Reasons 3 and 4: Why the Sky isn't Falling and We Can Stop Beating Outselves Up, Really!!!

chris.cillizza@washingtonpost.com

3. Now that they control the White House and Congress, Democrats will usher in a new progressive era.

Not likely. At first glance, the numbers do look encouraging for proponents of a new New Deal era in government: Obama claimed at least 364 electoral votes and more than 52.5 percent of the overall popular vote, while Democrats now control at least 57 seats in the Senate and 255 in the House.

But look more closely, and you see a heavy influx of moderate to conservative members in the incoming freshman Democratic class, particularly in the House. Of the 24 Republican-held districts that Democrats won in 2008, Kerry carried just three in 2004. Democratic victories on Nov. 4 included Alabama's 2nd district (where Kerry took 33 percent of the vote) and Idaho's at-large seat (where Kerry won just 30 percent). In fact, according to tabulations by National Journal's Richard E. Cohen, 81 House Democrats in the 111th Congress will represent districts that Bush carried in 2004.

The fact that roughly a third of the Democratic House majority sits in seats with Republican underpinnings (at least at the presidential level) is almost certain to keep a liberal dream agenda from moving through Congress. The first rule of politics is survival, and if these new arrivals to Washington want to stick around, they are likely to build centrist voting records between now and 2010.

4. A Republican candidate could have won the presidency this year.

I doubt it. In the hastily penned postmortems of campaign '08, much of the blame for McCain's loss seems to have fallen at the feet of the candidate and his advisers, who (so the narrative goes) made a series of lousy strategic decisions that wound up costing the Arizona senator the White House. There's little question that some of the choices McCain and his team made -- the most obvious being the impulsive decision to suspend his campaign and try to broker a deal on the financial rescue bill, only to see his efforts blow up in his face -- did not help. But a look at this year's political atmospherics suggests that the environment was so badly poisoned that no Republican -- not Mitt Romney, not Mike Huckabee, not even the potential future GOP savior, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal -- could have beaten Obama on Nov. 4.

Why not? Three words (and a middle initial): President George W. Bush.

In the national exit poll, more than seven in 10 voters said that they disapproved of the job Bush was doing; not surprisingly, Obama resoundingly won that group, 67 percent to 31 percent. But here's an even more stunning fact: While 7 percent of the exit-poll sample strongly approved of the job Bush was doing, a whopping 51 percent strongly disapproved. Obama won those strong disapprovers 82 percent to 16 percent. And Bush's approval numbers looked grim for the GOP even before the September financial meltdown.

Just one in five voters in the national exit polls said that the country was "generally going in the right direction." McCain won that group 71 percent to Obama's 27 percent. But among the 75 percent of voters who said that the country was "seriously off on the wrong track," Obama had a thumping 26-point edge.

Those numbers speak to the damage that eight years of the Bush administration have done to the Republican brand. It's a burden that any candidate running for president with an "R" after his -- or her -- name would have had to drag around the country.

To be continued......

View All Recent Meet the Real Sarah Palin Blog Posts:

Click on Share button to send to your favorite sites

Alaskan Democrats join defense of Palin, natural gas pipeline

Lawmakers say report by Associated Press was unfair to governor
By Pat Forgey Juneau Empire
Alaska legislators are criticizing a story on Gov. Sarah Palin by The Associated Press that challenged Palin's top accomplishment as governor - jump-starting progress on a natural gas pipeline.

"I thought it was a pretty shoddy reporting job, honestly," said Sen. Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage, among many Democrats and supporters of Barack Obama who are coming to Palin's defense.

The story, written by AP reporters Justin Pritchard and Garance Burke, concluded that the Alaska Legislature used a flawed process when it chose TransCanada Corp. to develop a pipeline to bring Alaska's gas to the U.S. Midwest, and blamed Palin for the decision.

The Legislature and Palin sought to make sure the pipeline was operated as an independent pipeline, whether it was owned by one of the state's major oil and gas lease holders or an independent company.

The AP reporters called that process "flawed" and linked it to an alleged conflict of interest by a Palin administration staff member.

The AP reporters said Palin had been warned, including twice by Vice President Dick Cheney, to bring in the oil producers to the pipeline project. On Alaska's North Slope, Exxon Mobil Corp., BP and ConocoPhillips Co. produce the bulk of the state's oil and hold most of its discovered gas reserves.

