Psycho Killer
Talking Heads
10:22 AM
Monster Mash
Bobby Boris Pickett
10:19 AM
Werewolves of London
Warren Zevon
10:16 AM
Witchy Woman
Eagles
10:12 AM
Black Magic Woman
Santana
10:06 AM
Spooky
Classics IV
10:03 AM
If You Wanna Get to Heaven
The Ozark Mountain Daredevils
9:59 AM
Gloria
Them
9:56 AM
Everybody Wants Some!!
Van Halen
9:40 AM
You Better You Bet
The Who
9:34 AM
Doo Doo Doo Doo (Heartbreaker)
The Rolling Stones
9:31 AM
Blitzkrieg Bop
Ramones
9:21 AM
Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo, part of an ambitious commercial space venture founded by British billionaire Richard Branson, crashed during testing Friday and broke into several pieces over the Mojave Desert. One test pilot was killed and another was injured.Keep reading.
"Space is hard and today was a tough day," said George Whitesides, the CEO of Virgin Galactic. “The future rests in many ways on hard, hard days like this. But we believe we owe it to the folks who were flying these vehicles … to move forward, which is what we'll do.”
The news of the second catastrophic accident in a week has sent tremors throughout the burgeoning commercial space industry and is sure to create questions about its future.
Two pilots were aboard SpaceShipTwo, company and FAA officials confirmed. According to the California Highway Patrol, one of the pilots was able to eject and parachute out of the aircraft before being airlifted to a hospital. The other pilot was killed in the crash. Their names have not been released.
The WhiteKnightTwo aircraft, which carries the SpaceShipTwo, landed safely. National Transportation Safety Board investigators were on their way to the site, which the Kern County Sheriff said was spread over five debris fields over a two- to three-mile area.
The rocket plane was using a new fuel formulation, said Kevin Mickey, CEO of Scaled Composites, which conducted Friday's test flight.
The new fuel mixture had been “tested and proven on the ground many times,” he said.
Virgin Galactic has engaged in a nearly decade-long endeavor to produce the world's first commercial space liner, which would make several trips a day carrying scores of paying customers into space for a brief journey...
With so many polls out there showing much the same thing about a Republican advantage, the chances that they are all wrong about who will vote (or have already cast ballots in early voting states) are slim. Unskewing seems like it makes sense but it is invariably based more on wishful thinking than sober analysis. Just as conservatives had to eventually accept that pre-election poll estimates of Democratic turnout were right, so, too, will liberals likely have to own up to the fact that today’s expectations about their base’s voting patterns are similarly accurate. Indeed, as Silver writes, it may be that pollsters are underestimating the number of Republicans this year just as they did the same to some degree for Democrats in 2012.RTWT.
This should not cause us to lose all skepticism about polls. They should be closely examined and probed for possible errors. But such analyses tend to be based on the idea that the candidates you prefer are being shortchanged more than a real suspicion of error. Assuming that the errors will all go one way or that your candidate will catch the breaks is a guarantee that you’ll soon be eating your hat, humble pie, crow, or whatever metaphor you prefer. Ms. Maddow and her friends will soon find that it doesn’t taste any better in their mouths than it did in mine.
WASHINGTON – As Election Day nears, America is the Land of the Fearful.Yeah, well, Obama sucks skanky donkey balls. Crush the bastard, I say. Deliver an epic thrashing to the Democrat-socialist traitors. Make them pay. Render them beyond the pale of decent society. Screw them and their Marxist-collectivist agenda of hate and social regression.
Voters are rattled by the Ebola virus, braced for years of conflict against the terrorist group Islamic State and still worried about jobs, a nationwide USA TODAY Poll finds. Two-thirds say the nation faces more challenging problems than usual; one in four call them the biggest problems of their lifetimes.
And many lack confidence in the government to address them.
"There's this cornucopia of icky that's going on right now," says Laurie DeShano, 38, of Bay City, Mich., an instructor at Saginaw Valley State University who was among those surveyed. She cites concerns ranging from ISIS – "We're absolutely in the cross hairs" – to the out-sized influence of special interests in American politics.
"Just to be painfully honest, it's obvious we're quite off track," says Mike Trujillo, 46, an emergency-room physician from Miami. "I never thought the country would be going in this direction, not in my wildest dreams."
President Obama's approval rating is a so-so 44%, and neither party is broadly trusted to handle the big issues ahead. By significant margins, those surveyed prefer congressional Republicans when it comes to dealing with the economy and ISIS militants in Iraq and Syria. By double-digits, they say congressional Democrats would do a better job in handling income inequality and social issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage.
On dealing with the Ebola virus, one in five volunteer that they don't trust either one.
But the bottom line seems to be that the downbeat mood of the electorate is favoring the GOP, whose backers are more enthusiastic about voting and animated by their opposition to Obama.
President Barack Obama is about to do what no president has done in the past 50 years: Have two horrible, terrible, awful midterm elections in a row.Keep reading.
In fact, Obama is likely to have the worst midterm numbers of any two-term president going back to Democrat Harry S. Truman...
“The video, titled ‘Democrats degrade women,’ features clips — many of which are from just the past week — of Democratic men making sexist comments toward Republican women.”Hopenchange is crashing all around.
