JBW Polling 'Analysis': NEW. MORE. DESPERATE. FAIL.

ROTLMFAO!!

It worked! My post this morning caused JBW to shoot his twaddle-wad like the adolescent dork he is. See, "I Don't Think Donald Douglas Likes Me..."

Actually, I don't even know JBW, although I don't particularly care for atheist online-troll sex-predators who harass attractive women across the web. And besides, what I really don't like is noodle-headed analysis like this ... JBW misspecifies my essay as predicated on polling data, and then he even gets that wrong:

He ... quotes two polls concerning Obama's approval ratings that seem to definitively prove that the president is also subject to this bout of "epic fail", except of course that they don't. The most recent RealClearPolitics accumulation of polling data shows the Rasmussen poll to be a statistical outlier (there is a consistent right-leaning bias in Rasmussen's methodology; pay attention to how often the right points solely to this organization's polling data to back up their talking points) while every other major polling firm shows Obama's approval rating to be either positive or within the margin of error (he's +2 overall)

Actually, RCP's "accumulated" polling averages have been dismissed by experts as wildly inappropriate indicators of public opinion. I wrote about that here, "Mixed Poll Averages Risky as Handicapping Tool" (in political science lingo, the pooled findings are flawed due to "incommensurability"). Moreover, leftists call Rasmussen an "outlier" not because of methodological errors, but because they disagree with the results. Or, as JBW puts it, "pay attention to how often the right points solely to this organization's polling data to back up their talking points) ..."

I hate to be hard on the boy, but JBW's proven badly wrong by this morning's CBS poll, "Obama's Approval Rating Hits New Low." (hardly a "wingnut" outlet):

Last week, President Obama signed historic health care reform legislation into law -- but his legislative success doesn't seem to have helped his image with the American public.

The latest CBS News Poll, conducted between March 29 and April 1, found Americans unhappier than ever with Mr. Obama's handling of health care - and still worried about the state of the economy.

That's after ObamaCare passed. So yes, JBW. EPIC. FAIL.

Not only that, I actually added this poll to my previous JBW decimation, so the only reason he would have omitted it from his entry is denialism, especially since JBW sits lapping his tongue across the keyboard all day waiting for blog updates at American Power so he can create yet another photoshop that's somehow supposed to convince people that he's got skills (although to his credit the latest iteration isn't racist).

And one more thing: JBW, being the small-penis prick he is, tries to act big nevertheless, by throwing down some kind of challenge that's supposed to, er, put me in my place on predictive analysis? Too bad I've never predicted that the GOP will take control of Congress in November:

If however Don is so certain about Obama's dismal approval ratings translating into epic failure then I'll offer him this meager yet serious wager: $100 says that the Republicans fail to gain a majority in either house of congress this November. I'm making the offer publicly so that every one reading this will be privy to it. I think Obama's a chess master of the highest caliber Don, and he's moved his pieces into position to retain his party's majorities through the remainder of his first term. Care to put your money where your mouth is, Fat Boy Slim?

No, I don't want that bet, JBW FAIL. Simply because it's still way too early to predict what will happen in November. But also because congressional elections aren't generally national referendums. The president almost always loses seats in the midterms. And this year will be no different. But we're talking individual House and Senate races around the country, and the GOP's defending even more open seats than the Dems. It's a tough political environment for both parties, which is something the tea parties frequently remind stupid RINOs.

Anyway, Obama's epic fail no matter what. He and the Pelosi-Reid Dems rammed through an unpopular bill while ignoring the economic crisis. The reckoning will come in November, and I hope it'll be the 40 or so seats needed in the House and the 8 or so in the Senate. But it'd be foolhardy to put money on something like that so soon, and without enough critical indicators. That said, Stanley Greenberg, who was President Bill Clinton's pollster in the 1990s, suggests that 2010 is shaping up to be a 1994-style election. See, "Clinton Pollster: If Election Were Today, It Would Be Like '94."

If JBW wasn't so stupid, he'd at least catch up on the latest analysis before throwing down the gauntlet.

Typical though.

EPIC. JBW. FAIL.

Update on Darcy Burner's Epic Fail for Netroots

Last November, just four days after the election, I published, "Bachmann and Burner: Epic Electoral Fail for Netroots."

Combining the defeat of Democratic House candidate Darcy Burner in Washington State, with the reelection of embattled GOP congresswoman Michelle Bachmann in Minnesota, I argued that "Together, the reelection of Bachmann and defeat of Burner mark a startling defeat for the 2008 netroots campaigns of Daily Kos, Firedoglake, Open Left, and their "Blue America" coalition of Internet activists ..."

Some of the lefty commenters at the post scoffed at the notion of an "epic fail" for the netroots, but as Eli Sanders notes in his, "Anatomy of a Netroots Failure," the defeat of Darcy Burner's campaign last year was "biggest failure of the cycle":

To understand how invested online activists were in the campaign of Darcy Burner -- the bright, tech-savvy, and ultimately failed candidate for Congress in Washington state's 8th Congressional District -- consider what happened in February of last year, when the University of Washington's student newspaper, not normally a major player in national politics, published excerpts of an interview with Burner campaign spokesman Sandeep Kaushik.

Speaking to a student reporter about the nationwide army of liberal bloggers and online activists who have become a force at all levels of politics in recent years, Kaushik said: "They're not at the point yet where they can really swing a race. Part of my job is making sure people know the blogosphere is not the campaign."

Impolitic words in this Internet era, certainly. But as it turned out, he was partly correct. Despite their many successes in 2008, liberal bloggers and members of the online "netroots" could not, in fact, swing this particular race to a candidate who had become a barometer of their clout. They now openly lament Burner's defeat as their biggest failure of the cycle.

Still, back in February 2008, to suggest that such an outcome might be possible -- and to suggest, by extension, that there might be a ceiling of netroots influence at all -- was highly taboo. Kaushik was quickly made to understand that the second part of his statement (that his job was to distance the Burner campaign from the blogosphere) was absolutely incorrect. In a post titled "Loyalty," published in near-immediate response to the appearance of Kaushik's quotations in the student newspaper, Jane Hamsher, of the influential national blog Firedoglake, reminded the campaign that liberal blogs had helped Burner raise nearly $125,000 in the primary. Now, in her opinion, the campaign was biting the online hand that fed it. "I can't think of another contributor who would raise that much money and get repaid like this," she wrote, calling for Kaushik's head. "They need to ditch this clown."

