Diaries

A Rahm Set Out To Pasture

Let’s say you run a Presidential Administration that takes on some water. It takes on water in a manner reminiscent of The USS Arizona at Pearl Harbor. It’s not over after the Germans get done bombing, but things are looking pretty bad there. Somebody has to fall on the gladius and take the blame. Pearl Harbor Day for this administration appears to be scheduled one month early this year, and the lucky guy getting to do the sword plant appears to be none other than Rahm Emanuel.

Yet this operation isn’t just as simple as whacking someone in the private sector. After all, this is Rahm “Effing” Emanuel were talkin’ about here, not some stinkin’ Jabroni. You can’t just leave the gun and take the cannoli. Rahm is a man of respect, he has to be properly taken care of.

Now it just so conveniently happens that Mayor Daley of Chicago has decided to hang up the spikes. That Rahm Emanuel leads a life of serendipity. It just so happens that Rahm Emanuel would love to be the Mayor of Chicago. Daley wants to move on, Rahm has been encouraged to leave DC, what do you think the likelihood of such a bizarre yet fortuitous coincidence occurring on Earth would be?

It somehow seems like this is Rahm’s place to lie down and peacefully die. It’s a perfect little Romania upon which he can unleash his inner Ceausescu. Now if he can just train his secretary the way Boss Man Bill from Arkansas had ‘em trained….

Yet all may not be tranquil in paradise. A few members of the family want to alter the deal. According to Jim Geraghty at NRO, an organization called The Progressive Change Campaign Committee issued the following fatwa against Rahm Emanuel.

“Rahm is unfit to represent Democrats in office. He’s a cancer on the Democratic Party. Democrats’ current 2010 situation is due to a weak Rahm Emanuel mentality that says water down real reform at the urging of Republicans and corporations, thus making Democratic reform less popular with voters than the real deal would have been.”

I almost hope Barack Obama has to actually endorse Rahm Emanuel for this job. It would be about the most stinging rebuke imaginable. It would also garun-frikken-tee that this is lights out for Emanuel’s political career. The City of Chicago would no longer be a temporary sinecure, but would instead be his Office by the River, in The Japanese Corporate sense.

Let Rahm Emanuel actually become a liability to the Democratic Party, let his bowing out at the White House become a national joke, and people will then become reminded of just how charming a person Mr. Emanuel has been throughout his glorious tenure of service to our great nation. I can’t imagine anyone with even a remotely kind thought for Eric Massa willingly stumping in ChiTown for Good Old Rahm. I can’t imagine anyone even remotely cognizant of what a raging fustercluck Fannie Mae truned into not being tempted to ask Rahm how he liked earning several million dollars as a managing director of that august organization.

Karma owes Rahm Emanuel. Payback may well come with full interest. Yet sadly, the world we live in has no such finely-honed sense of justice. Rahm will simply be parked there, in charge of his own urban Bulgaria. Let him stare at his portrait of Dorian Grey as he rots in peace. It’s better that than having that evil basilisk of a human being in charge of anything of national import or significance. Enjoy your retirement you vile son of a Rottweiler.

Four Reasons Progressives Are Running Like Heck From The Vanity Fair Hit Piece on Sarah Palin

It’s official. Every liberal pundit with an ounce of credibility is either ignoring the latest Vanity Fair column about Sarah Palin, or is running like heck from it. The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Hill have all ignored the story. And now, many noteworthy progressives, such as Kirsten Powers, Ben Smith, Julia Baird and David Weigel are panning it as untrue, disgraceful, sexist blather. In fact, only the far left nutter websites, like Crooks and Liars, see it as any sort of plus for the progressive cause.

So, why the mad dash away from this column by the leftist elites? It’s bashing Sarah Palin, so one would think that they would love it. Well, without much ado and mincing any words, I can tell you the four major reasons why liberals can’t seem to distance themselves from this column fast enough.

1.) Michael Gross, the author of this column, sounds like a blithering idiot, his column is dripping with hatred, and he manages to prove Sarah Palin correct about the “lamestream media”.

First of all, Gross’ column is a poorly written, non-flowing, rambling mess mess consisting of too long paragraphs, run-on sentences, dangling modifiers and non sequiturs. Second of all, his column is completely unsourced–everyone he quotes is either “some say”, “others say”, “someone who knows Levi Johnston says”, and some unnamed woman who says that Sarah Palin used to be her babysitter. (Mr. Gross explains that the reason why nobody will go on the record with him in Alaska is that the Palins are like “the mafia”, and that everyone’s afraid of them. He refers to Wasilla as “a city of fear” that is “populated entirely by abuse survivors”. I’m not kidding–you can read all of his insane fantasies about Sarah Palin cracking kneecaps in his long and crappy article.)

Furthermore, the one person that Gross did name, Shannyn Moore (a well known Sarah Palin hater), wrote him a nasty email where she basically tore him apart for misconstruing her words and taking her out of context. Her entire email is printed below–

Mr. Michael Gross,

You just “Sarah Palined” people here.

I’m going through a list doing damage control and telling people I’m so sorry I gave you their contacts and vouched for your professionalism and credibility.

You have neither.

I don’t give a rip what you said about me – though it was so completely wrong, and put me in such a completely inaccurate and unfavorable light people are mad on my behalf.

Fine thanks for Alaskan hospitality. I have extended the Alaska Spirit to dozens of journalists and visitors, and I will continue to do so. It’s on YOU, not me, as you are the only one who has broken agreements with sources you promised complete anonymity.

I’m sure you’re thrilled to be on TV now. Just know, like Sarah, Alaskans paid a price for it. Specifically, a 79-year old woman, with failing health, who spoke to you under anonymity who hopes her adult children will speak to her again.

Shame on you. You’re not a writer…you’re a climber.

With no respect,

Shannyn Moore

Second of all, Michael Gross’ column was loaded with half-truths, innuendos and out-right lies, all not-so-cleverly disguised as facts. For example, Gross began his column with the following quote–

“Erratic behavior and a pattern of lying matter little.”

Now, you would think that if Gross was going to come out swinging like that, then he must have some serious evidence to back up such powerful assertions such as those–that he, again, makes on Hardball. (See the embed below where Chris Matthews cuts Gross off on goes to Norah O’Donnell, because he realizes that Gross sounds a little nutty and unhealthily obsessed with Sarah Palin.)

However, it turns out that his column is rich in over the top rhetoric, but deeply lacking in facts or evidence. For instance, his smoking gun that Sarah Palin is a crazed liar is that she once said that she didn’t have a lot of experience with special needs children before her son Trig was born, but at a later time mentioned that she has an autistic nephew. (Mr. Gross makes no mention of how much time Palin has spent with her autistic nephew.) Oh, and his airtight evidence that Sarah Palin is a crazy woman with a violent temper who needs to be on “psychiatric medications”, is a story from an “unnamed source” about her and Todd Palin getting in a fight and throwing canned food at the refrigerator–and the fact that one of her teenage kids was supposedly embarrassed by her praying in public and called her a “phony”.