With Election Day approaching, so is the democratic day of reckoning for the Democratic Senate class of 2008. Those are the Senators who gave President Obama and Nancy Pelosi the accidental 60-vote supermajority they needed to pass the burst of liberal legislation in 2009-2010 that had been pent-up for a generation—especially ObamaCare.They're the source of gridlock:
Now these Senators are all again on the ballot, most of them pretending in one way or another that they have had little to do with that agenda, or want to reform it, or are really the solution to gridlock.
The truth is that they are the main Washington problem. As President Obama said last week, they “are all folks who vote with me; they have supported my agenda.”
In the media’s telling, gridlock in Washington is due to tea party pressure on House Republicans to resist Mr. Obama’s agenda. There is some of that, reflecting different views of government. But at least the House debates and votes in plain sight. Mr. Reid won’t allow the normal give and take of democratic voting and accountability that is the reason to have a legislature.Throw the f-kers out on their fat asses, the dirtbags. Restore representative democracy — and common decency.
The Reid shutdown runs even to the core legislative function of funding the government. The House has passed seven of 12 annual appropriations bills, most with big bipartisan majorities. Chairman Barbara Mikulski has passed eight of the 12 out of her Senate Appropriations Committee, and Republicans wanted to debate. Mr. Reid blocked a floor vote on every one.
The GOP has wanted to put Democrats on record on Mr. Obama’s regulatory overreach, such as targeting coal for extinction, or on the Administration’s refusal to fast-track approval for natural gas exports that might help Europe become less dependent on Vladimir Putin . No votes allowed.
Wyoming Republican John Barrasso kept a running tally of Mr. Reid’s amendment blockade through July. In the previous 12 months Senators introduced 1,952 amendments—1,105 from Republicans and 847 from Democrats. Mr. Reid blocked all but 19.
Legislation? Mr. Reid has blocked at least 10 bills sent to him by the House that passed with notable bipartisan support. Some 35 House Democrats voted with Republicans to delay ObamaCare’s employer mandate; 46 Democrats voted to expedite the approval of liquefied natural gas exports; 130 Democrats voted for patent-reform legislation; 158 Democrats voted to expand access to charter schools; and 183 Democrats voted (in a bill that passed 406-1) to exempt certain veterans from the ObamaCare employer mandate. Mr. Reid’s response: No debate, no vote.
***
As the election nears, many voters are asking if a Republican Senate would make a difference. The Beltway media line is that it wouldn’t, which ignores that Mr. Reid’s tactics are an historic aberration. How could the Senate possibly be any worse? Mr. Obama would retain his veto against legislation passed by a Republican House and Senate, but at least the legislators would have to vote and be accountable. At least Congress would again resemble a democracy.
It's all coming crashing down for the Democrats. The party of deceit and decay will be buried next Tuesday, praise the Lord.
— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) October 30, 2014Skewedenfreude: Why Democrats Can’t Face the Midterm 2014 Polls - http://t.co/c8GkJilmK3 #Democrat #Dirtbags
— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) October 30, 2014TINA DAUNT OF THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER IS WRAPPING UP MY INTERVIEW WITH THE SECRET SERVICE. NO PRISON BOYFRIEND AS OF YET! :)
— unsavoryagents (@unsavoryagents) October 29, 2014IF YOU ARE ON TWITTER AND YOU HAVE A POLITICAL OPINION THAT IS NOT LEFTIST, BE SCARED, BE VERY SCARED. OBAMA'S SECRET SERVICE IS WATCHING.
— unsavoryagents (@unsavoryagents) October 29, 2014THE SECRET SERVICE INTERVIEWED ME THIS MORNING ABOUT SOME TWEETS. HERE'S THE INTERVIEW.
http://t.co/t4ubq75Ilr
— unsavoryagents (@unsavoryagents) October 29, 2014MY NAME IS SABO, I RUN UNSAVORYAGENTS. I MAKE SHEPARD FAIREY AND BANKSY LOOK LIKE QUEENS. http://t.co/2mbyi0pgl9
— unsavoryagents (@unsavoryagents) October 30, 2014Dem Ad Blames NC GOP Senate Candidate Thom Tillis For Trayvon Martin Shooting.......Can Dems get any lower????....what pukes
— anthony zumpano (@tonyzump) October 25, 2014WASHINGTON — One day this month, as the nation shuddered with fears of an Ebola outbreak and as American warplanes pounded Sunni militants in Syria, President Obama’s national security adviser, Susan E. Rice, invited a group of foreign policy experts to the White House Situation Room to hear their assessment of how the administration was performing."Lurching from crisis to crisis..." Ouch.
She was peppered with critiques of the president’s Syria and China policies, as well as the White House’s repeated delays in releasing a national security strategy, a congressionally mandated document that sets out foreign policy goals. On that last point, Ms. Rice had a sardonic reply.
“If we had put it out in February or April or July,” she said, according to two people who were in the room, “it would have been overtaken by events two weeks later, in any one of those months.”
At a time when the Obama administration is lurching from crisis to crisis — a new Cold War in Europe, a brutal Islamic caliphate in the Middle East and a deadly epidemic in West Africa, to name just the most obvious ones — it is not surprising that long-term strategy would take a back seat. But it raises inevitable questions about the ability of the president and his hard-pressed national security team to manage and somehow get ahead of the daily onslaught of events...
