I will be live Blogging my reactions, feelings and just overall being a smart mouth on twitter.
You can follow me, by going to my twitter page, by going here.
I will also post things of interest here, throughout the evening.
Tag: liberals
Your Host goes to vote.
Yes, I did go vote this morning. Yes, I did take the Camera. First the pictures:
And…. Off we go!
I didn’t think there would be many cars at the voting precinct, well, needless to say, I was very wrong! 
Did I mention that there were many cars? 
Of course, the propaganda masters were out. But I took the bypass to get away from them. 
The line was LONG…. But it moved very quickly, people were very friendly, as friendly as one can be at eight O’clock in the morning. 
The line moved very quickly, the voting staff was very professional. They even verified my voting information while in the line. 
Of course, a trip to a public school to vote, would not be complete without exposure to liberal propaganda. 
Yes, let’s study and celebrate Multi-Culturalism. Translation: Let’s be ashamed of our ethnic heritage, be ashamed of our forefather mistakes, and embrace Illegal Aliens in our country. 
I think not! 
Well, those were the pictures that I could take. I was not allowed to snap photos inside the voting area, Which is understandable. I had one moron who snarled, “I don’t want any pictures taken of me!” () I said nothing. 
I wanted to tell him not to worry, because he was nothing I wanted to photograph anyhow. 
Let’s just say that I did not want to break my camera.
Some things that I saw that stuck out in my mind. An elderly man, who was easily every bit of 75 or older, barely able to walk; who walked with the assistance of a cane. Who came out to vote. I believe that this election is that important to people. Which is absolutely amazing.
The precinct did have plenty of ballots, the line moved very quickly. There were no hassles at all. The election staff here was very friendly. There was an election ballot challenger, he was from the Republican Party. (Surprise there boy!) He was eyeballing the people voting. I somehow doubt that he is going to find any problems around here.
I am glad that that I went early. Because I believe had I waited, I would have been in line much longer.
For what it is worth, I did vote a straight Libertarian ticket this year. Last night, I did have some second thoughts about it, I did consider voting for Obama, however, principles won out over emotions.
It will be an interesting today and this evening and I will be here Blogging on the interesting stuff.
Red State Update: Obama’s Aunt
Stupidity on the Left…
I meant to to report on this last night. But ran out of time.
It appears that some nut-ball liberal radio host has called for the death of Joe the plumber.
The Video: (H/T to The Radio Equalizer) (Warning: Language)
Transcript: (Via NewsBusters)
“F__G__D__Joe the G__D__M__F__plumber! I want M__F Joe the plumber dead.”
The reason why it is such a short transcript is because it was during a commercial bump on his show, and whether it was a open mic incident or intentional, still it should not have happened. If someone on the right had said that about anyone related to Obama’s campaign, the Liberals would be out for blood. But because it is McCain’s friends, it’s fine.
I’ve even been exposed to the wrath of Obama’s followers. I did something a while back, that earned me a spot on gawker.com. So, I know all about the rage. I admit what I did was stupid. So I think this liberal ought to own up as well.
Of course, it being a liberal and one of Obama’s supporters, we know that will never happen. 🙄
Even more stupidity from Republican Party….
Of which I am not a part of, nor will I ever be.
I happen to be looking at my RSS feeds tonight, and I happen to see a entry over at the NRO’s “The Corner”.
First watch the video:
To which the Editor of the National Review, Kathryn Jean Lopez replied:
Was There a Campaign Bus Nearby?
I mean, is there any more clearer indication to you, that the once fine National Review, founded by a great Conservative like the The Late William F. Buckley, has fallen into the hands of idiotic Neo-Conservative shills? I mean, even Buckley himself, before he passed acknowledged that the Magazine has changed direction.
At this point, I simply ask this. Call me a right of center, Call me a Libertarian Conservative, but don’t you ever call me a god damned Republican. Because the likes of Lopez do not speak for me, at all.
I just wonder, what is Lopez’s Immigration status? I bet an investigation into that would yield some very interesting info. For that damned matter, what’s a descendant of Mexicans doing commenting or American politics anyhow?
I know…. RAAAAAAAAACST!
Heartbreak: New USA Today/Gallup Poll, Obama 53% – McCain 42%
Egad, two days away and this is the best that John McCain can do? Not good, not good at all.