["Coming up on Live News at Five, married couples sometimes fight and teenagers are embarrassed by their parents. Next up--dog bites man."]

However, CNN reporter, Peter Hamby, has since contradicted Michael Gross with the following Tweet where he states–

I was w/ Palin for entire VP bid. never got a hint that she “lashed out at the slightest provocation”

So, another one of Michael Gross’ accusations bites the dust.

And finally, the most embarrassing part about Michael Gross’ article is that it has two serious factual errors in it.

One major mistake Michael Gross made in his column is he referred to Dr. Gina Loudon as Trig’s nanny, when she was actual the mother of Samuel, another special needs child with Down Syndrome that was backstage at a fundraiser with the Palins. Here is an exert of Gross’ column below–

“When …Piper Palin turns around, she sees her parents thronged by admirers, and the crowd rolling toward her and the baby, her brother Trig, born with Down syndrome in 2008. Sarah Palin and her husband, Todd, bend down and give a moment to the children; a woman, perhaps a nanny, whisks the boy away; and Todd hands Sarah her speech and walks her to the stage.”

Now, here are some exerts from Dr. Gina Loudon’s column rebutting the above statement by Michael Gross (be sure to click on the link to her column to see an adorable picture of Piper)–

“Unfortunately for Mr. Gross, it happens that I shared the stage with Sarah Palin at that event.”

“As I stood backstage with the Palins I remember a reporter asking me if I were “Trig’s Nanny” with a hint of something I didn’t trust in his eyes. I coldly retorted, “no, I am Samuel’s mother.” He looked confused, and had more questions to follow. In his VF story, he said that no one is willing to speak about Sarah “on the record” unless they are paid by her, or afraid. I was one of the people you interviewed Mr. Gross. I am not paid, or afraid. But since you opted not to print what I told you, here is the rest of the story:Since the first time the Governor saw my son Samuel (who also has Down syndrome), she bolts across the room to greet him every time she sees him. She nuzzles him like a mother who loves children with Down syndrome does. I remember commenting to my husband that she always “does the mama smell” of Samuel, that only moms understand.

All of the Palin children circle around Samuel the moment they can get close, but Piper, in particular, cannot seem to get enough of him. She literally plays with him (Gross does say she played with “the children” in his story) from the moment she sees him, until the moment she is pressed to let go of him. It is so sweet, and it speaks to the parenting in her life. She has obviously been taught a real, tangible love for “special children” by her parents, and it shines when she lights up at the sight of a baby with Down syndrome. This is not an ordinary reaction in children. Most children step away, look curious, or frightened, or confused. Not the Palin children, and especially not little Piper.

After an event in Nashville, the Governor went to the trouble of making a special call to me to thank me and tell me how much Piper enjoyed “loving on” my Samuel.

One more thing among your errors: “the boy” in the excerpted quote above, was not Trig Palin. That was my Samuel, also a beautiful boy with Down syndrome. No “nanny whisk(ed) the boy away.” I am his mother. I took my son, Samuel from Sarah before she went on stage. I told Mr. Gross that fact, but he didn’t let that divert him from his pathetic narrative.

That is not journalism. That is just gross.”

Ouch–that’s gotta sting a bit. I mean, Dr. Gina Loudon makes Mr. Gross look like he was so busy with his witch hunt on Sarah Palin, that he couldn’t even bother to get his facts straight–you know, like who the child in question really was, or who his mother was (however, he probably thinks that all Down’s Syndrome children look alike).

Now, the second major mistake in Michael Gross’ column is that repeats a rumor about Sarah Palin supposedly wanting a shotgun wedding for her daughter Bristol and Levi Johnston, that everyone who’s anyone in the media and blogs knows is total bunk. Both Ben Smith and Dave Weigel call Gross to the carpet on printing this known fabrication. To be specific, Michael Gross wrote the following with regard to the supposed plans that Sarah Palin had for a shotgun wedding for Bristol and Levi–

“Soon after her nomination, she brought up with McCain aides the subject of Bristol’s out-of-wedlock pregnancy by Levi Johnston: “Would it be good for the campaign if they got married before the election?” she asked, and went on to wonder whether one weekend or another would be more advantageous for media coverage.”

Dave Weigel responds to this unsubstantiated rumor in Gross’ column by writing the following–

“Smith explains that the quote came from a wild yarn in a UK Times story, passed on by a McCain campaign source, even though “the idea was never brought to Palin, much less seriously considered.” I can confirm that because I heard it from the same source, albeit after the campaign was over. It was, as I understand it, a goof, and it went to print because, basically, UK papers have more lax standards on what they print than American papers. Of course, it’s not like American papers have covered themselves in glory when “analyzing” Palin’s family based on rumors.

Point is, this anecdote is bunk, and it makes me wonder about the rest of the story.”

Dave Weigel just took the words right out of my mouth–I couldn’t have said it better myself. In a nutshell, what it looks like, is that, at best, Michael Gross was so obsessed with his witchhunt to paint Sarah Palin as Lucifer, that he engaged in some really sloppy journalism–and at worst, that he was outright lying (I vote for all of the above).

Now, on to the second reason why liberals are running scared from Michael Gross’ disgusting column.

2.) Michael Gross’ hit piece on Sarah Palin was just dripping with blatant sexism.

Gross goes out of his way to paint Sarah Palin as a bad mother, which everyone knows is classic sexism 101. One example that he gave was that she missed her children on the campaign trail, so when they were with her, she hung out with them too much and didn’t insist that they do their homework (someone needs to call child protective services…rolls eyes). Oh, and she insisted that her little girl get the pink and purple markers that she wanted to sign autographs with, and that a hairdresser do hair and make-up for another daughter. Please, allow me to put this another way. Could any of you imagine if someone wrote a column implying that Barack Obama was a bad father because he wasn’t around his daughters much during the 2008 campaign, and because he got them some pink markers to sign autographs?! Liberals would be screaming at the top of their lungs that the column was ridiculous garbage–and they would be right.

However, Gross’ disgusting sexism doesn’t stop at attacking Sarah Palin’s parenting skills. He goes on to say that “someone” (his favorite source) told him that an aide asked if Sarah Palin needed psychiatric medication–again, a classic and very transparent sexist technique implying that she’s some unstable “harridan” with raging hormones. Furthermore, Gross even goes so far as to write that “some say” that Todd Palin is “henpecked”. (I’m not kidding–he actually wrote the word “henpecked”.) Progressive Newsweek columnist, Julia Baird (who is certainly no Sarah Palin fan), wrote a column titled, Will Feminists Rally Around Sarah Palin?, where she did an excellent job defending Sarah Palin from these pathetic attacks. The excerpts below from her column pretty much say it all–

“It’s just about the lamest card in the pack of criticisms leveled at powerful women: you must be a Bad Mother. Just when you think we’ve accepted that a woman can have a job and still love her children, along comes another piece of reporting to remind us that some people still think it’s fair to judge a female public figure on the basis of what kind of parent—and wife—she is. This is something male politicians, who have long perfected the role of absent father, deal with very, very rarely.

While all politicians are vulnerable to personal attacks, some attacks are particularly shameful. So what is the substance of these allegations?