The Legislature nearly unanimously established rules that required an independently operated pipeline, but allowed the producers to submit their own bid under terms resembling an independent pipeline.

The AP reporters said seeking an independent pipeline ultimately favored TransCanada and excluded the producers, which was why the process was flawed.

Sen. Gene Therriault, R-North Pole, Senate minority leader, called the story "way off base."

http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/102908/loc_349549309.shtml

View All Recent Meet the Real Sarah Palin Blog Posts:

LaHood Needs to Put a Sock in it!!!

by Janet Crain

"LaHood supports McCain", but he sure has a heck of a way of showing it!!! With friends like this, McCain sure doesn't need any enemies. What is wrong with these people? Do they just want to see their comments in print so bad they will say anything? Don't they know newspapers like the HuffPo will jump on their remarks like a hungry wolf on a dumb little rabbit? Do they realize they could wake up Nov. 5th and say to themselves; "Yes, brilliant self you were right......and gulp!!!......Obama is president!!!" Do they care? Did they ever? Were they simply Democrats in Republican clothing to help their elections in the past? I really intend to remember each and everyone of these loose lipped closet liberals.

==========================================
The Huffington Post October 10, 2008 11:57 AM

Veteran Republican Congressman Ray LaHood criticized his party's vice presidential nominee Friday, saying that Sarah Palin's vitriolic campaign rallies ""don't befit the office she's running for."

Rep. LaHood, who has represented Illinois' 18th district for seven terms and is retiring in January, told WBBM Radio that Palin should control the racially-charged heckling at her rallies:

"Look it. This doesn't befit the office that she's running for. And frankly, people don't like it."

Some of the names Obama is being called, which include "terrorist" and "traitor," "certainly don't reflect the nature of the man," LaHood said to WBBM.
LaHood supports John McCain's candidacy, but warned that the heckling could backfire on the Republican ticket.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/10/republican-congressman-cr_n_133623.html?page=6

http://sarah-palin-2008.blogspot.com/2008/10/mark-my-word-obamas-review-of-ayers.html

http://sarah-palin-2008.blogspot.com/2008/10/bill-ayers-and-obama-shared-office-for.html

http://sarah-palin-2008.blogspot.com/2008/10/update-rico-investigation-of-acorn.html

http://sarah-palin-2008.blogspot.com/2008/10/obamas-extensive-ties-to-hate-groups.html


View All Recent Meet the Real Sarah Palin Blog Posts:

He's Baaaaaaaaaack!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

John Kerry, 2004 Presidential hopeful, now eyes Secretary of State, Cabinet Position



Sarah Baxter in Roanoke, Virginia

With the economy on the brink of recession and the country in the midst of two foreign wars, Barack Obama is considering appointing a cabinet of stars to steer America through potentially its worst crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s if he wins the presidency on November 4.

Obama has a well-regarded, close-knit team of domestic and foreign policy advisers who would follow him into the White House and key administration posts. But he is also being urged to make some high-profile appointments who would command the confidence of the country at such a troubled time.

“It’s important to send a signal,” an Obama adviser said. “With a comparatively new person in office and the awful mess we’re in, these appointments are going to resonate around the world.” Obama, 47, has been warning his supporters that the election is not over yet. “Don’t underestimate our ability to screw it up,” he said last week. But should Obama win, he will not be short of big names to choose for his administration.

A host of well-known figures, including some Republicans, have indicated they would be willing to serve in some capacity as Obama begins to acquire a winner’s glow. From Senator John Kerry, the 2004 presidential candidate with hopes of becoming secretary of state, to Larry Summers, a former US Treasury secretary under President Bill Clinton, and Chuck Hagel, the Republican senator who has been tipped as defence secretary, there are plenty who have signalled their availability.

Obama is thought likely to cherry-pick a few high-profile names, while rewarding the loyalty and discretion of advisers such as his foreign policy expert Susan Rice who have served him so well throughout the campaign.

“He has no patience whatsoever with prima donnas,” said one leading Democrat policy adviser. “He’s surrounded himself with people who are pretty smooth in dealing with each other.” All eyes were on Colin Powell, the former secretary of state under President George W Bush, to see if he would declare his support for Obama in an interview on Meet the Press, the flagship political television programme, today. Powell is unlikely to return to the cabinet after the mauling he received over the Iraq war, but could serve as a special envoy abroad. He is regularly consulted by Obama on foreign policy and military matters, and said last year: “I always keep my eyes open and my ears open to requests for service.”