This World Series could come down to one guy, and one question.More.
Madison Bumgarner, how many pitches can you make in Game 7?
"Maybe 200," he said.
He did not smile, or laugh, or elaborate. If he is the one man that can stand between the Kansas City Royals and the World Series championship, Bumgarner intends to stand tall, and heaven help the man or manager that stands in his way.
The 2014 season comes down to one game. America's darlings remain alive.
In the past few months, a former police chief in Pennsylvania pleaded guilty to voter fraud in a town-council election. That fraud had flipped the outcome of a primary election. Former Connecticut legislator Christina Ayala has been indicted on 19 charges of voter fraud, including voting in districts where she didn’t reside. (She hasn’t entered a plea.) A Mississippi grand jury indicted seven individuals for voter fraud in the 2013 Hattiesburg mayoral contest, which featured voting by ineligible felons and impersonation fraud. A woman in Polk County, Tenn., was indicted on a charge of vote-buying—a practice that the local district attorney said had too long “been accepted as part of life” there.Yep, lie, cheat and steal. That's the Democrat Party playbook.
Now come the midterm elections on Nov. 4. What is the likelihood that your vote won’t count? That your vote will, in effect, be canceled or stolen as a consequence of mistakes by election officials or fraudulent votes cast by campaign workers or ineligible voters like felons and noncitizens?
Unfortunately, we can’t know. But one thing is almost certain: Voter fraud will occur. Many states run a rickety election process, lacking rules to deter people who are looking to take advantage of the system’s porous security. And too many groups and individuals—including the NAACP, the American Civil Liberties Union and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder —are doing everything they can to prevent states from improving the integrity of the election process...
A double punch of economic and political dissatisfaction marks public attitudes in the closing week of the 2014 midterm campaign – a dynamic that reflects poorly on the president’s performance, bolstering his Republican opponents.Keep reading.
The discontent in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll is palpable. Despite its fitful gains, seven in 10 Americans rate the nation’s economy negatively and just 28 percent say it’s getting better. In a now-customary result, 68 percent say the country’s seriously off on the wrong track.
There’s no respite politically. Six in 10 express little or no trust in the federal government to do what’s right. Fifty-three percent think its ability to deal with the country’s problems has worsened in the last few years; among likely voters that rises to 63 percent.
Views of the president’s performance suffer in kind. Barack Obama’s job approval rating, 43 percent overall, is virtually unchanged from his career-low 40 percent two weeks ago. A steady 51 percent disapprove, essentially the same all year. His ratings on the economy – still the country’s prime concern, albeit one of many – are similarly weak, a 10-point net negative score.
These elements appear poised to depress voting by dispirited Democrats, tipping the scale to customarily higher-turnout Republicans. Disapproval of Obama reaches 56 percent among likely voters, and three in 10 say they’ll show up at the polls to express opposition to him – twice as many as say they’ll vote to show him support.
The result is a 50-44 percent Republican advantage among likely voters in preference for U.S. House seats in this poll, produced for ABC by Langer Research Associates. That compares with a +3-point Democratic tally among all registered voters, showing how differential turnout shifts the balance.
America is so over Obama. In 2008, the media and a majority of the voters were head-over-heels in love with the man who told them that “yes, we can” overcome war and recession.Heh, "kick him to the curb." Yeah, that'd be killer. I gotta remember that line for next Tuesday, lol.
By 2012, the amour had cooled but they were willing to give four more years to the guy who was – if nothing else – way hotter than Mitt Romney.
But now it’s 2014 and the passion is totally gone. Obama is the withholding boyfriend who knows that he’s probably on the way out and is just sending the odd friendly text message from the golf course. If this relationship-breakdown metaphor seems a little strained consider this: Barack Obama is close to having played more rounds of golf since 2009 than Tiger Woods.
America would happily kick him to the curb, but he can’t run again in 2016 – so these midterm elections are the chance to send a message of complaint...
This summer I had an epiphany as I watched packs of racists riot in Ferguson, Missouri, in support of a gigantic thug who was higher than a kite when he attacked Ferguson Police Department Officer Darren Wilson, who unfortunately had to put this animal down.Keep reading, if putting down big black gigantic animals is your thing.
Why do liberals go to such lengths to revise the motives of terrorists, who are quite clear about their goals? Why do liberals even obscure the names of terrorist groups, replacing the crystal clear “Islamic State” with the alphabet soup of “ISIS” or “ISIL”? Why do liberals replace the terrorists’ own, express rationale with made-up excuses, such as Justin Trudeau’s famous suggestion that terrorists are driven to violence because we “exclude” them?Terrible people, these so-called "liberals" (who are really America-hating, and Canada-hating, radical leftists).
Why do liberals try to revise history, and whitewash the war against us? How is it any more justifiable to minimize the atrocities against us committed by Islamic fascists than it would have been to minimize the atrocities committed by Nazi fascists?
Downplaying the crimes of the terrorists, and even suggesting we are somehow to blame – isn’t that like saying “Hitler wasn’t as bad as people say, and besides, the Jews provoked him”?
