There are two categories of people; those who categorize people, and those who don’t.

Likewise, I think, there are two different types of politicians.

One type, we’ll call the Political Engineer.  He or she pragmatically breaks down every issue, like a good Engineer does, carefully calculating the best path to take through the issue.  Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Norm Coleman, Karl Rove – all of them are Political Engineers.  Just as no engineer drives a pile or moves a circuit from spec to prototype without enough analysis to mitigate risk and controlling uncertainty, the Political Engineer figures the angles before things hit the fan – or tries to, anyway.  Politics involving real people rather than steel and electricity, it doesn’t always work – but then, the Political Engineer knows that.  Political Engineers may have principles and beliefs – they’re human, after all, and rarely driven by pure pragmatism – but those principles and beliefs are wrung through a lot of deconstruction before they go out into the world.

At the opposite extreme is the Political Artist.  They’re driven by something – an issue, a hot-button, a vision.  They have visceral, rather than political, reactions to issues; their heart, not their calculations, tell them the proper response to a political stimulus.  They tend, I think, to be charismatic, driven – and, sometimes but far from always, to have short careers.  For many, I suspect, the emotion that drives them is focused on an issue that precludes a lot of big-picture ambition.  For others, burnout ensues; a person can only maintain that level of emotional intensity for so long.  For still others?  When you wear your heart on your sleeve, as opposed to calculating exactly where you should wear your heart for best results, it’s easy to make a “mistake”, when things get hairy; those who don’t share your emotional commitment to the presenting issue might find allegiance to a Political Engineer less off-putting.  There are quite a few of ’em out there, too; Dennis Kucinich, Keith Ellison, Ronald Reagan (to an extent, although he substituted Ideals for Emotions, I think)…

…and, I think, Michele Bachmann.

First things first:  I support Rep. Bachmann.  No two ways about it; she is one of Minnesota’s very best congressional representatives.  She is vastly more qualified (to say nothing, at this point, of experienced) than her challenger, Elwin “E-Tink” Tinklenberg.  She is a lighting rod for all the usual constituencies that find an uppity, articulate conservative woman to be a huge threat, of course – but any woman that breaks from the mushy-left, pro-“choice” pack is going to be.

And Rep. Bachmann wears her heart on her sleeve.  She’s patriotic.  She’s American.  And in her infamous interview last week with Chris Matthews, she – like any hip-shooter up against a tingly-legged, in-the-bag huckster might – certainly uncorked on “anti-Americans”.

So what is “anti-American?”  Someone who actively connives to destroy this nation?  Certainly.  And in context, I don’t believe Rep. Bachmann was talking about this.

Someone whose actions, you hold, are inimical to this nation’s best interests?  Someone whose actions make this nation a weaker, worse place?  Someone who thinks this nation would be hunky-dory if it were just completely different than it is? 

That, I think, was what Rep. Bachmann was talking about, in context.  And I agree with her; I think there are a lot of people whose beliefs, platforms, agendas and actions could make this nation a really crappy place. And they need to be rooted out – at the polls.  Via our political process.

Would I have picked a different word to describe this idea than “anti-American”?  Probably. Do I wish Rep. Bachmann had?  Perhaps.  Did her propensity to shoot from the hip – to be other than a Political Engineer – slide her into a moment that everyone who wants to see her out of Congress can use to spin until we’re all ready to puke?

Give me a break. Chris Matthew’s leg was so tingly, it could have generated static electricity.

UPDATE:  Kouba’s take is pretty essential:

A conservative is going to get zero breaks from the media, so we need to minimize unforced errors. I’m eternally glad Bachmann is in Congress voting on the side of angels, and I hope it stays that way for a long time. Hopefully this, too, will fade, like so many other campaign flaps before it.

The Twin Cities’ tolerant lefties are hard at work vandalizing Norm Coleman’s house:

[Senator ] Coleman and his wife, Laurie, live in the Crocus Hill neighborhood of St. Paul. Spokesman Mark Drake says Wednesday morning that grafitti left on the outside of the garage says: “You are a criminal resign or else”; “Scum,” which is written three times; and “Psalm 2.”

