Tuesday, December 22, 2009

RASMUSSEN REPORTS: OBAMA REACHES TWO NEW LOWS -21 Approval Index, -12 Overall Approval


BTW, on the off chance you're wondering why your numbers are swirling down the bowl: IT'S YOUR AGENDA, STUPID!!!!


Tuesday, December 22, 2009

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 25% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-six percent (46%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -21 That’s the lowest Approval Index rating yet recorded for this President (see trends).

Fifty-three percent (53%) of men Strongly Disapprove along with 39% of women. Most African-American voters (58%) Strongly Approve while most white voters (53%) Strongly Disapprove.

Seventy-four percent (74%) of Republicans Strongly Disapprove as do 52% of unaffiliated voters. Forty-seven percent (47%) of Democrats Strongly Approve.

For the second straight days, the update shows the highest level of Strong Disapproval yet recorded for this President. That negative rating had never topped 42% before yesterday. However, it has risen dramatically since the Senate found 60 votes to move forward with the proposed health care reform legislation. Most voters (55%) oppose the health care legislation and senior citizens are even more likely than younger voters to dislike the plan.

One bright spot in the numbers for the President is that 51% of voters still say former President George W. Bush is more to blame for the nation’s economic woes. Just 41% point the finger of blame at the current President.

The Presidential Approval Index is calculated by subtracting the number who Strongly Disapprove from the number who Strongly Approve. It is updated daily at 9:30 a.m. Eastern (sign up for free daily e-mail update). Updates are also available on Twitter and Facebook.

Overall, 44% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance. Fifty-six percent (56%) now disapprove.


Also discussing these polling results are:

Left Coast Rebel

The Reaganite Republican: NEW LOW for America's Clueless Affirmative-Action President

Thursday, December 17, 2009

H/T to Miss T.C. Shore for her post link to a magnificently fun and thorough waste of precious and unrecoverable time.

From the Blogging Uber Vixen Miss T.C. Shore at ...In a Handbasket

TIger Hunting

This game is sick and disgusting. I don't know why I find it so funny. And fun.
This will be my ONLY Tiger Woods related post. I swear!


From Michelle Malkin comes the piece below on the gargantuan Rabelaisian scolding Turd from Flint Michigan threatening a Progressive Boycott of Connecticut if Nutmegger voters don't immediately cave to his infantile demand that we remove Joe Lieberman from office by a procedure not available under our Constitution.

Beclowned: Michael Moore threatens to boycott Connecticut over Lieberman

By Michelle Malkin • December 16, 2009 09:10 PM

Nutroots hero Michael Moore sent the state of Connecticut a boycott threat and demanded that voters there recall Joe Lieberman over health care.

His Tweet:

People of Connecticut: What have u done 2 this country? We hold u responsible. Start recall of Lieberman 2day or we’ll boycott your state.

One itty-bitty problem: Connecticut has no recall mechanism.

In fact, as Caleb Howe explains:

…Moore has an article at his own website, a repost of a Politico article, featuring a Connecticut state legislator calling for Lieberman’s ouster. The article, on Moore’s own website, points out that recall is not possible under the constitution.

Is there anyone on this planet quicker to claim the constitution is being violated at every turn than Michael Moore and his groupies? So yes, to state the obvious, it’s hilarious that he’s so quick to dismiss as conveniences him.

We all know Moore is a clown, so this isn’t breaking news. But I never pass on the chance to point out the stupidity of inexplicably influential jackasses.



Monday, December 14, 2009

Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll & Trends: Obama -18 Index, Total Disapprove Hits High of 55%

President Obama and his agenda are now in serious trouble domestically. Today's Rasmussen Daily Presidential Approval Index shows Obama at -18, a mere point higher than yesterday's all time low of -19. But this high negative hardly tells the whole story.

At this point Obama has also hit a Total Disapprove of 55% versus a Total Approve at 44% giving Boz a negative overall disapproval rating of -11, yet another record low.

Click the chart to go to Scott Rasmussen's Trends Page

To paraphrase the Clinton Campaign's slogan used most effectively against Papa Bush in 1992: "Its your AGENDA stupid!"

Friday, December 11, 2009

Rasmussen Reports: Republicans Lead in 5 of 6 2010 Senate Races

In 5 out of 6 2010 U.S. Senate Seat Races, Republican challengers are leading their potential Democrat Opponents. In five of these races, the Demoncrats are the incumbents. Click on the linked Orange state names below to read the full Rasmussen Poll report for the respective race.

Basically, a Referendum on Harry "the Dweeb" Reid

Its Pat Toomey's to lose, not a great lead, but still a lead.
Expect privilege addicted Arlen to get really nasty on Toomey. And yes, its another referendum on the Democrat incumbent.

All three Republicans leading Chris (The Bankers' Butt Boy) Dodd
A clear referendum on this rotting corpse of a political skunk


Boz's Home State, and Kirk (R) behind in only
one of three potential match-ups and in that race by just 2 percentage points, probably within the margin of error.
Not too slouchy for the seat formerly held by Mr. Hope N. Change.

And finally,

from the land of Bill & Hill,

Incumbent Blanche Lincoln running behind
all 4 potential Republican opponents

Wednesday, December 9, 2009


On Monday (Dec 7), Rasmussen Reports released poll results showing that the Tea Party movement would best the Republicans in a three way contest.

