Virginia Right!

Once again, President Obama took time today to press for a tax hike, his “Buffett Tax,” instead of addressing unemployment, high gas prices, or even this country’s debt crisis. Of course, the Buffett Tax would do basically nothing to help solve any of these serious problems.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell blasted Obama’s focus on this tax hike in a statement this morning, saying, “Sadly, an administration that promised it would focus on jobs is wasting yet another day on a political event that won’t take a single person off the unemployment line. With millions out of work, gas at nearly $4.00 a gallon, and the election still seven months away, Republicans are calling on the President to join us in support of the dozens of jobs and energy bills that have passed the House but are stalled in the Democrat-led Senate. We should be focused on jobs and energy legislation that can pass—not tax-hike show-votes designed to fail.”

The White House itself has said that the Buffet Tax “was never our plan to bring the deficit down and get the debt under control” and according to The Hill today, “Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) on Wednesday acknowledged GOP criticisms that the Obama administration’s Buffett Rule ‘isn’t going to balance the budget,’ but argued that the proposal was important as a matter of ‘values’ and ‘fairness.’ ‘This is an issue about fairness,’ Coons said on MSNBC. ‘It isn’t going to balance the budget, but it is important for values and for showing some fairness.’”

And National Journal wrote yesterday that “[i]f you’re an unemployed American . . . . you’ll realize the Buffett Rule has nothing to do with helping you, or 13 million other Americans looking for work as of March, find a job.”

Interestingly, the president was rather defensive about his tax proposal this morning. The AP notes, “President Barack Obama says his call for raising taxes on millionaires is not a redistribution of wealth . . . .” And Yahoo News writes, “President Barack Obama defended his ‘Buffett Rule’ proposal for higher taxes on the very rich Wednesday, denying it was a reelection campaign ‘gimmick’ that will do little to close the deficit or spur job growth.”

Of course, National Journal pegged the Buffett Tax yesterday, with an analysis piece concluding that it is in fact a political gimmick: “[I]t tells America’s job-seekers, don’t worry, we’re going to make the tax code look more fair to you. Lots of polls suggest that’s a good political argument. But that’s what it is: a political pitch.”

How proud Barack Obama and his local Clone Timmy Kaine must feel this week!

First, the Supreme Court stands ready to abort his “Crowning Achievement” Obamacare and the Democrats are circling the spin wagons to declare that, somehow, a victory. Tim Kaine, as head Cheer-girl for the ObamaCare disaster has been trying to change the subject of late demanding tax hikes on oil companies so the price of gas will climb even higher.

Last night, the US House brought up Obama’s proposed budget that adds more crushing debt even faster than the President has already piled up the trillions!

And not a single Democrat voted in favor of it.

It is ironic that the first truly bi-partisan effort of the US House of Representatives was a complete repudiation of Barack Obama’s massive spending bill.

It went down 414 – 0.

Ironically, Obama’s BFF in Virginia Timmy Kaine knows exactly how that feels. He had a similar vote cast on his final budget before leaving office as the Republicans and Democrats in the Virginia General Assembly found unity of purpose in killing the Kaine budget.

It speaks volumes about these far left Liberals when even their own party does not like their ideas.

But, hey. Those job killers stick together. Thick as thieves, they are!

There was a dust up last week that was very revealing and it was over statehood for Puerto Rico and whether they could have Spanish as an official language.  Here is the Santorum view:

There are two kinds of polls.

Those intended to “take the pulse” and get an accurate picture, and those skewed to attempt to influence thoughts and opinions.

Political candidates hire pollsters to get an accurate picture of how they are doing, where they are doing well, and where they need improvement.

These are the important ones.

Others run polls and intentionally skew the results to give the perception that their side is winning.

A recent NBC News-Marist Poll is a case study for polls trying to change the public perception that one candidate is falling behind.

A few days ago, Roanoke College came out with a poll showing George Allen rising to an 8 point advantage over Tim Kaine.

I am skeptical of all polls until I look at the numbers behind them. I am not interested in knowing the results of a poll that is not truly reflective the voters. I want the truth.

The Roanoke College poll was pretty well balanced. I like polls to have over 1,000 as a sample size, but if not, the ratios must be tightly controlled. Roanoke College passed my smell test. Based on the sample, I agree that Allen looks to have an 8 point lead, perhaps a bit less, but at least 5 points.

So when I saw a poll this weekend showing Tim Kaine had jumped to a 10 point lead, either something horrible had happened with the Allen that I had missed, or Kaine was Sainted.

Well, neither had happened. So I looked at the numbers behind the Marist Poll.

The quick answer came in the number of Democrats vs. the number of Republicans sampled.

In the Roanoke College poll, the mix of Republicans (30%), Democrats (28%) and Independents (31%) was pretty good. Virginia is pretty evenly split these days with the past couple of elections leaning a bit more to the Republican side.

And how evenly did the Marist Poll split the leanings? Well, not good at all. Those identifying as either a Democrat or leaning Democrat totaled 50%, Republican 36% and Independent just 14%.

So what gives with that? I can promise you that if this was a representative sample the Virginia Senate would not be in a 20-20 tie!

But even skewed polls tell us something.