Here’s the big question:  if Obama loses, how violent will the left get?

UPDATE:  They were apparently equal-opportunity vandals:

Also vandalized in similar fashion: U.S. Sen Amy Klobuchar and U.S. Reps. Keith Ellison, John Kline, Michelle Bachmann and Jim Ramstad. Klobuchar and Ellison are Democrats; Coleman, Kline, Bachmann and Ramstad, Republicans.

Ellison’s appears to be the only incident so far in which the home itself was vandalized. Campaign manager Larry Weiss said that Ellison’s wife, Kim, went out this morning and found graffiti that said “Traitor. Resign now. Psalm 2” across the side of their corner home. The word “SCUM” was spraypainted above the garage door — high enough, Weiss said, that the culprit probably would have needed a stepstool.

I don’t care who they vandalized – I hope the perps are caught and prosecuted as far as the law will allow.

And I’d say that even if they’d only hit Ellison and A-Klo.

…and ends with L-O-S-T.

Barack Obama declared last week that his economic plan begins with “one word that’s on everyone’s mind and it’s spelled J-O-B-S.” This raises the stubborn question that Senator Obama has never satisfactorily answered: How do you create more jobs when you want to levy higher tax rates on the small business owners who are the nation’s primary employers? (emphasis mine)

The answer is “you don’t.” Don’t believe it?

How about a word from an expert. A Democrat at that (emphasis mine).

Democratic Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus of Montana. Here is what Mr. Baucus wrote in a joint press release with Iowa Republican Charles Grassley on August 20, 2001, when they supported the income tax rate cuts that Mr. Obama wants to repeal:

“. . . when the new tax relief law is fully phased in, entrepreneurs and small businesses — owners of sole proprietorships, partnerships, S corporations, and farms — will receive 80 percent of the tax relief associated with reducing the top income tax rates of 36 percent to 33 percent and 39.6 percent to 35 percent.”

Then they continued with a useful economics tutorial:

“Experts agree that lower taxes increase a business’ cash flow, which helps with liquidity constraints during an economic slowdown and could increase the demand for investment and labor.”

Twelve Senate Democrats voted for those same tax cuts. And just to be clear on one point: An increase in “the demand for investment and labor” translates into an increase in J-O-B-S. So if lowering these tax rates creates jobs, then it stands to reason that raising these taxes will mean fewer jobs. From 2003 to 2007 with the lower tax rates in place, the U.S. economy added eight million jobs, or about 125,000 per month. The Small Business Administration says small business wrote the paychecks for up to 80% of new jobs in 2005, for example.

Apparently there are thirteen Democrats that know what is good for the economy.

Sadly, Barack Obama doesn’t happen to be one of them.

Tax “cuts” for people that don’t pay taxes in the first place coupled with tax increases for those that already bear most of the burden is a tax hike, net/net.

Tax increases of any sort for anyone is a bad idea right now and will further undermine an economy that is about to get a lot worse, with or without Obama’s “help.” Don’t believe it? Does history offer a clue?

In 1932, Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt was elected president as the nation was heading into a severe recession. The stock market had crashed in 1929, the world’s economy was slowing down, and all economic indicators in the U.S. showed signs of trouble.

The new president’s response was to restructure the economy with the New Deal — an expansion of the role of government once unimaginable in America. We now know that FDR’s policies likely prolonged the Great Depression because the economy never fully recovered in the 1930s, and actually got worse in the latter half of the decade. And we know that FDR got away with it (winning election four times) by blaming his predecessor, Herbert Hoover, for crashing the economy in the first place.

Change the names, and what is about to happen doesn’t seem so far fetched. Eight more years of hearing about the failed policies of the Bush administration, who pushed the same ineffective stimuless button that Pelosi is proposing. Obama and his Liberal Flunkies have blamed George Bush for everything so far, why stop now?

I’d like to welcome this blog’s latest sponsor, Chachi – home of the freakin’ awesome political t-shirt.

Think of them as bumper stickers for your torso.

Buy ’til it hurts!  (That last bit was motivated by pure greed.  Gotta do that before it gets regulated). 

