In what could turn out to be a classic "Dewey Defeats Truman" moment, New York magazine's most recent edition crowned Barack Obama nine days before Election Day:
The sub-headline for this forward-looking cover-story reads:
What an Obama presidency would look like.
Notice the asterisk at the bottom of the cover:
*if current projections hold.
Interestingly, CNN/Washington Post media analyst Howard Kurtz asked New York's John Heileman on Sunday's "Reliable Sources" if this was "just a tad premature perhaps."
Heilemann responded, "Well, you know, one wants to try to be ahead of the curve, I guess, Howie."
I guess so, for such forward-thinking continued inside Heilemann's article (emphasis added):
But as the outcome of the race has begun to seem more certain with each passing day—with Obama’s lead in the polls healthy and showing few signs of diminishing, with John McCain’s campaign listing aimlessly and lapsing into rank self-parody, with Sarah Palin devolving into a human punch line—Democrats are slowly, haltingly allowing themselves to believe that victory is truly within their grasp, and hence to contemplate what comes next. Transition. Inauguration. Those first hundred days. Maybe even, perchance, with augmented majorities for the party in both the House and Senate all but in the bag, the dawning of a spanking-new era of Democratic dominion.
The outcome of the race has begun to seem more certain with each passing day?
Honestly, do you need to know anything more about this piece?
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Yup
October 26, 2008 - 09:34 ET by Josh SNThis article has a nice rundown on the Dewey-Truman poll issues.
Back then the national media was run by the likes of Henry Luce, who was in the tank for Dewey the Republican and was using Time, Life, et cetera, to push for him. They had done the same thing when they got Willkie nominated over Taft, Vandenberg or Dewey (more traditional conservatives) in 1940.
As might happen this time, regular reporting that Dewey was ahead probably kept some Republicans home (oh, we are going to win anyway) and probably activated some Democrats to try extra hard.
Huh?
October 26, 2008 - 10:39 ET by JWFprobably kept some Republicans home (oh, we are going to win anyway) and probably activated some Democrats to try extra hard.
You mean like you are trying to do here, Propaganda Boy?
This is a site about exposing the liberal media bias. Take our gushy Obama teenybopper love elsewhere. You got a crush, put your Obama posters in your bedroom where they belong.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
Possible misreading...
October 26, 2008 - 12:04 ET by Tom1969caRespectfully, I suggest you may have misread the above quote: since the parties are reversed from 1948 (in 2008 it is the Democrat who is in the lead and the Republican is trailing), I think what he's saying is that some Democrat voters may not bother to vote since the election is supposedly in the bag, and hopefully the polls will motivate Republicans to get out the vote and prove the pollsters wrong.
=====
Daily Sarah Palin fact:
Sarah Palin and Chuck Norris walk into a bar. The bar instantly explodes because no man-made structure can contain that much awesomeness.
The naive One
October 26, 2008 - 09:43 ET by 10ksnookerWould someone tell me why communism is so appealing? Didn't ti kill some 100 million people throughout the 20th century.
Why work when the pies are free.
We *are* all in this together
October 26, 2008 - 09:59 ET by Josh SNWe all are all (more than 99.999%) part of one big society. Doing things collectively is very often fare more efficient (economical) than doing things individually.
The basic ones you know. It would be very disorganized if everyone on every plane had to assess for themselves if there were any bombs on board. Most people are incompetent to do this. We collectively agree that having specialists handle this is important. We disagree on exactly how much authority these people should have, how much they get paid, and how intrusive they can be.
If we all had to build our own roads it would be anarchy. Without eminent domain, it would be almost impossible to build new roads at all. None of us can build a high-speed train system like they are building in China, or a bullet train like they have in Japan. I'm not sure either of those projects make sense for America (I tend to believe trains are far more efficient) they can not be built except collectively.
Why do some collectivists (say, Stalin or Mao) make such awful decisions, resulting many millions of deaths? It is certainly true that neither side has a monopoly on good ideas (see: War in Iraq, the 2001, 2002 and 2003 tax cuts which were supposed to be good for the economy, but have resulted in the worst economy since before I was born).
Josh
October 26, 2008 - 10:19 ET byyour lack of distinction between public works and gestapo is truly frightening.