Each candidate will get the majority of votes from their own party as well as a percentage of the Independents.

With 50% Democrats sampled in the poll, you would expect that Kaine would get most of the Democrats and some of the Independents. You would also expect the same from Allen. And if we consider the Democrats who will vote for Allen a wash with the Republicans who will vote for Kaine, we would expect Kaine to get 50% plus a few Indy’s and Allen to get 36% plus a few Indy’s.

So how did our Senate Candidates do?

Allen did pretty much as you could predict. 39%. All of the Republicans and some of the Indy’s.

And Kaine? He only got 48% which indicates that he does not even get all of the Democrats and none of the Indy’s.

So if this poll were properly weighted to reflect the actual political landscape of Virginia, Allen would have at least a 6 point lead over Kaine.

NBC News releasing such a skewed poll is no surprise. The fact that Marist would release such a skewed poll and risk damage to their reputation as a polling firm either means they are also in the Democrat’s tank or NBC paid them a lot of money for this.

Marist Polls normally doesn’t play politics this much.

They should really be ashamed of conducting such a biased poll and not at least attempting to weight the poll to reflect reality.

I have saved this poll to my archives. I will be watching Marist Polls more closely in the future.

And if they continue this pattern of skewed results, I might suggest a slight name change.

MarXist Polls sounds appropriate.

Roanoke College has released a new poll of Virginians that shows the presumptive Republican Candidate for US Senate George Allen increasing his lead over Democrat Tim Kaine 45% to 37%.

As always, I look at the numbers behind the polls to see if they pass my “believability” test, or if the results are skewed and need to be “normalized”.

This poll passes with only 1 bit of criticism, sample size.

I am not a fan of polls involving less than 1,000 respondents and this poll interviewed only 607. But to the credit of the Roanoke College, they did a few things that I believe more than make up for a smaller sample size.

One was including cell phones in the sample. 24% of those called were on cells. And they also rotated the order of the candidate names.

And the mix of Republicans (30%), Democrats (28%) and Independents (31%) was pretty good.

My conclusion is that Virginians are beginning to move away from Kaine and towards Allen. In a September 2011 poll, Allen led Kaine 42% to 39% which shows movement away from Kaine and towards Allen.

Interestingly, as voters move towards Allen compared to the Roanoke College September poll, they are moving towards Obama who had 36% compared to Romney’s 44% in September and now stands at 42% to Romney’s 43%.

That runs counter to the argument that if Obama does well in Virginia, Kaine will do well.

This poll indicates that Virginian’s prefer Allen to Kaine – even if more prefer Obama to Romney.

That is really bad news for Tim Kaine who is hoping for strong support for Obama to help him in November.

Mental Recession has a great piece on some shocking Union behavior that I found very interesting:

The Albany Times Union has broken a story involving correction officers in Rensselaer county trying to unseat the incumbent Republican sheriff, Jack Mahar, through unsavory means.  The crux of the story involves getting inmates to register or change their enrollment to the Conservative Party, giving the Democrat challenger, Gary Gordon, an edge in the general election.  Gordon ended up capturing the Conservative line by a narrow margin, but losing the general election to Mahar.

Reports show a labor union leader for the corrections officers, Kevin Rogers, allegedly dropping off 140 voter registration forms that enrolled people in the Conservative Party, of which four have been confirmed to be inmates.

Check out the rest at The Mental Recession.

At the bottom of a rather lengthy post on the horrors and dangers that Bob Goodlatte is attempting to thrust on America, I noted that Virginia Right! has decided to endorse Karen Kwiatkowski in her Primary bid to retire the 20 year incumbent Republican Congressman.

Few things are as unforgivable as an intentional erosion of our Constitutional rights. This is expected by Progressives as they see the Constitution as an obstacle to their plans, but when it is a Republican, it is especially heinous.

And once a representative crosses that line, there is no going back.

Even Andy Schmookler, the Democrat who expects to run for the seat opposes SOPA.

Goodlatte has accepted a lot of money from the Entertainment Industry as the above linked post shows. That is simply not a good reason to infringe on the rights of Americans.

Time to go, Bob!

SOPA crosses the line.

I don’t plan to participate in the Virginia Republican Presidential Primary in March, 2012. Not because of the requirement that you take an oath to support the eventual Republican nominee, whoever that may eventually be. That’s a given. Any of the Republican candidates will be a far better president than Obama. If you are interested in why I am not participating, you can read about my issue with the RPV here.

What a lot of out of state Virginia Right! readers must understand is that Virginia does not require voters to register by party. Party affiliation is not on the form. The state remains neutral and allows each party great latitude in setting their own rules.

And Republican Primaries are open to all registered voters.

Many times, Democratic and Republican Primaries are held at the same time and same locations. When that is the case, you can only obtain one ballot, Democrat or Republican. There are not a lot of cross over votes and the concern that the other party will attempt to influence the competition’s primary by voting en mass for the weakest candidate is not worth worrying about.

But remember Rush Limbaugh’s Operation Chaos? He urged his listeners to stop Hillary by voting for her primary opponent, a fellow named Barack Obama. And while that didn’t work out so well for the Conservative side, it is not a tactic that is particularly noble and adds more than a hint of sleaziness to the elective process.