We didn’t think that was in the 1940s. We do now, because liberals have abolished the ideas of good and evil as too judgmental. Terrorists? No, our enemies are actually victims themselves, you see. We are privileged. Society is to blame.
When we see the beheading of innocent children and the rape slavery of the Islamic state, it is too horrible to process for the modern, liberal mind.
We cannot accept the terrorists’ reasons, that they mean to kill us and our freedom. So we offer up our own reasons – they’re not that bad, we deserve it, it’s not black and white.
Liberals cannot understand so much hate against us. So liberals sympathize. Liberals help find the answer. They join in. To justify the hate.
By hating ourselves.
.@SarahPalinUSA: President @BarackObama needs to PUT AMERICA FIRST - this is a crisis #Ebola @FoxNews #Greta
— Greta Van Susteren (@gretawire) October 27, 2014WHO IS IN CHARGE? @WhiteHouse pushes back on State #Ebola quarantines @SarahPalinUSA says we need LEADERSHIP @FoxNews #Greta
— Greta Van Susteren (@gretawire) October 27, 2014.@SarahPalinUSA: State & Federal level - we must make sure the solutions are SCIENCE based & not let politics creep in @FoxNews #Greta
— Greta Van Susteren (@gretawire) October 27, 2014Ebola may not be a widespread health crisis in the United States just yet, but it is creating a crisis of another kind — a crisis of confidence in the competence of the federal government.Keep reading.
Many Americans were shocked to learn that when Ebola-infected doctor Craig Spencer returned to New York City from Guinea, took a three-mile run, visited a coffee stand, ate at a meatball restaurant, traveled on three New York subway lines, met friends at a Brooklyn bowling alley and used an Uber sedan to return home, he was not violating the U.S. government’s Ebola protocols.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention instructs health workers returning from West Africa to monitor their health for 21 days and that “during the time that you are monitoring your health, you can continue your normal activities.” Only after a health worker’s temperature reaches 100.4 degrees Fahrenheit does the CDC advise that he or she go to a doctor, “limit your contact with other people” and “avoid public transportation.”
Continue your normal activities? It is simply unbelievable that this remains the official federal guidance for people who were exposed to the Ebola virus — especially after the CDC just came under fire for telling Dallas nurse Amber Vinson (who had been exposed to Ebola and had a 99.5-degree fever) that she was safe to fly on a plane with 134 passengers aboard because her temperature had not yet reached 100.4 degrees.
So bad has the CDC’s handling of Ebola been that the governors of New York and New Jersey had to step in and impose their own mandatory 21-day quarantine on health-care workers returning to their states from West Africa after treating Ebola patients...
Republicans are on the precipice of taking control of the Senate for the first time in eight years, new NBC News/Marist polls released Sunday show, but the GOP has yet to lock up many of the key battleground races.Keep reading.
The surveys show the Republican candidate with slight, inside-the-margin advantages in three of the hardest-fought contests for Democratic-held seats: Arkansas, Colorado and Iowa. North Carolina is a dead heat.
Republicans’ brief scare in South Dakota appears to be over, with Mike Rounds now leading by double digits. But the party still faces danger in Kansas, where an independent candidate is in a virtual tie with the GOP incumbent.
NBC/Marist didn’t poll all of this year’s competitive Senate races. But with Montana, West Virginia and South Dakota in the GOP column, Republicans need to pick up just three seats in the following states: Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Iowa, Louisiana and North Carolina.
Republicans have a cushion. Five of those states currently lean toward the GOP, poll averages show, while North Carolina is still a toss-up. They also are closing the gap in New Hampshire. But the party may need to pick up additional seats if it loses Georgia, Kansas (if the independent conferences with Democrats) or Kentucky.
Here are the numbers from Sunday’s NBC/Marist polls...
She is a former Marxist guerrilla whose organisation once stole $2.5 million from the safe of the governor of São Paulo.And now she's reelected to another four-year term. At the New York Times, "Brazil Stays With Rousseff as President After Turbulent Campaign":
RIO DE JANEIRO — Brazilian voters re-elected Dilma Rousseff as president on Sunday, endorsing a leftist leader who has achieved important gains in reducing poverty and keeping unemployment low over a centrist challenger who castigated her government for a simmering bribery scandal and a sluggish economy.PHOTO CREDIT: Brazil's Marxist president seen with America's Marxist president, courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.
Ms. Rousseff of the Workers Party took 51.4 percent of the vote in the second and final round of elections, against 48.5 percent for Aécio Neves, a senator from the Social Democracy party and scion of a political family from the state of Minas Gerais, electoral officials said Sunday night with 98 percent of votes in the country counted.
While Ms. Rousseff won by a thin margin, the tumultuous race was marked by accusations of corruption, personal insults and heated debates, revealing climbing polarization in Brazil. Mr. Neves surged into the lead this month in opinion surveys, only to be eclipsed by Ms. Rousseff as the vote on Sunday approached.
“People without much money have seen their lives improve during recent years,” said Liane Lima, 62, a secretary in São Paulo who voted for Ms. Rousseff. “I think we should let Dilma finish what she started.”
Indeed, Ms. Rousseff’s victory reflects broad changes in Brazilian society since the Workers Party rose to power 12 years ago with the election of her predecessor and mentor, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who chose Ms. Rousseff as his successor to run in the 2010 election and campaigned for her again this year.
