Election Odds N' Ends

1. Let's not candy-coat last night's results: this was a disaster for Democrats, a repudiation of the Far Left crowd mismanaging the Congress, and a direct rebuke of President Obama.

2. The Dems can spin the result of NY-23, where the Democrat won that special Congressional election, but the truth is that race was always a hot mess, and when you add together Conservative Doug Hoffman's 45% with the (dropped-out GOP candidate) Scozzafava's 5%, together they beat the Democrats' 49%. It wasn't enough to win---this time. Next year, the Dem will have to run again for his seat, and this time, the GOP will be ready with the right candidate.

3. Independents who voted for the Bama last year have swung big-time to the Republicans. Since over 60% of Independents oppose Obamacare, health care "reform" just might bite the dust.

4. The star power of Obama on the Left and Giuliani and Palin on the Right meant zip. It's the economy, stupid. And it's the spending too, stupid.

5. The White House claimed that the Bama wasn't watching the returns last night. Not much. During the campaign, he was all over VA and NJ. In fact, in NJ, he and (now loser) John Corzine were so joined at the hip, they were like the couple in the bathtub in the Cialis ad.

Celebrate today. Tomorrow, the hard work of taking our country back continues.

Comments

[gringoman]

MONICA/////4. "The star power of Obama on the Left and Giuliani and Palin on the Right meant zip. It's the economy, stupid. And it's the spending too, stupid."

gr/////1. Giuliani (like Don Imus, incidentally) plumped for NJ winner, Governor-Elect Christie, while Christie was out-spent massively.

2. True, Palin's conservative guy in 'NY 23' Doug Hoffman lost, but only after this accountant out of nowhere was gang-banged by the combined resources of both the Democrat and Republican machines, not to mention the ACORN Republican drop-out Scozzafava, they still managing to defeat Hoffman by only a few percentage points.

3. Obama, campaigning for the massively funded Goldman Sachs loser Corzine, spent more time in New Jersey than he does shooting hoops (unlike Sarah Palin who made no personal appearances, not even for the gang-banged Doug Hoffman in upstate NY.)

Conclusion: If the "star power" of Giuliani, and especially Sarah Palin "meant zip," it appears that Obamarxie's meant less than zip.

[Ummah Gummah]

. . . that agenda certainly is detrimental to the interests of the WHITE middle-class.

Posted by: DJ | November 04, 2009 at 08:10 AM

Why is "WHITE" in all caps? How do you think the BLACK middle-class is doing?

POSTED BY: FREDK2929 | NOVEMBER 04, 2009 AT 10:14 AM

--

FreaK, you're boring us with your insinuations of "racism". Obviously DJ is WHITE, and just like BLACKS who care mainly, scratch that, exclusively about BLACK issues he cares about WHITE issues.

Simple as that.

Goodbye.

.

[DJ]

FreaK, you're boring us with your insinuations of "racism". Obviously DJ is WHITE, and just like BLACKS who care mainly, scratch that, exclusively about BLACK issues he cares about WHITE issues.

Simple as that.

Goodbye.

.

Posted by: Ummah Gummah | November 04, 2009 at 12:03 PM

--

Exactly right, Ummah.

[gringoman]

MINDS THAT MEET

Tuesday, November 3, 2009 11:12 PM

By: Dick Morris and Eileen McGann

Chris Christie's gutsy win in New Jersey puts the arrogant big spender Jon Corzine in his place. But the election in Virginia probably has more to say to marginal Democratic congressmen who are considering how to vote on healthcare reform.

Obviously, Christie's victory is a body blow to Obama after Corzine outspent the Republican by 5-to-1. Corzine's defeat sends a message that the nation is moving sharply against Obama.

GRINGOMAN/////Re the two Gubernatorials. If Christie wins in NJ, after Republican already won big in Virginia,(both States that swooned for Obama "hope and change" in 2008) this is a solid blow to the Obamanation gut, and possibly even to the 2000 page behemoth of Bampirecare

Posted by: gringoman | November 03, 2009 at 11:46 PM

[thorn66]

Exactly right, Ummah.

Posted by: DJ | November 04, 2009 at 12:20 PM

DJ--As an expert on WHITE issues, I was wondering what you thought about the Justice of the Peace in Louisiana who refused to marry the mixed-race couple.