Via USA Today:
Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama leads Republican John McCain by 11 percentage points in the last USA TODAY/Gallup national poll of likely voters before Election Day.
With less than two days to go before polls open, the contenders’ support is estimated to be:
• Obama, 53%.
• McCain, 42%.Those numbers, released this hour, are based on national surveys of 2,472 likely voters. The interviews were conducted by telephone on Friday, Saturday and today. The margin of error on each figure is +/- 2 percentage points.
Gallup says the group it surveyed is mostly made up of voters who fit its “traditional” model of those likely to show up at the polls. Also among the 2,472 are some who have already voted — including first-timers.
The results are identical to Gallup’s “expanded” pool of likely voters, which adds more first-time voters than the survey firm used in the past.
One other set of numbers to consider: Gallup says that when it allocates the 4% of likely voters who either had no opinion or would not choose between Obama and McCain, it estimates the candidates’ current support levels would most likely be 55% for Obama, 44% for McCain.
This very well could be the writing on the wall for the McCain campaign. What could be causing such a hemorrhage of support for John McCain. Well, besides all the stuff racked up against the Bush Administration, there’s this:
McCain’s choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate doesn’t appear to be wearing well with most Americans. In the poll, 45% of registered voters rated the choice as “poor” and another 18% said it was “only fair,” while 19% called it “pretty good” and 16% excellent.
Those are much more negative ratings than in a USA TODAY survey taken just after the Republican National Convention in St. Paul. Then, 60% called the pick of Palin excellent or good; 38% said it was “only fair” or poor.
In contrast, assessments of Barack Obama’s choice of Delaware Sen. Joe Biden remain positive. Now, 60% call Obama’s choice excellent or “pretty good,” while 38% say it was “only fair” or poor. In early September, the divide was 63%-33%.
Biden has a favorable-unfavorable rating of 53%-32%. Palin has a favorable-unfavorable rating of 42%-49%.
One more historic tidbit from the survey: Obama’s favorable rating is 62% — the highest that any presidential candidate has registered in Gallup’s final pre-election polls going back to 1992.
That may very well be the answer. As I have written on here, many times before, John McCain ran on a faulty narrative. One that assumed that the angry Hillary Clinton voters would just come vote for John McCain. That formula, I am afraid was based upon some very flawed thinking. There was a great deal of cooling off that took place, not to mention there was quite a bit of mending that took place in the Democratic Party, between the factions.
Further more, John McCain thought that Sarah Palin would energize the base towards his campaign, and it did just that, but that’s the only thing it energized, it never did catch on with the rest of America. I cannot say that it is entirely the fault of John McCain himself, because having a Vice-Presidential pick say silly stuff like, “I can see Russia from my House!” as a qualification for Foreign policy experience, is not a good way to make an impression on the Independent voters.
I will offer the standard caveat, that is that polls are a snapshot in time; one should keep the issues, not the polls in mind when voting. Vote your principles, Vote your conscience, Vote with your mind, vote with your heart, But above all, Vote. Lives have been lost, blood has been spilled on many a battlefield; distant and domestic, over the great vast space of that shadowing figure we call time; so that we as American Citizens can exercise that one scared thing that gives we the people; the great citizens of this free and Democratic Republic, that is the opportunity to voice our opinions in what happens in our political system in this great country of ours. That is to cast a private ballot choosing whom; we as free Americans, without fear of oppression, to choose the next person to be the President of the United States of America.
Oy: Somebody better tell Joe The Plumber to go play with a pipe
Or something….
(H/T TPM)
If John McCain wants to win, despite the polls, this is not the way to go about doing it. Questioning someones loyalty to America is not a acceptable thing in Politics. As Michele Bachmann recently found out.
Something tells me, that we’ll be seeing a bit more less of this man in the future.
More of Obama’s Audio on the Energy Industry
(H/T to Capt. Ed over @ HotAir)
The Video:
The Quote:
The problem is not technical, uh, and the problem is not mastery of the legislative intricacies of Washington. The problem is, uh, can you get the American people to say, “This is really important,” and force their representatives to do the right thing? That requires mobilizing a citizenry. That requires them understanding what is at stake. Uh, and climate change is a great example.
You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, uh, you know — Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad. Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it — whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, uh, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers.
