Arlen Specter Switching Parties From Republican To Democrat

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/28/arlen-specter-switching-p_n_192298.html?view=print

The Huffington Post | Rachel Weiner 4/28/09 01:25 PM

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Penn.) is becoming a Democrat.

"I have decided to run for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary," said Specter in a statement. "I am ready, willing and anxious to take on all comers and have my candidacy for re-election determined in a general election."

"Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans."

The move will give Democrats a filibuster-proof 60 vote majority in the Senate, presuming Minnesota's Al Franken is eventually seated. However, in his statement Specter said his opposition to the Employee Free Choice Act -- widely seen as a defense against a Republican primary challenge -- will not change.

Polls had shown that, despite his shift on EFCA, Specter was on his way to losing his seat if he stayed in the GOP. A Rasmussen survey from last Friday had former U.S. Rep. Pat Toomey beating the Senator by 21 points in the primary.

Sources told the AP that an announcement could come later in the day -- or Wednesday.

Vice President Joe Biden and Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell have urged Specter to switch parties in the past.

President Obama called Specter Tuesday to say Democrats "are thrilled to have you."

Specter's Full Statement:

I have been a Republican since 1966. I have been working extremely hard for the Party, for its candidates and for the ideals of a Republican Party whose tent is big enough to welcome diverse points of view. While I have been comfortable being a Republican, my Party has not defined who I am. I have taken each issue one at a time and have exercised independent judgment to do what I thought was best for Pennsylvania and the nation.

Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans.

When I supported the stimulus package, I knew that it would not be popular with the Republican Party. But, I saw the stimulus as necessary to lessen the risk of a far more serious recession than we are now experiencing.

Since then, I have traveled the State, talked to Republican leaders and office-holders and my supporters and I have carefully examined public opinion. It has become clear to me that the stimulus vote caused a schism which makes our differences irreconcilable. On this state of the record, I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate. I have not represented the Republican Party. I have represented the people of Pennsylvania.

I have decided to run for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary.

I am ready, willing and anxious to take on all comers and have my candidacy for re-election determined in a general election.

I deeply regret that I will be disappointing many friends and supporters. I can understand their disappointment. I am also disappointed that so many in the Party I have worked for for more than four decades do not want me to be their candidate. It is very painful on both sides. I thank specially Senators McConnell and Cornyn for their forbearance.

I am not making this decision because there are no important and interesting opportunities outside the Senate. I take on this complicated run for re-election because I am deeply concerned about the future of our country and I believe I have a significant contribution to make on many of the key issues of the day, especially medical research. NIH funding has saved or lengthened thousands of lives, including mine, and much more needs to be done. And my seniority is very important to continue to bring important projects vital to Pennsylvania's economy.

I am taking this action now because there are fewer than thirteen months to the 2010 Pennsylvania Primary and there is much to be done in preparation for that election. Upon request, I will return campaign contributions contributed during this cycle.

While each member of the Senate caucuses with his Party, what each of us hopes to accomplish is distinct from his party affiliation. The American people do not care which Party solves the problems confronting our nation. And no Senator, no matter how loyal he is to his Party, should or would put party loyalty above his duty to the state and nation.

My change in party affiliation does not mean that I will be a party-line voter any more for the Democrats that I have been for the Republicans. Unlike Senator Jeffords' switch which changed party control, I will not be an automatic 60th vote for cloture. For example, my position on Employees Free Choice (Card Check) will not change.

Whatever my party affiliation, I will continue to be guided by President Kennedy's statement that sometimes Party asks too much. When it does, I will continue my independent voting and follow my conscience on what I think is best for Pennsylvania and America.

Read more...

Personal Aside: Obama’s Narcissistic “Don’t Blame Me for What Happened When I was Three Months Old!”

This question was raised last fall on a website called obamacrimes.com by Philip J Berg, a former asst US District Attorney.

tomroeser.com

Is America exceptional? Sure, the same way Brits think England is or Greeks think Greece is. Answer: for patriotism, look away from this cipher.

At the outset, one doesn’t know how to adjudge a president of the United States neglecting to defend his country on a foreign trip-shrugging off a chance to defend three predecessors including John Kennedy. That’s because this is a presidency we have never seen before-because he is a jumble of inconclusive responses to political stimuli, devoid of philosophy, as imponderable as a kaleidoscope with its varying patterns every time it is shaken.

At the root is narcissism but also more than that. Barack Obama’s still largely unexamined (by the media) personal background presages deeper analysis. His is not a family tree but a bramble bush of inconclusive parentage devoid of familial or parental stability…which explains his unfeeling inability to even feign patriotism or loyalty when what is supposed to be his country is under attack by foreign enemies. Answer: it is not his country; he knows no loyalty to anyone by himself. He is a multi-layered ideological non-citizen of any country: an anomaly of confusion even to himself.

He went to Europe and told the French-the French-that America “has shown arrogance and has been dismissive, even derisive” toward Europe-a criticism of his immediate predecessor. When in Prague he said America “has a moral responsibility” to embrace nuclear arms control because after all we dropped the atomic bomb, a slur at Harry S. Truman. When Nicaragua’s president Daniel C. Ortega spent 55 minutes ripping the U. S. as a fascist, anti-humane power he smilingly said,”I’m grateful President Ortega didn’t blame me for things that happened when I was three months old”-referring to the climactic test with USSR-sponsored Cuba, supposedly a shining hour of the Kennedy years. Shove off JFK: your travail has nothing to do with me. You see, I was only a baby! To our enemies he says hate the U. S. but love me!

How did this imponderable species of man happen?

Born in an even as yet undefined chaotic non-family structure, in a location alleged to be Hawaii but with certification that is not accepted as valid by the state…under suspicion he was in fact born in Kenya and protected from examination by a media that adjudges all queries as racist because if the probe were followed along reasonable paths his qualifications for president could be seriously challenged…sired (purportedly) by a black alcoholic father who abandoned the family twice, born to a white atheist mother who skipped out at least once leaving him with her parents…he has been floating all his life in a disparate non-family structure that involving scores of nondescript half-brothers, half-sisters, quarter-siblings and step-siblings in flotsam-jetsam fashion (grand aunts and half-brothers living in shacks in Africa turn up all the time)…thus who can blame him for showing no fealty to his supposed land of birth? How can one expect him to be loyal to any country when in fact he never belonged to any except when he was a young hustler on the make in Chicago?

