The Modern Massachusetts Miracle?

Massachusetts has resoundingly sent a message to Democrats by electing a Republican to the US Senate for the first time since 1972. Republican State Senator Scott Brown won the election in resounding fashion, which would explain why Democrats were already making all manner of excuses even before voters went to the polls. As of this writing, the lead was 52.4 to 46.6 and while Boston broke hard for Coakley, most of the state went for Brown.

Well, pundits and political insiders re going to have plenty of time to spend on recriminations in coming weeks, and Republicans are going to have to figure out what to do with the seat that they've just won.

Democrats are going to have to figure out what to do with their agenda for the next year as they will no longer have a filibuster proof majority. Mind you that Presidents have been able to move their agendas along without such majorities (it's the exception rather than a rule in US politics to have filibuster proof majorities), so President Obama is going to have to take a hard look at his agenda and respond accordingly.

The Democrats are also going to take a hard look at what to do with their health care proposals - whether they're going to try and pass something before Brown can take office, or whether they'll curtail their grandiose proposals to get something passed that might be more acceptable to a wider selection of the public. This most certainly throws a monkey wrench in the Democrats' political agenda.

Republicans are going to have to learn the right lessons from this election - this could be seen as a referendum on the Democrats' agenda nationally, or it could be the result of a poor Democrat candidate running an awful campaign and the Republican campaign ran as good a campaign as one could possibly expect. Republicans can't and shouldn't take anything for granted as far as elections in November are concerned but still build on this election; nothing breeds success like success, but they can't assume that close races will break in their favor unless they run good candidates who run good campaigns.

Scandals and Game Changers

Game Change: Obama and the Clintons, McCain and Palin, and the Race of a Lifetime, which chronicles the 2008 elections, and written by Mark Halperin and John Heilemann, is certainly going to raise eyebrows inside the beltway with the level of dirt being dished. Some of the juiciest bits have already come to light, and they do not put top Democrats, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and former President Bill Clinton, in a positive light.

It's plenty scandalous, but perhaps what's more scandalous is the fact that the media ignored many of these stories during the campaign even though there were inklings of issues that should have otherwise demanded closer scrutiny.

Marc Ambinder pulled some of the best of the worst:

On page 37, a remark, said "privately" by Sen. Harry Reid, about Barack Obama's racial appeal. Though Reid would later say that he was neutral in the presidential race, the truth, the authors write, was that his

encouragement of Obama was unequivocal. He was wowed by Obama's oratorical gifts and believed that the country was ready to embrace a black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama -- a "light-skinned" African American "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one," as he said privately. Reid was convinced, in fact, that Obama's race would help him more than hurt him in a bid for the Democratic nomination.

The relationship between Bill and Hillary Clinton are also thrown in to the fray as the Clinton campaign had to put together an effort to confront what was likely an inevitable leak on Bill cheating on Hillary in a significant way:

The authors write on page 50 about the "war room within a war room" that Hillary Clinton put together to deal with questions about her husband's "libido." The circle of trust included media strategist Howard Wolfson, lawyer Cheryl Mills and confidant Patti Solis Doyle.

The war room within a war room dismissed or discredited much of the gossip floating around, but not all of it. The stories about one woman were more concrete, and after some discreet fact-finding, the group concluded that they were true: that BIll was indeed having an affair -- and not a frivolous one-night stand but a sustained romantic relationship. .... For months, thereafter, the war room within a war room braced for the explosion, which her aides knew could come at any moment.

Bill also managed to step in it with comments that could be construed as racist when it comes to Obama. Senator Ted Kennedy was apparently offended about his conversation with Bill Clinton:

(Page 218): "Recounting the conversation later to a friend, Teddy fumed that Clinton had said, A few years ago this guy would have been getting us coffee."

That too could also be construed as Obama rocking the boat and upsetting the staid situation in the Senate; it was unheard of for someone who was such a junior member to run for President before even being in the Senate for an entire term. The fact is that for Obama to have such a meteoric rise was just amazing (and that he did so with entrenched interests in his own party displaying such views) is all the more remarkable.

For all the talk about how Republicans are racists, there seems to be plenty of it to go around.

Finally, then there is the continuing soap opera that was the Edwards' family. John Edwards was forced to can his campaign, but the media seemingly ignored John's infidelities during his wife's battle with cancer.

And John and Elizabeth (who the book says was known to Edwards insiders as "abusive, intrusive, paranoid, condescending, crazywoman") fought, in front of staffers, about the affair. The authors describe a moment where Elizabeth, in a such a state of fury, deliberately tears her blouse in the parking lot of a Raleigh airport terminal, "exposing herself. 'Look at me," she wailed at John and then staggered, nearly falling to the ground." (That's page 142.) (This was in October, by the way, well before the media took the reports of the Hunter affair seriously.)..

How exactly was that ignored by the media that was following the Edwards campaign? Why was no one willing to run those reports and why was it that only the National Enquirer thought it newsworthy that John was cheating on Elizabeth for months?

Now, where do we stand on all this? Reid has issued an apology, but is that truly sufficient? His comments clearly show that Reid is tone deaf (continuing a trend on that point), but his condescension and racist attitude is out of step with the Democrats' constituencies. I wouldn't be surprised to see him forced out at the next earliest opportunity, although GOPers are pushing for him to step down from the Senate Majority leader position now. As they point out, there's a wee bit of a double standard when GOPer Trent Lott was forced out for his inappropriate statements, but Reid gets a pass.

Bill Clinton continues to be a cad and the politics of his relationship with Hillary is a soap opera that makes the Edwards' family values look tame by comparison. His comments about Obama don't help his cause either.

Worst of all, the media's failings in reporting during the 2008 election season stands out the most. They were missing in action on the issues most important to voters looking to the media for answers on the various candidates' character and judgment.

That's the real message of the 2008 election - the ongoing inability of the media to report the news objectively.

Breaking Down Ohio Provisional Ballots Reveals Interesting Facts

In Ohio, voters cast about 207,000 provisional ballots, roughly 3.6% of all ballots cast. About 167,000 were counted. That means 80% (80.6% to be more precise) of the provisional ballots were eventually counted in the 2008 elections in Ohio.

