November 1-3, 2008
Nov 01 00:00 Zogby: McCain Leading 48- Obama 47 Nov 03 01:07 Will The Coal Industry Still Exist? Nov 02 20:04 That's Her Story & She's Sticking To It? Nov 03 02:07 Lawmaker Recommends Ignoring Immigration Laws Nov 03 05:29 Mark Olson's Shameful Behavior Nov 03 13:32 Delivering On The Promise Nov 03 15:52 Ohio Coal Assoc Pres." Obama 'extraordinarily misguided'
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
Zogby: McCain Leading 48- Obama 47
Yes, it's Zogby but it still shows John McCain leading:
ZOGBY SATURDAY: Republican John McCain has pulled back within the margin of error... The three-day average holds steady, but McCain outpolled Obama 48% to 47% in Friday, one day, polling. He is beginning to cut into Obama's lead among independents, is now leading among blue collar voters, has strengthened his lead among investors and among men, and is walloping Obama among NASCAR voters. Joe the Plumber may get his license after all...I talked earlier tonight with King about the state of the various races. Here's what I said then: I don't think anyone knows where this race is at. That said, one thing we agreed on is that Obama's shifting tax cut numbers are cutting Obama's support. There aren't a ton of people making $250,000.
At that point, most people thought that they wouldn't be affected by Obama's plan. Then suddenly, the number was $200K, then $150K. Finally, Gov. Richardson floated the number of $120K. Each time that number drops, more people, the more people it affects. Likewise, the more people it affects, the more people beneath that income level start wondering if they're the next target.
Whether people are wondering if they can trust Sen. Obama is still the unanswered question. We'll be tracking this the rest of the weekend, though.
That's for certain.
UPDATE: I just started thinking about this. Anytime anyone's started saying negative things about Sen. Obama recently, they've been labeled racists or they've been investigated. Is Mr. Zogby prepared for the pro-Obama onslaught?
UPDATE II: Here's John Zogby's take on things:
"Is McCain making a move? The three-day average holds steady, but McCain outpolled Obama today, 48% to 47%. He is beginning to cut into Obama's lead among independents, is now leading among blue collar voters, has strengthened his lead among investors and among men, and is walloping Obama among NASCAR voters. Joe the Plumber may get his license after all. "Obama's lead among women declined, and it looks like it is occurring because McCain is solidifying the support of conservative women, which is something we saw last time McCain picked up in the polls. If McCain has a good day tomorrow, we will eliminate Obama's good day three days ago, and we could really see some tightening in this rolling average. But for now, hold on."
Posted Saturday, November 1, 2008 2:17 AM
Comment 1 by Freealonzo at 03-Nov-08 09:31 AM
Oops. Now (Monday) Zogby has it 7.1 for BHO. McCain had a nice 24 hour run there.
Will The Coal Industry Still Exist?
Salena Zito's post is all over the comemnts Barack Obama made to the San Francisco Chronicle's editorial board. Here's a transcript of what Sen. Obama said in January, 2008:
What I've said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else's out there.That isn't what Sen. Obama says now. These days, he's saying that he's "open to drilling on the OCS" (as long as it's part of a comprehensive package). He's also saying that he's a proponent of clean coal technology. Here's a short video that sums things up pretty well:
I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, imposed every year.
So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted.
That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in solar, wind, biodiesel and other alternative energy approaches.
The only thing I've said with respect to coal, I haven't been some coal booster. What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as a (sic) ideological matter as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it.
Included in the clip is Joe Biden's quote that col power plants should be built "over there because it's killing us."
The video also notes that 49% of the United States' existing power plants are coal powered. According to the WSJ's WashingtonWire post , this is bad economics for blue collar workers in several key swing states:
Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin unleashed a new volley against Barack Obama on a four-city tour of Ohio on Sunday by touting newly released audio comments made by the Democratic presidential candidate promising to restrict the construction of new coal-fired power plants in the U.S. The issue is particularly sensitive in coal-rich Ohio, West Virginia, and Colorado.I can't believe Team McCain didn't unleash with this a week earlier. Nonetheless, their latest attack will move voters in Ohio. It likely will move votes in Colorado, too.
UPDATE: I just watched a special Hannity & Colmes. What I heard stunned me. It also stunned Pat Caddell, Ann Coulter and Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty. In a later part of the SF Chronicle interview, Obama actually says that, as a result of the cap and trade policy, "electricity prices will necessarily skyrocket." Sen. Obama didn't say that they'd go up. He didn't say that he was worried that his cap and trade policy would have an adverse effect on people's budgets. He simply said that utility bills would skyrocket.
