Suitably Flip

NY-20 Results Thread

[Scroll for updates]

Polls closed at 9:00, but 30 minutes later, only 1 of the 10 counties shows us anything and they've got a scant 2% of precincts reporting.

For what it's worth, those several voters broke for Scott Murphy (D) over Jim Tedisco (R) 72-28.

Via Drew at Ace's, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs has been busy lowering expectations today.

(White House Spokesman Robert) Gibbs echoed pretty much the basic Democratic talking points analysis/spin of the race: “Republicans have a significant voter registration advantage -- 71,000 more voters are registered Republicans than are registered Democrats.

“Kirsten Gillibrand was the first Democrat to hold NY-20 in 28 years when she upset then-Representative John Sweeny in 2006. Sweeny faced significant ethical issues. Even though Obama won the district in 2008, it had previously been solidly Republican. President Bush won NY-20 in both 2000 and 2004. In fact, NY-20 was one of only six districts in New York State voting for President Bush in 2000, and one of only nine supporting him in 2004.”

The Albany Times-Union has the latest numbers.

Update (9:40):  Much more now.

Essex: Murphy (58-42, with 47% in)
Greene: Tedisco (56-44, with 58% in)
Rensselaer: Tedisco (52-48, with 20% in)
Saratoga: Tedisco (58-42, with 25% in)
Washington: Murphy (57-43, with 85% in)
Warren: Murphy (56-44, with 45% in)

Update (9:43): Via Hot Air, the Saratogian offers the district-wide totals.

With 63% of precincts in, Tedisco leads by 4 votes (46,969-46,965).

Update (9:45):

With 68% in, Tedisco's lead expands to 856 votes (51,415-50,559), still less than 1%.

Update (9:50):

With 71% in, Tedisco leads by 951 (54,201-53,250).

Roughly 1/3 of the remaining precincts are in Saratoga County, where Tedisco is running 10 points ahead.  Fewer (but still a lot) are in Columbia County, where Murphy is running 12 points ahead.  Still very much up in the air.

Update (9:55):

With 81% in, Tedisco leads by 1,050 (63,197-62,147).  Still a lot of precincts in Saratoga and Columbia yet to come in.  The only other region with meaningful uncounted votes is Delaware County, where Tedisco is running 6 points ahead.

I'm going to give the edge to Tedisco, but by a nose.  Should be well under 1,500 votes (out of roughly 150,000) when all is said and done.

Update (10:05):

With 83% in, Tedisco leads by 1,112.  All remaining precincts come from those three counties.  Extrapolating from the vote shares in those counties thus far, the remaining precincts would increment the votes like so:

Saratoga: 1,186 net votes for Tedisco
Columbia: 1,069 net votes for Murphy
Delaware: 218 net votes for Tedisco
Total: 335 net votes for Tedisco

That'd give Tedisco the win by 1,447.

I don't how many provisionals, absentees, or other special votes are not reflected in tonight's reported totals.

Update (10:12):

With 96% in, Tedisco leads by just 102 votes (a slug of Columbia precincts just reported).  Still 14 precincts to go in Saratoga (Tedisco country) and 8 in Columbia (Murphy country).

Update (10:16):

Insane. With 97% in, Tedisco leads by 30 votes (0.02%).  11 of 19 remaining precincts are in Saratoga.

Update (10:18):

With 99.5% in, Murphy now leads by 252 votes.  All 3 remaining precincts are in Saratoga.

Based on the rest of the county's results, those precincts would give Tedisco just 68 net votes.

Update (10:20):

With just one precinct to go, Murphy's lead drops to 81 votes.

Update (10:40):

With 100% reporting, it's Murphy by 65 votes.

With thousands of absentees (not to mention months of exciting court battles!) to wade through, this is as close to a dead-heat as imaginable (50.02%-49.98%).

In other words, you can quit holding your breath.

Somewhere between 6,000 and 10,000 military and absentee ballots remain uncounted, according to the Associated Press, and overseas absentee ballots will continue be accepted until April 13. In short, no winner will be declared any time soon.

The High Cost Of Perpetual Nannyism

Azi Paybarah takes a look at the nearly $3 million that the previously-term-limited Mike Bloomberg has spent to date on his bid for a bonus round of mayoralty.

I’m combing through the numbers now, which campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson cautioned me could change by Monday’s deadline. So, as of now, here’s a few highlights: Among the expenses were four payments totaling more than $365,000 on “voter development” by the Washington-based Strategic Telemetry Inc. He’s spent $50,000 on print ads in Manhattan Media, $110,000 on Internet ads through Connections Media LLC, and$119,233.98 on “furniture” from The Switzer Group in Midtown. There’s also $3,406 spent on the Somos El Futuro Inc., a group comprised of Hispanic state lawmakers.

Shrinkage

Alas, the world was in the pool.

The World Bank's pronouncement over the weekend is sobering:

The global economy is likely to shrink this year for the first time since World War Two, with growth at least 5 percentage points below potential.

If gross world product is on the order of $50 trillion, that's $2.5 trillion of real economic output foregone as a result of this financial and economic crisis -- in just one year.

(Probably) Not If I Can Help It

The Observer weighs in on Bloomberg's prospects to get on the Republican line as he campaigns for the first of his potentially endless mayoral terms beyond the two that everyone believed to be the limit.

Manhattan Republican chair Jennifer Saul is not expected to make a decision in the next few days about whether to allow Michael Bloomberg to run in their primary. "We will do our screening process before the assembled district leaders and members of the executive committee," said the organization's executive director, Jason Weingartner. "A vote will take place afterwards." Those screening meetings historically have taken place in the first week of May, which means that the potentially tie-breaking decision of Saul and the committee—she would be the third of the five city chairs to approve Bloomberg's participation in the G.O.P. primary for mayor—may not be made for weeks.

As one of those district leaders, I'll certainly be delighted to hear what hizzoner has to say (assuming he comes in person to make his case), but I can't say I'll be going in favorably disposed.

A Democrat until he first ran for mayor eight years ago, Bloomberg conspicuously disavowed his nascent Republican status in 2007 (amid rampant rumors he was exploring a self-financed, half-billion dollar bid for the Presidency), saying:

“I have filed papers with the New York City Board of Elections to change my status as a voter and register as unaffiliated with any political party,” he said in a statement issued while he was in California delivering political speeches. “Although my plans for the future haven t changed, I believe this brings my affiliation into alignment with how I have led and will continue to lead our city.”

