Friday, October 31, 2008

Tonight's Music

Just in case Obama and his ACORN minions do manage to steal the election we will need to update "Hail to the Chief" with some new presidential theme music.

The author Pearl Buck once said that before every great tragedy there is a point where the whole thing can be avoided if the people involved will just stop, think it over and say "no, I'm not going to do this". Like if the German people on the eve of the election which gave the Nazi party the largest number of seats in the Reichstag had just said "no, I'm not going to vote for the maniac with the funny mustache and his party of pinheaded losers".

There is a scene in the movie Nicholas and Alexandria where the Czar and his advisers are making plans for war with Germany and one of them turns to Nicholas and says, "your Majesty, think of how many lives would be saved if everyone in this room just stopped what they were doing and went home right now".

The people of the Unites States have an opportunity like that before them right now. It is in our power to ensure that a lying Marxist street hustler who crawled out of the almost unbelievably corrupt sewer of Chicago Democrat street politics never has the chance to "fundamentally restructure the United States" after the pattern of a Fidel Castro or Hugo Chavez or Robert Mugabe.

The founders of our nation gave us, the people, the power to prevent this wretched little man from getting any closer to the White House than the guided tour.

And if hysterical nutjob leftist Erica Jong is correct when she says:

"If Obama loses it will spark the second American Civil War. Blood will run in the streets, believe me. And it's not a coincidence that President Bush recalled soldiers from Iraq for Dick Cheney to lead against American citizens in the streets."
The founding Fathers also gave us the Second Amendment so that if the vaporous intellectuals who are backing Obama because they believe that they will be the ruling elite in his "worker's paradise" manage to incite the masses of worthless human garbage who are supporting Obama because they hope for a life of free money to actual violence we can defend ourselves and slaughter them utterly.

Like I've been saying. . .

Drudge is reporting:

ZOGBY SATURDAY: McCain outpolled Obama 48% to 47% in Friday, one day, polling. He is beginning to cut into Obama's lead among independents, is now leading among blue collar voters, has strengthened his lead among investors and among men, and is walloping Obama among NASCAR voters. Joe the Plumber may get his license after all...

This doesn't mean that McCain has it locked up any more than the polls that showed Obama in the lead, but like I've been saying the undecideds are breaking for McCain, or it might be more accurate to say that they are breaking against Obama.

The fact is that everything there is to know about McCain has been out there for years. There is simply nothing else to learn about him. It is Obama that is the "X" factor and every last thing we've learned about him in the past couple of months has been bad. There just isn't anything out there to convince anyone who hasn't already drunk the Obama kool-aid to do so.

This is going to be a close 2.5 to 5 point election and there is the possibility of the popular vote going one way and the electoral vote going the other like it did in 2000, but in the end McCain/Palin will emerge the winners.

UNLESS the margin is so tight that the ACORN voter fraud is able to swing things to Obama in a couple of key swing states. But I doubt that because ACORN is really strong only in places that are already going to go for the little messiah.

The best part is not going to be McCain in the White House. THAT is going to be a battle that conservatives are going to have to fight nearly every day. No the best part will be watching Keith Olberman literally explode on live TV - and I'm talking about the kind of detonation that leaves brains on the wall.

That and the fact that Sarah Palin will be the heir apparent for the next presidential nomination in 2012 or 2016, depending on whether McCain wants a second term.

Just remember that no matter what the polls say Obama doesn't lose unless we actually get out and vote.

The Council has spoken

The Watchers Council has voted and these are the weekly winners.

Winning Council Submissions

Winning Non-Council Submissions

T* - Denotes Tie

I'm still confident of a McCain victory

I dislike slimy dick but he is an experienced political operative with excellent instincts. After all he did manage to put Bill Clinton in the White House twice. And if Hillary Clinton (who has wretched instincts) had not forced him out of the Clinton inner circle and caused him to become a nominal Republican he would doubtless have gained her the nomination and probably the presidency as well.

This is what he has to say about McCain's chances next Tuesday, and remember he has been saying that Obama was probably going to win up until now:

Published in the New York Post on October 30, 2008

Iraq isn’t the only place where the surge seems to be working. John McCain’s gains over the last five days are remaking the political landscape as Election Day approaches.

The double-digit leads Barack Obama held last week have evaporated, as all three of the top tracking polls (the most current and reliable measurements out there) show McCain hot on Obama’s heels.

Zogby had Obama ahead by 12 points last week - now it’s down to four. His margin in the Rasmussen poll has dropped from eight points to three in the last few days. Gallup shows only a two-point difference.

In each news cycle, Obama is on the defensive - staving off accusations of closet socialism and trying to wriggle out of his once overt advocacy of income redistribution. “Spreading the wealth around” has become the anti-Obama slogan - and might become the epitaph for his candidacy, just as “brainwashed” was for George Romney and “Where’s the beef?” was for Gary Hart.

And, as we head to Halloween, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s image is returning to haunt Obama. Yes, McCain refused to use the issue in his own campaign - but independent groups like are using funds from tens of thousands of individual donors to run ads featuring Wright and his relationship with Obama. Just yesterday, a tape surfaced in which Obama described Rev. Wright as “the best the black church has to offer.”

The double dose of Obama’s support for spreading the wealth around and his affiliation with the toxic Rev. Wright are eroding his once-formidable lead.

If the stock market doesn’t send us all into shock again, the election could be very close - with the undecided vote looming large. The key question is: About whom are they undecided?

At the height of the financial crisis, voters couldn’t decide if McCain was really a maverick or just a Bush clone. But the spotlight has shifted: It’s no longer McCain who is caught in its glare, but Obama.

As the Democrat moved convincingly ahead last week, voters began to seriously consider what kind of president he’d be. Bush and McCain seemed increasingly irrelevant as people pondered whether they really want to trust Obama with this kind of power.

By this point, the nature of the undecided vote has likely shifted from people who are torn between wanting change and worrying about Obama to people who have basically decided not to back Barack but haven’t sufficiently collected their thoughts to come out for McCain.

Then there’s the so-called Bradley effect - where white voters lie to pollsters and say they are backing the black candidate when they’re not.

To date, it’s been a myth: As The Wall Street Journal reported, Tom Bradly had lost his lead in the polls by the time California voted on his bid to become governor. But it may be real this year.

Undecided voters may be reluctant to say they’re not voting for Obama. They may be concealing their real intentions by saying they’re undecided. (They might even not have come to grips with their intentions themselves.)

High turnout may also be a wild card. On the surface, it seems sure to bolster Obama’s chances as large numbers of poorer, less educated, younger and minority voters turn out to vote for the first time.

But the swelling turnout may have gone beyond this social outreach. And, as it does, it can help McCain. After all, white voters back McCain by double digits. If the contest inspires them all to vote, Obama will lose.

So we approach Election Day with the possibility of a rerun of 2000 plainly before us. McCain has closed to a point where the race will likely be very, very close - and we’ll have to stay up very, very late on Election Night.

Miss Ann is talking

That means the YOU are listening!

As the case of Ashley Todd reminded us again last week, racial bias crimes are almost always hoaxes. Todd is the Republican volunteer who claimed that a black man in Pittsburgh had pummeled her and carved a "B" into her cheek after spotting the "McCain-Palin" bumper stickers on her car.

A lot of people suspected the case was a hoax from the outset, including Fox News' Bill O'Reilly, who immediately said: "It could be bogus. I'm a little skeptical about this, but our duty ... is to report everything to you."

The claim was bogus, but on MSNBC, instead of citing the Todd case as further proof of the maxim "Never believe claims of racial bias until proved," the hoax hate crime led to somber discussions of -- you guessed it! -- racism in America.

MSNBC's Keith Olbermann histrionically described Todd's hoax as "a narrative straight out of Reconstruction-era, race-based fear-mongering: a black man, 6-foot, 4-inches, attacking, sexually assaulting, fondling, mutilating a young white woman."