One can blame him for having no visible patriotism, nor loyalty to the system including two of his Democratic forebears-but can also understand his vacuity. By the very chaotic system of his upbringing he is a genealogical cipher, glossed over with a veneer that makes him smooth, evasive, tentative, harder to pin down than it is to nail a pudding to a wall. To him there’s a moral equivalence between the United States and its enemies. He says he supports the ideal of American exceptionalism the same way “the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks in Greek exceptionalism.” Which means he doesn’t buy it. Of course he doesn’t. The only exceptionalism he buys is imbued, he assumes, in himself.

The important thing to Obama the child of non-familial chaos is his own popularity, heedless of the fact that by shaking hands with Ortega and Hugo Chavez he has strengthened both in their anti-Americanism. So what? What is that to him? He’s not involved with America.

Indeed what is truth to this value-free relativist who doesn’t care if babies born from botched abortions are left to struggle in pain, left without nutrition or comfort, left to die…saying all this is “above my pay grade.” ? What does it mean to him? He is a glossy, faculty-lounge sophisticate who picked up Gentlemen’s Quarterly manners with no enduring values, no moral code, no patriotism, no loyalty to anything but to the constantly shifting scenes of his own self-interest.

And because America has always been gullible to liberal political confidence men like him, we deserve what we have.

We’re so dumb we don’t even realize it yet. But we will; we will. Will we ever.

Read more...

Chicago Alderman not biting at "Felony Franks" Proposal

Gary's personal comments - I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw this.

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/04/ald-not-biting-at-felony-franks-proposal.html

Ald. not biting at 'Felony Franks' proposal
April 24, 2009 12:19 PM

Jim Andrews has hired ex-offenders for years at his West Side paper business and hopes to expand soon by opening Felony Franks, a hot dog stand he expects to open in a few weeks on the Near West Side.

But Ald. Bob Fioretti, whose 2nd Ward includes the site of the proposed fast-food restaurant, 229 S. Western Ave., and who has worked to get jobs for ex-offenders in his ward, says he can't keep Felony Franks from opening--but won't make it easy.

"You know what, I don't find this humorous," Fioretti said. "Maybe I don't have a sense of humor when it comes to repairing people's lives."

Andrews attended Fioretti's weekly ward constituent meeting recently, and asked for the alderman's help getting permits to allow customers to use a driveway leading into a parking lot next to the building and for a sign for the stand. But Fioretti says he won't help Andrews in what the alderman thinks is a misguided attempt at humor.

Felony Franks, which Andrews hopes to open in a few weeks, will include items like the "misdemeanor wiener" on its menu, Andrews said.

"I'm trying to take the negative word 'felony' and show that there are good felons," Andrews said.

"Those that are negative on the name, the name Felony Franks, need to get over it."

--Liam Ford

Read more...

Supermodel Kathy Ireland tells Mike Huckabee why she became pro-life

Courtesy of Fran Eaton, Editor, Illinois Review

This is a powerful video, please watch and share with your pro-choice friends.

Read more...

Somali Pirate Hijacking Resolution Obama Style

From The Political and Financial Markets Commentator

There Is Nothing To Fear But Fear Itself: Franklin D. Roosevelt

Take a good hard look at the picture below. It is the USS Bainbridge with a Somali dingy in the foreground. The P-3 Orion aircraft that are also in the area are not shown. This is a lot of firepower for the size and scope of the mission. It is a great show of force by the Obama administration, that as we see is not instilling much in the way of fear within the Somali pirates that have U.S. citizen Captain Richard Phillips as a hostage. They have made the demand of $2 MM for his return.



My question to the Obama administration is what Plan B is. These pirates have nothing, and "when you ain't got nothing you ain't got nothing to lose" (Bob Dylan 1965). They live in a failed state and are being directed to do what they do by business interests on shore. These men I am sure are considered expendable by their employers and are therefore in a desperate situation.

The pirates want what they want which is money and they want it much like they have gotten it in every hijacking they have done in the past. They made the mistake this time of targeting a U.S. flagged vessel for the fact that it has brought world attention to the problem that before has been a story buried on page 5.

We can bring an aircraft carrier to the region, but unfortunately for this extremely brave Captain who behaved as a captain will, the only real deterrent going forward is to attack the boat, hopefully save the Captains life, but in the process indicate that going forward there will be no negotiating with terrorists. A pirate with all of romantic thoughts back to the age of Captain Hook, is a terrorist plain and simple. I realize this sounds callaus, and if it was me or a family member or friend of mine I may hesitate to say it.

The Obama administration is now being put in the position of its second foreign affairs test having failed the first one over the North Korea missile launch. The longer this standoff drones on, the weaker we will look. The more we try and negotiate and fail, the weaker we will look. There is no time for U.N. threats or to get a coalition of our allies together, but it is now the time for swift, definitive action out of this administration that says to the world, do not f__k with the United States.

We have not heard much from the President on this issue, and there are hopefully high level talks that are being conducted, but these are the types of situations where the American public needs to hear what the President has to say. He has not been shy in his first days in office as I seem to see him every time I turn on my T.V. Where is he now?

My hopes and prayers go out to this brave Captain's family and friends and I hope to God that he comes out of this okay, but we need to exert our force and resolve this situation.

Read more...

Somali Pirates Go American Because They Think They Can!

From The Political and Financial markets Commentator

An American Flagged Cargo Ship Is Attacked By Somali Pirates

I am going to try and not turn this discussion into a commentary on the world's perception of the strength and resolve of the United States under the Obama administration. Okay, I tried and then I tried again, but I just couldn't do it. The fact of the matter is that other country's or even pirates would typically think long and hard before attacking an American flagged vessel. And then not do it. Why? The real and frightening potential for swift and harsh action.



The fact is that every action typically has some reaction. The Somali pirates must have thought about it, discussed it among themselves and come to the determination that there was really not that much to fear. They, like others, seem to have figured out that President Obama is a great speaker (most of the time particularly in front of a teleprompter), but that his bark seems to worse than his bite.

If we look at recent events such as the blatant disregard of the warnings to North Korea not to test fire a missile, at the same time President Obama was overseas on a meet and greet tour specifically discussing nuclear disarmament, a fear of any retribution obviously did not exist.

Not to pick on any of our allies, but let's use France as an example of a country that would be considered a likely choice to give in to terrorists quickly and easily. The United States would now appear to be viewed in the same way.

I would like to take this opportunity to say to President Obama that he needs to observe what is going on around him and take it all in. Nobody is saying that establishing a stronger, more friendly relationship with our allies is not a good thing. Having more open communications with them is great as well.

But at the end of the day, when push comes to shove and military force has to be used, who will be the leader if not the only participant. That would be the United States.