Pat Caddell's first response was to ask Sean Hannity if that was actually Sen. Obama's voice. Sean affirmed that it was Sen. Obama's voice. That's why Pat Caddell, who was Jimmy Carter's pollster to say that "you could knock me over with a feather" after hearing that. I wholehearted agree with that. I don't know if this is enough to push McCain across the finish line but this has the potential to upset the Obama juggernaut.
His telling Joe the Plumber that he's for redistributing small business's wealth around with his tax policies shifted the race dramatically. His ever-changing statements on who would or wouldn't get a tax cut created uncertainty with voters, too. (BTW, his targets for tax cuts have changed from $300K, $250K, $200K in his infomercial, Biden saying $150K, to Gov. Richardson saying the Obama plan was for $120K and under.
Those things alone are enough to sink his candidacy if the Agenda Media wasn't so in the tank for Sen. Obama.
Additionally, he's saying that his cap and trade policies will bankrupt an entire industry while hurting blue collar workers in northern tier states with skyrocketing utility bills.
Let's think about the various people that will get hurt if Sen. OBama's plan is enacted. Schools and small businesses would be hurt mightily. City governments would, too. The ripple effect off those increases, coupled with no incentive for risk-taking entrepreneurs to take risks, would cause damage the likes of which we haven't seen since the Carter administration.
Unemployment would certainly rise well above the average of the 80's, 90's and this decade, meaning personal income would drop while Obama would pile up unprecedented deficits.
Forget about change I can believe in. Sen. Obama's policies are the things that financial nightmares are made of.
Posted Monday, November 3, 2008 1:20 AM
Comment 1 by Freealonzo at 03-Nov-08 12:28 PM
McCain hasn't unleashed this attack because his views on clean coal are similar to Obama's. Can't really complain about the policy when your policy is similar can you?
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 03-Nov-08 01:38 PM
Nice try but you're full of shit up to your ears & the rest is rocks.
Gov. Pawlenty explained the differences between Obama's stated plan & Sen. McCain's plan. The only real similarity is that they're both called Cap & Trade. After that, they're different in almost every significant way.
That's Her Story & She's Sticking To It?
Helen Jones-Kelley continues to say that it's routine for employees to run checks on her agency checks people who are "thrust into the public spotlight," amid suggestions they may have come into money, to see if they owe support or are receiving undeserved public assistance.
Unfortunately for her, her employees say differently:
Niekamp told The Dispatch she is unfamiliar with the practice of checking on the newly famous. "I've never done that before, I don't know of anybody in my office who does that and I don't remember anyone ever doing that," she said today.Conveniently, Gov. Ted Strickland and Ms. Jones-Kelley, who both endorsed Barack Obama, said they couldn't comment:
Democrat Gov. Ted Strickland and Jones-Kelley, both supporters of Democrat Barack Obama, have denied political motives in checking on Wurzelbacher. The Toledo-area resident later endorsed McCain. State officials say any information on "Joe" is confidential and was not released.This isn't surprising. This is just another trick from the Clinton playbook of investigating, then humiliating, anyone that gives them a hard time.
Today, Strickland press secretary Keith Dailey said neither the governor's office nor Job and Family Services officials could comment due to an ongoing investigation by Ohio's inspector general.
Posted Sunday, November 2, 2008 8:04 PM
No comments.
Lawmaker Recommends Ignoring Immigration Laws
I just finished posting about Barack Obama's statement that his cap and trade policies will "necessarily cause electric bills to skyrocket" and that his cap and trade would bankrupt the coal industry so I know what boneheaded statements sound like. I thought I'd heard them all but I was wrong. Josh Behling, the man I hope represents me in the Minnesota state legislature, participated in a debate at St. Cloud State. Here's his description of an exchange between my current representative and a student:
At a debate on the campus of St. Cloud State University this evening, there were 10 questions that were asked by the moderators and then questions from the audience were asked.Immediately after the debate, SD-15 co-chair Jeff Johnson issued the following statement:
A question was asked by an SCSU student. He spoke with broken English. His question was, "With the large amount of immigrants in this area and state what will you do as a Legislator to make sure that immigrants have an opportunity to succeed?"
Rep. Larry Haws responded 1st by saying, "What kind of immigrants are you talking about?"
The student responded, "Well there are a lot of different immigrants but mostly in this area I guess, Somalians."
Rep. Larry Haws responded, "Are we talking legal or illegal immigrants?"
The student responded, "Legal."
Rep. Larry Haws responded, " Good, because if your talking about legal, then I say send 'em here [SCSU], we'll check you at the door. If you are talking illegal, then send 'em over to Tech [St. Cloud Tech College]."