The purpose of a primary is to allow each party to select the best candidate from their party to run against the opposing party’s candidate. And it is highly dishonorable (in my opinion) to vote in a primary if you intend to support the other party.

Which is why I have no problem with the loyalty oath. Basically, it is non binding and absolutely useless. We have already established that it is a dishonorable act to vote in a primary for  “the other side” with the purpose in mind of selecting a weaker candidate go go up against the candidate of the party you support. Dishonorable people willing to do such a thing are not going to have a problem signing an oath promising to support the eventual Republican nominee and then doing the opposite.

And these are really the ones that the RPV is trying to stop, and it will do nothing to keep dishonorable people from acting dishonorably.

And the majority of Republicans are not going to support Obama in 2012. So the non binding oath is not going to change anything with them.

And if the RPV thinks for one second that a single Ron Paul supporter who goes in to vote for Ron Paul will let a little thing like a non binding oath to the Republican Party keep them from voting for Ron Paul should he fail to secure the Republican Nomination and run as a third party candidate, then they are absolutely delusional. Ron Paul supporters are going to vote for Ron Paul. Period.

So exactly what does the RPV hope to gain by requiring an oath to support the Republican Candidate as a condition of voting in the Republican Primary?

Well, I’m afraid I haven’t a clue.

The only thing this has done is generate more negative publicity for Virginia Republicans with absolutely no benefit to the party and tick off a lot of Republicans like Bob Marshall who would never vote for Obama anyway.

And it will also serve to feed the Democrats line that the Republicans are the Stupid Party and give a lot of Independents yet another reason to vote Democratic.

But if I were planning to vote in the Republican Presidential Primary in Virginia that has already been tainted by rule changes in the middle of the contest, I wouldn’t have a problem signing a pledge to vote in such a tainted process promising to support the eventual Republican nominee.

I was already planning to do that.

But it is really sad that the leadership at the RPV keeps shooting themselves in the foot for no good reason. This absolutely meaningless “oath” is just another stupid idea coming at a time when the RPV can ill afford it.

You gotta love those Liberals at Public Policy Polling. They do their best to spin the numbers and influence public opinion with their polls. Many media outlets simply report the results without even bothering to let you know that the good folks at PPP are Democratic Pollsters.

That doesn’t mean that the polls are not valid, because the data is absolutely valid.

The interpretation of those numbers is where the term Democratic Pollster becomes relevant.

Most people assume that a poll simply calls people and reports the results. And while that is true, in order to make the poll actually mean something relevant to the topic being polled, especially in political polls, the results must be weighted.

So what is poll weighting?

I will try to make this as simple as possible in case a Democrat (or a Progressive) reads this. Logic and complex thought is simply beyond their abilities, bless their hearts!

If you ask 200 Democrats who they will vote for in the Virginia Senate race, Tim Kaine or George Allen, a very high percentage will say Tim Kaine.

And if you ask 200 Republicans the same question, George Allen will be the top answer.

But if you ask 200 people who are not a member of either party, the results will be entirely different.

So, how do you make any sense of this? Do we throw out the answers by Democrats and Republicans and only consider the Independents?

Well, that would inaccurate too because Republicans and Democrats will vote in the election.

So, why not just use statistics that tell us how many Republicans, Democrats and Independents there are in the state, and call them in the exact proportions?

Well, that’s one way to do it, but you would have to call a large number of people and not even use the data from a lot of them.

That is where weighting comes in. We know that currently , 39% of Virginians consider themselves Republicans and 36% are Democrats, leaving the remaining 25% as neither, usually called Independents.

So, the optimum sample of Virginians to give you a good idea of how the candidates might do if the election were held today, we would need to call 39% Republicans, because we know most – but not all – will pick Allen over Kaine. And we need to call 36% Democrats, most but not all picking Kaine. And 25% need to be neither party.

So how did this PPP poll do in correctly picking the right mix of Republicans, Democrats and Independents?

Well, they were perfectly on target for Democrats. Exactly 36% of the 600 people called said they were Democrats. So, they get an A+ for Democrats.

But they didn’t do so good with Republicans. Out of the 600 people they called, only 33% said they were Republicans, not the 39% we had hoped for. So the Republicans were under-counted by 6%.

Which also means that there were too many Independents. Instead of 25% Independents, they added the 6% that should have been Republicans! 31% of those called were Independents.

So, if you call the exact right number of Democrats (36%) and fewer Republicans (33% instead of 39%) you can expect a Democrat to do better than he actually will in the election, right?

So let’s “weight” these numbers so that they more accurately represent the voters in Virginia and see what this poll is really telling us.

Don’t worry about the math. I am using a calculator. And we will do a very simple weighting example so the Progressives can follow.

The PPP report said that they called 600 people. And we have the percentages of Democrats (36%), Republicans (33%) and Independents (31%).

Let’s change those percentages to real numbers. It makes it easier to see.

Of the 600 people called:

216 Were Democrats (600 times 0.36 if you want to check my math).

198 Were Republicans (600 times 0.33)

186 Were Independents (600 times 0.31)

Add those three up and we get 600. Good. The math is correct so far.