Your understanding of the current economic situation is laughable and sophomoric
Your foreign policy stance is bumper sticker logic
“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” -Chief Justice John Roberts
Actually
October 26, 2008 - 10:30 ET by Josh SNIf you had read closely, you'd see I specifically brought up the "power" TSA employees might have and how "intrusive" they could be. This is exactly the question of how much power the police can have. Unlike some people, I don't support warrantless wiretapping, indefinite detention based on the President declaring someone a terrorist (abortion clinic bombers can be held forever, without trial, until the "abortion clinic terrorism war is over???????).
I am the odd person who believes in more cops, but less power for cops (where cops=FBI, CIA, police officers, et cetera).
TSA employees??
October 26, 2008 - 10:48 ET bynope don't see any mention in your post, but try CPS, Public Schools, building inspectors, etc.
Do you really want the Feds doing only what the Constitution provides? Get constructionists on the SCOTUS and lets start moving back to the true 'Enumerated Powers' provision of the Constitution.
btw FISA is overseen by judges.
“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” -Chief Justice John Roberts
Um
October 26, 2008 - 11:09 ET by Josh SNWho normally inspects planes, to keep bombs off them? The TSA.
Who mentioned FISA?
bombs on planes???
November 1, 2008 - 14:59 ET bywhat the heck are you hallucinating now? where was that mentioned??
You wrote "I don't support warrantless wiretapping, indefinite detention based on the President declaring someone a terrorist" you do realize what FISA overees don't you? It's why i mentioned them.
next you'll bring in Haliburton i guess.......
“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” -Chief Justice John Roberts
FISA bombs
November 1, 2008 - 15:03 ET by Sergeant ROCKThough I'm sure that under an Obama administration all of those things will be quite acceptable.
PALIN/McCain 2008
Even a broken clock...
October 26, 2008 - 10:48 ET by acumenI am the odd person...
Praying for a speedy recovery.
Sorry Josh, your view of
October 26, 2008 - 10:33 ET by cocodrieSorry Josh, your view of history and reality are badly skewed and inaccurate. Better get hold of some genuine history books and deep-six the revisioist social engineering textbooks you are apparently using now.
Huh?
October 26, 2008 - 10:41 ET by Josh SNWhat history did I mention, other than the facts that Stalin and Mao made decisions which killed millions of people?
Josh
October 26, 2008 - 11:00 ET by cocodrieYou referenced road building and eminent domain - both have a long history in this country. You mentioned railroads - they were built by private enterprise, not government - long history here also. You distorted the Iraq situation - more history. You paralled society with communism, gross distortion. Read you own post and do some accurate research and educate yourself.
Roads = History? Ok...
October 26, 2008 - 11:18 ET by Josh SNIs there a long history of private roads in this country, or are most roads built by governments? Eminent Domain for the railroads (or, nowadays, to build the southern border fence) exist. I didn't say anything controversial about it. It was used to get the rights of way to build railroads. It was used to get the land for the Interstate Highway System.
I do lots of research. For example, you say private corporations built the railroads, but the first transcontinental railroad was supported by government bonds. In addition the government gave the land to the private railroads. You can educate yourself about that here
Josh
October 26, 2008 - 11:37 ET by cocodrieThis country was built by individuals and private enterprise. Your selective examples only illustrate that government takes the fruits of private industry and squanders it by wasteful spending. Every government project costs many times more than the same done by private companies. I am very familiar with eminent domain - property bought by politicians and resold to the government at enormous profit thanks to advance knowkedge of planned construction. Please educate yourself.
But not the railroads
October 26, 2008 - 11:45 ET by Josh SNYou insulted me by saying I didn't know what I was talking about. You said the railroads were built by private enterprise. To a degree, you are right, but it is strictly impossible for private enterprise to have built the railroads without the government giving them monetary support (funded by bonds) or the land.
I served on a board in a small town's government in New Hampshire. Every serious road effort was funded by the government, by sale of bonds.
