Archive for January, 2010

Random Thoughts

How did I miss this?

Appar­ently Ter­rell Owens isn’t sat­is­fy­ing with just throw­ing his cur­rent QB under the bus, but all Quar­ter­backs he’s ever played with.  Oh, and for an encore, he tells us Jerry Rice was only the great­est foot­ball player to ever strap on the pads because he had great quarterbacks.

I know hands-down I’d be close to Jerry Rice’s records if I had been with qual­ity quar­ter­backs like he had. He had Joe Mon­tana and he fin­ished with Steve Young. That wasn’t a drop-off.

Say I had been with a guy like Tom Brady, Pey­ton Man­ning or Drew Brees all of my career. Are you kid­ding me?”

Good to see T.O. has hum­bled so much with his year-long exile to Buffalo.

Polls are funny things

So after spend­ing the week attack­ing Ras­mussen, will lefty blog­gers in WI now latch onto them since they appear to be the only poll­ster so far (Gallup did not) who caught a post-SOTU bounce for Pres­i­dent Obama?

Yeah, I didn’t think so either.

Notice to Readers

1) After a year of being back, I’m get­ting bored with the cur­rent tem­plate, will prob­a­bly be exper­i­ment­ing with a new one in com­ing days.

2) Don’t expect a lot of “Tommy vs. Russ” talk on the blog.  It’s not a state­ment on my level of sup­port towards a pos­si­ble Thomp­son can­di­dacy or his abil­ity to beat Fein­gold.  In actu­al­ity, I’m pretty sure that a pos­si­ble Thomp­son cam­paign could raise a large amount of money with ease and make this one hell of a race to observe and com­ment on.

No, the rea­son I won’t talk a lot about a “Tommy vs. Russ” race is sim­ply put, it’s not worth talk­ing about a “Tommy-Russ” race until there actu­ally a “Tommy-Russ” race.  This isn’t my first time at this rodeo and I’m not an ide­o­logue who needs to sleep at night know­ing the biggest fraud Wisconsin’s seen since “Fight­ing Bob” will be back in the Senate.

A Sign of Their Collapse

The Wash­ing­ton Times had an op-ed yes­ter­day men­tion­ing the crown jewel of assets owned by the UAW, the “Edu­ca­tion Cen­ter” — try million-dollar 5-star resort — at Black Lake is up for sale.  Seems the automak­ers unions no longer has the money (from union dues) to main­tain upkeep, which has topped $25 mil­lion over the past five years.

By the Logic of Jay Bullock…

I’ll do my tra­di­tional post on this fully when I have all num­bers in front of me (wait­ing for Savard and Williams on the GOP side), but a quick glance at FEC reports show that com­bined, Trager, Rib­ble, Roth, and McCormick out-raised incum­bent Steve Kagen in Wisconsin’s 8th Con­gres­sional district.

So if I’m remem­ber­ing my blog posts from 2005–2006, accord­ing to Jay Bul­lock, being out-raised by the oppos­ing party; that means bad things for Kagen in Novem­ber, right?

Cook Unloads on the “B-Plus“

Heck of a col­umn in the National Jour­nal by polit­i­cal hand­i­cap­per Char­lie Cook of the “Cook Polit­i­cal Report” writes the fol­low­ing at National Journal.

Con­gres­sional Democ­rats are hardly blame­less on this, but it is the pres­i­dent who sets the agenda and largely runs the show. After his his­toric elec­tion to the pres­i­dency, Obama had a lot of polit­i­cal cap­i­tal. But by opt­ing to push a deeply flawed and insuf­fi­ciently robust eco­nomic stim­u­lus pack­age, one that failed to keep unem­ploy­ment from ris­ing far higher than the admin­is­tra­tion expected, Obama com­mit­ted his first pres­i­den­tial sin. Some observers argue that the $787 bil­lion stim­u­lus pack­age was the biggest the pres­i­dent thought he could get. A far more per­sua­sive argu­ment is that he wanted to save his polit­i­cal cap­i­tal for causes nearer and dearer to his heart. Mak­ing mat­ters worse, the leg­is­la­tion lost cred­i­bil­ity because Obama let the stim­u­lus become a Christ­mas tree for all kinds of pet Demo­c­ra­tic projects. Instead of being seen as a much-needed eco­nomic shot-in-the-arm, the pack­age was widely viewed as waste­ful spending.