Reason number 10,393 I dig Sarah Palin:

So get this … we found out when Sarah Palin checked into the Omni Berkshire Hotel in NYC for her “Saturday Night Live” performance, she used an alias — first name, Tina.

I smell a “Crocodile Dundee”-style remake here…

I went to a town hall meeting featuring Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN6), DFL-and-Independence Party endorsed challenger Elwin “E-Tink” Tinklenberg, and unendorsed Ventura “Independence” Party challenger Bob Anderson.

The shorter version:

• Tinklenburg:  Platitudes.  Lots and lots of them.  Look, I’ll cop to it; I’m singularly unimpressed by E-Tink.  His performance during the 35W Bridge Collapse was uniquely loathsome, and I won’t be forgiving that for quite some time.  That said, even by the low standards I expected, his performance was unimpressive; loads of platitudes, no real answers.  That he’s even a contender is a sign of how dire things are for Republicans these days. 
• Anderson:  Seemed like a good guy, albeit not a politician.  Confessed to being a fiscal conservative, which introduces an interesting question; given that the Ventura “Independence” Party endorsed E-Tink for CD6 over him, and Dean “Like Ed Schultz, Only Here” Barkley over the Lars Ulrich Skeet Uldrich Jack Uldrich for Senate, where indeed is the notion that there is a place for disaffected Republicans in the IP?
• Bachmann:  I won’t kid you; I went in rooting for Michele.  She’s conservative, she’s sharp, and she’s got the one thing that the left hates most from conservative women; she’s uppity.  And instead of hiding behind platitudes, she grabbed a dry-erase marker and spent five minutes at a whiteboard explaining the numbers behind her opposition to the bailout bill – the trillions of dollars for which we the taxpayers are now on the hook.  It was a pretty polarized crowd – about half of them were obviously fans, and the other half were not (and some of them were pretty rude about it, nattering and chattering away in the audience as the Representative explained her position, although Rep. Bachmann did a great job of fielding their questions). 

It wasn’t a debate – call it a “forum” – and I’ll cop to my biases in advance.  But how anyone who isn’t voting on pure ideology could choose E-Tink over Bachmann is…

…well, finding an analogy is irrelevant, since that’s about the only reason in play at the moment.

…Colin Powell earned the respect of every American.

As a Secretary of State, Colin Powell made an excellent general.

There’s not much I can say about Powell’s endorsement of Obama that others aren’t saying better.

But watching him on Today this morning, one bit stuck out:  Obama, he of the paper-thin resume, with a third of a term in the Senate and a brief career as a Chicago ward heeleer in the Illinois legislature and a barely-filled suit, is a “transormational figure”…

…while Sarah Palin is “inexperienced”.

Jay Reding has more.

On Saturday’s NARN show, Ed and I spent a segment talking about the Catholic Church’s relative silence (at least in America) on abortion in politics (a conversation Ed continued at Hot Air this morning).

I’m a Protestant, of course, and mildly peeved that the state of discourse is now such that I have to painstakingly disclaim “I’m not anti-Catholic”. 

But I’ve had a few questions for American Catholics for a very, very long time.

Catholic doctrine – to this goy, who had exactly a semester in Catholic school, and that only because my elementary school had to be torn down, so we rented a room at Saint John’s Academy – has always seemed like a bit of a paper tiger among American Catholics.  Catholics in the US seem scarcely less willing than us goyim to do all the stuff the priests and nuns told ’em not to way back when – use birth control, get divorced, knock back a couple of Big Macs on Friday, what have you.  As to being pro-life?  Many of America’s most-Catholic cities – Boston, New York, Philly, Saint Paul, New Orleans – are also the most left-leaning, ergo most pro-“choice”.  And that’s not a demographic accident; generations of American bishops, archbishops and (I dunno) flying-buttressbishops, like Minneapolis/Saint Paul’s former Archbiship Flynn, were scarcely farther to the right than Barack Obama on any issue, and seemed conveniently and consistently silent as re politicians’ stances (especially those of “Catholic” pols, like Joe Biden, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi and, lest we forget, pro-“choice” congresswomen Betty McCollum, not merely Catholic but graduate of Catholic women’s college and pristinely-liberal hothouse Saint Catherine’s, in Saint Paul which, like neighboring Saint Thomas, seems to find Catholic doctrine more a matter of fund-raising than a moral foundation.