[gringoman]

FreaK, you're boring us with your insinuations of "racism". Obviously DJ is WHITE, and just like BLACKS who care mainly, scratch that, exclusively about BLACK issues he cares about WHITE issues.

Simple as that.

Goodbye.

.

Posted by: Ummah Gummah | November 04, 2009 at 12:03 PM

--

Exactly right, Ummah.

Posted by: DJ | November 04, 2009 at 12:20 PM

Their double-standard liberal racism is not only insufferable, it's increasingly out-dated. Yet they and their designated black hacks are still trying to run a neo-plantation. The dumber ones don't even get it.

[gringoman]

NY 23: A CONSERVATIVE WIN?

MICHELLE MALKIN////Conservatives owe NY-23 candidate Doug Hoffman immeasurable gratitude. He overcame impossible odds (single digits just a month ago) to come within two points of defeating Democrat Bill Owens. Hoffman had zero name recognition. National Republican Party officials dumped nearly $1 million into the race on behalf of radical leftist GOP candidate Dede Scozzafava, who then turned around, endorsed Owens and siphoned off 5 percent of the vote with her name still on the ballot after she dropped out.

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/11/04/the-gop-elites-1-million-object-lesson-and-the-message-of-ny-23/

[gringoman]

REDSTATE////NY 23 a Conservative Win

Posted by Erick Erickson (Profile)

Wednesday, November 4th at 12:04AM EST
145 Comments

The race has now been called for Democrat Bill Owens.

This is a huge win for conservatives.

“Whaaaa. . . ?” you say.

There are two big victories at work in New York’s 23rd Congressional District.

First, the GOP now must recognize it will either lose without conservatives or will win with conservatives. In 2008, many conservatives sat home instead of voting for John McCain. Now, in NY-23, conservatives rallied and destroyed the Republican candidate the establishment chose.

I have said all along that the goal of activists must be to defeat Scozzafava. Doug Hoffman winning would just be gravy. A Hoffman win is not in the cards, but we did exactly what we set out to do — crush the establishment backed GOP candidate.

And make no mistake, despite the Beltway spin, we know for certain based on statements from the local Republican parties, that they chose Scozzafava based on advice from the Washington crowd.

So we have demonstrated to the GOP that it must not take conservatives for granted. The GOP spent $900,000.00 on a Republican who dropped out and endorsed the Democrat. Were we to combine Scozzafava and Hoffman’s votes, Hoffman would have won.

Secondly, and just as importantly, there has all of a sudden been a huge movement among some activists to go the third party route. We see in NY-23 that this is not possible as third parties are not viable.

Third parties lack funding and ability for a host of reasons. Conservatives are going to have to work from within the GOP. The GOP had better pay attention.

For all intents and purposes, NY-23 is a trial run for Florida. And in Florida, the conservative candidate is operating inside the GOP. If John Cornyn and the NRSC do not want to see Florida go the way of NY-23, they better stand down.

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/11/04/in-ny-23-conservatives-win/

[gringoman]

Exactly right, Ummah.

Posted by: DJ | November 04, 2009 at 12:20 PM

DJ--As an expert on WHITE issues, I was wondering what you thought about the Justice of the Peace in Louisiana who refused to marry the mixed-race couple.

Posted by: thorn66 | November 04, 2009 at 12:45 PM

If the couple has any sense, and don't want to hire themselves out to the liberal racists and Grievance, Inc for a "case," why don't they go find a Justice of the Peace who will marry them? What kind of idiot wants to be married by an obvious "enemy"? What a way to begin 'marital bliss'!

There is no right to marry, anywhere, not even for homosexuals who wish to dictate a right that does not exist.

[mjfell]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091104/ap_on_bi_ge/us_fed_interest_rates

The economy started to grow again last quarter for the first time in more than a year, although there are uncertainties about the strength and staying power of the recovery, especially after government supports are removed.
--------
The economy did NOT start to grow last quarter. The GDP numbers were artifically created by Cash for Clunkers and housing sales dependent on government spending. This is NOT growth. There were NOT jobs created, because the economic private sector is STILL shrinking!

