It's so much easier to suggest solutions when you don't know too much about the problem.
Malcolm Forbes
Quiz of the Day
Christine O'Donnell is to Chris Coons as click here for answer is to Barack Obama.
Election Updates
Bennett (D-CO) clinched Colorado in a narrow victory over Tea Party-backed Ken Buck yesterday, and Patty Murray (D-WA) edged Dino Rossi tonight, leaving the official count 53-46 in favor of the Dems. McAdams conceded the Alaska race, which leaves Undecided (Murkowski) versus Joe Miller, either of which will caucus with Republicans. In the governor's races, two of the undecideds, Quinn (IL-D) (Blagojevich's successor), whom trailed in most polls leading up to the election, narrowly beat Brady, and Kizhaber (OR-D) won an unprecedented third term over Dudley. ABC shows no change in the status of any of the outstanding 9 House seats.
Election Updates
Bennett (D-CO) clinched Colorado in a narrow victory over Tea Party-backed Ken Buck yesterday, and Patty Murray (D-WA) edged Dino Rossi tonight, leaving the official count 53-46 in favor of the Dems. McAdams conceded the Alaska race, which leaves Undecided (Murkowski) versus Joe Miller, either of which will caucus with Republicans. In the governor's races, two of the undecideds, Quinn (IL-D) (Blagojevich's successor), whom trailed in most polls leading up to the election, narrowly beat Brady, and Kizhaber (OR-D) won an unprecedented third term over Dudley. ABC shows no change in the status of any of the outstanding 9 House seats.
Late Edits to Yesterday's Interim Post
I usually post before midnight PDT/PST; multiple sections were in process when I initially posted last night's longer-than-usual post, and I have subsequently completed and published the final version. If you read the initial version (say, before 3AM PDT this morning), you may want to revisit the finished post.
Faithful readers of my posts know that one of my favorite lines, which I used before Sarah Palin was signed (as I predicted) by Fox News Channel, was FNC's "slobbering love affair with all things Sarah Palin", a play on words referencing the title a popular conservative book authored by FNC contributor Bernard Goldberg.
I do not doubt Megyn's overall intelligence and her specific competence in legal matters. But some of her interviews are so blatantly one-sided, it borders on pandering. In particular, Megyn Kelly was having a conversation with Michael Reagan about Sarah's latest political ad, in a mutual Sarah Palin admiration society, drawing a parallel between the famous 1984 "Morning in America" ad.
OH, STOP! Ronald "I Didn't Quit" Reagan not only served 2 full terms in the country's most populous state and budget (including a state income tax), but had to deal with with an opposition legislature, both in California and in Washington DC. Alaska has just under 700,000; California has just under 37M. Sarah Palin, unlike John McCain, eagerly embraced federal earmarks as a small town mayor and then a first-term governor, this in a state which does not have a state income tax--and in fact gives its citizens checks every year simply for living there; she couldn't even get along with her own state legislative leadership. She has materially misled the American people about her position on the Bridge to Nowhere (she specifically supported bridge funding during her gubernatorial run, and during the 2006 race debates, she couldn't list her positions on pending legislation and seemed to take an anti-intellectual pride in not knowing the policy details and statistics, while spending most of her time thinking up one-liner putdowns of her opponents.)
What's particularly disturbing to me about Michael Reagan is how he seemed to go along with letting his father's good name get linked with a red-meat, populist, politically-spinning demagogue whose knowledge on policy is, at best, shallow and lacks Reagan's intellectual prowess and substantive communication skills (e.g., he had substantive discussions with the likes of libertarian Reason Magazine and authored a syndicated opinion column after his 2 terms as California governor). Reagan was likeable, of good cheer and able to negotiate with his opponents; Sarah Palin is ultra-defensive, polarizing, snarky, and seems to have problems with anyone, not just the opposition, but even with other members of her own party whom happen to disagree with her on policy.
What astonished me in this conversation with Megyn was her lack of due diligence and unbalanced, uncritical assessment of Sarah Palin. In justifying Palin's attacks on "big tent" conservatives/Republicans like myself, Megyn pointed that Sarah Palin was a "conservative" first and "Republican" second. And then she started referencing "RINO's" ["Republicans in Name Only"]. What an absolute load of crap! Other than putting some trappings of the governor's office (selling off a plane, not needing domestic help, etc.), Palin was hardly a low-tax-and-spend conservative. Let's go to USA Today for a reality check:
Palin didn't cut the size of government as mayor of Wasilla, and she hasn't done so as Alaska's governor, city and state budget records show. Spending in fast-growing Wasilla increased by 55% during her tenure from 1996-2002, records show. In nearly two years as governor, she has presided over a 31% spending hike by a state government that sought earmarks from Washington even as it reaped billions from higher oil prices and Palin-backed tax increases on oil companies [and] signed bills that included hundreds of millions for local projects inserted by state lawmakers, similar to those McCain has regularly ridiculed as pork in the U.S. Senate, spending records show. As governor, Palin has signed off on $402,000 to study the arctic fox; $154,000 for renovations to three gun clubs and $125,000 for the Alaska Aviation Heritage Museum, state records show. Her budgets have funded $44,500 to spruce up a ski resort, $75,000 for the Arctic Thunder Air Show and $50,000 to improve a Little League field in the Mat-Su Valley near her hometown of Wasilla...The Palin administration asked Washington for $197 million in earmarks [in 2008]...90% of the state's revenue comes from the oil and gas industry...Palin, with help from Democrats in the Legislature, increased taxes [in 2008] by billions on the energy industry.So, Ms. Kelly, it's time to put the lawyer in you on trial. I assume you did due diligence and researched Palin's record as governor. In what sense is Sarah Palin a legitimate representative of the Tea Party movement? McCain has never requested an earmark. In what sense is allowing hundreds of millions of state earmarks, as well as actively seeking hundreds of millions in federal earmarks, not hypocritical? In what sense is raising business taxes a pro-growth philosophy or increasing operational spending by nearly a third not in fact the very essence of tax-and-spend?