In the current political environment, I'm loath to advocate against anyone who wants to participate in Republican politics.  But in light of Bloomberg's history of calculated party shifting, his jaw-dropping track record of nanny statism, and his correct acknowledgment that his policies have not been in keeping with any brand of Republican (nor, frankly, even mainstream Democratic) ideology, rolling over for sake of notching up an electoral win (an admittedly rare event, as no Manhattan resident has any Republican representation at any level of government) seems nearly as cynical as the mayor's penchant for expedient party affiliation.

As noted, I'm not making up my mind before hearing his argument (and my opinion may well carry minimal weight during the screening process anyway), but shame on Bloomberg for fooling us once in 2001.  In the words of our erstwhile President, "Fool me... we can't get fooled again."

Bloomberg's Political Dysmorphia

This is a joke, yes?

Mayor Bloomberg has begun reaching out to city Republican leaders to gauge whether he could run on the GOP line in his re-election bid this year, several sources told The Post.

The maneuvering began in the past two weeks, and sources said the mayor is expected to try to run on a major-party as well as a third-party line, likely one of his own creation.

Several sources said Bloomberg's political aides have started reaching out to GOP chairs in the five boroughs, including Manhattan's Jennifer Saul.

"I've heard from Republican leaders he's been making phone calls," said Gristedes supermarket mogul John Catsimatidis, who for months has been campaigning for the GOP nomination for months.

Bloomberg, a lifelong Democrat who joined the Republican Party for his first mayoral bid in 2001 but then abandoned it in 2007, must mend fences if he wants to secure the Republican line, several sources said.

That Was Fast

It's now Franken by 280?  That's a 14,000% reversal of Coleman's lead just this morning.

If this clown manages to pull it off, we're just a single Maine RINO away from a filibuster-proof Senate.

Franken within 2 (Or Possibly 5)

Either way... cripes.

George P. Bush For Senate

With Caroline Kennedy now confirming that she would very much like to be hand-picked to replace Hillary Clinton in the U.S. Senate, I feel compelled to advance another candidate:  George Prescott Bush, son of former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, nephew of the President, and grandson of Bush 41.

It's true that "P." doesn't currently live in New York, but as Hillary aptly carpetbagged demonstrated in 2000, one doesn't need to establish residency in New York (until the day of election/appointment) to become one of its Senators.

It's also true that Bush has not demonstrated any particular political ambition or experience, beyond campaigning for family members.  Of course, the same can be said for Caroline...

So far as I can tell, Bush and Kennedy's qualifications are remarkably well-matched: both are at least 30 years old and both count several family members who have held high office.  If the latter represents Kennedy's primary qualification, I'd say Bush likely edges her out with his doubly Presidential family resume.

Yes, the American people carry a certain nostalgia for the image of young Caroline romping around the Oval Office in the 1960s (and I don't mean to diminish the relevance thereof as relates to Senatorial qualifications).  But let's not forget George P.'s adorable leading of the Pledge of Allegiance at age 12 at the 1988 Republican National Convention.

Finally, while I'd hesitate to play this card under normal circumstances, here it's worth pointing out that P. is of Hispanic descent.  And New York Governor David Paterson - upon whose shoulders falls the terrible burden of picking Clinton's replacement - has explicitly stated that he wants to pick "a woman or an Hispanic candidate."

Thus vanishes any advantage Caroline might have over George.  If we're going to incorporate familial considerations into Senate appointments, we may as well be orderly about it.  There's been a George Bush or a Prescott Bush in Congress, a Governor's mansion and/or the White House for 42 of the last 57 years (20 of the last 28 as part of a Presidential administration).

This one's a George Bush and a Prescott Bush.  And he's a member of the largest and fastest-growing minority in the country.  It's as if he were bred in a lab to be the ultimate American politician.  I can see it being debatable if Caroline's middle name were Teddy or Bobby, but that incongruous first name and gender tend to muddy the dynastic symmetry.

Update: The incomparable S.E. Cupp has an op-ed in the New York Daily News questioning why Paterson ought to feel compelled to fill Cilnton's seat with another woman.

Chambliss Headed For a Fat Win? Update: Yes.

Results from the run-off Senate election in Georgia have started pouring in and with 33% of precincts reporting, things are looking good for incumbent Republican Saxby Chambliss.

S. Chambliss (R)  460,400  (61%)
J. Martin (D)         289,569  (39%)

Update:  Holding at 61-39 with 71% reporting.

Update:  Fox News calls it for Chambliss.

For Clinton's Senate Seat, Gov. Paterson Would "Prefer a Man Or a White"

Now that President-elect Obama has made official his intention to nominate Hillary Clinton to head the State Department, speculation has begun to brew in earnest as to her replacement in the U.S. Senate.

Since the most recently elected Governor of New York has resigned in order to spend more time with his family, the terrible burden of appointing Clinton's temporary successor (to serve for two years until a special election in 2010) falls to Governor David Paterson, who - in a shocking turn - has lain bare troubling streaks of racism and sexism in his ruminations over possible appointees.

Perhaps inevitably, noted former President Bill Clinton's name has been floated as a possible replacement.  Still, it saddens those of us who cherish the ideals of a color- and gender-blind society that Bubba's race and sex were apparently key resume enhancers.

"This is not an election. This is not a campaign. It's a constituency of one. David Paterson. It's all about what the governor wants to do," said political analyst Stuart Rothenberg, editor and publisher of The Rothenberg Political Report.

"Paterson has said he would prefer someone from upstate New York, or a man or a Caucasian candidate," Rothenberg said.

Actually, wait... I think I pasted that wrong.  Let's try this again:

"Paterson has said he would prefer someone from upstate New York, or a woman or an Hispanic candidate," Rothenberg said.

There we are.

My apologies to Governor Paterson for that libelous lapse.

Turns out his selection criteria aren't racist or sexist after all.  On behalf of 20 million grateful constituents, I thank the Governor in advance for his sober and objective hand-picking of our next representative to the U.S. Senate.  Join me in congratulating him for his courage in deciding to use this pick not only to serve the best interests of New Yorkers, but also to pander (quite courageously, mind you) to key voting demographics that may feel underrepresented in elected offices that are - lamentably - so frequently filled according to the coarse and bigoted consensus of their fellow citizens.

Truly, where Eliot Spitzer invited a modicum of shame unto the highest office in the state, Paterson has hereby restored honor and magnanimity to the Governor's mansion.  By bravely declaring his disinclination to appoint a white or a male, Governor Paterson reminds us that, while he may be legally blind, he surely cannot be labeled color-blind.

Sad News: Al Franken Stricken Blind

After weeks of digging through poorly lit trunks and squinting into the dark recesses of his basement in his continuing search for wayward bags of Franken-friendly ballots, the Democratic Senate candidate has tragically lost all visual faculties.