My suggestion therefore is not to be afraid to be tough and firm because you don't want to be called another George Bush or of possibly angering our allies. You need at the very least to create the perception and belief that you are a man of your word and are willing to back up what you say with action. Not a provocateur, but strong.

You are not in office to make friends. You are in office to protect the American people and advance our interests and if in the process you improve our relations around the world then that would be a bonus.

Remember that there is a fine line between being a good ally and becoming weak and vulnerable. Observe the actions of those that would like to do us harm, and as much as the Democrats ridicule the last 8 years, consider the fact that we have been terror free. Do not give in to the temptation to use the United Nations as our voice, guide and decision maker.

Read more...

Change: Obama moves to legalize wiretaps

Ok, let me begin by saying, I am NOT a Keith Olbermann fan. I liked him on Sports Center, but once he opened his mouth about politics... he should shut up.

But... this was brought to my attention by my friend Rob and from a blog Andrew T is on the Cut.

Obama spoke out against Bush and his expanding of the Exec Branch's powers.
Remember, change came to Washington... or so we thought.



Keith is right... the ironies are piling up.

This is really bad news folks.

Read more...

My personal nightmare - Illegals Criminal Aliens May Have the Right To Vote

http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/other-views/story/987795.html

When non- U.S. citizens vote
BY GLENN GARVIN
ggarvin@miamiherald.com

Pity the voters of Maine.

Once America's leading political aphorism for their reliability in picking presidential winners (''As Maine goes, so goes the nation''), they were reduced to a national wisecrack after their state was one of only two to choose Alf Landon over Franklin Roosevelt in 1936 (``As Maine goes, so goes Vermont''). Now they're about to be outsourced: The state is considering a bill that would abolish U.S. citizenship as a requirement for voting in local elections. Somehow, ``as Mogadishu goes, so goes Maine'' just doesn't have the same ring.

Bill LD 1195, introduced by Democrats in the state Legislature last month, would allow non-U.S. citizens to vote in Maine's municipal elections. The bill is getting a sympathetic hearing from state officials who, extraordinarily, feel that Maine has been tinted by restricting voting to actual Americans. ''Whenever you get more people to participate, you add legitimacy to that process,'' Matthew Dunlap, Maine's secretary of state, told The Portland Press Herald.

The bill would apply only to legal, resident immigrants, but that may be only a first step. The vague rationales for LD 1195 -- an increase in the numbers of voters and their ethnic diversity -- would certainly apply to refugees and illegal immigrants as well.

Even more expansive is the reasoning of Eric Nkusi, the executive director of a Portland immigrant-advocacy group called the Intore Club. ''We pay the same taxes,'' he says, an argument that would even apply to Canadian tourists who stop at gas stations on their way to their annual winter sunburn in Florida.

There's nothing to stop Maine legislators from passing LD 1195 but the apparently slender thread of their own common sense. Federal law and the U.S. Constitution have little to say on the subject of local elections,

and a handful of small towns

already allow it -- notably Takoma Park, Md., a people's-republic suburb of Washington that has also declared itself a nuclear-free zone and severed diplomatic relations with Burma.

If a presumed political adult like Maine follows suit, it may be time to start worrying. For there's a small but determined movement to abolish the link between citizenship and voting that would surely leverage victory into a national initiative.

Unlike the Maine politicians, most advocates of granting the vote to foreigners make no pretense that it's anything but a naked left-wing power grab. ''Imagine the progressive possibilities in jurisdictions of high numbers of immigrants such as New York City; Los Angeles; Washington, D.C.; and Chicago,'' says Ron Hayduk, a leftist political scientist at the City University of New York and a founder of the Immigrant Voting Project.

Whatever you think of Hayduk's goals, his grasp of numbers is good. In nearly 900 U.S. cities, 10 percent or more of the voting-age population is composed of non-U.S. citizens. In nearly 200, it's greater than 25 percent -- and in 21 cities, it's more than 50 percent.

Don't imagine for a minute that the immigrant-voting movement will stop with seats on school boards and zoning commissions. Louis DeSipio of the University of California at Irvine and Rodolfo de la Garza of the University of Texas, whose 1998 book

Making Americans, Remaking
America was one of the seminal texts of the immigrant-voting movement, make it clear their ambitions are far more grand. 'The only national race -- the campaign for the presidency -- is, in fact, just 50 state races in which the winner takes all of the states' electoral votes an empowered noncitizen electorate could swing the election.''

Even if you like the lefty political agenda that these men pursue, their tactics bear some careful consideration. In effect, they seek to abolish the concept of American citizenship -- the U.S. government would be turned into a matter of geographical whimsy, under the control of whoever happened to be physically present at a given moment.

Immigrants, legal and otherwise, play an important role in the U.S. economy. But if they're interested in voting, they need to learn the language, the history and the political culture -- that is, they need to become citizens.

`Remember the Maine!'

The odd thing is that actual immigrants, as opposed to the politicians seeking to manipulate them, show little interest in this.

Remember Takoma Park?

In most elections, their turnout is barely 10 percent; in 2007, the city council contest was a flat zero: Not a single one of the several hundred registered non-U.S. citizens bothered to show up. Whether they have a more clear understanding of the nature of citizenship than the American chattering classes, or simply lack interest in becoming a cog in somebody else's political machine, it may be that the immigrants themselves will prevent ''Remember the Maine!'' from becoming a national battle cry for the second time.

Read more...

North Korea and Iran: What Do Americans Think?

From The Political and Financial markets Commentator

The Economy Yes, But Foreign Affairs Too!

For months and more the topic that has led in most every news venue has been about the economy, housing, unemployment, TARP, TARF, the banks and the new administrations handling of it all.

What has been overlooked to some (or even a great) extent, and a topic that has been discussed often here, is the fact that while the economic recovery is of the utmost importance, the threats that we face from our adversaries around the globe is equally as important. This is due to the fact that if nuclear weapons proliferate and spread to rogue states that would have no compunction about using them against us, the state of the economy will not really matter.

This was shown clearly over the weekend as North Korea defied the global cries and demands not test their missile, that in time they will be able to configure to carry a nuclear warhead capable of reaching our allies as well as us. And did it anyway. I imagine they do not have a fear of rhetoric and empty threats.

Poll Watching Will Help Us Focus On The Problem

As our politicians take a look at the polls that indicate the publics concern over the threats from North Korea and Iran, we will hopefully get some action that will include more than just reliance on the United Nations issuing more worthless Resolutions. The poll results are below, and the following clip is a spoof on the lack of fear that the U.N. instills in the leader of North Korea.