Keeping interest rates at zero is continuing to pump yet more devalued dollars into the banking system. Thank God the banks still aren't lending...inflation would be through the roof. When that happens, the Fed will be forced to raise interest rates. Expect high interest rates...VERY high interest rates in the future.

When you employ the policies of Jimmy Carter on steroids, you'll get those results on steroids.

For every action there's an equal and opposite reaction.

[Truther]

I posted earlier a suggestion to firewall banks, to stop the flow of bad securities and monetary flow to risky places. My feedback includes the statement that if the flow to China were stopped it would be Armageddon.

Is that BS? Is that a banker's threat or a Chinese threat? We have heard from our politicians, and we have heard from the bankers who do not want to discuss the value of any assets. But no one has talked to, or openly discussed the actual position of the Chinese government. Are they threatening US? Are we threatening them? Do we need their purchase of our treasury bonds at all? If the Fed can buy them, do we need the Chinese? I understand that the Chinese control communications to their people, but who is controlling communications about China here in the US?

Besides the Chinese, what about companies like Liz Claiborne? A retail business that has slumped with the economy is surviving on credit. No doubt they are being compelled to become more competitive, possibly to "go global" to survive, if they have not already. Should they be protected by the banks through credit, or protected by the government through tariffs?

Then finally, there are all the bad loans to people, places, and things that have never turned a profit and likely will never. Should the banks continue to payout cheap money to them, allowing them to satisfy one loan, with a loan from somewhere else, etc?

[Truther]

Where is the Chinese ambassador to the US? Has anyone ever seen him? Can he speak English? Does he live in a closet?

[xbjllb]

Conservatives and GOP: What have we learned from this little Hoffman debacle?

1. The overwhelming majority of Americans in this Great country don't buy you AND your endless war anymore. They want peace, and the troops home, NOW. They see through the BS and are tired of making four Offense Contractor Corporations filthy blood-drenched rich at the expense of American lives.

2. At the same time, they want SECULAR FISCAL conservatism, NOT religious extremism. Elmer Gantry has been put down, yet again.

If you can figure that out, and pick your candidates based on THAT criteria, you CAN beat Obama and the Democrats.

If not, then fail. Again. And again.

Until you do learn.

[Truther]

WE have heard more from Amadinejad, than we have from the Chinese government, a country that our banks have made us dependent upon. Should not the people of the US have a notion of the type of people we are dealing with over there, before we are asked or forced to imbalanced trade relations with them, even to the extent of depressing our economy?

If they spew Communist propaganda, should we not see that? These people are not going to disappear, right?
How much ought we to invest in Iran right now? Is there any difference between Iran and China?

[thorn66]

Exactly right, Ummah.

Posted by: DJ | November 04, 2009 at 12:20 PM

DJ--As an expert on WHITE issues, I was wondering what you thought about the Justice of the Peace in Louisiana who refused to marry the mixed-race couple.

Posted by: thorn66 | November 04, 2009 at 12:45 PM

If the couple has any sense, and don't want to hire themselves out to the liberal racists and Grievance, Inc for a "case," why don't they go find a Justice of the Peace who will marry them? What kind of idiot wants to be married by an obvious "enemy"? What a way to begin 'marital bliss'!

There is no right to marry, anywhere, not even for homosexuals who wish to dictate a right that does not exist.

Posted by: gringoman | November 04, 2009 at 01:48 PM
---------------------------------------------------

Gringo- I realize that your greedy narcissism compels you to answer questions that are not even directed towards you, but isn't it enough that your posts already comprise 50% of the content on this blog. I'm sure D.J. is more than capable of speaking for himself.

[DJ]

DJ--As an expert on WHITE issues, I was wondering what you thought about the Justice of the Peace in Louisiana who refused to marry the mixed-race couple.

Posted by: thorn66 | November 04, 2009 at 12:45 PM

--

Sorry, thorn. I'm unacquainted with that particular story so I cannot comment on it other than I agree with Gringoman's take.

[mjfell]

Glenn Vs. The GOP:

SAY NO TO BIG TENT

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/videos/?uri=channels/338017/596792

[thorn66]

(apologies if Gringo may have already posted this last week)

Birther Orly Taitz's Lawsuit Dismissed

"A U.S. district court judge on Thursday dismissed a lawsuit involving Orly Taitz seeking to have President Obama removed from office because he is not a natural born citizen of the United States.