PLEASE. Sarah Palin is no conservative by any stretch of the imagination. She's a political opportunist, not a principled conservative. Let's take, for instance, just the issue global warming. She's on the record. She was talking about seeing evidence of global warming in and around Alaska. Then after the Climategate scandal hit, she immediately swerved her position.
As for her contemptuous attack on moderate Republicans, there's NO SUCH THING as a "RINO" (Republican-In-Name-Only). The most conservative Senate Democrats, by lifetime ACU, are Bill Nelson (FL, 35.5) (remember Gator-Aid?), Specter (PA, 43.6) (remember Benedict Arnold?) and Ben Nelson (NE, 46.9) (remember Cornhusker Kickback?). The least conservative Republican is Olivia Snowe (ME, 47.9). The overwhelming majority of Dems rank below 20. If you're claiming that Snowe is the equivalent of a progressive Democrat whom votes like an Obama, Biden, Clinton, or Boxer, you are in a state of denial. Yes, some Republicans are less conservative than others, and I wish Snowe or Collins voted more in line with my preferences. But if you asked me whether I see them replaced by the two Maine Congressmen, rating below 10 in the ACU ratings, I would think that you have lost your mind. I don't think there's any merit in the GOP falling on their sword.
Let's just take the Mike Castle issue. When Scott Brown was elected as senator from Massachusetts as the 41st senator against Obamacare, the Tea Party embraced him--but, in fact, Mike Castle has a similar voting record. Let's look at this excerpt from National Review, founded by the late William Buckley, the intellectual leader of the conservative movement since the 1950's, written before the primary election:
Over his 17 complete years in the U.S. House of Representatives, Castle has voted the conservative position, as defined by the American Conservative Union, about 52 percent of the time. In 2009, ACU scored Castle at 56. So how did he get that rating from the group last year? He voted for a January 2009 bill that would prevent the Treasury from spending the $350 billion that remained in the TARP program. He opposed the Obama stimulus. [A] self-described pro-choice Republican, he supported an amendment to the health-care bill that would ban using taxpayer funds to provide abortion services, He voted against the health-care bill. He’s open to the idea [of repealing Obamacare] if the GOP can regain control of the White House. He voted to extend the repeal of the estate tax and opposed making the new estate-tax rates permanent. He voted for a bill to repeal the TARP program and lower the federal debt limit. Finally, he voted against the financial-industry-regulation legislation..And why should Mike Castle have been the GOP nominee?
[Delaware is] a state where registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans roughly 329,000 to 179,000. Castle has consistently led all polls and his voting history suggests he will vote with conservatives 52 percent of the time or so. [Coons is expected to vote comparably to existing Democratic senators voting the conservative postition 4 to 12 percent of the time.]And let's not forget that Christine O'Donnell, after running in the 2006 election as a write-in after losing the GOP primary, had scored 4% of the vote against Carper, and she won only about a third of the vote against Joe Biden in 2008, focusing more on the Presidential campaign as the VP nominee. So let's think here: who would you prefer to send up against a progressive Democrat: someone who won at least 11 statewide races against Democratic opponents in a blue state--or someone, without experience, whose best showing with opponents was 35% in one race?
So when Sarah Palin was asked to explain election results and her support of Christine O'Donnell, she basically makes the following 3 points: (1) Delaware is a blue state; (2) Castle wouldn't have won, either; and (3) you can't support an unprincipled Republican. Let's just this straight: it's obvious to Palin that a Republican who votes with the ideal conservative 5 times more than the current Democratic US senators, has won 2 terms as governor and 9 terms as at-large Congressman and beat Coons by double-digits in every single pre-primary matchup is a less credible candidate than O'Donnell, who has NEVER served public office at any level (including local or state) and had lost every single matchup against Coons except one pre-primary makes sense?