(Gallup)Americans were asked to state their levels of concern about a variety of international matters. While the long-standing issues of international terrorism, Afghanistan, and Iraq rank highest in terms of overall concern, it is noteworthy that Americans express similar levels of concern about the emerging threats posed by Iran, North Korea, and Mexico.

Key Findings

International terrorism concerns Americans most -- 88% say they are concerned, including 59% who are very concerned.

Americans are next-most likely to be "very concerned" about Iran's nuclear capabilities (54%) and North Korea's nuclear capabilities (52%). In terms of overall concern, the rankings of both are nearly as high as those of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Americans are slightly more likely to be "very concerned" about the conflict in Afghanistan (51%) than about the conflict in Iraq (48%). These ongoing conflicts rank second and third, respectively, in terms of overall concern.

The emerging issue of drug violence in Mexico is rated almost on par with concerns about Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, and North Korea -- 79% of Americans are concerned, including 51% who are very concerned.

The military threat posed by China concerns Americans more than the military threat posed by Russia -- 39% are very concerned about China, while 25% are very concerned about Russia. While these threats are less worrisome to Americans than the others discussed thus far, more than 6 in 10 Americans do express some concern about them.

The conflict between Israel and the Palestinians concerns 72% of Americans -- ranking it toward the bottom of the overall list. Only 35% are very concerned.

Read more...

NW Indiana - RDA vote at risk

Some background for those reading from elsewhere in the state -

• Northwest Indiana doesn't do regional collaboration well. Lake County is a total mess and most residents of Porter County moved east to get away from the Lake County mess.
• A few years back the legislature gave Northwest Indiana a chance to work together on regional projects, especially ones that require large matching funds to get federal or state monies. For once Porter and Lake Counties voted to join together and the RDA (Regional Development Authority) started.
  
• Porter County sends $3.5 million a year to the RDA from their .5% economic development income tax. The county does not have an economic development department, director, or redevelopment commission. So far reports suggest in two years Porter County received the benefit of roughly $20 million in returned projects from that $7 million investment.
• In a weird juxtaposition, Republicans want to keep the RDA generally to create jobs and build projects to large for a small community .. and Democrats wants to kill it to further separate from Lake County and eliminate the taxes.
  

Here's my recent post from Northwest Indiana Politics on the subject:

In nearly every conversation this week in Porter County I hear about the RDA, and very very strong opinions. It all started with Chuck Williams suggesting that voters in Porter County obviously don't want to be in the RDA in November after the Republicans locally were totally beaten ... we posted early this week Headline - Porter County to vote on leaving RDA with a summary of the antagonists. As a result I received emails, twitter messages, facebook messages, comments here on this site ... with lots of strong opinions. I said yesterday to one very irate business person "engage on this issue, or hold your tongue on Thursday ... I'm getting sick of private angst and public surprise after the decision has been made"

In response Leaving the RDA - Let's Go Back to Porter County, 1863! was posted by another author with a decided slant toward the long term vision of development and job growth. As the last couple days unfolded Mayor Costas has taken the position of regional leadership that is his obvious mantle, while Councilman Whitten has continued to decry any tax or regional structure. The sides and lines have been drawn.

Last nite the two of them actually debated on Lakeshore Television, I was not one of the 16 people who watched the show, and cannot find a link to watch or embed here ... too bad our only local television show is mired in the 70's.

Where are you? Where do you stand? Do you have all the details, need more information? I know three of our county councilmen read this site daily ... care to engage and give us some of your thoughts?

Read more...

Some thoughts on a quality GOTV operation

I had some quality time walking door-to-door recently in NY20 to think about most Republican campaigns approach to GOTV. “Most” is a broad statement and I realize many of you work campaigns in areas where some of the theories I will discuss are not relevant. It is also important to consider the myriad of variables that affect a GOTV operation in preparation and execution.
So, just for the sake of conversation, we were talking about a general election where turnout was expected to be between 50-55%. You could take the approach that in a district where you had a partisan registration advantage it would be all about base R turnout (assuming your candidate is winning most of the R’s). Let’s say had already done your homework and had identified about 15% of the independents as favorable (presumably by a combination of volunteer and paid efforts). Let us also make another assumption that your candidate has a reasonable amount of local volunteers, Generation Joshua kids and maybe a few out-of-state partisans to execute your GOTV plan.
Lets say you had a 5 day GOTV plan laid out (Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday and Election day). What to consider next-
· You would sort precincts into walkable and non-walkable for your door-to-door.
· Locations for phone banks. Keep in mind that the best place for phone banks is WHERE the volunteers are and probably not WHERE the press is. This would explain why some of the best GOTV phone bank centers are not at the Campaign HQ.
· Lists. Have you been using voter vault or something else? Make sure you have easy access and can print new lists and conduct new sorts based on a changing political situation.
· Campaign literature, paper, pens, clipboards, etc. When and where will you print these thousands of sheets of paper for calls and doors? FLS has great walkbook product I like that prints the list on card stock paper with a corresponding map. Of course if you have the volunteer resources you can just do it yourself with some card stock paper and 3 ring binders. Regardless if you pay for it or do it yourself I would strongly suggest a reusable book system that allows a volunteer to make notes and improve the list as they go.
· Food, stickers, t-shirts, etc. Have enough to keep your volunteers motivated but not so much that it is more than 15% of your total GOTV budget.
Then would take your list of R’s and favorable Independents and put them into 3 groups, A’s, B’s and C’s.
· A’s will be our rockstars who vote in EVERY election no matter what.
· B’s are our Presidential voters who often skip primaries and off year elections.
· C’s are our new registrants and least likely voters.
Assuming we have enough lines and volunteers we will start with C universe on Friday. When complete we will then call the B’s and C’s. When that is done we will call the A’s B’s and C’s. So our weakest voters will get 3 touches and our strongest one.
For door-to-door let’s assume that we can get people to drink the Kool-Aid and do multiple shifts over the 5 days. Ideally we would pair local volunteers with out-of town ones to prevent mistakes and getting lost. Then on Friday when they began going door-to-door they will be keeping the same list document over the course of each day.
· So if Bob the local volunteer is paired up with Heather the out-of-town volunteer on Friday they walk their precinct keeping notes on who they talked to, who needs an extra push (maybe even a call from the candidate) and who has already voted early or absentee. They also touch base at the phonebank to see who called their precinct and compare notes.
· On Saturday Bob coaches football and has to cut his grass so Heather from out of town is paired with someone else but she now has the list and first hand experience with the precinct.
· Sunday Bob is back with Heather as they continue looking to contact people they missed on Friday and Saturday. They are now gliding thru the precinct efficiently skipping the hostiles and touch base again with the undecideds.
· Monday Bob has to work but Heather is still on the trail and working with a new volunteer hitting houses and firming up C list voters. Heather is now on a first name basis with some of the voters in their precinct and she has a great list that is full of notes and updates.
· Tuesday Bob is back with Heather with their list in the neighborhood by mid morning. Meanwhile Connie (another local volunteer has been at the polling site for their precinct since it opened. She has kept a list of all who have voted and during lulls she texts their voter ID number to Heather. As Heather and Bob walk the precinct they strike names of those that have voted to improve the efficiency of their list. They are ratcheting up turnout and increasing the GOP margin by a couple of points.
At this point of course I have only covered the traditional methods. I would assume that emails, texts, Facebook events etc are going on concurrently with this operation. The important thing to remember is that
Most GOTV operations I have seen have failed not because of lack of volunteers or lack of cash but lack of thorough planning. All of the things I have covered are not rocket science or overly complex they just require planning and follow thru.
On Tuesday this week as I headed to grab a coke on a break between precincts I happened to drive by the community center where the precinct was voting. I saw a man walking in that I had woken up from his nap. While talking to him at his door I clearly got the impression that voting was not a priority today. To see him walking into those doors to vote made all my work worth it. When Jim Tedisco is sworn into Congress later this month it will REALLY be worth it.
@chrisfaulkner