So when I see this story, about Denver’s archbishop questioning Biden and Obama on “choice”, and lighting a figurative fire under his followers’ (parishioners?  Archbishopricticioners? Prelatistas?) figurative feet over “choice”…:

Denver Roman Catholic Archbishop Charles Chaput labeled Barack Obama the “most committed” abortion-rights candidate from a major party in 35 years while accusing a Catholic Obama ally and other Democratic-friendly Catholic groups of doing a “disservice to the church.”

Chaput, one of the nation’s most politically outspoken Catholic prelates, delivered the remarks Friday night at a dinner of a Catholic women’s group.
His comments were among the sharpest in a debate over abortion and Catholic political responsibility in a campaign in which Catholics represent a key swing vote.

…my response wasn’t so much “there y’go” as “why is this news?” 

Of course, it is news; of America’s bajillion archbishops, Chaput would seem to be one of very, very few actually telling Catholic politicians to reckon with Catholic doctrine in adopting their positions.

And, possible Reaganesque flight to the right notwithstanding, an awful lot of Catholics will be voting for The One next month. 

Compare and contrast; when evangelical Protestants don’t vote their faith, it makes the news; when the Catholic hierarchy asks Catholics not even to vote their faith, but for Catholic pols to be aware of the rules, regs and beliefs of that faith, it’s newsworthy.

Where is the Catholic hierarchy?

…when the Ventura “Independence” Party in Minnesota finally falls below that magical 5% mark, loses “Major Party” status (which grants it an automatic place on the ballot and a seat at debates), and we never have to hear from hamsters like Dean Barkley ever again.

While I’ve consistently labelled the IP “DFL Lite” – largely accurately – the party’s roots trace back to the old “Reform” party, the last fallout of Ross Perot’s brief political heyday.  And some – a tiny few – of the candidates the IP has put forward have actually been mildly interesting; Jim Gibson, the 2000 Senate candidate who ran against Rod Grams and Brave Sir Mark Dayton, was a thoughtful candidate with a lot of positions that could attract a conservative – indeed, had Grams been significantly ahead in the polls that year (he lost to Brave Sir Mark), I thought about voting for Gibson.  Lars Ulrich Jack Uldrich, the IP candidate who lost the party’s Senate endorsement to Barkley, calls himself a former Republican; I’ve talked with him, and he’s got a few positions that make sense (along with plenty of IP detritus).

But Barkley’s the one the IP is putting out there for Senate.  I talked with Senator Barkley (“Governor” Ventura appointed him to fill the late Paul Wellstone’s seat for two months in 2002, petulantly refusing to give the recently-elected Norm Coleman a head start in office) briefly last night on Marty Owings’ show on Blog Talk Radio. 

I asked him to square his current platform – the one he’s pimping in the debates, which is all sorts of high/mighty talk about fiscal restraint – with the only record the “Independence” Party actually has, the four years of the Ventura Administration, in which Barkley and Tim Penny did most of the thinking, and during which the Ventura Administration turned most of Minnesota’s surpluses into permanent spending, booming the budget by 28% in two years.

Barkley’s response?  “What were you smoking?”  As I tried to focus on actual history, Barkley yelled over me with a trail of peevish ad-homina.

Later, when asked about his Iraq policy, he responded he wanted out “as soon as possible”.  I asked him how he judges the term “possible”; what would make this withdrawal “possible”, according to “Senator”, Senator Dean Barkley. 

For that, I got more ad-homina – to which I responded “I think you’re too brittle to be a Senator; if you think I’m a pain in the ass, imagine when you’re sitting across the table from Vladimir Putin”. 

His only response?  A Sarah Palin joke. 

So OK, all you “Independence” Party people out there (and thanks to Jesse Ventura’s eternal, dumb coattails and no other reason whatsoever, you do continue to poll better than the Libertarians, the Natural Law and Constitution parties); how is it that he is still in public life?

