October 7, 2006 Posts
01:26 Rothenberg Report: "Blowout Is Now Possible" 11:14 Pelosinomics 22:46 Don't Let the Door Hit Your Backside When You Leave
Rothenberg Report: "Blowout Is Now Possible"
Stuart Rothenberg is the latest inside the Beltway pundit to get it wrong. Here's his pronouncement:
After looking at the news for the past 10 days or so, I have to wonder how Democrats can possibly fail in their efforts to take both the House and the Senate. The national atmospherics don't merely favor Democrats; they set the stage for a blowout of cosmic proportions next month.Mr. Rothenberg is just the latest political pundit to not get it. Mr. Rothenberg doesn't think that demographics matter. Mr. Rothenberg thinks that conservatives won't turn out at the polls. Mr. Rothenberg is also making the mistake of believing that the Beltway media is the source of information for most Americans. That's a foolish, but common, mistake.
Bob Woodward's book and the leaked NIE give more fodder to critics of the White House, undercutting President Bush's fundamental argument about the war against terror.Nonsense. Woodward's book has been discredited by no less a man than Tom Edsall. As for the NIE undercutting President Bush's beliefs, forget it. Tons of bloggers have already proven that the leak was intended to tell a tiny portion of the truth while the Key Findings told an entirely different story. In addition to bloggers, pundits like Mort Kondracke, Bill Kristol and Charles Krauthammer have discredited it, too. If that wasn't enough, columnist Jack Kelly wrote a devastating column last Sunday that utterly destroyed the leak's credibility.
In fact, Democrats' attempts to hype the leak spell doom for them. The American people get it. They understand that this was misinformation leaked by a political enemy of President Bush. By now, only moonbat liberal conspiracy theorists think of the NIE leak as proof.
Rothenberg also makes the mistake of underestimating the damage being done by Pelosi's and Reid's daily statements on subjects ranging from the economy to the GWOT. People hear how stupid and over-the-top their statements are and they drive people from the Democratic Party.
Rothenberg's also forgotten to take into account the bitter feelings between the various factions within the Democratic Party. The Kos Kidz hate the DLC types, calling them 'Republican Lite'. Alot of DLC types don't feel part of the Democratic PArty anymore. We keep hearing that "the base" is energized, with the Agenda Media painting it like it's a monolith. Brendan Loy doesn't think it's a monolith:
But regardless of all that, the hard reality is that the voters have spoken, and their message was loud and clear: there's no longer room for Joe Lieberman in the Democratic Party. And alas, tonight's result will reverberate through the November elections and into the 2008 presidential campaign. It's really much more than just a single primary in a single state; it's a shot across the bow of moderate Democrats everywhere. And so, whatever further ramifications this result might have, there's one thing it definitely means, one result that is officially cast in stone, as of today:Mr. Rothenberg hasn't taken into account that 'the base' isn't entirely pumped. In fact, lots of them, like Brendan Loy, are walking away from the Democratic Party. Rothenberg isn't talking about the root cause of the Democratic fundraising problems which the Washington Post's Chris Cilizza wrote about here.
I am no longer a Democrat.
One House Democratic leadership aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to preserve relations with Dean's operation, put it more bluntly: "There is plenty of time, but the red flashing sirens should be going off there."In my opinion, the problem lies in the fact that moderates aren't giving to the DNC because they see it as being hostile towards their policies. They see it as being run by Kossacks.
Finally, Rothenberg isn't taking into account that Republicans are on the right side of the issues. Do most people favor a terrorists' bill of rights or do they favor aggressive terrorist interrogations? Do most people favor 'comprehensive immigration reform', which sounds like amnesty and no border enforcement to many, or do they favor building the fence? Do more people favor intercepting terrorist communications with sleeper cells here or do they want the NSA blinded? Do small business people prefer keeping Bush's tax cuts in place or would they prefer the tax increases promised by Pelosi, Klobuchar, Rangel and co.? Do people prefer a nation with the Patriot Act in place or do they prefer a congress whose leader bragged about killing the Patriot Act?
These are easy answers, with 60+ percent favoring the GOP position on each of them. In fact, I remember the NY Times doing a poll right after they published the NSA article. I'll guarantee that they were expecting people to overwhelmingly be disgusted with the program. Instead, the poll showed 70+ percent of Americans being in favor of the program.