What happened to the other 20% (19.4%)?

That's 40,000 provisional ballots that were disqualified.

47% of the disqualified ballots were because the person was not registered to vote in Ohio.

That runs to 18,800 people who were not registered to vote who proffered provisional ballots hoping to affect the outcome of the election.

Another 36% were ballots rejected because they voted in the wrong district or county (14,400 ballots rejected).

In a close election, those are significant figures. To claim that voter fraud is not an issue or that it is a minor one takes away from the objective fact that people are trying to engage in voter fraud and hope they aren't caught. Ohio can claim that the process worked and that these ballots were not counted because the provisional ballots were checked against their records.

Pressure Mounts On Blagojevich To Resign

Pressure is mounting on Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich to step down. Well, it's the least he can do right now to spare Illinois of a real mess as the state heads into legislative session and has to deal with a faltering economy.

Since current law gives Blagojevich the right to select Barack Obama's replacement in the Senate, the legislature will have to act swiftly to strip the governor of that right and to call for a special election in its stead. That raises a question as to whether Blagojevich would veto such a bill, but I can't see him taking any actions at this point since he's pretty much secured himself a long term stay in Club Fed.

The Illinois legislature, which is currently adjourned, plans to reconvene on Monday to address the political fallout from the arrest of Mr. Blagojevich on Tuesday on charges of conspiracy and soliciting bribes. The state House is expected to draft a bill that would call for a special election to fill Mr. Obama’s Senate seat, which he resigned last month; state law authorizes the governor to appoint the President-elect’s successor. More than 50 lawmakers have already signed a draft bill to create a committee to investigate whether the governor should be impeached.

Cindy Davidsmeyer, a spokeswoman for Emil Jones, the president of the state Senate, said lawmakers could pass a bill on the special election as soon as next Tuesday. It is unclear whether Mr. Blagojevich would sign such legislation; he could veto it or delay it by returning it to the legislature with requests for changes or by taking no action at all for as long as 60 days.

Steve Brown, a spokesman for the state House speaker, Michael Madigan, said the legislature would act quickly “to try and send yet another signal that there is not confidence in the governor’s ability to make this appointment.”

Since Blagojevich isn't ready to resign, impeachment could be an option, but it's complicated, especially since if impeachment were to begin with the current legislature, no one quite knows for sure how the process would carry over if the impeachment isn't concluded by January 14 when the new legislature is sworn into office or whether the process would have to start anew. Much could be saved simply by Blagojevich resigning, but he's not going to go down without a fight.

Meanwhile, people are still trying to figure out who the other candidates mentioned on the wiretaps were, since they were identified only as numbers. It now appears that Candidate Number 5 was none other than Jesse Jackson Jr.

Oh, and Iowahawk was up to his usual self, identifying Blagojevich's eBay account (humor).

UPDATE:
Barack Obama has weighed in and is calling on Blagojevich to resign as well. That could be out of self-preservation of avoiding juicy details from leaking out that might harm Obama and his own advisers.

Cold Cash Jefferson Loses House Seat

Rep. William "Cold Cash" Jefferson, the Louisiana Democrat who was caught with $90,000 in cash stored in his office freezer, lost his reelection bid to a Republican. Color me shocked.

In a year when national Republican fortunes took a turn for the worse, Louisiana delivered the GOP two seats in Congress in elections delayed by Hurricane Gustav.

Indicted Democratic U.S. Rep. William Jefferson was ousted Saturday from his New Orleans area district, while Republicans narrowly held on to the seat vacated by a retiring incumbent.

The wins followed Republicans' reconquest of another House seat earlier this fall that had been lost to Democrats.

In the 2nd Congressional District, which includes most of New Orleans, Republican attorney Anh "Joseph" Cao won 50 percent of the vote to Jefferson's 47 percent and will become the first Vietnamese-American in Congress. His only previous political experience was an unsuccessful 2007 bid for a seat in the state legislature.

Jefferson survived a Democratic primary race despite pending charges of bribery, laundering money and misusing his congressional office.

Cao will be the first Vietnamese American in Congress. Congrats!

Cao will have a very difficult road ahead of him as Louisiana continues to struggle in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and the state's rebuilding efforts continue to lag.

UPDATE:
Isn't it funny that Louisiana voters could send Jefferson packing, but Harlem voters couldn't do the same for Charles Rangel despite his ethical flaps and tax evasion?

Washington Post Admits Obama Bias

Well now that the election is over there is no harm in admitting that your nationally acclaimed newspaper was biased for a political candidate.

The Post provided a lot of good campaign coverage, but readers have been consistently critical of the lack of probing issues coverage and what they saw as a tilt toward Democrat Barack Obama. My surveys, which ended on Election Day, show that they are right on both counts.

***

But Obama deserved tougher scrutiny than he got, especially of his undergraduate years, his start in Chicago and his relationship with Antoin "Tony" Rezko, who was convicted this year of influence-peddling in Chicago. The Post did nothing on Obama's acknowledged drug use as a teenager.

The Post had good coverage of voters, mainly by Krissah Williams Thompson and Kevin Merida. Anne Hull's stories from Florida, Michigan and Liberty University, and Wil Haygood's story from central Montana brought readers into voters' lives. Jose Antonio Vargas's pieces about campaigns and the Internet were standouts.

One gaping hole in coverage involved Joe Biden, Obama's running mate. When Gov. Sarah Palin was nominated for vice president, reporters were booking the next flight to Alaska. Some readers thought The Post went over Palin with a fine-tooth comb and neglected Biden. They are right; it was a serious omission. However, I do not agree with those readers who thought The Post did only hatchet jobs on her. There were several good stories on her, the best on page 1 by Sally Jenkins on how Palin grew up in Alaska.

