Recently in Fourth Estate Category

Okay, I stated the obvious. But here's the proof:

Ninety-four percent of Obama voters correctly identified Palin as the candidate with a pregnant teenage daughter, 86% correctly identified Palin as the candidate associated with a $150,000 wardrobe purchased by her political party, and 81% chose McCain as the candidate who was unable to identify the number of houses he owned. When asked which candidate said they could "see Russia from their house," 87% chose Palin, although the quote actually is attributed to Saturday Night Live's Tina Fey during her portrayal of Palin during the campaign. An answer of "none" or "Palin" was counted as a correct answer on the test, given that the statement was associated with a characterization of Palin.

Obama voters did not fare nearly as well overall when asked to answer questions about statements or stories associated with Obama or Biden - 83% failed to correctly answer that Obama had won his first election by getting all of his opponents removed from the ballot, and 88% did not correctly associate Obama with his statement that his energy policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry. Most (56%) were also not able to correctly answer that Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground.

Nearly three quarters (72%) of Obama voters did not correctly identify Biden as the candidate who had to quit a previous campaign for President because he was found to have plagiarized a speech, and nearly half (47%) did not know that Biden was the one who predicted Obama would be tested by a generated international crisis during his first six months as President.

Our pathetic excuse for news media in this country certainly did its job well, I'll give them that. They were determined to make sure Obama was elected, and they made sure the Oprah/View/SNL crowd stayed ignorant of the truth about him.

We cannot expect the Americans to jump from capitalism to communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving Americans small doses of socialism until they suddenly awake to find they have communism.

- Soviet dictator Nikita Khrushchev, 1959

JASmius adds: How's this for a Biblical metaphor of the last eight years of American politics?:

"Now when the unclean spirit goes out of a man, it passes through waterless places seeking rest, and does not find it.  Then it says, 'I will return to my house from which I came'; and when it comes, it finds it unoccupied, swept, and put in order.  Then it goes and takes along with it seven other spirits more wicked than itself, and they go in and live there; and the last state of that man becomes worse than the first. That is the way it will also be with this evil generation."

Kinda self-explanatory, ain't it?

And how, you may be asking, can the American capitalist frog not realize it's boiling to death inside the boiling communist cauldron?  Simple, gentlebeings - utter, complete ignorance (via American Thinker):

Call it Dan Rather's revenge.  And that was BEFORE the mainstream media is stamped out by the return of the "Fairness" Doctrine.  Once Limbaugh, Hannity, Hewitt, et al and the starboard blogosphere are banned, how will even Sarah Palin manage to overcome the American Khrushchev and his invincible propaganda monopoly?

David Limbaugh delivers it sadly and succinctly:

I am sincerely worried that if Obama wins, the checks and balances incorporated into our Constitution may not be enough to prevent a radical and irreversible diminution of our individual liberties because a confluence of factors has emerged to create a climate conducive to fundamental change.

These are the factors:

A shockingly unknown candidate, whose mysterious past and numerous shady alliances are deliberately left unexplored by a corrupt, supportive media

The candidate's charismatic qualities that inspire a cultish loyalty

His intellectual trappings that create a fascination and allure among the intellectual elite, including some hypnotized conservatives

A major financial crisis that exacerbates the people's fears and uncertainties

A largely manufactured cloud of negativity placed over America by the media and a grossly partisan Democratic Party that places its self-interest above the national interest

An apparently discredited Republican Party and conservative movement that have been blamed for our actual and perceived problems

All of these could lead to entrusting this man with unprecedented power, giving him a license to operate with minimum scrutiny and an opposition party effectively impotent to oppose his radical blueprint for America.

More than ever, perception is trumping reality.

And the deodorant-testing part?  That Republican "impotence" has no perceivable remedy, for the very same reasons as the onset of the disease.  If you think that Obamunist propaganda Limbaugh goes on to recap in dismaying detail will let up after next Tuesday, you haven't been paying attention.  It's permanent, my friends, because the Obama/Pelosi/Reid Axis is meant to be permanent, and they will never, EVER let up, or allow ANY possibility of their EVER losing power again.  From the reimposition of the "Fairness" Doctrine to forcible re-unionization of what's left of the private sector (until it's all nationalized) to mass illegal alien amnesty (adding twelve million new Democrat voters), it's going to be a left-wing blitzkrieg the likes of which we have never seen.