Building on an economic stabilization project put in place by the Social Democrats in the 1990s, Ms. Rousseff and Mr. da Silva aggressively expanded social welfare programs, lifting millions of Brazilians out of poverty. Pointing to the popularity of the antipoverty spending, Mr. Neves, the challenger in the race, said he would not scale it back.
But while Ms. Rousseff campaigned largely on her government’s support for poor and working-class citizens, she faced fierce criticism over her economic policies, with Brazil struggling with slow growth throughout her first term and a recession this year. Brazil’s financial markets gyrated wildly throughout the race, reflecting skepticism over her management of the economy.
Ms. Rousseff, 66, a former Marxist guerrilla who was imprisoned and tortured by Brazil’s military dictatorship, rejected much of the criticism while emphasizing that she had no plans to shift away from policies involving greater state control over the economy. Still, she signaled openness to shaking up her cabinet, including replacing her unpopular finance minister, Guido Mantega.
In addition to facing turbulence in the markets, Ms. Rousseff will deal in her next four-year term with a sprawling scandal involving testimony of bribes and money laundering at Petrobras, the national oil company, which has eroded confidence in the Workers Party. A former high-ranking executive at Petrobras has testified that he channeled bribes to the party and its allies in BrasÃlia.
“I always voted for the Workers Party, since I was a teenager, but this government hasn’t done anything different,” said José Abel, 48, who runs a tourist agency in BrasÃlia and voted for Mr. Neves largely out of concern over corruption in Ms. Rousseff’s government. “They’re just the same as other parties now.”
Julia Roberts: I've risked my career by not having a facelift http://t.co/BzOBIqMA8O
— Telegraph Film (@TelegraphFilm) October 26, 2014Living with #Ebola in West Africa (in our redesigned blog) http://t.co/DC4SxLRp6r #photojournalism pic.twitter.com/wbZkGrfZqg
— The Big Picture (@big_picture) October 9, 2014Madison Bumgarner Complete Game Shutout #WorldSeries Game 5
We are all witnesses. pic.twitter.com/6gHrpb2rcy
— #OctoberTogether (@SFGiants) October 27, 2014#sfgiants a win away from championship after Bumgarner gem: http://t.co/SaOhro2zQZ
— Henry Schulman (@hankschulman) October 27, 2014The White House pushed back against the governors of New York, New Jersey, Illinois and other states that instituted procedures to forcibly quarantine medical workers returning from West Africa, deepening an emotional debate brought on by recent Ebola cases in the U.S.Whatever happened to federalism? You know, the laboratories of democracy? We might find out that New Jersey's doing the right thing, but then again, the Democrat-left isn't really about keeping people safe and healthy. They're all about creating more political conflicts and distractions.
A senior administration official said Sunday that new federal guidelines under development would protect Americans from imported cases of the disease but not interfere with the flow of U.S. health workers to and from West Africa to fight the epidemic there.
“We have let the governors of New York, New Jersey and other states know that we have concerns with the unintended consequences of [quarantine] policies not grounded in science may have on efforts to combat Ebola at its source,” the official said.
It wasn’t clear what action the Obama administration could take to end the quarantines.
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie held firm on his decision to quarantine returning health-care workers. “I absolutely have no second thoughts about it,” he said on Fox News.
A nurse detained in New Jersey after treating Ebola patients in Sierra Leone retained lawyers to challenge her mandatory quarantine in a tent at a Newark hospital, where she said Sunday the conditions are “really inhumane.”
One of those lawyers, Norman Siegel, a prominent civil rights attorney, said the mandatory quarantine policy infringed on the constitutional rights of the worker, Kaci Hickox, a 33-year-old Doctors Without Borders nurse, raising “serious questions procedurally.”
New York Mayor Bill de Blasio also criticized how Ms. Hickox was treated.
WASHINGTON — Bracing for a difficult election in just over a week, when they could lose control of the Senate, Democrats exasperated with the White House are already moving to pin blame on President Obama, whom Republicans have made the centerpiece of the campaign.Continue reading.
Even optimistic Democrats say they have little more than a 50-50 chance to retain their Senate majority. Senior elected officials, strategists and donors have begun to openly criticize Mr. Obama, contending that his low popularity and some ill-advised remarks have proved toxic for candidates trying to distinguish themselves from the president to appeal to swing voters.
“It is all Republicans are running on,” Gov. Mike Beebe of Arkansas said. “It’s not necessarily the national environment as it is mismanagement by the White House, real and imagined.”
Republicans have expanded their advantage in the final days of the midterm campaign and now hold an 11-point lead among likely voters on the question of which party should control Congress, a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News/Annenberg survey finds.Nearly 9-in-10 registered voters at the poll said they disapproved of President Obama's handling of the ISIS threat. Yep, the Democrats continue to appease our enemies, and it shows.
Some 52% of likely voters in the survey said they wanted the election to produce a Republican-led Congress, while 41% favored Democratic control.
A week earlier, Republicans had held a narrower, 5-point lead on the question in the Journal/NBC/Annenberg survey.
“The Democrats, who badly need some momentum, find little comfort in these results some ten days out from the election,” said pollster Peter D. Hart, who helped conduct the survey. “The thread holding things together for them is both more slender and now even frayed.”