These numbers ought to be a piercing and painful clarion call to the national Republican leadership to get back quickly to the core conservative principles of (1) strictly limited government interference and (2) a strong fiscally conservative approach to the economy and never stray from them again.

In a nutshell, Republicans: Adapt to the clear will of the people, or die.

UPDATE: Matt at ConservativeHideout2 has also picked up on this story and discussed it at greater length here

Tea Party Tops GOP on Three-Way Generic Ballot
Monday, December 07, 2009

Running under the Tea Party brand may be better in congressional races than being a Republican.

In a three-way Generic Ballot test, the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds Democrats attracting 36% of the vote. The Tea Party candidate picks up 23%, and Republicans finish third at 18%. Another 22% are undecided.

Among voters not affiliated with either major party, the Tea Party comes out on top. Thirty-three percent (33%) prefer the Tea Party candidate, and 30% are undecided. Twenty-five percent (25%) would vote for a Democrat, and just 12% prefer the GOP.

Among Republican voters, 39% say they’d vote for the GOP candidate, but 33% favor the Tea Party option.

For this survey, the respondents were asked to assume that the Tea Party movement organized as a new political party. In practical terms, it is unlikely that a true third-party option would perform as well as the polling data indicates. The rules of the election process—written by Republicans and Democrats--provide substantial advantages for the two established major parties. The more conventional route in the United States is for a potential third-party force to overtake one of the existing parties.

(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.

The standard Generic Congressional Ballot shows Republicans holding a modest lead over Democrats. It appears that the policies of the Obama administration and the Democratic Congress are currently enough to unite both those who prefer Republicans and those who prefer the Tea Party route.

Data from the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll shows that just 55% of conservatives nationwide consider themselves Republicans. Recent polling shows that 73% of Republican voters believe their leaders in Washington are out of touch with the party base.

Republican voters are paying a lot more attention to the Tea Party movement than anyone else. Forty-three percent (43%) of GOP voters are following news about the movement Very Closely. Another 30% are following it Somewhat Closely. Just 12% of Democrats are following stories about the Tea Party movement Very Closely.

Seventy percent (70%) of Republican voters have a favorable opinion of the Tea Party movement while only seven percent (7%) offer an unfavorable view. Interestingly, 49% of Democrats have no opinion one way or the other.

Among unaffiliated voters, 43% have a favorable opinion of the Tea Party efforts while 20% say the opposite.

Forty-one percent (41%) of all voters nationwide say Republicans and Democrats are so much alike that a new party is needed to represent the American people. Republicans are evenly divided on this question, while Democrats overwhelmingly disagree. However, among those not affiliated with either major party, 60% agree that a new party is needed, and only 25% disagree. Men are far more likely than women to believe a new party is needed.

As for the voting preference, the Tea Party bests the GOP among both men and women and in all age groups except those over 65.

The Tea Party candidates are the first choice among political conservatives. Among moderates, the Tea Party candidates are more popular than Republicans. However, nearly half of all moderate voters prefer a Democrat.

Among the Political Class, not a single respondent picked the Tea Party candidate.

However, among those with populist or Mainstream views, 31% prefer the Tea Party, and 26% are undecided. Twenty-three percent (23%) pick a Republican candidate, and 19% are for the Democrat (See more on the Political Class-Mainstream divide).

Tuesday, December 8, 2009

Conn Senate Race: Per Rasmussen, all three leading Republican contenders beat Dodd in One on One matchups.

Great news from Rasmussen for us Nutmeggers and, by extension, the rest of the country as well:

2010 Connecticut Senate: Dodd Struggles Against All Republican Challengers
Tuesday, December 08, 2009

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in Connecticut now finds Dodd attracting just 35% to 40% of the vote against three possible Republican challengers.

Former GOP Congressman Rob Simmons is still his toughest opponent, leading Dodd 48% to 35%. Seven percent (7%) prefer some other candidate in this contest, and 11% are undecided. Those figures are a slight improvement for Simmons since September.

The newest Republican in the race, Linda McMahon, the ex-CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment, earns 44% of the vote to Dodd’s 38%. Eight percent (8%) opt for another candidate, with nine percent (9%) not sure.

Long-shot candidate Peter Shiff, the widely-known president of Euro Pacific Capital, is essentially even with Dodd and holds a one-point edge, 40% to 39%. In their race, eight percent (8%) like some other candidate, and 14% are undecided.

An incumbent who polls below 50% is generally viewed as vulnerable, and the fact that even Shiff is now moving up on Dodd suggests that next year’s election continues to be a referendum on the longtime senator.


For the rest, click here

Friday, December 4, 2009


Here's a great piece on how Obama's Puppeteers at Goldman Sachs are starting to get a wee bit nervous about the rising tide of public anger against ..... well, THEM. It makes for a great read. H/T Christopher Fountain

From Karl Denninger: Goldman Arming Itself? :->

Dec. 1 (Bloomberg) -- “I just wrote my first reference for a gun permit,” said a friend, who told me of swearing to the good character of a Goldman Sachs Group Inc. banker who applied to the local police for a permit to buy a pistol. The banker had told this friend of mine that senior Goldman people have loaded up on firearms and are now equipped to defend themselves if there is a populist uprising against the bank.