So when the PPP poll reported that Tim Kaine has 47% and George Allen has 42%, we can actually look at the numbers:

282 said Kaine (600 times 0.47)

252 said Allen (600 times 0.42)

That only totals 534, so 66 people were either clueless or were voting for someone else.

So, what do we know so far?

Well, we know most Democrats are going to pick Kaine and most Republicans are going to pick Allen.

We know that PPP called the right number of Democrats and too few Republicans.

And too many Independents.

So, the 282 people who picked Kaine had the correct number of Democrats and too many Independents.

The 252 people who picked Allen had too few Republicans and too many Independents.

So let’s do the correction, shall we? (Sorry Dems, this can get a bit complicated.)

Republicans were under-sampled by 6%. So let’s fix that.

6% of 600 is 36 people, most of whom would have picked Allen. So let’s add 36 to Allen’s total votes, which was 252. That gives us 288 votes for Allen compared to 282 for Kaine.

Which comes out to an Allen lead – 48% to 47%.

Now let’s look at the left wing spin in the poll results from PPP.

In four polls PPP has conducted this year on the Virginia Senate race,
Democratic former Gov. Tim Kaine has gained every time on George Allen, former
holder of the state’s other Senate seat and another ex-governor.  The two were tied in February, then Kaine inched ahead by two points in May, to three points in July, and he now leads by five (47-42).

That would make you think that Kain is gaining ground. But if you look at the number of Democrats vs. Republicans called, every one of these polls has more Democrats than Republicans. And going by the last 2 elections, that is absolutely inaccurate. some of these polls had as many as 39% Democrats polled.

And then there is the “margin of error”. This is another calculation that means that the accuracy of the poll can be off by some calculated percentage. This PPP Poll’s MOE is 4% plus or minus which means that the unweighted results of the poll could be Allen 46% and Kaine 43% instead of the Kaine over Allen 47% to 42% as they reported.

PPP did the same thing in 2009 in the Virginia Governor’s race. At one point, PPP reported that Democrat Creigh Deeds had cut Bob McDonnel’s 14 point lead in half!

And the Progressives cheered at the wonderful news.

But PPP really fudged the numbers. Comparing the in September 2009) to their August poll, Deeds appeared to be mounting a comeback. What they didn’t tell you was that the August poll talked to more Republicans and the September poll talked to more Democrats. Here is what I wrote in 2009 about PPP:

Now, in looking at the internals in the poll, there are some glaring differences in the two sample groups. In the August 4 poll, they surveyed 35% Republicans and 32% Democrats. In the current poll, 38% were Democrats and 31% were Republicans. So, Republicans polled went from +3 to -7 – a swing of 10%. It seems that the only shift has been the in the sample. Deeds polls higher with women, and the latest poll surveyed more women (59%-41%) compared to the August 4 poll (55%-45%).

So, was Deeds really the comeback kid that PPP wanted to make the Democratic base think? Or were they just intentionally skewing the numbers to excite the Democratic base?

We all know that McDonnell beat Deeds by almost 18%.

My advice, take the PPP polls with a grain of salt. They are not usually what they appear.

If you really want an accurate poll, you need to look at Likely Voters, not simply Registered Voters as this poll does. They ask questions to determine how and when you have voted in the past. If you only vote in Presidential elections, then you are not very likely to vote in a state only race. And most polls of Likely Voters favor Republicans. Especially the last few years.

Roanoke College did a poll of Likely Voters for this race in September and it showed Allen leading by 3%. Rasmussen did one later in September and it showed Kaine up by 1%.

So, the bottom line in these polls is that this is a very tight race. I would call it even. Be careful of pollsters, particularly Democratic Pollsters like PPP. If you properly weight their results, the data is somewhat useful, but with a sample size of 600, none of these are going to be very accurate. I prefer a sample size of at least 1,000 and 1,500 is even better.

This poll called more Democrats than Republicans, which is not accurate at all and completely out of touch with the political landscape of Virginia. 30 more people in this Democrat skewed poll picked Kaine. The 5% “lead” is actually 30 people out of 600. This was done to give the left wing media the opportunity claim Kaine won the Associated Press debate.

The numbers have not moved. This race is dead even. Period.

How can I help Ron Paul right here in Virginia or wherever you are (assuming you are not in Iowa and/or NH):

• Buy a Iowa precinct where you can have the supervoters in that precinct be sent the Ron Paul Superbrochure!
• Pledge to give money to the RP campaign on December 16, 2011 (Boston Tea Party anniversary)!
• Make calls into Iowa for the campaign!
• If you are an independent or Democrat voter, see this site for how to become a Blue Republican!  (Any voter can vote in the Virginia Republican Primary if they express an intent to vote for the winner in the general election)
• If you are maxed out in giving to the RP campaign, go to the RevolutionSuperPAC site and give as much as you want!
• If you have time, go to Iowa or NH and campaign for Paul!  Go to the Youth for Paul site for details!
• Here is a site in regard to flyers for RP based on Pearl Harbor Day; see if you like this!
• Buy your Amazon materials through the Daily Paul!
• You can get for the price of postage some RP stickers but you need to put the bumper sticker on your car:  Go here!