Please, do read the whole column, and ask yourselves this: with talk radio and the starboard blogosphere shut down and the GOP literally decimated, who is going to lead us back out of this wilderness?  And will occupied America and the Republican underground be beyond the ability of even a Reagan or Gingrich to rescue?

RIP, Dean Barnett.  As a co-blogger with Double-H who parlayed that break into a professional writing gig with the Weekly Standard, as well as guest hosting the Hewitt radio show (which will be closed down next year in any case), you got to live my dream.

You just didn't get to live it long enough.

I surrender.  I throw in the towel.  I quit.  No mas.  I just can't fight it anymore.

Campaign 2008 and the inevitability of the One?  Of course not, don't be an idiot; I'm referring to the Enemy Media polling psych-ops plot.  They've gotten so ludicrously Obiased even on the state level that the data has been rendered meaningless.

This isn't the first time I've personally encountered this phenomenon in my blogging career.  The 1996 campaign was even worse.  Bill Clinton's inevitability was proclaimed for two full years before any ballots were cast.  Admittedly, that wasn't all that difficult an outcome to predict given that the GOP insisted upon giving poor ol' Bob Dole his "turn"/gold watch, and the rest of the Republican field that year (Pat Buchanan, Phil Gramm, Lamar Alexander, Steve Forbes) was even less scintillating, and Sick Willie was piggy-backing the accomplishments of the Republican Congress he'd gotten elected two years before.  But the leads the EM pollsters attributed to him - in the twenty-point range of LBJ-Goldwater, Nixon-McGovern, and Reagan-Mondale - were outrageously overinflated.  I never denied that Clinton was substantially ahead and was going to win, but argued obstinately that he wasn't THAT far ahead.  And I was vindicated (if you can call it that), as Clinton ended up with a mere eight-point margin of victory and was denied a popular vote majority again.

Four years ago I played around with every methodology I could think of to try and strip Enemy Media bias out of the national surveys.  Yet over the final weekend before Election Day, when pollsters are supposed to put biases aside and get the most accurate final numbers they can for the sake of professional credibility, most of those same national surveys showed a surge toward John Kerry.  As I recall, it averaged out to about a two-point Kerry victory in the popular vote.  This just made no sense to me (for a number of reasons) so I tried a different approach.  I composited each state's polling numbers and amalgamated a national composite weighted by population (in this case, percentage of the Electoral College).  That produced a result of Bush 51.2%, Kerry 48.4%, which ended up being spot-on target.

This year I wasn't going to bother since I knew from Groundhog's Day forward that I had no horse in this year's.  As I've written (bitterly and clingingly) many times, we were getting our choice of two Democrats (a Lieberman/Scoop Jackson one and an Alinsky/Marxist one), and I was pretty much going to sit this presidential election out and concentrate on the rest of the ballot.  But anybody who knows me knows I'm far too big a spreadsheet geek to resist tracking even a race I am indifferent to - and as I was forced to concede a few days ago, the threat to America's economy, America's identity, America's remaining liberties, and American lives posed by an unchecked Obama/Pelosi/Reid dictatorship is too dire and harrowing to leave undone anything within my meager power that can avert this collective act of national suicide.

What that method indicated was that "50/50 nation" still basically exists, at least at the presidential level.  The McCain-Obama contest is being waged within about a five point range either side of even, right up to this very moment.  So all the Enemy Media national surveys showing Barry O ahead anywhere from eight to twelve (or more) points are, for all intents and purposes, garbage.

The driver of this Obias is, of course, the partisan weighting assumptions of these polls.  It is simply being taken on blind, rote faith that B.O. is so dynamic, so charismatic, so attractive, that he's going to bring stampeding to the polls the hordes of "new, young, idealistic" voters that the press is always predicting every four years and always uses to intellectually justify their chronic oversampling of Democrats and undersampling of Republicans.  The difference this time is that the magnitude of the Obias has become so blatant that it's polluted even the state polling that has enabled me in the past to filter it out.

