October 31st, 2012

The watershed election

I think Stanley Kurtz is spot-on:

…Obama and his advisors never abandoned their quest to shape a permanent leftist majority, a coalition that would forever put an end to Clintonian triangulation and usher in unfettered leftist Obamaism instead. Obama’s frantic efforts to gin up the women’s vote and the youth vote aren’t only desperate attempts to secure his base. They flow from a deliberate decision not to fight for the center, but to build an independent majority on what is supposedly the “demographically ascendent” left.

Kurtz goes on to analyze Obama’s campaign decisions, some of which have seemed so dumb and could be summed up as “going small.” Dumb like a fox. As I’ve indicated before, Obama is smart (or, if you prefer, clever) about elections. The fact that he may lose this one doesn’t mean he hasn’t played it about as well as it could have been played with the material at hand, and the proof of this is that the election is still very close and he might pull it out after all.

So many of us (including me) have been asking: why does Obama still have so much support? Kurtz’s article spells it out: Obama has carefully appealed to a coalition of special interest groups who, together, might even form the majority. If so, they would liberate the left from ever having to cater to anyone in a flyover state of mind again.

If that works out, Obama could drop the pretense of moderation. I’ve long felt that is what would happen in an Obama second term. It is one of the many reasons this election is of such vital importance.

But my nervousness come next Tuesday will not be just about the prospect of four more years of Obama. Even if Romney wins, if his margin of victory is of anything less than landslide proportions I will be only somewhat placated; I think we will only have bought a bit of time. This is because of the Gramscian march through our institutions—especially education—the takeover that already occurred while most of us were looking the other way.

Obama is merely the person who benefited from that march, the One who came to the fore because of the long and careful preparation. If the ground had not been properly laid, someone so far to the left (with his voting record, community organizing/Alinsky background, Ayers and Wright connections, and plans to “spread the wealth” and “bankrupt” coal plants) could never have been elected in the first place. Furthermore, someone who had presided over such troubled years as the last four—featuring a stagnant economy, Obamacare and the way it was passed, Benghazi, Honduras (remember that?), and the smallness, nastiness, and class warfare of his campaign—would never have come so close to re-election without an MSM hopelessly compromised and in the tank, a school system dedicated to leftist indoctrination, and arts so degraded and propagandist.

We will have our work cut out for us no matter what.

48 Responses to “The watershed election”

  1. Artfldgr Says:

    too bad Sanger removed over 50,000,000 resident voters that were replaced by amnesty, etc… and too bad the other policies visited upon women by feminism has put them in the poverty or state slavery position (as liberation from their own families), while exterminating many of their family lines, which if not accomplished through abortion, is by planning on top of abortion numbers as the financial impingement upon ‘their’ men.

    this is the “majority coalition” of hate groups against one scape goat group… every one of these coalition groups hate one group, and when they achieve majority parity, they will pretty much vote to finish the extermination job that most people dont believe has happened given we live for 75 years and it takes a few decades to see an effect if you dont understand the numbers (and why this majority coalition at some point will be the minority oppressed majority of hate).

    Fire up them ovens and camps, as this minority oppressed majority loves communism if its on the back of the one hated scapegoat group (Jews, Christians, the men of western civ, etc… ergo 17% rise in violent crime all in that one sector in one year).

    I mean its already ok to tax them and disproportionately deny them return from that which then is distributed to people who are told that the more they hate this group the more social justice allows them to raise taxes for all, and then to give back to some. which means that this one group not only is affected in schooling, business, health, outcomes of life, children, etc.

    and this is all just fine and ok that we have done this and destroyed peoples lives for 40 years, and its not going to go over the top when that is ok and the group that has been bled by this all this time is now broke and cant pay these people.

    most people paying into that welfare system make less than that, and have forgone children, houses, businesses, etc… they cant get any of it back from SBA, or student loans, certainly no scholarships, housing help, free obama phones, and on and on.

    Over $60,000 in Welfare Spent Per Household in Poverty
    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/over-60000-welfare-spentper-household-poverty_657889.html

    the response to adding the diversity that was to improve the nation and its outcomes, and doing so by stealing from one group in excess by blocking their access to what is provide – as punishment for slavery of which they ended, and most of them were not part of.. or for Germany, as if all whites were part of that and who opposed them were, what?