By historical measures, an 11-point lead on the question of which party should control Congress is large. Republicans held a seven-point lead on the question at this point in the 2010 election in a Journal/NBC survey, which used a different method to determine which voters were most likely to cast ballots. Republicans went on that year to make big gains in the Senate and to retake the majority in the House.
In the new survey, Republicans also led on the “congressional control” question among registered voters, a broader group than likely voters, with 46% favoring GOP leadership and 42% favoring Democratic control. The GOP lead had been two percentage points a week earlier.
“The GOP appears to be solidifying its lead,” said Mr. Hart.
The midterm battle for control of the Senate will hinge on state-by-state dynamics in about a dozen closely contested races, where Democrats hope intensive campaigning has built a climate more favorable to their candidates than national polls suggest.
Still, the Journal/NBC/Annenberg survey points to a national political climate that continues to favor Republicans. Coming amid fears of Ebola, the U.S. war on Islamic State terrorists and intensified campaigning just ahead of the election, the survey found that recent events had taken a toll on both parties but had hurt Democrats more.
Asked whether the events of the past few weeks made them feel more or less favorably toward the parties, 53% said it made them less favorable toward Democrats; 40% said they were less favorable toward Republicans.
Everything in Amy Poehler's book makes me think we'd be friends, but this sex advice for men proves we're soulmates pic.twitter.com/zpBc9r00iI
— Jessica Valenti (@JessicaValenti) October 22, 2014Polls: Momentum swinging to Republicans http://t.co/6gLwiXYw6j
— The Hill (@thehill) October 26, 2014
I think it’s a respectable position to say we should not allow flights from West Africa. I don’t think it’s probably very effective, because don’t just fly here from direct to Africa. They fly around the world and then come here. So, I just don’t think it’s effective, but it’s a respectable position.OMG!! Brooks is just a Fox News fearmonger! Oh, well, not exactly, since he's on the far-left PBS network, but don't tell No More Mister! He might get his "we won't panic" panties in a bunch, lol!!
But I don’t think it’s below the belt to have a feeling that the establishment or the ruling class in this country is not particularly competent. And you wouldn’t look at the way Ebola has been handled, at least so far, and say it’s been a testimony to the competence of the establishment.
And there are a lot of people who are just — we have a great social segmentation going on. And so there are a lot of people just with no contact with the people like us they see on TV giving them expert opinion about Ebola or anything else, and they just want to wave it away and they just want to pull in and trust the people they trust and that’s local.
And when the national borders seem porous and uncontrolled, they are going to react. And I think that’s a completely legitimate reaction.
The liberal media and the Obama enablers will not tell you the truth, instead you have a New York Times editorial saying: "Starting Monday in six states, and rolled out in other states soon after, travelers who visited [the Ebola region] will be required to report their temperature and any other symptoms to state or local health officials daily for 21 days, the maximum incubation period for the disease to develop. The officials will be responsible for finding and detaining anyone violating these rules."
Are you kidding me? The officials will be responsible for finding these people if they don't call in?
They should be in isolation. If you have direct contact with anyone in the Ebola region, and you come back to the U.S.A., you should be in quarantine for 21 days. Period.
The Times continues: "The new measures surely make unnecessary a harmful ban on all travelers who have been in the three countries."
Sure. Just ask Dr. Spencer, he went through the screening, it did not work. That doesn't matter to the New York Times because the countries involved are poor and largely comprised of Black Africans. That's why the Obama administration and the liberal press do not want a travel ban.
Here's what should be happening: No American airlines go to the Ebola region. None. Charter flights are allowed, but folks on those flights should be isolated for 21 days. You simply can not have self-reporting, it does not work. So the people, military people, diplomats, whoever they might be, have to give up three weeks of their lives when they return from the Ebola region. Otherwise, we're going to have more Ebola cases.
As I discussed here yesterday, of all the unexpected twists and turns of this year's midterm election cycle, nothing has surprised and flummoxed me more as an analyst than the Senate race in Colorado between incumbent Democrat Mark Udall and Republican challenger Rep. Cory Gardner. Sen. Udall held a narrow but persistent lead in the polls all year until early September. Ever since, he has been trailing in virtually every poll, and the trend into October has been getting worse.Bwahahaha!! Boy, I'm sure old Booman's going to have a bang-up election forecast for the midterms!
This has confused me for a couple of reasons. I can't think of anything that Sen. Udall has done to arouse the anger of Coloradans. If he's outspoken about anything, it's government surveillance which I don't think is something that would galvanize any opposition outside of the Intelligence Community.
Senator Mark Uterus https://t.co/odi4dASTwm
— Rosie Gray (@RosieGray) October 8, 2014
People are irrational in their assessment of risks, blah, blah. Yes, we can find here and there examples of Americans overreacting to Ebola. But more in evidence has been media’s own anti-hysteria hysteria. This week a Bloomberg Radio host rudely and repeatedly (and uncharacteristically) hushed a Wall Street analyst for suggesting we still have things to learn about how the virus is transmitted. Guess what? This is true. What’s more the virus is subject to forces of natural selection, so even our broadly reliable generalizations about transmissibility are hardly written in stone.Oh, so it's not irrational to worry about the spread of Ebola? And that's coming from an infectious disease expert? Well, what do you know? I thought No More Mister had laid down the final word about the Ebola hysteria, which is of course that it's all a Republican plot to make President Obola look bad just before the midterms! See, "YOU'LL HAVE TO DO THE PANICKING FOR US, DOUG."