The poor fellow had to ask the Minnesota election canvassing board to help him glean the intent of the voter who cast this ballot.

That’s the only challenge in the special envelope in Plymouth so far, according to Sandy Engdahl, the city clerk and the official running the city recount.
...
Eight of the 24 precincts had been counted by 1:45 p.m., and the only challenged ballot, in Engdahl’s view, was clearly a vote for Coleman. Nevertheless, the Franken campaign was allowed to seek a second opinion.

Brave little guy.

(HT: American Spectator, via Ace)

HowObamaGotElected.com

As featured on Hannity and Colmes.  Good for a laugh.

Then a long sigh.

Then a head in the oven.

And here's something similarly frightening.

Zogby Poll

512 Obama Voters 11/13/08-11/15/08 MOE +/- 4.4 points       

97.1% High School Graduate or higher, 55% College Graduates   

Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Question      

57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing)

The Latest On Al Franken's Magical Vote Conjuring Skillz

Power Line gets you caught up with their seventh in an indefinite series tracking the pro-Franken irregularities and profound statistical anomalies that underlie Minnesota's pre-recount number shifting.

The blog's John Hinderaker appeared on Hannity and Colmes last night to discuss.

Market Stat Of the Day

Change in Dow from Bush's inauguration through election day 2008: -9.1% (10,587.59 - 9,625.28).

Change in Dow in two days following Obama's election (as of 1:15 pm): -9.3% (9,625.28 - 8,730.6).

Update:  Worst two-day plunge in history.

McCain's Concession Speech

For those of you watching networks that didn't bother to carry it.

(HT: Allah)

Obama Wins Ohio

Race over.

Update: Melanie Morgan is already looking ahead:

This Is What Real Voter Intimidation Looks Like

Evil Republicans want to intimidate poor people by requiring some kind of polling place ID verification, under the cynical guise of attempting to curb the coordinated voter fraud we now know to be occurring across the country.

If only they knew that a much more effective method of intimidation is to have armed supremacists simply block the entrance to the polling place.

Update:  Michelle Malkin notes these statements made yesterday by the New Black Panther Party.

”We will not allow some racists and other angry whites, who are upset over an impending Barack Obama presidential victory, to intimidate blacks at the polls,” [Minister Najee Muhammad, national field marshal for the New Black Panther Party] said. “Most certainly, we cannot allow these racist forces to slaughter our babies or commit other acts of violence against the black population, nor our black president.”

Muhammad added, “We must organize to counter and neutralize these threats using all means at our disposal. This is a great time for our people, and we must ensure that peace prevails for our people.”
...
“We will be at the polls in the cities and counties in many states to ensure that the enemy does not sabotage the black vote, which was won through the blood of the martyrs of our people,” he said.

Update:  Wow.  Via Election Journal, here's amateur video by an enterprising Penn student (and credentialed poll watcher) encountering a Black Panther who falsely identifies himself as "security" while brandishing his nightsick outside the entrance to the polling place at 1221 Fairmount in Philadelphia.

Update: The next chapter (also from Election Journal), in which the cops arrive...

Pay No Attention To That Man Behind the News Desk

As exit poll numbers inevitably "leak" today before polls close, just remember: they're pretty worthless.

The McCain campaign offers the following reminder:

1. Historically, exit polls have tended to overstate the Democratic vote.

2. The exit polls are likely to overstate the Obama vote because Obama voters are more likely to participate in the exit poll.

3. The exit polls have tended to skew most Democratic in years where there is high turnout and high vote interest like in 1992 and 2004.

4. It is not just the national exit poll that skews Democratic, but each of the state exit polls also suffers from the same Democratic leanings.

5. The results of the exit polls are also influenced by the demographics of the voters who conduct the exit polls.

After the 2004 election, the National Election Pool completed a study investigating why the exit polls that year showed John Kerry over performing 5.5 net points better than the actual results showed him to have done. Their conclusion was that the primary reason the exit polls was that Kerry voters and Democrats were more likely to participate in the exit polls.
...
The recent Fox News survey showed that 46% of Obama voters said they were very likely to participate in the exit polls, while just 35% of McCain supporters are.

And if any intrepid reporters show up at Hyde Tattoo and Body Piercing to interview voters taking advantage of the free body piercing with voting stub offer, it's probably safe to disregard any apparent consensus among that voting bloc.

Rain Drops Keep Fallin' On the Swing States

Virginia, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina are looking at a soggy election day.

Lesser electoral prizes Minnesota, Nevada, and Colorado will see some inclement weather too.

This is a McCain-friendly turn of events, if history is any guide.

For the [2005 study, "The Republicans Should Pray for Rain: Weather Turnout and Voting in U.S. Presidential Elections."], published in The Journal of Politics in June 2007, a team of political scientists cross-referenced voting data and weather reports from more than 3,000 counties, for presidential elections from 1948 to 2000.
...
Overall, the researchers found that "rain does have a significant effect decreasing the Democratic vote share," said political scientist Brad Gomez, a co-author of the study.

"For nearly 95 percent of our observations, the effect of rain on vote share is positive, significant, and increases in magnitude as the county becomes more Republican," the study found.

Specifically, "for every one-inch increase in rain above its election day normal, the Republican presidential candidate received approximately an extra 2.5 percent of the vote," the study found.

And take a closer look at Pennsylvania on that map.  It won't be raining throughout the state - just Philadelphia and most of the rest of southeast PA.  The rest of the state should have sunny skies under which to walk their racist, redneck selves over to the gummint pickin' stayshuns.

The rain in Philly will fall mainly after 3 pm and continue through the evening hours.  Virginia and North Carolina will be wet all day.

Prediction: McCain Wins 281-257

This conjecture is predicated on the latest Rasmussen swing state polls, the RealClearPolitics battleground averages, a slight, eleventh hour, unpolled pro-McCain swing in Pennsylvania based on the anti-coal flap, a dash of wishful thinking, and an assumption of 4-5 percentage points of Obama overpolling due to a combination of 1) Democrat oversampling/unrealistic turnout modeling, and 2) lying pollees, whether you want to call it Bradley effect or just a tendency to skew artificially toward the socially desirable answer of Obama (or "undecided").

Broadly speaking, this implies that McCain wins all 5 major eastern battleground states (Florida, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, and Ohio) and that Obama will win the three key western battleground states (New Mexico, Colorado, and Nevada).

From this base case (McCain winning with an 11 point cushion), there are a couple deviations worth mentioning, given that Virginia and Pennsylvania seem to represent the most tenuous wins for McCain.