There was about a 5-10 second pause as the entire room gasped and re-adjusted themselves in their chairs.
You could see that all but a few of the students looked at him and each other thinking, I can't believe he just said that.
Here's my question after Rep. Haws statement: Shouldn't we expect the people that write our laws to obey our laws? The notion that we should "send 'em" to the St. Cloud Tech College is offensive to law-abiding citizens. The notion that a lawmaker didn't say that we should call in law enforcement if we find illegal immigrants is extremely telling. It says that Rep. Haws doesn't care about illegal immigration."I find it unbelievable that a sitting Minnesota state representative, regardless of party affiliation, would make such a profoundly stupid and thoughtless remark. I am deeply disappointed by Rep. Larry Haws insensitivity to our international students attending St. Cloud State University and St. Cloud Technical College," said SD15 Co-Chair and SCSU Associate Professor of Aviation, Jeff Johnson.
"As a faculty member who works with numerous international students, I can personally attest that this remark is totally uncalled for and does not foster an atmosphere of tolerance and acceptance. It is unconscionable that anyone, let alone a leader in the St. Cloud community, would stoop to such demeaning behavior. Minnesota citizens and our international student guests deserve far better than thoughtless, cruel answers from Rep. Haws on how to solve real everyday problems. Rep. Haws needs to do the right thing by issuing an immediate apology to our SCSU and St. Cloud Technical College international students."
Disclaimer: I am speaking as Co-Chair of SD15 and I am not officially speaking for SCSU.
BONUS QUESTION: What other laws does Rep. Haws think we shouldn't enforce?
DOUBLE BONUS [two-part] QUESTION: Doesn't this indicate that Rep. Haws isn't the moderate he claims to be? Doesn't this indicate that he's actually an extremist with a folksy nature?
Finally, doesn't this sound like Rep. Haws favors the creation of sanctuary campuses?
Originally posted Monday, November 3, 2008, revised 29-Nov 8:51 AM
No comments.
Mark Olson's Shameful Behavior
A loyal LFR reader forwarded this picture of a Mark Olson lawn sign:
Mark Olson still thinks of himself as the GOP-endorsed candidate in this race. It's likely that he thinks that he's entitled to this Senate seat, especially since he got beat out of his old seat. I only have this to say about him losing the endorsement for his House seat: Mary Kiffmeyer is a very honorable lady who will improve the GOP's image with voters.
After Sen. Coleman's statement where he agreed with the Senate GOP caucus in not supporting Olson's candidacy, Olson whined about how district outsiders had robbed him of what was rightfully his. What he didn't say was that he'd gotten beat for the House seat by a local Republican who would've annihilated him if they'd gone to a primary.
Late last week, I received an email from MNGOP Party Chairman Ron Carey to the SD-16 BPOU. What Chairman Carey says in the email to the SD-16 BPOU is significant because he laid out what was permissable. Here's the text of that email from Chairman Carey:
From: Ron W. CareyThis is more proof that Mark Olson is selective in which laws he'll obey. It's regrettable that he's got the right to run a write-in campaign but that's his legal right.
Sent: Monday, October 06, 2008 4:02 PM
Subject: SD 16 Republicans
I have been informed that you are considering calling an endorsing convention for Senate District 16 Republicans. My understanding is that the call may state that Mark Olson remains the "endorsed" Republican candidate as per action of state party leadership. Please note for the record that Mark Olson does not currently hold any endorsement of the Republican Party at either the state or local level. I ask that you refrain from implying in any communication that he does .
If you choose to call an endorsing convention for SD 16 Republicans, the only endorsement that may be considered is whether or not to endorse the certified Republican on the ballot in November, Alison Krueger . Action to endorse any other person for this office would be invalid and would carry no standing within the party organization.
Ron
Following Chairman Carey's communication with Olson and the SD-16 BPOU removed any legitimacy to Olson's claim to being an endorsed GOP candidate. The SD-16 BPOU's endorsement is therefore illegitimate. It might even be illegal since the endorsement belongs to Alison Krueger by virtue of Minnesota State Statute 204D.10, which reads:
Subdivision 1. Partisan offices; nominees. The candidate for nomination of a major political party for a partisan office on the state partisan primary ballot who receives the highest number of votes shall be the nominee of that political party for that office, except as otherwise provided in subdivision 2.It appears as though the SD-16 BPOU ignored Chairman Carey's communication. Chairman Carey stated unequivocally that Mark Olson isn't the endorsed anything within the state GOP. That's in step with Minnesota state statute.