    U.S. Drops in Global Innovation Rankings
    http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/marketplacek12/2012/07/us_drops_in_global_innovation_rankings.html

    and ultimately doing this as a social policy since the 80s, has resulted in decline and people wondering how can we be on the verge of a permanent left who will eventually eradicate the others?

    because each of those groups that are the coalition are NOT as smart or independent as the group that is the designated scapegoats. oh, there are exceptions, but exceptions PROVE the rule, not refute it.

    Majority of women are not independent at all, as they have let strangers dictate to them how to live and they accepted strangers ideas over their own families – which has resulted in their demographic demise (and refusal to accept it. ie. they cant turn away from crashing into the wall, because if they did , that would show they accept that there is a wall there. so they will plow into it).

    the same can be said for each group in the base of the majority coalition. they each are favored for their lack of intelligence and great allegiance to those who kibbitz their demographics to be that way through free money to have kids if your not smart, and take your money if you are, so your intelligence makes you reticent. over time that does what to each group? and Sangers people been doing that to these groups for over 40 years, and the liberated women stand as guards preventing that engine of demographic population manipulation from even being considered!!

    yet the fight right now is for state control of their birth canals… and mediating birth rates by how much free abortive materials are available, and creating state funded organizations willing to take the children away from the alone harried unsupported hard working high tax paying liberated woman.
    (which was supposed to be better than the woman who had time for beauty parlors and their happy gulags with children, family, holidays, and homes… )

  2. Tom Murin Says:

    I don’t think there is too much to add to this post. It really is amazing how many people will still vote for him. I live in NJ. Chris Christie is great in many ways, but I don’t think he would win re-election if it were this Nov. O will carry NJ by a pretty good margin, I think. We are taxed to death and people don’t make the big government connection. If anything they seem to want more of it.

  3. sergey Says:

    This liberal utopia is unsustainable, and already there is no money to run it. That is the cardinal problem with socialism, as Thatcher observed: eventually it runs out of other people’s money. California is bankrupt, as well as Massachusetts and Illinois. This fiscal reality will crush all Gramshian schemes.

  4. Harold Says:

    Unless Republicans/Romney make structural changes, like banning government unions, eliminating government withholding of dues etc. his administration will merely represent a Hudna (Muslim word for a break in fighting to recover) for the left and the next time a Democrat is elected they will pick up where they left off.

    Unfortunately Republicans are deeply stupid and weak when it comes to fighting this ideological battle.

    You can see this in how terrified they are to openly describe Obama as a socialist despite a long line of Marxist associations from childhood to present.

    Even Stanly Kurtz has gone through an evolution in how radical he views Obama to be.

    I remember during the Clinton reelection he actually taunted Republicans to call him a Socialist as if that was like a racial epithet. I don’t get it but it is what it is.

  5. LondonTrader Says:

    I remain extremely nervous about next Tuesday. I read all of PJ type blogs that tell me that Romney has the momentum and will win the swing states but while the polls show him in the lead nationally they don’t show that in Ohio etc.

    I’ve read all the posts debunking the polls but that doesn’t stop me being nervous. When I lived in the UK too often the party losing would say that the polls weren’t correct but too often they were.

    Meanwhile Nate Silver and Intrade show Obama winning. Intrade bothers me.

  6. Sam L. Says:

    Still, it will be hard to keep all those little groups corralled.

  7. T Says:

    Neo,

    “If the ground had not been properly laid, someone so far to the left (with his voting record, community organizing/Alinsky background, Ayers and Wright connections, and plans to “spread the wealth” and “bankrupt” coal plants) could never have been elected in the first place.”

    I disagree in part with this statement. Yes I do agree that a leftist foundation was laid over many years, but remember that Obama campaigned as a moderate in a decidedly anti-Bush era (much of which was manfractured by the MSM). 53% of people did not vote for a leftist; it remains to be seen next Tuesday precisely how many voters recognize that they were duped (see Glenn Reynolds recent interview with Camille Paglia).

    Further, your wrote: “. . . an MSM hopelessly compromised and in the tank, a school system dedicated to leftist indoctrination, and arts so degraded and propagandist. . . . ” No disagreement there, but IMHO I suggest two things:

    First, that this character of our national dialogue was not invented overnight from whole cloth. It evolved over half a century or more. Likewise, if we are to change this national dialogue neither will that happen overnight. If a Romney administration provides just a first step in that direction, that will be very encouraging indeed–after all the first step, a tipping point, is often the most difficult.