Hundreds of commenters chimed in, many agreeing, and by the next day, the Burner campaign had released a statement distancing itself from Kaushik's words. A copy of the statement now closes that particular Firedoglake comment thread: "We are truly sorry that a part-time political consultant associated with this campaign said things to a college student which reflects poorly on Darcy and her campaign. Please know that they do not reflect her views."

The chastised Kaushik stayed on with the campaign, but the lesson was clear: Attention, and deference, must be paid.

God, isn't that classic of the totalitarian left. This Kaushik dude spoke the truth, and the netroots hordes practically lynched him.

Read the rest of the article here.

This is just sweet schadenfreude for me, considering how high the lefties were last November. The damned nihilists had been trying to get Burner elected for almost four years. Big time bloggers were walking precincts in her district to put her over the top, and she still lost. In turn, Michelle Bachmann was excoriated for merely suggesting that the media take a close look at the contingent of socialist members of Congress, and the big netroots blogs raised something close to $1 million for Bachmann's challenger, and they still lost.

The 2008 election was a monumental victory for the left, but it sure felt good to see two of the most intense netroots campaigns crash-and-burn in what is now even recognized over on the dark side as a genuine "epic fail."

Darcy Burner, Netroots' Epic Fail, Now Helping Leftist House Members ... Fail

I couldn't resist the schadenfreude of leftist Darcy Burner's defeat in last November's election.

Some of my thought are here, "Bachmann and Burner: Epic Electoral Fail for Netroots, and here, "Update on Darcy Burner's Epic Fail for Netroots."

The left poured all their resources into electing Burner, and she lost her congressional bid for the second time in a row - and this was in Washington State's 8th District, with its Democratic voter advantage and 15-point margin for Democratic nominee Barack Obama in 2008.

Burner, who is about as hardline radical as they come, is now executive director of the American Progressive Caucus Policy Foundation. This leftist cell's mission is to "is to bring together the collective wisdom of progressives inside and outside of Congress to promote peace and global security, energy independence, environmental sustainability, human rights, civil liberties and the health and economic well-being of us all."

It turns out that Representative Barbara Lee, and Nation editor and publisher Katrina Vanden Heuvel, are on the Board of Directors of Burner's organization. As I wrote regarding Representative Lee at my Pajamas essay, "A ‘National Day of Service’? Or a Political Hijacking of 9/11?", she's "the only member of Congress to vote against the Bush administration’s authorization of force following the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in 2001." She also chairs the Hip Hop Caucus Advisory Board, the organization of the "Reverend" Lennox Yearwood, who leads the White House group seeking to hijack September 11 for a National Day of Service and "eradicate the significance of the day as one of remembrance."

As for Katrina Vanden Heuvel, here's how FrontPage Magazine describes The Nation:

As the flagship publication of the political Left, The Nation consistently champions leftists’ lost causes, supporting totalitarian and Communist regimes while simultaneously rejecting any suggestion the United States is justified in military, or even philosophical, opposition to these rogue states.

It's clear that Darcy Burner is "burning it up" with some hardcore capitalist-bashing cadres.

Now it turns out that Burner's lobbying congressional "liberals" to "hang together" in support of the ObamaCare public option. Roll Call reports, "Burner Helping House Liberals Hold Firm on Public Insurance Option":

An organizer for liberal House Democrats says the bloc “isn’t bluffing” as it prepares to take a reputation-defining stand to protect a public insurance option in the health care overhaul.

Darcy Burner, executive director of the American Progressive Caucus Policy Foundation, said the health care debate has rallied traditionally disparate Congressional liberals to hang together, while galvanizing support for their position from an array of left-leaning outside groups. The result, she said, is that Democratic leaders will not be able to clear a package through the House if it does not include the public plan.

“We have never had the Progressive Caucus organized the way it is right now,” Burner said during a Friday roundtable with Roll Call. “This is not the normal scenario. And Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi [D-Calif.] knows it.”

Whoo hoo!

A "reputation-defining stand"! That's awesome. A two-time congresssional loser now spearheading the left's plan to resurrect the DOA public-socialist option!

Hey, sounds like a winner!

More at Memeorandum. And Daily Kos too!

Democratic Epic Moral Fail!

Regarding my recent blogging on the Democratic nihilists, Skye from Midnight Blue asks,"Why bother with Casper? He is an embarrassment even with the fringe folks."

Democratic blogger, epic moral fail, at bottom, jonesing for traffic.

Why? Well, with all due respect to my beautiful friend Skye, I mainly do it because it's worth highlighting the total moral bankruptcy and infinite hypocrisy of these freaking idiots.

Nihilist netroots bloggers called out conservatives for their outrage on the Linda Biegel story. What's the problem with a little Photoshop of Trig Palin as a ghoul? It's not about the baby. It's the "evil" "Homophobic, Red Shirt, Bible Thumping Nazi, Gay Bashing, Tea Bagging, Racist, White Guy, Bigots."

Well, remember John Hawkins' suggestion, that it's "time to give them a taste of their own medicine"?

It turns out when you turn the Photoshop tables, the nihilists don't like it one bit! Here's this from Repsac3, in response to my Photoshop yesterday on the "Commissariat for Internet Affairs":

A college professor with a Ph.D., and this is the level of discourse you're choosing?

As before, all I can say is wow.

If I were your employer, your student, or your friend, I'd be embarrassed to have to admit it.

Politics of the personal, at it's finest.

And worst of all, not even funny.

A loss on all counts.

Sad, to see what you've become. But I guess I should've expected it. The hinges have been coming off for awhile.

My sympathies to all those who knew you back when...

Hmm ... pretty indignant right?

The increasingly frequent "wow, just wow" line is when leftists realize they're TOTALLY F*****!!