Read more...

The Obama Democrats: By The Numbers

From The Political and Financial Markets Commentator

These statistics were sent to me by a friend of mine. Very interesting look at our politicians and policies. Some of those on the committees that have been indignantly grilling executives of various industries are exposed, I mean mentioned, here as well.

The Obama Democrats: By The Numbers

$34,000: the amount of federal taxes that Secretary of the Treasury
Timothy Geithner (D) failed to pay during his employment at the
International Monetary Fund despite receiving extra compensation and
explanatory brochures that described his tax liabilities.
.
$75,000: the amount of money that the head of the powerful tax-writing
committee, Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY), was forced to report on his taxes
after the discovery that he had not reported income from a Costa Rican
rental property. His excuses for the failure started with blaming his
wife, then his accountant and finally the fact that he didn't speak
Spanish.
.
$93,000: the amount of petty cash each Congressional representative
voted to give themselves in January 2009 during the height of an
economic meltdown.
.
$133,900: the amount Fannie Mae "invested" in Chris Dodd (D-CT),
head of the powerful Senate Banking Committee, presumably to repel
oversight of the GSE prior to its meltdown. Said meltdown helped touch
off the current economic crisis. In only a few years time, Fannie also
"invested" over $105,000 in then-Senator Barack Obama.
.
$140,000: the amount of back taxes and interest that Cabinet nominee
Tom Daschle (D) was forced to cough up after the vetting process
revealed significant, unexplained tax liabilities.
.
$356,000: the approximate amount of income and deductions that Daschle
(D) was forced to report on his amended 2005 and 2007 tax returns
after being caught cheating on his taxes. This includes $255,256 for the
use of a car service, $83,333 in unreported income, and $14,963 in
charitable contributions.
$800,000: the amount of "sweetheart" mortgages Senate Banking Chairman
Chris Dodd (D-CT) received from Countrywide Financial, the details for
which he has refused to release details despite months of promises to do
so.
.
Countrywide was once the nation's largest mortgage lender and linked to
Government-Sponsored Entities like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Their
meltdown precipitated the current financial crisis. Just days ago
in Pennsylvania , Countrywide was forced to pay $150,000,000 in
mortgage assistance following "a state investigation that concluded that
Countrywide relaxed its underwriting standards to sell risky loans to
consumers who did not understand them and could not afford them."
.
$1,000,000: the estimated amount of donations by Denise Rich, wife of
fugitive Marc Rich, to Democrat interests and the William J. Clinton
Foundation in an apparent quid pro quo deal that resulted in a
pardon for Mr. Rich. The pardon was reviewed and blessed by Obama
Attorney General and then Deputy AG Eric Holder, despite numerous
requests by government officials to turn it down.
.
$12,000,000: the amount of TARP money provided to
community bank "OneUnited" despite the fact that it did not
qualify for funds, and was "under attack from its regulators for
allegations of poor lending practices and executive-pay abuses." It
turns out that Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), a key contributor to the
Fannie Mae meltdown, just happens to be married to one of the bank's
ex-directors.
.
$23,500,000: The upper range of net worth Rep. Allan Mollohan (D-WV)
accumulated in four years time according to The Washington
Post through earmarks of "tens of millions of dollars to groups
associated with his own business partners."
.
$2,000,000,000: ($2 billion) the approximate amount of money that House
Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-WI) is earmarking related to his
son's lobbying efforts. Craig Obey is "a top lobbyist for the nonprofit
group" that would receive a roughly $2 billion component of the
"Stimulus" package.
.
$3,700,000,000: ($3.7 billion) not to be outdone, this is the estimated
value of various defense contracts awarded to a company controlled by
the husband of Rep. Diane Feinstein (D-CA). Despite an obvious
conflict-of-interest as "a member of the Military Construction
Appropriations subcommittee, Sen. Feinstein voted for appropriations
worth billions to her husband's firms ."
.
$4,190,000,000: ($4.19 billion) the amount of money in the so-called
"Stimulus" package devoted to fraudulent voter registration ACORN
group under the auspices of "Community Stabilization Activities".
ACORN is currently the subject of a RICO suit in Ohio.
.
$1,646,000,000,000 ($1.646 trillion): the approximate amount of
annual United States exports endangered by the "Stimulus" package,
which provides a "Buy American" stricture. According to international
trade experts, a "US-EU trade war looms", which could result in a
worldwide economic depression reminiscent of that touched off by the
protectionist Smoot-Hawley Act.
It's not just a culture of corruption. It's a culture of
corruption and stupidity. And, unlike Republicans, Democrats appear
to be above the law.
.
All of the aforementioned clowns are still in office, ruling like the
royalty they've become.
.
AND, IT'S ONLY BEEN SIX WEEKS, FOLKS---- OUR SAVIOR JUST KEEPS
PRINTING MONEY 24/7.

Read more...

Obama wants to control the banks too!

There's a reason he refuses to accept repayment of TARP money.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123879833094588163.html

Also published on Illinoisreview.com

By STUART VARNEY

I must be naive. I really thought the administration would welcome the return of bank bailout money. Some $340 million in TARP cash flowed back this week from four small banks in Louisiana, New York, Indiana and California. This isn't much when we routinely talk in trillions, but clearly that money has not been wasted or otherwise sunk down Wall Street's black hole. So why no cheering as the cash comes back?

