You betcha!

Barack would destroy Pennsylvania's economy

and impoverish those bitter people who cling to their guns and religion. Then he would give them $500 of your cash money and enthusiastically congratulate himself for making it all better. He's asking Pennsylvanians to vote for their own destruction. He's asking you to vote to enslave yourself to his dictates.


h/t

Update:
Why did the San Francisco Chronicle sit on the damaging quotes from Obama? Why did they not report the story? 1 2

Bonus: trailer for the new movie, "O", by Oliver Stone. link

Of all the firms in all the world [to work for in his first job],

"Obama had to walk into the one that years before had closer ties to SDS than any other mainstream business in the world. What luck!"

When it comes to consorting with terrorists, little Barack is the unluckiest Presidential candidate in history. Jim Lindgren has the full story at Volokh Conspiracy.

If Dow holds steady today, McCain has a decent chance

I'm standing in surf, being battered and buffetted to and fro, and saying I predict McCain will win.

I will not shrink in the face of "professional" opinions. All I have is my opinion - and I will not kow-tow. I will say what I truly think: McCain wins. It's an amateur opinion, but by stars it's my opinion, and a man gets to have his own opinion (at least until Jan. 21). I say McCain wins Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida, and those states catapult him to electoral victory.


I hear much talk that Barack has "many paths to victory, yet McCain has only one path." I hate to go all Forrest Gump and Confucious, but a man only needs one path.


Gallup, as if to flip people like me the middle finger, has raised their final pre election numbers from 10 and 10 to 11 and 11 (for Oct 31/Nov 1/Nov 2 period). How can Gallup control poll numbers, you ask? Answer: their numbers have everything to do with demographic assumptions which are built into their models. Like Johnnie Cochran below, I say of Gallup: THIS DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. It's difficult to imagine Barack winning by 11. If he does, most of the nation - both those who like Barack and dislike him, will be shocked. I will be at the head of the line of shocked persons.


At this point, most polls agree that Barack wins big (though by varying large margins); a couple of polls say Barack wins narrowly; and we the public get to guess which poll is correct. I choose IBD/TIPP, which came closest of anyone to correctly predicting the 2004 result. IBD/TIPP has Barack at +2, with 8.7% Undecided. IMO: 8.7% Undecided = McCain solidly in the lead. It's a professional poll! I'm standing with the pros!

What is the hope for a McCain victory based on?

1) Poll demographics and weighting are miscalculated.
2) Undecideds go heavily for McCain.
3) As much as 80% of homes have refused to take questions when pollsters have called. Homeowners who do take questions seem far more likely to be Barack supporters.

There are a few brave souls who predict McCain will win by a decently large electoral margin. God bless their courage. My heart wants to agree with them, but my brain is not ready to go that far in my prediction. They point to the high % of homeowners refusing pollster calls. This could mean poll #'s which are inaccurately skewed in Barack's direction - which, how else do you explain Gallup's Barack +11 number? If that number is correct, I'm the biggest cognitive dissonance sufferer in America.

Obi-Wan thinks poll numbers later this morning will tell us a lot. link


I'm waiting on this afternoon's final Dow numbers. Those numbers will have an effect on tomorrow.


Whether John McCain wins or loses: I've been heartened by the conservatives' reaction to this election. Conservatives have come out of the woodwork to overtly support Senator McCain. Conservatives have shown themselves to be good people with solid intellectual values. Conservatives have shown themselves to be large in number, and willing to engage in the cause of keeping America faithful to her founding values. This is why Barack has run as a pretend moderate - he would never have a chance running as a liberal. However the election result plays out, I am heartened and optimistic about the future. I am tranquil and at peace. Oddly, Barack's bullshit campaign theme is hope, and this long, long campaign has renewed my hope that America will not become Euro-Socialist Belgium. American Conservatives will fight over the long term to prevent that.

The point

Rashid Khalidi was in PLO

Khalidi, media, and Barack campaign have begun meme that Khalidi was never involved with PLO, and is mere victim of an "idiot wind". Bull. Khalidi was a terrorist operative through and through. Case closed.