• If McCain loses Virginia (13 votes), he can still win by picking up any of the three western battlegrounds (NM, CO, or NV).  Of these, at least Colorado appears plausible, so Virginia isn't necessarily a killer.
• If McCain loses Pennsylvania (21 votes), he needs to pick up any two of those western states.  This is a stretch, so losing Pennsylvania would appear nearly lethal.  The caveat here is that McCain could lose Pennsylvania and pick up only Colorado, which would yield a 269-269 tie.
• If McCain loses both Virginia and Pennsylvania, President Obama is a near mathematical certainty.

Update: Over at Hot Air, Ed Morrissey and Allahpundit have placed their chips as well.

Ed sees McCain winning with 273.  This is the losing Virginia, but picking up one western state (NV) deviation described above.

Allah sees Obama winning big with 318.  Take my map and strip McCain of Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania (ouch) and that's the scenario.

Update: More predictions compiled at Stop the ACLU.

Update: Kos predicts a monster win for Obama (390-148).  I'm on a bit of a limb with my own prediction, so I'm somewhat loath to throw stones, but I'm fairly confident in labeling Kos certifiably bat$#!& crazy on this one.

I'd say the realistic worst case scenario for McCain is Allah's map, but with Ohio and Missouri slipping blue (Obama wins 349-189).

While we're at it, let's lay down an equivalent, breaking-point-of-feasibility best case for McCain at 300-238 (my map, but with Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico going for McCain).

Zogby Poll No Longer Tightening...

Now it's widening.  Only now McCain's on top.

Or so implies Drudge, with the headline:

ZOGBY:  MCCAIN MOVES INTO LEAD 48-47 IN ONE DAY POLLING

So by "widening" I mean that if you interpolate continuously between Friday's 7-point Obama lead and Saturday's 1-point McCain lead, at some point it would've been tied.

And if you extrapolate based on the current momentum, McCain should be up by 25 points by Tuesday.

The republic is saved!

Update: JZ clarifies:

Pollster John Zogby: "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."

The 3-day average is 49-44 for Obama.

Neither Protest Nor Petition Nor Bribe Nor Barrage Of Email Stays These Journalists From the Swift Suppression of Newsworthy Material

That seems to be the L.A. Times' new creed.

Michelle Malkin offers a digest of the latest citizen-led initiatives to coerce or shame the newspaper into doing its job.

Rasmussen: McCain More Trusted On Economy, Taxes

More confirmation that revelations of Obama's socialist leanings are sinking in nationwide and that Americans are gradually waking from their Hopenchange hypnosis.

After several weeks of John McCain’s campaign attacks on Barack Obama’s tax plan and idea of “spreading the wealth around”, the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds voters trust McCain more than Obama on taxes, 47% to 45%.

Two weeks ago, Obama had a one point-advantage on the issue of taxes and a month ago, he had a three-point edge.

The swing on the economy question is even more dramatic.

McCain also has gained ground as the candidate to trust on economic issues. Forty-eight percent (48%) now trust the Republican hopeful more than the Democrat while 47% hold the opposite view. This is the first time McCain has led on the issue that has hurt his campaign since September 17. One month ago, Obama held a nine-point advantage when it came to economic issues.

(HT: HA Headlines)

Bounty On Obama/Khalidi Tape Up to $200,000 (Or Maybe $230,000)

Harry adds the $25,000 in pledges Ace has collected to his $175,000 already announced.  He's got another $30,000 pledged, but those benefactors are squeamish in light of the possibility of receiving the Joe the Plumber treatment (i.e. Obama's political allies abusing their positions of power to investigate you if you question His magnificence).

Can't say I blame them.

Bad News, Good News In Florida Early Voting

Bad:

Democrats are beaming that their party is outperforming the Republicans in early voting, releasing numbers Wednesday that show registrants of their party ahead 54 percent to 30 percent among the 1.4 million voters who have gone to the polls early.

Good:

But party breakdowns for turnout aren't the same as final tallies, and at least one poll offered a different view for the campaign of Republican John McCain.

A Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll gave McCain a 49-45 lead over Democrat Barack Obama among Floridians who have already voted.

And Republicans continued to show a traditional strength, leading 50 percent to the Democrats' 30 percent in the 1.2 million absentee ballots already returned.

Whoops.  That wasn't supposed to happen.  Yes, Democrats are outvoting Republicans in the early goings.  The only problem is they're voting for John McCain.

(HT: Wizbang)

The Obama Infomercial

As expected, it's crammed full of anecdotes (the most compelling arguments are always anecdotal).  Betilda the 104-year-old single mother and mill worker who eats cat food because of George Bush, etc.

And the constant sappy lute and synthesizer muzak in the background is a particularly neuron-deadening touch.

I can scarcely wait for the live stage act portion.  Special guests are rumored to include Bubba himself, Jack Benny, and Paul Lynde!

Update:  Wow - not a single appearance (live or taped) from either Clinton.  Wasn't expecting that.

I enjoyed Obama's inclusion of his I am my brother's keeper, I am my sister's keeper speech, especially on the day that his aunt Zeituni Onyango (the identity of whom was confirmed by Obama's half-brother George from his dollar-a-month hut in Nairobi) was found dwelling in a Boston slum.

It's mildly curious that Obama the Collectivist hasn't seen fit to spread a bit of his own wealth around to help lift his close family members out of abject poverty.

$150,000 $175,000 Bounty For Obama-Khalidi Tape

Dirty Harry's Place publishes a sizable bid by one Aston Grimaldi for a copy of the video of Barack Obama toasting anti-Israel "scholar" and former PLO adviser Rashid Khalidi at his Jew-bashing going away party in 2003.  The L.A. Times is resisting a whole lot of pressure (and any semblance of integrity or objectivity) in refusing to release the tape, but perhaps this wad of cash will manage to pry it loose.  Maybe a staff member who's beginning to suspect he won't have a job much longer anyway decides it's time to look out for himself.  Or maybe the original source opts to cash in by duping another copy for Mr. Grimaldi.

Something tells me this is going to work.  It's a shame that the media needs to be bribed into doing its job, but to be fair, they do really like this guy.

Update: Newt Gingrich also thinks this is the way to get it done.

Update: Dirty Harry reports the total bounty is now $175,000.

Gallup Shows Bulk Of Obama Lead Disappearing Overnight, Notices "Slight Narrowing"

Gallup's latest daily poll of traditional likely voters gives Barack Obama a 2-point lead over John McCain (49-47).  The gap has shrunk from 5 yesterday and 7 on Friday.  The headline of the poll: "Presidential Race Narrows Slightly."