First, Palin may have something representing a modern marriage, which has prompted some locals to speculate that Todd may be “henpecked.” Fancy that charge being leveled at the husband of a woman with opinions. It’s striking that while the husbands of successful women are frequently portrayed as emasculated by their wives’ success, the women who marry powerful men are usually seen to benefit from their greater status.

Second, Palin’s work has affected her closeness to her kids: we are told that “at least since the start of the 2008 campaign, Todd has been shouldering the bulk of the parenting and that Sarah’s relationship with her children has grown more distant.” And yet a few sentences later we also learn that when she grew lonely on the campaign trail, Palin wanted her kids to travel with her because she “seemed comforted” by having them around. But instead of empathizing—who wouldn’t hate to be separated from their kids?—the implication is that she is selfish: the kids came, but not much homework was done. What choice would you make?

The third allegation is that she was a sloppy parent when her kids traveled with her, and she failed to discipline them adequately, at least in the eyes of some observers: “On the road, aides say, Sarah spared the rod.” She reportedly demanded one child use the pink and purple Sharpies the youngster wanted to sign autographs with (not the black one that was provided) and insisted another have hair and makeup done by a campaign stylist. She was hardly being cruel; it’s stupid to judge such trivial incidents without context.”

Furthermore, liberals now have a perception problem that they seem to tolerate blatant sexism within their ranks–as long as it aimed at any woman that gets in Barack Obama’s way. Throughout the 2008 Presidential election, many prominent liberals seemed to gleefully participate in a dogpile of sexism and misogyny directed at both Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin. In fact, liberal sexism became so rampant during the 2008 election that Democratic strategist, Kirsten Powers, (one of the many progressives currently running away from this Vanity Fair hit piece) was alarmed enough by it to write a column in the summer of 2008 titled, A Brilliant Trap Makes Dems The Male Chauvinists. To be specific, Powers wrote the following with regard to the appalling behavior of many Obama supporters–

“One Obama supporter and political operative blogged, “In picking an unknown, untested half-a-term governor from Alaska . . . John McCain is following in a long line of reckless men who have rolled the dice for a beauty queen.”

Do we really have to do this again?

No sooner was Hillary Rodham Clinton out of the race, and a new woman is in the cross hairs.

On CNN, during a discussion about whether it was appropriate for Palin to accept this job when she has a baby, Dana Bash pointed out it’s unlikely anyone would ask this of a male candidate.

I can’t help wondering if this is a trap. The McCain camp watched and learned as Obama supporters offended Hillary supporters by their treatment of her. The McCainiacs had to know that this group is incapable of behaving, that Palin would bring out their worst instincts.

One top Republican said to me: “Just wait until she is debating Joe Biden and he starts attacking or condescending to her. Hillary voters are going to say, ‘Oh yeah, I remember this.’ “

Ironically, two feminist, leftist bloggers recently wrote an op-ed in The New York Times titled, A Palin of Our Own where they lament the rise of Sarah Palin as a feminist icon. However, what is so ironic about this column is that liberals helped to create the superstar that is Sarah Palin by sending moderate, suburban women (some of them former Hillary Clinton supporters) running into her arms with their obnoxious, misogynistic behavior (for example, Keith Olbermann hoping that someone would beat up Hillary Clinton). And, deep down inside, they know that this is true–which is why they are running like heck from this recent vicious, sexist hit-piece on Sarah Palin.

Now, on to the third reason why liberals are throwing Michael Gross under the bus with gusto.

3.) When Michael Gross is not attacking Sarah Palin in his column, he is attacking her supporters–who are his fellow Americans.

Gross paints Sarah Palin’s supporters at her rallies as a bunch of incurious simpletons who “cling to their guns and their religion”. To be specific, Gross writes the following about the people who attend Sarah Palin’s rallies–

“People who admire her believe she is just like them, and this conviction seems to satisfy their curiosity about the objective facts of her life.”

Whoa. If that’s not a round about way of calling Sarah Palin’s supporters a bunch incurious, uneducated dumb dumbs who don’t understand “the objective facts of life”, then I don’t know what is.

Moreover, Gross writes in his column about how Palin is sending out a “dog whistle” to Evangelical Christians in her speeches when she uses the phrase, “Leading with a servant’s heart”, and then prattles on about how she gets emails from Evangelical Christians who pray for her and call themselves “prayer warriors”. Mr. Gross is clearly bothered by the prayer warriors and thinks that they are a bunch of dangerous crazies–it is painfully obvious when he writes the following–

“The term “prayer warrior” describes a person who offers a specific kind of supplication: asking God to direct an unseen battle between forces of light and darkness—literal angels and demons—that some Christians believe is occurring all around us.”

Yeah, those Christians have always been a delusional, dangerous bunch. Remember how they were personally responsible for ending the African slave trade? They’ve always been unpredictable and crazy like that. You never know what they’re going to do next (rolls eyes).

Now, do I really need to explain to anyone why attacking and mocking random American citizens is a big no-no for a journalist? This really should be common sense. It is one thing to attack a politician, a journalist, a blogger, or any other public figure. It is quite another thing to show such disdain–as well as religious bigotry–towards your fellow Americans. In other words, private citizens who are minding their own business should be able to attend a Sarah Palin rally, or attend any church that they want to, without some know nothing, liberal elitist journalist mocking them in Vanity Fair.

And finally, on to the fourth reason why liberals are high-tailing it in the the opposite direction of Micheal Gross.

4.) Franky speaking, Michael Gross sounds like a pervert who is way too interested in Sarah Palin’s undergarments, as well as her sex life.

For starters, Gross writes about how “this person” told him that Sarah and Todd Palin don’t always sleep in the same bed and that Todd once supposedly said, “I don’t know how she even gets pregnant”. Yuck. I feel like I need to take a shower now. I mean, could any of you imagine if some right wing journalist started asking local people in Chicago about the Obama’s sex life?! I rest my case.

Furthermore, Mr. Gross admits to having dinner with Joe McGinniss at his house–you know, the weirdo who moved in next door to the Palin family in order to stalk, I mean, report on them? Now, right away, Gross freely admits that McGinniss is lying about not being able to see into the Palin’s home. Gross writes that, when he was standing on McGinniss’ deck, “it was possible to see several of the Palins’ windows, a fair bit of the yard, and much of the lakefront edge of their property”. However, Gross then goes on to sympathize with Joe McGinniss and paint him as a victim who has received over 5000 hostile emails and has had one of his truck windows shot out. Oh, oh, I have an idea! Pick me Teacher, pick me. How about not stalking the Palin family, and then you won’t have to worry about receiving hostile emails by people calling you a “stalker”? But, I digress.

However, by far the creepiest part of Michael Gross’ column was when he not once, but twice referenced what kind of undergarments Sarah Palin wears. Specifically, Gross writes about how “a friend” of Sarah Palin supposedly told him–

“Once, while Sarah was preparing for a city-council meeting, she said, ‘I’m gonna put on one of my push-up bras so I can get what I want tonight.’ That’s how she rolls.”