The Washington Post, and all most all of the media outlets in this country, let the American people down. They failed to report on every major issue regarding Obama, and by extension, Biden. If Sarah Palin said that America would be tested by its enemies in the first six months of a McCain presidency, the media would have been all over it. Biden mixes up Lebanon and Libya, Hezbollah and Hamas, and the media doesn't blink. McCain mixes up Sunni and Shite and the entire media claims he knows nothing about world religion. The double standard was incredible. Not only Obama's relationship with Rezko, but his relationship with Ayers and Reverend Wright were poo pooed by media cadre all to happy to worship at the Obama altar. Does anyone really think that if the LA Times had a damaging video of McCain at a dinner for a known associate of Yasir Arafat, former PLO spokesmen, toasting him and laughing at derogatory jokes against Jews, that the video wouldn't be all over the media?

The Washington Post needs to not only admit its problem, but to set up safeguards to ensure that this does not happen again. I am not saying that an editorial board cannot endorse a candidate. But the media must remain objective and impartial. To skew the results of an election by unfair and unbalanced reporting is tantamount to ACORN organizing voter fraud -- oh and where was the unbiased reporting of that issue in the Washington Post?

The Curious Case of Tim Robbins' Election Day Kerfuffle

I had noted on November 4 that Tim Robbins had problems attempting to vote in Manhattan and went through the process of going to the Board of Elections headquarters at 200 Varick Street in Manhattan to get a judge to sign off on his ability to vote at the McBurney Y.M.C.A., at 125 West 14th Street, which is where he claimed to be properly registered, and where his partner, Susan Sarandon was also registered to vote.

She had no problems voting, but his name was not on the voter roll.

Well, it turns out there was more to the story.

It may have something to do with the fact that there were two registrations for Tim Robbins in the elections database, and one of those was considered inactive.

The letter, signed by Gregory C. Soumas, the Manhattan Democratic representative on the 10-member elections board, said that Mr. Robbins’s voting problems were, in essence, his own fault.

According to state and city election records, Mr. Robbins registered to vote, under the name Tim Robbins, in November 1997, listing an address on West 15th Street, and registered a second time, under the name Timothy F. Robbins, in February 2004, listing an address on West 19th Street. The 1997 registration is now listed as inactive, while the 2004 registration is listed as active.

Mr. Soumas wrote that based on the active registration, Mr. Robbins should have gone to vote at the Andrew Heiskell Braille and Talking Book Library, at 40 West 20th Street, not the McBurney Y.M.C.A.

“It would appear, based on a review of your voter registration history, that your voting experience was less than positive because you simply went to the wrong poll site,” Mr. Soumas wrote to Mr. Robbins. “The change in voter address was not noticed earlier because you have not voted in any recent election, including the presidential primary in February 2008 and the party primary in September 2008.”

Of course, Robbins claims that the Board is mistaken and that he had been voting at the YMCA for years. The problem is that he should have been voting at a different location based on the address information he provided to the Board.

This is yet another reason that the elections system in the country needs an overhaul and closer review of voter rolls. These problems are all too common and ensuring that the voter rolls are accurate takes time and effort that many states simply do not want to do, and whose political elites think may in some way result in disenfranchisement.

As the Times further points out to sum up the incident:

In sum, from the board’s point of view, Mr. Robbins was at fault for filing a second voter registration card, while from Mr. Robbins’s point of view, the board was at fault for suddenly purging his name from the Poll List Book at the site where he had voted, without any problems, in several previous elections — and where, according to Ms. Williamson, his name appeared as recently as the September primary.

Robbins should have been advised of the proper location to cast a ballot from the time when his address changed years earlier, and that he had been able to cast ballots at the YMCA despite actually residing in a different location shows just how archaic the system is. While this was a clerical error - whether it was Robbins' fault or the fault of the Board of Elections, someone with malicious intent could take advantage of this system to game the system.

Reflections on the GOP Losses

While Democrats get to cheer and gloat over their victories and the historic win of President-elect Barack Obama, the Republican party has to begin some serious and thoughtful soul-searching.

Some folks will point out that the Obama campaign used a tremendous advantage of the media and ground game. Some will even point out the incredible amount of money Obama spent to win the Presidency. Those are fair points, but they do not address why Obama's empty slogans of hope and change won over a majority of Americans.

How did John McCain come so close and yet fail so miserably? How did Republicans, who were supposed to be the party of fiscal responsibility deviate so far from that core message?

It comes down to economics.

Obama was able to paint McCain as McSame - the same kind of economic policies that have led to the current financial troubles and the toxic paper meltdown. That isn't fair to McCain, but McCain didn't do himself any favors by pushing for the bailout either. Polls generally showed a very close election up until the point when McCain suggested he might opt out of the second debate because of the financial crisis. Obama was able to claim the mantle of reformer, a title that Republicans had held since Reagan was swept into office in 1980.

At that point, it became inevitable that Obama could point out that McCain was pursuing the same policy as the Bush economic plan (even though Democrats were pushing for it in Congress and needed McCain and the House GOP to provide cover).

Pushing for a bailout of companies that made bad business decisions (even if those decisions were forced on them by the government intent upon increasing the number of affordable homes and increased homeownership rates in minority communities) was a stupendously bad idea.

Of course, we're now going to hear claims how the economy is in dire straits and that we need still more bailouts - this time focused on individuals rather than the banks that are still reeling from those bad business decisions.

In the hope for a quick panacea, the Republicans, and the Bush Administration threw fiscal responsibility out the window. It cost them. It will continue to cost them, and the rest of us dearly for years to come.

So, how does the Republican party fix itself?

For starters, it begins with focusing on two areas. The economy and national defense.

The economy:

Republicans must renew their pledge for fiscal austerity and responsibility. They must work to eliminate earmarks, fight new entitlements that are little more than government issued Ponzi schemes, and fight to scale back existing failed entitlement programs. They must hold the line on taxes, demanding that tax hikes be taken off the table indefinitely - and to frame the issue of the 2010 Bush tax cut phase out as the tax hike it truly is. Letting those cuts expire will result in massive tax increases, and there's no way around that. Say it early. Say it often.