Only the 3rd and final day of the latest polling window followed the discovery of Obama's 2001 tragedy of non-redistribution interview, so the actual swing over the last couple days may be larger than the rolling average currently lets on.

Fox News Rowdydow: Kelly vs. Burton

This was a good one.

At issue was the newly uncovered audio tape of Obama waxing redistributive and campaign spokesman Bill Burton's statement that,"This is a fake news controversy drummed up by the all too common alliance of Fox News, the Drudge Report and John McCain."

Burton was on Fox a couple hours earlier receiving a similar browbeating from Neil Cavuto (who'd done his homework on the Obama economic plan and shown that - even granting all of the campaign's dubious assumptions - their own math doesn't add up, unless they introduce additional taxes above and beyond what they've already copped to).

Maybe Burton figured he could vent some of his frustration following that round by talking over Megyn Kelly about how unfair Fox is.  Cathartic?  Maybe.  Effective?  Eh... not so much.

(HT: Hot Air)

Obama-Biden Locks Out Another Media Outlet That Deigns Not To Worship

This is becoming a bad habit.

AUDIO: Obama's Redistributionist Roots

Barack Obama's revealing statement to Joe Wurzelbacher was no impromptu slip of the tongue.  His latent Marxism is as long-standing and considered as you suspect.

Gateway Pundit points out this audio discovery made by Naked Emperor News of a 2001 radio interview during which State Senator and Constitutional law professor instructor Obama bemoans the fact that the Warren Court never got around to foisting socialism on us.

But don't despair.  He's a lot more optimistic that "radical" "redistributive" change can be achieved legislatively.

If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court. I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order as long as I could pay for it I’d be o.k.

But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical.

It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that.

This shouldn't have shocked his Chicago constituents back in 2001, since he was an active member of a socialist party when they elected him in 1996.

Since hitting the national stage, Obama has largely succeeded in closeting his socialist leanings (run-ins with impudent plumbers notwithstanding).  The full measure of his redistributionist ideology is coming to light very late in the game, but there's still time to save ourselves from such an eager advocate of this most quintessentially unAmerican ideology.

Previously:
Revelation Of Obama's Socialist New Party Membership Goes (Sort of) Mainstream
Barack Obama: Socialist Party Poster Boy
Obama Was a Socialist Party Member In 1996

Update: Not surprisingly, this is turning into one of those wildfire clips.  Also playing at:

The Corner
Little Green Footballs
Atlas Shrugs
Ace of Spades (with flaming skull, no less)
Michelle Malkin
Stop the ACLU
RedState
HillBuzz
Protein Wisdom
Hot Air

Update: And now it's hit Drudge, so with the ensuing traffic flood at YouTube, it should only be a matter of time before users flag it as hate speech.  I've ripped a local copy in case it disappears.

Update: Here's Obama's spin:

"In this interview back in 2001, Obama was talking about the civil rights movement – and the kind of work that has to be done on the ground to make sure that everyone can live out the promise of equality," Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton says. "Make no mistake, this has nothing to do with Obama’s economic plan or his plan to give the middle class a tax cut. It’s just another distraction from an increasingly desperate McCain campaign."

Burton continues: "In the interview, Obama went into extensive detail to explain why the courts should not get into that business of 'redistributing' wealth. Obama’s point – and what he called a tragedy – was that legal victories in the Civil Rights led too many people to rely on the courts to change society for the better. That view is shared by conservative judges and legal scholars across the country.

"As Obama has said before and written about, he believes that change comes from the bottom up – not from the corridors of Washington," Burton says. "He worked in struggling communities to improve the economic situation of people on the South Side of Chicago, who lost their jobs when the steel plants closed. And he’s worked as a legislator to provide tax relief and health care to middle-class families. And so Obama’s point was simply that if we want to improve economic conditions for people in this country, we should do so by bringing people together at the community level and getting everyone involved in our democratic process."

Note the failure to even attempt to refute the idea that Obama does indeed support "redistributive change" through legislative means (or other "coalitions of power"), given that the Supreme Court is unlikely ever to be sufficiently radicalized to "break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution."

Suddenly It All Makes Sense

Ashley Todd is a Paulnut.

In March, Ms. Todd was asked to leave a grass-roots group of Ron Paul supporters in Brazos County, Texas, group leader Dustan Costine said. He said Ms. Todd posed as a supporter of former Arkansas governor and presidential candidate Mike Huckabee and called the local Republican committee seeking information about its campaign strategies.

“She would call the opposing campaign and pretend she was on their campaign to get information,” Mr. Costine said last night. “We had to remove her because of the tactics she displayed. After that we had nothing to do with her.”

About a month earlier, he said, Ms. Todd sent an e-mail to the Ron Paul group saying her tires were slashed and that campaign paraphernalia had been stolen from her car because she supported Mr. Paul.

(HT: LGF)

Previously:
Ashley Todd Made It All Up
Drudge: Assailant Carves Letter "B" Into Face Of Female McCain Volunteer

Ashley Todd Made It All Up

Unbelievable.  Please lock this idiot up.

Police say a campaign volunteer confessed to making up a story that a mugger attacked her and cut the letter B in her face after seeing her McCain bumper sticker. 

At a news conference this afternoon, offiicals said they believe that Ashley Todd's injuries were self-inflicted. 

Todd, 20, of Texas, is now facing charges for filing a false report to police.

I guess she was dumb enough to carve the letter backward in the mirror after all.

Previously:  Drudge: Assailant Carves Letter "B" Into Face Of Female McCain Volunteer

Obama Reaffirms Intent To "Spread the Wealth"

Interviewer:  "Any regrets ... that you said 'spread the wealth'?"
Obama:  "Not at all."

Eesh.

O'Reilly Ambushes Bill Ayers

I generally don't have a whole lot of use for the Factor, but I'll be tuning in Friday night.  Based on the promo, it looks like one of Bill O'Reilly's field correspondents simply follows Ayers around for a while and fruitlessly asks questions about his relationship with Obama and his lack of repentance for his terrorist ways.

Even so, if it's good enough for a man who dared to ask Obama an uncomfortable question when the candidate darkened his doorstep, then a bit of mild harassment is probably good enough for a proud Marxist bomber.

Drudge: Assailant Carves Letter "B" Into Face Of Female McCain Volunteer

You stay classy, presumed Obama supporter.

Update:  More.

Pittsburgh police spokeswoman Diane Richard tells Channel 4 Action News that the victim was robbed at knifepoint on Wednesday night outside of a Citizens Bank near Liberty Avenue and Pearl Street just before 9 p.m.