His expert pontificator on race was The Washington Post's Eugene Robinson, who said the Pittsburgh hoax was "the blood libel against black men concerning the defilement of the flower of Caucasian womanhood. It's been with us for hundreds of years and, apparently, is still with us."

Robinson was last heard from on the subject of race crimes in his famous April 25, 2006, Post column melodramatically saying of the Duke lacrosse rape case: "It's impossible to avoid thinking of all the black women who were violated by drunken white men in the American South over the centuries. The master-slave relationship, the tradition of droit du seigneur, the use of sexual possession as an instrument of domination -- all this ugliness floods the mind, unbidden, and refuses to leave."

Note to Mr. Robinson: There's a pill you can take for that now. Makes those endless, incessant thoughts of interracial rape just go away. Ask your doctor if this new pill is right for you.

As is now well-known, the alleged gang rape of a black stripper by white lacrosse players never happened. At least Ashley Todd's hoax didn't almost ruin an actual person's life.

Meanwhile, back at Hoax Interpretation Central, Olbermann spent most of October issuing blistering denunciations of John McCain and Sarah Palin based on the claim that someone had yelled "Kill him!" in reference to Obama at a Palin campaign rally.

"There's a fine line between a smear campaign and an incitement to violence," Olbermann lectured. "If Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin have not previously crossed it this week, today even, they most certainly did."

One of Olbermann's many guest-hysterics was Newsweek's Richard Wolffe. Equally excited, Wolffe said it was "no excuse" that McCain and Palin couldn't hear what the crowd was shouting because "what you're seeing here is a very conscious attempt to paint Obama as un-American, as unpatriotic and, yes, cohorting, consorting with what they call, 'domestic terrorists.'"

(Liberals indignantly reject the label "domestic terrorists" for former Weathermen, preferring to call them "future Cabinet members.")

After beating the "Kill him!" story to death for a week, Olbermann delivered one of his comical "Special Comments" about the incident. "You, Sen. McCain," he pompously announced, "are not only a fraud, sir, but you are tacitly inciting lunatics to violence."

Olbermann demanded that McCain cease campaigning: "Suspend your campaign now until you or somebody else gets some control over it. And it ceases to be a clear and present danger to the peace of this nation."

Anything else, Keith? Should I just concede the election now -- or would next week be all right? While I'm up, can I get you a sandwich? How about a hot towel?

As has now been conclusively established, no one ever shouted "Kill him!" at a Palin campaign rally. The Secret Service undertook a full investigation -- listening to tapes of the event, interviewing people who had attended the rally, and interrogating Secret Service and other law enforcement officers who were spread throughout the crowd.

As even an article on the crazy, left-wing, don't-make-any-sudden-moves-around-them Salon site noted: "The Secret Service takes this sort of thing very, very seriously. If it says it doesn't think anyone shouted 'kill him,' it's a good bet that it didn't happen."

While we're on the subject of massive deceptions, Olbermann regularly has Chris Kofinis on his show to talk about the sleaziness of Republican candidates. But why has Olbermann never asked this former communications director of John Edwards' campaign about the hoax Edwards was pulling running for president as a family man with a sick wife while carrying on an extramarital affair?

What were they planning to do if Edwards got the nomination? Claim that Rielle Hunter's baby was fathered by a black man?

Having helped promote massive hoaxes that lasted for weeks in the case of "Kill him!" and years in the case of the Duke lacrosse case, you would think liberals would go easy on the crocodile tears over a 24-hour hoax by an obviously disturbed girl in Pittsburgh.

There were two reasons that I didn't post anything here about the young woman who claimed that she had been attacked because of the McCain bumper stickers on her car. One was that I've been too busy to post much of anything lately and the other was that the story just didn't pass the smell test.

As Miss Ann notes almost all "bias crimes" turn out to be hoaxes. The Duke rape case, the black professor in NYC who claimed to have found a noose on her doorknob and so on.

What happened in this case was that a disturbed young woman wanted some attention and some sympathy so she made up a story in the hopes of being the next "Joe the Plumber". She needs help and that's the end of the matter.

The big difference between the way Republicans are handling this and the way Democrats would is that if a black woman Obama supporter had lied about being attacked by a white male McCain supporter leftists would be filling the New York Times with articles and op-ed pieces about how the story was "false but accurate". We would be assured by one talking head after another on CNN and MSNBC that there were millions of "Sarah Palin Republicans" who wanted to attack and mutilate black women and this unfortunate woman's fantasy was simply a response to the crushing pressure of living in the structurally racist USA.

Now the left has one Republican who lied that they can use to establish moral equivalency with the hundreds of "hate crimes" against women/minorities that never happened. I hope they're happy and can console themselves on next Wednesday morning when the media is trying to figure out how Obama lost.

Can you say "Enemies List"?

From Drudge:

Fri Oct 31 2008 08:39:55 ET



The Obama campaign has decided to heave out three newspapers from its plane for the final days of its blitz across battleground states -- and all three endorsed Sen. John McCain for president!

The NY POST, WASHINGTON TIMES and DALLAS MORNING NEWS have all been told to move out by Sunday to make room for network bigwigs -- and possibly for the inclusion of reporters from two black magazines, ESSENCE and JET, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

Despite pleas from top editors of the three newspapers that have covered the campaign for months at extraordinary cost, the Obama campaign says their reporters -- and possibly others -- will have to vacate their coveted seats so more power players can document the final days of Sen. Barack Obama's historic campaign to become the first black American president.


Some told the DRUDGE REPORT that the reporters are being ousted to bring on documentary film-makers to record the final days; others expect to see on board more sympathetic members of the media, including the NY TIMES' Maureen Dowd, who once complained that she was barred from McCain's Straight Talk Express airplane.

After a week of quiet but desperate behind-the-scenes negotiations, the reporters of the three papers heard last night that they were definitely off for the final swing. They are already planning how to cover the final days by flying commercial or driving from event to event.


This is only the latest example of Obama's totalitarian nature working itself out. I ask this again, if Obama will do this kind of thing when the election is still in doubt what will he do if he actually becomes president?

The truth is I believe that the reason for the only reporters who might have been expected to honestly cover the goings on in the Obama inner circle being kicked off the plane is that Obama and his string-pullers are worried. They see the polls tightening and they realize that the trend among the still undecided voters is away from Obama.

That plane is going to be filled with a lot of last minute brainstorming on how how to turn this situation around and if they lose on Nov. 4 how to succeed where Gore failed in 2000 and steal the election. And failing all of that they will be seeing just how many violent, bloody riots they can kick off in the big cities to show the stupid crackers what will happen if they don't do the right thing next time Obama is on the ticket.

None of this is the kind of thing a candidate who is hoping to coast in on the illusion of inevitability wants to see broadcast to the great bestial mass of ignorant sheep that he is counting on voting for him.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

To those who doubt

Rasmussen has the Obama lead down to just three points:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows Barack Obama attracting 50% of the vote nationwide while John McCain earns 47%. This is the first time McCain has been within three points of Obama in more than a month and the first time his support has topped 46% since September 24 (see trends). One percent (1%) of voters prefer a third-party option and 2% are undecided.

Drudge is reporting on his front page that Gallup now has the margin down to two points.

Remember even the best polls always overestimate the support for the Democrat. If Obama isn't up by over five points on the evening before election day he will lose.

Many of those in the 1% who prefer a third party candidate are Libertarians who now plan to vote for Bob Barr. When these people step into the voting booth many of them will decide that they would rather have someone who at worst represents more of the same (McCain) than a full-blown Marxist who plans to make structural changes to the nation that might take generations to undo, if ever (Obama).

I have to say that knowing what I now know about Obama that I would be voting for McCain even if he had picked his detestable little butt-boy Lindsey Graham to be his running mate.

Back in 2006 I warned you that while it was true that the Republican majority in Congress didn't deserve to be returned to power based on their past behavior that the nation didn't deserve what would happen if Democrats were given control over the legislature.