That tipping point came, for me, last Thursday with another cluster-bomb explosion of "Big Ten Battleground" results of "rust belt" states conducted by the University of Wisconsin.  This wasn't its first batch in this campaign, and the previous one (in late September) didn't yield any conspicuously unreasonable results.  This batch was a different story.  Not a single one of them showed McCain within single-digits - even Indiana.  Two of them (Michigan and Minnesota) showed him down twenty or more, and thirty in Illinois.

This, my friends, is bullbleep.  Not that the Golden Child isn't ahead in most of the "Big Ten" states; but there is no way he's up in ALL of them, and by THAT much.  And, not surprisingly, the methodology was as risibly skewed as you would have imagined: a sixteen-point bulge for Democrat respondents over Republican respondents.  Not in THIS quantum reality, Badger-Donks.

There were also two new California surveys (PPIC and Survey USA) with the same gaping methodology flaw that purported to show Obama leading in the Golden State by twenty-five points.  Now there's no question that Barry is going to carry California, and that it'll be by double-digits, but twenty-five points?  That shifted my national composite by a point all by itself, and like the New York Stock Exchange has built-in breakers to shut down if sell-offs get out of hand, so I've suspended my "E-Minus" updates for the time being.  To continue them I would need to correct the weighting for every single state poll, which is beyond the scope of my time and available resources.

Am I ruling out the possibility that the partisan identification numbers may have shifted Donkward to SOME degree?  Not entirely, given the impact of the Democrat Financial Logic Bomb that successfully sabotaged the financial markets and stuck hapless Republicans with the blame; but not enough to deviate from the 38% Democrat/35% Republican/27% Independent constant that has closely held for the past generation.

Here's the soon-to-be-forced-into-Fairness-Doctrine-retirement Rush Limbaugh on the subject:

Nice to be following along in El Rushbo's wake like a dinghy to an aircraft carrier.  It may be one of the final times.  But he's right; this race is not "over."  Not because the race is "tightening," but because Obama was never outside the margin of error in the first place.  My sop to pessimism is that because that range is so comparatively narrow, a two or three point Obama lead will be a lot more difficult to overcome, even with Joe Biden's imprudent warnings of national security disasters to come and Joe The Plumber as the human face on the scourge of Obamanomics.

To be fair and balanced, here's Generalissimo Duane's sop to optimism:

I was having dinner a night ago with a friend of mine who is a statistician for a well-regarded private polling company. They do some work for Republicans in California, but most of the work they do is for Democrats or Democrat-leaning operations (Unions, etc.). Anyway, her shop was retained to do a few Presidential polls for targeted states on behalf of a union so the union could decide where to spend their ad dollars for the last week. They did Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada and Missouri. After mocking the hell out of the voter id spreads used by Rassmussen, Zogby, etc. (and this is coming from a committed Dem who will be voting for Barry O) she said the results of their polling lead her to believe that McCain will definitely win FL, OH, NC, MO and NV. She says Obama definitely wins New Mexico. She said that Colorado and New Hampshire were absolute dead heats. She said she thinks there is a 55% chance Obama holds on in Pennsylvania and a 75% chance McCain wins Virginia. She absolutely laughed at the public polls showing Obama leading Virginia – and pointed out that all of those polls rely on Dem turnout being +4 and as much as +7, when in 2006, Republicans actually had the advantage by three. She also pointed out that the numbers for Obama in SWVA look absolutely awful and that McCain is running ten points better then Allen did in NoVa.

 

Anyway, her companies conclusion is that the election will come down to Colorado, New Hampshire and the Republican leaning district in Maine, which in her opinion might very well decide the Presidency (apparently the district in Nebraska that Obama thought he might be able to get is now off the table). She said she has very little doubt that the public polling is part of a “concerted voter suppression effort” by the MSM. She said IBD/TIPP was the only outfit doing public polling that was “worth a bucket of warm piss”.

Revenge of the Plumber....

Michelle Malkin is pissed. And for very good reason. The narrative from the Obama camp (that of course includes the major news media) is the mean, nasty people at the McCain/Palin rallies. Yeah, it's the REPUBLICANS who are out of control. Read Malkin's rundown of just who the Democrat supporters are, and what they do. Gawd, these people are lower than snake spit.

