3 pages of no credibility

9/4/2009 8:01:50 PM

Poll: Lowest Congressional Approval in Two Decades
Posted September 2, 2009

Quote :

"While the 2010 midterms are still 14 months away, pollsters seem to agree that it's not a question of if things will be bad for the Democrats but how bad things will be for the Democrats. Nate Silver of fivethirtyeight.com recently suggested a 20- to 50-seat loss in the House. Republican pollsters have tried to tamp down excitement but are still predicting a loss of about 26 seats for the Democrats. A new poll from the Pew Research Center shows just how unpopular Congress has become. In the poll, 37 percent of Americans expressed a favorable view of the legislative branch, one of the lowest approval ratings given to Congress in two decades. Pew points out that voters may take their frustrations out on the majority party."

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/washington-whispers/2009/09/02/poll-lowest-congressional-approval-in-two-decades.html

9/4/2009 8:05:50 PM

Quote :

" Democrats had held a double-digit advantage in respondents' perceptions of how they managed the federal government and reduced the budget deficit, but now Democrats and Republicans are scoring about even. And the two parties are running about evenly in terms of whether respondents would vote for a Democrat or a Republican candidate today."

fivethirtyeight is also predicting that unemployment will be down before the midterm elections, which should shift some of the prediction on seats.

9/4/2009 8:16:50 PM

Looks like the people running the NC GOP aren't getting along according to the N&O

Quote :

"Fetzer rebukes party's No. 2, gets sharp retort N.C. Republican Party Chairman Tom Fetzer has chastised the party's vice chairman over an incident involving a GOP staff member. The rebuke has prompted the vice-chairman, Timothy F. Johnson, to accuse Fetzer of excluding him from party business at least in part because Johnson is black. In a letter to Johnson dated Sept. 3, Fetzer said Johnson grabbed and berated a party staff member at a Greater Greensboro Republican Women's Club event on Aug. 23. "You approached her, grabbed her by the hand and would not let go of it while you berated her about the performance of the staff at the NCGOP headquarters for several minutes," Fetzer wrote. "During the entire conversation, she felt 'cornered' and unable to escape. She found your attitude to be condescending and the entire encounter to be very embarrassing." Fetzer wrote that Johnson let go only after a witness got another party staff member to intervene. "At best, as reported to me, you exhibited extremely poor manners, and at worst, conduct unbecoming an officer of the North Carolina Republican Party," Fetzer wrote. Johnson said Fetzer's account is inaccurate. Johnson said while he talked to the woman, the two held hands in a protracted handshake. "I surely was not trying to be angry with her," Johnson told Dome. "I wasn't trying to control her and not allow her to walk away." Johnson said he is being excluded from the party. He said he has asked for an office at party headquarters in Raleigh and to be included in events and planning. "I'm the first black to serve at this role, as the state vice chair, and I'm not being included," he said. "All the people [Fetzer's] bringing on staff are continuing to perpetuate the traditional image of the party, which is just whites. That's all we have in our headquarters is whites." Johnson was elected to his position in June on a promise to diversify the party's appeal. His election came amid some controversy. Blogs began circulating a story that in 1996 Johnson pleaded guilty to an aggravated assault charge. Johnson apologized to party delegates for the incident, but said he was disappointed that the incident came up. Johnson e-mailed an apology to the staff member Friday afternoon. "With his apology, I consider the issue resolved," Fetzer told Dome. Johnson disagreed. "It's not behind us," Johnson said. "This issue is between him and I. It's about him and I, the vice chair and the chair of the state GOP don't have a working relationship." "

9/6/2009 10:20:15 AM

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/8140/leftvsconservatards.png

[Edited on September 6, 2009 at 3:36 PM. Reason : ]

9/6/2009 3:36:23 PM

yall better hope pence stays clean. hes an attractive candidate imo no homo

[Edited on September 8, 2009 at 2:01 AM. Reason : i like him]

9/8/2009 2:01:15 AM

Quote :

"These positions "included ... opposition to abortion in cases of rape or incest ..., covenant marriage, school vouchers and tax policies to favor his view of the traditional family and public policy discrimination against those he labeled as "cohabitators, homosexuals or fornicators." In this master thesis he also declared his belief that working women harmed the family and described 1972's Griswold v. Connecticut as "illogical". At page 20 of the thesis, he wrote, "man’s basic nature is inclined towards evil, and when the exercise of liberty takes the shape of pornography, drug abuse, or homosexuality, the government must restrain, punish, and deter.""