In last week’s debate against John McCain, his Republican opponent, Obama indicated that he would adopt a bipartisan approach to government, citing the Republican senator Richard Lugar, who worked with him on a bill to prevent nuclear weapons proliferation, and General Jim Jones, the former Nato commander, as figures he admired.

“Those are the people, Democrat and Republican, who have shaped my ideas and who will be surrounding me in the White House,” Obama said.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4968993.ece

Kerry on Iraq



John Kerry: our U.S.soldiers in Iraq are lazy & dumb



View All Recent Blog Posts:

McCain's Letter in 2006 Could Have Prevented the Present Financial Crisis!!!

McCain Letter Demanded 2006 Action on Fannie and Freddie
by Human Events
10/10/2008

Sen. John McCain's 2006 demand for regulatory action on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could have prevented current financial crisis, as HUMAN EVENTS learned from the letter shown in full text below.

McCain's letter -- signed by nineteen other senators -- said that it was "...vitally important that Congress take the necessary steps to ensure that [Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac]...operate in a safe and sound manner.[and]..More importantly, Congress must ensure that the American taxpayer is protected in the event that either...should fail."

Sen. Obama did not sign the letter, nor did any other Democrat.

View the Letter Here:

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28973#continueA



View All Recent Blog Posts:

ALL WE HAVE TO FEAR IS OBAMA HIMSELF

America is about to make the worst voting mistake in our lifetimes. If polls are to be believed, the junior Senator Barack Hussein Obama, who never had to meet a payroll or held any serious private sector jobs (except being a leftwing activist for ACORN in Chicago), will be our Chief Executive.

One of the reason Obama is doing well is that people are worried about the economy. While there are reasons for concern, the current crisis has been overhyped to stampede Congress into an unwise bailout and stampede the people into voting for Obama. Our current hangover from a housing bubble induced by excessive subprime lending is leading to home prices declines, higher foreclosure rates, a weak economy, and a crisis in the financial industry as bank and investment houses have lost significant capital and some have gone under. As with the bubble bursting in internet, techs and telecoms in 2001-2003, this bubble bursting may well lead to a recession, although we were not in one up until this quarter. At times of crisis like this, it makes sense to ask: How did we get here?Obama says that deregulation caused the current crisis. He is wrong.

Cont.here:

http://no-bama.blogspot.com/2008/10/all-we-have-to-fear-is-obama-himself.html


View All Recent Blog Posts:

Obama's Speech Auditory Tape Found

View All Recent Blog Posts:

Reasons to Vote Democratic

View All Recent Blog Posts:

Archives prove Obama was a New Party member

WAKE UP AMERICANS!!!!!


October 08, 2008
Thomas Lifson

Another piece in the puzzle of Barack Obama has been revealed, greatly strengthening the picture of a man groomed by an older generation of radical leftists for insertion into the American political process, trading on good looks, brains, educational pedigree, and the desire of the vast majority of the voting public to right the historical racial wrongs of the land.

The New Party was a radical left organization, established in 1992, to amalgamate far left groups and push the United States into socialism by forcing the Democratic Party to the left. It was an attempt to regroup the forces on the left in a new strategy to take power, burrowing from within. The party only lasted until 1998, when its strategy of "fusion" failed to withstand a Supreme Court ruling. But dissolving the party didn't stop the membership, including Barack Obama, from continuing to move the Democrats leftward with spectacular success. Erick Erickson, editor of RedState, explained fusion in a Human Events article:

Fusion is a pretty simple concept. A candidate could run as both a Democrat and a New Party member to signal the candidate was, in fact, a left-leaning candidate, or at least not a center-left DLC type candidate. If the candidate -- let's call him Barack Obama -- received only 500 votes in the Democratic Party against another candidate who received 1000 votes, Obama would clearly not be the nominee. But, if Obama also received 600 votes from the New Party, Obama's New Party votes and Democratic votes would be fused. He would be the Democratic nominee with 1100 votes.

The fusion idea set off a number of third parties, but the New Party was probably the most successful. A March 22, 1998 In These Times article by John Nichols showed just how successful. "After six years, the party has built what is arguably the most sophisticated left-leaning political operation the country has seen since the decline of the Farmer-Labor, Progressive and Non-Partisan League groupings of the early part of the century .... In 1996, it helped Chicago's Danny Davis, a New Party member, win a Democratic congressional primary, thereby assuring his election in the majority-black district .... The threat of losing New Party support, or of the New Party running its own candidates against conservative Democrats, would begin a process of forcing the political process to the left, [Joel] Rogers argued."