Richard said the robber took $60 from the woman, then became angry when he saw a McCain bumper sticker on the victim's car. The attacker then punched and kicked the victim, before using the knife to scratch the letter "B" into her face, Richard said.

Update:  It does appear to be a "B", but you have to turn your monitor upside down.

Michelle Malkin and Ace think it smells fishy, for a variety of reasons.

I'm not convinced the "backwards B" (some are suggesting she could've carved it herself and didn't think to accomodate for the mirror's mirror effect) is terribly meaningful, for a few reasons. 1) If she were on the ground and the assailant were above her, it'd be easy enough for him to be oriented such that this was a proper B from his perspective.  2) This is a digital image; it could've been flipped somewhere along the line.  3) She didn't seek medical help, so she could've taken this picture of herself in a mirror (camera chest-high, from several feet away, then cropped just the face). 4) If her account is accurate, the assailant was pretty clearly deranged. It's not a huge mental leap to assume a deranged man, capatable of carving into another person's face, might draw a letter backward.

That said, there are a couple of other weird details that Michelle and Ace point out (including the fact that she didn't seek medical help), but this story is plenty weird one way or another, so who knows.

Finding the Threshold Of the Obama Campaign's Anti-Fraud Measures

If it exists at all, one has to plumb pretty deep to find it.

Power Line:

I went to the Obama campaign website and entered the following:

Name: John Galt
Address: 1957 Ayn Rand Lane
City: Galts Gulch
State: CO
Zip: 99999

Then I checked the box next to $15 and entered my actual credit card number and expiration date (it didn't ask for the 3-didgit code on the back of the card) and it took me to the next page and... "Your donation has been processed. Thank you for your generous gift."

This simply should not, and could not, happen in any business or any campaign that is honestly trying to vet it's donors.

Hot Air:

The same ["John Galt"] claims to have tried to donate the same way on McCain’s website and had his card rejected.
...
 Reader “Dale in Atlanta” says he tried it with a fake name and the transaction showed up on his credit card immediately — but marked “pending.”  We’ll find out later today if it clears.

Mark Steyn:

Further to my post below about the Obama campaign intentionally disabling security checks for their credit card donations, several readers have wandered over to the site to test it out. One was accepted with the following details:

Name: JarackBoe BOamabiden
Address: 2345 Fak Addrss Lane
Phone: 555-555-5555
Email: barackjoe@obama.com

The only query he got back was to ask him if he didn't want to give more money.
...
You'd think a diligent New York Times reporter might want to check out this thing. After all, most of them have already been over there to make their own donations, so it's not like they don't know the URL.

[UPDATE: And another - a $15 donation from:

Name: Della Ware
Address: 12345 No Way
    Far Far Away, DE 78954
Employer: Americans Against Obama
Position: Founder]

Ace:

Another test:

Frankly, its easier than I'd believe to do this. Courtesy of my (real) CC number and expiration date, the Obama campaign has just received a $19.45 donation from mister Adolf Hitler, whose occupation is "Dictator" at the company "National Socialist Party of Ger" (I got cut off). I captured screenshots to prove this.

No verification required.  The listed address wasn't even close to my real address.

And finally, me, just now, with the following data:

Name: Nodda Realperson
Address:  1000 This Is a Bogus Street
City/State: Neighborhood of Makebelieve, CA
Email: if.a.live.person.is.vetting.this.donation@its.fake.dont.process.it.com
Employer: Barack Obama
Occupation: Cow-Eyed Disciple

The debit transaction (of $5) processed at my account within 90 seconds.

What robust security!  Aren't you reassured knowing that Obama's $250 million or so in small-dollar donations that will never see the light of FEC disclosure are so painstakingly vetted?

To clarify, via an AoS commenter, this appears to be deliberate:

"Having worked for companies that process credit cards online, it is necessary to go through and manually disable the safeguards that they put in place to verify a person's address and zip code with the cardholder's bank."

Update: At 1:47 pm, Steyn posted an update:

NR reader "Borat Oblama" writes:

I tried to donate $5 in the name of "Borat Oblama" from "Madeuptown, USA", using a legit credit card number, and got a screen saying the card didn't match the address.

Apparently they've been shamed into reinstating the security checks.

Pity we didn't figure this out in August

My glaringly fake transaction went through more than 15 minutes after that update, so security is most assuredly not reinstated.

Update: Patrick Ruffini (having also just contributed $5) has more on the very standard security measures Obama had to eschew in order to make his site so porous to excessive, foreign, and otherwise fraudulent contributions.

The issue centers around the Address Verification Service (or AVS) that credit card processors use to sniff out phony transactions. I was able to contribute money using an address other than the one on file with my bank account (I used an address I control, just not the one on my account), showing that the Obama campaign deliberately disabled AVS for its online donors.

AVS is generally the first line of defense against credit card fraud online. AVS ensures that not only is your credit card number accurate, but the street address you've submitted with a transaction matches the one on file with your bank.

Authorize.net, the largest credit card gateway provider in the country, lists AVS as a "Standard Transaction Security Setting," recommends merchants use it, and turns it on by default. So, in order for AVS to be turned off, it has to be intentional, at least with Authorize.net.

Small-Dollar Campaign Finance Fraud Is So Last Quarter

Sure, it's easy enough to fraudulently fill the campaign coffers using sub-$200 credit card donations, far from the prying eyes of the pesky FEC.  But after the first $30 million or so, the data entry is bound to get tedious.

Solution?  Huge, honkin' fraudulent credit card donations.

There have been a smattering of incidents reported in which people have seen credit card charges surface suggesting they donated to Barack Obama when they did not.

Now comes the story of Mary T. Biskup, of Manchester, Missouri. Biskup got a call recently from the Obama campaign, which was trying to figure out why she donated $174,800 to the campaign -- well over the contribution limit of $2,300.

The answer she gave them was simple. "That's an error."

Biskup, a retired insurance manager who occasionally submits recipes to the local paper, says someone used a credit card to donate the money in her name. No charges ever showed up on her credit card statement.

Good on the Obama campaign for noticing a contribution that exceeded federal limits by 7,500% (exactly 7,500%, oddly), especially since noticing glaring irregularities hasn't been their strongest suit thus far.

Better yet, it gives us an excuse to haul this out for the second time today:

(HT: Amanda Carpenter)

Previously:
Obama Turns Blind Eye To Ongoing Credit Card Fraud Lining His Pockets
Have You Contributed To Obama? Are You Sure?
New Details On RNC's FEC Complaint Over Obama's Misbegotten Millions
RNC Filing FEC Complaint Over Obama's Excessive, Secret, and Foreign Campaign Cash [Update: $34 Million In Particularly Filthy Lucre]
Good Will Funneling

Obama Coins a New Term To Replace "Kinsleyian Gaffe"

"Rhetorical flourish."

Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden predicted "an international, a generated crisis to test the mettle" of his running mate to supporters in Seattle on Sunday evening.

"Joe sometimes engages in rhetorical flourishes," Obama said this morning during a press conference in Richmond, Virginia.

That he does.

Assuming this new term of art applies only to true Kinsley gaffes (wherein Senator Biden inadvertently opens his mental kimono), we can't retroactively reclassify all of his greatest hits.

While this one would certainly qualify...

• "Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be vice president of the United States of America. Quite frankly, it might have been a better pick than me."

Most are mere stupidity gaffes...

• "When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television..."
• "Chuck, stand up.  Let 'em see ya."
• "A three-letter word: jobs. J-O-B-S."

Jackie Mason In Blackface?

Oh, that's a fine rant.

(HT: Stop the ACLU)

A Bloodthirsty and Unapologetic Terrorist

This amatuer web ad will certainly never see the light of day, under an official McCain or RNC banner.

And that's too bad, because it's highly relevant to any undecided voters or Obama leaners who are succumbing to His HopeyChangey candidacy, and who have thus far glossed over his troublingly close connections to the worst of the worst that America has to offer.  (Scroll down if you want to skip to the ad, because I've got a rant that needs ranting.)

The notion that connecting Barack Obama to Bill Ayers is "dirty" politics or some kind of illegitimate "guilt by association" is simply false.  Obama simply is connected to Ayers, in very meaningful ways - socially, professionally, and politically.  If the inference from that association is damaging to Obama, so be it.

Despite demonstrably false, explicit campaign assertions to the contrary, it's well established that the two shared an office.  Despite demonstrably false, explicit campaign assertions to the contrary, Obama blurbed Ayers' book.  And, as the campaign concedes, the two served on the boards of two non-profits for several years.

Furthermore, despite the campaign's attempts to cast Ayers as simply a "guy from the neighborhood", this terrorist and his terrorist wife hosted Obama's political coming out party during his first political campaign and (very likely, according to as yet unnamed sources) have served as his kids' babysitter in the years since.  There's also strong circumstantial evidence that suggests that Ayers ghost-wrote Obama's first memoir (which Obama explicitly claims he wrote without assistance).

Given the proven extent of the relationship between this would-be President and a proud domestic terrorist and the candidate's unwillingness to acknowledge these connections (not to mention the likely, but as yet unproven, more damning connections that would illustrate ongoing bald-faced lies and an even more troublingly close association with such scum), is it possible that these relations run much deeper?  If so, is it possible that revelations of such might prove troubling to the country in coming years?

For those with a sense of history, let's consider a similar historical question.  In 1992, when the world had learned of just a few of Governor Clinton's extra-marital activities, what were the odds that during his Presidency, we'd learn of such filth, habitual abuse of power, and willingness to lie to the American people, that we'd witness the first-ever impeachment of an elected President?

Clinton's weakness was a combination of access to young girls, a perceived invulnerability, and a lack of respect for the truth.

Obama has clearly illustrated he shares the latter 2 of those 3.  While he hasn't shown a weakness for interns, he has well and truly lain bare a fondness for a much more dangerous sort.

Revelation Of Obama's Socialist New Party Membership Goes (Sort of) Mainstream

Stanley Kurtz weighs in at NRO.

Ace wonders if this is sufficiently legitimizing for McCain to incorporate it into his stump narrative or campaign ads.  One hopes.  The spread-the-wealth flap arising from the Joe the Plumber encounter seemed to be enough to prompt Americans to stroke their collective chin and wonder whether Obama might indeed have socialist leanings that place him well left of the mainstream left.  His active membership in a socialist party during his first run for political office just 12 years ago likely has some capacity to confirm the suspicion.

Previously:
Barack Obama: Socialist Party Poster Boy
Obama Was a Socialist Party Member In 1996

Hateful Republicans Now Reportedly Firing On Obama Campaign Bus

I wonder why this isn't getting any media attention.

Oh, wait.  I think I may have mixed up the details...

We learned at this morning’s Stop Obama Rally here that the McCain/Palin Straight Talk Express came through town yesterday.  It arrived with a window shattered by a .22 caliber weapon.  It had also been hit by an unknown number of paint balls from a paint ball gun or guns.  There were reportedly no injuries and neither candidate was on board. One local man who saw the damage and spoke with the McCain/Palin staffers said the attack(s) had occured in southern New Mexico that same day.

That makes more sense.

(HT: JWF)

Quote Of the Week (Runner-Up)

CHRIS MATTHEWS: "Can you give me a case where Barack Obama has reached across the aisle and cut a deal and gotten something done for the country? One example."

GOVERNOR PATERSON: "Well, Senator Obama has been there two years and I can’t cite an example right now..."

Who is this anchor and in whose basement is he keeping Chris Matthews?

(For the record, Obama's been there for nearly four years, not two.)

(HT: Riehl World View)

Quote Of the Week

Senator George Voinovich (R-OH) on Barack Obama:

"He is left of Teddy Kennedy. With all due respect, the man is a socialist."

This is just silly. It's common knowledge that the Senate's only true socialist (the only one to admit it proudly, anyway) is Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

Yes, Obama was an active member of a socialist party when he ran for State Senate.  And yes, Obama did campaign for Sanders in 2006 and yes, he's established a more liberal voting record than Sanders.  But does that really make Barack "Spread the Wealth" Obama a socialist?

If we're going to start labeling as socialists all Senators with more liberal voting records than their confessed socialist colleague, then there'd be as many as two other Senators we'd be forced to classify as such.

Yes, two.  Multiple.

I don't want to ruin the surprise for you...  Highlight the white space below to reveal Obama's two fellow sub-Sanders pseudo-socialists.

In 2007, Obama's composite liberal score of 95.5 was the highest in the Senate. Rounding out the top five most liberal senators last year were Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., with a composite liberal score of 94.3; Joseph Biden, D-Del., with a 94.2; Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., with a 93.7; and Robert Menendez, D-N.J., with a 92.8.

ACORN, Flush With Cash From Taxpayers and Obama Campaign, Helps Raise Albuquerque's Fraudulent Vote Share To 30%

Oh, good.

The Associated Press reported Friday that the New Mexico GOP found 28 people who voted fraudulently in Albuquerque during the June Democratic primary by absentee ballot. One of the ballots was cast from someone named "Duran-Duran"

The GOP's review was conducted in House District 13 and only included 92 ballots. That means roughly a third of the ballots examined were fraudulent.