    Second, as for the propagandistic nature of the arts, when were they ever non-propagandistic. In the 16th century, the Counter-Reformation encouraged religious art not only to proselytize Catholicism, but as a counter to the Protestant eschewing of religious art. Roman projects were propagandistic in that they reaffirmed the power of the state (first the Republic, then the Empire). And yet again, in the 19th century, works such as Delacrtoix’s Liberty Leading the People with its revolutionary furor and later Duchamp’s Fountain of R. Mutt (an in-your-face anti-establishment peice) are all propagandistic in their own right.

    I think today, the problem is that the argument has become so one-sided coupled with the fact that there are simply too many aritists and authors producing too much junk. Of all the artistic imagery produced only a small portion is really worth viewing or commenting on; of all the books published, and now self-published, only a small perentage are worth reading, but it’s always been so.

    One of the problems we have in the arts is that only the truly best remains as part of our artistic heritage. Why is Beethoven considered so highly? If one listens to the work of some of his contemporaries one instantly hears why. This, however, is difficult to do because musicians don’t want to perform or record mediocre music. So, too, with the visual arts. Most works today wind up (or will wind up) in storage or in a trash can and in truth, this is where most of them belong. Does anyone still read Jacqueline Susanne? Does anyone under age 50 even know she ever wrote?

  8. T Says:

    SamL @11:06,

    “Still, it will be hard to keep all those little groups corralled.”

    Like herding cats, no?

  9. George Pal Says:

    I wonder if the normative democratic steps of persuasion (fair and foul) can be of any use in stemming the rise of the entitled coalition. Does the classic liberal argument, abstract in the main and dependent on a reasonably educated electorate, stand a chance against a monthly check? In a society subverted now for fifty years by convenience over effort? Not a chance.

    Republicans, conservatives, Tea Partiers, and the angry as hell and not going to take it crowd, would have done better, in the long run, taking over the school boards than the executive and legislative branches of the federal government. Republicans, conservatives, Tea Partiers, and the angry as hell and not going to take it crowd, ignorant of this simple fact are destined for the wrong side of history. Its long odds I’ll give that any talk on education coming from the center-right will see and speak to the problem for what it is. Better make book the discussion on education from the center-right will be laced with enough clichés to kill a literate human. No problem may be fixed that will not be identified.

  10. texexec Says:

    Intrade.com makes me nervous too.

  11. T Says:

    George Pal,

    You mention the “educated” class and that got me to thinking (always a dangerous proposition).

    In many ways what we have seen vis-a-vis the rise of the Ivy League liberal class now so ubiquitous in govt seems similar to what happened in France between Louis XIV and Louis XVI.

    Louis XIV, “The Sun King” has frequently been used as a critcal Obama metaphor, but IMO think this is incorrect. Louis XIV created the palace and cour at Versailles but did so for a reason. By gathering the nobility in one place and establishing himself as the model for a social lifestyle that only he could afford (subsidized by the state treasury) he was able to keep an eye on the nobility and their conspiracies against hem and keep them poor enough so that they couldn’t effectively fund any conspiracy. The point is that this expensive and elaborate lifestyle actually had a political purpose.

    Two generations later, in the time of Louis XVI, this lavish lifestyle became a lifestyle per se. It signified a nobility without any internal or external purpose beyond that and essentially living in a bubble with no connection to the nation itself or its people(“Let them eat cakes!”).

    I see Obama and the credentialed (but not necessarily knowledgable) Ivy League set as more akin to Louis XVI’s court. In other words of Louis XV “Apres moi, le deluge!”

    I humbly offer that “le deluge” is upon us. We shall see on November 6th.

  12. Occam's Beard Says:

    The media and the educational establishment are at the root of the cancer.

    Recently, going through my father’s effects when I came across a newspaper article from the late 1950s that he’d saved because it mentioned him. On the back was an article about a schoolteacher being forced to resign for ties to the Communist Party, as discovered by HUAC. And this in San Francisco!

    Nowadays membership in the Party (perhaps sub rosa) is a resume builder.