What isn't in step is the SD-16 BPOU. They insist that they should be able to ignore the will of the people. It wasn't enough that their endorsed candidate didn't win the primary. That simply infuriated them. They then ignored Minnesota state statute by endorsing the write-in candidacy of a convicted criminal.
What's worse is that they ignored Alison Krueger, who will be a great state senator if given the opportunity. While Mark Olson has spent the past 16 years in St. Paul, Alison Krueger has teamed with her husband in running 3 successful small businesses. While running those businesses, Mr. and Mrs. Krueger have dealt with issuese like taxes, regulations, health care and transportation.
In other words, she's dealt with all the issues that will be front and center in the next legislative session.
Posted Monday, November 3, 2008 5:29 AM
Comment 1 by eric zaetsch at 04-Nov-08 01:51 PM
This is an internal GOP thing to resolve. Olson is pushing things.
Olson has behavioral issues. However, pushing things, if hypocrisy is a concern, is not a per se bad thing.
Bob Anderson is the ballot choice of the IP in MN 6, despite the shameful deal IP party bosses cut with Elwyn Tinklenberg, giving the endorsement out to a crony when a true independent said he would run.
That's in a way internal party politics also, but Bob Anderson has no baggage.
It will be interesting in both instances to see if there is any long-term antagonism resulting, or whether it's personalities of the moment clashing, each wanting his way.
Comment 2 by eric zaetsch at 04-Nov-08 01:53 PM
By the way, the blog name clearly is unique, but there is a national operation afoot.
Gary, you are in no way an affiliate or stalking horse for these people, are you?
http://www.npr.org/blogs/secretmoney/2008/11/let_freedom_ring_money.html
Say it Ain't So, Joe.
Delivering On The Promise
That's the name for this closing advertisement:
After people finish watching this video, I defy them to explain how rational people can even ponder the option of voting for Al Franken. Norm isn't the ideologically pure candidate that some want. That's ok. He doesn't need to be. What he is is a servant leader. If you look for the definition of public servant in the dictionary, you'll be directed to a picture of Norm Colamen.
If we had more people like Norm, the US Senate would be a far better place than it is today. The Senate needs advocates like Norm fighting the principled fight for their constituents within the construct of limited government.
If you're reading this post and you're undecided or even leaning in Franken's direction, I urge you to give this video serious consideration. Consider what it'd be like to have a principled politician in Washington that actually keeps his promises. Wouldn't that be refreshing? That's the type of change that most people would welcome.
Posted Monday, November 3, 2008 1:32 PM
Comment 1 by Freealonzo at 03-Nov-08 04:40 PM
Sure it's nice but just about every elected official could cut a similar ad. Regardless of all the crap we give our elected officials, this is the stuff they do everyday. Democrats and Republicans.
I am sure if Al Franken is elected in 6 years we will be seeing a similar ad from him.
Comment 2 by eric zaetsch at 04-Nov-08 07:58 AM
Yeah, I guess Nasser Kazeminy is a constituent, and Norm sure fought the fight for him - offshore drilling, where Nasser's Houston company makes bucks, no drilling in ANWR, where Nasser's deepmarine services don't earn Nasser a thing.
Constituent Nasser Kazeminy wants Norm reelected. On principles.
Comment 3 by Gary Gross at 04-Nov-08 10:43 AM
Eric, Most Minnesotans think that we should drill offshore. Deal with it. As for ANWR, Coleman made a promise in his debate with Walter Mondale that he wouldn't support drilling in ANWR. He's kept that promise. Talk about being an untrustworthy person. A politician that actually keeps his campaign promises.
Al, Very few politicians could cut this ad. Norm's one of the best in terms of constituent services.
Thankfully, we won't have to worry about Sen. Franken. He doesn't exist & he won't exist. Coleman wins by 5-7 points tonight.
Comment 4 by eric zaetsch at 04-Nov-08 01:46 PM
Gary, win or lose, Coleman has 'splaining to do. Kazeminy's deepwater drilling firm paid $75,000 and it appears Coleman is not denying it was paid to Hays Companies.
How the money was handled from there, the paper trail Coleman COULD easily provide, is absent.
Win or lose, for Coleman this one should have legs. Stevens was in office when the jury said "Guilty," and that could be Coleman's fate, if he wins.
Franken has a hard time - the Iron Rangers are antagonistic, and he's got Elwyn Tinklenberg downticket in MN 6 while running against "pay and play" politics in Washington DC.
I make no prediction. I hope.