Fusion, fortunately for the country, died in 1997. William Rehnquist, writing for a 6-3 Supreme Court, found the concept was not a protected constitutional right. It was two years too late to stop Obama.

View All Recent Blog Posts:

FINANCIAL CRISIS CAUSED BY DEMOCRATS!!!!!

The present economic crisis was caused by the Democrats. And now the one man who tried to stop it is being penalized in his candidacy for president.





View All Recent Blog Posts:

'Election is About Obama'

News

'Election is about Obama'

By JOHN EBY / Niles Daily Star
Tuesday, September 23, 2008 11:15 AM EDT

BENTON HARBOR - The two-year, wide-open White House race with no incumbents for the first time since 1952 boils down to one factor, according to Karl Rove.

Rove, who masterminded President George W. Bush's successful White House bids in 2000 and 2004, told The Economic Club of Southwestern Michigan Monday night at Lake Michigan College Mendel Center, "This election is about Obama."

Rove said the presidential election "would be over" had Obama selected Hillary Clinton for vice president instead of Joe Biden, robbing John McCain of an opening to energize his campaign by selecting Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin for vice president.

Rove pointed out there are "two populists running for president, outsiders arguing about who's responsible for this mess" heading into the first debate Friday in Oxford, Miss.

Vice presidential candidates square off in St. Louis Oct. 2, followed by presidential forums in Nashville, Tenn., and on Long Island, N.Y.

The winner of the first debate can expect a 4-percent poll jump, perhaps more with it centered on foreign policy, Rove said.

The first Gallup Poll after Labor Day has been reliable in forecasting the winner of the popular vote in seven of the past eight elections except 1980. It showed McCain by 4 percent. "The problem is, this is also the first Labor Day poll right after the Republican convention," he said.

"Blue-collar households are somewhat suspicious of this guy. They see him as an elitist. Particularly in blue-collar households in the Midwest and the industrial mid-Atlantic, they remember (Barack Obama's) comment about people clinging to their guns, their faith and their xenophobia. What was he thinking? He has advantages he can't take advantage of because of deep, persistent doubts about his fitness for office. Two weeks ago, 48 percent said he was not qualified. This is the second-highest negative answer to that question that I can find in modern polling. The only presidential candidate who had a worse number was Michael Dukakis in 1988, who had 56 percent of the people in October who said he was not qualified. It really matters who the president is. Big changes are dictated by the outcome. We invest a lot of ourselves in the election. It's really important, and that's the way it should be."

Rove said there will be four battles waged simultaneously, with each candidate talking about the same issues in different ways.

"McCain wants to talk about the war on terror, energy, taxes and spending, which for him are about jobs and the economy," Rove said. "On the other hand, Obama doesn't want to talk about the war on terror at all. He negotiated to have the first debate Friday devoted to foreign affairs so the last debate would be devoted entirely to domestic affairs. And we've seen how events can intrude into a campaign in a very powerful way in the last few days" with the mortgage meltdown and $700 billion bailout for Wall Street.

"The economy has come to the fore. It's a natural advantage for Obama because he wants to talk about it and McCain doesn't," Rove said.

"McCain's going to say he's the experienced reformer. Obama's going to say he's the guy who's going to fight for change and cares about people like you. Each of them wants you to comfortably see them in the Oval Office ... for the first time since spring, McCain is seen as more honest and trustworthy than Obama. In the Fox poll, they asked, 'If you had the most important decision of your own life, who would you turn to for guidance, McCain or Obama?' The answer was 50-36, McCain."

Adding to Rove's interest is that neither Obama or McCain was expected to prevail in his party's primaries. The campaign has gone on so long that the chief issue has shifted from the war in Iraq to the economy.

Their solutions would be very different, Rove stated. Obama favors more regulation and higher taxes for wealthy Americans, while McCain supports less regulation and a limit on the percentage any citizen should be taxed on their income.

They'll be fighting over issues such as taxes, with each arguing for "fairness. Obama says it's fair to take money from the people at the top 5 percent to issue a tax cut for the 95 percent below that. A couple of things are hidden in there. One is that two out of every three in the top five percent is small business, which creates three out of every four new jobs. He's also not saying when he says 'tax cut' he wants to give everyone in the lower 95 percent a $500-a-year tax credit or, if you're married, $1,000. Forty-eight percent of Americans who file income taxes have no liability, so they'll be getting checks. It's not a cut because they don't owe any tax. This is a transfer."