I was right then and I'm right now.

It is true that John McCain doesn't deserve to be president based on his past behavior. However as bad as he is he is not a true-believing Marxist who has already shown a tendency to use the mechanisms of law enforcement to harass and intimidate anyone who opposes him. McCain's supporters do not have the glassy-eyed look of fanaticism common to both Obama followers and committed Hitler Youth in the Third Reich.

Frankly Obama and his brainwashed minions scare the hell out of me. The people who follow Obama are either like him, Marxists who hate this nation as it now is but love a vision of what it could be if they were able to burn it down and rebuild it in their own image, or they are the deadbeat bottom-feeding dregs of our culture who are willing to trade Obama their liberty in exchange for a lifetime of free money and other handouts which will allow them to pass their lives in a blissful haze of drug/alcohol/sex induced euphoria for which no bill will ever come due.

What both these groups have in common is that they care nothing for the rule of law or the Constitution or ideas like "the consent of the governed" when they stand in the way of them getting what they want. Half the people in the deadbeat class will already cut your throat for a dollar and half the people in the Marxist class will cut 25 million throats for an idea.

What will they decide they are willing to do if they ever gain real power?

Now go out and do the right thing.

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Fred tells it like it is

Now go and do the right thing.

Just a word before I go

Just a word as I'm on my way out the door. I've had more work dumped on me since the end of last week than I have in the whole preceding month. So I haven't had much time to post. I have several things saved up to bring to your attention and I will try to start posting them this evening.

I'll mention this before I sign off. Last Friday Sarah Palin came to Asheville to speak at the Civic Center. Asheville, you will know if you read here regularly or live in the area, is the moonbat capital of the Southeast and is working hard to become the East Coast San Francisco.

The Civic Center was packed to overflowing. People stood in line for hours for a chance to see Governor Palin and thousands were turned away because there simply wasn't room for them inside.

If there is this much of an outpouring of affection for Mrs. Palin in a town where Obama yard signs outnumber bars of soap (just hang out in downtown on a hot summer day if you doubt me) then I refuse to believe that this election is anything but very much in play.

The most reliable polls show Obama with a lead of less than fiver points. All polls always err in favor of the Democrat in every presidential election. Obama's own campaign says in internal memos that if he isn't up by over five points on next Monday night that he will lose.

Look at what has been happening with early voting. We were told that the early voting might just be what is going to give Obama his margin of victory. This is, in fact, why Democrats have been pushing early voting for years. They know that as the election gets closer people begin paying more attention to the candidates and that the favorable impression which the MSM is able to create about the Democrat candidate always begins to crumble under closer scrutiny. The left hopes to use early voting to lock in the Democrat lead by getting people to the polls to vote Democrat before they know any better.

Yet the numbers from every state with early voting, even California the most left-wing state in the Union, show that early voters are evenly divided among Democrats and Republicans.

Where is the tsunami of support for Obama?

One of the ways that polling organizations are using to produce the Obama lead is by increasing the sample size of groups which are expected to turn out in greater numbers to vote this year than have in the past. Young voters and blacks are expected to show up at the polls in far greater numbers to vote for Obama this year yet the early voting patterns show voter participation this year is almost the same as in every recent election.

The attempt by the Obama campaign and its propaganda organs (otherwise knows as the mainstream media) to create an aura of inevitability around Obama may be backfiring. The very groups who Obama needs to turn out in unusually large numbers to put him over the top are the ones most likely to believe the line of crap coming out of the MSM about how Obama has already won. This makes it very easy for them to put off going down to vote early and will make it very easy for them to not bother getting up early and standing in line on election day.

As things are right now I stand behind my prediction that McCain/Palin will win by a narrow margin. And a big part of the reason for the Obama loss will be the over the top performance of the MSM.

Friday, October 24, 2008

Tonight's Music

This is the new Clandestine at the Cactus Cafe on the University of Texas campus 3 July 2008.

The gap between the media's version and the actual truth grows wider

PRINCETON, NJ -- Gallup Poll Daily tracking data indicate that about 11% of registered voters who plan to vote have already voted as of Wednesday night, with another 19% saying they plan to vote before Election Day. Roughly equal percentages of Barack Obama supporters and John McCain supporters have taken advantage of the early voting opportunity -- so far.

In addition to the 11% who say they have already voted, another 19% of registered voters who plan to vote say they will vote early, before Election Day. That leaves just about 7 out of 10 voters who intend to go to the polls on Nov. 4 itself.

The percentage of early voters has increased from 7% in Gallup's Friday through Sunday average, when Gallup first began measuring this variable, to the current 11% in the Monday through Wednesday average.

The pace of early voting so far appears to be roughly on par with 2004. At about this time before that year's election -- Oct. 22-24 -- 9% of registered voters said they had already voted. However, in that 2004 poll, only an additional 13% said they intended to vote early, lower than the 19% who say so in the current Oct. 20-22 average. Thus, early voting this year may end up being higher than it was in 2004. (In Gallup's final poll before the election that year, conducted Oct. 29-31, 17% said they had voted early, and another 4% claimed they were still going to vote before Election Day.) As noted above, projections from this year's data are that as many as 30% of voters could end up voting early.

But we've been hearing that the early voting was massively favoring Obama! In fact the mainstream media's attitude has been that the election would be over by election day with the early voters giving Obama a Reagan-style landslide!

NOW we find out that not only is early voting happening at about the same level as past elections where it was available but that the results are split evenly between Obama and McCain.

Could it be that the media have been reporting what they wish the truth to be rather than what it truth actually is?

To ask the question is to answer it. Of course the media is attempting to shape the outcome not just report in the process.

Do you wonder how the polls can be so all over the map with some showing Obama with a 10 point lead and others tied up? The answer is that some polls are massively oversampling Democrats. If you ask 1000 people who they are going to vote for but approached 500 of those people as they were leaving an Obama rally while randomly choosing the other 500 out of the phone book how could you show anything else but an "Obama landslide"?

The real question is why is the media going so all out this year? I mean they ALWAYS slant their coverage to favor the Democrat in a presidential race. They simply can't help themselves. Think of it this way suppose you are a reporter covering a political race. One candidate is someone you think of as a pretty good guy whose policies you mostly agree with and who you think would do well in office. The other is a Grand Dragon in the Ku Klux Klan who campaigns in his Klan robes and features cross burnings at his political rallies and whose platform is that we need to round up all the blacks, Jews and homosexuals and gas them to death to finish the work that the great Hitler started.

On an emotional level that is how the average member of the mainstream media sees any race between any Democrat and any Republican - and I'll give you one guess which part the Republican plays in this fantasy.

Many ordinary Americans were turned off by the ugly and unfair way that Charles Gibson treated Sarah Palin in his interview. Gibson honestly doesn't understand this criticism. In his mind the fact that he didn't beat Sarah Palin to death with his bare hands and then urinate on her corpse means that he treated her far better than she deserved.

When you have that kind of mindset, and the overwhelming majority of people working in the MSM do, the fact that you aren't going on camera every day wearing your "Obama '08" t-shirt means that you are bending over backwards to be fair.

However there is still a palpable difference between how this campaign is being covered and how previous campaigns have been reported on.

This year the media is doing far less to disguise its advocacy than ever before. Some speculate that the reason for this is that the media wishes to be a part of the history making election of the first black president (as long as he is a Democrat). Others believe that they see in Obama the most overt Marxist who has ever run for the office and had a chance to win.

Both of these are right to a degree but neither explains why the media has thrown away even the pretense of journalistic integrity and made themselves so obviously an arm of the Obama campaign.

I believe that there is only one reason why so many people would so openly destroy their own characters in public view. The old or mainstream media is in the grip of a toxic blend of panic and anger over their dwindling numbers of viewers and readers and over their loss of influence with the general public.