How did Barack keep befriending such people and having dinner with them? He must be the unluckiest Presidential Candidate of all time.

~~~~~~~~~~~Above this line are facts~~~~~~~~Below this line are rumors~~~~~~~~~

The lack of media scrutiny of Barack's life allows and prompts Mencius Moldbug, he of evil demagogic talents, to deliciously and demagogically ask: Did Barack even attend classes at Columbia? MM's argument, which is only 90% (or more) likely to be untrue, yet which I still find fun and compelling, is that Barack met the Weather Underground during the apartheid demonstration at Occidental in which Barack played a large part and even appeared onstage to be play arrested by a play South African government. Out of this protest, which it is documented was partially organized by two Weather Underground members, Barack decided to go to NYC - not particularly to attend Columbia - but rather to be a real radical and change the world. NYC was the hub of activism. This would've been around 1981. The Weather Underground was still active, and was centered in NYC.

No Columbia student has ever publicly recalled attending class with Barack. Doesn't that seem a bit strange? Wouldn't such fellow students normally be springing up everywhere with stories of remembrance? Wouldn't media normally find such human interest stories -- just as they found and interviewed girls who attended various colleges with Sarah Heath? Just as they interviewed Naval Academy Graduates who recalled what a cocky and irreverent and undisciplined student John McCain was? In fact, NYT and Fox did go looking for fellow Columbia student remembrances of Barack, and found ...... zip. Bupkas.

Obama File:

When asked about his undergraduate training at Columbia University, The New Times states that Obama

"declined repeated requests to talk about his New York years, release his Columbia transcript or identify even a single fellow student, co-worker, roommate or friend from those years."

Many of his classmates don't remember Obama. He's not in the yearbook. Columbia couldn't find a picture of him at school.What can be said with some certainty is that Mr. Obama lived off campus while at Columbia in 1981-83 and made few friends. Fox News contacted some 400 of his classmates and found no one who remembered him.

MM argues that Columbia was the most radicalized and radical-compromised university in America(likely true), and that Barack was credited with class grades in the registrar's office even though he did not attend classes. Maybe whoever allegedly fabricated the grades rationalized that Barack's radical activities comprised "study".

Barack's Columbia days are a complete void. He refuses to give out info about them, except to say "I was a hermit who studied". Here's the thing: why do we have to guess about those days? Why has the media not done it's job of investigating a Presidential Candidate? Why do we have to speculate? How is it that a 47 year old man has written two books about his brief life and yet remains mysterious and unforthcoming? It's an absolute scandal that the media have hidden Barack. It's an absolute scandal that MM can speculate such a theory and the entire nation cannot immediately laugh it off as horse manure. We cannot laugh away MM's theory because we do not know the truth about who Barack is and what his background is. Media have allowed Barack to remain a mystery to us. For all we actually know, MM's theory could be exactly correct. It's the not knowing which is truly a scandal.

Mencius Moldbug:

My guess - not because I have any reason to believe that this specifically is what happened, but just because every other explanation I can think of strikes me as less probable - is that Obama, as a young black radical with SDS credentials and obvious talent and potential, found it relatively trivial to earn quick admission to the [NYC Weathermen Underground] inner circle, spent two years as a gofer, intern, catamite, or what have you for the Ayers crime family, and was rewarded by the gift of a Columbia degree and a ticket to Harvard Law.

Did Bill Ayers have connections in the administrative staff at Columbia? It would be remarkable if he didn't. Folks, the Movement was the center of the universe in 1968. If you were one of the top hundred people in it, let alone Bill Ayers, you were the giant glowing sun in the core of your social galaxy. You were a stud beyond studs. You had friends everywhere.