Oh, yeah – Barkley, a lawyer, said he didn’t give or take PAC money when he was working as a lobbyist.  Perhaps; although I’m wondering if he’s not parsing his words a little narrowly.

The Minnesota Poll shows The Obamessiah ahead by double digits.

The poll, conducted Thursday and Friday, found that Obama is supported by 52 percent of likely voters, while 41 percent are backing McCain. The results show that while McCain has cut into Obama’s 18-point lead from two weeks ago, it’s not enough to move Minnesota back into the toss-up column, as it was immediately after the Republican National Convention was held in St. Paul in early September.

Experience says when the Minnesota Poll shows a huge DFL lead alone among polls, it most likely means it’s pretty close to the margin of error, DFLers are scared, and the MNPoll is doing it’s best to coax Republicans into staying home. 

Sort of like they’re doing nationwide.

Don’t believe the hype, Republicans.  It’s gonna be a tough election – but the media and Democrats (pardon the redundancy) want you to believe it’s hopeless.

The behavior of the “tanning bed media” – the hordes of media vultures that descend on whomever dares to question The One – should be getting some reactions.  The “Joe The Plumber” story is merely the latest incident…:

“It actually upsets me,” Mr. Wurzelbacher [AKA “Joe”] said. “I am a plumber, and just a plumber, and here Barack Obama or John McCain, I mean these guys are going to deal with some serious issues coming up shortly. The media’s worried about whether I paid my taxes, they’re worried about any number of silly things that have nothing to do with America. They really don’t. I asked a question. When you can’t ask a question to your leaders anymore, that gets scary. That bothers me.”

Mr. Wurzelbacher confronted Mr. Obama over his tax proposals, asserting that the Democratic nominee’s plan would tax him more if Mr. Wurzelbacher bought a plumbing business.

 

In the course of their conversation, Mr. Obama said, “It’s not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody that is behind you, that they have a chance for success, too. I think that when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

…in a trail of behavior that should make every “liberal” that’s spent the last eight years howling about the Bush Administration’s (largely imaginary-to-the-point-of-paranoid) transgressions against American civil liberties blanche with horror – were it not for the fact that nearly every damn one of them is a mindless partisan hypocrite.

The media took plenty of time off from reporting on two wars and an economic crisis to find, and report with rapturous glee, that Wurzelbacher isn’t licensed, hasn’t drawn up a business plan, and wouldn’t be buying a company that made over $250K even if he did, and has a few unpaid fines and a divorce in his past.

I’ve heard a couple of liberals respond “Then his question doesnt’ count!  He couldn’t have even bought the business!”

Buncombe.  A guy can dream – and he doesn’t have to vet his dreams with a producer in New York before asking a Presidential candidate a question.

Is it personal?  Yell, hah.  Last week, I got into an email exchange with a liberal about Obama and his Democrats’ crimes against the First Amendment.

> [The reinstatement of the “Fairness” Doctrine would be a harm felt…]
> by whom besides Limbaugh and those who echo
> him?

Which is a statement that could only come from a person for whom the (liberal) ends justify the (authoritarian) means (and who supports a campaign that seems by all indications to believe the same).  Is Limbaugh’s speech not protected by the First Amendment?  Is not one who a (dimwitted) liberal might believe (wrongly) “echoes” Limbaugh – that’d be me – entitled to it?  (We all sound the same to them).

Apparently not.

In an un-linked sidebar to a Strib editorial full of platitudes about stomping out hate in the presidential campaign (which mentions the incidents involving a few overexcited people at the Lakeville rally last week, although nothing about the physical attacks, sexist defamation and economic threats  against Mac, Sarah and their supporters, and the media lynching of any who dare question The One, not that we expected the Strib to have an especially ecumenical definition of “hate”), the Strib runs this bit by “political media expert” Kathleen Hall Jamieson about Mac’s response in Lakeville:

 “The audience that expressed that needs to be told that’s not the way we campaign and treat the opposing candidate … McCain was slow to respond. He should be applauded for doing so, but he should have done it more quickly.”

“More quickly?”

Perhaps someone needs to do some metrics on the exact delay threshold between “treating the opponent well” and “condoning hatred”.  It’s not a picayune point, as anyone who’s had to “think on their feet” in front of a crowd can tell you.