It's time for the Rothenbergs of the world to look at reality instead of listening to the Beltway echochamber. If they continue believing those reports, they'll drift further out of touch with Americans.
Posted Saturday, October 7, 2006 1:26 AM
August 2006 Posts
No comments.
Pelosinomics
That's the title for this IBD article, an article that takes a number of swipes at Pelosi's rhetoric about the Bush economy. Make sure you read it all. Here's my favorite section:
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has been all over the place talking about what Democrats will do after they win Nov. 7. But it's hard to take her seriously when she promises to "jump-start our economy and reform our economic policy...to address the needs of working families."Ms. Pelosi has made disparaging statements on everything Bush part of her daily babblings, whether it's on Iraq, the other fronts on the GWOT or the economy. Her incessant whining is annoying and dishonest at best. She's ignoring the facts listed above. She's praying that dishonest talk will persuade more voters than do the facts.
Huh?
"Jump-start the economy"? That's what President Bush did in 2003, when he pushed through bold, broad tax cuts to end a slump that began in 2000 under a Democratic administration. Since the cuts took effect, the economy has added $1.26 trillion in real output, $14.4 trillion in net wealth and 5.8 million new jobs, while productivity has grown 10% and business investment 24%. Since 2000, total consumer spending has risen $1 trillion, nearly $8,000 per household, after adjusting for inflation. The Dow Jones industrial average is hitting new highs.
Then there's the budget deficit, which the Congressional Budget Office reckons will come in around $250 billion. By our calculations, that's about 1.9% of total output. In early 2004, when Bush vowed to halve the shortfall, it stood at 3.6% of GDP.
Hoping that the American people are ignorant is a routine practice with Democrats. As you've noticed, it isn't a productive strategy.
Posted Saturday, October 7, 2006 11:16 AM
August 2006 Posts
No comments.
Don't Let the Door Hit Your Backside When You Leave
I just read a press release with the headline stating "World's Most Popular Evangelist to Deliver Major Sermon Sunday; In the Face of Unholy Scandal, Religious Leader Severs Ties to GOP". Immediately, I wondered which evangelist they were talking about. Billy Graham? Franklin Graham? Not a chance. Tony Evans? Hardly. Luis Palau? Max Lucado? Nope. So who? Dr. K. A. Paul, that's who. Frankly, I've never heard of him before. That's why I googled him. He's part of an organization called Global Peace Initiative.
Here's something from their website, titled "Liberty Under Attack" with a subtitle of "An Overview of How the War on Terror is Threatening America More Than It's Enemies":
As followers of Jesus, the leaders of Global Peace Initiative espouse a very simple religion based on James 1:27: "True religion that is undefiled before God is to take care of the widows and orphans in their distress,"I'm very familiar with James 1:27. I agree with the statement that the truest form of religion is helping widows and orphans. By the time the statement says that "Jesus didn't live and die for principles", though, red flags were going off. Only a liberal would say that Jesus didn't live for principles. The Jesus that liberals see isn't the God of judgmentalism. The liberal's Jesus is the Jesus of endless love.
That's it! It is pure. It is simple. It doesn't defile anyone. It doesn't claim geography or buildings. It never kills or has destructive fanaticism at its fringes like most other religions. It only helps, rescues and builds up. It is not based on principles. It is based on people. Jesus didn't live and die for principles. He lived and died for people.
Here's more from GPI's website:
Every human being, no matter how despicable, dirty, or unlearned, is a creation of God and deserves to live in dignity. Anyone who will help us make sure all can experience that inalienable right is welcomed with open arms.Yes, every human being is God's creation but that doesn't mean that everyone "deserves to live in dignity." According to Dictionary.com, the definition of dignity involves the word respect. I don't have respect for people that are trying to kill me. Another definition of dignity involves "nobility or elevation of character." Forgive me if I don't see a reason to treat terrorists the way I'd treat someone posessing "nobility or elevation of character."
The bottom line is that I can't respect an organization that spends its time living in a theoretical world devoid of reality and purpose.
The best thing to do is to 'let' Dr. K.A. Paul leave and tell him that we hope that the door doesn't hit him in the backside.
Posted Saturday, October 7, 2006 10:46 PM
August 2006 Posts
No comments.