OK–why would anyone who calls himself a journalist even bother to write down smut like this? But Mr. Gross was just getting warmed up. Further down in his column, Gross wrote that Sarah Palin spent $3000 on Spanx girdles during the 2008 campaign. Oh for crying out loud! It’s so obvious what Gross is trying to do here (besides acting like a real creep/weirdo)–he is clearly trying attack to Sarah Palin’s beauty and imply that her looks are just a mirage, and she’s really kind of fat. Yeah, that Sarah Palin–she’s a real uggo and a fatty. What is she? A size four? What a cow! (Rolls eyes.)

By the way, just an explanation here. You don’t have to be “fat” to wear Spanx or a girdle occasionally (especially after you’ve just had a baby). Every woman has that unforgiving dress that, on a “fat day” when you might be retaining some water, can make even the most svelt, toned woman look like she has a bulge. Full disclosure–I am a size two and even I have to sometimes use “help” when I wear an unforgiving dress on a bad day. If not, then even a very attractive, tall, slim woman with toned arms can wind up looking like this in a unforgiving dress–

And that’s no good, because that just doesn’t do any woman justice. Every well brought up red state woman knows that the right undergarments are essential to dressing well and presenting your self with style–otherwise, you can wind up looking like your letting it all hang out a bit too much. (Just ask Dolly–see 1:18-1:49 in the embed below).

However, let’s move on from this topic of conversation, because Michael Gross might be getting turned on–uh, I mean some of the guys might be getting bored.

So, in conclusion, Michael Gross not only not only made a flaming ass out of himself, but he also totally humiliated the liberal mainstream media. He managed to bring every caricature of an elitist, egotistical, out of touch, liberal journalist to life. And the worst part was that he was incredibly sloppy with many of the facts–which in turn, discredits his entire piece. Credible leftist/progressive journalists and columnists can’t flee from his disaster of a column fast enough–and I don’t blame them.

However, sad to say, this isn’t the first time that Vanity Fair has written an outrageous, totally unsourced hit piece on a politician. During the 2008 campaign Todd Purdum wrote a totally unsourced hit piece in Vanity Fair about Bill Clinton, implying that he was openly dating while campaigning for Hillary in South Carolina. (Whatever you may think of Bill Clinton, I live in SC. If Bill Clinton was going out publicly clubbing and picking up women, someone, somewhere would have seen him. SC is a small state.) Furthermore, Purdum then wrote a totally unsourced hit piece on Sarah Palin a year later. Surprise, surprise. (Has anyone ever noticed that Vanity Fair has never written an unsourced hit piece on Barack Obama?)

But now, Vanity Fair’s chickens have come home to roost. They have gotten away with writing unsourced hit pieces for so long, that they got over-confident. This time, they gave Michael Gross carte blanche to pretty much write what ever he damn well pleased–muddled facts, sexism, stalkers, underwear and all. To tell the truth, I’m not at all surprised that some columnist, somewhere, would write something like this; however, I am surprised that any editor would actually go through with publishing it. Basically, Vanity Fair unintentionally gave Michael Gross just enough rope to hang himself, and Vanity Fair’s credibility in the process. Michael Gross’ column should serve as a cautionary tale for progressive journalists everywhere. Don’t let your love of all things Obama and your hatred of Sarah Palin get the best of you–or you will wind up proving Sarah Palin correct about the “lamestream media”.

Update: Michael Gross has now come out and admitted that he was wrong about “the nanny whisking Trig away”, and he has now admitted that he wrote about the wrong baby–and the wrong mother. However, the fact that he would make this kind of ridiculous “mistake” in the first place, tells me that he really didn’t go to Alaska to find out the facts about Sarah Palin. Gross obviously went there to try to dig up dirt–and he failed miserably and made fool out of himself in the process.

This column is cross-posted from NewsReal, and it is also posted on 73 Wire, Hillbillypolitics and Many Faces of Barack.

“Danger, Danger, Will Robinson,” Obama Failure Does Not Guarantee November Victory

In the mid sixties a sci fi television series began called, “Lost in Space.” It was the story of the space family Robinson who through an overt act by Doctor Zachary Smith became lost in space and over three season tried to find their way back to Earth. On board the Jupiter 2 the Robinson’s had a robot who was their protector, defender and companion to son Will Robinson. Whenever danger approached the robot would flay his robotic arms and cry, “danger, danger Will Robinson.”

With the mid term election only weeks away and poll numbers showing a disaster for Democrats and failure in reality and in the eyes of the public for Barack Obama, bringing with it an almost certain change in majority status for the House and possibly the Senate. But in the back of my mind, I keep hearing the robot yelling the warning, “danger, danger Will Robinson.”

Every indicator is pointing toward a massive defeat for Democrats in November. In fact the polling numbers this year are far worse for Democrats than they were in 1994 when the GOP took the House and the Senate after 40 years of Democrat majorities. So with numbers like this why should danger signs be evident as the election approaches?

The reason is we are dealing with Democrats who are notorious for deception and will do anything, pulling out all the stops and lies in order to stem defeat and keep power. 1994 was a shock to Democrats and for the most part all of the pundits. The polls were showing a slight lead for the GOP but no one predicted the massive losses Democrats experienced during the 94 mid term.

Bill Clinton was President and though not extremely popular at the time, his poll numbers were not as low as those of Barack Obama. Even the generic poll for Congressional voting had the GOP up by 6 at it highest and 2 – 3 on an average which gave the idea that the November mid term of 1994 would be tight and not a massive defeat for Democrats as it became.

2010 is quite different. Obama is crashing with approval ratings staying in the low 40′s and could possibly be dipping into the thirties by November. Clinton averaged just below 50% as the 94 mid terms approached. Two recent generic Congressional polls, one by Gallup and the second by Rasmussen show a 10 and 12 point lead respectively for the GOP. So 2010 as compared to 1994 looks like a lock for the GOP and devastation for Democrats.

Yet I still hear, “danger, danger, Will Robinson.” And with good reason. In 1994 the numbers though good for the GOP were not as bad for Democrats as they are this year. So the anger which accompanied the voter rebellion against Democrats stayed focused since tighter polls were not a sign of sure victory. Of course I understand that in elections there is no such thing as a sure victory but polling is usually fairly close to the final result.

The problem we have this year as compared to 1994 is that polling is so bad for Democrats it can create a situation with voters can become almost over confidence of victory and as a result the anger and fight we have waged for nearly two years can fade. Additionally Democrats are panicking and are very capable of pulling the virtual political rabbit out of their hat at the last minute, which many call the, “October surprise,” that has been known to change the course of elections in the past.

So the danger lies in NOT letting our guard down just because the numbers in August several weeks before the election look so good and so promising. Obama is an ideologue who will do anything to stay in power. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are notorious liars who will say and do anything to hold onto the reigns and with an ideologue like Obama in The White House who sees it as his destiny to change the country into his own Marxist image and needing a Democrat majority to do so, they will stop at nothing and do anything it takes to hold on to power and the majority.