My answer: The government wants to control the banks, just as it now controls GM and Chrysler, and will surely control the health industry in the not-too-distant future. Keeping them TARP-stuffed is the key to control. And for this intensely political president, mere influence is not enough. The White House wants to tell 'em what to do. Control. Direct. Command.

It is not for nothing that rage has been turned on those wicked financiers. The banks are at the core of the administration's thrust: By managing the money, government can steer the whole economy even more firmly down the left fork in the road.

If the banks are forced to keep TARP cash -- which was often forced on them in the first place -- the Obama team can work its will on the financial system to unprecedented degree. That's what's happening right now.

Here's a true story first reported by my Fox News colleague Andrew Napolitano (with the names and some details obscured to prevent retaliation). Under the Bush team a prominent and profitable bank, under threat of a damaging public audit, was forced to accept less than $1 billion of TARP money. The government insisted on buying a new class of preferred stock which gave it a tiny, minority position. The money flowed to the bank. Arguably, back then, the Bush administration was acting for purely economic reasons. It wanted to recapitalize the banks to halt a financial panic.

Fast forward to today, and that same bank is begging to give the money back. The chairman offers to write a check, now, with interest. He's been sitting on the cash for months and has felt the dead hand of government threatening to run his business and dictate pay scales. He sees the writing on the wall and he wants out. But the Obama team says no, since unlike the smaller banks that gave their TARP money back, this bank is far more prominent. The bank has also been threatened with "adverse" consequences if its chairman persists. That's politics talking, not economics.

Think about it: If Rick Wagoner can be fired and compact cars can be mandated, why can't a bank with a vault full of TARP money be told where to lend? And since politics drives this administration, why can't special loans and terms be offered to favored constituents, favored industries, or even favored regions? Our prosperity has never been based on the political allocation of credit -- until now.

Which brings me to the Pay for Performance Act, just passed by the House. This is an outstanding example of class warfare. I'm an Englishman. We invented class warfare, and I know it when I see it. This legislation allows the administration to dictate pay for anyone working in any company that takes a dime of TARP money. This is a whip with which to thrash the unpopular bankers, a tool to advance the Obama administration's goal of controlling the financial system.

After 35 years in America, I never thought I would see this. I still can't quite believe we will sit by as this crisis is used to hand control of our economy over to government. But here we are, on the brink. Clearly, I have been naive.

Mr. Varney is a host on the Fox Business Network.

Read more...

North Korea Follows Through: Now What?

From The Political and Financial Markets Commentator

The Obama Administration Has Faced Its First Test And Failed

I have been talking about this announced North Korean missile test ad infinitum, and it has now taken place. The North Koreans, in the face of international demands not to fire this missile test/satellite, have done it anyway. The Obama administration has come out over the past few weeks saying that the test should not be done as it is in direct violation of specific U.N. resolutions. I suppose that North Korea was not impressed by that argument.

In the same way that countries like Iran will not abide by any resolutions from this anemic body, neither will North Korea. If the U.N. is to be the basis for our foreign policy actions and decisions, we are in trouble. Face to face talks and signed treaties are all great as well if it comes to that, but the overriding problem is that despite any public relations benefits these talks may have, you still need both parties to any agreements to follow them. And we all know that is not the case.

In any event, here are some excerpts from the President and the State Department concerning this missile firing:

President Barack Obama said North Korea should refrain from further provocative actions after that nation’s government made good on their promise to launch a long-range rocket.

“I urge North Korea to abide fully by the resolutions of the U.N. Security Council,” the president said as the council approved an emergency session Sunday to deal with North Korea’s rocket launch.

North Korea will not find acceptance in the international community “unless it abandons its pursuit of weapons of mass destruction,” Obama said.

Obama called North Korea’s latest act a clear violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1718, which prohibits North Korea from conducting ballistic missile-related activities of any kind. The Security Council adopted the 2006 resolution five days after North Korea conducted a test of a nuclear weapon.

“North Korea has ignored its international obligations, rejected unequivocal calls for restraint and further isolated itself from the community of nations,” Obama said.

The president’s statement came from Prague, the Czech Republic, where the president was to make a speech Sunday on nuclear proliferation.

The United States will take “appropriate steps to let North Korea know that it cannot threaten the safety and security of other countries with impunity,” said State Department spokesman Fred Lash.

Rep. Howard Berman, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said the launch would raise tensions unnecessarily.

“It is alarming that North Korea carried out this missile launch in direct defiance of the international community,” said the California Democrat. “The test is an unnecessary provocation that raises tensions in the region, and I urge the North Koreans to stop using their missile and WMD programs to threaten their neighbors and the rest of the world.”(Daily News)


We hopefully have some more tricks up our sleeves than just rhetoric.

Read more...

Mark To Market Eased: Making A Silk Purse From A Sow's Ear? Example Included Below

From The Political and Financial Markets Commentator

Taking From Peter To Pay Paul

The FASB (Financial Accounting Standards Board)relaxed the rules that require a bank to mark the value of an asset on its books to a"market" price, IF a transaction that takes place is distressed and/or if the market that security trades in is inactive. This would probably describe pretty much every asset that is considered toxic, and that if marked to market would most likely cause a bank to become effectively insolvent.

These are complicated products that even the banks themselves, save for a few of the quants that created them, could either explain or describe. Products created with and about most every type of esoteric financial product available. Products with bid/ask spreads wide enough to drive a truck through. Products so illiquid that they may never trade and therefore can't be priced yet that allow the firms selling them to make huge money on them. You get the gist.

Now there also happens to be a Treasury plan that was recently created to let the private sector buy some of these assets off of the books of the bank in conjunction with the government at what is determined to be a market price. Before these mark to market rules were relaxed there was much concern that the bid/ask spread would never narrow enough for any of these assets to sell. Now that he banks can value them as they wish, it is pretty much a given that they won't sell.

The end result is that most of these assets will remain on the banks books, the banks capital positions will strengthen, earnings, at least in the near term will look good but the problem will still remain. Now some or even many of these assets will be fine, but the jury is out on the rest. The whole idea of removing them and replacing them with new capital that the banks can lend to you and me seems to be on hold. The banks will hopefully lend based on this new and improved capital position created by loosening mark to market, but what will happen if these positions really head south? Hmmmmm.

It all seems a little like hocus pocus.

Mark To Market: An Attempt At A Simple Example Of Trader Magic

Mark to market is a term that is getting thrown around all over the place: on Capital Hill, T.V., the newspapers, the internet and anywhere else the financial markets are covered. But what exactly is mark to market?