National Security:
As for national security, Republicans must hold the line on defense spending, which is still at near historical lows as measured by a percentage of GNP/GDP. The government's core mission is to protect and defend the nation from foreign threats, and harsh language or the UN are not going to deter enemies that seek to do us harm, let alone terrorists who openly ignore and flout international norms and conventions.

A hasty departure from Iraq will increase the likelihood of disaster there, even as we're witnessing a stabilization and handover of Iraqi back to the Iraqi government. Republicans must work to ensure that we do not cut off funding to support Iraq, or else we'll see a repeat of Vietnam following our departure in 1973. It took two years, but Democrats finally cut funding, resulting in the disastrous collapse of the South Vietnamese government and ensuing bloodbath.

Republicans must also guard against any attempts to cut funding for the war in Afghanistan, which includes a hunting compact with Pakistan's government to go after Islamists there. The terrorists simply cannot be bargained with.

Democrats did a masterful job of painting the notion that the war in Iraq took money that could be used elsewhere - entitlements or programs back home, but that's a misleading notion at best.

From there, Republicans can focus on a third area: ground game and the future.
Republicans need to cultivate a new generation of leaders who can take their message into longtime Democrat strongholds and have them resonate with moderates, independents, and even old-time Reagan Democrats. Far too many states have been conceded to the Democrats for far too long that you've got a sclerotic political system that amounts to one-party rule. That means contesting elections up and down the ballot - from town alderman up to statewide offices.

It doesn't mean that you throw millionaire after millionaire against established politicians in the hopes that they catch lightning in a bottle, which is the New Jersey experience. It takes a message. It take hard work, and it takes the development of a farm system in which talented people are cultivated to work through the ranks to seek higher office.

If the Republicans want to turn things around, they have to start today.

UPDATE:
Michelle Malkin has some advice to dispirited GOPers. AJ Strata notes the need for an optimistic outlook. I'd counsel pragmatism. Ragnar says that conservatives cannot take a break now.

Don Surber says the GOP needs to get back to its roots.

Macranger thinks that the problems are just beginning for the media and the Obama Administration. All those lofty expectations are going to come crashing down with the reality that they are out of sync with what most Americans expected.

One thing I don't expect is to see a demonization of Obama along the lines of what the left did to President Bush. I, for one, respect the Office of the White House too much to let that happen. Obama's politics are fair game, his personal connections are fair game, but attacks on him personally aren't. I fault his character and judgment, and I hope I'm wrong about that - for our nation's sake.

Others weighing in include Sister Toldjah and Stop the ACLU has a roundup of reaction.

UPDATE:
The Anchoress has a great posting on the matter, and on the subject of respect towards the outgoing President, George W. Bush.

UPDATE:
Jules Crittenden notes that American is still here, and that the challenges of yesterday remain challenges today. What is different is the approach that Obama intends to take.

UPDATE:
Two sides of the same coin. David Frum notes two paths for the GOP to take. One involves following the Palin route, and that might result in some wins, but a long term losing strategy as a result of changing demographics and economic positions of core constituencies, or adjusting the tone and tenor of the debate back to the core issues of fiscal responsibility. Jeff Flake goes deeper into this, and addresses many of the concerns I've had with the national spending spree for years.

Congratulations to President Elect Barack H. Obama

It pains me to say it, but congratulations to the next President of the United States, Barack H. Obama of Illinois. Obama ran an exceptional race and surprised many with how well he ran. He's defeated the notion once and for all that we are a nation of racists (not that we've been that way for more than a generation, but that's besides the point). Obama has made history and his supporters have won the right to bask in that adulation.

Just don't let it get to your head, because your first real test at executive leadership is right around the corner - as in today. Obama has to start making important decisions, including cabinet positions, judicial nominees, and there is no higher pay grade in the nation on which he can defer. Obama is now going to be the one who decides. Choose wisely.

I can only hope that Obama surrounds himself with those who have more wisdom and experience than he has shown thus far (Rezko, Ayers, Dohrn, Wright, Pflegler) and that you do your utmost to keep us safe from all threats foreign and domestic.

I hope that Obama has enough sense not to destroy the economy with your tax and spend plans and that your fellow Democrats in Congress don't go overboard.

I hope that Obama doesn't decide to take his fellow Democrats' advice and cut and run from Iraq, slash the defense budget in a fit of fury and retribution for being incapable of doing so since 2003.

Of course, I'll be writing the entire time as a member of the loyal opposition and watching as Obama and his fellow Democrats push through an agenda to the detriment of the nation as we have witnessed a majority of the nation decide to take a vacation from history. In their demands for hope and change, they've thrown their lot in with the guy who has no experience, but a great slogan.

The only problem is that history doesn't take vacations, and neither do our nation's enemies. They're still lurking, and they'll be waiting. May Obama have the wisdom, judgment, and capability to meet those threats.

I also fully expect that Obama and his fellow Democrats will move swiftly to shut down operations in Iraq and will slash spending on national defense. Those are decisions that will affect us for a generation or more, and our enemies will take due notice. At the same time, I also expect the tax increases to come fast and furious, as will the inflation and unemployment.

I wish that wasn't the case, but having seen your policy pronouncements during the campaign, your associations, and the plans concocted by your fellow Democrats, I hope to be proven wrong. The sad thing is that I fully expect to be proven right.

UPDATE:
James Lileks points out that history has a way of pushing people in unexpected directions. Obama will be facing many a challenge and will have his moments of surprise and disappointment - as will anyone filling the Office of the President. We can only hope that he has more moments of greatness than disappointment.

UPDATE:
Steve Den Beste has a very thought provoking post on what Obama's ascension to the Presidency will mean. The key grafs:

The President of the United States is the most powerful political figure in the world, but as national executives go his powers are actually quite restricted. Obama will become President, but he won't be dictator or king, let alone deity. He still has to work with the House and the Senate, and he still has to live within Constitutional restrictions, and with a judiciary that he mostly didn't appoint.

The main reason this will be a "coming of age" moment is that now Obama and the Democrats have to put up or shut up. Obama got elected by making himself a blank slate, with vapid promises about "hope" and "change" -- but now he actually has to do something. Now he has to reveal his true agenda. And with the Democrats also having a majority in both chambers of Congress, now the Democrats really have to lead. And they're not going to do a very good job of it. It's going to be amusing to watch.