Reporters and editors and producers car read and they know what the implications of falling ratings and subscriptions mean for their job security. They know that it took them six years to destroy George W Bush's standing with the public (and Bush had to help them by never fighting back, by signing all kinds of bad legislation, by advocating amnesty for illegal aliens and by trying to appoint Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court) where before they could have done it in two.

Reporters and editors and producers know what it means to their financial future when the largest group of people tuning in to the nightly network news broadcast or buying the daily newspaper are over 70-years-old.

They are scared and angry. Their rice bowl is being overturned and the ones doing are are talk radio and the Internet news sites and the blogs.

It was a blogger who gave CBS News a major black eye and destroyed the reputation of Dan Rather by exposing how Rather attempted to tarnish George W Bush's reputation and cost him reelection by using forged (and badly) documents.

It was talk radio and the blogs which shamed NBC into playing the full Biden video which showed Biden not only promising that electing Obama would bring about an international crisis within the first six months of his presidency but that his response would be so poor and incompetent that it would destroy his standing in the polls.

It was radio talker Sean Hannity who - a year ago - began exposing Barack Obama's close associations with deeply troubling individuals like lunitic racist hate-monger Jeremiah (God Damn America!) Wright and unrepentant violent communist revolutionary and domestic terrorist bomber William Ayers. Associations which are eroding Obama's support and will probably wind up costing him the election.

It is the blogs which expose and mock these deeply disturbing and creepily evil "Obama Youth" videos which show the absolute commonality of mindset between the most fervent Obama supporters and the fanatical followers of Adolf Hitler.

So why does the fear that they might someday have to get real jobs motivate the MSM to further their loss of respect by the general public by coming out so nakedly in support of Obama?

The Fairness Doctrine.

The Democrat party hates talk radio and the Internet just as much as the MSM. Even a Republican president as great and as beloved as Ronald Reagan could not bring about a Republican House of Representatives and could only achieve a Republican Senate for a few years.

This is because the misnamed Fairness Doctrine was in force for all but the last year of his presidency. The Fairness Doctrine was born when commercial radio was in its infancy and large parts of the nation might be served by only one radio station. It was intended to prevent radio stations who carried campaign advertisements from one candidate in a political race from refusing to carry advertisements from his opponent, or from charging that opponent a higher rate for carrying his advertisements.

Over the years as radio and then television grew the Doctrine mutated into a rule that broadcast outlets have to give "equal time to all opposing points of view". This meant that if a radio host spent ten minutes talking about why taxes were too high then the station had to allow someone to come on the air and spend ten minutes talking about how taxes were just right or even too low.

The vast majority of radio and television station owners did not care to expose themselves to the potential trouble of FCC complaints from members of the community who thought that their point of view was being given unfair treatment so most radio stations just played music and the handful of stations that operated on a talk format did straight news, traffic, sports and weather with a few radio psychologists, cooking shows and movie/theater/restaurant reviews thrown in for good measure.

The end of the Fairness Doctrine resulted in an explosion of talk radio stations and talk radio became a multi-billion dollar industry. Market forces ruled this new industry and popular shows/hosts prospered and unpopular ones fell by the wayside. The result was that talk radio became a bastion of conservatism as ordinary Americans flocked to the AM dial to hear their beliefs and ideals upheld and defended rather than relentlessly attacked and mocked, as they were relentlessly by the MSM.

This opening up of a new conduit through which information could be distributed to the public broke the monopoly which the MSM had previously held and allowed the "other side of the story" to finally be told, unfiltered, to the American people.

The result is that it is much harder for Democrats to lie and get away with it and much harder for Democrats to get elected to national office. The arrival of the Internet on the scene has only accelerated this process. What Reagan could not do talk radio and the Internet did - bring about a Republican controlled congress for 12 years (it's not new media's fault that Republicans lost control because they forgot to act like Republicans).

The MSM wishes to destroy their competition and Democrat politicians want to restore the monopoly on information distribution to people they can depend upon to lie for them. Reimposing the Fairness Doctrine on radio and television and extending it to the Internet and satellite radio will accomplish this goal.

This is the reason that the mainstream media has become so over the top in its advocacy of Obama. They realize that their newspapers and network news divisions may not be commercially viable for very much longer and they see in an Obama presidency their best and what may be their last, chance to bring back what the see as the Golden Age when they told the public what to think and no one challenged them.

Panic will cause people to do things which reason would never lead them into. As the old media tries harder and harder to drag Obama over the finish line by sheer brute force they are becoming more and more an object of contempt in the eyes of the general public and they are generating more and more of a backlash against them and their anointed candidate.

Their very efforts to restore their former power and glory are actually hastening their ultimate downfall. There is something of the Greek tragedy in all of this. Perhaps the little messiah was being ironically prophetic in giving his acceptance speech in a mock up of the Parthenon.

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Tonight's Music

In honor of Ascended Master Bodhisattva Barack Obama we present iconic classic rock group Steely Dan's hymn of praise to Lord Barack the enlightened.

The transformation is upon us

Our friend Hyunchback sends us a link to a NewsBusters article about the latest Obama cult video. This was filmed right here in my back yard, which isn't surprising since Asheville is working hard to be the San Francisco of the mountains.

Here is the part of what NewsBusters had to say:

Here is yet another Barack Obama video with cultish overtones. It was filmed in the Asheville, NC area which makes sense since that city has become sort of a hippie center in the Southeast region. Participants in this video are encouraged to envision a President Obama. Here are the New Age slogans flashing on the screen with people looking like they are the midst of a rapture lovingly repeating, "President Barack Obama," as New Age type music is played:

Between now and November 4...

Let's spend one minute a day...

Envisioning Barack Obama...

As our President...

Prepare your heart to fill with hope...

Prepare your mind to embrace the change...

Envision Barack victorious on election night...

...Taking the oath of office...

On Inauguration Day...

Believe that this great moment in American history is already a reality...

Say the words to yourself...

To your family...

To your friends and neighbors...

Say it to the world...

Your vision is a sacred trust...

You are a sanctuary of a sacred vision for a renewed America...

Envision it...

Say it...

Feel it...

Believe it...

Make it our reality...

Manifest Obama, America!

I want to do everything in my power to encourage this movement!

If you are an Obama supporter then I want you to visualize an Obama presidency. I want you to believe in that vision so fiercely that in your mind Obama is already president. I want you to believe so totally that Obama is already president that you don't even bother to go and vote!

That's right you can make Obama president with only the power of your faith and your commitment to visualize and chant the Obama mantra. You don't even need to bother to go to a polling place and vote.

Why bother to get up early on election day and stand in line when you can do more by believing in the Obama presidency than you ever could by marking some stupid ballot. So just sleep late on election day. Then when you get up drop some peyote or drink some fine red wine and make passionate love to your boyfriend, girlfriend, same sex life partner or animal companion then spend the rest of the day communing with nature in the mountains north of Asheville as you contemplate the Vortex and let its raelian energy wash over you and begin the process of change which Enlightened Master Barack, who is Maitreya reborn, will bring to our sick and hurting earth.

So remember DO NOT VOTE.

Actually voting would be evidence of a lack of faith in the destiny of Master Obama and of his power as a transformative figure. To go to a polling place and cast a ballot would indicate that you do not believe completely in the absolute determination of the Universe to place not just the United States but the entire planet under the care of the Ascended Master Barack.

Remember Bodhisattva Barack does not need or want your vote. What Bodhisattva Barack requires is your absolute and unquestioning faith and obedience. Bodhisattva Barack does not practice the Old Piscean Age politics which required the "consent of the governed". Bodhisattva Barack practices the Aquarian Age politics of transformation and rebirth.

One does not "vote" for Bodhisattva Barack any more than a caterpillar votes to enter its cocoon and emerge a Butterfly. The caterpillar simply does what it must as the planet will do what it must now that Bodhisattva Barack has risen like the sun to bring about the World Collective.

So remember again DO NOT VOTE.

To vote would be to insult Master Obama by implying that he lacks the power to fulfill his destiny without your help. Instead of voting spend every possible moment of every day between now and election day and all of election day in prayer. Not praying FOR Master Obama but praying TO Master Obama.