Back in the day, fresh out of B School, I was a municipal bond trader in a time when the most complicated product on the market were futures. Traders would use the firms capital to go out on "the street" and bid on bonds, buy them if they were the winning bid, put them into inventory and pray that the market would go their way.



You would buy them "on the bid", and then "offer them out" at a higher price (i.e. pay $94 and try and sell them at $94 3/8). If you paid to much you would eventually have to sell them at a loss, get bailed out by the market or try and get the retail brokers to sell them to their clients (the thought was that retail would buy anything).

Now bonds have ratings (AAA down to junk or unrated), and although all bonds with the same rating are not worth the same, there is a ballpark value that you would use. There are strong AAA bonds and weaker AAA bonds, but if the "scale" for AAA revenue bonds due in 10 years was 5.10%, then the range might be 5.00% to 5.20%.

Now at the end of the day, you have to mark all of the bonds in your inventory to the market. But let's say the market has gone against you hard, and you are sitting with large losses. You have two choices. The first is to mark correctly, show the paper losses (because losses are not real until you realize them) and get called back to the head of the departments office for a spanking. You only seemed have to much inventory when the market went against you. The second choice is the hope and pray, where you mark your bonds higher than they should be, show a small loss or no loss at all, and hope and pray that the market bails you out.

Now in the hope and pray the firm really had paper losses that should have been recognized when figuring out the capital position, but did not know about them unless someone in management knew about the market and went through every traders books to make sure the marks were correct. Now multiply that situation by the massive numbers we are talking about today, and you can begin to see the scope of the problem.

Now the hope and pray would work until either the market rallied (good)or your positions got to old or "stale" and the department would force you to liquidate at which time you were screwed (bad).

Instead, take today's esoteric incredibly complex instruments that don't trade, that no one understand, are incredibly illiquid, may or may not be performing and that in no way can be valued effectively. Picture the bid/ask spread on those puppies. That is where we are today.

Read more...

IL (former Gov.) Blagojevich indicted on federal corruption charges

AP – In this Dec. 15, 2008 file photo, then Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich leaves his house through an alley …

• Play Video Video:Hey, Mr. DJ: Blago Hits the Airwaves ABC News
• Play Video Video:Former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich indicted AP
• Play Video Video:Blagojevich indictments 'imminent' KGW NewsChannel 8 Portland, Ore.

By MIKE ROBINSON, Associated Press Writer Mike Robinson, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 12 mins ago

CHICAGO – Ousted Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich's plan to auction off President Barack Obama's vacant U.S. Senate seat marked the culmination of years of scheming for personal gain that included trying to extort a congressman and pressuring businesses to hire his wife, prosecutors alleged Thursday.

A sweeping 19-count federal indictment alleges that Blagojevich discussed with aides the possibility of getting a Cabinet post in the new president's administration, substantial fundraising assistance or a high-paying job in exchange for the Senate seat.

Obama's deputy press secretary, Josh Earnest, said the White House would not comment on the indictment, which does not allege any wrongdoing by Obama or his top aides.

Prosecutors also accused Blagojevich and members of his inner circle of plotting to line their pockets with millions of dollars in ill-gotten gains. They are accused of squeezing contractors, hospital owners and others seeking state business for kickbacks they planned to split after the governor left office.

"I'm saddened and hurt but I am not surprised by the indictment," Blagojevich, who was in Walt Disney World with his family, said in a statement. "I am innocent. I now will fight in the courts to clear my name."

The indictment alleges Blagojevich told an aide in 2006 that he wanted to stall a $2 million state grant to a school supported by a congressman until the lawmaker's brother held a political fundraiser for the governor.

Obama's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, was the congressman, attorneys familiar with the case said Thursday. The attorneys spoke on condition of anonymity because the congressman isn't named in the indictment and the information is secret grand jury material.

At the time, Emanuel represented the 5th District on Chicago's North Side. Some of the funds were later released, even though no fundraiser had been held.

The indictment also alleges that Blagojevich:

_Was involved in a corrupt scheme to get a massive kickback in exchange for the refinancing of billions of dollars in state pension funds.

_Told an aide he didn't want executives with two financial institutions getting further state business after he concluded they were not helping his wife get a high-paying job.

_Withheld state aid sought by the Tribune Co. unless the company fired unfriendly editorial writers at the Chicago Tribune.

Also, convicted fixer Tony Rezko paid Patti Blagojevich a $14,396 real estate commission "even though she had done no work" to earn it and later hired her at a salary of $12,000 a month plus another $40,000 fee, the indictment said.

Others charged were brother Robert Blagojevich; former chief of staff Alonzo Monk; one-time chief fundraiser Christopher G. Kelly; Springfield lobbyist-millionaire William F. Cellini; and another former chief of staff, John Harris. Prosecutors said Harris has agreed to cooperate.

Robert Blagojevich is chairman of the Friends of Rod Blagojevich campaign fund.

"We were hoping that it wouldn't happen but now we go to trial and win," said his attorney, Michael Ettinger.

Cellini attorney Dan Webb said his client never had a substantive conversation with Blagojevich, much less conspired with him. Messages were left for attorneys for Monk, Kelly and Harris.

Blagojevich faces 16 counts of wire fraud, racketeering and extortion conspiracy, attempted extortion and making false statements. Most of those charges carry a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

Prosecutors said at least $188,370 belonging to Friends of Blagojevich is subject to forfeiture. If the money can't be found, Blagojevich might have to forfeit his Washington, D.C., apartment and Chicago home.

Blagojevich, 52, was arrested Dec. 9 on a criminal complaint and U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald had faced a Tuesday deadline to supplant it with an indictment handed up by a federal grand jury. The Democrat's arrest led to his political downfall: The Illinois House impeached him Jan. 9. The Senate convicted him and removed him from office Jan. 29.

Illinois lawmakers had considered stripping Blagojevich of his Senate-appointment powers after his arrest, but couldn't agree on legislation. Blagojevich shocked everyone by naming former Illinois Attorney General Roland Burris to the seat Dec. 30.

Burris has since come under fire for changing his story about the circumstances surrounding his appointment. He also acknowledged trying, unsuccessfully, to raise money for Blagojevich.

Burris would not comment on the indictment, spokesman Jim O'Connor said. Earlier in the day, Burris told reporters with The Hill as he came off the Senate floor that it "has nothing to do with me."

Blagojevich's administration has been under federal investigation for years and Kelly and Rezko already have been convicted of federal crimes and are awaiting sentencing.