Let me give those fine bankers from Goldman Sachs (and the other big banking and trading houses) a few pieces of advice. And yeah, it's unsolicited and free, so you figure out whether it has value.

  1. A handgun is a close-quarters defensive weapon. The FBI says that of shootings involving a handgun, most happen at something like 7 feet (yes, feet) of range or less. Oh, and you'd be surprised at how many people miss at that same seven feet. No, guns in real life don't work like in the movies where each bullet has a GPS in it and directs itself to its target, and when shot people don't go flying backward through windows. Guns simply make holes in things, wherever they are pointed when they go "bang" is where the bullet will travel, and all the energy that goes into the target also goes into your body (Newton's laws of motion and all.)

  2. There are, by some estimates, more firearms in America than there are people. Americans bought something like 20 billion rounds of ammunition this year alone. Indeed, there are shortages of many sorts of ammunition and have been all year. While some of that lead undoubtedly was expended at the practice range, an awful lot of it is being stockpiled. Everyone who is stockpiling it in various amounts is doing so for different reasons, and most would self-declare it as protection against "zombies." Definitions of "zombie" differ.

  3. There are a lot of hunting rifles in America. Most hunters can easily hit a deer-sized target at well beyond 100 yards with said rifle. I'm willing to bet that Mr. Investment Banker can't hit the broadside of a barn at 100yds with his brand new pistol that he's probably never fired, and probably never will.

  4. Don't bother with soft body armor. It's useless against rifles. It is effective against pistols, which is why cops wear it (see that FBI stat about most handgun battles happening within seven feet.) But again, a hunter can easily hit a deer-sized target at well beyond 100 yards, common hunting rifles are legal almost literally everywhere, even in places like NYC, and a person armed with a handgun doesn't have a prayer in hell defending against a person with a rifle 100 or more yards away that has drawn a bead on them.

  5. Unless you're prepared to practice with that weapon on a regular basis, and unless you have personally been in a life-threatening situation (a real one, not some mock-up or fake "game" run at some "weekend commando" class you were undoubtedly sold to make you feel macho with that shiny new handgun) there is at least a 50% chance that if you really do wind up confronted by some crazed nutball at close range you will either miss or worse, freeze - and the "bad guy" will simply take your gun from you and then kill you with your own weapon. Go ask the military about this - studies have shown that despite putting new soldiers through a grueling "basic training" course a veryat them, intentionally fire high - that is, they miss on purpose in their first firefight. It turns out that most people have a hard-wired aversion to killing other humans. That's probably a good thing but psychopaths seem to be missing that inhibition. If someone really does come after you they're pretty much by definition one of those psychopaths. significant number of them will, when first confronted with an enemy shooting

Finally, if you're a "big banker" and concerned about your safety you might want to consider that in the 1800s there were lots of guns too, and yet they were both unnecessary and inadequate. Bankers during the panic of 1873 were simply hauled out of their offices bodily and hung from the lamp posts. We don't have lamp posts any more in Manhattan, so you have an advantage there, and I've not noted a run on boiled rope.


A better strategy for your self-protection is to turn state's evidence and rat out someone else. Like your boss, for instance.

Get on the side of the people and help them. You folks in those tony executive suites (and suits) know full well that this entire bubblelicious line of BS you ran on middle-class America for more than two decades was an out-and-out fraud. It is impossible to argue otherwise - after all, it really is just fifth grade math on the nature of exponential functions, and unlike most of America it has to be presumed that if you got a Harvard MBA you passed. Therefore it can also be assumed that claims of ignorance will not serve you.

Let's face it - the economy isn't going to recover. All the stories I hear (and now Bloomberg is willing to print, which is surprising) in the anecdotal department are that you folks have your Gulfstreams fueled up and your bug-out bags packed and sitting by the door.

Most of you have figured out the math - there's simply too much debt that you created and sold off into the market, and you've all patted yourselves on the back as you walked out of Treasury smug in the "knowledge" that you'd be bailed out. Remember this picture?

Yeah, it was all good, right? Uh, well it was - for you. But for the rest of America, it sucked. You took the "CARD" act (the Credit Card reform act) and used the delay in its implementation to ram down Americans throats 29.9% interest rates and huge reductions in credit lines - even for those who had never been late. The Fed (one of you folks - banksters all) could have told you to cut it out and in fact demanded that you do so, but of course didn't.

The supposed "zero interest rates" are great for your bonuses - record bonuses, right? But nobody in America is getting the benefit except you. We the people are all paying more to borrow - when we can borrow at all. Bank Credit is contracting at a record rate. The stock market is on a tear, gold is on a tear, oil has more than doubled since March.

But if you go to Harlem in NY City you don't see "economic recovery." Nor do you if you step outside of the enclaves in Washington DC where everyone sucks on the government tit. No, what you see is both the NY and California State Governments on the verge of insolvency, property and other taxes heading to the moon to try to keep the states from having to fire police officers for lack of funds, and the crumbling of our infrastructure - along with the hiss of an overpressurized "social safety net."

The vampire squid sucked too much blood (debt service requirements) and now the host is dying from volumetric shock, all the while screaming not for whole blood (all gone!) but anything - even an injection of saline simply to make up the volume.