I don't recall Repsac3's outrage, or that of his radical allies, at David Hoogland Noon's Photoshop of me from last year. Nope, it's totally cool when it's done by your side!! No matter that nihilist Noon boasts a Ph.D. from the University of Minnesota. Hey, anything to take down the "evil" neocons! Even left-wing anti-Semitism is cool with these jerks.

What was that Black Flag song again? Oh yeah, "No Values":

I've got no values
Nothing to say
I've got no values
Might as well blow you away

And they would too. They would blow away Sarah Palin if they had the chance. Look how they've mercilessly stalked the Palin family for almost a year now. Recall how this whole controversy erupted? With the awful, just reprehensible Photoshops of Baby Trig? Hey, no problem for the Democrats. The leftists are fully down with it! And it's understandable. "Sarah Palin is the most dangerous threat to the Obama administration with no close second." And to the radical left as well.

Of course, look at this picture ... this is who the nihilist leftists want to destroy:

And what does Brain Rage have to say about Trig Palin? It's all at the blog:

There's nothing worse than an ugly baby....

And about Trig's mother, Governor Palin?

... an incurious dullard.

A Downs child? An "ugly baby."

God help these people, seriously? I blog about this stuff all the time. It's time consuming, I know. And like Skye, many others have said, "don't waste your time on these moral reprobates."

The point's well taken, but you have to see it to believe it, so I continue to blog this stuff, to get this pure hate out in the open for all to see. John Hawkins is right: You have to get down and dirty, but you can never GET THAT DIRTY.

Repsac3 and James "Barebacker" Webb are not some fringe contingents of the Democratic Party. These people ARE the Democratic majority. THIS IS WHAT THEY DO!!

Even this morning, James "Barebacker" Webb has a post up saying it's all a joke, and that American Power has suffered a "Humor Fail."

Actually, the post in question wasn't comedy. My parody was only half in jest, as anyone familiar with the left's secular demonology knows.

Besides, we can just appeal to the marketplace of ideas to see who's really epic fail here.

Let's compare: Here's my traffic report for last week:

Here's James Webb's traffic report for last week:

So, my friends. There you have it. James B. Webb. Total. Epic. Moral. Fail.

Pretty freaking lousy blogging too! See Robert Stacy McCain, "How Not to Get a Million Hits On Your Blog, And Not Score With Hotties. Ever."

PWNED!! TOTALLY!! DUDE!!

**********

Cartoon Credit: David Horsey.

Epic Fail? Hackers Sought Damaging Evidence on Palin

The father of the e-mail hacker who breached Sarah Palin's personal files refused to discuss the case when contacted by Threat Level. It turns out that the suspect's father is a Democratic assemblyman in Tennessee:

A person who identified himself as the student's father, when reached at home, said he could not talk about the matter and would have no comment. The father is a Democratic state representative in Tennessee.

Threat Level kept the identity of the suspect confidential pending further investigation, but Gateway Pundit indentified the suspect as David Kernell, and the father is Democratic Representative Mike Kernell. David Kernell has been contacted by the FBI, and Representative Kernell's personal home page has been taken down.

According to the Knoxville Tennessean:

The son of state Rep. Mike Kernell has been contacted by authorities in connection with a probe into the hacking of personal e-mail of vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, Kernell told The Tennessean.

Note too, that despite the widespread rejection of political or ideological motives behind the Anonymous group's attack on Governor Palin, reports on the initial security breach among 4Chan hackers show disappointment that no incriminating evidence against Palin was found - a fact which supports the contention of an extreme left-wing ideological agenda to destroy the Palin family:

The generally apolitical 4chan pranksters, who have now been widely profiled in the media, are known less for their social activism than for their propensity for pulling online stunts designed to evoke maximum anger, shock and disgust.

But now the anonymous participants on 4chan's /b/ bulletin board--the home base of their community and launching pad for their pranks--seem to feel they blew a chance to do some real damage.

According to accounts so far, and chatter on /b/ itself, shortly after the password information to Palin's account was posted on the board, the account became inaccessible, either because too many people tried to access it at once, or because a dissenter from within /b/ changed the password.

Either way, the amount of information retrieved from the Palin account appears to be relatively small. A screen shot of Palin's account shows it contained 84 unread e-mails and possibly hundreds more, but only two have made their way online, suggesting the rest were not saved before the account was locked. If they were, wouldn't we have seen them online by now?

"/b/ is now 'epic fail /b/' for not finding anything good in Palin's e-mail," wrote one anonymous commenter on the site, slamming the board with /b/'s highest-order insult. "Seriously, /b/. We could have changed history and failed, epically."

"I agree," said another. "This is epic fail. How can there not be something good in those messages?"

One of the bits of data that appears to have been taken from the account is a text-only list of all the e-mails contained in its Inbox, including the subjects and names of the senders. The list, linked here, looks authentic and matches with the data in the screenshots of the account. (Note: this link was having trouble Wednesday night because of interest in this story.)

As I noted previously, Anonymous is claimed to have no political agenda, although the group has staged nationwide protests against the Church of Scientology, and is characterized ideologically as an anarchist organization:

From what I can gather, they likely think of themselves more as TRUTHTELLERS with an anarchist strain, and so may be of the left-libertarian anarchist bent.

While the hackers under suspicion may have been politically confused, the broader 4Chan membership fits the anarchist ideological specification of utopian revolutionaries who can be placed at the extreme left-wing of the political spectrum. As part of their ideology, anarchists are opposed to religion (coercive religious institutionalism, in particular). Hence, Anonymous' current hate campaign against Scientology - an organization identified as either a controversial religion or an opportunistic financial pyramid - reflects an anti-authoritian, anti-capitalist ideological agenda

**********

Added: See, "Palin E-mail Hacker Targeted Family and Staff, Investigators Say":

... there is widespread speculation about who was behind the attack and what the motivation was.

Jose Nazario, a senior security engineer with Arbor Networks Inc., said he knows “through personal contacts” that members of the group Anonymous were involved in the Palin e-mail attack.

He said Anonymous is a loose network of a few dozen people who live in the United States and abroad and range from teenagers to 30-year-olds who share what he said is a “sociopathic sense of humor.”