Josh
October 26, 2008 - 12:06 ET by cocodrieDon't you understand? The government usurping the role of private enterprise is the source of most of our economic problems and most of our debt? We need to get government to mind its own business and stay out of the business of private enterprise. If the government ever takes over sno-ball stands, a sno-ball will probably cost $99.99 and you will receive it on the first of the month, if you're fortunate enough to receive it at all.
coco... Unfortuantely, I
October 26, 2008 - 12:10 ET by Clear thinkercoco...
Unfortuantely, I would imagine in an Obama administration that sno-balls would be considered frivolous and therefore banned (except for elites).
Give Your Firearms To Obama - Not A Joke!
Making Fun of AGW http://giovanniworld.wordpress.com/
CT
October 26, 2008 - 12:35 ET by cocodrieyou're probably right about the sno-balls, I know you're right about the guns. too bad Charlton Heston isn't here anymore.
the tax cuts in 2001, 2003
October 26, 2008 - 10:23 ET by JnobleDID result in a good economy for a stretch of years. It wasn't until the housing and credit markets took a crap this year (which had ZERO to do with Bush's tax cuts) that things turned sour.
By the way, the Democrat idea of easy credit to almost anyone and pushing banks to lend to certain people or else they'd be labeled racist and subject to legal trouble? Years and years of that? Barney Frank looking the other way as Freddy and Fanny Mac crumbled? Had NOTHING to do with this. That's right. Nothing at all. Just walk away, it was all Bush and the Republican's fault.
This is a bit too much. Really?
October 26, 2008 - 10:39 ET by Josh SNThe mortgage side of this problem was already in effect in 2007. The Democrats didn't get the majority in the House until 2007. Blaming this on Barney Frank is absurd. What about Rep. Oxley, chair of the Financial Services Committee from 2001 to 2007? How about Bush's Treasury Secretaries? How about Bush's Commerce Secretaries? How about President Bush? The job of legislators is first to create good laws. The Executive has almost all of the investigative power (the Department of Justice) in the Federal Government.
josh, it's quite evident
October 26, 2008 - 11:08 ET by larry on LIthat you should be the poster boy for the US public education system
Take the partisan blinders off Josh
October 26, 2008 - 13:11 ET by RpeggioTake it from a true independent....you can't look at the Fannie/Freddie debacle and say Barney Frank had nothing to do with it...he was involved in active support of them BEFORE 2007. You need to read-up on this a bit more. There are audio and video recordings with Barney chastising the Feds for looking into the screwy accounting and investments by Fannie/Freddie and Frank Raines (spelling?) barking at those same Feds, while sitting next to Barney, saying why are we even here, the company is fine, investments are fine....it's very very obvious Barney was protecting them before & after he took the position as head of the Finance Committee. And admit, that if Barney was a Republican, you'd have already called for his head on a platter.
This issue dates back several years. And though you don't want to admit it, the Dems (and some Republicans) voted against regulation of Fannie/Freddie in 2005, well documented. And in 2006 McCain wrote two letters expressing similar concern. So yes Bush is an idiot and he takes the ultimate blame, and we shouldn't have gone into Iraq (though the surge strgy has worked and was the right thing to do), but there are so many fingerprints on this huge huge huge financial debacle....don't make it partisan, it was a colossal failure by our Gov't, across the board...and whoever becomes President MUST investigate and name names....Pelosi has put Barney in charge of that, so don't expect anything but partisan finger pointing if Obama wins. Take a step back for a moment, we can't look back 30 yrs from now and see that no one took responsibility and no blood was shed in Congress etc. They failed us, period. Don't you realize why Fannie/Freddie contributed the most money to Dodd, Obama, Hillary, Kerry, in that order? Don't be partisan man, the Dems have plenty of culpability in this too.
Good assessment overall,
October 26, 2008 - 16:50 ET by SmartypantsGood assessment overall, but Bush is no idiot. The decision to go into Iraq was a lousy one only, and I mean only, in hindsight. Given what was known at the time, and in the aftermath of 9/11, the Iraq decision was a rational one. We know what happened given the Iraq invasion; we'll never know what would have happened in Iraq if Bush never pushed the issue. One thing is reasonably certain, Iraq would have had to be dealt with at some point in time--in one way or another. The status quo was not working.