In response to my comment above JCASHFAN, you asked this about the republican running for gov in Virginia:
"I'm no fan of evangelical Christians running as evangelical Christians for office, but is there any evidence that he still believes this?"

I just read a washington post article that said he said the following in 2003 I believe:

Quote :

"He also became known for telling the Daily Press of Newport News that certain homosexual activities could disqualify a person from the bench. "It certainly raises some questions about the qualifications to serve as a judge," he said. "

While 2003 still gives him some time to evolve in his views between then until now, although much less than from his thesis to then, I am less hopeful after reading this.

I'll admit readily though that his democratic opponent, which you described as "far and away the most conservative Democrat in the primary field", is someone I know almost nothing about, so I can't say if he is any better or not.

9/9/2009 1:16:12 AM

Quote :

"I'll admit readily though that his democratic opponent, which you described as "far and away the most conservative Democrat in the primary field", is someone I know almost nothing about, so I can't say if he is any better or not."

Well, I volunteer for Creigh Deeds, so I'll jump in here. He was the most conservative in the primary field, but compared to the spectrum of conservatives in Virginia, he's further towards the middle like Mark Warner was. He's pretty business friendly, but also willing to invest in schools and support abortion rights. He has all the tools and record of not only a competent manager of the state, but also one that could get a lot done with regards to some of the serious problems we face here (like making Southside Va. a better place for business w/o just putting up more "business certified community" signs). He's from Western Va., which bodes well since he'll have the registration advantage in NoVa and Richmond already and he can identify readily with Southwest/Southside/Western Va.

As for McDonnel: first of all, there have been a fair number of former GOP delegates to come out against him. Their popular opinion of him was that he was a man who was obsessed with culture war issues over economic ones. Now he's running as a moderate, hammering on about jobs and education (as he should). The amount of power he can have over the state law w/ regards to birth control is minimal w/o the help of the house and senate, but he has a history of being very interested in culture warring. After all, he did attend Regent U, Pat Robertson's vanity school.

Quote :

"a comment that Bob McDonnell made 30 years ago"

I wouldn't define close to 100 pages as a "comment".

And as for DOCTOR STEVEN CHAOS, MASTER OF INDEPENDENT THOUGHT AND REASON and the equivocation with Webb: is there a difference between sexist comments made on the fly and a planned, well-thought out grad thesis that explicitly was meant to cover his political values?

It's the record WaPo has been attacking, a record which originated with this manifesto of his.
So, it was 20 years ago.

Quote :

"I have to wonder if you and other Democrats were similarly inflamed by some of Jim Webb's less than charitable remarks about women (which were equally from "a long time ago") during his Senate race? I somehow doubt it."

It's easy to play above the fray and be all like "look at you hypocrites!" when noone gives a shit about your party and its gang of a few hundred sociopaths, objectivists, and ron paul supporters, isn't it? lucky you, you'll never get to defend the consequences of your political brothers.

And before you say something, yes, I support Deeds because I legitimately agree with him on most issues.

[Edited on September 9, 2009 at 1:06 PM. Reason : .]

9/9/2009 1:05:41 PM

It's been a few minutes since the last good GOP sex scandal, so here's another!

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/09/gop_lawmakers_graphic_sex-bragging_caught_on_tape.php?ref=fpblg

Quote :

"Michael Duvall is a conservative Republican state representative from Orange County, California. While waiting for the start of a legislative hearing in July, the 54-year-old married father of two and family values champion began describing, for the benefit of a colleague seated next to him, his ongoing affairs with two different women. In very graphic detail."