**********

One of the more fascinating aspects of the Anonymous is the group's "plausible deniability." Plausible deniability is the notion that members of an organization can evade blame for their actions in the haze of an amorphous or non-existent chain of command. Members or supporters of Anonymous can act in any way illegally, and leave no evidence of wrongdoing or abuse. Thus, in theory, there's no one to be held responsible.

What better way for the Democrats to destroy Sarah Palin than to infilitrate the 4Chan network with Democratic Party insiders, who can then claim that Anonymous in fact has no political agenda, and no formal organization structure?

Too bad for them, the hackers weren't the brightest kids on the block. The radical left has completely endorsed the Palin security breach, and the episode provides one more example in a long chain of depravities this year that has totally discredited any claims to moral decency among those on the hardcore Democratic-left.

April Fools: Fail Blogger James B. Webb on Fail President Barack Obama

From fail blogger James B. Webb, November 2008 ...

... I plan to hold our new president's feet to the fire for the next four years; having defended him on many different levels and issues over the past few years I now fully expect him to follow through on his promise of trying to build a better tomorrow for the citizens of this country ...

Okay. Right.

JBW hypocrite fail:

JBW fail and Barack Obama fail. Separated at birth?

From April Fool's Day approval ratings at Rasmussen:

Overall, 47% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance. Fifty-three percent (53%) disapprove ...

Fail.

And last week at CNN: "Majority Disapprove of Obama for First Time."

EPIC. JBW. FAIL.

ADDED BONUS FAIL: "Obama's Approval Rating Hits New Low" (via Memeorandum).

Epic Fail: Obama and the Politics of Personal Destruction

From Jennier Rubin, "Obama and the Politics of Personal Destruction":

The president and his party are in a fix.

At their moment of great political ascendancy — when they control both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue and a recession has rocked faith in free market capitalism — they still can’t get the country to go along with their big government schemes.

Each day brings a new batch of bad polling news for the president. The public is wary of his spending, is convinced he is too liberal, and doesn’t much care for ObamaCare. Meanwhile, the speaker of the house has Dick Cheney-like poll numbers and the Democrats’ generic poll numbers have slid.

Under such circumstances, the only reasonable thing to do is attack the voters and the Republican Party. That at least seems to be the conclusion reached by the Obama White House, which now is convinced that smearing citizens who bother to come to town hall meetings and painting their opponents as intransigent critics of all reform — or as fruitcakes — are the keys to success.

And from Obama himself, the once presidential candidate who wanted to have civil discourse and get beyond name calling, the message to his critics is: “get out of the way.” Anyone who disagrees with ObamaCare is now a crank, a stooge, or an obstructionist. Even the Washington Post editors have had quite enough of the “round-up-the-usual-suspects demagoguery.”

Read the whole thing (link).

I've been blogging the administration's epic fail on ObamaCare for weeks now. Click around at the tags for additional entries.

See also the unbelievable USA Today essay from Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer, "‘Un-American’ Attacks Can't Derail Health Care Debate" (via Memeorandum).

Fail-Blogger Blue Texan Single-Handedly Changes Definition of Word 'Never'

It's amusing, frankly, although it'd be nice if fail-blogger Blue Texan of the totally lame Instaputz would actually throw me a little traffic. That said, it's all of a half-brained piece, as I noted Tuesday, "Blue Texan at Firedoglake Trashes Right-Bloggers for Criticizing Senate Majority Cyclops Robert C. Byrd."

So with that, let's administer the coup de grâce.

First, start with Blue Texan's new "rebuttal," "Functionally retarded Donald Douglas semi-refutes one of my 4 rebuttals, declares victory."

Well, no, I didn't semi-refute anything. Let's go back to Blue Texan's original fail quote, "Byrd renounced his past racism, and became a true champion for civil rights. Lott's voting record on civil rights sucks, and he's never renounced his ties to the CCC."

There are at least two absolute statements here which are demonstrable false. (1) You can't "renounce your past racism" and be "a true champion for civil rights" when you're calling folks "nigger" on national television in 2001. Nope. Sorry. STFU on that "true champion" bull, got that. You. Just. Don't. Get. A. Pass. On. "Nigger." --- "NAACP President Kweisi Mfume denounced Byrd's comments as 'repulsive'." See, "Where's the Outrage Over Robert Byrd? Group Decries Racist Remark by Liberal Lawmaker, Asks Why Criticism is Muted."

And see how Blue Texan's just making shit up. If NAACP calls out Byrd as a backwoods cracker, while GWB was in office no less, that's just massive repudiation of the lame hick Byrd's alleged civil rights creds.

But notice as well the bogus claim that Trent Lott "never" renounced" his racism. Never means never. Did he NEVER renounce his CCC ties or not? And linking to ADL is fail. Nope. No lifeline. Do not pass go. Additional citations don't get you off the hook for screwed BUT COMPLETELY ABSOLUTE statements. NEVER. MEANS. NEVER. HAHAHAHAHA!! SMACK. DOWN. YO.

But wait!! Blue Texan can't be wrong, remember. He's a freakin' Democrat. There's no such thing as right or wrong. Just ask Nancy Pelosi! It's all George Bush's fault .... aaaawwwhhhh!!!

BLUE. TEXAN. FAIL.

Okay, but Hamsher's henchman says he's packing more heat. Okay, what you got, mofo? This ...?

As for my other rebuttal points #1, #2, the first three-fourths of #3, and #4 -- Donald offers no comment. Good move. That's why I say he's functionally retarded, as opposed to a total drooling giggling vegetable finger up his nose mouth breathing kind of retarded.

So let's sum up: Obviously, Blue Texan's one sick lying motherf***ing hypocrite.

It's always so much fun to watch these wingnuts melt down.

Listen kiddo. Those other "rebuttal points" weren't even worth mention, having no basis in any kind of reality. Just saying you're right doesn't actually, you know, make you right.