So fellow patriots, while the prospect of taking the majority away from Pelosi and Reid looks mighty good right now, do not drop your guard. We cannot let the fight we have waged go in vain nor can we waver in any respect in our goal of taking our country back and defeating the agenda of Barack Obama with a new Congress that stands for our Constitution and the principles which have made our Nation great.

Heed the warning of the robot. “Danger, danger Will Robinson,” November 2 is still several weeks away and we must stay in the fight until the last vote is cast and counted. Then even as we prevail in November we can never grow complacent again as we have been in the past. We must keep EVERY elected officials feet to the fire and hold them accountable at every turn. Fighting for our Republic in 2010, defeating Obama in 2012 and always showing those in Washington that they work for us and we the people are the true authority in our Nation.

Ken Taylor.

Talking Smack Vs. Inciting Hatred and Violence

Americans talk the smack better than any other culture on the planet. I think we invented it, patented it, and elevated it to an art form that transcends all race, ideology and social class boundaries. We see it clearly when pollsters ask voters of either party about their political enemies. The question becomes what happens when all these smack-talkers forget that it can be carried too far. I think we discovered that recently when James Jay Lee took over the Discovery Channel building and held hostages.

Unlike the pitiable Environmentalist Whack-Job James Jay Lee, people don’t really speak from their hearts on these surveys. They just slag down the people they would never consider voting for. The unspoken assumption is that it’s all just a game.

Sadly, in the case of James Jay Lee, we just met someone with very strong, opinions, and no particular understanding of a lot of the political speech around him. He really didn’t know that Al Gore, a father of four children and the owner of a palatial estate himself, was talking smack to the activists about overpopulation and resource overconsumption.

A recent Daily Kos Poll suggests those Right Wingers, the ones Kos doesn’t exactly send Christmas and Hanukah Cards every year, have bizarre and irrational beliefs. Can you imagine a Daily Kos poll getting that result? Did you know that President Obama was a secret Muslim? Or that 36% of those whack-job Republicans believed he was born abroad and not really a US citizen? Show us the birf-surtifikate, President ObaMao! But that just describes our side’s sick puppies.

In 2008, James Zogby discovered that Liberals were nearly twice as likely as Conservatives to believe they should have the right to succeed from the United States. It’s as if that whole State Contract vs State Compact Thingy was all just Bush’s fault! Perhaps the Democrats didn’t lose the last American Civil War badly enough….

No, the real truth here is that Zogby’s poll result is a predictable result of Liberal politics of racist pandering. The highest pro-succession results come from Black and Hispanic respondents who coincidentally tend to hold liberal beliefs. This skews the statistic for liberals and thereby produces the “gotcha” result that got Zogby all the web hits and blog citations. Zogby reports his racial crosstab below.

Broken down by race, the highest percentage agreeing with the right to secede was among Hispanics (43%) and African-Americans (40%). Among white respondents, 17% said states or regions should have the right to peaceably secede.

This result can be looked at in two ways. Russ Douthat describes it as a symbolic belief. People claim that George W. Bush either prefers LIHOP or MIHOP; and we’re not talking about pancakes. But they perhaps claim to hold this belief to make a political statement. Douthat describes these symbolic beliefs below.

For all but the hardest-core conspiracy theorizers, they may express what Sanchez calls “symbolic beliefs.” These are “propositions you profess publicly” but would never follow through on, because they’re adopted as a kind of political and cultural statement rather than out of deep conviction.

(HT: Russ Douthat).

Now I’m willing to concede that most Americans have stayed awake through enough US History to accurately understand how successful Pickett’s Charge was. Popular Mechanics Magazine has written the definitive smack-down of all stupid 9-11 Conspiracy theories. The Hawai’i an Certificate of Live Birth for Barack Obama states that his familial religion is Islam. It also offers evidence that he was born in the US and is constitutionally eligible to misrule the United States of America for yet another two years of ignominious and arrogant enstupidation. These are all three bodies of fact that are not in serious intellectual dispute.

So why do people still say these things? For the same reason that the chicken pooped after she crossed the road: to insult the other side. Everybody alive has probably called at least one individual with an IQ greater than 130 an idiot over some point of intellectual contention. People say things that they know well are not accurate about people for whom they bear great antipathy. Most of us get that and aren’t really aligning our beliefs to statements such as “There is no need for red-hot pokers – Hell is other people!”

Yet every so often, we get a Sirhan Sirhan or a James Jay Lee. We meet somebody who just doesn’t get Al Gore’s shtick. The leading Environmentalists repeat the discredited lies of Thomas Malthus or Paul Ehrlich who predicted mass starvation by the mid 1980’s if we didn’t quit procreating. The authors of these screeds usually assume that Earth has some fixed biotic carrying capacity for human population that in no way accounts for technological advances in medicine, food production, community planning or energy.

The ideas in Erlich’s work make a certain rudimentary sense if you only examine only a minimal data set. It’s the modern scientific equivalent of the Geo-Centric Theory. You can hand-pick data and torture the numbers until they support Malthusian Doctrine; but you can’t keep making chicken salad out of such an obviously wrong conclusion. We mostly all know this, – except for James Jay Lee.

Maybe what we all learned from the Discovery Channel debacle and James Jay Lee’s condign, yet untimely death, is that really funny jokes like George W. Bush committing LIHOP, or Barack Obama having a secret Kenyan Birth Certificate, aren’t particularly funny. It’s all fun and games until someone puts an eye out, or carries one of these mistaken beliefs so far that they strap explosives on and take hostages over a stupid, dishonest and wrong-headed ideological screed.

The aforementioned Sirhan Sirhan was a dedicated true-believer as well. That doesn’t make you feel any better in the morning if your last name happens to be Kennedy. One of these days the cute political conspiracy theories that we use to trump the bad guys could get an awful lot of us killed by someone who doesn’t understand it’s not serious.

Don’t Be Complacent. Get Your Liberty On

Labor Day is traditionally when the regular folks start to become interested in the upcoming elections. The larger than usual turnout in the GOP primaries makes me think this interest about the upcoming elections started earlier this year. We can’t get complacent and let the enthusiasm wane before November 2. There are no foregone conclusions, and nothing is really won or lost until after the votes are tallied on Nov. 2. We also have to do things in the right sequence. Before we work on changing the leadership of the GOP establishment Republican candidates need to win in the General Election. You are really putting a GOP candidate in an untenable spot when you demand of him to denounce the current GOP leadership. Please wait until December to talk about any of that stuff. The Democrat incumbents are going to fight to hold on to the reins of power, and they are going to try to project themselves as outstanding servants to their constituents. Do not allow them to lie about their voting records. Show people the grade each of them received from Liberty Central.

Liberty Central just completed a video contest, Get Your Liberty On, on Sept. 1. Below are the grand prize winner and runnerup. Below that is an awesome video by C&W duo, Tichenor Clark. So enjoy Labor Day, don’t be complacent, and get your liberty on.

Liberty Central grand prize winner was submitted by AJ Roach, of Pleasant Grove, Alabama:


Are you inspired yet? If not, check out this moving reflection from a veteran, and resident of Liberty Nebraska, Ralph Bodie.