In his dismissal...Judge David O. Carter writes that removal of a sitting president for any reason "is within the province of Congress, not the courts."

"Plaintiffs have attacked the judiciary, including every prior court that has dismissed their claim, as unpatriotic and even treasonous for refusing to grant their requests and for adhering to the terms of the Constitution which set forth its jurisdiction," he writes.

"Respecting the constitutional role and jurisdiction of this Court is not unpatriotic," continues Carter. "Quite the contrary, this Court considers commitment to that constitutional role to be the ultimate reflection of patriotism."

Carter says at another point that "the hearings have been interesting to say the least."

"Plaintiffs’ counsel has favored rhetoric seeking to arouse the emotions and prejudices of her followers rather than the language of a lawyer seeking to present arguments through cogent legal reasoning," he writes. "While the Court has no desire to chill Plaintiffs’ enthusiastic presentation, Taitz’s argument often hampered the efforts of her cocounsel Gary Kreep (“Kreep”), counsel for Plaintiffs Drake and Robinson, to bring serious issues before the Court."

"[T]he Court has received several sworn affidavits that Taitz asked potential witnesses that she planned to call before this Court to perjure themselves," writes Carter. "This Court is deeply concerned that Taitz may have suborned perjury through witnesses she intended to bring before this Court."

Elsewhere in the document, Carter says that "[p]laintiffs appear to assume that should the Court receive a document from Kenya, the Court would give credence to this document over the American birth records of the President and the case would be resolved."

"Even should the Court permit the issuance of a letter rogatory to Kenya, the Court would still engage in a comparative exercise in which the records of America, which has historically maintained some of the most credible recordkeeping practices in the world, would be contrasted with the credibility of the records obtained from Kenya," he writes.

The Judge complains that the plaintiffs "have encouraged the Court to ignore these mandates of the Constitution; to disregard the limits on its power put in place by the Constitution; and to effectively overthrow a sitting president who was popularly elected."

At one point, in a footnote, Carter says that "The inclusion of the First Lady in this lawsuit, considering she holds no constitutional office, is baffling."

Taitz has filed multiple court cases making similar claims, and was fined $20,000 following another dismissal by a judge who says she had abused "her privilege to practice law." She is refusing to pay the fine."
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/10/29/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5452727.shtml

Full court opinion: http://www.scribd.com/doc/21808122/Judge-Carter-Ruling-on-MTD

[xbjllb]

Say "No" to the big tent and die, die, die.

The sooner the better. We may well end up with three "major" parties, The DNC, the marginalized GOP, and the dying CKT.

(ChristianIST Kooks Tea) Party.

It's amazing how a bunch of fringe demonstrations protesting exactly the wrong things can falsely empower a small group of truly fringe people into believing they're mainstream.

And I'm one of the FIRST Birthers....

[mjfell]

Proof positive that Olbermann is a complete idiot who's probably never even watched Beck (like the rest of the left wing lunatics who denounce him). Why would anyone in their right mind pay attention to this buffoon?

http://www.breitbart.tv/olbermann-to-beck-go-to-hell/

[mjfell]

Defeat in Maine a harsh blow to gay-marriage drive

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091104/ap_on_an/us_gay_marriage_analysis

In an election that had been billed for weeks as too close to call, Maine's often unpredictable voters repealed a state law Tuesday that would have allowed same-sex couples to wed. Gay marriage has now lost in all 31 states in which it has been put to a popular vote — a trend that the gay-rights movement had believed it could end in Maine.
-------------
How long is it going to take for this reality to sink in to the proponents for destroying the cornerstone of human civilization?

Marriage is between a man and a woman in order to perpetuate the species. A family becomes a clan, which becomes a tribe, then a village, then a town, a city, state, country, world.

Of course, the proponents for gay marriage are the same eco-nazis who refuse to admit that human beings are also part of the ecology.

Idiots, one and all.

[mjfell]

Say "No" to the big tent and die, die, die.

The sooner the better. We may well end up with three "major" parties, The DNC, the marginalized GOP, and the dying CKT.