Do this and the God of This World will receive you into his warm embrace where you will reside for all eternity.

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Biden screws up and tells the truth

From The New York Post:

Joe Biden warned that America's enemies would test Barack Obama with an international crisis within six months if he's elected president - a shocking comment John McCain eagerly pounced on yesterday to claim Obama isn't ready to be commander-in-chief.

"Mark my words," Biden told donors at a Seattle fund-raiser Sunday night.

"It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We're about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America.

"Watch. We're going to have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.

"And he's going to need help . . . to stand with him. Because it's not going to be apparent initially; it's not going to be apparent that we're right."

OK, let's translate. Barack Obama is a know-nothing, done-nothing radical leftist whose instinctive reaction to any situation is to come down on the side which is against America. He has consistently indicated that he will be the best friend that America's enemies have ever had in the White House (surpassing even Jimmy Carter).

Because of this our enemies will naturally think that they have carte blanche to run wild across the world stage. Rogue states like Iran and North Korea will sign deals with the Obama administration in which we will give them billions in various kinds of aid in exchange for their promise to abandon their nuclear weapons programs. Promises which will never be honored, just as the promise that Clinton extracted from Kim Jong-il to abandon his nuclear program was never honored.

Then sometime toward the end of his first two years in office when Iran tests its first atomic bomb (possibly on Tel Aviv) Obama will have a massive crisis on his hands. Now the crisis, from Obama's point of view, will not be containing a nuclear Iran. Rather it will be spinning the situation so that Obama doesn't look like the abject fool that he in fact is.

Also during the first two years of Obama's presidency terrorists who are very aware of Obama's anti-war positions and the fact that he wants to return to a law enforcement approach in our anti terrorism efforts will execute some spectacular 9/11 type attack either on American soil or against American interests overseas (like a military base or an embassy).

Then again Obama will have a massive crisis on his hands - which will be explaining why this kind of thing didn't happen after 9/11 when Bush was president and our troops were fighting Islamofascists on Middle Eastern soil but is now happening again on his watch.

And then there will be China and Russia. China will annex the Spratley Islands or invade Taiwan and Russia will reoccupy all of Georgia, Ukraine and the Balkan Peninsula. The crisis which Obama will face here will be explaining why allowing totalitarian states to advance by swallowing up democracies (think Hitler and Czechoslovakia) is really good for America and the world.

Of course the American people, knuckle-dragging louts that we are, will have a hard time understanding why surrendering to every enemy that comes down the pike while doing nothing as our people are slaughtered and our allies are destroyed is really all in our best interests.

After all after the first two years even the bloom will have started to fade off of that Soviet-style "free" health care.

So of course Joe Biden is engaging in a bit of preemptive begging, pleading with the Democrat base to remember how much they love him and the little messiah now when the feces has well and truly hit the fan and a night traveler could navigate from one end of the nation to the other by the light of Obama's burning effigies.

Or we could do the sane thing and elect someone who our enemies already fear and who they would not be tempted to test. A man like John McCain who for all his faults is a patriot who understands the use of military force and who had no illusions about the nature of the world we live in and the kind of people our adversaries are.

Isn't it interesting that we have Biden screwing up and telling the truth about this coming right on the heels of Obama's accidently telling Joe the plumber that his economic philosophy was nothing more or less than Marxism.

Did Biden resent Obama's gaffe getting all the attention when putting your foot in your mouth was supposed to be Biden's territory?

And the winners are. . .

The winners of the weekly Watchers Council vote are as follows:

Winning Council Entries

Winning Non-Council Entries

Monday, October 20, 2008

One liberal likes another liberal, yawn

WASHINGTON - Former Secretary of State Colin Powell endorsed Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., for president on Sunday, criticizing his own Republican Party for what he called its narrow focus on irrelevant personal attacks over a serious approach to challenges he called unprecedented.

Powell, who for many years was considered the most likely candidate to become the first African-American president, said in an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that he was not supporting Obama because of his race. He said he had watched both Obama and his Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, for many months and thought “either one of them would be a good president.”

But he said McCain’s choices in the last few weeks — especially his selection of Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska as his vice presidential running mate — had raised questions in his mind about McCain’s judgment.

[. . .]

Powell also told NBC’s Tom Brokaw that he was “troubled” by Republicans’ personal attacks on Obama, especially false intimations that Obama was Muslim and the recent focus on Obama’s alleged connections to William Ayers, a co-founder of the radical ’60 Weather Underground.

Stressing that Obama was a lifelong Christian, Powell denounced Republican tactics that he said were insulting not only to to Obama but also to Muslims.

“The really right answer is what if he is?” Powell said, praising the contributions of millions of Muslim citizens to American society.

Where to start?

I have heard that the reason that McCain has placed an absolute ban on any mention of Jeremiah Wright within his campaign is due to the fact that he was earnstly desiring Colin Powell's endorsement.

Any person whose endorsement would be jeopardized by criticisms of Jeremiah Wright is not a man whose endorsement would be worth anything.

While I do not doubt Colin Powell's ability as an Army officer and his uniformed service to his country the fact remains that during the greatest test he faced as an officer he performed very poorly. As Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the first Gulf War Powell begged (literally begged, people who were there said that Powell was trembling and his voice was quavering like he was just barely fighting back tears) George H.W. Bush to call off the attack on Iraq before our forces entered Baghdad and to leave Saddam Hussein in power. His stated reason for this was his fear that if the war lasted more than a few days the American public would turn against it and his soldiers would be spit upon when they returned home, just like he was when he got back from Vietnam.

Powell's council was the largest factor in President Bush's decision to make what he as subsequently called the biggest mistake of his presidency - leaving Hussein in power in Iraq.

As Secretary of State Powell was also a major disappointment. It was at his absolute insistence that we dithered for around 14 months attempting to gain the approval of France and Germany (whose leaders we now know were on Saddam Hussein's payroll and were never going to support using force to remove him from office) for military operations in Iraq. It was Powell who was instrumental in allowing enough time for the infrastructure of terrorist operations in Iraq to be built prior to our invasion and occupation.

It was also during Powell's tenure as Secretary of State that an illegal and treasonous shadow government was formed , centered in the State Department and the CIA, whose single-minded purpose was to undermine, and if possible destroy, the Bush presidency. It was, after all, the Powell protege Richard Armitage at State who leaked Valerie Plame's name to the press and it was Powell who ordered Armitage not to reveal this fact publicly so as not to derail the independent council's politically motivated investigation into the Bush Administration.

None of this should come as a surprise to anyone who has been watching Powell since his entrance onto the public stage. Powell has described himself as a "New Deal kid" which means that he is at the very best "socialist-lite" and at worst an out-and-out Marxist in the Obama mold. His primary and perhaps only reason for joining the Republican party and serving in a Republican administration was that as a career Army man he deeply opposes (or opposed since his endorsement of Obama will bring that event closer to happening) gays being able to serve openly in the military and a Republican administration seemed to be the best way to keep that from happening.

What about Powell's stated reasons for turning his back on McCain? He has said that he was "troubled" by McCain's choice of Sarah Palin. OK, this tells us something important about Mr. Powell. He is turned off by the choice of an authentic Reagan conservative for the VP slot.

He also says that he is concerned about what kind of judges another Republican administration would appoint to the Supreme Court. Well, no one who isn't a frothing left-wing kook has the slightest problem with Justices Roberts or Alito and conservatives almost unanimously believe that Thomas and Scalia are the best men to ever serve on the High Court so what - exactly - is Powell's problem?

What are Powell's real reasons for endorsing Obama? There are three and they are all equally important. One is that Powell is a liberal. He was willing to work for George W Bush because Bush is not a true conservative. He said that he thought McCain would make a good president because McCain is also not a conservative, but he changed his mind because of McCain's conservative running-mate.

The second reason is that Obama is black and Powell likes the idea of seeing the first black president.