One more video created by Jamie Teachenor and Ben Clark for a new song, Never Gonna Stand For This:

Days of Labor in Camel-Not

Less government union Labor per Day, please

The original meanings of many American national holidays, including tomorrow’s Labor Day (originally celebrated on a Tuesday) with its and others removal to Mondays, have given way to the celebration of leisure, especially of the three-day weekend variety for federal employees.

Most Americans will be thankful that their Obama Administration rulers will take 24 hours off from promulgating new guidelines to “properly” direct our happiness pursuits, but if idleness defines the day for employed government bureaucrats, then over 25 million underemployed Americans and their families (50 million or 16.7% of Americans impacted directly) have been “celebrating” this day for two years, thus dwarfing even 12 days of Christmas.

Hard work worthy of an American holiday celebration didn’t first occur in 19th Century northern industrial sweatshops.

Its harder to organize and collectively bargain with fellow travelers on the Mayflower or cacti obstructing the way west than it is with New York City factory owners when the whistle blows at quittin’ time. Gotta be some nearby deep pockets to pick before one can avert their gaze from the Scripture-endowed labor required before eating.

No, those that labored to found a nation that would become wealthy enough to indulge Jimmy Hoffas didn’t insist on a day celebrating the work that made non-farm subsistence possible in the first place, much less UAW-GM pensions at age 52 that minimum wage Waffle House employees are now taxed to provide.

Fairness at the heart of the holiday

The labor movement that led to this holiday was, first and foremost, at least in the collective American mind, about fairness. Of course, as my Dad used to say to childish whinings about the cruel facts of life, “the fair comes in October,” but the large numbers of former garden-keepers that moved to cities had to eat, riot or starve, and so the movement began. Keep in mind that employers who became so via hard work away from farms had no movement in hard times except movements back to the farm or six-feet under.

But the same Holy Bible insisting on labor before lunch, also promotes one day of rest out of every seven even for its Creator author, and inspired a Constitution meant to preserve endowed and unalienable rights that include the right of free speech and association. Hence the choice of job-providers to bargain with collectives or go back to mules and plows.

Full disclosure requires that DeVine Law reveal his upbringing was enhanced by the relatively better wages earned by Southern Railway, Carmens union members I addressed as Pop and Daddy. I also represented the union and many members in the 1990s. I also listened to the complaints of Daddy about how union policies hurt the company over time by making it nearly impossible to fire incompetent and slothful employees.

Whose labor owns the day?

Even before Americans discovered the true meaning of John Edwards’ “Two Americas” mantra, I have called for Labor Day to be abolished as a national holiday every year since 2006.

Don’t get me wrong, I am all for allowing most all non-military, not postal employees (I like the 44 cents solution) every second Monday in September (and all other days of the year) off from work.

But I have a problem with the Leftist, Democratic Party, class envy definitions of whose labor is worthy of praise, and so I refuse to participate, except to the extent I celebrate the labors of whoever slaughtered the pigs for my bar-be-que, the hands that cook it and Exxon for drilling the oil that gets me to the pit.

Democratic Party contempt for Reagan and ObamaDem policies reveal their true feelings about labor and fairness

Then FDR-New Dealer-Truman Democrat Ronald Reagan essentially gave up Hollywood super-stardom and his marriage to save the Screen Actors Guild labor union he led as President from Communist infiltration, nearly 30 years before he became President of the United States and led the war against the Evil Empire that employed those agitators (community organizers?, but I digress).

Reagan was shot at twice while SAG leader; only once as leader of the Free World, as he operated within the American Rule of Law that made union organization possible. Yet, when he fired illegally-striking air traffic controllers, he was denounced by the same AFL-CIO division of the Democratic Party that never had an encouraging word for him before he faithfully executed the laws as per his Oath.

By the 1980s you see, privilege, not fairness, defined the “movement” (if you can call it that given its decline from 30% of the private sector in the 50s to less than 10% then and now) so much, that Kremlin conversations were abuzz that this Cold Warrior was cut from stronger cloth than Nixons, Kissingers and Carters, if he had the audacity to fire, much less enforce the law against supposed union masters.

Fast forward 20 years and the majority of union members now being paid by taxpayers not only don’t fear being fired thanks to jobs saved or created by ObamaDem “stimuli”; but if existing laws don’t suit them and and their GM counterparts, and Congress won’t or can’t change the laws due to timid blue dogs, Reagan’s successor will deem the law as he sees fit, so long as it fits the SEIU agenda.

America used to be prosperous and fair. Now its Camel-Not. (h/t Rush caller)

The labor movement of the late 19th and early 20th centuries accomplished a lot of good, most of which has been enacted into law to protect the health, safety and minimum wages of all workers. Many individual unions have been a blessing too many an employee and kept the faith with owners and managers in not killing the goose that made golden eggs possible. UPS comes to mind.

In many ways, the drastic decline in the percentage of private sector union employees is a result of union and American success and unparalleled prosperity over the past 100 years.

I find the existence and recent growth of the government union movement to be insidious ( a subject for another day), but at least before President Barack Obama and super-majorities of Democrats started carving out special privileges for their labor union benefactors both in and out of government, one could say that the battles had been, on the whole, “fair”. Not so at Obama’s un-round table.

In the wake of the assassination of her husband, former First Lady Jackie Kennedy referred wistfully to the 1000 days of America’s romance with JFK as like “Camelot”. Why did she echo the words of the legendary King from Excalibur after the end of the great prosperous fellowship of the Round Table (pictured) and Camelot:

” Let us remember, so that we may have it again.”

It, being a rule of law applying equally to Kings, Lords and Commoners. It, being the rights acknowledged by the Magna Carta. Sounds like America used to be doesn’t it. Sounds like the days before a President could kill prosperity with TRO-violating oil-drilling moratoriums, doesn’t it?

Looking forward to celebrating Labor fairness everyday, but first please, some labor

I believe most unelected Democratic voters care about labor, i.e. people. I also believe that bad dentists care about the patients who suffer from the pain they cause. But given the results of the leftist policies that have failed every time the Democrats had the votes and a President to impose them in the late 60s, late 70s and late 2000 naughts, one would be hard-pressed to gather enough evidence to convict them of caring about labor, jobs, the poor and middle class in a court of law.

Is it fair? Has it “worked”?

ObamaDems taxed non-government individuals and businesses and printed and borrowed trillions over the past 20 months, promising to “save and create”enough jobs to keep unemployment under 8%. Unemployment in the District of Columbia and many blue state capitols where government jobs were saved and created. Jobs that we will have to be taxed to pay for, forever.

Was that fair? Did it “work”?

Well, not if by “work”, you mean achieving the stated goal of less than 8% unemployment. Unemployment in non-Districts of the United States, called “states” (you know, the entities that formed a federal government of limited powers, and who are now slaves to the monster, Dr. Reid Pelosi Obama created, still hovers near double-digits as the underemployment rate approaches Great Depression numbers.

Beyond that is it fair that:

Pitchforks get sicked on companies that dare question pay czars, secured bond holders, doctors and insurance companies?