McCain's take on fairness is questioning whether the government should not be limited in how much it "can take out of anyone's wallet, and 35 percent is more than enough," Rove said to applause.

http://www.nilesstar.com/articles/2008/09/23/news/ndnews3.txt

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Dem's Fault?

NY TIMES SEPT 2003: BUSH PROPOSED TIGHTENING OVERSIGHT OF FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC - THE DEMOCRATS OF CONGRESS BLOCKED IT

September 18, 2008

New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae
By STEPHEN LABATON

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

New Site Spoofs Facebook

Enjoy!!! :-)

http://www.barackbook.com/

The Icarus Syndrome

September 12, 2008 12:00 AM

Obama’s Descent to Earth
It’s hard to maintain a celestial conceit for four years — even if you believe it yourself.

By Charles Krauthammer

The Democrats are in a panic. In a presidential race that is impossible to lose, they are behind. Obama devotees are frantically giving advice. Tom Friedman tells him to “start slamming down some phones.” Camille Paglia suggests, “be boring!” Meanwhile, a posse of Democratic lawyers, mainstream reporters, lefty bloggers, and various other Obamaphiles are scouring the vast tundra of Alaska for something, anything, to bring down Sarah Palin: her daughter’s pregnancy, her ex-brother-in-law problem, her $60 per diem, and now her religion. (CNN reports — news flash! — that she apparently has never spoken in tongues.) Not since Henry II asked if no one would rid him of his turbulent priest, have so many so urgently volunteered for duty.

But Palin is not just a problem for Obama. She is also a symptom of what ails him. Before Palin, Obama was the ultimate celebrity candidate. For no presidential nominee in living memory had the gap between adulation and achievement been so great. Which is why McCain’s Paris Hilton ads struck such a nerve. Obama’s meteoric rise was based not on issues — there was not a dime’s worth of difference between him and Hillary on issues — but on narrative, on eloquence, on charisma.

The unease at the Denver convention, the feeling of buyer’s remorse, was the Democrats’ realization that the arc of Obama’s celebrity had peaked — and had now entered a period of its steepest decline. That Palin could so instantly steal the celebrity spotlight is a reflection of that decline.

It was inevitable. Obama had managed to stay aloft for four full years. But no one can levitate forever.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=N2JiYTc5OWEyYmRlZjY0ZTI1NjQ5OTU4ODgzMmM2YmE=

Obama's Tone Sharpens as Party Frets

One of Obama's accusations is that John McCain is computer illiterate, yet Sen.Obama stated in a Reader's Digest interview last month that he only uses the computer to check sports scores.


By JEFF ZELENY and ADAM NAGOURNEY
Published: September 12, 2008

DOVER, N.H. — Senator Barack Obama intensified his assault against Senator John McCain here on Friday, drawing sharp connections between his Republican rival and President Bush through a coordinated, partywide message as he confronts an invigorated Republican ticket and increasing nervousness among Democrats.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/13/us/politics/12cnd-candidates.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Palin leaves her rivals rattled

Palin leaves her rivals rattled
Peter Wallsten and Janet Hook, Los Angeles
September 11, 2008

THE emergence of Sarah Palin as a political force in the US presidential race has left many top Democrats fretting that, just two weeks after their convention ended on a emotional high, Barack Obama's campaign has suddenly lost its stride.

Senator Obama responded aggressively this week to Mrs Palin's presence on the Republican ticket, using television ads and campaign rallies to attack her contention that she is a political reformer who will take on the Washington establishment — a role Senator Obama has long claimed as his alone.

But some Democrats are now worried about the perils of Senator Obama's strategy, saying that his campaign, instead of engaging the Alaska Governor, should avoid any moves that draw more attention to her, which could enhance her appeal among the white, blue-collar voters who remain cool to his candidacy.

New polls suggest Mrs Palin has given a major boost to John McCain's campaign, exciting the Republican base, winning over white women and erasing Senator Obama's lead. Democrats expressed anxiety about the new challenge suggested by the recent surveys showing Senator McCain has gained ground among independent voters and women, who could decide the race in states such as Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Virginia.

Cont. Here:

http://www.theage.com.au/world/palin-leaves-her-rivals-rattled-20080910-4dru.html?page=-1