Now please don't get me wrong - I happen to think that you should not lend more. After all, we're here because we got drunk on credit, and you can't drink yourself sober, despite what CNBS keeps screaming about and calling for (including "The Donald" this morning, who's one of those folks who I suspect is going to wind up with all of his so-called "wizard deals" in the pine box of Chapter 7.)

No, we as a society need to go through the DTs and detox. Some of us will go bankrupt. That's ok. Indeed, if you as a citizen were imprudent - if you lied about your income to get a mortgage, if you played the HELOC game to pay off a credit card you ran to the sky (and then did it again - and again!), if you put yourself into a debt hole from which you cannot reasonably climb out, you should declare bankruptcy and get it over with. Discharge that which you can, take the hit to your credit and reputation, and learn from the experience.

Frugality isn't a sin, it's a virtue. It is, indeed, the first step of true capital formation - which is how, ultimately, we create jobs - and true prosperity.

In this vein you need to come out and tell the truth - you lent too much and you're NOT going to do it any more - no matter how loud people scream. We need reality in this country, not more fantasy.

But you folks who stole all this money?

You need to give it back.

Yeah, we know you can't give it all back since you blew some of it on Netjets to various exotic vacation destinations and high-priced hookers. We understand that.

What America doesn't understand and is increasingly unwilling to tolerate is the smug grin you folks have on Wall Street, having not only run Americans into bankruptcy but when your imprudent lending threatened to bankrupt you instead of sucking it up you extorted Congress to the tune of more than $12 trillion in direct support and guarantees.

That is you forced the bankrupt consumer to go broke twice and cover your imprudent acts, as all that money to cover up your insolvency is now being forcibly extracted from Main Street by the government through taxes!

Here's the problem, in a nutshell: If we don't get the debt out of the system - really get it out, not just shuffle it around and shift who's balance sheet it sits on - we can't restart true economic growth.

Without true economic growth we cannot regain the lost jobs, and people cannot regain their ability to earn an honest living and support themselves and their families.

You and I both know that The Government cannot continue to run $1.5 trillion deficits for very long. Indeed, it might be able to do it for even one more year. Ultimately Uncle Sam's credit card will come back declined just like the subprime homeowner, and when it does the thin veneer that has papered over the bankruptcy you have served up on the American people and her government will be ripped away like a bandage that has adhered to a scab.

That's when the riots start and both you and I know that too. It's why you're buying those guns.

But the guns won't save you if ugly times come.

Only preventing the riots will save you, and preventing the riots means we must stop bankrupting the country.

That in turn means we must stop ladling on more and more debt - HERE AND NOW!

Getting that bad debt out means that both borrowers (who are already going bankrupt) and lenders (who are thus far being protected) need to go bust.

That's reality.

This is beyond politics, wishes, dreams or desires - it is mathematics.

Justice, on the other hand, demands that the frauds and abuses not stand. No, ripping off Jefferson County Alabama is not acceptable, and paying a fine is not enough. People need to go to prison. Ditto for the other cities and states where these scams were run - and that's a huge number.

I understand your fear, Wall Street. If I robbed Main Street America of trillions of dollars I'd be afraid too.

Main Street is angry, and with good cause - and the "moguls" who claim that happy days will return if we can all start charging up our credit cards and HELOCing our houses again are not only wrong they're poking sticks into a hornets nest. That's right out of "Dumb and Dumber."

Arming yourselves won't solve the problem you created, and it also won't protect you should the mood in America turn truly ugly.

Do the right thing Wall Street.

Not only will it be good for your soul, it will be good for Main Street.

Sunday, November 29, 2009

I.R.S. Liens Governator's Properties to the Tune of $79K - Did Ahnawld Piss Someone off Perhaps?

The L.A. Times is reporting that the I.R.S. has attached a lean against all of Governator's assets:

Read the whole rather odd story here:

IRS files $79,000 tax lien against Schwarzenegger

One might wonder why Timmy (ooops I forgot to pay my taxes) Geithner's collection division would be so aggressive toward a quite friendly and symbiotic RINO? Well, just maybe it all relates back to Gerald Walpin's investigation into Barackophile and good buddy Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson's alleged misuse of federal AmeriCorp funds. It appears Walpin's initial inquiries into Johnson's possible misappropriational conduct may well have been triggered at Arnie's request that the FEDS investigate allegations of Johnson's separate misuse of young female staffers.

Did Arnie step on some very sensitive toes to himself trigger the retributive reflex of the Obama Treasury Department's enforcers?

To refresh your recollection on this story, here's a link to my June 27, 2009 post Walpin's Kevin Johnson Investigation Initiated at Request of Governator ????

It certainly makes for interesting speculation...

Friday, November 27, 2009


Norwegian government ministers have announced that they are shocked at news that the Iranian government has seized the Nobel Peace medal of laureate Shirin Ebadi, demonstrating for all the world to see the true depth of the Norwegian capacity to remain completely oblivious to reality as they traverse the perpetual hallucination that is their socialist utopia.

Yes, that's right Norwegians, Iran has a very naughty government that doesn't play nicely in the sandbox of nations.


Iran seizes rights lawyer's Nobel Peace medal
Nov 26, 8:23 PM (ET)

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iranian authorities have confiscated Nobel Peace laureate Shirin Ebadi's medal, the human rights lawyer said Thursday, in a sign of the increasingly drastic steps Tehran is taking against any dissent.