EPA issues regulations by executive fiat when Congress tires of the three-times-a-charm ObamaCare strategy on how a bill becomes a law?

Federal judges issue orders allowing some of the 25 million American Idles to labor in the Gulf of Mexico, and the Commander-in-Chief puts them out of work the next day with the threat of attacks by the Coast Guard instead of the usual Rahm Emmanuel steam room visit?

What of executive orders giving preference to unionized companies instead of low bids, regardless of unionization?

Where is Edison’s Bulb and Chevy’s Corvette and why isn’t the Ford Mustang also subsidized?

Fannie, Freddie and Dodd bills still impose racial quotas on mortgage lenders despite the bubble as mortgage-paying taxpayers fund the sloth, drinking tea through gritted teeth.

Bailouts for Ye Olde Obama’s union and other pals, but not for Thee, We the People.

And if you don’t like ObamaCare, take a painkiller and go home to die.

Sound fair? Didn’t think so.

So what do we celebrate on Labor Day 2010?

I’ll celebrate the labor of responsible labor unions, with my greatest praise reserved for those that created the jobs and the companies through their unsung labors in the first place.

I’ll celebrate the labors of the founders, the warriors and the slaves that built and eventually built and protected the City on a Hill.

Most of all, I will celebrate the labors of God Almighty, his son Jesus Christ and his followers of the past 2000 years.

Then, I will rest, but not for long, because the only way the City on a Hill will shine again, will be through countless man-hours of mostly, non-union, yet united, labor.

Mike DeVine

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

Charlotte Observer, The Minority Report and Examiner.com archives

www.devinelawvista.com

Liberty Central Grades the 111th Congress

I love the Liberty Central website as an excellent place for me to use for political research. I especially like the legislative scorecards they did for the 111th Congress. All 535 members of the US House and US Senate received a grade from A to F. They based the grades on 12 House votes and 14 Senate votes that they decided had the most effect on their five principles of liberty. These grades make so much more sense to me than any scorecard I have seen by ACU, CFG, or NTU. I like it so much that I crunched some numbers from it to create this diary. I took the results for 5 incumbent Dem Senators and 27 incumbent Dems in the US House that the experts are calling toss-ups. The grades they have received do not provide a reason to call these races toss-ups for anyone except possibly Bobby Bright. We need to remember these important votes, and not allow anyone to distract us from the fact that the votes are really what matters most. When a Susan Estrich opines that that there are fissures and divisions in the Republican Party what she is actually saying is that she will be less bummed about a Democrat losing to a liberal Republican. I say let her be bummed. Let's nominate and elect Republicans who can earn an A from Liberty Central instead of an F. We can do this as long as we GOTV and don't allow our enemies to distract us. They will be trying. They are very trying.

Liberty Central compiled scores for all Senators, in order to determine which Senators have the most respect for five principles: limited government, individual liberty, personalresponsibility, free enterprise, and national security.

The 14 Senate votes measured

Dodd-Frank Conference Report*
Murkowski Resolution*
Border Fence*
Financial Reform*
Earmark Moratorium*
Health Care*
SERVE/Americorps*
Stimulus*
Sanctuary Cities*
Terrorist Trials in Civilian Courts*
Lilly Ledbetter*
Repeal DC Gun Ban*
TARP Rescission*
School Choice*

Scores were calculated as follows.

1 point for each vote that contradicted our five principles (e.g., growing the size of government, weakening our national defense, or taking measures against the free market).

1 additional point for sponsoring or co-sponsoring one of the aforementioned bills, since the Senator proudly attached his or her name to that measure.

1 point for opposing legislation that supports the five principles.

In other words, the higher the score, the worse the Senator. Tallied points for each Senator and assigned grades based on the following scale: A=0 to 1 points, B=2-3 points, C=4-6 points, D=7-8 points, F=9 and above.

Incumbent                                         Grade         Score
Bennett, Michael (D-CO)                       F               12
Boxer, Barbara (D-CA)                          F                15
Feingold, Russ (D-WI)                          F                15
Murray, Patty (D-WA)                            F                15
Reid, Harry (D-NV)                                F                15

Liberty Central compiled scores for all Representatives, in order to determine whichRepresentatives have the most respect for five principles: limited government, individual liberty, personal responsibility, free enterprise, and national security.

Incumbent                                         Grade         Score
Arcuri, Mike (D-NY24)                            F                12
Bishop, Timothy (D-NY01)                     F                 15
Boucher, Rick (D-VA09)                        D                  8
Bright, Bobby (D-AL02)                         B                  2
Carney, Christopher P. (D-PA10)          D                  8
Connolly, Gerald E. "Gerry" (D-VA11)   F                14
Foster, Bill (D-IL14)                               F                12
Giffords, Gabrielle (D-AZ08)                  F                15
Hall, John (D-NY19)                             F                 15
Heinrich, Martin T. (D-NM01)                 F                15
Hill, Baron (D-IN09)                               F                  9
Kagen, Steve (D-WI08)                          F                13
Kirkpatrick, Ann (D-AZ01)                      F                  9
Klein, Ron (D-FL22)                              F                14
Marshall, James (D-GA08)                    D                  8
McMahon, Mike (D-NY13)                      F                11
McNerney, Jerry (D-CA11)                    F                 12
Mitchell, Harry (D-AZ05)                       F                   9
Murphy, Patrick J. (D-PA08)                 F                 16
Nye, Glenn C. (D-VA02)                       F                   9
Rodriguez, Ciro (D-TX23)                     F                  12
Schrader, Kurt (D-OR05)                      F                 12
Shuler, Heath (D-NC11)                       D                   8
Skelton, Ike (D-MO04)                          F                  11
Space, Zachary T. (D-OH18)                F                  10
Spratt, John (D-SC05)                          F                  12
Sutton, Betty (D-OH13)                        F                   15

Lifeless Daniels truces won’t produce majority reports

Liberty.com is Live

Ok so it’s 11:00pm here in Las Vegas and I’ve been at the office working on Liberty.com since 7:00am in order to get everything ready for tomorrow mornings launch and Press Conference. I t goes without saying I’m beat tired and as much as I’d like to explain to you all the goings on here I think, at this point, it’s better if I just let the press release do the talking… good night and I hope to see you all on Liberty.com.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT Yates Walker 210 381 8692

Vegas-based Liberty.com to launch tomorrow!
Conservative news-activist hybrid site to launch with 70,000 members nationally,
Intends to rival the left-wing Moveon.org!
Press conference at 10 AM at Nevada Department of Employment

LAS VEGAS – At 10 AM tomorrow, a key organizer in the 2009 Tax Day Tea Party and “Don’t Go” movement pioneer Eric Odom will join a national coalition of conservative movement activists in launching Liberty.com, a right-of-center news and national activism website with the intention of eclipsing the left’s Moveon.org. A press conference will be held by the Vegas-based Liberty.com at 10 AM in front of the Nevada Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation.