And would someone who blows up police stations blanch at planting a file? Honestly, can we even be confident that the staff at Columbia looked at the file? Who are they, and how do we know them? Again: why do we believe that Barack Obama attended classes at Columbia?

Moreover, a bogus Columbia degree is exactly the sort of thing an ambitious person can get away with in this world. Especially an ambitious black person. Everyone hates to be a racist. Of course, you have to have a serious pair of brass balls, but I think we know Obama has those.

Barack: I won't answer questions until after the election. Of course not.

BTW: Barack won't answer questions then, either.

U.S. GDP contracted in third quarter

According to advance figures released by the U.S. Dept. of Commerce. If this causes the Dow to drop significantly on Monday, McCain could be toast. The election is that volatile.

NO ONE believes the polls

Even Dems don't believe the polls. Dems are nervous as cats, or, well, nervous as Godless neurotic urban Dems.

Gallup Expanded and Gallup Traditional both show Obama +10. These are long time, trusted, professional pollsters. PROFESSIONALS. Yet most of the nation doesn't trust the polls. Few believe Obama is ahead by 10. If Gallup is correct, and Obama wins by 10, 70% of the nation will be shocked.

I haven't studied Gallup's methodology. Yet, based on gut instinct and dubious anecdotal this and that: I'm saying Gallup is full of manure.

I'm acting like an apparent crazy person. WHY am I so confident? HOW IN THE WORLD am I loose and relaxed in suspecting I have a better read than Gallup? In this instance, I'm acting like a fool and saying: I've got a sense. I've been in sales a long time. I study people. McCain and Palin seem loose and happy to me; Barack and Biden seem tense. All four are attempting to convey a positive and confident message. However, from watching all four: I suspect things are going better for McCain and Palin.

I agree with Rove: you have to favor Obama right now, but don't kid yourself: the race is still open. That sounds exactly right to me. However, Obama by 10 points?!! Bull. Only a heavily-educated pollster could be smart enough to believe this nation prefers Obama by 10 points. What of Gallup Expanded and Traditional showing identical numbers?!! Bull. Only an over-educated pollster could input assumptions which produce that output. Gallup is training us to disbelieve it's results.

About Gallup, I feel like Johnny Cochran in Southpark's Wookie Episode:

Does that make sense? How can Barack lead by 10 if Chewbaka is livin on Endor with a bunch of Ewoks? That does not make sense. NONE OF THIS MAKES SENSE! So you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberatin and conjugatin the Emancipation Proclamation: does it make sense? NO! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury: It does not make sense! If Chewbaka lives on Endor Barack cannot win by 10! The defense rests.

A good SNL skit:

Old Number: $70,000 = Rich

My point is: Barack is a stone cold liar. He is fundamentally cynical. He is unserious about keeping his word, and therefore is all over the place in his supposed-but-not-really "positions" on issues - just as when, after wrapping up the Dem Nomination, he made immediate and wholesale changes in his political positions which I documented here.

Ed Morrissey on $70,000:

Obama’s top end for cuts certainly changed dramatically. If he thought that tax cuts should be limited to $70K in 2003, he hasn’t explained what changed in the following five years to move that to $250K $200K $150K $120K. Obama could have simply changed his mind, but the ambiguity surrounding Democratic talking points in the past few weeks suggests that his commitment to the higher income levels is tenuous at best.

Place your bet on something worse than "tenuous".

Sowell

Ego and Mouth:

Barack Obama has the kind of cocksure confidence that can only be achieved by not achieving anything else.
[...]
The kind of self-righteous self-confidence that has become Obama’s trademark is usually found in sophomores in Ivy League colleges— very bright and articulate students, utterly untempered by experience in the real world.

Beginning today: Wall to Wall Reverend Wright on TV

And properly so. The man based his church doctrine on racially ignorant political ideology, and Barack loved it. In "Audacity of Hope" Barack credits these Rev. Wright words for actually attracting him to Rev. Wright's church:

“It is this world, a world where cruise ships throw away more food in a day than most residents of Port-au-Prince see in a year, where white folks’ greed runs a world in need, apartheid in one hemisphere, apathy in another hemisphere…That’s the world! On which hope sits!….” [208]
[...]
… Reverend Wright spoke of Sharpsville and Hiroshima, the callousness of policy makers in the White House and in the State House.[209]

This video would be funnier than SNL, if it was, you know, satire...


h/t to my new soulmates at Hillbuzz


A fun political ad for the children would feature my favorite old, skinny, bearded Russian blog commenter at neo-neocon staring into the camera and delivering his opinion:

Sergey Says: October 27th, 2008 at 2:22 pm

My advice from Russian historical experience: when socialist agitators arrive at political scene, form armed vigilante groups and hunt them, shoot them down as rabid dogs. They are more dangerous than the latter.

Protein Wisdom: If it redistributes like a duck....

Piper blogging!

Poor tired sugar-crashing princess...



If the embed doesn't work, here's a link.

McCain Ahead!

48-47 in Zogby!

in one day polling on Friday, per Drudge Report.


I don't trust Zogby. No one does. But, Obama's Campaign famously fears the first headline which says "McCain Ahead!", so there it is up there above the champagne! Yee haw!



Bad for McCain: most poll margins are not 2-ish, as I hoped they would be at this point, but rather 6-ish. 6-ish is a lot-ish.

Bad for Obama: AP reports 1 in 7 voters are still persuadable. That is shockingly high. Most polls reflect extremely high % of undecided voters - often about 7%. These voters will break heavily for McCain. If they were going for Obama, they would no longer be undecided. Dick Morris thinks the undecideds will win it for McCain. Rove agrees this is problem for Obama, says this is the second largest margin of undecideds in modern times, trailing only 1988.

Bad for Obama, imo: the polls showing his big lead are wrong. Their demographic assumptions of energized Dem voters and nonenergized Repub voters are wrong.

Bad for Obama, imo: My soulmates at HillBuzz have convinced me: McCain wins Pennsylvania. Very bad for Obama.

Bad for Obama: Rasmussen says McCain now trusted more on taxes and the economy.

Bad for Obama: Gallup reports youth vote shifting in McCain's direction.

Bad for Obama(or a hoax, don't know which): anonymous Hillary supporter staffing Obama campaign details Obama Campaign's efforts to demoralize Repub voters, says Obama's internal polls show the race is very close.

Bad for Obama: The Dow was up 11.3 percent for the week, its best weekly performance in 34 years.

We shall see what happens on Nov 4. I'm awfully confident for a know-nothing amateur whose fave candidate trails in professional polls which must be proven vastly wrong. At this point it's extremely likely Obama will lead those polls on Tuesday morning. The polls will have to be proven extremely wrong, and I'm saying there is a decent chance of that happening. Chutzpah baby!

New Number: $120,000 = Rich

According to Obama Cabinet-Member-To-Be Bill Richardson.

Giuliani on the stump:

"$120,000?! They can't even get their stories straight - because it is a story."

Obama friend Khalidi wrote obit for Black September terrorist

Powerline:

According to Fox News, in 1991 Khalidi wrote an obituary for Salah Khalaf, a founding member of the terrorist Black September organization which, among other things, carried out the massacre of Israeli athletes at the 1972 Olympics. Khalaf was known as Israel's most-wanted terrorist. Fox News reports that in the obituary Khalidi praised Khalaf and said he would be "sorely missed by the Palestinian people to whom he devoted his life."

[...]
He was, no doubt, missed by those who approve of terrorist mass murders. It is fair to say that Khalidi, a representative of the PLO, was among that number.

It was shortly after this that Obama and Khalidi became friends and, as Obama has said, Khalidi

"offered constant reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases."

[W]hat sort of a person would consider [Khalidi] to be not just a profound thinker but a moral compass? That is to say: what sort of a person is Barack Obama?

I know.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A slim sliver of circumstantial evidence of Khalidi's terrorist sympathies:
A children's dance troupe performed at the Khalidi farewell at which Obama spoke. Debbie Schleusel reports she obseverved, at another performance of this children's dance troupe in 2004, the child dancers pull out swords and simulate beheadings.