In Norway, where the peace prize is awarded, the government said the confiscation of the gold medal was a shocking first in the history of the 108-year-old prize.

Ebadi won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2003 for her efforts in promoting democracy. She has long faced harassment from Iranian authorities for her activities - including threats against her relatives and a raid on her office last year in which files were confiscated.

The seizure of her prize is an expression of the Iranian government's harsh approach to anyone it considers an opponent - particularly since the massive street protests triggered by hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's disputed June 12 re-election.

Acting on orders from Tehran's Revolutionary Court, authorities took the peace prize medal about three weeks ago from a safe-deposit box in Iran, Ebadi said in a phone interview from London. They also seized her Legion of Honor and a ring awarded to her by a German association of journalists, she said.

Authorities froze the bank accounts of her and her husband and demanded $410,000 in taxes that they claimed were owed on the $1.3 million she was awarded. Ebadi said, however, that such prizes are exempt from tax under Iranian law. She said the government also appears intent on trying to confiscate her home.

Ebadi, the first Muslim woman to be awarded the peace prize and the first female judge in Iran, said she would not be intimidated and that her absence from the country since June did not mean she felt exiled.

"Nobody is able to send me to exile from my home country," she said. "I have received many threatening messages. ... They said they would detain me if I returned, or that they would make the environment unsafe for me wherever I am.

"But my activities are legal and nobody can ban me from my legal activities."

Ebadi has criticized the Iranian government's crackdown on demonstrations by those claiming the June vote was stolen from a pro-reform candidate through massive fraud.

Ebadi left the country a day before the vote to attend a conference in Spain and has not returned since. In the days after the vote, she urged the international community to reject the outcome and called for a new election monitored by the United Nations.

During the past months, hundreds of pro-reform activists have been arrested, and a mass trial has sentenced dozens to prison terms. Authorities also went after Ebadi's human rights center in Iran.

"After the election all my colleagues in the center were either detained or banned from traveling abroad," Ebadi said.

Calls to Iranian judiciary officials were not returned Thursday.

Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere called the move "shocking" and said it was "the first time a Nobel Peace Prize has been confiscated by national authorities."

The Norwegian Foreign Ministry summoned Iran's charge d'affaires in Norway Wednesday to protest the confiscation, spokeswoman Ragnhild Imerslund said.

The Foreign Ministry also "expressed grave concern" about Ebadi's husband, who it said was arrested in Tehran and "severely beaten" earlier this fall, after which his pension and bank account were frozen.

Ebadi said her husband, Javad Tavassolian, and her brother and sister have been threatened many times by authorities pushing them to persuade her to end her human rights campaigning.

Ebadi has represented opponents of Iran's regime before but not in the mass trial that started in August of more than 100 prominent pro-reform figures and activists. They are accused of plotting to overthrow the cleric-led regime during the postelection turmoil.

The Iranian Embassy in Norway refrained from giving a comment.

The Norwegian Nobel Committee's permanent secretary, Geir Lundestad, said the move was "unheard of" and "unacceptable." He told The Associated Press that the committee was planning to send a letter of protest to Iranian authorities before the end of the week.

Ebadi said she planned to return to Iran when the time is right.

"I will return whenever it is useful for my country," she said. "Right now I am busy with my activities against violations of human rights in Iran and my international jobs."

Friday, November 20, 2009

Dodd's Approval Ratings in Graveyard Spiral as Connecticut Voters Disapprove of his Performance 54/40 %

According to poll numbers released by Quinnipiac University's Polling Institute on November 12th, Chris Dodd is in deep doodoo here in Connecticut:

Former Connecticut Congressman Rob Simmons has an early lead in the Republican primary race for the 2010 U.S. Senate contest and runs better than any other challenger against Sen. Christopher Dodd, topping the Democratic incumbent 49 - 38 percent, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

Former World Wrestling Entertainment executive Linda McMahon gets 43 percent to Sen. Dodd's 41 percent, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University poll finds.

Even potential Republican contenders with almost no name recognition and almost no Republican primary voter support give Dodd a run for his money

Simmons leads a Republican primary matchup with 28 percent, followed by McMahon with 17 percent. No other contender tops 9 percent and 36 percent are undecided.

Connecticut voters disapprove 54 - 40 percent of the job Dodd is doing, compared to a 49 - 43 percent disapproval September 17, and say 53 - 39 percent that he does not deserve reelection.

"After inching up in the polls for months, Sen. Christopher Dodd is sliding back down again on job approval. He continues to struggle with independent voters as 60 percent disapprove of the way he is handling his job. President Barack Obama is still popular with independents, but voters say that his support of Dodd won't affect their Senate vote," said Quinnipiac University Poll Director Douglas Schwartz, PhD. To see the rest of this poll's interpretation, go here


Astrologycat coughs up fur ball of Obama Voter Statistics

From AstologyCat come these gnarly few statistics:

Friday, November 6, 2009

We the people don't count

Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota points out some interesting facts concerning last November's Presidential election:
Number of States won by: Democrats: 19 Republicans: 29
Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000 Republicans: 2,427,000
Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million
Republicans: 143 million
Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by:
Democrats: 13.2 Republicans: 2.1
Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Republicans won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country. Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in low income tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."
Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.
If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegals and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years. If you are in favor of this, then by all means, delete this message.If you are not, then pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.