Quote :

"She wears little eye-patch underwear. So, the other day she came here with her underwear, Thursday. And? so, we had made love Wednesday--a lot! And so she'll, she's all, 'I am going ?up and down the stairs, and you're dripping out of me!' So messy!"

Quote :

"According to both KCAL and the OC Weekly, an alternative weekly in Orange County, the woman who wears the "eye-patch underwear" is Heidi DeJong Barsuglia, a lobbyist for an energy company, Sempra Energy. Duvall is vice chair of the Committee on Utilities & Commerce."

Can't make this stuff up folks, the moral party indeed!

9/9/2009 1:45:43 PM

B-b-b-but Clinton!

9/9/2009 1:48:32 PM

You would think that the GOP would of behaved themselves during the joint session.....I guess that was too much to ask (House member yelled "That is a lie" when Obama said illegals would not be part of the universal healthcare).

[Edited on September 9, 2009 at 9:36 PM. Reason : w]

9/9/2009 9:33:27 PM

well, when we hear of the "47 million Americans without insurance," a number that includes illegal aliens (who aren't Americans, but nevermind facts, here), as a reason for a massive gov't takeover of the healthcare industry, it's hard to imagine that Paco and Sanchez are gonna be left out. I know, common sense should be outlawed

9/9/2009 9:36:50 PM

I guess that member of the GOP is among the lunatic fringe.....

9/9/2009 9:37:44 PM

The "lunatic fringe" that can connect the dots?

You wanna put money on this? I'll bet you a thousand dollars that within a YEAR of this shit passing, if it does, that illegals will be getting benefits from it. You know why? Because they already get welfare. They get food stamps. What in the hell makes you think they won't get free healthcare on the public dime, too?

9/9/2009 9:44:29 PM

I know it is shocking, because you are so anti alien, but some actually pay taxes when they dont have to, lets refund them that money....see we got so much of it!!!! bling bling!

9/9/2009 9:51:33 PM

I'm not "anti-alien." I'm "anti-law-breakers." What a terrible thing to be...

9/9/2009 9:55:12 PM

I guess he could do worse…

^ do you rat out your friends who drank underage or provided alcohol to minors, or who drive drunk, or download music illegally too?

[Edited on September 9, 2009 at 10:46 PM. Reason : ]

9/9/2009 10:45:38 PM

given that none of those apply to me, what is your point? If I get caught dl-ing music illegally, though, I'm not gonna come crying to congress and ask them to let me get away with it. Likewise, if one of my friends buys beer for an 18-year-old, I'm not gonna go crying to congress and ask them to forgive him.

9/9/2009 10:47:37 PM

^ so who’s crying to congress to ask for forgiveness of illegals?

If an illegal games the system, the problem is not the system, it’s the illegal. What percentage of illegal immigrants end up getting welfare anyway?

And why is it that you don’t get up in arms about the other groups of people breaking laws?

Illegals have very little negative impact on our society, it’s only the xenophobic elements of the far right that are scaring people into hating the illegals, and you fell for it.

9/9/2009 10:54:01 PM

Quote :

"so who’s crying to congress to ask for forgiveness of illegals?"

umm, democrats? did you really ask that question?

Quote :

"If an illegal games the system, the problem is not the system, it’s the illegal."

When the system says that illegals get the benefits, even if they are illegal, then the illegal isn't "gaming the system."

Quote :

"And why is it that you don’t get up in arms about the other groups of people breaking laws?"

Care to bring any examples of this, other than drug laws?

9/9/2009 10:56:10 PM

Quote :

""so who’s crying to congress to ask for forgiveness of illegals?" umm, democrats? did you really ask that question? "

haha, where are they doing this?