But here you go: (#1) The "context" doesn't matter for shit, and the post doesn't place anything in "context." Robert Byrd WAS KKK. He can "renounce" all he wants, but kinda hard to bring back the lynched black boys the group murdered. But hey, I understand. The Democrats are the big "party of civil rights" so we're supposed to forget about the sheets. Byrd didn't of course, still slurring folks as "nigger" just a few years before his death.

Screw you and your white supremacist double-standards, prick.

And how about (#2), "Being Southern and associated with a white supremacist group in 1942 is not the same thing as being Southern and being associated with a white supremacist group in 1992." Says who? Is there some kind of ripening date on being a white supremacist? Well, no, actually, so obviously Blue Texan has no clue. Again, you be down wit' de double-standards bitch. That's called hypocrisy, yo.

And (#4): "Is Douglas really defending Robert Stacy McCain, who wrote that Byrd's death makes him "the best kind of Democrat"? This is not a truth claim and deserves to be ignored. (Cue the laugh-track.) It's worth pointing out this pathetic attempt of some kind guilt by assocation, and that's assuming whatever R.S. McCain wrote was improper. None of that is in evidence, so it's completely beyond reason to assert any kind of argumentative triumph. But again, it's a self-superiority moral thing for leftists: They just say they're right, and if you don't agree they'll bludgeon the f*** out of you until you get in line (kinda like SEIU).

Blue Texan's all about avoidance, denial, and obfuscation. The hypocrisy's killer, too, as I've pointed out. I guess that explains the DEAFENING silence on Hammering Jane's totally FUBAR racist smears. (And that's not to mention TBogg, the prime bigot of all the FDL clowns.) Lie down with dogs ...

You lose epic Blue Texan loser. Respond on point, dickwad, or STFU.

Or, as Mike said, "Civil discourse? Here’s all the civil discourse these Red-toothed, America-hating douchebags deserve: fuck every last one of them. In the heart, railroad spike, cayenne pepper in the Vaseline; you know the drill."

How Bad For the Democrats in 2010?

Having little knowledge of how congressional elections work, JBW thought he'd attempt to puff out his concave chest a bit, slapping down some nonsensical wager to mask his intellectual impotence and moral depravity:

If ... Don is so certain about Obama's dismal approval ratings translating into epic failure then I'll offer him this meager yet serious wager: $100 says that the Republicans fail to gain a majority in either house of congress this November. I'm making the offer publicly so that every one reading this will be privy to it. I think Obama's a chess master of the highest caliber Don, and he's moved his pieces into position to retain his party's majorities through the remainder of his first term. Care to put your money where your mouth is, Fat Boy Slim?

Just ignore JBW's weightist slur there at the end (the dude's shootin' blanks, so no surprise with the bigotry).

I'll add though, it's guaranteed that "Obama's dismal approval ratings" -- combined with economic anxiety and anti-incumbency outrage -- will translate into Democratic losses this fall. The questions is how large will they be?

Sean Trende has thoughts on this today. See, "How Bad Could 2010 Really Get For Democrats?":

I think those who suggest that the House is barely in play, or that we are a long way from a 1994-style scenario are missing the mark. A 1994-style scenario is probably the most likely outcome at this point. Moreover, it is well within the realm of possibility - not merely a far-fetched scenario - that Democratic losses could climb into the 80 or 90-seat range. The Democrats are sailing into a perfect storm of factors influencing a midterm election, and if the situation declines for them in the ensuing months, I wouldn't be shocked to see Democratic losses eclipse 100 seats.

You'll want to check the whole thing. Trende's mostly analyzing macro-trends, which lack specificity and suffer from extreme volatility. His presentation of data is pretty convincing, in any case, in the probabilistic sense: There's an extremely intuitive case to be made for a massive blowout this fall, with voters repudiating the Democrats up and down the ballot across the country. I think it's going to happen, but I wouldn't bet on it until I see more data. Specifically, for Congress, we'd need to have some hard polling results at the district level (ideally in all 435 constituencies), along with the incumbent's margin of victory in 2008, as well as the party results for the presidential race. Trende does offer something along those lines, with this map, which shows "a rough average of the President's approval in recent state polls":

As you can see, a number of Obama states in 2008 are now "red states" at the map: Colorado, Illinois, Nevada, North Carolina, and Virginia; plus, Florida, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania -- all Obama states in 2008 -- are trending GOP in the polls. And thus, contra JBW, Mr. "Chess Master" Obambi's heading into epic fail territory as per state-level aggregate data. And Trende notes that "The One" is in fact killing his party:

President Obama's policy choices to date are wreaking havoc on the brand that Democrats cultivated carefully over the past twenty years. Bill Clinton worked long and hard to make it so that voters could say "fiscal conservative" and "Democrat" in the same sentence, but voters are finding it difficult to say that again.

I think Trende's analysis is probably the best you'll see until we have some full-on political science analysis of prospects around the country. Folks can go to Congressional Quarterly to see their "Race Rating Maps for 2010 Elections."

And with that, if JBW's so confident that "Obama's a chess master of the highest caliber," then the Dems shouldn't lose any seats at all. I mean, seriously, President George W. Bush actually gained seats in his first midterm elections in 2002 -- 6 in the House and 2 in the Senate. Since Obambi's so much greater than GWB (well, not, actually, not that lefties care), no doubt JBW will gladly put his money where is weightist-wanker mouth is. $100 says Dems lose seats in 2010. If on the other hand, Obama, like Bush in 2002, gains Democratic seats in Congress this year, I'll cut Brain Rage poser-boy a check for $100 fat ones. "Care to put your money where your mouth is," sexist weightmaster prick?

RELATED: Michael Barone, "What 1946 Can Tell Us About 2010."

Leftists Reduced to Childish Whining Amid Obama-Democratic Epic Failures

James B. Webb's incessant and whiney trolling got me to thinking about how, nearly a year into the Obama administration, the radical left is still obssessed with the Bush administration, and the GOP remains the constant scapegoat for whatever happens to be the Democratic epic fail of the day.

At one of my White House gatecrasher posts yesterday, crazed JBW left a comment so totally off topic to be mind boggling:

With respect, a Republican administration is responsible for the current recession, our two open-ended and unfunded overseas wars and adding trillions to the federal deficit. The current level of outrage on the right over government spending was virtually nonexistent for eight full years before Obama took office and I find it to be the height of partisan hypocrisy.