  13. southpaw Says:

    A couple of things that work against a long term socialist takeover — our debt and deficits have reached unsustainable levels already. Further social spending isn’t going to be economically possible to maintain for decades, as it was in Europe. Fiscal reality will put limits on what’s desired and what is possible.
    The second thing is if Romney wins, it’s within his grasp to manage a Reagan-like recovery. With a large population of college graduates suddenly leaving home and going to work, some of them might conclude the a decent job and independence are more valuable than youthful idealism. And if widespread prosperity breaks out, the barbarians might have to wait at the gate another generation.
    Fingers crossed.

  14. T Says:

    Sothpaw,

    Another generation? I’m hoping two or three generations at least, although I won’t see it.

  15. stan Says:

    Victory will not come until the MSM collapses economically (or technologically) OR until a Republican president directly calls them out and declares them to be a partisan enemy. Pretending that the MSM is impartial simply empowers the lying and partisanship.

    The press is partisan. Admit reality and say so directly and with emphasis. To do otherwise is to give support to the enemy.

    Would a Pres. Romney get skewered for making such a declaration early in his presidency? Sure. But better to get the cards on the table early than let the lying SOBs keep stacking the deck every election.

  16. DNW Says:

    You may be right that a Romney election will have only bought some time. Many of us have undoubtedly been thinking the same thing.

    And it’s a reasonable surmise, given how far the environment shaping activities of the collectivist kind have already gone.

    Is it even possible at this point to “starve the beast”? What does one do when notions of civility and restraint are so degraded your own (figurative) neighbor threatens to self-destruct and take you with him if you even show signs of withholding your affirmations, much less withdrawing to a safe distance and letting his life choices work themselves out?

    It seems obvious that many, all things being equal, would just as soon be dead, as be responsible.

    Which immediately suggests the question as to whether everyone really does want to be free.

    The left’s [the people called or self-identifying as leftist] contempt for charters of “negative liberties”, their reduction of life to a hedonic equation, their cynical sneering at the concept of self-direction and responsibility, their devaluation of the conscious mind, and their relegation of the faculty of reason to the status of an instrumental function subservient to unexamined appetites and their expression, leads me, and many others probably, toward concluding that they all do not.

    And this shouldn’t be surprising. They have been telling us for some generations now, just that.

    In modern times Comte, Marx, and Freud have only been among the more prominent voices in a persistent chorus calling for a reconfiguration of the concept of man, and the meaning of life, and thereby a revaluation of values.

    Were they engaging in an objective analysis of mankind’s existential condition? Or, were they merely in fact revealing how they themselves – as some subsegment of humankind – were constructed, and how following from that, they wished to reshape the total human environment to suit?

    That question, concering the origins of the collectivist and totalitarian impulse, can probably be answered at leisure.

    The pressing question for one who does not wish to be dragooned into the service of such a deconstructive and nihilistic program, and is tired of underwriting the activities of those who would cheerfully remake us all into members of some mindless hive, is: Where do we go from here?

  17. Geoffrey Britain Says:

    “This liberal utopia is unsustainable, and already there is no money to run it… This fiscal reality will crush all Gramshian schemes.” sergey

    Certainly possible but consider this; Nine in ten Scots ‘living off state’s patronage’ puts an entirely different light on just how many ‘mouchers’ a society can support, doesn’t it?

  18. T Says:

    Stan,

    I disagree, not that the press is the problem, but that a president should call them on it directly. It would make Romney, or any Republican president for that matter, look like the whiner-in-chief. Look at how that tactic played for Obama’s continually blaming Bush. It worked at first, and now, even the leftist media is saying one reaches a time when this has to stop.

    This bias argument is one that has to come from surrogates. The problem in the past is that the argument wasn’t made forcefully and when it was, those inured to the MSM didn’t believe it.

    As I’ve said before, we should thank Obama for being extreme enough to clearly allow this MSM bias to be revealed to anyone who bothers to look.

  19. ziontruth Says:

    George Pal:

    “Republicans, conservatives, Tea Partiers, and the angry as hell and not going to take it crowd, would have done better, in the long run, taking over the school boards than the executive and legislative branches of the federal government.”

    Quoted for truth.

    Occam’s Beard:

    “The media and the educational establishment are at the root of the cancer.”

    Quoted for truth.

    DNW,

    “You may be right that a Romney election will have only bought some time.”

    That’s the way I think about the whole Reagan presidency. A great era, sure, but squandered by not taking care of the root problem.