Thursday's indictment said that in 2003 — the former governor's first year in office — Blagojevich, Monk, Kelly and Rezko agreed to direct big-money state business involved in refinancing billions of dollars in pension bonds as part of a deal with a lobbyist who promised a massive kickback in return. The lobbyist wasn't identified.

Rezko raised more than $1 million in campaign contributions for Blagojevich and also was a major Obama fundraiser.

Illinois residents said they were tired of the corruption.

"I'm so disgusted," said Linda Dowdy, a 59-year-old Belleville tavern manager who calls herself a hardcore Democrat. She lamented that even well-intentioned politicians don't last long in office.

"He may have every intention of going in and trying to change things and of making things better," she said. "But once he's in, he doesn't have any choice but to be as crooked as they are or he's not gonna stay in there."

___

Associated Press writers Tammy Webber and Michael Tarm in Chicago and David Mercer in Champaign contributed to this report.

Read more...

The G-20: Anarchists and Correspondents Speak Out

From The Political and Financial Markets Commmentator

Watching The News: The Bias Is Sometimes To Much To Take

Before getting to the G-20 itself, I have to say that the coverage from some "news" outlets is unbelievable in it's biased love affair with President Obama. I know that this comes as no great surprise, but sometimes it gets to the point where it has to be brought up.

John Harwood is the Chief Washington Correspondent of CNBC and a political writer for the New York Times. I watch him report on CNBC, only because I watch the ticker on the bottom. As a correspondent, it is his job to report the news, not to invoke his opinion of the news.

That is not the case and at times it is to much to bear. The commentary Wednesday was that the throngs of protesters in downtown London stood in stark contrast to the throngs outside of Buckingham Palace expressing their adulation for President Obama, ostensibly proving the strength of his popularity not only in the United States, but in England and the rest of Europe as well.

If that is the case John Harwood, then the protesters and anarchists must be an indicator of popular U.K. and European thought as well. More likely, these are both relatively small groups of people drawn by a specific occasion. Each could be in the majority of English thought or minority, but it is not John Harwoods place to make that determination. I would also assume that not every person outside of the Palace was pro-Obama or pro-United States, but in this case of consistent partisanship, that possibility was not mentioned.

Anarchists and Financial Fools Day



In a world that is feeling the pain and frustration of the financial crisis, the protests that went on Wednesday in London by anarchists and other groups was for the most part non-violent, although uniform in the condemnation of the capitalist way of doing business.

The first thing that I was struck by is that as non-participants in capitalism, the protesters have more than enough time to travel to these summits and demonstrate. The second thing that I was struck by was that it seemed as if there were some non-anarchist types interviewed who also seemed to question whether an alternative system might be better.

The problem as I see it is the potential for these types of protests and waves of dissatisfaction to slip from fringe groups to the regular folks who begin to understand the extreme depth and ramifications of the problem. These world leaders and rainmakers need to solve or stem the tide of the problem before the term social unrest spreads to groups that we would never have anticipated that it could spread to.

Read more...

Inside Scoop on NY 20

I am beat.
I walked precincts all day for Jim Tedisco and when the polls closed I thought I could head to the party…but then things went awry. In the next 13 days political communications will play as important a role as the legal fight and I want you to know the facts.
The election is NOT over. There are still over 4,000 absentee ballots that have not been returned which totaled with the 6,000 already received would be almost 10,000 absentee ballots that have NOT been counted. These ballots will continue to be accepted until April. 13th. ANY premature counting of votes will, basically, be counting BEFORE the voting is over…and that is just wrong.
Jim Tedisco is currently trailing Scott Murphy by 59 votes according to machine tallies. NOTICE I did not say ballots. NY 20 uses old school level machines to vote so there is NO "ballot" to count. Votes are tabulated on the machine as people pull levers. Most of these machines are probably older than me.
The results you saw tonight were nothing more than the UNofficial notes of whichever random poll worker transcribed results from the machine to the form that they report to the Board of Elections. It is fair to say that these numbers are often riddled with mistakes as people mix up numbers and read the wrong tallies.

With memories of Washington State 2004 and Minnesota 2008 looming in my mind here are some things to consider.

Jim Tedisco will win the absentee vote.
The only way Scott Murphy can win is too challenge and disqualify absentee and military ballots that will, most likely, be votes for Jim Tedisco.
Scott Murphy is so anti-military he tried to stop Harvard from having a ROTC program on campus while he was a student there and prevent military personnel from teaching classes. Knowing that, it is hard to imagine military members voting for him.

It's 3:23 AM so forgive the horrible grammar and even worse sentence structure.

Chris Faulkner

P.S. Somehow I knew wearing my "Coleman Recount Team" polar fleece today was a bad idea …

Read more...

What Is Going On In Afghanistan?

From The Political and Financial Markets Commentator

Market Update

The stock market closed up on Tuesday although it faded into the close. On the housing front "home values in 20 major U.S. cities fell at the fastest rate on record in January and are now down a record 19% in the 12 months ending in January, Standard & Poor's reported Tuesday.

The Case-Shiller 20-city home price index fell a record 2.8% in January, with home values in all 20 cities falling at least 1%. Prices in the original 10-city index fell a record 19.4% over the year. Prices fell 2.5% in January in the 10 cities.(MarketWatch)

What Is New On The Afghan Front?

Today in The Hague representatives from 23 countries and 11 international organizations began meeting to discuss strategy for Afghanistan. The purpose of the meeting, or at least one of the purposes, is to try and come to some kind of consensus over how to handle what is becoming a troubling and violent situation. I have been asking for days (or maybe weeks) where the United States foreign policy stood, and where Secretary Clinton had been hiding. Just Monday I was speculating she was at the United Nations waiting to put our protest into the Security Council when North Korea test fired it's missile/satellite launcher.



It turns out that she must have been preparing for this conference to let the world know what our policy is, and how the recently planned troop deployment will be handled. One goal is of course to tackle the Taliban and Al-Qaeda problem, and another will be the attempt to put a dent into the cash crop of opium.

An extremely interesting sidebar to the conference is the fact that Iran will be at the table, and that Secretary Clinton has not ruled out direct talks with them.

"Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was coy Monday about whether she would meet Iranian delegates at an international conference on Afghanistan, and she urged Tehran to play a positive role in helping stabilize its neighbor.

"I believe that there will be an opening by this conference that will enable all the countries, including Iran, to come forward," Clinton told reporters aboard her plane en route to The Hague for Tuesday's conference. "The fact that they accepted the invitation to come suggests that they believe there is a role for them to play, and we're looking forward to hearing more about that." (CNN)

If I was a betting man I would say that the Obama administration will not have those talks, but you never know.

Read more...