“The employment office is the appropriate location because Nevada is suffering from the worst unemployment in the nation, despite trillions of dollars spent by Harry Reid and his liberal ilk,” says Liberty.com Communications Director Yates Walker, who will be speaking at the Sept. 1st press conference. “At over 14% unemployment, Nevada, more than any other state, knows that Washington’s spending is not working, and that it’s past time that we elect leadership that will create a business friendly environment that will promote job growth.”

A recent Washington Examiner article revealed that the Democrats’ stimulus bill was more expensive than America’s entire expenditures for the American-led war in Iraq. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Little-known-fact-Obamas-failed-stimulus-program-cost-more-than-the-Iraq-war-101302919.html Liberty.com will seek to highlight liberal policy failures like the stimulus bill and drive national activism in the same way that Moveon.org has electrified activists on the left.

“For years, Moveon.org has directed millions of activist dollars to influence races and to defame targets like General David Petraeus,” observes Liberty.com editor-chief Eric Odom. “With Liberty.com, the conservative grassroots will be able to fight back.”

Organized along with Americans for New Leadership as an unconnected and unauthorized political committee that will conduct only independent expenditures, Liberty.com will begin operation having already raised $700,000 from individual donors and with over 70,000 members transferred from Odom’s existing networks, American Liberty Alliance and The Patriot Caucus. A January, 2010 Supreme Court decision has made the new organization possible. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/us/politics/22scotus.html
“In January, the Supreme Court surprised us all by ruling in favor of free speech,” said Liberty.com Communications Director Yates Walker. “That decision and Eric’s vision have led to the creation of a new weapon in the conservative arsenal: Liberty.com.”

The website will offer exclusive new content in the form of webcasts, blog entries, and podcasts from contributors across the country, while also allowing cross-posting from many established conservative sites like Redstate, Hotair and others. Beyond news, Liberty.com will be focused on supporting and driving conservative activism throughout the country.

“One of the most important and unique aspects of Liberty.com will be its coalitions network,” adds Odom. “If you’re having an event anywhere in the country, chances are that Liberty.com can help make your event stronger and larger.”

Over twenty partnering networks will be listed as coalition members when the site launches on September 1st. Eric Odom expects that number to grow.

Liberty.com will seek to influence state and federal elections immediately. Their first target is the US Senate Majority Leader, Democrat Harry Reid of Nevada.

“Nevada may have been purple in 2008,” observes Odom. “But the last two years have moved them to the right. Harry Reid may be the last to learn that his policies have helped turn his home state red.”

Liberty.com’s parent organization Americans for New Leadership has already purchased a $250,000 ad against Reid.

“We’re going to be a thorn in the left’s side right away,” grins Steven Foley, Liberty.com’s Director of New Media. “This is going to be fun.”

Liberty.com’s September 1st press conference will begin at 10 AM in front of the Nevada Department of Employment. The address is 2800 E. St. Louis Ave, Las Vegas, NV, 89104. Liberty.com’s Communications Director Yates Walker will make a brief statement, then take questions from the media.

Read Liberty.com’s Mission Statement

Liberty.com Mission Statement

To keep the right honest, the press nervous and the left unpopular and out of power. We will accomplish our mission by engaging a national grassroots network of hundreds of thousands of activists, arming them with the knowledge they need to hold their local, state and federal representatives to account for their votes and actions.

The founders of Liberty.com believe that America is a center-right nation. Since America’s founding, our people have sought to limit their government’s role in the lives of the individual citizen. Americans have rightly distrusted their government, and that distrust has been well-earned.

Though, issue by issue, the majority of Americans of every creed and color believe in low taxes, strong national defense and limited government, three shifting variables have allowed the power-seekers in Washington to creep into nearly every aspect of American life and commerce and expand their influence through the federal government.

The first variable is the two party system. Both the Republicans and the Democrats will claim to be champions of freedom and individual liberty. Both parties insist that they are acting in the interests of the American people. The reality is that both parties overstep their mandates and, by omission or commission, tread on individual liberty. In their efforts to serve factions and special interests, each party has at various times forgotten that the duty of government is to protect and preserve our inalienable individual rights. Liberty.com will strive to keep the political parties on the straight and narrow path of limited government stewardship.

The second variable is the media. The mainstream media has been infiltrated by the activist left. Through apologies, rationalizations and journalistic malpractice, the fourth estate has become an accomplice to the progressive left’s assault on individual liberty. Liberty.com will provide a check on the activist left in the media by crying foul on bias and by providing an outlet for news that the mainstream press won’t cover.

The final variable is what has often been referred to as the silent majority in America. For too long, Americans have taken for granted that our inalienable rights will endure undefended. For over two centuries, American soldiers have fought and died defending those freedoms abroad. But for the last fifty years, those same freedoms have been eroding while our citizenry slept. Over the last few years, there has been a great awakening of the silent majority. Liberty.com will strive to keep the American electorate informed and vigilantly guarding against the forces on the left who seek to redefine individual liberty, redistribute wealth, and remake America into a socialist, cradle-to-grave nanny state.

The founders of Liberty.com believe that the system has been rigged against individual liberty for far too long. By providing a forum for daily communication between hundreds of thousands of liberty-minded American citizens, Liberty.com will seek to engage and inform a nationwide network of bloggers and activists to fight the expansion of government and to promote America’s founding principles of individual liberty.

To learn more, please visit www.liberty.com.

Let’s Party Like It’s 1894!

After the financial panic of 1893, in Grover Cleveland’s 1894 midterm, Democrats went from 218 to just 93 of 357 House seats. Between 1892 and 1894, Democrats lost 125 House seats, about 35 percent of the total. Can Obama’s 2010 midterm be comparable? RCP has 111 D seats being contested and 16 R seats being contested in 2010. This means the GOP needs to be looking at 14 to 30 more seats than RCP is looking at. Let me offer up some more D seats that just might not be as safe as the “experts” believe them to be. I have managed to come up with 19 additional seats that are not in my opinion all that safe.

The major problem the candidates are going to have of the 19 that I have listed is having enough money to buy the radio and TV ads they will need to promote their candidacy. This is a special midterm election that is a national referendum instead of all local concerns. We just need to expand our optimism about what is possible. To paraphrase eburke In this election cycle there is no such thing as a quioxtic quest for conservatives. Let’s not wake up on November 3rd and and bemoan a lost opportunity. Let’s man the barricades and help get them over the top.

Alabama
AL-7(open) Don Chamberlain 

California
CA-10 Gary Clift 
CA-23 Tom Watson 
CA-29 John Colbert 
CA-32 Ed Schmerling 
CA-39 Larry Andre 
CA-43 Scott Folkens 

Colorado
CO-2 Stephen Bailey 

Michigan
MI-5 John Kupiec 

Minnesota
MN-7 Lee Byberg 

Mississippi
MS-2 Bill Marcy 

Nevada
NV-1 Kenneth Wegner 

New Jersey
NJ-6 Anna Little 

North Carolina
NC-4 BJ Lawson 
NC-13 Bill Randall 

Ohio
OH-10 Peter Corrigan 

Pennsylvania
PA-4 Keith Rothfus 

Texas
TX-15 Eddie Zamora 
TX-27 Blake Farenthold 

Cross-posted at RedState