  20. Geoffrey Britain Says:

    neo’s absolutely correct that this election is just a battle. We are in the middle of a 100 yr culture war for the soul of America. Entitlements, education and the media are the battlegrounds of this culture war.

    Entitlements can be reduced and tied to inducements for change like work for welfare.

    The department of education can be eliminated and fiscal leverage can be applied to state universities and colleges to effect study guides, course materials and liberal intrusion into non-poly-sci classes.

    Controlling interests in publicly held, parent companies of the major media outlets can be secured. Change the media from the top down.

    Like a snowball rolling down a hill, change will initially appear to be incremental but in but a few decades, the left will look around and wonder what happened.

  21. Paul A'Barge Says:

    Harold is right: Structural Changes.

    And to accomplish that we’re going to need not just the White House but the US Senate as well. If Dirty Harry Reid holds the Senate, grid lock will not even begin to describe what we will experience.

    In addition, even if we have the Senate and even if we repeal Obamacare, we still need those Structural Changes, which must include but not be limited to:
    (1) Shut down the Department of Education
    (2) Fire every lawyer in the DOJ and force all of them to re-apply for their jobs – hire no Democrats
    (3) Shut down the Department of Energy
    (4) shutter the EPA
    (5) start repealing Dodd-Frank and all the other over-regulatory legislation.

    Do you think a President Mitt will be willing to tackle the above, already-minimal list?

    I’m worried about that.

  22. Curtis Says:

    I would make a great illiberal. I tend (the most gentle verb I can think of here) to not seek the truth but victory, tend to think from my senses (that is emotionally) and tend to allow fear and anger to cycle in an upward fashion.

    Only two things save me. And those two I can rest assured were gifts. One is that I have a faith (some might say idee fixe) in Scripture, which Scriptures provide a good guidance; and the second is that I know that I am mad, mad, mad and need help.

    Those two “things” are nothing less than basic tenets of the Judeo-Christian doctrine.

    Against that doctrine is the doctrine of socialism. Recently, someone at this honorable blog posted a very intriguing book by Igor Shafarevich’s called The Socialist Phenomenon. It has a forward by none other than Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn.

    The book presents a way to understand history, namely, that socialism is an historical phenomenon from the ancient to the modern. In my framework, it is one way to unify the many disparate attempts by man to create a way of life inimical to the Judeo-Christian doctrine. In my world, I call it rebellion.

    The historical analysis by Shafarevich complements Neo’s trustworthy analysis. Indeed, the title of the web link, “the long and careful preparation,” hints, shouts, at that complement: Not only is our work cut out for us, our work is cut in us, and this battle we are facing is the latest iteration of man’s condition.

    One final word on “our work is cut in us.” The best bastion against the evil that rebellion is and brings is not greatness but goodness. Illiberals hate Romney because his goodness shields him; however, there is a built in safety switch. As the attacks become more and more vehement and irrational, they become self-defeating to all but the fully lost. We can see this reflected in Obama’s rallies where the main fare is not persuasion or outreach but soothing sarcasm to assure the herd and bind up anxious thoughts contrary to their inculcation.

    So, DNW asks, “Where do we go from here?” I answer from the framework of what good men have done throughout history. Resist and believe.

  23. Occam's Beard Says:

    Paul A’Barge for President.

  24. neo-neocon Says:

    sergey: the fiscal reality will crush all Gramscian schemes, but not before a lot of suffering occurs. Sometimes it’s very hard to go back, to fix what’s broken, to put Humpty Dumpty back together again. Plus, one generation learns the lesson, and then the next needs to learn it all over again, unless education follows suit.

  25. Sangiovese Says:

    SamL @11:06,

    “Still, it will be hard to keep all those little groups corralled.”

    As long as each group individually gets what they want, there will be no need to corral them. Free birth control for the feminists, gay marriage for the GLBT crowd, food stamps and other government services for the lower income masses, amnesty or Dream Act for immigrants, race-based preferences for African Americans. That should add up to 50% + 1 pretty easily.

  26. Curtis Says:

    As was noted by Neo on an earlier thread, Hitler never did gain a majority in Germany’s coalition gov’t. Another point is that all the catered to groups are not monolithic, especially the hoped for biggest group/non-group of all: women.

    But underneath the bidding war is the overlooked fact that there shouldn’t be a bidding war. Another way of looking at whether a tipping point has been reached is by how much of the voting populace has been so corrupted as to actually be enticed by a bidding war.