That just creates one of those, yawn, "yeah right" moments -- especially given the existence of charts like these:

And back in May, Brian Riedl wrote that:

President Obama continues to distance himself from this "inherited" budget deficit. But the day he was inaugurated, the 2009 deficit was forecast at $1.2 trillion — meaning $600 billion has already been added during his four-month presidency (an amount that, by itself, would exceed all 2001-07 annual budget deficits). And should the president really be allowed to distance himself from the $1.2 trillion "inherited" portion of the deficit, given that as a senator he supported nearly all policies and bailouts that created it?

The president also talks of cutting the deficit in half from this bloated level. But even after the recession ends and the troops return home, he'd still run $1 trillion deficits — compared to President Bush's $162 billion pre-recession deficit. In other words, the structural budget deficit (which excludes the impacts of booms/recessions) would more than quintuple.

And even Obama's not unaware of his engorgement on the budget pie. See this morning's New York Times, "Debate on Creating Jobs, Without Raising Deficit":

While stimulus measures usually are not “paid for” by spending cuts or tax increases since that would defeat the purpose of pumping money into the economy, the fact that even liberal groups now are suggesting ways to avoid adding to the deficit shows widespread acceptance of the political if not economic danger of adding to the ever-growing national debt.

Of course, no one wants to increase the size of the deficit, and no one's as good at doing so than the Obama administration and the current Democratic Congress. (See also, the Washington Post, "In Health-Care reform, No Deficit Cure," via Memeorandum.)

In any case, the other example of GOP scapegoating is the freaking unreal post yesterday on the Salahi dinner-crashers, "Before Obama Met Salahi, George Met Jack." Shorter Crooks and Liars: The virtually catastrophic state dinner gate-crashing crisis is nothing compared to George Bush's long-forgotten relationship to the convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff now doing time in a federal correctional facility in Maryland, or something ...

Dumb Democrats, JBW too.

James B. Webb All-Talk (Non) Political Analyst Pwned: Word Bro ... Atheist Megalomaniac EPIC FAIL on Intellectual Substance

OPEN LETTER TO JAMES B. WEBB: WORD TO THE WISE, EXTENDED VERSION (SO BE WISE)

James (OR WHATEVER YOUR REAL NON-COWARD NAME IS), FWIW (a reponse to your sterile big talk):

You told me not to comment on your blog some time ago, and I have observed your rules. But when Repsac3 stalks and taunts American Power with genuine racist insults, when he refuses to observe my rules and common decency, you're down with that ... of course you're into racist photoshopping and cyberstalking, so NST, yo!

Frankly, son, you're nothing but a child to me, with an overdriven playground gotcha mentality. Fact is, every single time I've argued substantive points you've ignored them and moved on predictably to insults and snarks: On the budget deficit you blamed Bush and FAILED. On my post on faith, morality and fighting Satan, you dissed it without a single mention of the issues ... FAIL. On Sean Trende's RCP analysis on the November congressional elections? Ignored it again ... FAIL.
And you recently wrote at my blog:

"I'm not suggesting that the left isn't responsible for many acts of hate and violence in the world. I'm just pointing out the stupidity of the myopic worldview that one side of the ideological aisle is so much better/worse than the other and regardless of which side says it (and I hear it from both on a constant basis) they always sound like uninformed children when they do."

Actually, the contemporary left's entrenched ideological culture of violence is unmatched on the conservative right. And I responded to you with a link to Jamie Glazov's, United in Hate: The Left's Romance with Tyranny and Terror. Glazov's book is deeply argued and written from personal experience of tyranny and terror. His parents were Soviet dissidents. Their lives were put on the line for speaking out against the Communist Party in 1968, when Jamie's father signed the famous "Letter of Twelve" human rights manifesto. The forward to the book was written by R. James Woolsey, who was President Clinton's Director of Central Intelligence from 1993 to 1995. United in Hate received critical reviews from both sides of the spectrum, and retired United States Air Force Lieutenant General Thomas McInery called the book "a must-read if America is to survive the global war against Radical Islam." In short, this is serious stuff, worth engagement.
And what was your response to the citation for United in Hate? Totally predictable:

That's exactly what I mean when I talk about uninformed children, Don. Thank you as always for illustrating my point.

Breathtaking juvenile anti-intellectualism topped with a staggering heaping of brain-addled stupidity.
But that's to be expected from someone who's not right in the mind, oddly consumed by some kind of big man syndrome (when in fact nothing seems to warrant such a psychology, which thus raises appropriate and characteristic questions of megalomania).
And let's not forget your online perversions and stalking. When called out on these you own them with insecure phony laughter and some backslapping with your braindead followers in the comments at Brainrage.

So, JBW, let's be real, okay. Honestly, you're but a lost child to me. I'm a Ph.D. professor with 15 years experience teaching. I'm a father of two who's been married for 16 years. I've traveled widely and have nearly lost my life. But credentials, wisdom, life failings, and experience mean nothing to you, BECAUSE YOU KNOW IT ALL ALREADY.
Anyway, I understand the sources of your disrespect (hey, four years of college and you've got knowledge), but it's obvious to anyone who's been around the block a couple of times that you're all talk and little action. And the fact that James B. Webb is not your real names adds a hilarious touch to any mention by you of the word coward. So, here's a bet. You will not come out and identify yourself, and you will not meet me for a beer where you express a little humility and respect for someone who ought to be, frankly, your intellectual mentor. I'm in the O.C. Name the bar, on a weekend evening, and we'll meet.
So, what do you say big boy? You have my e-mail. Send me your name, phone number, and a location, and we'll meet like men ... instead of playing meaningless tit-for-tat on blogs that few people actually read.
Donald
BONUS DEDICATION: "No Values", from Black Flag's 1980 EP, Jealous Again:

I don't care what you think
I don't care what you say
I've got nothing to give you
Why don't you just go away

I've got no values
Nothing to say
I've got no values
Might as well blow you away

You're just a hole in the corner
Always loaded to the hilt
I could try some satisfaction
I could destroy everything you build

I've got no values
Nothing to say
I've got no values
Might as well blow you away

Don't you try classification
When you know it won't work
What if I try some annihilation
Throw your face in the dirt

I've got no values
Nothing to say
I've got no values
Might as well blow you away

Don't you try pretendin'
Telling me it's all right
I might start destroyin'
Everything in my sight!
No values
No values
No values

American Bridge, Media Matters Smear Outfit, Achieves Epic Fail with Despicable Attack on David Perdue

American Bridge, according to the Center for Public Integrity, is a far-left super PAC whose key principal is David Brock of Media Matters. See, "PAC Profile: American Bridge 21st Century":

American Bridge 21st Century was started by former journalist and liberal activist David Brock, who staffed the super PAC with former Hill staffers and employees of his nonprofit, Media Matters for America.