The media, as if citing an iron law, keep telling us that (to use the New York Times formulation) “people infected with Ebola cannot spread the disease until they begin to display symptoms, and it cannot be spread through the air.”
Sorry, each clause of that sentence is subject to caveat, and the whole thought needs to be preceded with the words “government scientists believe . . . .”
Acknowledging these realities is not tantamount to saying an uncontained breakout is likely or possible in the United States. A person deliberately infected and sent among us in an act of bioterrorism wouldn’t be able to infect any sizable number of people given what we know about Ebola. The average American is in far more danger from a ham sandwich or the neighborhood salad bar. Yet much sense was spoken on PBS on Wednesday night by Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University, who said: “I would like not to call it irrational. When people are just learning about something, something that they regard as a threat, and they haven’t integrated all of this information still into their thought process, their sense of anxiety obviously increases.”
Final Score #SFGiants win 11-4, tie the #WorldSeries 2-2
Pence 3-for-5 3 RBI
Sandoval 2-for-5 2 RBI
Petit (W) pic.twitter.com/EL7azDfabA
— #OctoberTogether (@SFGiants) October 26, 2014#sfgiants come back with huge burst of runs, tie Series at 2-2: http://t.co/mb0tyRwwtf
— Henry Schulman (@hankschulman) October 26, 2014Vogelsong and the #SFGiants try to tie up the #WorldSeries in Game 4 at 5 PT. http://t.co/C2cW85bk3j #OctoberTogether pic.twitter.com/gwImxsJoMK
— #OctoberTogether (@SFGiants) October 25, 2014SAN FRANCISCO — Zack Greinke asked out of Kansas City four years ago. He was in the prime of his career. He would not sign a new contract with the Royals because he wanted to win and, as he told anyone who asked, he did not believe the Royals could win.More.
Greinke has taken his talents to the Milwaukee Brewers, to the Angels, and to the Dodgers. He has yet to pitch in the World Series.
And just look at the team he jilted now. The Royals are halfway to the World Series championship.
Alcides Escobar, one of the players the Royals acquired for Greinke, got two hits and scored two runs Friday. Lorenzo Cain, another of the players in the trade, drove in a run and made two splendid catches in right field. And Kansas City got four hitless innings out of its splendid bullpen to close out a 3-2 victory over the San Francisco Giants in Game 3 of the World Series.
The Royals lead the Series, two games to one. The record of the largely anonymous underdog Kansas City squad this postseason: 10-1.
"There's no intimidation on this team," Cain said. "No one's intimidated. It's just a baseball game."
The only pitcher to beat the Royals in the postseason: Giants ace Madison Bumgarner. Although another loss would put the Giants on the verge of elimination, Manager Bruce Bochy said he would stick with Ryan Vogelsong for Game 4 — even though Bumgarner said he would be willing to start on short rest.
"It's not like he pushed real hard," Bochy said.
The scarred, leather-faced tank commander, Don “Wardaddy” Collier (an aggressively deglamorized Brad Pitt), butchers a solitary German officer rather than take him prisoner [in the opening scene]. A short time later, he not only decides to shoot an SS man who surrenders to him, but he forces — in an excruciatingly prolonged scene — a jittery clerk-typist, Private Norman Ellison (Logan Lerman), to pull the trigger. “Don’t make me do this!” weeps Ellison as Collier slaps him and wrestles him into position to fire a bullet into the head of a man who has pulled out photos of his wife and children and is begging for his life. And then — blam!"Weeps Ellison." OMG terrible. Just terrible!
Here’s the long and short of it: Fury is probably the best Hollywood WW2 movie since “Saving Private Ryan.” It has courage. It has heart. It is intentionally upsetting. It has unrelenting battle scenes that will have you on the edge of your seat and more than slightly repulsed at the carnage. It has an underlying message of resistance to evil, devotion to faith and ethics that viewers can accept or ignore. The film works as Grand Guignol just as well as it works as a religious statement.Word, brother. Mother f-king Word.
Fury left me deeply moved and more admiring than ever of the Greatest Generation. More than anything, it left me shaking my head about the nation we have become, and how we became such a pale imitation of what we once were.
The fact is, there are no “lone wolves” in the global jihad.
For months, the White House has insisted that President Obama would do all he could to help his party in the midterm election. Now that he’s started, some Democrats wonder whether he could help a little bit less.Ah, far-left Sturm und Drang --- you gotta love it!
In a rocky return to the campaign trail, Obama has served up campaign fodder for Republican opponents in a formal speech and in an off-the-cuff interview. He’s been heckled by immigration activists angry about his decision to delay executive action on deportation. On Sunday, he watched a chunk of his audience head for the exits — apparently to avoid traffic — before the end of his stump speech.
The slip-ups have even extended to the usually disciplined first lady, who campaigned in Iowa for Senate candidate Bruce Braley but repeatedly called the congressman by the wrong last name. After she went back Tuesday for a do-over, a White House news release got Braley’s name right but his title wrong.