JASmius adds: I would advise Double-M and her readers to pace themselves.  If she, and they, are going ballistic now, they'll burn themselves out before Barry's inauguration - and there's at least four years of snake spit to come after that.

UPDATE: One other thought to ponder, or prediction to bear in mind: You know the Bush Derangement Syndrome that has raged for the past eight years?  This Obamunist narrative is a pre-emptive framing of any opposition to his administration as not just Obamaphobia, but an outright attempt to permanently delegitimize the Right as "ugly, dangerous, extreme, racist, bigoted, annnnnnnnd [drumroll please] traitorous" for not bowing down and worshipping False Messiah.  Or pretty much what the Left has been since Florida 2K.

That's why I counsel pacing ourselves.  Four - or eight - years is a long time to maintain such high dudgeon rage; but as the past two years have starkly illustrated, if it can be sustained long enough, it eventually works.

I just pray the country can survive that long under neoMarxist domination.

What's gotten into CNN this week?  First they out Barry O as a William Ayers disciple, and now they blow the whistle on his long, close, and ongoing alliance with ACORN:

Y'know, it's a pity that nobody watches that journalistic honey bucket, or this sudden eruption of professional objectivity and integrity might actually make some kind of difference in the campaign.  Either that, or Drew Griffin and Campbell Brown are convinced "Democrat Jesus" has the election in the bag and feel free to stop covering his worthless ass on this stuff.

Elsewhere in Cablenewsland, Fox brought us the not-overly-useful revelation that when one of their anchors abdicates control over a crossfire-type interview, John Fund doesn't have the cajones to set aside composure and civility and tell the filibustering left-wing election stealers he's been excoriating in print for the last several years to shut the f up:

Ace thinks this segment was a net-plus for the GOP by showing what arrogant assholes these lefties be when they start celebrating victories they haven't technically won yet.  But you know my theory on how jerks come off as jerks at first, but eventually the pathos of their stubbornly passive victims breeds the audience's contempt.  It's the same dynamic that has McCain rallies booing their main event speaker for demanding their "civility and respect" for the dickwad who has smeared him at least half a dozen times as a racist and attacked righties such as Stan Kurtz and David Fredosso as "extremists" and "hate-mongers" and gotten them shouted down in media appearances even worse than Fund was.  But have no fear, my friends, for Fox, suddenly mass-hypnotised into believing they're CNN, also brings us ACORN's profuse reassurances that they're totally and completely "non-partisan".

At least to the degree that Terry Bradshaw - or GOP Congressman Thad McCotter - has hair:

And, still my palpitating heart, could ACORNgate be the Great Equalizer that the Right, if not Team Sith, has been frantically praying for?

Nah, probably not.  But hey, the McCainiacs have put out an ad about it, for whatever that's worth:

'course, this is a web video, not a TV ad.  And it's still using the "blind ambition" tag line, which lets B.O. off the hook for knowingly linking himself to ACORN as he did to the communist terrorist Bill Ayers.  Which means that the Republican presidential nominee is officially being softer on Barack Hoover Obama on this, one of his greatest political liabilities as conceded by his own attempts to cover it up, than Cable F'ing News Network.

Shucks, maybe this is better off not on the tube.

Road Runner, if he catches you, you're through....

Send out your hated Barracuda to talk about the forbidden subject....

....and FORCE the press to cover it if only to try and shout her down:

A CNN reporter telling a CNN anchor on the CNN airwaves BEFORE THE ELECTION that their favored candidate has lied repeatedly about every aspect of his very close personal, professional, and political relationship with an unrepentant communist terrorist - from serving on the same boards to running the Chicago Annenberg Challenge to launching his political career in Bill Ayers' living room in 1995.  Compelling the following admission from an Obamunist spokeshack:

Okay, it's not much of an admission - "Yes, Barry knew Ayers was an unrepentent communist terrorist but worked with him anyway," which is another way of saying, "No, Barry isn't an autistic fool," which is still another way of saying, "We think we've got this election sufficiently in the bag that ceasing to insult the public's collective intelligence with our risible lies about it won't hurt us."

The question is, is that arrogant complacency on the part of Team Messiah, or is it pretty much on the mark?

UPDATE: Don't fret, my friends, the New York Times hasn't gone, er, "wobbly".