Oh, yeah – the Strib didn’t see fit to tell anyone that Kathleen Hall Jamieson is “Policy Director” at the Annenberg Foundation.

Does that ring a bell with anyone?

As I read the accounts of Todd Palin’s visit to the Arrowhead, I’m reminded of the 1994 Senate race.

The conventional wisdom said metrocrat DFLer Ann Wynia was going to walk all over Grams, a former TV anchor, to replace Dave Durenberger. 

A last-minute push outstate by the NRA was later credited with pushing Rod over the top, barely tipping Wynia by a fraction of a point. 

Coleman’s going back to that well: 

Todd Palin, the husband of Republican Vice-Presidential candidate Sarah Palin, campaigned in Duluth this afternoon. He attended an NRA rally for GOP Sen. Norm Coleman. The ex VP of the National Rifle Association, Wayne LaPierre, also spoke at the rally. 1,000 people reportedly were in attendance.

The Twin Cities media routinely ignores that large, quiet, but in the end formidable constituency.  There’s no mistaking Al Franken for anything but an orc on the gun issue. And guns may not be a make-or-break this election.

But it’s worked before…

Lame.

A brief behind the scenes sketch and a stint on Weekend Update where she watches while Amy Pollock does a Palin rap.

Plus the musical guest? Who is Adele?

Josh Brolin. Not funny.

If you missed it you didn’t miss it.

I could have been sleeping.

A little awkward, but also funny.

“…and I got my middle name from somebody who obviously didn’t think I would run for President.”

“…my middle name…it’s actually Steve.”

On Wednesday night at the end of the debate, I hinted to the crowd that we had a special event coming up.

Boy, do we. 

A week from this coming Tuesday – on October 28 – we’ll be welcoming Dennis Prager, Michael Medved and Hugh Hewitt to in the Twin Cities for a humongous listener rally for the election.  We’ll be holding it at Orchestra Hall in Minneapolis.

It’s called “Talk the Vote” and it’s going to be free to the public (although please give us an RSVP at the website). Bring the kids.  Get your neighbors.  Drag anyone in whose courage is flagging.  It’s go time!

We’ll see you there!

HT Troy

“I can’t wish my opponent luck; but I do wish him well.”

John McCain is funnier than you might imagine, and also a class act.

If I were Joe the plumber I would like to think I’d have answered Obama’s queries a little differently.

I would have bristled at the audacity of his condescension as he stood there and told me that had I had a tax break from the government I could have built my business faster;  as if I needed the government to help me get where I’ve gotten. On my own, thank you very much.

And maybe those firemen and nurses and teachers would have been better off too with that middle class tax cut; but they aren’t building a business. They provide valuable services and exhibit bravery in the face of danger (I’m talking about teachers too);  we need them for sure. But they work for the government. They don’t create jobs. They don’t buy capital goods. They won’t pull us out of this economic crisis.

By the way, I would have asked him why so many of the people he hangs out with hate America so much?

If I were Joe, I would have asked Barack Obama how he can give tax cuts to 95% of Americans when 40% don’t even pay income taxes?

I would ask him why I should believe that a man that has consistently voted for more taxes and more spending would change his stance now? Does he think Joe’s stupid?

I would have asked him what he knows about building anything. What risks, save experimenting with drugs, has he taken in his life?

I would have asked Obama if he could be patient. Cut my taxes and I will grow faster, hire more people, invest in my business, buy more equipment and ultimately my success would create way more tax revenue for Obama and his pet projects.

I would have agreed with Obama: I’m not voting for him, but not because of his skin color. So don’t call me a racist. Joe isn’t going to vote for Obama because he doesn’t get it – despite Obama’s America-hating elitist wife’s pleading to the contrary.

You see America was founded by Joe the Plumber. Guys like Joe are the true pioneers. He’s a self-starter. Joe creates something from nothing. He scratches a business plan on the back of a pink sheet he got from his last employer, asks his wife to make sacrifices, support and believe in him. Joe claws his way to some semblance of success. He creates jobs and buys American trucks and hardware. He is the self-reliant, hard-working risk taker. Joe owns two guns. One to hunt with. One to defend his family with. Joe is what is left of the American backbone.