In terms of the rest of Bush's agenda, the tax cuts had absolutely nothing to do with this financial mess, and that is the most important thing to remember. Obama is flat out lying in saying we've been miserable for the past eight years. The economy has actually been pretty strong during that time, even after 9/11, Kartina, etc. Also, Bush wanted to reform Social Security and was rebuffed by the Dems, who said it was just fine, that Bush was creating a problem where one didn't exist. Watch, SS will be a coming mess that will result in reduced benefits or increased taxes. Bush has been a better president than the media has indicated. Clinton never had to deal with 9/11, Katrina, corporate scandals (which went on under Clinton's nose) and now a financial meltdown.
Oh, what a good little socialist!
October 26, 2008 - 10:50 ET by JWFSpreading the communist propaganda just as you supposed to.
Yea, Democracies, Republics, Capitalism, they absolutely cannot build roads without going all willynilly! How in the name of Obama did we manage to build all those roads these last 230 years? God we are hopeless.
Who on these pages are advocating anarchy, Propaganda Boy?
Here is a clue, you might find more converts for your propaganda over at DKos.
Oh, just because you can lie about the worst economy, tax cuts, and the War in Iraq does not make it so. It is called propaganda, Propaganda Boy.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
JWF obvious Josh
October 26, 2008 - 10:55 ET bywas born after the Carter administration, he's young and brainwashed, but i have hope that he can evolve into a thinking person.
“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” -Chief Justice John Roberts
We disagree there sir.
October 26, 2008 - 11:04 ET by JWFI think he is too far gone.
He is not only lapping up propaganda, he is actively trying to spread it here.
Josh
October 26, 2008 - 13:31 ET by MazziThe reason communism, and marxism are so dangerous is because the power lies totally at the top of the pyramid. Socialism is different, and allows the power to be spread a bit more. But all of those systems take the power and use it to control the people.
We, on the other hand, were created with a multi-tiered level of government where the government is supposed to answer to the people - not the other way around. Our people are supposed to control the government.
We have strayed considerable from what we are supposed to be, partly because of ambivilance of the people, and partly through deception from those who seek to take the power for themselves. And this election, we have reached a terrible crisis.
Radicals who don't play by the rules, have been using our sense of fairness against us. They have been trying to buy and steal elections. They have convinced very nice liberal people that they are "one of them" when in fact, they despise liberals, and plan to throw them under the bus as soon as they possibly can. They are deliberately planning to bring our society to it's knees - so they can rebuild it in this fantasy "model" which has never worked, and will never work.
I am not a mind reader, nor am I a conspiracy theorist. Rather, I am a well-read person who has researched the links (DIRECT links) between the leaders in todays democrat party and people who describe how to destroy this society. Go read about Saul Alinsky. Compare his "rules" and ideas with what is happening in the world today.
And, ask yourself if your freedom is worth the couple of hundred bucks that Obama might give you as a reward for voting for him. Especially read about how he tells his followers to "use" the liberals to get what they want. Read what he thinks about all the white liberal middle-class people. Read how he outlines, step-by-step, how to get the liberals on their side, and how to proceed from there.
Here's a quote from Saul Alinsky to get you started:
"Organization for action will now and in the decade ahead center upon America's white middle class. That is where the power is. ... Our rebels have contemptuously rejected the values and the way of life of the middle class. They have stigmatized it as materialistic, decadent, bourgeois, degenerate, imperialistic, war-mongering, brutalized and corrupt. They are right; but we must begin from where we are if we are to build power for change, and the power and the people are in the middle class majority."
If you have even the smallest amount of analytical skill, you will be able to understand what would happen if Obama is elected. And it would be too late, because the foxes will be guarding the henhouse.
"Fool me once - shame on you... fool me twice - shame on me." ~ my Father
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere" ~ Martin Luther King Jr.
Chickens Hatching Too Early
October 26, 2008 - 09:45 ET by dbo*if current projections hold.
And if August projections had held my retirement portfolio would have 40% more value today. New York magazine might want to read this at Hillbuz.
http://hillbuzz.word...
...McCain will definitely win FL, OH, NC, MO and NV
In the tank
October 26, 2008 - 09:52 ET by acumen...."Well, you know, one wants to try to be ahead of the curve..."
I prefer the more accurate terminology -- 'influence the election'.