    Excellent article at the link about the Frankfurt school and its effort to create a majority of corrupted persons. The article is by Timothy Matthews, the editor of the British, Catholic Family News. The excerpt shows various areas to corrupt and create a coalition group.

    http://tinyurl.com/cclrhe6

    1. The creation of racism offences.
    2. Continual change to create confusion
    3. The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children
    4. The undermining of schools’ and teachers’ authority
    5. Huge immigration to destroy identity.
    6. The promotion of excessive drinking
    7. Emptying of churches
    8. An unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime
    9. Dependency on the state or state benefits
    10. Control and dumbing down of media
    11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family

  27. Curtis Says:

    http://www.robertlstephens.com/essays/shafarevich/001SocialistPhenomenon.html

    The above link is the free on-line book by Shafarevich. It’s got some great history and reads easily.

  28. sergey Says:

    Statist mythology can be defeated only by experience of living under liberal tyranny with empty treasury and empty food store shelves. This means a great suffering, but majority of people will woke from their utopian dreams only a hard way. Most of East Europe was doomed by history to go all this way to its end and is now much more conservative than their western neighbors.

  29. Steve Says:

    Is Romney closing in on Obama in swing states as is claimed in polls over the past few weeks or are the polls being adjusted to reflect likely voters (vs registered) and realistic samples of dems and republicans (not D+8). I think it is true that the debates play some role in the shift but I think the polls are also doing exactly what they always do: skewing results to bias perceptions in favor of dems and then changing direction to shore up ‘credibility.’

  30. David L. Says:

    There is a particular reason why the Intrade results bother me. Intrade users are free to factor in personal estimates of things no pollster or modeler can recognize openly: counting irregularities, litigation, or outright intimidation. That’s why I sometimes, in my most cynical and pessimistic moments, say to myself “I don’t know who’s going to win the popular vote or the Electoral College, but I know who’s going to be taking the oath on January 20, 2013.” (And his initials are not MR.)

  31. M J R Says:

    Sangiovese, 1:44 pm — “That should add up to 50% + 1 pretty easily.”

    Let’s leave aside the fact the statist side needs only maybe 47 or so percent, given the boost of the graveyard, illegal, and fabricated votes. (Let’s also leave aside the existence of the electoral college, as I’m sure Sangiovese is writing symbolically when s/he writes of 50 percent plus 1.)

    Let’s posit that The One manages to eke out an electoral as well as a popular vote victory (although the latter is looking much less likely by the hour).

    Obamacare was rammed through, even over the objections of a fairly clear majority of the population. Those who rammed it through could not care less. Look for much, much more of the same. The statist ilk will know that they have four years to ram all manner of heaven-knows-what-else through, probably also over the objections of a majority (and probably a clear majority of those who foot the bill, super-rich lefties notwithstanding).

    It takes me back to the sixties and “hell no, we won’t go”. If enough is rammed through without the consent of the people, it will get very, very ugly. Will the state have to forcibly suppress dissent in order to maintain the peace? Will it be the peasants-with-pitchforks now who will chant, “no justice, no peace”?

    Even granting for sake of discussion only that a collectivist statism is the wave of the future — and I for one certainly pray that is ^not^ the case — Bill Clinton and his lawfully wedded female henchperson (elect one, get one free) knew enough to not push the people too far. The One either doesn’t know that or doesn’t care a damn (I strongly suspect for the latter).

    On the other hand, let’s posit that The Mittster wins the election. The Al Sharptons and his ilk will ^never^ let it go. It will not not peasants-with-pitchforks but ugly, vicious thugs [union and otherwise] with knives, guns, and maybe worse.

    Do I ever ^not^ envy Mitt Romney, but ^do^ I ever appreciate the gargantuan sacrifice he and Mrs. Romney are making for us — “no good deed goes unpunished” writ larger than large. They could easily retire in comfort of which I can only dream, but they are really dedicating themselves to trying to fix this ungodly mess we’re in.

    God bless them.

  32. Ackler Says:

    There’s nothing cynical or pessimistic about it, David. I know events are moving at lightening speed right now, so most of the posts on here are already “outdated” in relation to the current state of the campaign. Bottom line: Obama ensured his re-election today, beyond any concern of irregularities, litigation or intimidation. The minute Chris Christie starting babbling out his Obama lovefest I knew it was over. The only question now is, how big will the margin be. I’m predicting quite large, given that Democrats have five more days to thoroughly exploit Sandy. We shall see.