“This is a bombshell. We now have undeniable proof that a significant number of fraudulent voters were cast in Democrat primary races for the New Mexico state legislature as a result of ACORN’s voter registration fraud,” said State Representative Justine Fox Young (R.-Albuquerque). “No longer can ACORN argue that their phony voter registration forms don’t translate into fraudulent votes. They do and today we can prove it.”
...
Information from House Minority Leader John Boehner's (R.-Ohio) office shows that Albuquerque's ACORN branch has received $349,253 in federal tax dollars since 1998.

Good thing the Supreme Court has just ruled that Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner doesn't need to reconcile the 200,000 mismatched registrations that she had been hiding.  Obama paid $800,000 in good money for ACORN's Ohio services and even went to the trouble of concealing it from the FEC.  It would be a slap in the face not to allow those tireless fraudulent registration efforts to blossom into fraudulent votes, especially now that New Mexico has shown beyond a doubt that it can work.

A glorious day for community organizing!

Debate 3: Mac's Last Stand

How many minutes into the proceedings will McCain first bring up Bill Ayers?  I'm guessing 15.

In addition to hammering Obama's on his circle of terrorist buddies, McCain - as has been endlessly opined - needs to make his economic case.  He's got plenty of ammunition (particularly with regard to investment income taxes and windfall profit taxes), as Obama's plans to punish capital represents the surest parth to devaluing stocks and killing jobs.  If the economic theory eludes McCain, he can point to Obama's closest historical analog, our 39th President, and remind Americans how well this worked last time.

Whether McCain elects to finally fire those bullets is another story.

Reminding people that Obama and his Democratic colleagues were the ones who thwarted the attempts of McCain and other Republicans to rein in Fannie and Freddie is also important, but McCain's already proven willing to make this point (and likely will again tonight), so I don't expect this to be a source of major annoyance this evening.  The expected infuriations involve 1) McCain letting Obama get away with his whopper that 95% of Americans won't be hurt by his tax increases and 2) kid gloves remaining on during the Ayers exchange.

Ideally, I'd like to see McCain ask Obama why, if he believes "spreading the wealth around" helps everybody, he hasn't simply been cutting an extra check to the IRS each year to bring his own effective tax rate up to the "fair share" he'd like to see imposed on high income earners.

It doesn't matter how bad a year this is for Republicans.  A terrorist-sympathizing candidate with strong socialist leanings (and former socialist party membership) shouldn't even be polling in the double-digits.  McCain can still put him away, but he needs to get in the fight tonight in a way he hasn't even approached in earlier rounds.

100 million eyeballs will tune in again tonight, but after this the election goes on auto-pilot, save a true October bombshell.

Update:  Significantly better than expected.  A solid B- for McCain, possibly bumped up to a B for his Herbert Hoover zinger.  Not enough pushback on Obama's minimization of his Ayers relationships, nor on the 95%-of-taxpayers baloney.  Not a knock-out by any means, but a pleasant surprise nonetheless.

Update:  Heh.

Obama called on people to put down their video games, but as a McCain staffer e-mails: “But he advertises on them? Disingenuousness.”

What Obama actually said was that he was going to take away our video games.

Update:  Joe the plumber weighs in on the debate that featured him some 20 times.

In Ohio on Sunday, Obama was approached by one man who said, "Your new tax plan's going to tax me more."

A video clip caught by Fox News shows Obama replying, "It's not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance at success, too. And I think that when we spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

McCain referred repeatedly to that voter, Joe Wurzelbacher, a plumber from Toledo, Ohio.

Wurzelbacher watched Wednesday night's debate and said he still thinks Obama's plan would keep him from buying the small business that employs him.

About McCain: "He's got it right as far as I go."

Ayers Likely Ghost Wrote Obama's Memoir - Part II

Last Thursday, I linked Jack Cashill's extensive analysis of Barack Obama's first memoir Dreams From My Father, the glaring literary ineptitude of its ostensible author, and its striking technical and lyrical similarities to Bill Ayers' memoir Fugitive Days.

I traded e-mails with Cashill shortly thereafter and learned that he was continuing his analysis of Ayers' other written works.  Among those works is Ayers' 1993 book To Teach, wherein Cashill has found additional support for his thesis that Ayers ghost wrote Obama's book.

Some of this is rehash of his earlier analysis (comparing Dreams and Fugitive Days), but the comparison between Dreams and To Teach is all new and offers yet more convincing evidence that Ayers was the true author of the work that earned Time Magazine's plaudit "the best-written memoir ever produced by an American politician."

As a reminder, Obama explicitly claims that he did not employ a ghost writer or a co-author in the composition of his memoir.  The revelation that Ayers either helped write or simply wrote Dreams would not only expose Obama in a bald-faced, intellect-deflating lie; it would further refute his increasingly laughable assertion that the unrepentant terrorist is simply a "guy from the neighborhood."

Read Cashill's latest installment at World Net Daily.

Previously:  Ayers Likely Ghost Wrote Obama's Memoir

(HT: Ace)

Have You Contributed To Obama?

No?  Are you sure?

Steve and Rachel Larman say a strange credit card charge appeared on their statement this month — a $2300 donation to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. The Larman’s say they don’t want this to be about their political affiliation, but they say they’re not about to give the Obama campaign any help from their pocketbook.

They said they notified Chase, their credit card bank, to report the fraud.

“(They) said that they had seen-they were familiar with this,” said Steve Larman. “It was fraud, they believe through telemarketing but they were going to be doing some more investigations.”

“(They) said that they had seen-they were familiar with this,” said Steve Larman. “It was fraud, they believe through telemarketing but they were going to be doing some more investigations.”

The Larman’s don’t want their politics to enter into what is essentially just a fraudulent charge. But they say that the charge involves the Obama campaign adds insult to injury for the registered Republicans.

“They (Chase) kept on asking me ‘are you sure you wouldnt have gone to a site in support of Obama’,” said Rachel Larman. “And I repeatedly said ‘Im voting for McCain - I would not be going to an Obama site’.”

Chase dropped the charge from the Larman’s card. The couple is thankful thay they caught the charge on the card, but worried that others may not see that type of fraud on their own credit cards before it’s too late.

(HT: MM)

You can check for your name here, but the Larmans' forcible contribution doesn't appear to have been reported by the Obama campaign to the FEC (at least not under their own name - it could've been processed using a fictitious name or even that of the card thief), so you're probably better off double-checking your credit card statements.

Dead people, foreigners, gibberish names, and now the unwitting.  The number of asterisks following Obama's "fundraising record" continues to grow.

Judgment

Would you let these people babysit your kids?

(HT: Riehl World View)