Quote :

"When the system says that illegals get the benefits, even if they are illegal, then the illegal isn't "gaming the system.” "

The system isn’t set up to give an illegal immigrant health care. But if a hospital has a liability because they do the humane, moral, and ethical thing of treating a sick person that happens to be an illegal immigrant, then in order to keep costs down for everyone else the gov. has to reimburse them, then so be it. You would already be paying for the illegal immigrant (and any other poor person who goes to the emergency room) anyway implicit in health care costs, the gov. shouldering this just spreads it out more, reducing it for everyone. It can’t rationally be avoided.

But an illegal immigrant wouldn’t be able to sign up for the subsidized plan as it is designed.

9/9/2009 11:02:03 PM

as it is designed right now.

as for "forgiving illegals," have you never heard of ANY of the calls amnesty? Don't be dense

9/9/2009 11:06:31 PM

hey.

we should make it easier for people to immigrate here legally so that noone has to do it illegally.

9/10/2009 8:23:12 AM

I love how that woman is literally a whore. She exchanges sex for lobbying power.

9/10/2009 8:28:27 AM

Quote :

"I've heard recently that in addition to the whole Sanford adultery on the public dime scandal, the republican Lt Gov of SC who called on Sanford to step down may have just been unwilling outed to keep him from rising to power in the republican ranks, and that Sanford's appointee, Kristin Maguire, as Chairwoman to the State Board of Education is resigning because its been discovered that in addition to being an an Upstate evangelical and one of South Carolina’s most respected social conservatives she's the prolific author of hardcore erotic fiction on the Internet and Maguire believes that a former friend is leaking the information to the media in an effort to ruin her political career."

Given that & now this South Carolina Republican Congressman Joe "the shouter" Wilson who called the president a lair during an address to a joint session of congress last night, the SC GOP has destroyed itself.

The last time Wilson was challenged in a race, over the course of the whole race his opponent raised about 500k. Thanks to his shout out last night, he will easily have raised over half a million for his opponent in under 24 hours... its up to about 400 k so far: http://www.actblue.com/entity/fundraisers/19079 Its just amazing to me that in less than a day his opponent will have out-raised the entire last campaign against Wilson all because of Wilson.

9/10/2009 3:59:02 PM

you know...just because his opponent has raised that money doesn't necessarily mean it was from South Carolinians

9/10/2009 4:03:21 PM

certainly, a significant amount of his opponent's recent funds are coming from people across the nation who want to punish him for being such a rude jerk.

the point is, his combined arrogance and buffoonery has just funded his opponent's war chest.

9/10/2009 4:22:21 PM

Quote :

"you know...just because his opponent has raised that money doesn't necessarily mean it was from South Carolinians"

Didn't try to imply they were, if anything I was pointing out how doing something stupid has cost him the ire of a great many people.

9/10/2009 6:11:57 PM

A friend of mine introduced me to the dirty underside of congressional races. You simply cannot win without outside money, which begs the question, who is a congressman representing?



On another note, this is the sort of asinine commentary coming out of the GOP which makes me despise it as a minor-league fascist party:

Quote :

" While Congress is the first branch named in the Constitution, the president is the commander-in-chief, the leader of the country, and in many unspoken ways treated as a king. We stand when the president enters the room, no matter who the president is. He has his own tune when he goes anywhere. When he gives a speech, his seal is on the lectern. The president is treated with royal respect, even though he is overtly not a royal. Ever since George Washington declined to become a king, we have established traditions that give the president all the kingly trappings."

http://tinyurl.com/ktxkxz

9/10/2009 6:13:44 PM

Quote :

"A friend of mine introduced me to the dirty underside of congressional races. You simply cannot win without outside money, which begs the question, who is a congressman representing?"

i know it's just a movie but in Charlie Wilson's War Charlie Wilson states that he isn't elected by people in the Texas 12th Congressional District...he's elected by Jews from NY



^^i'm just saying that it doesn't necessarily mean he has fallen out of favor with his constituents...especially in South Carolina

[Edited on September 10, 2009 at 6:30 PM. Reason : sldkjfd]

9/10/2009 6:28:35 PM

House races are different from senate races.