So, Democrats no longer have any excuses. They've got the power that they've been craving, and can't blame obstructionist Republicans if they fall flat on their faces.

It's time for the Democrats to put up or shut up. It's also time for the GOP to do some serious soul searching. My advice on that point? That's going to be another post.

Another Election *Almost* in the Books

We are only a few hours from possibly knowing who the next president of the United States of America will be. Who will it be? Will we be swearing in Sen. Barack Obama or Sen. John McCain as the next President of the United States come January? I think George Washington would be pretty excited to know that his great experiment has lasted this long and will be carrying out yet another peaceful transfer of power based on the will of the people. Most people didn't give this nation much of a chance to overcome its birthing, let alone the growing pains that included the end of slavery. We have come so very far in a relatively short amount of time, and yet our best days are still ahead of us, regardless of who wins.

Voters had to choose from two very divergent political viewpoints, and emotions will run hot for quite some time to come. They had to deal with that back in Washington's day as well. Back then, you had federalists and anti-federalists running around and publishing pamphlets supporting or opposing various aspects of government and the grand experiment that we were about to undertake. These folks used pseudonyms, but we know them by their actual names - Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, George Clinton, and Patrick Henry.

On this most patriotic of days, I decided to head down to Federal Hall, where Washington was inaugurated as the first President of this great nation.

It was actually my first time inside, and it's a shame I hadn't been inside earlier. It really is a magnificent building. It's notable for being where John Peter Zenger was arrested for the crime of libel against the Crown, but it also became the first Capitol of the United States as Congress held session here prior to the construction of the District of Columbia. It's also where the Bill of Rights was ratified.

Most folks usually take photos outside, but the interior rotunda is quite impressive. There are also a few interesting pieces on display. The following photo of a well worn book is none other than the very bible on which George Washington took the oath of office. George H.W. Bush (Bush 41) was sworn in with this bible as well. It has an interesting history all of its own. The bible was on loan from the St. John’s Lodge of Ancient Free and Accepted Masons in Newburyport.

Since the results aren't quite in yet, let's not forget that the media and pundits and everyone in between once wrote off another politician seeking higher office only to have to eat a mighty large amount of crow. Let's not forget President Thomas E. Dewey Harry S. Truman.

More Election Problems Surface; Real Versus Imagined Voter Intimidation

In addition to the problems I've been reporting in Pennsylvania, there were problems here in New York City. Apparently Tim Robbins ran into what is a pretty common problem. His name didn't appear on the voter roll at his proper polling place. He went down to the Board of Elections at 200 Varick Street, where they indeed showed him as properly registered to vote at that location and had a judge clear him to vote.

40 other people at his polling place had similar problems, but not Robbins partner, Susan Sarandon. She didn't have any problems.

Before you think that this is some kind of voter intimidation or suppression of votes, keep in mind that these are Democrat districts and precincts. They would want to maximize the number of votes cast, not minimize them. Robbins would like to believe that this is intimidation, but it's actually worse than that.

What Robbins' situation showcases is that the election system in the country is broken and no one has taken this problem seriously, even after the 2000 debacle in Florida and the problems in Ohio and Pennsylvania in 2004.

Philly.com headlines and claims that GOPers are engaging in voter intimidation outside polling places in Pennsylvania. The outlet ignores the real intimidation of Black Panthers wielding clubs outside polling places. Philly.com calls the Black Panthers guarding the polling place.

This is the video of those thugs outside the polling place.



I'd say that is more intimidating that what the Democrats claim is intimidation by asking for party affiliation or identification information.

UPDATE:
More voter fraud: The Jawa Report notes that an idiot in Philadelphia admits going and voting multiple times. Thanks for admitting that you've committed multiple felonies. For every person dumb enough to admit this, how many more are getting away with the unconscionable act of stuffing the ballot box?

UPDATE:
Scattered problems in New Jersey, particularly with electronic ballot machines and incompetent workers who didn't know how to operate them. Some were inadvertently turned off, and some malfunctioned.

You don't have that problem with paper ballots.

Meanwhile, a judge refused to extend polling hours in New Jersey. Oh, and for those wondering about requiring to show ID to vote in NJ, you're in luck.

You don't need to:

According to Casciano, representatives of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama petitioned Essex County Assignment Judge Patricia Costello Tuesday morning to extend polling hours because some machines had been down for 45 minutes to two hours.

Costello rejected the request, Casciano said, on the grounds that there was still plenty of time for people to vote and that voters had been given emergency ballots when the machines were unavailable.

The American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey reported that some voters in Hudson, Camden, Essex, Mercer, Middlesex and Monmouth counties were improperly asked to provide identification in order to vote.

ACLU New Jersey director Deborah Jacobs said voters should only be asked for ID if they are voting for the first time at a polling place and did not provide it when they registered.

UPDATE:
Instapundit points out that there are additional problems in South Jersey and Philadelphia and the New Hampshire GOP has filed suit over access at the polls "...claiming that Republican election officials are purposefully being kept away from new registration tables. Both Republicans and Democrats appoint election officials to ensure that neither party tries to tamper with votes or registration."

Beware the Rumors and Media Spin

Let's start off with the media spin. The New York Times is already noting that the media may not wait until all the states have closed their polls for the evening before starting to call the election.

A senior vice president of CBS News, Paul Friedman, said the prospects for Barack Obama or John McCain meeting the minimum threshold of electoral votes could be clear as soon as 8 p.m. — before polls in even New York and Rhode Island close, let alone those in Texas and California. At such a moment, determined from a combination of polling data and samples of actual votes, the network could share its preliminary projection with viewers, Mr. Friedman said.

“We could know Virginia at 7,” he said. “We could know Indiana before 8. We could know Florida at 8. We could know Pennsylvania at 8. We could know the whole story of the election with those results. We can’t be in this position of hiding our heads in the sand when the story is obvious.”