Thursday, November 19, 2009

WSJ: 1 in 7 Mortgaged Homeowners in default or foreclosure; 1 in 10 last year at the same time.

As Obama's team of allegedly brilliant economic wizards go back to school for Master degrees in Fiddling While Rome Burns (apparently a must have credential in this administration), it turns out that all those Billions of TARP dollars that the Shrub and Congress shoved down our collective throats last fall have done ABSOLUTELY FLIPPING NOTHING to stem the tide of mortgage defaults and foreclosures. Hat tip goes to my friend Chris Fountain.

From today's Wall Street Journal:

More Homeowners Falling Behind on Mortgages

About one in seven American households with mortgages is behind on payments or in foreclosure, according to new data from the Mortgage Bankers Association. That is up from about one in 10 a year ago.

The trade group reported Thursday that 14.4% of first-lien mortgages on one- to four-family homes in the third quarter were 30 days or more overdue or in the foreclosure process. That is the highest since the MBA began reporting such data in 1972 and works out to about 7.5 million households at risk of losing their homes. The percentage is up from 10% a year earlier and 7.3% two years ago.

Loan defaults have been rising swiftly for more than three years. At first, the problem largely reflected loose lending practices during the housing boom that allowed millions of people to buy homes they couldn't afford. Now the problem is compounded by rising unemployment, which hit 10.2% in October, the highest since 1982.

Unemployment may start gradually declining in next year's first half, said Jay Brinkmann, the MBA's chief economist. If so, he said, the percentage of loans that are delinquent could start to decline by mid-2010. But he said the number of loans in foreclosure is likely to remain elevated longer as banks struggle to figure out which borrowers might be able to stay in their homes if payments are lowered.

Largely because of efforts to sort through mounds of paperwork and figure out which borrowers qualify for lower payments, there has been a jump in the number of people far behind on payments but not yet in foreclosure. About 4.4% of the loans were 90 days or more past due but not in foreclosure in the latest quarter, up from 2.2% a year earlier. The states with an above-average rate of such "seriously delinquent" loans are Nevada (7.8%), Florida (6.1%), Arizona (6%), Michigan (5.9%), California (5.9%), Mississippi (5.5%), Georgia (5.1%) Indiana (5.1%), Illinois (4.8%) and Rhode Island (4.5%).

The states with the highest rate of home loans in foreclosure are Florida (12.7%), Nevada (9.4%), Arizona (6.2%), California (5.8%), New Jersey (5.5%), Illinois (5.3%) and Ohio (4.6%). North Dakota had the lowest rate at 1.1%.

For the rest of this piece on sorry state of affairs our economy is in, click here

It appears that 62% of likely voters have a far better understanding of how economies prosper than do the pointy headed HAHVAHD grads and Goldman Sachs alumni that Obama has polluted his economics team with.

With a Hat Tip to James Yanke who writes The Reaganite Republican, From today's Rasmussen Report:

To Create Jobs, Voters Say Cut Taxes and Stop Spending

As the policy debate has unfolded in Washington this year, voters have consistently believed that tax cuts would do more than increased government spending to stimulate the economy and create jobs. Now that the nation’s unemployment rate has reached 10.2%, voters continue to hold that view.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 62% believe tax cuts are a better way to create jobs and fight unemployment. Only 21% believe that additional stimulus spending is a more effective tool. Earlier this year, as the first stimulus package was being debated in Congress, 62% of voters wanted the plan to have more tax cuts and less spending.

Given a different choice today, 51% believe canceling the rest of the stimulus money would create more jobs while 32% say spending the money would be the better approach to job creation. These findings are consistent with earlier polling. Most Americans say that, generally speaking, increased government spending is bad for the economy. Earlier this year, before the unemployment rate had reached its current highs, 45% wanted to cancel the rest of the stimulus spending while just 36% disagreed.

While voters believe that tax cuts and stopping spending is the path to job creation, the Political Class disagrees. Sixty-nine percent (69%) of those in the Political Class say that spending the stimulus money would create more jobs than canceling the remaining stimulus spending. Fifty-five percent (55%) of the Political Class believes that new spending will create more jobs than tax cuts. Only 13% believe the tax cutting would do more (see more on the Political Class).

On both questions, there is also a substantial partisan divide. Democrats are fairly evenly divided on both questions while Republicans overwhelmingly believe that canceling the rest of the stimulus money and cutting taxes are better job creation tools than additional stimulus spending.

As for those not affiliated with either major party, just over 50% say that stopping spending and cutting taxes is the best way to create jobs.

The survey also found that most voters are skeptical about claims of government job creation. Most (58%) say it’s unlikely that the stimulus plan has saved or created more than 600,000 jobs.

Sixty-two percent (62%) of voters are opposed to a second stimulus package.

Yes Barack, notwithstanding Larry Summer's hallucinations to the contrary, tax cuts ALWAYS trump government spending as a driving force in job creation.

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Human error... Yeah, THAT'S THE TICKET: "HUMAN ERROR"

Below, from ABC News comes a story on more bogus job figures on Recovery.gov. This time "saved and created" jobs are being attributed to
non-existent congressional districts. The mistakes, of course, are being attributed to "human error." There's an old saying in data collection. "Garbage in, garbage out." One might reasonably wonder if the FIRED ACORN WORKERS of a few months back have been newly employed in "created" jobs at Recovery.gov.