Media Matters describes itself as a “progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.” American Bridge’s mission is similar, with a strong focus on opposition research to help Democratic candidates and other allied super PACs.

It's worth noting then how badly these losers screwed up today with their ill-considered attack on Georgia Senate candidate David Perdue.

Here's their tweet, which links Evan McMorris-Santoro of BuzzFeed, followed by the latter's tweets and retractions, and related posts. F-king scumbag losers:

Presented without comment. #gasen http://t.co/DE1zZkRy7a https://t.co/IoyNQNdnkr
— American Bridge (@American_Bridge) October 24, 2014

#GASen Watch A Republican Senate Candidate Sign A Young Woman’s Torso http://t.co/DQNzp8Piup
— E McMorris-Santoro (@EvanMcSan) October 24, 2014

staff try to block camera as David Perdue signs a young woman’s torso and says “no pictures on this.” Video: http://t.co/DQNzp8Piup
— E McMorris-Santoro (@EvanMcSan) October 24, 2014

if you think the tracker was excited to capture this David Perdue footage, you are right http://t.co/DQNzp8Piup
— E McMorris-Santoro (@EvanMcSan) October 24, 2014

“No pictures on this.” #GASen http://t.co/DQNzp8Piup
— E McMorris-Santoro (@EvanMcSan) October 24, 2014

no pictures brian RT @brianbeutler: Send the Pulitzer directly to @EvanMcSan c/o BuzzFeed's DC bureau http://t.co/DQNzp8Piup
— E McMorris-Santoro (@EvanMcSan) October 24, 2014

.@American_Bridge Perdue tracker footage missed Perdue signing girl’s insulin pump, says GOP. Vid backs them up: http://t.co/jPqhAFDhWY
— E McMorris-Santoro (@EvanMcSan) October 24, 2014

UPDATE: Perdue footage from @American_Bridge did not capture the whole story in that #GASen signing http://t.co/jPqhAFDhWY
— E McMorris-Santoro (@EvanMcSan) October 24, 2014

Another angle on the Perdue signing, not captured by Republicans, backs up Perdue’s explanation for torso signing. http://t.co/jPqhAFDhWY
— E McMorris-Santoro (@EvanMcSan) October 24, 2014

http://t.co/jPqhAFDhWY pic.twitter.com/qiz8GFOlZG
— E McMorris-Santoro (@EvanMcSan) October 24, 2014

http://t.co/jPqhAFDhWY pic.twitter.com/9jOSgsmKb8
— E McMorris-Santoro (@EvanMcSan) October 24, 2014

.@American_Bridge tells BuzzFeed News they will be pulling down the Perdue tracker video
— E McMorris-Santoro (@EvanMcSan) October 24, 2014

#FF RT @morningmoneyben: "If they claim it's a torso, get more than one source-o." #unfollow
— E McMorris-Santoro (@EvanMcSan) October 24, 2014

American Bridge posted this video as it was recorded without commentary. We regret any confusion it caused.
— American Bridge (@American_Bridge) October 24, 2014

Boy, Evan McMorris-Santoro (@EvanMcSan) screwed the pooch on that Perdue hit piece. And @American_Bridge is total fail. #DavidPerdue #DEMS
— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) October 24, 2014

RT @famblog: Buzzfeed hack falsely claims David Perdue signs woman’s torso http://t.co/5eSayYVXwR #tcot #tgdn pic.twitter.com/dwBjDk8g7i
— ┌П┐(•_•) (@exposeliberals) October 24, 2014

Dems accuse David Perdue of signing girl’s “torso.” Was signing insulin pump - Hot Air http://t.co/o9hZXKLAhD
— Ed Morrissey (@EdMorrissey) October 24, 2014

Seriously, Evan McMorris-Santoro's nothing but a leftist political hack with a byline. This isn't journalism. It's character assassination, brought to you by David Brock's Democrat-allied Media Matters for America, and sleazily enabled by the BuzzFeed political assassination unit.

And to think, Perdue was signing a kid's insulin pump to help raise awareness for diabetes. Nothing's too scuzzy for the desperate and depraved Democrats these days. Absolutely nothing.

Progressives Conflicted Over 'Assassination' of Osama Bin Laden

I've written a couple of times now on John Yoo's thoughts on the Bin Laden killing. Recall that Yoo argues that President Obama had choices. U.S. forces could have gone in with a much heavier contingent for the primary purpose of capturing Bin Laden. We captured Saddam Hussein, for example. We could have taken Bin Laden as well. And, sure, we now know that Bin Laden's (purported) resistance was the (potentially lethal) fact of a couple of guns within arm's reach, and perhaps a suicide bomber's vest that could have been detonated as the commandos stormed the upper chambers of the compound. But given the administration's failure to close Guantanamo, and its backtracking on civilian trials for al Qaeda's leadership, it's entirely within reason to consider that President Obama frankly didn't want to deal with it. Screw it. Kill the f**ker and be done. The truth is, John Yoo's offered one of the most compelling explanations of the operation yet. And now the folks at Balloon Juice are freakin' out over his hypothesis, chest thumping at how the killing of Bin Laden has allegedly caused conservative heads to explode. See "Only Real Men Torture Folks…" (via Memeorandum and Talking Points Memo). Again, all of this is about claiming credit. The left's hypocrisy on national security is unmatched, and Republicans are going to have an enormous opportunity to clarify the debate in 2012. Indeed, it's not the idiotic dolts at Balloon Juice who represent the long-term progressive stand on this, but folks like Michael Moore. The communist filmmaker was on Piers Morgan's last night gnashing his teeth about how horrible it is that Americans killed Bin Laden. But not for the reasons that John Yoo identifies. No, Moore's just unhappy that U.S. forces would actually kill our foremost enemy. More than unhappy, in fact. He's completely dejected, "The world's a better place without him," Moore says, but "it's not necessarily the way" he would have done it:

At least Moore's honest about this. Most progressives are just too busy spiking the football to let both their rank hypocrisy and epic fail sink in. See Dana Loesch for more on that: "In the Left’s Rush to Politicize Bin Laden They Overlook Their Hypocrisy."