In the tank is correct. I
October 26, 2008 - 10:19 ET by SeashellIn the tank is correct. I see Heileman on Morning Joe all the time and he is so in the tank it is unbelievable.
I do not expect the white
October 26, 2008 - 09:57 ET by BuxomAnnieMcGreggorI do not expect the white media to create positive black male images.
Huey P. Newton
We have two evils to fight, capitalism and racism.
We must destroy both racism and capitalism.
Huey P. Newton
We
were trying to increase the conflict that was already happening... we
felt that we would take the conflict to so high a level that some
change had to come.
Huey P. Newton
"We retort..... you decide."
This Magazine cover causes
October 26, 2008 - 10:03 ET by BuxomAnnieMcGreggorThis Magazine cover causes me to wonder.... when you're that deep in the tank.... do you ever wonder to yourself just how much of life you're missing outside the tank?
"We retort..... you decide."
What I find interesting is
October 26, 2008 - 10:07 ET by BDWhat I find interesting is that the media is soooo in the tank for Obama, they have not even asked the simple question of who McCain would replace himself in the Senate with IF he did the unthinkable (To them) and won the election.
But they have glowing "What will an Obama Administration look like" features?
As a resident Arizonan I wanna know, who would McCain select?
Um
October 26, 2008 - 10:43 ET by Josh SNSenators don't pick their own replacements. Democratic Governor of Arizona, Janet Napolitano, would get to replace McCain.
So, that question becomes
October 27, 2008 - 10:13 ET by BDSo, that question becomes even more key.
Huey Newton also had another view...
October 26, 2008 - 10:04 ET by CapedConservativeCapedConservative
He adamantly opposed welfare... he said it would enslave the black race. Looks like he was right on that one.
CC
Yes.... he was also quoted
October 26, 2008 - 10:10 ET by BuxomAnnieMcGreggorYes.... he was also quoted as saying;
Any
unarmed people are slaves, or are subject to slavery at any given
moment. If the guns are taken out of the hands of the people and only
the pigs have guns, then it's off to the concentration camps, the gas
chambers, or whatever the fascists in America come up with. One of the
democratic rights of the United States, the Second Amendment to the
Constitution, gives the people the right to bear arms. However, there
is a greater right; the right of human dignity that gives all men the
right to defend themselves.
He was right on that one as well.
"We retort..... you decide."
What an Obama Presidency would look like...
October 26, 2008 - 09:59 ET by TexndocWell, just read online from the Jersualem Post that "a senior Iranian official has threatened to attack Britain". Yeah, that's what it's probably going to look like.
as the price of
October 26, 2008 - 11:20 ET by larry on LIoil retreats the rhetoric out of iran will intensify it's their only method to combat their runaway inflation.
as the price of
October 26, 2008 - 11:21 ET by larry on LIoil retreats the rhetoric out of iran will intensify it's their only method to combat their runaway inflation.
I liked the title: The
October 26, 2008 - 14:35 ET by kgI liked the title:
The Next New Deal
The huge opportunities—and huge risks—of a possible Obama administration.
and then at the bottom of the first page said:
Next: Is McCain's bid for Pennsylvania doomed?
"Forget change, I want improvement!"
Two Huge Items Between Obama and Presidency
October 26, 2008 - 10:02 ET by CapedConservativeCapedConservative
First, the Palin factor. They readily admit Palin is bringing voters from across the spectrum and in numbers that startle them. No one has a good handle on that impact.
Second, I was in the early voting line in front of a husband and wife that supported Obama... wife was a volunteer. After filling out the ballots and heading for the scanner/checkout, the husband was directly behind me. His ballots fell out of his packet when he changed hands holding them and they fell at my feet. The top ballot clearly showed he voted McCain. Not what he was voicing in the two hour line. What "lever" people pull in the booth is going to be strictly private with ZERO pressure to vote Obama.
CC
A great man
October 26, 2008 - 10:14 ET by cocodrieA great man once said something that directly applies to this election - "IT AIN'T OVER 'TIL ITS OVER" - Yogi.
oh wow
October 26, 2008 - 10:25 ET by JnobleGood thing you were the only one who noticed that. He might have had to be "re-educated" if discovered by others who have their "minds right" before he voted
Now thats funny!