The sec­ond pres­i­den­tial sin: Instead of imme­di­ately piv­ot­ing back to the econ­omy when unem­ploy­ment proved to be worse than antic­i­pated, Obama plowed ahead with health care reform, all but yelling, “Damn the tor­pe­does! Full speed ahead!” That enraged vot­ers still more.

The third pres­i­den­tial sin was fail­ure to appre­ci­ate the intensely neg­a­tive pub­lic reac­tion to the Trou­bled Asset Relief Pro­gram, ini­ti­ated in the wan­ing months of the Bush admin­is­tra­tion and car­ried through under Obama, and to the var­i­ous bailouts and takeovers. In my judg­ment, these res­cue oper­a­tions were essen­tial because our finan­cial sys­tem was tee­ter­ing on the verge of col­lapse. But many vot­ers were hor­ri­fied that the role and reach of gov­ern­ment were sud­denly expand­ing expo­nen­tially and deficits were sky­rock­et­ing. That response — com­bined with neg­a­tive reac­tions to Democ­rats’ han­dling of the stim­u­lus, health care, and cli­mate change — trig­gered a revolt even among many Amer­i­cans not already up in arms over the fail­ure to pay more atten­tion to jobs.

Because of his trio of sins, Obama’s job-approval rat­ings dropped more in his first year than those of any other pres­i­dent in recent times. With each of these sins, many con­gres­sional Democ­rats were at least enablers and often will­ing co-conspirators. Obama may have led them off a cliff, but they seemed deter­mined to go along.

Now Democ­rats’ hold on the House is increas­ingly pre­car­i­ous. Tech­ni­cally, not enough Demo­c­ra­tic seats are in extreme jeop­ardy for ana­lysts to con­clude that the party will lose the cham­ber. But if Democ­rats stay on their cur­rent down­ward tra­jec­tory, their major­ity will be his­tory. The retire­ments that are likely to result from almost any dete­ri­o­ra­tion in the House Democ­rats’ cur­rent sit­u­a­tion would reduce their chances of main­tain­ing con­trol to 50–50.

For a guy both sides trust for clear­headed analy­sis of the Amer­i­can polit­i­cal envi­ron­ment, it’s a pow­er­ful indictment.

Comments (1)

County Coroner Races Aren’t What They Used to Be

(H/T Say Any­thing Blog)

Won­der if this guy will end up winning…

Leave a Comment

Cartoon of the Day

Rest in Peace J.D. Salinger.

Leave a Comment

8M in Second Half of 2009">Walker Hauls in $1.8M in Second Half of 2009

Very impres­sive, espe­cially since the expected Democratic/Liberal answer will be, “Well, Bar­rett raised $750K in only six weeks!” becomes moot if you trans­pose those num­bers over the entire period (Remem­ber Doyle bowed out in August), Walker would still have out-raised Barrett.

UPDATE 5:00 CDT — (Yeah, that answer didn’t take long to come out.)

Repub­li­can can­di­date for gov­er­nor Scott Walker says he had more than $2 mil­lion cash on hand head­ing into this elec­tion year.

Walker said Sat­ur­day that in the final six months of 2009 he raised $1.79 million.

Spend­ing reports were due to the state on Monday.

Walker is being chal­lenged for the Repub­li­can nom­i­na­tion by for­mer U.S. Rep. Mark Neumann.

Neu­mann loaned him­self $1 mil­lion and raised about $230,000 over the same time period, leav­ing him with about $975,000 cash on hand.