Similarly, the editor of the Web site Slate, David Plotz, said in an e-mail message that “if Obama is winning heavily,” he could see calling the race “sometime between 8 and 9.”

You get the feeling that they're impatient for the coronation? I do. Let the polls close and let the election workers do their jobs in tabulating the votes.

The media touted early exit polls in 2004 showing a landslide victory for John Kerry. President Bush handily won reelection. I fully expect the media to again run with exit polling data that will not truly reflect the outcome in an attempt to shape the outcome of the election.

All the early announcements do is have an effect on the West Coast states where late voters may decide not to head to the polls based on what happened back on the East Coast.

Meanwhile, rumors and reports of thuggish behavior at some polling places is disconcerting. We're going to hear a lot more about this over the course of the day, and some of it may be nothing more than rumors.

Some districts are finding scattered problems with voting machines and heavy turnout is causing long lines.

Republican polling observers were kicked out of several Philadelphia polling locations in violation of a court ruling.

A Pennsylvania judge previously ruled that court-appointed poll watchers could be NOT removed from their boards by an on-site election judge, but that is exactly what is happening, according to sources on the ground.

It is the duty of election board workers to monitor and guard the integrity of the voting process.

Denying access to the minority (in this case Republican) poll watchers and inspectors is a violation of Pennsylvania state law. Those who violate the law can be punished with a misdemeanor and subjected to a fine of $1,000 and sent to prison between one month and two years.

You also have potential violation of state election law in New York. You've got Hillary violating the law on politicking within 100 feet of a polling station. She's right inside as she's being interviewed.



Meanwhile, Starbucks has to offer up free coffee to anyone who asks today because federal law prohibits anyone from offering rewards for votes. They had originally sought to provide free coffee to those who said that they had voted. No good deed goes unpunished, although since this is Starbucks we're talking about, burnt coffee isn't much of a reward.

Here's a bit of advice for those who are overly anxious or concerned about the election outcome. Stay away from Drudge.

Heck, stay away from the news sites altogether.

It does you no good hearing all the crap spewed by people searching out for a story. The only story here is that we're voting and we're deciding. The outcome will not be known until tonight at the earliest. Ignore the exit polls.

Get out and vote. That's the only poll that counts.

Everything else is fluff and pollsters and pundits hoping that they can make a name for themselves.

UPDATE:
Gateway Pundit links to a report out of Georgia that nearly 100,000 Georgia voters may also be registered to vote in Ohio and Florida.

A team of investigative journalists from WSB-TV in Atlanta, WFTV in Orlando and WFTS in Tampa and WCPO in Cincinnati compared Georgia's voter rolls with those in Florida and Ohio and found more than 100,000 people who appear to be registered to vote in more than one state, with no government oversight to catch it.

Several people are already under investigation for voting in more than one jurisdiction.

Who says fraud doesn't happen in elections?

UPDATE:
Voter intimidation in Philadelphia, courtesy of the Black Panthers. Oh, and when Fox News showed up, the Black Panthers accused them of intimidating voters.



UPDATE:
Hillbuzz also notes the media and the Obama campaign are both looking to depress GOP turnout and dispirit those who might vote against Obama.

The goal of the Obamedia is to depress you so much you don’t turn out to vote. Our friend Astrid always falls for this garbage, and we know she is not all alone. She’ll be miserable all day because she’s never learned to turn out the media and just chill out.

This is going to go down just like Super Tuesday - where the media claimed Obama would win California, New York, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and others…but Clinton won every state we predicted she’d win.

In fact, we were right about every state in the primaries except Missouri, which Clinton lost by less than 1%. Otherwise, we were spot-on.

So, we know you Eeyores are going to drive everyone in your lives crazy today. You are going to panic and wet yourselves and email/call/bother all of your friends and relatives all day. You’ll forward bogus polls and terrible links to everyone, and depress people left and right.

That's what I've been saying - ignore the polls and get out there and vote. Obama doesn't have this in the bag, no matter what the media is throwing out and calling news.

Meanwhile, why exactly is a law enforcement officer entrusted with detecting voter fraud being told not to send anyone to polling places in Wisconsin?

Last week Mike Sandvick, head of the Milwaukee Police Department's five-man Special Investigative Unit, was told by superiors not to send anyone to polling places on Election Day. He was also told his unit -- which wrote the book on how fraud could subvert the vote in his hometown -- would be disbanded.

"We know what to look for," he told me, "and that scares some people." In disgust, Mr. Sandvick plans to retire. (A police spokeswoman claims the unit isn't being disbanded and that any changes to the unit "aren't significant.")

In February, Mr. Sandvick's unit released a 67-page report on what it called an "illegal organized attempt to influence the outcome of (the 2004) election in the state of Wisconsin" -- a swing state whose last two presidential races were decided by less than 12,000 votes.

The report found that between 4,600 and 5,300 more votes were counted in Milwaukee than the number of voters recorded as having cast ballots. Absentee ballots were cast by people living elsewhere; ineligible felons not only voted but worked at the polls; transient college students cast improper votes; and homeless voters possibly voted more than once.

It raises more questions than answers, doesn't it.

UPDATE:
Rumors of voter suppression calls in Pennsylvania; calls in Lancaster County originating in Philadelphia telling voters that polling places have changed. Consider this one unsubstantiated. However, if you're reading this and am concerned about where you should be going to vote, contact your local board of elections. Most are available online and will provide the correct polling location.

Jules Crittenden is live blogging the election from Massachusetts and has a great collection of links.

UPDATE:
More video of the Black Panthers in action from Philadelphia:


UPDATE:
11 reasons why you should ignore exit polls at all costs. It boils down to the fact that they are notoriously unreliable and have already shown themselves to overstate Obama's chances in primaries this year. Many of the numbers thrown out there will be bogus, inflated, or nothing more than guestimates of what the real vote will be.

Ignore them.

The real results will be here soon enough.

Election Day 2008 Is Here

Now get out and vote. Every presidential election has significant and long lasting effects. Your choice (or if you end up not voting, your silent assent) will affect everything from defense policy, foreign policy, and economic policy, to court nominations and domestic spending and priorities.