  33. David L. Says:

    Doubt that, Ackler. You are positing that the electorate is composed of such low-information voters that domination of a single news cycle will produce a landslide victory and long coattails that will give the Democrats both the Senate and the House.

    That would require a massive swing in public opinion, based on nothing more than a photo op which Obama managed not not screw up. I’m sure Obama and his team hope voters are exactly such fools, but I suspect that most voters have made their decision on the their evaluation of the Obama administration’s record. For me and I hope for 50%+1 of the two-party vote, that record runs from bailouts to Benghazi, by way of “Fast and Furious,” crony capitalism, and economic failure.

  34. parker Says:

    We all, except Acker, understand the tortuous path that brought us to this watershed. No matter who is president come January we are in for a difficult time ahead. With Obama we reach the fiscal-monetary abyss on a speeding train. With Romney I think we will be on a slow train that might just be able to switch tracks. That is the choice. Be of good cheer.

  35. momo Says:

    Obama is the 1st anti-American President.
    Due to the Gramscian march (that is already “baked-in”) he will not be that last.

  36. Jed Skillman Says:

    Your observation here is on the money. The only circumstance in which the Democratic frame of mind can be reversed is through consequence.

  37. SteveH Says:

    There’s one piece of legislation that would be the best shot at stopping socialism and the Gramscian march in its tracks. Do away with payroll deductions and make everyone pay the govt like they pay any other bill.

  38. Michelle Says:

    “an MSM hopelessly compromised and in the tank, a school system dedicated to leftist indoctrination, and arts so degraded and propagandist.”

    “We will have our work cut out for us no matter what.”

    What are your thoughts on where our work should start?

  39. neo-neocon Says:

    Michelle: getting on school boards.

  40. Pat Says:

    @DavidL: It is very hard for Americans to bet on Intrade. I know. I did, once. I hads to get a debit card that wasn’t being tracked by the US Government. Next time I tried, it got harder. I gave up. Most of the bettors are foreigners relying on media reports. The current odds are ludicrous, but try trading there.

  41. Curtis Says:

    amen

    school me

    on a

    board

    with water

    amen

  42. parker Says:

    DNW,

    I re-read your pos a few minutes ago. You shot a 0.5 inch group at 100 yards. Bravo!

  43. Darrell Says:

    Pat, I am on intrade, easiest way to fund it is a wire transfer from your bank, I have money riding on Romney, if he wins I triple my money.
    I also think it is way off base on obamas chances, being driven by lots of overseas investors.

  44. David Says:

    Sadly, it doesn’t really matter who you vote for, though. Nothing drastic is going to change. The rigged shell game that is the war on drugs will continue. Pharmaceutical giants will hold hostages as insurance companies grab an ever expanding slice of the pie. Patents will be used as chess pieces to block forward progress that could disrupt the profitable status quo. And, whomever you vote for, the CEO’s will continue their march toward demi-god status; the modern incarnations of the land barons of feudal Europe or the pharaohs of Egypt.

  45. David Says:

    IN the early 19th century, the United States was one of the most egalitarian societies on the planet. “We have no paupers,” Thomas Jefferson boasted in an 1814 letter. “The great mass of our population is of laborers; our rich, who can live without labor, either manual or professional, being few, and of moderate wealth. Most of the laboring class possess property, cultivate their own lands, have families, and from the demand for their labor are enabled to exact from the rich and the competent such prices as enable them to be fed abundantly, clothed above mere decency, to labor moderately and raise their families.”

    For Jefferson, this equality was at the heart of American exceptionalism: “Can any condition of society be more desirable than this?”

  46. T Says:

    Regarding the concept of a watershed election, C. Edmund Wright has an interesting point of view over at American Thinker. His claim is that Obama began losing the election even before his inauguration in 2008. To the extent that this is true, it agrees with my recurring theme of American Exceptionalism being in our DNA. A quote:

    Obama started losing this election in late ’08, before he was inaugurated. Business owners, knowing Obama better than conservative pundits, shed 2 million jobs in 90 days starting in November of 2008. Those jobs are still gone, and they still matter today. Georgians, fearing a liberal Senate, gave Saxby Chambliss an overwhelming ideological victory in a special election in December of ’08 — days after we supposedly saw the end of conservatism. Those were both anti-Obama developments. Every development since his election has been anti-Obama. Let those who have eyes to see….