I am sure there are many other things to do but this is a good list – thanks to the Daily Paul!  Pick one to do if you can!

Meet the 2012 Presidential Candidates!

The Super Committee has failed. The Democrats one and only goal here is to make Republicans go for a tax increase.

Again.

And they plan to use this “compromise” to win in 2012.

Again.

So what do you do when the answer to the question “Are you better off now than you were four years ago” is a decisive No! It is impossible hard to win reelection with unemployment at record levels, debt and deficits as far as the eye can see and America’s image in the world at an all time low.

What can Democrats possible do to hold onto power that, by all measures, they do not deserve to have?

Four years ago, Candidate Barack Obama had no record to run on and a press unwilling to criticize the man they saw as the Democrat’s answer to Ronald Wilson Reagan (with a side of Jesus Christ).

Now, Obama has a record and even Chris Matthews is having a hard time pretending that this president even deserves another term.

Matthews is echoing the feelings of the Democrats base:

So, what can the Democrats do at this point? Obviously, Obama’s record is better suited to running from than on. So, naturally, divide and conquer is one option. Class warfare. The Virginia elections in 2009 saw Republicans gains in historic numbers and were an early predictor of the 2010 National elections, the 2011 Virginia results could be seen as predicting a dismal 2012 for Democrats. The anti-Democrat wave has neither subsided nor diminished.

History may hold a solution and the Democrats are, obviously, desperate to try anything. And Republicans must heed the lesson to avoid the same consequence.

The Democrats want to create another George H. W. Bush to run against. Never mind that H.W. is not the candidate. Neither was the son, and that worked out pretty well for the Democrats.

In one of the most memorable (and unfortunate) sound bites in the archives of history, George H.W. Bush uttered the words “Read my lips. No new taxes!” during his successful 1988 bid to ride the Ronald Reagan wave into office.

For the next few years, the Democratic controlled Congress fought with Bush the Elder again and again and finally convinced him that a “balanced approach” to attacking the national debt must include new taxes. His ability to govern was thwarted at every turn because of his insistence that he stick to his promise not to raise taxes.

Finally, unable to fight the barrage of negative press from the liberal media, Bush agreed to compromise and increase taxes.

So what was his reward for going along with the Democrats in the spirit of bipartisanship and compromise?

Did we see a new era of camaraderie and cooperation between Democrats and Republicans?

Hell, no!

The Democrats pounced on Republicans like a chicken on a June bug!

Then candidate Bill Clinton, aided by a willing media, forgot about the spirit of compromise. The ignored the magnanimous gesture of a President willing to backtrack on one of the cornerstone promises of his campaign and acceptance speech for the good of the country. Bush put the country ahead of partisan politics.

The expected good will between parties never materialized. Bush had been successfully ambushed by Democrats. The demand for tax increases by the Democrats was a ruse. A political maneuver designed, not to reduce the national debt, because the Democrats are not concerned with such nonsense, but to gain political advantage.

And it worked.

Republicans today need to take that lesson to heart. This “balanced approach” the Democrats are demanding is simply an attempt to create another “Read my lips” moment.

Each and every Republican Presidential Candidate has promised to hold the line on taxes. And while there are only two candidates actively engaged in legislating, Michele Bachmann and Ron Paul, should the Republicans raise taxes, Obama is prepared to spend a billion dollars, which will pale in comparison to the Union and Special Interest ads sure to join in, on commercials and ad campaigns to make all Republicans, House, Senate and the eventual Presidential Nominee, another George H.W. Bush.

Untrustworthy liars.

And for the Republicans who break the tax pledge, the Democrats are counting on the TEA Party to assist them in their quest to hold onto power.

And if you doubt that the left is not giddy over the TEA Party turning on one of it’s own, you only need to look at the Huffington Post’s glee over the dust-up Congressman Allen West, a TEA Party darling, received after voting with House Speaker John Boehner to raise the debt ceiling:

Tea Party leaders announced Thursday that they will mount primary challenges against four freshmen Republicans who have declared their support for John Boehner’s debt ceiling plan.

According to The Hill, the Tea Party groups are calling the four congressmen — Allen West (Fla.), James Lankford (Okla.), Mike Kelly (Pa.), and Bill Flores (Texas) — “Tea Party defectors.”

West addressed the accusations on Laura Ingraham’s radio show, saying he would continue to support Boehner’s plan.

“I think what we have to ask ourselves is, If you’re telling me that I need to vote no against the Boehner plan, then what am I voting for?” West said.

“I’m going to stand with this Boehner plan and, once again, if the folks who one minute they’re saying that I’m their ‘Tea Party hero’ and what, three or four days later ‘I’m a Tea Party defector’ — that kind of schizophrenia I’m not going to get involved in.”

This is a scenario that has Team Obama drooling.

And they are setting the stage for exactly this scenario for 2012.

Think about it! The Democrats only call for a “balanced approach” when they have some nefarious plan in mind. Otherwise, it is their way or the highway. All or nothing.

Consider the Democrat’s position on a balanced approach to Union Labor. Or Global Warming. Or oil, coal, nuclear.

Democrats seek no balance on the EPA, health care, business regulations or social issues.