Joe is as proud as he is concerned that his business pays not only his mortgage and car payments, but also those of his employees and their families. His biggest monthly bill is his company’s health insurance plan and judging by how much government has f*cked up just about everything else they’ve put their hands on, the last thing he wants government to do is get involved there. In fact, he would just as soon give his employees the ability to shop and choose their own health insurance provider. He’d give them a raise if they did.

Joe doesn’t want a handout. He doesn’t want a floor beneath him because he doesn’t want a ceiling above him. He doesn’t want to be penalized for working hard, following the rules and realizing the American dream. He’d just as soon you leave him alone and stay out of his way.

And for his success what does Barack Obama offer him?

Deep down Barack doesn’t want to celebrate his success. Barack can’t identify with a guy like Joe. Barack colors him “wealthy” and wants to take from him and give to those that can’t or won’t do what Joe has done.

Taking from the rich and giving to the poor has left us a bankrupt nation. In the interest of “fairness”, Barack Obama and his liberal cronies want now to take from the almost-rich and give to the almost-poor. It is time-tested formula for national failure. It is exactly the wrong course for America in a time when we need leaders for which more spending and more taxes isn’t the answer to every single issue that faces our nation.

But of late, Joe has become outnumbered. The pendulum has swung from the ranks of the self-reliant individual that values hard work, saving, accountability, investment, financial freedom and wealth creation; The American Dream is dying a slow death by asphyxiation.

Swelling are the ranks of those that have given up on those values; including far too many Republicans.

We now suffer a majority of Americans that see government as some disassociated entity that sends them a check without regard for where it came from. Life is too tough. Government is the answer. We have a right to a home and a comfortable life and we shouldn’t have to work so hard to have it. These are the people that think Joe just got lucky. And maybe he did – it’s the kind of luck that comes from working hard. They don’t see the sleepless nights; the seven-day work weeks; the fear of failure.

Welcome to the Entitlement Society. Where no one suffers and no one rises above. Where the goal is to game the system, and the Democrats will show you how. They will tell you you’re pissed and rightfully so: vote for me.

The Democrats are leading the charge and are ignorant to risks their policies pose to the financial survival of our nation. The takers have stormed the castle of the givers and have breached the outer wall, flooding the courtyard chanting Change, Hope and “Obama! Obama! Obama!”

We all need Joe. We need Joe desperately right now. But Joe may become an endangered species. Obama wants to put Joe on the ropes because Joe doesn’t vote for guys like Obama.

…and when we have no more Joe’s, our nation ceases to exist.

cockamamie: ridiculous, pointless, or nonsensical: full of wild schemes and cockamamie ideas.

…as in John McCain on Joe Biden’s “…cockamamie idea of dividing Iraq into three countries…” for me was the highlight of last night’s debate. Not because the statement was truly relevant in times like these nor because it was debate time well spent. Rather, it was a glimmer that John McCain was finally going to go after Barack Obama on the issues that matter to conservatives.

Last night’s debate was certainly John McCain’s best effort, repleat with gritted teeth and his nervous ticks, criticizing Obama for his affinity for government spending and earmarks, a broken promise on campaign financing, his relationship with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers and finally delivering the one-liners that McCain supporters have been waiting for like “I am not George Bush.”

The crowd at the AM1280 The Patriot event at Trocadero’s had many opportunities to stand in applause…and as many to shout at the screen in disagreement or disappointment when opportunities were fully grasped…or totally missed.

Missed were opportunities to talk extensively about effective strategies for growing our economy out of the current malaise, and hitting Obama harder for his far-left liberal record on a litany of issues (that should be) relevant to the American voter.

Alas, all Barrack needed to do was not lay an egg. As such, it was probably not the breakthrough McCain needed to sway the lion’s share of the undecideds he needs let alone dislodging any Obama supporters. Obama was calm, cool and never appeared defensive as he lied through his teeth to the American people.

So as a souvenir, I leave you…”Cockamamie”.