    In 2009, Obama lost surrogate elections in New Jersey and Virginia. In early 2010, he lost a big one in Massachusetts, and late in 2010 he lost almost a thousand total elections nationwide. In 2011 he lost in Wisconsin — again. Obama and the liberal statists have been hurdling towards a giant thud almost since the day they won in 2008. Yet they have refused to recognize it even as they have hit all kinds of bumps on the way down.

    Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/11/obamas_loss_inevitable_for_years.html#ixzz2AyVI5RBI

    Beyond this thought, however, I’m concerned about the growing identification of an Obama “landslide” loss (or a Romney “landslide” win). First because to identify it as on its way may, in fact, increase the determination of the opposition to get to the polls and thus blunt, or worse cancel, its occurance. Second, even if such a landslide does occur, I can see the MSM headlines already being written: Obama’s Loss Not Nearly As Large as Expected; Romney Win Not A Mandate. The MSM will simply have re-stocked the quiver of their tired yet tireless argument that in the absence of a landslide victory liberal theories are still “obviously” supported by the American public.

  47. T Says:

    Revision. Sorry>

    “His claim is that Obama began losing the election even before his inauguration in 2008″

    Should be:

    “His claim is that Obama began losing the election in 2008 even before his inauguration”

  48. DNW Says:

    parker Says:
    November 1st, 2012 at 12:04 am
    DNW,

    I re-read your pos a few minutes ago. You shot a 0.5 inch group at 100 yards. Bravo!”

    Thanks. A generous remark. I was of course just offering another formulation of what we have all been thinking and saying to a greater or lesser extent.

    As for the grouping remark, let’s hope that that carries over to the 15th, and that my “microgrove” .444 performs that well on some unwary 10 point. I have to admit that I still get the a bit of the shakes when confronted by a really outstanding rack. Referring to deer of course … whitetails.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>



About Me

Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely leaving the fold and becoming that dread thing: a neocon.
Read More >>








Blogroll

Ace (bold)
AmericanDigest (writer’s digest)
AmericanThinker (thought full)
Anchoress (first things first)
AnnAlthouse (more than law)
AtlasShrugs (fearless)
AugeanStables (historian’s task)
Baldilocks (outspoken)
Barcepundit (theBrainInSpain)
Beldar (Texas lawman)
BelmontClub (deep thoughts)
Betsy’sPage (teach)
Bookworm (writingReader)
Breitbart (big)
ChicagoBoyz (boyz will be)
Contentions (CommentaryBlog)
DanielInVenezuela (against tyranny)
DeanEsmay (conservative liberal)
Donklephant (political chimera)
Dr.Helen (rights of man)
Dr.Sanity (thinking shrink)
DreamsToLightening (Asher)
EdDriscoll (market liberal)
Fausta’sBlog (opinionated)
GayPatriot (self-explanatory)
HadEnoughTherapy? (yep)
HotAir (a roomful)
InFromTheCold (once a spook)
InstaPundit (the hub)
JawaReport (the doctor is Rusty)
LegalInsurrection (law prof)
RedState (conservative)
Maggie’sFarm (centrist commune)
MelaniePhillips (formidable)
MerylYourish (centrist)
MichaelTotten (globetrotter)
MichaelYon (War Zones)
Michelle Malkin (clarion pen)
Michelle Obama's Mirror (reflections)
MudvilleGazette (milblog central)
NoPasaran! (behind French facade)
NormanGeras (principled leftist)
OneCosmos (Gagdad Bob’s blog)
PJMedia (comprehensive)
PointOfNoReturn (Jewish refugees)
Powerline (foursight)
ProteinWisdom (wiseguy)
QandO (neolibertarian)
RachelLucas (in Italy)
RogerL.Simon (PJ guy)
SecondDraft (be the judge)
SeekerBlog (inquiring minds)
SisterToldjah (she said)
Sisu (commentary plus cats)
Spengler (Goldman)
TheDoctorIsIn (indeed)
Tigerhawk (eclectic talk)
VictorDavisHanson (prof)
Vodkapundit (drinker-thinker)
Volokh (lawblog)
Zombie (alive)

Regent Badge