They simply don’t want or care about compromise or bipartisanship, except as a weapon, or a tool to incrementally impose draconian new rules and expand government power.

So why do they want a “balanced approach” to the debt?

Simple, the Republicans fell for it before, they will fall for it again.

“Read my lips!”

By the Numbers:

There are 7 seats on the Hanover Board of Supervisors

There are 7 Republicans running for the 7 seats.

There is 1 Democrat running

There are 6 Independents running.

Only 1 seat is uncontested.

Only 1 Democrat?

A word on “Independents”.

There are several reasons to run as an Independent instead of as a Republican or Democrat. Some are legitimate reasons, some are circumstantial, and some are downright deceitful.

The legitimate reason to run as an Independent is because you are truly independent of the ideology of either major party. This is easily the most noble of reasons to run as an Independent, but what it really means is that you are unable to take a strong and committed stand on any ideology. These candidates rarely win because voters are looking for someone to lead, not be indecisive.

There are no true Independents running in Hanover County.

The second reason to be an Independent is if you try and lose a Primary contest for your party, yet still believe you have a chance to win. Or worse, you are hoping to split the vote and cause your party to lose the seat. A sour grapes Independent. Hardly noble.

There are no Sour Grapes Independents running in Hanover.

The third reason to run as an Independent is to avoid the expense (and effort) of a primary contest. Not exactly ignoble, unless you are not honest with voters as to the true reason you are running as an Independent. Half of the Independents running for a seat fit into this category. Of these three, only one, Jeff Kyte, running in the Cold Harbor District was truthful. He said would never defeat incumbent Elton Wade for the Republican nomination. Which is true.

The other two “Independents” are actually, or have been, Republicans. Both became Independents to avoid a primary contest. South Anna incumbent John Gordon has been a Republican for years. Rather than face a primary challenge from Republican Wayne Hazzard who has raised over $32,000 to Gordon’s $6,000. Given the opportunity to explain his party change, Gordon used the usual platitudes of representing all of the citizens. I feel that is less than honest.

The third in this category is Debby Winans. She was a Republican and, in order to avoid a primary she likely couldn’t win, became an Independent, much the same as Gordon. And she echos the same platitudes about representing all of the citizens. That is an explanation that rings hollow. In 2008, the Democrat’s shining moment, Hanover voted for Republican Candidate McCain 66.5% and in 2009, Republican Bob McDonnell received 76% of the Hanover vote. Is Hanover Independent? Hardly. The lack of candor from Gordon and Winans is disappointing.

The final reason I will mention for running as an Independent is the most deceitful of all. That is the two Democrats who are pretending to be Independents because Democrats have no chance at all in Hanover, even in the best of years for Democrats – like 2008. Jim Ellis is running in the Chickahominy District as an Independent. This is not Ellis’ first run for this seat. In 2007, Ellis resigned as a Democrat to run for the same seat. After losing the election, he rejoined the Democrats, resigning again to run as an Independent this year. Is there any doubt after the election that he will rejoin his party? Ellis is a Progressive Democrat and has not been just a member of the Democratic Party, he has held ledership roles. Hanover voters should not be fooled.

The second in this category of Independent is Patti Jackson, running in the Henry District. While Jackson does not have the long and established Democratic leadership record of Ellis, she has voted as a Democrat in primaries and is an obvious Liberal.

The final Independent, Carol Cash, running in the Cold Harbor district has a background in education, which may make her more towards the liberal end of the scale, and her answers at a recent forum seem to confirm her leftward leanings. But there is little political activity available in her background.

Hanover is unlikely to elect a Democrat for Board of Supervisors in 2011. That is a given.

But…

Honesty is important. If we can’t find honesty in a candidate’s choice of political party, can we expect something different if they are elected?

Senate Democrats are moving forward with yet another stimulus bill this week, this time a $60 billion infrastructure stimulus (including $10 billion for an infrastructure bank), despite the fact they know there are bipartisan concerns about the bill and that they know it can’t pass.

According to The Hill today, “Obama will try to ramp up pressure on Republicans by visiting Washington’s Key Bridge on Wednesday, one of many bridges around the country eligible for funding if the infrastructure bill passes. . . . Democratic operatives are quick to note that they never expected to pass the jobs bills through the Senate, adding that the multiple roll calls will put Republicans on the defensive and force them to explain on the 2012 campaign trail why they voted no on measures that poll well with voters.”

So it appears Democrats are finally admitting what was obvious all along: these stimulus bills that couple ever more spending with job-killing tax hikes are designed to fail in order to score political points, not create jobs. In fact, Politico pointed out last week, “[Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry] Reid has pushed the president’s agenda when it has had no chance of passing. Reid has pressed for passage of the president’s $447 billion jobs bill and individual pieces of it, even when some of his own rank-and-file Senate Democrats, like [Nebraska Sen. Ben] Nelson, have stood in opposition.” And today Politico notes that Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) “expressed frustration that Senate Democratic leaders continue to bring pieces of the president’s plan forward even though they know full well the proposals will fail.”