The hypocrisy of Sarah "I Quit" Palin is palpable. While Castle was voting to cut spending and taxes and has decades of votes and actions on public record, Palin was feeding the state government beast in an unholy alliance with state Democrats to pass growth-crushing business tax hikes in feeding a ravenous appetite for hundreds of millions in state operational costs and earmarks. And for someone leading the ideological purist role, as the New Yorker pointed out before Sarah Palin was chosen as McCain's running mate, she explicitly made comparisons between her 2006 "change" gubernatorial campaign and that of the Obama campaign, distanced herself from being stereotyped as Republican, expressed concerns about the Iraq surge strategy and its rationale (i.e., motivated by dependence on Middle East oil?), and thought it was pretty cool that Obama had started edging McCain in some Alaskan polls, making the state more purple.
I will say that Michael Reagan and Megyn Kelly did briefly address the elephant in the room (pun intended) by gently raising the issue of Sarah Palin's self-serving early resignation as governor. Expected future Presidential candidate Governor Tim Pawlenty (MN-R) will stay overtime, if necessary, if the governor's race goes into a recount (remember the 2008 Coleman-Franken race?) [Democrat Dayton narrowly leads Republican Emmer].
Our Morning in America?
Sarah Palin, I remember Ronald Reagan. He was my President. And you are no Ronald Reagan.
Do not plagiarize Reagan's 1984 winning campaign slogan; who do you think you are--Joe Biden?
Christine "Sore Loser" O'Donnell
I'm mocking Sean "Repetitive Talking Points" Hannity whom routinely criticized more electable GOP candidates sniped during the Republican primaries in purple or blue districts for refusing to legitimize fruit from the poisoned tree; he demanded that they "prove" their party loyalty by offering an endorsement which would adversely affect their own credibility.
O'Donnell referred to criticisms of her controversial upset victory by Karl Rove and others as "Republican cannibalism". She claimed that she didn't need the "Republican establishment", i.e., the state party chair openly disappointed that the first real chance of the GOP to win a Senate seat in Delaware in a decade (Carper defeated Roth, best known for a special type of retirement IRA).
And then Wednesday, she reprised the charge of "Republican cannibalism" and complained that, unlike the other states with Tea Party-backed candidates, that the GOP didn't unite behind her candidacy, and she would have won with enough support. Oh, PLEASE! Stop making excuses, take some responsibility and use some common sense, Christine! This is the third consecutive Senate race you've run for and lost in 5 years, your percentage (40%) was larger than what you got against Biden (35%) in 2008, your percentage was comparable (slightly less) than the GOP Congressional nominee, and you were running in a state where the number of Democrats significantly exceed the number of Republicans. In order to appeal to the Democrats and independents needed to carry yourself to victory, you need to be perceived as credibly qualified (you have never served a public office on the local or state level) and to be pragmatic enough. You lost every head-to-head poll with Coons (except a dated one where you statistically tied) before the primary and after the primary. And as to the debates, I didn't listen to them, but I did catch your wavering response to the question of the First Amendment, when the law school audience started laughing at you; I don't recall the last time I heard an audience laugh at a debater's response. That was poorly handled. Try working your way up through a local race or perhaps run for the at-large district seat in 2012. Don't try running against Carper again in 2012. Maybe Mike Castle will consider running against Carper.
Joe "Sore Loser" Miller
Joe Miller, behind presumably Lisa Murkowski (no other major candidate had announced) by roughly 5 points, is lawyering up, looking to strike as many ballots as he can (it's highly unlikely that another write-in would bleed that many votes from Murkowski). The courts have already said that voter intent is the key criterion, that minor misspellings (e.g., Mercowsky) would count. Miller is also distrustful of the lieutenant governor, whom was earlier appointed to another post by Palin's predecessor Frank Murkowski, but Palin herself paved the way for Campbell to success Parnell, Palin's successor and currently reelected. Murkowski leads by 13,000 with 30,000 absentees left to count. It's highly unlikely that absentees can make up the difference: the amount of votes he has to make up more than exceed his total number of votes expected from a relevantly sized representative sample, never mind offsetting any additional Murkowski votes. Murkowski has hired Ben Ginsberg (i.e., Bush v Gore in 2000). Given the fact that the number of write-in's is historically small and Murkowski was the only widely promoted write-in candidate, it's fairly clear to see whom won, but don't challenge ballot by ballot based on spelling. Personally, if I was Joe Miller, I would concede and waive the ballot count; it would be the classy thing to do. Everybody knows Lisa Murkowski pulled off the first write-in win since 1954.
Political Humor
If you want to find out how many of your Facebook friends are real friends, post an update that says you’re moving and you need help. The people that respond are your real friends. - Jimmy Kimmel
[Um, I'm not one of Barack Obama's friends on Facebook, so how can I suggest that he move out? I would even volunteer to help him do it...]
Voters didn’t like how President Obama was handling the economy. Wait a minute — he was handling the economy? - David Letterman
[You know the jobs in the massive stimulus bill? Obama packed them in USPS boxes, stamped "Handle With Care", and left them with the Postmaster for delivery to US households. They somehow ended up in China and India; Obama did get some very nice thank you notes back...]
Musical Interlude: Instrumentals/One-Hit Wonders
Vangelis, "Chariots of Fire"