The polls are open all along the East Coast, and the early word is that the polling places are extremely busy. Good. They were extremely busy in 2004 too, back when pundits and pollsters were saying that this would favor the Democrats. Turns out that President Bush won reelection. Turnout may also seriously influence the polls, depending on what models and data they used.

Speaking of pollsters, Gallup reports that only two percent say that Obama is qualified or experienced.

TWO PERCENT.

Two percent also think that McCain would bring change or a fresh approach. The media and the Obama campaign have done quite well in painting the Maverick as a continuation of President Bush's policies and have similarly found that Obama is inexperienced, but apparently hope for change trumps actual experience. We'll see soon enough if the polls and exit polls match what the voters actually did. There are more than enough reasons to question the polling data and methods and how the pollsters have arrived at their divinations.

Among battleground states, Colorado looms large. There are quite a few ballot initiatives in play there, including several tax related items. Michelle Malkin notes several other states with key initiatives and ballot questions.

The Dead Keep on Voting

The nexus for the Army of Darkness (aka the legion of dead voters)? Ohio, of course.

Among the thousands of graves at Highland Park Cemetery, one modest tombstone stands out.

Alex Holmes Sr. has been at rest in that cemetery for 15 years. But recent election records show he cast a ballot in this year's primary.

And our 5 On Your Side investigation found a home on Cleveland's east side listed as Holmes' address.

Jeremy Moore, Holmes' grandson, was stunned.

"He's deceased. Deceased since 1993," Moore said.

And it doesn't appear to be a name mix-up.

Records reveal Alex Holmes Jr. -- who is still alive -- voted in the same election as his deceased father.

Cuyahoga County Elections Director Jane Platten said she'll look in to it.

"Without having full detail, I have no idea why that would have happened," Platten said.

Oh, I have a real good idea. The board of elections at the state and local levels around the country aren't doing their job of clearing the voter rolls of deceased voters, felons, and others who are ineligible to cast ballots.

The Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner has done a disastrous job of handling the state elections and doesn't think it important to ensure that the voter rolls are accurate and culled of deceased voters. She issued a directive to Boards of Elections across the state to withhold dates of births in public records requests. That information is important in positively identifying dead voters. Instead, we get a situation where the dead vote. Often.

Thousands of dead voters remain on voter rolls in Memphis, and there are actual signs that at least 12 votes were cast by the dearly departed, though the efforts to clear the rolls have uncovered far more serious problems, including multiple registrations.

The names of Deaton and the others appeared despite reforms undertaken following a 2005 special state Senate election in which corrupt Memphis poll workers used the identities of dead voters to sway the outcome of an especially tight race. The reforms were aimed at ensuring deceased individuals are removed from voter rolls.

Yet inadequate purging of dead voters isn't the only concern facing the county's bulging, 645,000-name voter roll. A computer analysis by The Commercial Appeal and Scripps Howard News Service also found:

As many as 1,681 voters appeared to have more than one registration on file with the Shelby County Election Commission. Such dual registrations create the potential for fraud. Records show a handful of voters may have as many as three registrations on file.

Electronic records hint that as many as 12 dead people voted in the 2004 general election, although that finding is believed to involve clerical errors and not actual fraud.

The dead vote far more often than the New York Times or Washington Post would ever care to admit (and even then, they'll refuse to call it fraud. And every one of these votes undermines the legitimate votes cast in those districts because it effectively nullifies a legitimate vote.

How many of these deceased votes have been cast this year? Far more than ever should be allowed, and in a close election and in certain districts, it could be a decisive vote.

The Deep Breath Before the Plunge

Today is the last day before people start heading to the voting booths around the nation and casting their ballots for local offices on up to the Office of President.

I think I've made my preferences known as to who I think should be President. I don't think there really is any question that Sen. Barack Obama's policies will be harmful, corrosive, and undermine national security and our economic standing. However, perhaps nearly 50% of Americans think that Obama should be President. Of that number, some are not voting for Obama, but rather against Sen. John McCain.

The true believers for Obama may be in for quite a shock and disappointment, even if Obama wins. They'll quickly find out that Obama isn't going to do what they want him to do, even as some intend to push Obama to move even further to the Left than he already is. And I wouldn't even begin to wonder what might happen if McCain pulls off the shocker of our generation by beating Obama and forcing all the prognosticators, pollsters and pundits to eat a whole bunch of crow. Doug Ross comments on that possibility. Let's just say that the last eight years of Bush Derangement Syndrome might not begin to capture the craziness emanating from the Democratic party should Obama go down to defeat. Of course, that possibility also opens the door to Sen. Hillary Clinton and her segment of the Democratic party becoming resurgent. It would also create serious turmoil in the Party and the ensuing internecine battle for primacy will be fun to watch, although Democrats who believed that the Presidency should have been theirs in 2008 will be fighting to assign blame for the disastrous results.

Either way, we're going to see quite a bit of buyer's remorse, no matter who wins. This was not an election of two qualified candidates whose executive experience and knowledge were substantive and measurable, but rather a choice between the evil of two lessers. This was the best that our nation's political system could come up with.

And that's truly a sad statement on the political process in the United States.

Obama Keeps Defining Rich Down

First it was $250,000. Then it was $200,000. Now, we've got Obama and his fellow Democrats saying $50-70,000. Yeah, do you feel richer for knowing that you're now considered rich by the Obama campaign and its Democratic party allies?

Hillbuzz has the video.



As I pointed out yesterday, Obama's plans for the coal industry would amount to yet another tax on everyone - regardless of your income level. The cap and trade fees would be passed on to the end users; the companies that don't go bankrupt would be forced to pass on the costs to the consumers. Everyone would pay higher energy costs as a result because 50% of the nation's electricity is generated from coal.

You Don't Say: Obama's Aunt Living in Boston is An Illegal Alien

You don't say. Sen. Barack Obama's aunt, a Kenyan national who lived in public housing in Boston was here illegally after having her asylum request denied four years ago.

Barack Obama's aunt, a Kenyan woman who has been quietly living in public housing in Boston, is in the United States illegally after an immigration judge rejected her request for asylum four years ago, The Associated Press has learned.