A Kansas City couple notes that their credit card has a fraudulent, $2,300 donation to the Obama campaign on it:

Steve and Rachel Larman say a strange credit card charge appeared on their statement this month — a $2300 donation to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. The Larman’s say they don’t want this to be about their political affiliation, but they say they’re not about to give the Obama campaign any help from their pocketbook.

They said they notified Chase, their credit card bank, to report the fraud.

Emphasis added next:

“(They)  said that they had seen-they were familiar with this,” said Steve Larman. “It was fraud, they believe through telemarketing but they were going to be doing some more investigations.”

The Larman’s don’t want their politics to enter into what is essentially just a fraudulent charge. But they say that the charge involves the Obama campaign adds insult to injury for the registered Republicans.

Stealing votes, stealing money – what’s the difference?

Chicago politics; it’s not just for Chicago anymore!

On the other hand, the Larmans just have a head-start on the financial aspects of four years of two-branch Democrat rule.

Conservatism – of sorts – wins in Canada, increasing its lead over the melange of other parties:

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Wednesday he will reach out to all parties during the global financial meltdown after his Conservative Party won in national elections but fell short of a parliamentary majority.

Harper had called Tuesday’s elections early in hopes of getting his party a majority, and in doing so he became the first major world leader to face voters since the financial crisis…Harper sought to put a good face on the results Wednesday, pointing to an increased number of seats and pledging cooperation.

Canada’s parliamentary system is a little more byzantine than ours – but at the end of the day, votes count – and it was a good day, albeit not a slam-dunk, for Conservatives:

With nearly all the returns in, Canada’s election agency reported on its Web site that the Conservatives had won or was leading in races for 143 of Parliament’s 308 seats, an improvement over the 127 seats the party had in the previous Parliament.

The Conservative Party needed to win 155 seats to govern on its own.

Maybe that’s why we’ve had fewer celebs promising to move to Canada if Mac and Sarah win; their government may actually develop more common sense than ours.

As I’ve noted in the past, I don’t so much care that Al Franken wrote for Playboy; I’ve been a freelance writer, and I know you don’t look gigs like that in the eye.

Does he cuss during the occasional speech?  Yeah, and I doubt I’ll let him babysit my kids, but I’d suspect he’ll be in a different mode should Minnesota lose its collective mind and send him to DC. 

And is he an aloof, elitist jerkwad – sort of a younger Garrison Keillor?  Sure.  But I’m not voting for a buddy – I’m voting for a Senator.  Right?

Right.

But what does matter is that Al Franken is buddying up with a group that is under investigation in a third of this nation’s states for rampant, mind–numbingly bizarre, massive, immense, systematic, criminal voter (and other) fraud – including Minnesota:

It was last July that Minnesota ACORN endorsed Al Franken.

Today, the Al Franken for U.S. Senate campaign is proud to announce the endorsement of Minnesota ACORN, a member-driven community organization dedicated to providing housing services to low- and middle-income Minnesotans.

“I’m thrilled and honored to receive this endorsement,” said Al Franken. “And more motivated than ever to work with ACORN and other community organizations in this campaign and in the Senate to fight for economic justice, health care reform, good-paying jobs, and a solution to the housing crisis.”

There will need to be a national accounting for ACORN and its contributions – especially in terms of votes – to Democrats across this country.

Tonight is the debate for all the marbles. 

Do you want to tell your grandchildren you were cleaning out the garage when this happened?  Or would you prefer to say you were there, sitting with a couple of hundred of your closest friends, watching history be made?

AM1280 The Patriot is hosting a debate viewing party at Trocadero in Minneapolis (it’s right by the Monte Carlo, on Third Avenue at First Street North) for the final debate, a week from tonight!  Join the NARN – I’m one of ’em – for an evening of fun and politics!

We’ll have free appetizers and a cash bar (and let me tell you – nobody does appetizers like Trocadero!). The debate goes from 8pm CST to 9:30pm CST and doors will open at 7:30pm-ish.

Admission is free – but please RSVP at the handy AM1280 RSVP Page so we can plan accordingly.

Sign on up and join us tonight.  And stay tuned for details about the Patriot’s election-night coverage!

We’ll see you there!