On the Demo­c­ra­tic side, Mil­wau­kee Mayor Tom Bar­rett is run­ning to replace Demo­c­ra­tic Gov. Jim Doyle, who is step­ping down after two terms. Bar­rett has said that he raised $750,000 in the final two months of 2009 and had $1.5 mil­lion in the bank for his bid.

We won’t know cam­paign “burn rates” until full reports are released by the Wis­con­sin Gov­ern­ment Account­abil­ity Board (GAB) some­time on Mon­day.  About the only thing to be cer­tain about those is that the Neu­mann Cam­paign is burn­ing its money faster than its com­ing in.

UPDATE 8:22 CDT — In the Walker Campaign’s release on this news, they report hav­ing over 18,500 donors and lit­er­ally break­ing GAB’s com­puter sys­tems try­ing to upload it electronically.

Comments (3)

Cartoon of the Day

Leave a Comment

Excuse Me, But I Gotta Ask…

Hav­ing worked at the agency for 21–22 months, I just need to know…

…when did HUD get into the train busi­ness?

Comments (3)

Dear Lord, That Edwards Sex Tape is Real

From the Wash­ing­ton Post:

The sor­did saga of John Edwards just got messier: The dis­graced politician’s for­mer mis­tress, Rielle Hunter, has taken legal action to retrieve a “very pri­vate and per­sonal” video­tape from for­mer Edwards aide Andrew Young, accord­ing to court doc­u­ments obtained by the Asso­ci­ated Press.

In or about Sep­tem­ber 2006, using my video cam­era, I authored a per­sonal video record­ing that depicted mat­ters of a very pri­vate and per­sonal nature,” Hunter wrote in an affi­davit filed Thurs­day in North Car­olina. “In 2006, I was also hav­ing an inti­mate rela­tion­ship with Edwards.” Hunter says she tried to destroy the video a few months later — by pulling the tape out of the cas­sette — and stored it in a box with per­sonal belongings.

In Young’s cringe-inducing cam­paign tell-all “The Politi­cian,” in book­stores on Sat­ur­day, he claims to have found a dam­aged tape marked “spe­cial” in a box of trash while clean­ing out a house he had rented for Hunter. After re-spooling the tape, he watched it … only to find Edwards and a “vis­i­bly preg­nant” woman, who wore jew­elry iden­ti­cal to things Hunter would typ­i­cally wear, doing some­thing explicit.

It remains unclear if Hunter’s 2006 tape is the same one that Young claims to have found. Young admits the preg­nant woman’s face is never vis­i­ble in the tape. Fur­ther­more, Hunter gave birth to her and Edwards’s daugh­ter, Frances Quinn, more than a year after she says her 2006 “pri­vate” video was made.

When court-ordered deputies went to Young’s home to recover Hunter’s items, Young’s attor­ney told them he could not imme­di­ately turn over the tape. Hunter has also filed a law­suit against Young and his wife, seek­ing a jury trial and dam­ages for inva­sion of privacy.

Edwards and his wife Eliz­a­beth recently separated.

Leave a Comment

2009: The Year in Review for Democrats

From the Sen­ate Repub­li­can Con­fer­ence.  I’ve been told blog­gers in Wis­con­sin know their ‘Internet/Web Video Guy.”

Leave a Comment

Cartoon of the Day

Leave a Comment

After all, It Only Fits the Template Right?

(H/T Instapun­dit)

Too hilar­i­ous from the left-wing web­site Salon.

The Jan. 25 arti­cle “Is the Pres­i­dent Pan­ick­ing” orig­i­nally stated that Fox News led the charge against Bill Clin­ton in the ’94 midterm elec­tions. Fox News did not come into being until 1996.

The story has been cor­rected. [Cor­rec­tion made 1/27/10]

Pity jour­nal­is­tic ethics when you an enemy to smite.

Leave a Comment