House races are actually funded largely by in state contributions, especially the smaller races. The red to blue races will garner more attention and will have a good deal of national money.

The donors who are giving to Rob Miller don't give a shit about Rob specifically, but just want Joe punished for what he did.

And it happens on both sides, not just Dems....

9/10/2009 6:32:20 PM

Even so, it doesn't change the fact that South Carolinians still love him. I spoke to a several SC friends and relatives about it. The general consensus was "He's passionate about health care, and listening to the lies about undocumented immigrants just made him upset. I don't blame him for acting out. He's just doing what we all wish we could do."

So, whether or not you agree with what he did, or their reasons for agreeing with him, it doesn't seem like it's changed the mind of most of his voters.

[Edited on September 10, 2009 at 8:04 PM. Reason : ]

9/10/2009 8:03:45 PM

^Maybe a super well funded campaign by his opponent with all the ads that buys will help change opinions (in combination with all the republican leadership scandal in SC). The last campaign against Wilson was at the end of the campaign season a $500 k challenge against an incumbent with 1 mil. Thanks to Wilson's shout out his opponent raised nearly $700 k in 24 hours, and should in a few days easily break a million, more than Wilson's entire last campaign war-chest. Even if your argument is that money doesn't matter that much in this kind of politics, this much money might.

9/10/2009 11:45:42 PM

And I'll tell you that based on what I see ON THE GROUND here,, it might not matter.

9/10/2009 11:52:17 PM

money being funneled to the opponent's campaign from out of his district will not necessarily equal votes.

9/11/2009 12:21:22 AM

it may even backfire. the constant publicity surrounding this increase in cash could be spun as an "OMG NY JOOZ ARE BUYING OUR CONGRESSMAN!!!!1"

9/11/2009 10:12:59 AM

i'm curious as to how many threads ^4 is going to post that in

9/11/2009 10:16:04 AM

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/09/11/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5302288.shtml

[Edited on September 11, 2009 at 12:26 PM. Reason : ]

9/11/2009 12:26:04 PM

"hey, that sounds like a good idea, let me cla........OH SHIT I'M A REPUBLICAN"

What a bunch of fucking tools.

9/11/2009 1:07:04 PM

I would hardly accuse that douchebag of being a republican. Or the one beside him, either

9/11/2009 1:17:58 PM

Quote :

"What a bunch of fucking tools."

9/11/2009 1:23:48 PM

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/poll_health_care_091109.pdf?tag=contentMain;contentBody

Quote :

"As is often the case in Presidential addresses, Americans who watched the speech were more likely to be from the president’s own political party. 42% of speech watchers identified themselves as Democrats, 27% were Republicans and 31% were independents."

at least they admit the bias

good job with another slanted poll, Boone. keep 'em comin'

9/11/2009 3:01:06 PM

Quote :

"I would hardly accuse that douchebag of being a republican. Or the one beside him, either"

Ahahaha, this is exactly why the GOP is going to have trouble. A party that devours itself can't expand. How do you expect to get anyone except the far right? Do you not realize that the whole "Reagan Revolution" was a coalition effort and not just a movement of the hardcore right wingers?

RAR NOT MAH REPUBliCAN PARTIE!

Not to mention, these gains that might happen will be in conservative districts, so the party shift won't be evident.

Here's a question: How can the GOP win when its already been wiped out of the Northeast and parts of the West, and the fastest growing states are growing larger mostly b/c of Hispanic immigration? They'll either have to change or die, because a Hispanic Texas isn't going to vote for border fence proponents, according to most polls.

[Edited on September 11, 2009 at 3:48 PM. Reason : .]