Democrats have witnessed the performances, cringed and complained, offering a preview of the finger-pointing that might come if the party fares poorly in the Nov. 4 election.
“It doesn’t open up a new line of attack, but it freshens one right as voters are tuning in,” said a campaign advisor, one of several Democrats who would not be quoted by name while discussing the president’s effect on elections.
The focus of much of their frustration has been Obama’s off-message comments, which undermined a key strategy for many Democratic candidates — to distance themselves from the unpopular president.
Several Democratic strategists and campaign advisors noted Obama’s blunders were minor problems compared with the drag his sunken approval rating is putting on their candidates.
Still, they saw in the missteps a window into a president’s mind-set and his political operation. They blamed a White House political team disconnected from the tough realities of campaigning and a president better at selling himself than his party...
Retracing the steps of the New York Ebola patient http://t.co/rMlqr5PVtg pic.twitter.com/ga1JviBp9p
— The New York Times (@nytimes) October 25, 2014@ChrisCoon4 @AmPowerBlog David Perdue he is my vote. I ain't voting for no Fugly shemail Obama loving Democrat
— Thomas Kayler (@KCSI_RW) October 25, 2014Disenchantment among millennial voters is the latest worry for Democrats fighting to hold their Senate majority.Well, Republicans shouldn't get cocky. It's a pox on both houses, as far as I'm concerned. But the fault lies with young voters themselves.
Young voters rallied to President Obama’s side when he first ran for the White House in 2008, and then defied predictions that their enthusiasm would drop off in 2012.
But there is no guarantee they will turn out for Democrats at the polls next month.
Plagued by unemployment and economic anxiety, 18- to 34-year-olds feel a sense of disappointment in the party it helped boost in previous elections, political observers say.
Jim Manley, a Democratic strategist and former spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), said the promise of “hope and change millennials invested in has hit a brick wall.”
Manley said that this in turn has made young voters “very cynical about the political process and less likely to vote than they had in the past.”
Julian Zelizer, a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University, agreed that winning over young voters is an issue for Democrats.
“Obama in 2008 had been successful at exciting millennials about political institutions they distrusted and giving them faith in an economy that really wasn’t delivering on the American dream,” Zelizer said.
Since then, Zelizer added, Obama “seems like politics as normal while the economy continues to crawl.”
“Democrats have failed to really lock in their support,” he said.
A poll released earlier this year showed a significant decline in the number of Democratic-leaning millennials who planned to vote in the midterm elections.
The survey, conducted by Harvard University’s Institute of Politics, found that young voters are increasingly turned off by the political environment.
It revealed that a mere 23 percent of Democratic-leaning millennials said they would vote in the midterm elections. That was down from the 31 percent who said they would vote in the 2010 midterm elections. (Only 24 percent actually showed up at the polls that year.)
At the same time, the poll indicated that 32 percent of conservative-leaning millennials said they would vote in the election.
“We’ve seen a growing disenchantment with Democrats generally,” John Della Volpe, director of polling at the Institute of Politics, said in an interview.
While millennials were an important part of the Democratic coalition in recent election cycles, that same coalition appeared to be “fractured” now — something that should concern Democrats, Della Volpe said.
Sensing a weakness, Republicans have pounced...
Alamosa, Colo.More.
The political class is so focused on what Democrats may lose Nov. 4 that it has largely missed what the party already has lost. So much for the much-vaunted “Colorado Model.”
Nothing has buoyed the progressive left more in recent years than a self-satisfied belief in that blueprint, Exhibit A in their promise of a new Democratic majority. The party poured money into the Centennial State, building an activist infrastructure honed to outspend and attack Republican candidates. These messages were aimed at what was described as an ascendant coalition of liberal whites moving to the state, and minorities—who would join to keep Colorado blue for decades.
It seemed to be working. Democrats, beginning in 2004, would ultimately take from Republicans the state legislature, the governorship, both U.S. Senate seats, key House districts and a variety of statewide offices. The media pronounced a new Democratic dominance of the Mountain West, and the left promised exportation of its model far and wide.
Or not. If Colorado is serving as a model for anything these days, it’s the risks of Democratic overreach. Sen. Mark Udall has trailed GOP Rep. Cory Gardner in every poll since September. Gov. John Hickenlooper is trailing Republican Bob Beauprez in poll averages. Republicans are poised to take back the state Senate. Democrats recently pulled funding from the only Colorado U.S. House seat they had targeted, that of GOP Rep. Mike Coffman.
The party’s biggest mistake was thinking its recent electoral victories—based largely on a superior campaign game—translated into a mandate for liberal governance. Colorado long has been, and remains, a pragmatic state. It’s a place that for decades gave Republicans the state legislature and Democrats the governor’s mansion. It loves its political independents, folks like former Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell, who it elected in 1992 as a Democrat and re-elected in 1998 by an even bigger margin as a Republican.
No surprise, the state hasn’t appreciated Mr. Obama’s ideological agenda. Some 22,000 residents just found out they’re losing health insurance; some 200,000 more face cancellations next year. Residents are worried about Ebola and the terror threat, frustrated by falling incomes, disturbed by Washington scandals. The president’s approval rating—in supposedly liberal-ascendant Colorado—is 40%...