The third reason is to indulge in a bit of payback over the way he feels that he was ill used by the Bush administration. Powell was required as Secretary of State to go before the UN and make the USA's case for war with Iraq. Of the more than 20 reasons justifying war (any one of which should have been sufficient by itself) one was that Hussein was maintaining stockpiles of chemical weapons which he could use against his neighbors - including Israel.

It is known that there were stockpiles of chemical weapons because Hussein used them against the Iranians and against Iraqi Kurds and we found some of them during our first war against Iraq. It is possible that Hussein ordered those stockpiles destroyed after the Gulf War (and then kept that fact a closely guarded state secret) or (thanks to the year of dithering that Powell insisted upon) he and his Russian and European allies may have successfully removed them from Iraq during the buildup to the current war.

Whatever the reason for the absence of WMD's in Iraq Powell feels that he was made to go before the UN and lie. And since Powell is a liberal he respects the UN and values "world" opinion more than the opinion of the American people so this "lie" is - in his mind - a stain upon his personal honor.

With more than two weeks to go before the election and a large chunk of voters still undecided there is enough time for the McCain campaign to begin to exploit Jeremiah Wright and the other deeply troubling connections to Obama that opening the "Wright door" will reveal. Like the fact that Obama is the preferred candidate of lunatic antisemite Louis Farrakhan (who calls Obama the messiah without irony).

Rubbing the American electorate's face in the fact that Obama's preferred friends and partners have always been the very worst elements of humanity (the people who work in the Communist Party - USA headquarters are all wearing Obama buttons) is a strategy which is working. Obama's lead is shrinking. Put enough doubts in enough minds and McCain will be seen as the "safe, if boring" choice by a majority come election day.

And in the meantime Colin Powell's name can be stricken off the list of people whose opinion should be accorded the slightest weight whatsoever.

Oh, I almost forgot. By his own admission Obama has not been a "lifelong Christian". He was converted in his 20's by the ministry of Jeremiah Wright who led Obama into "Black Liberation Theology" which is not orthodox Christianity. This means that either Powell has not bothered to learn anything about the man he is endorsing for the presidency or that he doesn't know the difference between true and false forms of Christianity or that he is simply rationalizing his decision to support the black guy who also happens to be a left-liberal.

My vote is on the latter. Powell looks at Obama and doesn't see anything beyond his skin color and his left-wing politics and that's good enough for him.

Friday, October 17, 2008

I told you so

WASHINGTON (AP) - The FBI is investigating whether the community activist group ACORN helped foster voter registration fraud around the nation before the presidential election. A senior law enforcement official confirmed the investigation to The Associated Press on Thursday.

A second senior law enforcement official says the FBI was looking at results of recent raids on ACORN offices in several states for any evidence of a coordinated national scam.

Both officials spoke on condition of anonymity because Justice Department regulations forbid discussing ongoing investigations particularly so close to an election.

Like I said there is enough information out there to justify prosecuting ACORN under the RICO statutes.

Let us hope that everyone involved with their fraudulent voter registration efforts, up to and including B. Hussein Obama, becomes very familiar with our nation's federal prison system.

Submitted for your approval

The Watchers Council submissions are up (actually they have been up, I'm just late posting them). I can recommend all of these to you without reservation. Enjoy your reading.

Council Submissions

Non-Council Submissions

Sometimes you just need a plumber

Cartoon from Americans for Limited Government

Miss Ann is talking

That means that YOU are listening!

With an African-American running for president this year, there has been a lot of chatter about the "Bradley effect," allowing the media to wail about institutional racism in America.

Named after Tom Bradley, who lost his election for California governor in 1982 despite a substantial lead in the polls, the Bradley effect says that black candidates will poll much stronger than the actual election results.

First of all, if true, this is the opposite of racism: It is fear of being accused of racism. For most Americans, there is nothing more terrifying than the prospect of being called a racist. It's scarier than flood or famine, terrorist attacks or flesh-eating bacteria. To some, it's even scarier than "food insecurity."

Political correctness has taught people to lie to pollsters rather than be forced to explain why they're not voting for the African-American.

This is how two typical voters might answer a pollster's question: "Whom do you support for president?"

Average Obama voter: "Obama." (Name of average Obama voter: "Mickey Mouse.")

Average McCain voter: "I'm voting for McCain, but I swear it's just about the issues. It's not because Obama's black. If Barack Obama were a little more moderate -- hey, I'd vote for Colin Powell. But my convictions force me to vote for the candidate who just happens to be white. Say, do you know where I can get Patti LaBelle tickets?"

In addition to the social pressure to constantly prove you're not a racist, apparently there is massive social pressure to prove you're not a Republican. No one is lying about voting for McCain just to sound cool.

Reviewing the polls printed in The New York Times and The Washington Post in the last month of every presidential election since 1976, I found the polls were never wrong in a friendly way to Republicans. When the polls were wrong, which was often, they overestimated support for the Democrat, usually by about 6 to 10 points.

In 1976, Jimmy Carter narrowly beat Gerald Ford 50.1 percent to 48 percent. And yet, on Sept. 1, Carter led Ford by 15 points. Just weeks before the election, on Oct. 16, 1976, Carter led Ford in the Gallup Poll by 6 percentage points -- down from his 33-point Gallup Poll lead in August.

Reading newspaper coverage of presidential elections in 1980 and 1984, I found myself paralyzed by the fear that Reagan was going to lose.

In 1980, Ronald Reagan beat Carter by nearly 10 points, 51 percent to 41 percent. In a Gallup Poll released days before the election on Oct. 27, it was Carter who led Reagan 45 percent to 42 percent.

In 1984, Reagan walloped Walter Mondale 58.8 percent to 40 percent, -- the largest electoral landslide in U.S. history. But on Oct. 15, The New York Daily News published a poll showing Mondale with only a 4-point deficit to Reagan, 45 percent to 41 percent. A Harris Poll about the same time showed Reagan with only a 9-point lead. The Oct. 19 New York Times/CBS News Poll had Mr. Reagan ahead of Mondale by 13 points. All these polls underestimated Reagan's actual margin of victory by 6 to 15 points.

In 1988, George H.W. Bush beat Michael Dukakis by a whopping 53.4 percent to 45.6 percent. A New York Times/CBS News Poll on Oct. 5 had Bush leading the Greek homunculus by a statistically insignificant 2 points -- 45 percent to 43 percent. (For the kids out there: Before it became a clearinghouse for anti-Bush conspiracy theories, CBS News was considered a credible journalistic entity.)

A week later -- or one tank ride later, depending on who's telling the story -- on Oct. 13, Bush was leading Dukakis in The New York Times Poll by a mere 5 points.

Admittedly, a 3- to 6-point error is not as crazily wrong as the 6- to 15-point error in 1984. But it's striking that even small "margin of error" mistakes never seem to benefit Republicans.

In 1992, Bill Clinton beat the first President Bush 43 percent to 37.7 percent. (Ross Perot got 18.9 percent of Bush's voters that year.) On Oct. 18, a Newsweek Poll had Clinton winning 46 percent to 31 percent, and a CBS News Poll showed Clinton winning 47 percent to 35 percent.

So in 1992, the polls had Clinton 12 to 15 points ahead, but he won by only 5.3 points.

In 1996, Bill Clinton beat Bob Dole 49 percent to 40 percent. And yet on Oct. 22, 1996, The New York Times/CBS News Poll showed Clinton leading by a massive 22 points, 55 percent to 33 percent.

In 2000, which I seem to recall as being fairly close, the October polls accurately described the election as a virtual tie, with either Bush or Al Gore 1 or 2 points ahead in various polls. But in one of the latest polls to give either candidate a clear advantage, The New York Times/CBS News Poll on Oct. 3, 2000, showed Gore winning by 45 percent to 39 percent.