They — you — you can already see what the arguments will be during the general election. People will say, “Ah, Obama and Al Gore, these folks, they’re going to destroy the economy, this is going to cost us eight trillion dollars,” or whatever their number is. Um, if you can’t persuade the American people that yes, there is going to be some increase in electricity rates on the front end, but that over the long term, because of combinations of more efficient energy usage, changing lightbulbs and more efficient appliance, but also technology improving how we can produce clean energy, the economy would benefit.
If we can’t make that argument persuasively enough, you — you, uh, can be Lyndon Johnson, you can be the master of Washington. You’re not going to get that done.
Sorry, you cannot spin that. Obama, in essence, is saying that he will cause one industry to collapse. All so he can promote his own agenda of “Green” energy. The problem with that is this, there are no tested, proven and ready alternative forms of energy, yet.
Ed from HotAir weighs in:
Energy prices skyrocketing will leave the economy in tatters, as we saw earlier this year. While no one doubts the need to start transitioning to better sources of energy, the manner in which that gets done means the difference of whether it gets done at all. A stagnant or receding economy does not produce scientific breakthroughs, especially when government both increases taxes and imposes steep cost burdens on energy. That cuts into both manufacturing and R&D, because as profits fall, fewer dollars go into research — which means that all of these wonderful developments would get delayed, or go unrealized altogether.
We need to plan for the transition better than what Obama proposes. We need to use our own reserves of oil, natural gas, coal, and shale to cushion the economy while we develop the alternatives and build the infrastructure to deliver it. That’s what John McCain proposed in his Lexington Project.
Price shocks on energy is the last thing this economy needs. It would be worse than the taxes Obama promises to impose on investment, and would have the same depressive effect. It’s an utter disaster.
Not only this, but I also believe that if Obama does this, Jobs will be lost. I guess Obama believes that stealing one man’s job, top create another is just perfectly fine. 🙄
That would be like shutting down an auto plant, and putting people, who have worked at an auto plant for some 30 years, out of a job. Just so that a company could start a car plant, making electric cars. Yeah, sure, new jobs are created, but what about the people working for the auto plants, that do not make the Electric car? Why allow them to suffer?
Just more things to keep in mind, when voting, come Tuesday. Because Obama believes in spreading the wealth, except it comes to those working in the coil industry.
If I were the Unionized Coil Miners, I would raising the roof about this!
Others: : QandO, PoliGazette, Little Green Footballs, Soccer Dad, Chicago Boyz, Silent Running, Ed Driscoll.com and Tapscott’s Copy Desk
shocking audio: Obama said he will bankrupt the coal industry…
This is not new, but it is still something to think about when you vote on Tuesday.
First the Video:
The Quote: (H/T to News Busters)
Let me sort of describe my overall policy.
What I’ve said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else’s out there.
I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, imposed every year.
So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.
That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in solar, wind, biodiesel and other alternative energy approaches.
The only thing I’ve said with respect to coal, I haven’t been some coal booster. What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as a (sic) ideological matter as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it.
So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can.
It’s just that it will bankrupt them.
Now had John McCain had said something like that, the Liberal Media would be all over it. But it’s Obama, so it’s okay.
Remember this on November 4.
Others: Weekly Standard,, DBKP, Democrat=Socialist, Ed Driscoll.com, Neptunus Lex, Macsmind, Jules Crittenden, Right Wing Nut House, Political Byline, Michelle Malkin, Wizbang, Babalu Blog, The Campaign Spot, Shopfloor, Doug Ross, Stop The ACLU, A Blog For All, Don Surber, BizzyBlog, 24Ahead, Wake up America, Moonbattery, Dirty Harry’s Place, Scared Monkeys and and more via Memeorandum
No wonder The Washington Times was tossed off Obama's plane!
Wow, no wonder The Washington Times was taken off of Barack Obama’s plane.
The Washington Times, in one of it’s commentary sections really let Barack Obama have it, These are questions that The Washington Times felt that John McCain should have asked Barack Obama:
- With the announcement that you raised an additional $150 million in September alone, you’re on pace to raise and spend something on the order of $650 million during the campaign. Together with your Big Labor allies and liberal 527s spending perhaps $350 million more on top of that on your behalf, we’re looking at a staggering $1 billion. Furthermore, it has been reported you’re out-advertising the McCain campaign 4-to-1 around the country. Aren’t you essentially trying to buy the presidency? When was it put up for sale to the highest bidder?