Meanwhile, the White House has been awfully candid about how this pattern is all part of a campaign strategy. The Hill reported, “David Axelrod… released a campaign memo on Tuesday signaling that Obama would make his American Jobs Act a major component of his reelection strategy, pummeling Republicans who obstruct his attempts to revive the economy.” Vice President Joe Biden simply came out and admitted, “People say we’re campaigning. We sure as heck are campaigning.”

Bob Woodward, no Republican partisan, recently explained to Chris Matthews that “Barack Obama wants to win so badly, as I understand it, everything in the White House is driven by the election.” Other journalists have noted this, too, with CNN’s Kate Bolduan observing, “The reality in Congress is this bill has virtually no chance of passing and Democrats know that.” And Carl Bernstein said on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, “[F]irst of all, Obama knew that bill couldn’t pass when he formulated it.” Politico acknowledged last month, “Winning in Congress was never really part of the plan. President Barack Obama didn’t do much to bring along lawmakers on his jobs bill — and it showed . . . . [T]he relentless focus on the American Jobs Act wasn’t about racking up a legislative win. It was always about laying the foundation for . . . 2012 . . . .”

As Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said today, “We know the President’s strategy. His so-called jobs bill has one purpose: to divide us. Just this morning, I read a story that quoted some Democrat operative almost bragging about the fact that they don’t expect any of the legislation the President’s been out there talking about on his bus tour to pass. They openly admit these bills are designed to fail. It’s not exactly a state secret that Republicans — and yes, some Democrats — don’t think we should be raising taxes right now on the very people we’re counting on to create the jobs we need to get us out of a jobs crisis. And yet the one thing that every single proposal Democrats bring to the floor has in common is that it does just that. So the Democrats’ plan is to keep putting bills on the floor they know ahead of time we’ll vote against, instead of trying to solve the problem.  And they don’t even hide it. The President’s top strategist actually issued a memo a few weeks ago saying the President would use this legislation not as a way to help people but as a way to pummel Republicans.”

Leader McConnell explained, “What we’re witnessing in Washington right now is two very different styles of governance: a Republican majority in the House that believes we should actually do something about the problems we face, and which has put together and actually passed bipartisan legislation that would help address those problems. And a Democratic Majority in the Senate that’s teamed up with the White House on a strategy of doing nothing — all for the sake of trying to score political points and spread the blame for an economy that their own policies have cemented into place as they look ahead to an election that’s more than a year away.”

On Tuesday, President Barack Obama tried to keep the pressure on Congress to consider his nearly $450 billion jobs bill, saying it had been two weeks since he sent the bill to Capitol Hill “and now I want it back.”

“I want it back, passed, so I can sign this bill and start putting people back to work,” Obama said Tuesday.
So why have Democrats delayed action in the U.S. Senate on President Obama’s stimulus bill?
    
WLS Radio’s Bill Cameron reports his own party has delayed action in the Senate and talked with Senator Dick Durbin, the number two Democrat in the Senate, about the reason why.
“The oil-producing state senators don’t like eliminating or reducing the subsidy for oil companies, “ Durbin tells WLS Radio, “There are some senators who are up for election who say I’m never gonna vote for a tax increase while I’m up for election, even on the wealthiest people. So, we’re not gonna have 100% Democratic senators. That’s why it needs to be bi-partisan and I hope we can find some Republicans who will join us to make it happen.”

But so far, Durbin concedes Democrats don’t have the votes in the Senate to pass it, “Not at the moment, I don’t think we do but, uh, we can work on it.”
There has been no clear sign that his campaign for his bill is winning over Republicans in Congress whose support he needs.

Northern Virginia businessman Tim Donner is running for the US Senate seat being vacated by retiring Democrat Jim Webb. Now I have spoken to Donner on a few occasions and we have done several interviews for Virginia Right!, but this interview is not so much political as it is interesting.

With the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 tragedy at hand on Sunday, several people have reminisced on that day, though none with any fondness.

A mutual acquaintance told me that Tim Donner had a very interesting story about his visit to New York on 9/11/2001. When we began the interview, that was really all I knew. Donner had an interesting story.

I began the discussion with a bit about dates that stand out in people’s memories. Those that you always remember what you were doing and where you were. Like Pearl Harbor and the assassination of President Kennedy.

I had no idea that Donner had an eerie connection between the Kennedy assassination and 9/11. It was just by coincidence that I opened the interview like that.

Listen to the podcast for the story in Tim Donner’s own words.

Podcast: Play in new window

I predicted a victory in the 11th Circuit for the 26 States lining up against Obamacare and in the 4th Circuit Court where a verdict is expected any day. Both of these 3 judge panels were stacked “randomly” with more judges appointed by Democrats then by Republicans. At first blush, the “fix” would appear to be in. These 3 judge panels in the 11th and the 4th have a majority Democrat Appointed makeup. It would make sense that they would rule in favor of the Democratic president.

As I said a couple of months ago in a post about the Virginia case in the 4th US Court of Appeals, the Obama administration is well aware that Obamacare will most likely be killed by the Supreme Court. Even if Justice Elena Kagan fails to recuse herself, as she should do, the vote will not be in favor of Obamacare and the unconstitutional mandate.

This is the reason that the Obama administration is dragging the out. The hope is that the law will become so expensive to back out of that the major provisions and the framework to Socialized Medicine that they are setting up will prevet the law from going away despite the constitutionality – or unconstitutionality. The longer this drags out, the more tentacles wrap around  the medical profession.

