pont calls it the "Europeanization of America," and lists seven things that'll happen:

The U.S. military will withdraw from Iraq quickly and substantially, regardless of conditions on the ground or the obvious consequence of emboldening terrorists there and around the globe.

Protectionism will become our national trade policy; free trade agreements with other nations will be reduced and limited.
Income taxes will rise on middle- and upper-income people and businesses, and individuals will pay much higher Social

Security taxes, all to carry out the new president's goals of "spreading the wealth around."

Federal government spending will substantially increase. The new Obama proposals come to more than $300 billion annually, for education, health care, energy, environmental and many other programs, in addition to whatever is needed to meet our economic challenges. Mr. Obama proposes more than a 10% annual spending growth increase, considerably higher than under the first President Bush (6.7%), Bill Clinton (3.3%) or George W. Bush (6.4%).

Federal regulation of the economy will expand, on everything from financial management companies to electricity generation and personal energy use.

The power of labor unions will substantially increase, beginning with repeal of secret ballot voting to decide on union representation.

Free speech will be curtailed through the reimposition of the Fairness Doctrine to limit the conservative talk radio that so irritates the liberal establishment.

Doesn't sound very appealing at all, does it?

Obama already thought about "redistribution of wealth" in 2001

For a candidate that promotes "change" incessantly, Obama's tax plan doesn't seem to reflect much of it. And in a 2001 radio interview, Obama's already keen on the idea of "redistribution of wealth."

Obama supporters are voting themselves out of their jobs, especially if they work for small businesses.

Liberal Halloween props

I suppose it's no surprise that people are going to make Halloween decorations a platform for their political views this year. But a Palin mannequin hung from a noose and a McCain emerging from flames?

Only in West Hollywood.

NYT endorses Obama, credit rating cut to junk

Surprise! S&P did what all of us have known for years: cut NYT's credit rating to junk.

Obama up, markets down

Are we seeing a correlation here? As Obama gathers even more steam in the last week and a half until election day, the global markets continue to slide in a downward death spiral. Investors are well aware of an Obama presidency and the policies that will bring. If this is any indication of the collective intelligence, I'm going to believe that the public is smart enough not to want a socialist America and will not cast the ballot for Obama. A few polls showing McCain and Obama in a tight race are starting to get more attention, and people are starting to discount those polls having Obama leading five or more points.

As Peggy Noonan says in the WSJ, "Obama looks like a winner, but it's not over yet."

The Forbes analysis

Steve Forbes of Fobes writes one of the best analysis of the economic meltdown. The article is long, but it's a good read on the why and how paired with historical context.

Vote, with vengeance or principles?

Let's face it: many conservative voters are in a bind this year in choosing the next president. Conservatives are not thrilled with Sen. John McCain, but casting a vote to the opposing candidate, the furthest-left ever in American history, would cause countless sleepless nights. Many people will go the "lesser of two evils" path and stick with McCain. 

Then there are those who will vote blue (and turn blue as well?) to punish the GOP for its failure to reign in government largess and the prolonged war in Iraq. That's the mentality of Radley Balko who'd voted Republican in 1996 and 2000, but voted Democrat in 2004. His frustration is clear as he pens in Reason "Why the Republicans Must Lose":

...The Republican Party has exiled its Goldwater-Reagan wing and given up all pretense of any allegiance to limited government. In the last eight years, the GOP has given us a monstrous new federal bureaucracy in the Department of Homeland Security. In the prescription drug benefit, it's given us the largest new federal entitlement since the Johnson administration. Federal spending—even on items not related to war or national security—has soared. And we now get to watch as the party that's supposed to be "free market" nationalizes huge chunks of the economy's financial sector.

Agreed, agreed, and agreed. But even Mr. Balko understands "This isn't to say that Barack Obama would be any better." So why vote for the "more of the two evils"?

His argument is simply... revenge. Wake up call. Punishment for the GOP. Let the Republicans have it for four years and hopefully they'll come out better and stronger. But guess what? Politicians, Republican or Democrat or whatever, won't suffer as much as the everyday folks, supposedly the "Joe the Plumbers" across America.

Your vote, that piece of paper so honored in a democratic society, is not really a weapon. Don't think of it as a firecracker that'll get a politician's undivided attention. Rather, think of a vote as a reflection of your beliefs and principles. Cast your vote because you agree with Obama or share McCain's agenda.

Don't throw away that vote simply because of your vengeful partisanship.