- — My campaign has been criticized by the liberal media in recent weeks for some angry words about you from some of my backers, which I’ve disavowed repeatedly. By contrast, why have you not vigorously condemned the remarks of your supporters, like those of actress Sandra Bernhard, who warned Sarah Palin to stay out of Manhattan lest she be gang-raped by Miss Bernhard’s “black brothers,” or Rep. Charlie Rangel, who said Mrs. Palin was “disabled”; or South Carolina Democratic Party Chairwoman Carol Fowler, who said Mrs. Palin’s chief qualification for having been selected as my running mate was that she hadn’t had an abortion; and most recently Rep. John Lewis of Georgia who likened me to one-time segregationist George Wallace?
- — You have spoken of your intention of raising taxes on the “rich” and making them pay their “fair share.” Can you put some hard numbers on that? What constitutes “rich” in your view, and what do you consider a “fair share,” given that, according to October 2007 Internal Revenue Service figures, the top 1 percent of taxpayers already pay 39.4 percent of all income taxes, the top 5 percent pay nearly 60 percent and the top 25 percent pay 86 percent? Is that not “fair share” enough, and if not, what would be “fair,” in your view?
- — You and your vice-presidential running mate, Sen. Joe Biden, have vowed repeatedly to “end” the war in Iraq. Why is the verb always “end” and never “win”?
- — You have sought to make an issue of my supposedly voting with President Bush 90 percent of the time, hoping to link me to a president whose popularity rating is under 30 percent. But isn’t it also true that you have voted 95 percent of the time with a Democratic Congress whose popularity rating is even lower than Mr. Bush’s, in some polls as low as 9 percent. So isn’t that 90 percent thing a red herring?
- — During the Democratic primaries, you refused to participate in a debate on the Fox News Channel, supposedly because the network isn’t “fair and balanced,” even though the event was to be co-sponsored by the Congressional Black Caucus. If you are unable to stand up to Brit Hume and Chris Wallace, why should we believe that as president you would be able to stand up to Vladimir Putin, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong-il or Hugo Chavez?
- — You have longstanding ties to ACORN, a left-wing group that is being investigated on voter-registration fraud charges in at least a dozen states, including in Nevada, where ACORN employees submitted voter-registration forms for the entire Dallas Cowboys starting lineup. Will you sever all ties to ACORN, call on Congress to revoke its millions of dollars in federal funding and urge the attorney general to pursue a RICO (Racketeer-Influenced Corruption Organization Act) investigation of ACORN?
- — You have received the backing of the teachers unions and have called for more federal spending on public education. So, if you are elected president, will you send your daughters, Sasha and Malia, to the D.C. public schools, as President Carter did with Amy? Would it not be hypocritical – in essence saying, “Do as I say, not as I do” – to do otherwise?
- — In your acceptance speech at the Democratic Convention, you said we should be our “brother’s keeper.” Yet, what have you done in that regard to help your own half-brother, George Hussein Obama, who lives in a hut in the slums of Nairobi, Kenya, on $1 a month?
- — You say you are against gay marriage, so why have you come out against a ballot referendum in California that would overrule the actions of four judges there that overturned the expressed will of 61 percent of the people of California in a 2000 referendum and imposed gay marriage by judicial fiat?
- — Some of your supporters have tried to make a health issue of the fact I’ve been treated for melanoma, even though I’ve been pronounced cancer-free. Yet you have not released more than a summary of your medical records. Will you release your full medical records before the election. If not, why not? Don’t the people have a right to know?
While all of these questions are legitimate, It seems to me, that the times is a bit on the aggressive side. I also noticed that this did not get printed till after their reporters were safely off the plane. Smart move, one would suppose. While on their face, the questions asked here are proper, but it comes off, at least to this writer, as a bad case of sour grapes.
At the risk of being accused of being a race baiter myself. I honestly have to ask the The Washington Times, if they would ask such questions of this Democratic Candidate, if he were a white man? I really wonder.
I think it would be good for the Conservative media, at the point, to just get over it, and accept the fact that the Democrats are going to win this election and start planning for 2012.
Oh yeah, but I’m a liberal, if I say stuff like that! 🙄