The reason I predicted that the Democrat appointed judges would make sure the law is found unconstitutional is the fact that the loser – in this case Obama – gets to decide the next venue. This case can now move on to the Supreme Court, where a near certain finding of unconstitutional awaits, or the Obama Administration can decide to put the question before the full Appeals Court – which will delay the final ruling by the Supremes until after the full Appeals Court decision is rendered. Had the Democrat Judges ruled in favor of Obamacare, there is no doubt that the case would be immediately appealed to the Supreme Court.

Now the next move is up to Obama and Eric Holder. Somehow, it is doubtful that the case will be fast tracked and the appeal will be to the full appeals court.

We will now hear from the 4th Circuit, where the Democrat majority judges are most likely under tremendous pressure to help Obama delay the inevitable by ruling against Obamacare.

Not much is certain in this case, but should the 4th Appeals Court hand Virginia a loss in their case, there is a 100% chance that Virginia’s Rock Star Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is going to shun an appeal to the full Appeals Court and go straight to the Supremem Court. He has already files motions to skip the lower courts, where the rulings are nearly meaningless – these cases are going to SCOTUS, no doubt at all.

I will further predict that the Obama Administration will appeal to the full court in the 11th.They want to play keep-away.

Delay. Delay. Delay.

Ok, I really don’t like the idea that this bill “prevents default”. If the government shuts down, we still have money. Defaulting on the debts will be a choice by the President, not an inevitability. And the task before Congress is twofold. Protect the credit rating and keep the government running. Simply borrowing more money to pay our loans will surely result in a downgrading of America’s creditworthiness. I would hope the Senate Minority Leader would make that clear in the future. Other than that, I agree with McConnell’s assessment.

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following statement Friday after House passage of a bill to prevent default and reduce Washington spending:

“The House has now passed its second bill in two weeks that would prevent a default and significantly cut Washington spending. The Senate is a different story. Rather than working towards a solution to this crisis the way the Republican majority in the House has, the Democrat majority here in the Senate has been wasting precious time rounding up ‘no’ votes. Rather than come up with a bill that can pass, they’ve been busy ginning up opposition to everything else. Now it’s time for them to act. I eagerly await the Majority Leader’s plan for preventing this crisis.”

`The reason we’ve got a $14 trillion debt is because no matter how much money Washington has, it always spends more — and the only way to cure the problem is to stop enabling it.’

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following statement on the Senate floor Friday regarding a vote on a Democrat proposal to defeat the Cut, Cap and Balance bill. The Cut, Cap and Balance bill would cut government spending now, cap it in the future and approve a constitutional amendment to balance the federal budget:

“Five months ago, President Obama unveiled the only concrete statement he’s made to date on our nation’s debt crisis: A 10-year budget plan so preposterous, so unequal to the moment, that it was rejected in the Senate by a vote of 97-0.

“The President’s response to this crisis was to pretend it didn’t exist.

“Two months later, the President doubled down on his vision for a future of debt by demanding that Congress raise the debt limit without any cuts to spending or any plan to rein it in.

“It was a total abdication of leadership, and it wasn’t sustainable.

“So over the past several weeks the President has been doing his best impersonation of a fiscal moderate. He’s talked about balance and left it to others to fill in the blanks.

“And here’s what Democrats in Congress have proposed as a solution: More spending and higher taxes — as the solution to a debt crisis.

“Just yesterday, with the clock ticking, we heard reports of a `volcanic’ eruption among Democrats at the suggestion that we should solve this crisis by focusing on reducing Washington spending.

“The solution to this crisis is not complicated: If you’re spending more money than you’re taking in, you need to spend less money.

“This isn’t rocket science.

“We could solve this problem this morning if Democrats would let us vote on the Cut, Cap, and Balance bill — and join us in backing this legislation that Republicans support.

“But the first step in solving a problem is to admit you have one, and too many Democrats refuse to admit that Washington has a spending problem.

“That’s why Republicans have insisted that we focus on spending in this debate.

“The reason we’ve got a $14 trillion debt is because no matter how much money Washington has, it always spends more — and the only way to cure the problem is to stop enabling it.

“Americans get it.

“And I want to thank every American who’s spoken out in favor of the Cut, Cap, and Balance Plan.

“Today the American people will now know where we stand.

“A vote to table this bill is a vote to ignore this crisis even longer.

“A vote to get on this bill is a vote for getting our house in order

“So I would urge my Democrat colleagues one more time to re-consider their position.

“Join us in support of a future we can afford.”

#Senate News Briefing

It’s just not fair. Anthony Weiner has done nothing most other Democrats have not done. He has lied, blamed the right wing conspiracy and generally made an ass of himself for a long time.

And then this Twitter picture scandal hit and he lied some more, blamed the right wing and made himself look like an ass.

While the saying is true, the only good elected Democrat is a former one, it’s not like this improves the current crop of Progressive scumbags in office. One less is hardly a dent. Pelosi promised to drain the swamp. Her own resignation would be a good start.

Hey, Tony! Don’t let the door hit ya’.