(ChristianIST Kooks Tea) Party.

It's amazing how a bunch of fringe demonstrations protesting exactly the wrong things can falsely empower a small group of truly fringe people into believing they're mainstream.

And I'm one of the FIRST Birthers....

Posted by: xbjllb | November 04, 2009 at 04:19 PM

---------------------

Braindead waste of carbon molecules alert!!

[xbjllb]

I watch Beck, when CNN gets into their occasional Obama-worshipping "reports."

Nice complexion. For a complete idiot. I thought only drunks claiming to be ex-drunks (like Bush) acted drunk most of the time.

Guess not.

Olbermann? He's still outnumbered and outgunned 20 to 1 in the media, so why so angry? What's the threat?

Oh. Occasional Truth. Can't have that. Not in the US of A.

[xbjllb]

"Braindead waste of carbon molecules alert!!" - MJFell

----

Thanks for the fear. You complete me.

[thorn66]

Sorry, thorn. I'm unacquainted with that particular story so I cannot comment on it other than I agree with Gringoman's take.
Posted by: DJ | November 04, 2009 at 03:41 PM
-------------------------------------------------

I completely understand DJ. It's been a national news story for a couple of weeks. Here's a reprint from the Fox News site.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,567842,00.html

Judge Who Refused to Marry Interracial Couple Asked to Resign

AP Monday , October 19, 2009

NEW ORLEANS —
Louisiana's governor and a U.S. senator joined Friday in calling for the ouster of a local official who refused to marry an interracial couple, saying his actions clearly broke the law.

Keith Bardwell, a white justice of the peace in Tangipahoa Parish in the southeastern part of the state, refused to issue a marriage license earlier this month to Beth Humphrey, who is white, and Terence McKay, who is black. His refusal has prompted calls for an investigation or resignation from civil and constitutional rights groups and the state's Legislative Black Caucus.

Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal said in a statement a nine-member commission that reviews lawyers and judges in the state should investigate.

"Disciplinary action should be taken immediately — including the revoking of his license," Jindal said.

Bardwell did not return calls left on his answering machine Friday.

Bardwell has said he always asks if a couple is interracial and, if they are, refers them to another justice of the peace. Bardwell said no one had complained in the past and he doesn't marry the couples because he's worried about their children's futures.

"Perhaps he's worried the kids will grow up and be president," said Bill Quigley, director of the Center for Constitutional Rights and Justice, referring to President Barack Obama, the son of a black father from Kenya and a white mother from Kansas.

Obama's deputy press secretary Bill Burton echoed those sentiments.

"I've found that actually the children of biracial couples can do pretty good," Burton told reporters aboard Air Force One as it flew to Texas.

Humphrey and McKay were eventually married by another justice of the peace, but are now looking into legal action against Bardwell.

Humphrey said she called Bardwell on Oct. 6 to ask about a marriage license. She said Bardwell's wife told her that Bardwell would not sign marriage licenses for interracial couples.

Bardwell maintains he can recuse himself from marrying people. Quigley disagreed.

"A justice of the peace is legally obligated to serve the public, all of the public," Quigley said. "Racial discrimination has been a violation of Louisiana and U.S. law for decades. No public official has the right to pick and choose which laws they are going to follow."

A spokeswoman for the Louisiana Judiciary Commission said investigations were confidential and would not comment. If the commission recommends action to the Louisiana Supreme Court, the matter would become public.

U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., said in a statement Bardwell's practices and comments were deeply disturbing.

"Not only does his decision directly contradict Supreme Court rulings, it is an example of the ugly bigotry that divided our country for too long," she said.

Tangipahoa Parish President Gordon Burgess said Bardwell's views were not consistent with his or those of the local government. But as an elected official, Bardwell was not under the supervision of the parish government.

"However, I am certainly very disappointed that anyone representing the people of Tangipahoa Parish, particularly an elected official, would take such a divisive stand," Burgess said in an e-mail. "I would hope that Mr. Bardwell would consider offering his resignation if he is unable to serve all of the people of his district and our parish."

Bardwell, a Republican, has served as justice of peace for 34 years. He said he has run without opposition each time, but had decided earlier not to run again. His current term expires Dec. 31, 2014.