Ohio Coal Assoc Pres." Obama 'extraordinarily misguided'
Sen. Obama's statements on the coal industry are getting incredible amounts of attention. Salena Zito's Forty-Fourth Estate blog has posted this statement from Mike Carey:
Mike Carey, president of the Ohio Coal Association issued the following statement in response to Obama's remarks about the nation's coal industry:Mr. Carey's statement wipes away one of the Obama campaign's first spin tactics. Team Barry said that it's suspicious that this news is just surfacing days before the election. Clear-thinking people couldn't care less about the circumstances of the information's release. They care that Sen. Obama's coal policy is a disaster waiting to happen.
"Regardless of the timing or method of the release of these remarks, the message from the Democratic candidate for President could not be clearer: the Obama-Biden ticket spells disaster for America's coal industry and the tens of thousands of Americans who work in it.
These undisputed, audio-taped remarks, which include comments from Senator Obama like 'I haven't been some coal booster' and 'if they want to build [coal plants], they can, but it will bankrupt them' are extraordinarily misguided.
It's evident that this campaign has been pandering in states like Ohio, Virginia, West Virginia, Indiana and Pennsylvania to attempt to generate votes from coal supporters, while keeping his true agenda hidden from the state's voters.
Senator Obama has revealed himself to be nothing more than a short-sighted, inexperienced politician willing to say anything to get a vote. But today, the nation's coal industry and those who support it have a better understanding of his true mission, to 'bankrupt' our industry, put tens of thousands out of work and cause unprecedented increases in electricity prices.
In addition to providing an affordable, reliable source of low-cost electricity, domestic coal holds the key to our nation's long-term energy security, a goal that cannot be overlooked during this time of international instability and economic uncertainty.
Few policy areas are more important to our economic future than energy issues. As voters head to the polls tomorrow, it is essential they remember that access to reliable, affordable, domestic energy supplies is essential to economic growth and stability."
Here's the paragraph that's likely to hurt Sen. Obama's campaign the most:
But today, the nation's coal industry and those who support it have a better understanding of his true mission, to 'bankrupt' our industry, put tens of thousands out of work and cause unprecedented increases in electricity prices.This is a warning siren to people living in northern tier states who already are pinched with high energy prices, inflation and rising unemployment. People in Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia will notice. Ditto with Colorado. People living in coal mining cities will wonder how this will affect their economies. If coal industries are severely hampered, the first that'll happen is that they'll lay off employees, thereby deepening the impending recession.
This policy, if implemented, will have a ripple effect on our national and local ecnomies. City governments will pay more for heating and electric at a time when state government revenues are shrinking. That's significant because state government will likely cut LGA payments to cities. School districts will be similarly affected, as will small businesses and homeowners.
In other words, this information affects almost everybody.
I suspect that the Obama campaign is retreating from Obama's January statements. I'm betting that they're saying that his statements are either (a) being taken out of context or (b) not Sen. Obama's current position on coal-based energy. If they're saying that he didn't really mean his SF comments, that begs the question of whether people can take anything Sen. Obama says seriously.
It's impossible to take Sen. Obama's statements out of context. They provide their own context. It's quite possible, though, to not trust anything that Sen. Obama says. Like Mr. Carey says, Sen. Obama has proven that he'll say anything to anyone to get votes.
That isn't the type of change I can support. Instead, it's the type of change that I'll reject without giving it a second thought.
UPDATE: A loyal reader of this blog living in Pennsylvania just returned my email on how Obama's anti-coal statements are impacting the race in Pennsylvania. My contact's reply was succinct:
Huge huge huge problem.Based on this information, I won't be surprised if this tips Pennsylvania into McCain's column.
Posted Monday, November 3, 2008 4:58 PM
Comment 1 by Freealonzo at 03-Nov-08 04:46 PM
Funny Ohio Senator Voinovich said the same thing about Senator McCain 3 years ago:
http://www.c-spanarchives.org/congress/?q=node/77531&id=7351631
Yes, just three years ago on the floor of the United States Senate, John McCain's Republican colleague George Voinovich of Ohio took to the floor to argue against a proposal by McCain to curb greenhouse gas emissions. McCain's proposal, Voinovich said, would "put coal out of business" and cost thousands of jobs, an argument that McCain did not contest.
In fact, McCain agreed that his plan would require sacrifice, but he also argued (correctly) that in the long-run, America would be better off. In other words, he made the exact same arguments as Barack Obama --
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 03-Nov-08 05:01 PM
Free, who cares? Sen. McCain opposed drilling the OCS, too, until gas got to sinking the economy. By contrast, this summer, Sen. Obama went from calling drilling a GOP hoax to saying regular tuneups would save as much oil as we'd get from the OCS to saying he'd consider drilling on the OCS if it was part of a comprehensive energy plan. He did that in 3 short days this summer.
Consistency matters.