October 26, 2008 - 20:46 ET by bmovies"I was in the early voting line in front of a husband and wife that supported Obama... wife was a volunteer. After filling out the ballots and heading for the scanner/checkout, the husband was directly behind me. His ballots fell out of his packet when he changed hands holding them and they fell at my feet. The top ballot clearly showed he voted McCain. Not what he was voicing in the two hour line. "
Hahahahahaha!!!!!!!!
The End of America!
October 26, 2008 - 10:09 ET by ChasvsThis will mark the end of our Republic!
The Republic cannot stand when the government stops being of the people, for the people.
It is now of Obama, for Obama and his chosen few.
STOP THE INSANITY _ STOP OBAMA NOW!
"The outcome of the race
October 26, 2008 - 10:12 ET by Kevroy"The outcome of the race has begun to seem more certain with each passing day..."
Reality isnt their forte. McCain continues to gain ground each day. I hope the Obamaites believe this is so 'in the bag' that too many of them stay home on election day.
We are going to win this thing and when we do, I am going to thoroughly enjoy the MSM misery, weeping and gnashing of teeth...
I'm so with you Kevroy!
October 26, 2008 - 10:25 ET by BuxomAnnieMcGreggorI'm so with you Kevroy! I'm having a "ComingOut of the Tank" party planned on election night with a minimum of six screens for my guests viewing pleasure [HD no less]. Every Net and cable news outlet visible. We'll have an open bar and several 'pools' going on which TV correspondent will be most whiney...most incredulous... most insulting.... and who will actually lead the way and shed the first tear! I'll have it all catered and make sure those who are doing the serving will be wearing those horrid "Obama" masks from Wall*Mart!
"We retort..... you decide."
where do you live
October 26, 2008 - 10:27 ET by Jnoblecan I come? :-) If McCain pulls this off, that would be one of the most fun nights in my life
All are welcome! NOTE* We
October 26, 2008 - 10:33 ET by BuxomAnnieMcGreggorAll are welcome! NOTE* We will be heavily celebrating our freedom! Bring your opinions and celebrate our first amendment! Bring your concealed weapons and celebrate our second amendment in our private firing range!
"We retort..... you decide."
Annie
October 26, 2008 - 10:44 ET by cocodrieY'all sound like my kind of people. The kind of gun control I believe in results in a bullseye. About this election, I quote again - It ain't over 'til it' over" - Yogi.
Something's missing
October 26, 2008 - 10:16 ET by flyingmonkeyWhat? No crown and Dashiki!!!
To asterix or not to asterix...
October 26, 2008 - 10:17 ET by TempeConservativeVogue didn't even bother to include an asterix in their Nov '08 issue while fawning over Biden and his ladies...
"All the Vice President's Women"
http://www.allaboutt...
Good morning Temp
October 26, 2008 - 11:05 ET by cocodrieCan't wait for Slick Willie's cover to come out - "The President's Vice With All These Women"
What the caption should have read...
October 26, 2008 - 10:45 ET by c5then"Obama looks to the left for Soros' instructions."
i am outraged at this
October 26, 2008 - 11:00 ET by hirogen73i am outraged at this time. we didnt even vote yet and the liberal gotcha media is making barack obama the newest president. that is unfair at this time. i will not be voting for obama at this time and they will have to take down that picture because it isnt true at this time.
we dont need socalist at this time. we need mavericks.
What The MSM NEEDS
October 26, 2008 - 11:20 ET by JoelCTI found an item for the MSM; they will need it for their "coverage" of Obama over the next 10 days:
http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_00948431000P?keyword=00948431000&sLevel=0&sid=I0084400010000100383&aff=Y
Don't forget This!
October 26, 2008 - 12:07 ET by ChasvsHere'a another item that will be needed!
http://www.ky.com/in...
Look at it this way if he
October 26, 2008 - 11:42 ET by DarasenLook at it this way if he wins. We had to endure Carter to get Reagan.
He Won't Win
October 26, 2008 - 12:10 ET by JoelCTHe won't win if we all get off our butts and go vote!
IBD/Tipp Tracking Poll: Obama 45.8% McCain 41.9% NOT SURE 12.2%
Anyone who has not already bought their kneepads for Obama is NOT going to vote for him, in my opinion.