Exclusive: Jobs 'Saved or Created' in Congressional Districts That Don't Exist

Human Error Blamed for Crediting New Stimulus Jobs to Nonexistent Places


Nov. 16, 2009—

Here's a stimulus success story: In Arizona's 15th congressional district, 30 jobs have been saved or created with just $761,420 in federal stimulus spending. At least that's what the Web site set up by the Obama administration to track the $787 billion stimulus says.

There's one problem, though: There is no 15th congressional district in Arizona; the state has only eight districts.

And ABC News has found many more entries for projects like this in places that are incorrectly identified.

Late Monday, officials with the Recovery Board created to track the stimulus spending, said the mistakes in crediting nonexistent congressional districts were caused by human error.

"We report what the recipients submit to us," said Ed Pound, Communications Director for the Board.

Pound told ABC News the board receives declarations from the recipients - state governments, federal agencies and universities - of stimulus money about what program is being funded.

"Some recipients clearly don't know what congressional district they live in, so they appear to be just throwing in any number. We expected all along that recipients would make mistakes on their congressional districts, on jobs numbers, on award amounts, and so on. Human beings make mistakes," Pound said.

To read the rest of it. go here

Oh, by the way Mr. Pound, human beings have every so often also been known to lie, mislead, dissemble, cook books and generally obfuscate to make themselves or their BOZ look better when the REAL data tells a very different story from the picture they want the world to see. On the other hand, you might be right on this one, in as much as this administration is showing itself to be peopled almost entirely by woeful incompetents.

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

From ..."In a handbasket": Obama Not Watching

More than a bit busy today, so here is a great post from the very talented Miss. T.C. Shore writing "...In A Handbasket" who reflects on the W.H.'s official position that BOTUS isn't paying attention to yesterday's election returns.

Yeah! uh-huh! So Axelrod, where's that bridge you have for sale? Brooklyn?


After spending many days and millions of tax-payer dollars campaigning in Virginia and New Jersey, it's clear that Obama has no coat-tails.

One year ago, Obama handily won Virginia and New Jersey, and now his star-power has dimmed to a twinkle as both Virginia and New Jersey elected Republican candidates into high office.

Apparently the White House spin machine was not ready to explain the results. It was a nice touch not having to listen to Obama lecture us about how wonderful and bright he is and how he inherited every problem under the sun from the previous administration. The White House issued a statement after the GOP win saying the president was "not watching election returns and would not be making any remarks on the results." Bet me.

The key question now is: how are the Blue Dog Democrats going to view this big new political news? This was the first real poll of public sentiment about big government, big tax and spend, and the Obama-Pelosi-Reid drive to socialize America as fast as possible.

To be clear, these elections were not purely a referendum on Obama. Each candidate and each state has its own unique nuances. However, enough voters expressed that the Obama presidency played a role in their decision to affect the outcome. Clearly, independent voters, the ones who actually decide elections, are unhappy with the direction Obama is taking us.

Sunday, November 1, 2009

Rule 5 Sunday - Carla Bruni | No Doubt the Hottest Political Spouse

Carla Bruni | First Lady of France
and No Doubt the Hottest Political Spouse in Recent History
(Perhaps Ever...)

NICK, you lucky HORN-DAWG !!!!

Saturday, October 31, 2009

Pelosi Sells Her Soul to the Tort Lawyers Bar

Parliamentarian prostitute from San Francisco, Nancy Pelosi, handjobs the AAJ (f/k/a ATLA) a legislative Happy Ending from on high, essentially locking a NO TORT REFORM ZONE into the health care landscape. Here it is from BigGovernment.com. Read it, and weep for the Republic:


The health care bill recently unveiled by Speaker Nancy Pelosi is over 1,900 pages for a reason. It is much easier to dispense goodies to favored interest groups if they are surrounded by a lot of legislative legalese. For example, check out this juicy morsel to the trial lawyers (page 1431-1433 of the bill):

Section 2531, entitled “Medical Liability Alternatives,” establishes an incentive program for states to adopt and implement alternatives to medical liability litigation. [But]…… a state is not eligible for the incentive payments if that state puts a law on the books that limits attorneys’ fees or imposes caps on damages.

So, you can’t try to seek alternatives to lawsuits if you’ve actually done something to implement alternatives to lawsuits. Brilliant! The trial lawyers must be very happy today!

While there is debate over the details, it is clear that medical malpractive lawsuits have some impact on driving health care costs higher. There are likely a number of procedures that are done simply as a defense against future possible litigation. Recall this from the Washington Post:

“Lawmakers could save as much as $54 billion over the next decade by imposing an array of new limits on medical malpractice lawsuits, congressional budget analysts said today — a substantial sum that could help cover the cost of President Obama’s overhaul of the nation’s health system. New research shows that legal reforms would not only lower malpractice insurance premiums for medical providers, but would also spur providers to save money by ordering fewer tests and procedures aimed primarily at defending their decisions in court, Douglas Elmendorf, director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, wrote in a letter to Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah).”