9/11/2009 3:43:08 PM

9/11/2009 8:15:39 PM

^^^ Just in case you missed it, you're referencing the wrong poll

9/12/2009 8:28:38 AM

Quote :

"3. Overall, which party, the (Democrats) or the (Republicans), do you trust to do a better job in coping with the main problems the nation faces over the next few years? -----------Democrats--Republicans--Both--Neither-----No opinion 9/12/09-------48----------28---------3-----19-----------2 2/22/09-------56----------30---------3------9-----------3 12/14/08------56----------23---------3-----15-----------3 5/11/08-------53----------32---------2-----10-----------2 "

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll_091309.html?sid=ST2009091400007


Republicans shouldn't be so giddy over Obama's numbers.

[Edited on September 14, 2009 at 12:20 PM. Reason : ]

9/14/2009 12:20:08 PM

This could be the opportunity for the libertarians to try and differentiate themselves from the republicans and the democrats.

I think a good way to do this, from a PR perspective, is to come out in favor or gay rights by arguing for the repeal of DOMA.

This would give them a lot of media attention, while also showing that someone can be socially progressive while still supporting small gov. and good financial policy. You don't have to be a racist or a Christian nut to like small government.

I also think it's really interesting that even since the beginning of Bush's presidency, there has been generally more trust in Democrats.

[Edited on September 14, 2009 at 12:32 PM. Reason : ]

9/14/2009 12:25:19 PM

Quote :

"This could be the opportunity for the libertarians to try and differentiate themselves from the republicans and the democrats. I think a good way to do this, from a PR perspective, is to come out in favor or gay rights by arguing for the repeal of DOMA. This would give them a lot of media attention, while also showing that someone can be socially progressive while still supporting small gov. and good financial policy. You don't have to be a racist or a Christian nut to like small government."

If you're talking about the Libertarian Party, I'm sorry, but I'm pretty sure they already oppose DOMA, and no annoucement by them gets any coverage. They've been entering elections for nearing 40 years and their percentage of the popular vote hasn't changed a whole lot. In 1980 they hit their electoral peak.

If you're talking about libertarians who are sympathetic to the GOP, you're not saying anything new, either. Most of the people you'd be talking about are the Ron Paul people, and they are pretty well entrenched as a group who thinks monetary and foreign policy are their ticket to relevancy.

I don't know what other constituency of libertarians you are thinking of. The Tea Party People? They're more of a Palin crowd.

Actually, pretty much every lib group from right to left already supports the repeal of DOMA. This would be like the GOP trying to get attention by coming out in favor of "family values".

Back to the GOP: can someone explain to me how the GOP can take control of congress or the Presidency again by catering to the hard right (namely the constituencies who loved the Wilson outburst)? I mean, you've got neocons like David freaking Frum turning on you, the Evangelicals+maybe those Ron Paul people can't win national (or many state) elections.

[Edited on September 14, 2009 at 1:02 PM. Reason : .]

9/14/2009 12:56:26 PM

^ i was talking about the first crowd, and i'm not saying they don't already oppose DOMA, i'm saying they could capitalize on the growing amounts of people discontent with both parties.

Theyre not going to win any elections soon, but it should force the other two parties to reconsider certain policies.

Just because they have been failures in the past doesn't mean they'll continue to be failures. Things are changing.

[Edited on September 14, 2009 at 1:04 PM. Reason : ]

9/14/2009 1:03:30 PM

Quote :

"Back to the GOP: can someone explain to me how the GOP can take control of congress or the Presidency again by catering to the hard right (namely the constituencies who loved the Wilson outburst)? I mean, you've got neocons like David freaking Frum turning on you, the Evangelicals+maybe those Ron Paul people can't win national (or many state) elections."

The same way they did in 2004, by spanking the Democrats in turn out. If you can get them worked up or scared enough about silly issues like gays and abortions, they'll get to the polls. Obama won in 2008 because his "get out of the vote" efforts dwarfed those of McCain/Palin. There will always be ~30% of the country that will vote Republican no matter who the candidate is or who they are running against, the trick is to get them to show up on election day.

[Edited on September 14, 2009 at 1:36 PM. Reason : :]

9/14/2009 1:34:50 PM