Zeituni Onyango, 56, referred to as "Aunti Zeituni" in Obama's memoir, was instructed to leave the United States by a U.S. immigration judge who denied her asylum request, a person familiar with the matter told the AP late Friday. This person spoke on condition of anonymity because no one was authorized to discuss Onyango's case.

Information about the deportation case was disclosed and confirmed by two separate sources, one of them a federal law enforcement official. The information they made available is known to officials in the federal government, but the AP could not establish whether anyone at a political level in the Bush administration or in the McCain campaign had been involved in its release.

How would anyone have know that Obama was running for the President four years ago when the asylum request was denied; Obama himself admitted that he was completely unqualified to run at that point. The question is how this particular piece of news came out now. Good question. Maybe the media should have spent more time looking into Obama's family relationships and his story months and years ago than putting a shine on the Obama coronation when the election hadn't even taken place.

Imagine if the media took as much interest in Obama's family as they did in Joe the Plumber. We might have learned this ages ago.

Of course, the situation with Obama's aunt isn't exactly indicative or reflective on Obama himself, but it does call into question the media's reporting talents. What took them so long to find this person and use their investigative talents?

The Ohio Obama Plumbers; The Plot Thickens

As bad as the crime was, the coverup is invariably always worse. Ohio's Director of Job and Family Services, Helen Jones-Kelley, is making a bad situation worse. It's turning into a full blown criminal coverup of epic proportions.

Someone lied to the state employee who ran the search on Joe Wurzelbacher, and then was told to keep the matter quiet and the reasoning changed for the search after the fact.

Vanessa Niekamp said that when she was asked to run a child-support check on Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher on Oct. 16, she thought it routine. A supervisor told her the man had contacted the state agency about his case.

Niekamp didn't know she just had checked on "Joe the Plumber," who was elevated the night before to presidential politics prominence as Republican John McCain's example in a debate of an average American.

The senior manager would not learn about "Joe" for another week, when she said her boss informed her and directed her to write an e-mail stating her computer check was a legitimate inquiry.

The reason Niekamp said she was given for checking if there was a child-support case on Wurzelbacher does not match the reason given by the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services.

Director Helen Jones-Kelley said her agency checks people who are "thrust into the public spotlight," amid suggestions they may have come into money, to see if they owe support or are receiving undeserved public assistance.

The Director is lying to cover her ass. She knows that employees are fired for illegally accessing the computer records. So does Niekamp, and Niekamp has fired employees who have engaged in illegally accessing computer records. There's absolutely no reason that anyone should have checked Joe's computerized records in this instance, and most certainly he did not inquire about his own status to generate searches of a multitude of state records.

Kelley abused her position to have her subordinates engage in a fishing expedition to dig up dirt on Joe the Plumber, whose sole transgression was having the audacity to ask Sen. Barack Obama a question about his economic policy. It was an innocuous question, but Obama's response was most illuminating as to Obama's true intent - the redistribution of wealth.

Niekamp was tricked into running the searches, and those who told her to run the searches must be held accountable. They must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. They abused their power, and used the computerized searches to engage in a partisan attack on someone who they believed was a threat to someone who they sought to elevate to the Office of the President.

Hot Air also notices the coverup in Ohio and the partisan politicians at the state's highest level are attempting to bury the story even as the criminality of those involved becomes all too clear.

UPDATE:
The media is ignoring the story. Other than the Columbus Dispatch, the media isn't looking into the story in any way, shape or form. The NYT doesn't even have anything on it. MSNBC? Nada.

They simply aren't interested in a scandal of what's growing into epic proportions - because of the coverup no less. It's sad. You have government officials abusing their power and obstructing justice with lying about their intentions to run database searches for purely partisan reasons. Where is the accountability?

UPDATE:
Wurzelbacher says that he doesn't have a child support case. Jones-Kelley's excuses keep changing, and it doesn't make it any better. There was nothing routine about running his name through the databases, and there most certainly wasn't a "public spotlight search protocol" in place.

Murtha Seeks Million Bucks To Save Campaign

Go pound sand. Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) is going to lose his supposedly safe seat in Congress because he has revealed himself to be an unmitigated jackass who believes that his constituents are racist idiots who will not vote for Sen. Barack Obama on the basis of Obama's skin color. He believes that the residents of his corner of Pennsylvania are racists and rednecks.



People don't take kindly to being called racists, and they will take their ire out on the guy who claims to represent these very folks, Murtha. He's hoping to get someone to donate $1 million so that he can save his seat in the House. Murtha had been ahead in polling up until those inane comments, and since then he's been scrambling to hold on to his seat.

Murtha's opponent is Republican Lt. Colonel Bill Russell (US Army ret.). As far as I can tell, Russell hasn't called his prospective constituents idiots, racists, rednecks, or shot off his mouth and accused Marines of being cold blooded murderers as Murtha did in commenting on the Haditha incident. Murtha is facing lawsuits over his slander and libel of the Marines involved.

New Jersey Political Ad Roundup

This election season, there aren't exactly that many political ads running that stick in one's mind, but here are two that do stand out for different reasons.

I would suggest that this is the cutest attack ad I've seen related to any campaign anywhere this political season. It's got a cute and catchy jingle, and it hammers home the tax and spend ways of the person involved, Linda Stender. It could be applied to any number of tax and spend politicians across the country, and I wouldn't be surprised to see it used down the road.



Meanwhile, the following ad fails because it could truly apply to anyone involved in the 2008 toxic paper mess. The target of the ad is Scott Garrett, a Republican, but it could apply just as surely to Sen. Barack Obama, Joe Biden, or any number of Democrats around the country (Rep. Barney Frank) that are up for election and who stood by and either did nothing, took money from the financial companies, Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae or Countrywide, or even said that there was no problem for years on end up until there was absolutely no doubt that there was a major crisis brewing because of all the subprime borrowing. So, you want to fire Scott Garrett? How about not hiring Obama and Biden. They've got the same failings. The ad was produced by Democrat Dennis Schulman.