The only way he will win is if we accept the word of the MSM and give up.
Joel... You will be happy
October 26, 2008 - 12:21 ET by Clear thinkerJoel...
You will be happy to know that I have a No-Kneepad rule on my property!
Give Your Firearms To Obama - Not A Joke!
Making Fun of AGW http://giovanniworld.wordpress.com/
12% of the voters still are not in the ranks in polling
October 26, 2008 - 12:51 ET by Lame CherryDrudge was showing what I have been noting for weeks in likely voters and that there is a big margin of voters who have not decided for either candidate. The figure runs from 11 to 12 percent.
The media is ignoring this huge group as much as what Michael Barone noted in Conservatives tell pollers who call to stuff it and hang up.
Bush 41 lost the election because his patricians told this voting block to shut up and go away along with Lawrence Walsh bogus indictment handed down.
These Americans who are never pushed just like Reagan noted will make up their minds on how to vote on Monday in November. In tradition these keep the powder dry Yanks will vote American. That means John McCain. That is why Dewey lost the election as these Silent Americans do not like rocking the boat.
If I might they are like Finnish people who will take the sure deal of 1000 dollars offered instead of risking it all for a million they might not get.
Americans vote for the sure deal. I also know this 11 to 12 percent hate cocksure Obamas putting their pictures out as President before they have been voted into office.
This election is not going to be known for certain until Monday before the election and then it will only be known by the 11.6% until the votes are counted.
I have faith in God and faith in that 11.6% as they aren't going to be fooled by a Perot this time nor an Obama.
agtG
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
Anti-Obama Website Shut Down Again by Obama Scum
October 26, 2008 - 13:17 ET by john5750This is about the third time the Obama Scum has shut down this website.
In my opinion it's the best Anti-Obama site out there. They were first to break the Forged birth certificate, Kenya birth, Ineligible to be prez, ACORN corruption & connection to BO, BO money-laundering, Ayers, Auchi, Rezko, and so many other articles on Obama lies and corruption.
I hope they get back up soon. But, you know how hard BO works at violating Free Speech Rights.
WWW.NOQUARTERUSA.NET
...
McCAIN-PALIN 2008 and HILLARY-ANYBODY 2012
Left of Carter
October 26, 2008 - 13:28 ET by RpeggioMost of the young folks posting here and elsewhere, spouting thin arguments in support of The One are not old enough to remember the Carter debacle. Double digit inflation, unemployment, and interest rates just over 20%! He raised cap gains and income taxes etc. just like Obama plans on doing....good old class warfare, taxing for reason of FAIRNESS not logical economics. It doesn't work! Regan came in and dropped taxes across the board and tax revenues DOUBLED! This is a fact, it can't be ignored.
If Obama were more centrist like Clinton, I could possibly vote for him, but he's much more liberal and probably left of Carter.
Even Clinton understood the economy and lowered Cap Gains to 20%, Bush later lowered it to 15%. Lower taxation on investment works folks, it just does. Clinton's 90's, Regan's 80's, JFK even lowered taxes with good effect. And yes it makes some rich folks richer, but fuels the growth of businesses, growth of jobs, it's how capitalism works. Penalizing wealth and risk for reasons of fairness to spread the wealth to 40% who don't even pay taxes is just blind ideological stupidity. And in the end, higher unemployment, stagnant wages, more offshore outsourcing will occur and that only hurts the 40% he wants to give meager $500-$1000 checks to once a year. If I made $40k/yr and rather have a job than one single spread the wealth check for $500.
Newsweek did the same thing almost
October 26, 2008 - 20:03 ET by Cape Conservative- big article on how Obama will rule - NO mention of what would be the case under President McCain!
Bias????? What bias?????? RIGHT!
Because they believe it
October 27, 2008 - 02:59 ET by Dan The Man 2Because they believe it will be in the Stalin mold of regime, but if they publish something like that they will be sued.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
The coming MSM meltdown
October 27, 2008 - 12:31 ET by SFCMAC....will be even worse than 2004 when McCain wins.
"On the Eighth Day God Created the United States Army and the Devil Stood at Attention"