RELATED: At the Rhetorican, "White House Messaging Fail: Farenheit 2011?"

And Christopher Taylor, "The Vindication of Former President Bush?"

Crashing Public Support for ObamaCare

From the Wall Street Journal, "Support Slips for Health Overhaul":

Public support for a massive revamping of health care has been slipping as the effort has slowed.

With Congress heading off on August recess, opponents have the chance to mount local campaigns against the plans while lawmakers are home.

President Barack Obama had hoped to have sweeping legislation to overhaul the nation's health system in hand by the summer break. But the effort has been hindered by infighting among Democrats and his failure to effectively sell the plan to Americans.

That's right. Failure: Massive. Epic. Fail.

See also, Scott Rasmussen, "Health Reform and the Polls":

For all the back and forth about the “public option,” Congressional Budget Office estimates and proposed tax hikes, the fundamentals are really what make health-care reform a hard sell to American voters. As members of Congress head home for the August recess, they should take a close look at some poll numbers before they attempt to pass any new legislation.

The most important fundamental is that 68% of American voters have health-insurance coverage they rate good or excellent. That number comes from polling conducted this past weekend of 1,000 likely voters. Most of these voters approach the health-care reform debate fearing that they have more to lose than to gain.

Adding to President Barack Obama’s challenge as he sells health-care reform to the public is the fact that most voters are skeptical about the government’s ability to do anything well. While the president says his plan will reduce costs, 53% believe it will have the opposite effect.

There’s also the reality that 74% of voters rate the quality of care they now receive as good or excellent. And 50% fear that if Congress passes health-care reform, it will lead to a decline in the quality of that care.

Advocates of health-care reform on Capitol Hill are up against something bigger than voters’ reactions to a variety of specific proposals. Our polling in February found that by a 2-1 margin, voters believe that no matter how bad things are Congress can always make matters worse. That’s one reason 78% believe passage of the current congressional health-care proposals is likely to mean higher taxes for the middle class.

See also, Daniel Henniger, "Why Obama May Fail If Obama Can’t Sell More Government, No One Can."

More at Memeorandum. See especially, "Health Debate Turns Hostile at Town Hall Meetings."

Majority of Americans Says Obama's an Epic Fail

It's a 52 percent majority, and Aaron Blake is sure to point out the question offers a "binary" choice between success and failure (and not other options, like perhaps he's only partially fail).

At the Washington Post, "A majority of Americans say Obama’s presidency is a ‘failure’."

“Eat Shit and Die, ‘Blue Commie Texan’”

I can't recommend Melanie Phillips' new book enough: The World Turned Upside Down: The Global Battle over God, Truth, and Power. Those of us on the side of right are endlessly smacking down the upside-down destroyers of America. Phillips writes that the radical left possesses an "infallible" sense of certainty through which no amount of reason or evidence can penetrate. "It is hard to overstate the influence on our culture that is wielded by the doctrines of anti-imperialism, multiculturalism, feminism, environmentalism and the like." These are the foundations of the left's bankrupt "unchallengeable orthodoxy."

I mention this with reference to yesterday's beauty of a post, "Blue Texan at Firedoglake Trashes Right-Bloggers for Criticizing Senate Majority Cyclops Robert C. Byrd." It turns out that "Blue Texan" runs the asinine "Instaputz" blog, whose mission is in "Systematically documenting the putziness of Glenn Reynolds, Pajamas Media, and various other Putzen."

Right.

I guess it takes a putz to know one, given this case of classic upside-down leftist infallibility. Check the post. Blue Texan suggests I'm not very bright and then offers this epic-fail excuse of racist hypocrisy on the late KKK Senate Majority Leader: "Byrd renounced his past racism, and became a true champion for civil rights. Lott's voting record on civil rights sucks, and he's never renounced his ties to the CCC."

I'm tempted to dismiss Blue Texan as stupid, but that'd be getting off too easy. Blue Texan's in fact a morally decrepit liar. There was no Trent Lott renunciation of CCC? Well, yes there was, actually: "Lott Renounces White 'Racialist' Group He Praised in 1992." (This is what leftists do: lie and then lie some more as part of the never-ending campaign of death, denial, and destruction.)

And don't forget, Robert C. Byrd, that "true champion of civil rights," actually continued to slur "niggers" as recently as 2001. And let's remember, Blue Texan's Firedoglake patron never really did renounce her racist bona fides:

So let's sum up: Obviously, Blue Texan's one sick lying motherf***ing hypocrite.

And while I suggested yesterday that "words fail" with the deceit and depravity of Firegdoglake, Mike at Cold Fury disagreed:

Not me, they don’t. Eat shit and die, “Blue Commie Texan.” Everything you toss at us, we toss back from here on in. Don’t like it? I hate it for ya, you fuckin’ punk. Cry me a river, why don’tcha.

No links from me to the FDL sewer, but Donald has ‘em, along with screencaps.

Civil discourse? Here’s all the civil discourse these Red-toothed, America-hating douchebags deserve: fuck every last one of them. In the heart, railroad spike, cayenne pepper in the Vaseline; you know the drill.

Mofo! That's what I'm talkin' 'bout!

RELATED: From John Hawkins, "Right Wing News vs. David Frum, Little Green Footballs, Media Matters, & Excitable Andy!"