In the last presidential election the polls were surprisingly accurate -- not including the massively inaccurate Election Day exit poll. In the end, Bush beat John Kerry 50.7 percent to 48.3 percent in 2004. Most of the October polls showed the candidates in a dead-heat, with Bush 1 to 3 points ahead. So either pollsters got a whole lot better starting in 2004, or Democrats stole more votes in that election than we even realized.

The answer to the question of why even small "margin of error" discrepancies always seem to favor the Democrats is that news organizations are left-liberal and use polls not to simply report of where public opinion is at any given time but as a tool to shape public opinion.

The polls showing Obama with a 10 point lead were never accurate and the polling firms and their MSM partners knew that. They were simply an attempt to give the Obama candidacy the aura of inevitability and depress Republican voters.

The thing is that pride has a tendency to go before a fall and anyone who thinks that being the "inevitable" candidate is a good thing should sit down for a nice long talk with Hillary Clinton.

Tonight's Music

Now for something completely different. Here is the other kind of music that I like:

This is Shriekback performing Nemesis. Come on, how many of you thought you would ever hear the word parthenogenesis used in a song?

Here is a video that someone put together around Shriekback's Underwaterboys. I like it because like Fata Morgana I like the sound of explosions. You know some people need nothing else.

Here are some other Shriekback classics. This one is The Fish Below the Ice.

This is This Big Hush, which was featured in the movie Manhunter (the first movie based on Thomas Harris's novel The Red Dragon). This movie had several Shriekback numbers in it. The producer, Michael Mann (of Miami Vice fame) had a talent for mating his visual images with just the right piece of music to convey the mood of the moment.

Thursday, October 16, 2008

I voted

While I am not really a fan of early voting the opportunity to vote against Barack Obama and for the eventual presidency of Sarah Palin was too great to resist.

The line at the Board of Elections office was long, but moved quickly. The only people there whose vote I felt certain was going one way or another were the young black man in the Che t-shirt who I was sure was an Obama supporter and the uniformed Marine NCO from the local recruiting office who I was equally sure was a McCain/Palin man. Oh, there was also the woman with the developmentally disabled son who I would bet was there to vote for Sarah Palin and whatever guy was on the ticket with her.

The truth is that I have little doubt that the majority of people there were going to vote for McCain. As you drive around my county you notice the couple of Obama yard signs because they stand out so starkly against the sea of McCain/Palin signs.

I see the same thing in Eastern Tennessee in my travels there. This is one reason why I simply can't believe those polls which were showing Obama with a 10 point lead or more. And you shouldn't believe them either. When you look at the internals of those polls you see that the way that the Obama lead was obtained was by significantly over counting African-American voters and registered Democrats or by sampling registered voters instead of likely voters.

A fair sampling of likely voters has never given Obama more than a five point lead and the most credible polls have shown him with a less than four point advantage. In fact Drudge is reporting that Gallup is now showing Obama with a TWO POINT lead among likely voters, a number which is within the poll's margin of error.

The fact is that the efforts to get the truth about Obama out before the public are paying off. Rather than "backfiring" as the mainstream media had been claiming they have eroded Obama's support among undecided voters and independents.

With the race less than three weeks away people are looking hard at the candidates and the American public instinctively knows that the character of a candidate has an enormous amount to do with whether he will make a good president. They also know that a man is revealed by both the friends and enemies that he makes as he travels through life.

This scrutiny is causing people who thought that Obama might actually represent something new, some genuine hope and chance for change to turn from him in disgust.

I believe that this trend of turning away from Obama will continue until election day and see John McCain win with a 3.5 to 5 point margin of victory.

There it is in black and white. The Hillbilly White Trash election prediction. If I am wrong you may ridicule me but I don't think I am.

So the cry of "kill him" was a lie from the start

Now the truth comes out:

SCRANTON – The agent in charge of the Secret Service field office in Scranton said allegations that someone yelled “kill him” when presidential hopeful Barack Obama’s name was mentioned during Tuesday’s Sarah Palin rally are unfounded.

The Scranton Times-Tribune first reported the alleged incident on its Web site Tuesday and then again in its print edition Wednesday. The first story, written by reporter David Singleton, appeared with allegations that while congressional candidate Chris Hackett was addressing the crowd and mentioned Oabama’s name a man in the audience shouted “kill him."

News organizations including ABC, The Associated Press, The Washington Monthly and MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann reported the claim, with most attributing the allegations to the Times-Tribune story.

Agent Bill Slavoski said he was in the audience, along with an undisclosed number of additional secret service agents and other law enforcement officers and not one heard the comment.

“I was baffled,” he said after reading the report in Wednesday’s Times-Tribune.

He said the agency conducted an investigation Wednesday, after seeing the story, and could not find one person to corroborate the allegation other than Singleton.

Slavoski said more than 20 non-security agents were interviewed Wednesday, from news media to ordinary citizens in attendance at the rally for the Republican vice presidential candidate held at the Riverfront Sports Complex. He said Singleton was the only one to say he heard someone yell “kill him.”

“We have yet to find someone to back up the story,” Slavoski said. “We had people all over and we have yet to find anyone who said they heard it.”

Hackett said he did not hear the remark.

Slavoski said Singleton was interviewed Wednesday and stood by his story but couldn’t give a description of the man because he didn’t see him he only heard him.

When contacted Wednesday afternoon, Singleton referred questions to Times-Tribune Metro Editor Jeff Sonderman. Sonderman said, “We stand by the story. The facts reported are true and that’s really all there is.”

Slavoski said the agents take such threats or comments seriously and immediately opened an investigation but after due diligence “as far as we’re concerned it’s closed unless someone comes forward.” He urged anyone with knowledge of the alleged incident to call him at 346-5781. “We’ll run at all leads,” he said.

So the ONLY person to hear the "death threat" against the little messiah was a reporter with the mainstream media.

Why am I not surprised?

Despite the fact that only one person heard the "death threat" which was supposedly shouted at high volume in a large crowd (the crowds turning out to see Governor Palin are always large) the rest of the mainstream media ran with the story reporting that deep rage and death threats were the signature feature of all McCain/Palin rallies.

All this off of ONE report of ONE incident by ONE mainstream reporter - which we now know was a lie.

And it was not a mistake it was a LIE.

The mainstream media has come out in support of Barack Obama in a way which they have never done for any presidential candidate in my lifetime. Everything but the most microscopically thin vernier of objectivity has fallen away from them in their efforts to deceive the American people about the true nature of Senator Obama.

David Singleton, the reporter whose lie started the mainstream media feeding frenzy, knew that as long as he was saying something incendiary about Governor Palin or her supporters that his colleagues in the media would do no fact checking but simply run with the story as if it were gospel truth. He also knew that left-wing blogs and talk radio callers would take up the mantra and that the perception that McCain/Palin events were little different than Nuremberg Rallies (ironic because the candidate whose followers most resemble fanatical Nazis is Obama, there are no videos of McCain Jugend floating around the 'net) would become the unquestioned assumption among the media and Democrat talking-heads.

This is exactly what happened with New York Times writers confidently assuming that McCain and Palin were whipping up the great masses of nascent knuckle-dragging Klansmen (who they all just know infest the alien landscape of flyover country) into a murderous fury*.

Friends, when it comes to this election and these candidates we must assume that whatever the mainstream media says is a lie unless backed up by overwhelming confirmation from non mainstream media sources. If the New York Times says that the sun is shining brightly at noon on a cloudless day don't believe it unless you go outside and look for yourself. If MSNBC says that water is wet get a glass of it and conduct your own experiments before forming an opinion.

Or better yet do what the rest of us are doing and tune them out altogether. If you want an Obama position paper or a sheet of Obama talking points you can go to your local Democrat party headquarters and they will give them to you at no charge (and throw in an Obama bumper sticker and yard sign as well). You don't have to pay the New York Times or the Washington Post or your local paper that prints stories off the AP wire for them.

Of course the MSM has been lying to us about a great deal more than the character of Sarah Palin rallies and they have been doing it for a lot longer than this current election season. However what is happening right now is of critical importance for the future of our nation.