Knowing how things operate in now nearly terminal Washingtoon, a trial lawyer probably drafted the provision. To read more on the obstreperous conduct of the tort trial bar, see my post from October 13th Litigation Increases Medical Costs, but Lawyers Block Reform.

Friday, October 30, 2009


Below, in part, is a well considered piece on the Obama Administration's position regarding curtailing or even reversing decades of 1st Amendment case law through the State Department's participation in the drafting of a U.N. Resolution that could very well open the door to religious defamation suits by faith groups that dislike criticisms of their religions. Read on, THIS IS VERY SERIOUS STUFF!


Troubling Signals On Free Speech

In his eagerness to please international opinion, President Obama has taken a small but significant step toward censoring free speech.

It was nice to hear Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton say on October 26, "I strongly disagree" with Islamic countries seeking to censor free speech worldwide by making defamation of religion a crime under international law.

But watch what the Obama administration does, not just what it says. I'm not talking about its attacks on Fox News. I'm talking about a little-publicized October 2 resolution in which Clinton's own State Department joined Islamic nations in adopting language all-too-friendly to censoring speech that some religions and races find offensive.

The ambiguously worded United Nations Human Rights Council resolution could plausibly be read as encouraging or even obliging the U.S. to make it a crime to engage in hate speech, or, perhaps, in mere "negative racial and religious stereotyping." This despite decades of First Amendment case law protecting such speech.

Click Here to read the whole story.

Can we keep our Republic? - How Far Will Things Go?

From LL who pens "Can we keep our Republic?" comes this superb post in which he asks just how far the Obama Administration is willing to carry its agenda all while lying and seeking to suppress free speech in its efforts to impose a "soft" tyranny. LL's questions are truly thought provoking. Read it for yourself and consider the possibilities.

How Far Will Things Go?

I have been trying to determine the philosophical limit to which the Obama crowd is willing to push their utopian national socialist agenda.

Frederick Douglass, one of the most prominent black Americans in history, and for some time, a slave, weighed in on the issue with profound insight:
"Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did, and it never will. Find out just what people will submit to, and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue till they have resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they suppress."

There you have it. How much will we endure?

Dr Joseph Goebbels offered his opinion on the requirement of the government to suppress dissent through control of the media:
"The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth becomes the greatest enemy of the State."

As the Third Reich's propaganda minister, Dr. Goebbels was no stranger to the need for the government to lie. And one of the most effective ways to promote your lie is to declare that all who tell the truth are liars. There is a move for the White House to create (in effect) it's own news network to do this very thing. The attack on FOX NEWS (click here) seems to be the beginning of the muscling to shut them down.

Since truth is the mortal enemy of the State, how long will we believe the lies?

My definition of political correctness is: A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical socialist minority, rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream and other non-enquiring media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end. The whole notion of political correct language has spawned a generation of cowards who are mortally afraid of saying anything for fear that what they will say will offend someone in some way. The White House is currently running with this ball, suggesting that any language that anyone finds offensive smacks of "hate", therefore the speaker is committing a "hate crime". And the Constitutional right to free speech goes right out the window.

Will we accept limits to the Freedom of Speech?

Is the term "Patriot" a dirty word? In the lexicon of the present usage, it might become very similar to the term "Domestic Terrorist" as defined by Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano. (Returning veterans, Tea Party Activists, pro-life advocates, those who oppose illegal immigration, etc.)

Are we Patriots? Or are we afraid to be known by that name/title?

Thursday, October 29, 2009

STIMULUS WATCH: Stimulus jobs overstated by 1,000s

From the AP (via Breitbart's BigGovernment.com) comes the following deeply disturbing - but also, sadly, completely unsurprising - story about how federal Stimulus fund recipients are in many cases wildly overstating the numbers of jobs created or saved with tax payer borrowed dollars. The sheer chutzpah of some of the recipients use of the funds is staggering and underscores the Administration's willingness to use fudged numbers to support the now blatantly indefensible inter-generational theft that was the Stimulus. The open question is whether the massive book-cooking scheme was done a) by the recipients themselves of their own accord to justify their retention of the funds, or b) at the behest of the White House to show that the Stimulus "worked", or c) at the White House itself. Any which way it happened, it smells like a stack of week old dead rats.

STIMULUS WATCH: Stimulus jobs overstated by 1,000s

WASHINGTON (AP) - An early progress report on President Barack Obama's economic recovery plan overstates by thousands the number of jobs created or saved through the stimulus program, a mistake that White House officials promise will be corrected in future reports.

The government's first accounting of jobs tied to the $787 billion stimulus program claimed more than 30,000 positions paid for with recovery money. But that figure is overstated by least 5,000 jobs, or one in six, according to an Associated Press review of a sample of stimulus contracts.

The AP review found some counts were more than 10 times as high as the actual number of jobs; some jobs credited to the stimulus program were counted two and sometimes more than four times; and other jobs were credited to stimulus spending when none was produced.

For example:

—A company working with the Federal Communications Commission reported that stimulus money paid for 4,231 jobs, when about 1,000 were produced.

—A Georgia community college reported creating 280 jobs with recovery money, but none was created from stimulus spending.

—A Florida child care center said its stimulus money saved 129 jobs but used the money on raises for existing employees.

To read the whole dreary story, go here: STIMULUS WATCH: Stimulus jobs overstated by 1,000s