The United States of America simply cannot afford Barack Obama. We cannot afford him in a financial sense as the pure Marxist socialism which he reflexively thinks is the answer to any and every economic problem would bankrupt the nation and risk turning the coming recession into another great depression.

The Unites States of America simply cannot afford Barack Obama in a national security sense as his determination to surrender in the war in Iraq would destabilize the region and send a message to every other nation in the world that we are an unreliable ally and an enemy who is not to be feared.

The Unites States of America simply cannot afford Barack Obama in a foreign policy sense as his determination to negotiate with outlaw nations without preconditions would tell these rogue states that they can have the legitimacy of diplomatic relations with the US without reforming themselves in even the slightest sense. It would signal the world that America is not a serious player on the world diplomatic stage. The international respect which the left claims that we have lost under George W Bush would actually be lost under Barack Obama.

The United States of America simply cannot afford Barack Obama in a social policy sense as his unconditional support of partial-birth abortion and his refusal to countenance even the giving of supportive care and comfort to infants born alive after a botched abortion attempt (wishing them to be thrown into a garbage can to die instead) reveal a man whose moral center had been totally corrupted and sold out to the very worst and most extreme elements of the modern left-wing culture of death.

John McCain is a deeply flawed candidate. He is not a conservative. Although some of his positions fall into line with conservatism those positions are not arrived at through the outworking of a conservative worldview. Senator McCain's central guiding motivations are his love of country, his sense of personal honor and a profound desire to do his duty to his nation. These are all admirable qualities but he lacks an underlying political philosophy to serve as a lens to focus these desires in a consistent and constructive way.

This explains his erratic voting record as a Senator on everything other than foreign affairs and military issues. He knows those things by personal experience and since he has no underlying liberal philosophy which forces him to misinterpret what he sees with his own eyes his opinions in those areas are based on simple reality and so line up with conservatism.

Since Mr. McCain lacks the base of personal experience in other areas like economics he must arrive at his opinions using secondhand information. Since he has no underlying conservative philosophy to guide him toward good sources of information like the Heritage Foundation and The Cato Institute and away from bad sources like the New York Times and any liberal academic his opinions on those issues are seldom consistent and often wrong.

This lack of an underlying conservative philosophy is, as I said, a serious flaw but it is one we can deal with. Dragging John McCain, often kicking and screaming, from center-left to center-right is a goal which we can accomplish more than half the time. Attempting to drag Barack Obama, who does have an underlying political philosophy - of the most radical leftism bordering on Marxism - from the most extreme fringes of the Marxist left halfway back to center-left is a task we will fail at 75% of the time.

I know that there are many conservatives who dislike John McCain, I am one of them. However John McCain has unwittingly chosen the best possible person to be his running mate and therefore set her up for her own presidential run in 2012 or 2016. Preventing Barack Obama from stepping into the Oval Office with a Democrat congress to back him up for at least the first two years with all the potential damage which would could be done to the nation during that time is worth whatever personal discomfort we might feel in casting a vote for John McCain.

Placing Sarah Palin, the next Ronald Reagan, in a position to be Republican party's next presidential candidate is also worth the discomfort of casting a vote for John McCain. And make no mistake about it. Governor Palin is the next Ronald Reagan. She has the same underlying conservative philosophy as Reagan. She has the same telegenic quality that Reagan had and most importantly she has the same ability to connect with ordinary Americans which Ronald Reagan had.

In fact she has that ability to connect with average citizens to a greater degree than Mr. Reagan. What took Ronald Reagan years as a professional actor, more years as a representative for General Electric traveling from one end of the nation to the other speaking to and listening to ordinary Americans and still more years as Governor of California to perfect Sarah Palin has naturally.

All it takes is one announcement on a local radio or television station that Sarah Palin will be making an appearance and enough people to fill a football stadium show up to see her. The most common reaction which ordinary Americans have to her is love, respect and admiration. If she did not have the anchor of John McCain tied around her neck she could be president this year.

Some people say that if McCain loses this election that Mrs. Palin's career on the national political stage will be over. Nothing could be further from the truth. If Barack Obama becomes the president Republicans will remember Sarah Palin as the vice presidential candidate who was almost strong enough to drag the party over the finish line despite all the disadvantages we had this time around. She will become the savior in the wings just as Reagan was between 1976 and 1980.

However it is not necessary to give Barack Obama and his radical friends and allies that two-year opportunity to inflict harm upon this nation. All we must do is not lose heart and turn out to vote. That and not be afraid to speak our minds to our friends and neighbors.

If you are the kind of person who reads or writes a blog or blogs then you are most likely the kind of person who goes out of his/her way to be informed. I know that talking to ordinary people who only get their news from a daily paper and a nightly network newscast (I've started to think of those people as "civilians") can be a frustrating experience. They "know" so many things which just ain't so that talking to them about politics can feel like trying to discuss plasma physics with a two-year-old.

But I urge you to make the effort. Remember that you cannot just assume that they know who William Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, Jeremiah Wright or Anthony Rezko are. They will likely have only heard the mainstream media version of Obama's association with these men and so you will have to do some patient explaining. Have your facts together and know them from memory.

Know that it is very very common for a "small business" to make more than $250,000.00 per year so that Obama's tax increases will harm most small businesses. Know that Obama's $3000.00 tax credit to a business that creates a job will not come anywhere close to covering the actual costs of hiring a new employee.

Know that tax increases on businesses either large or small force those businesses to cut their payroll and raise their prices so that the price of "taxing the rich" will always fall on ordinary working Americans.

Know that Obama's plan to allow people to withdraw money from retirement accounts without penalty will drain money from capital markets just when it is most needed and risk turning the coming recession into a true depression, as well as tempting Americans to sell stocks when they are low and waste the opportunity to participate in the coming recovery.

Be able to remind people that the meltdown in the housing market which started the current crisis was the direct result of Democrat party policy which Barack Obama supported and that in just two years in the Senate Obama managed to become the second largest recipient of cash from Fannie Mae. Be able to remind people one of Obama's closest friends was Anthony Rezko the slumlord (and felon) who preyed upon the very poor people that "community organizer" Obama was supposed to be trying to help.

Be ready to ask people why Barack Obama's health records have not been released like John McCain's have been. Why even Barack Obama's birth certificate has to be kept secret. Why Obama will not release his doctoral thesis. Where are Obama's writings from when he was a law professor?

Be ready to ask people why Obama is constantly receiving the endorsements of people that he has to run away from like Louis Farrakan, the leader of the antisemitic cult the Nation of Islam or Hamas, the Islamist terrorist organization or bigoted hate-monger Jeremiah Wright or violent communist revolutionary and terrorist bomber William Ayers? Why are Obama supporters like Jesse Jackson promising that under an Obama administration that America will turn away from its support for Israel and begin favoring the Arab world? Even if Obama denies this ask why so many people find the idea credible.

Remind people that Obama has a brother who is living in squalor in Kenya. Ask them why Obama isn't lifting a finger to help his own flesh and blood. Sending this poor man a check for a hundred dollars a month would raise his standard of living enormously. Why hasn't Obama sponsored him for immigration to the United States?

Ask people who are thinking of voting for Obama why trust Obama to help their families when he won't even help his own family.

These facts and questions ought to be draped around Obama like the chain around Marly's ghost. And they would be if the media was doing its job rather than acting as unpaid press agents for his campaign. So it is up to us to ask them as often as we can to anyone who will listen. We still have time to drag John McCain across the finish line but we must roll up our sleeves and do the work.

Now I'm off to vote (early voting starts in NC today).

*Note to the mainstream media: To the extent that there is "murderous fury" out here it is being whipped up by YOU not by any politician. I'm sorry that we aren't as stupid as you thought we were and have figured out that you have been lying to us for years and that you are just as much the enemies of our nation as al Qaeda is, even if your methods of attack are not violent.