That God Would Be So Good

HotAir alerts us to the following Twitter feed from Nancy Pelosi:

Driven by the urgency of creating jobs & protecting #hcr, #wsr, Social Security & Medicare, I am running for Dem Leader.

I hope she wins. Republicans need to plaster this picture on every billboard in America for 2012. Harry Reid would be enough of an albatross for Obama, but this would be perfect.

Unintended irony.

P.S. I believe that #hcr = health care reform and #wsr = Wall Street reform.

Weekend Music Chill

This goes out to some of our friends who are feeling a little out of sorts over Tuesday's results here in California.

Winning Hispanics

It has been widely reported that Harry Reid's victory was due in large measure to high Hispanic turnout that went 90% Democrat. Even if that is an exaggeration, that Hispanics seem to favor Democrats in the west is an impediment to Republicans ever having a chance in California.

My fellow SLOB, Sarah Bond, has said that we need to reach out to Hispanics and I agree. But we have to get the border actually secured as a prerequisite. This may sound counter-intuitive, but doing so takes the anti-illegal issue off the table. Hispanics wrongly believe that it is a symptom of racism in the Republican party, even though it is a reflection of the desire for the rule of law. But if the border were actually secured, we could lead the fight for a fair and comprehensive reform of immigration. This would give the lie to the racism argument. Hispanics, who don’t seems particularly enamored of Democrat positions on abortion, gay marriage and burdening small businesses would move to the GOP in sufficient numbers to totally wreck the Democrat coalition.

Comprehensive reform is needed, failure to deliver if we do secure the border would be a big mistake, but securing the border is the necessary down payment to earn the public trust.

More on that U-T Poll

The U-T poll on Proposition D, reported on October 23rd, has come under heavy criticism for its methodology. At the time, I thought we had a good chance based on the flawed methodology:

• The survey is of registered voters, not likely voters. My belief is that Tea Party energy makes the No's more likely to vote.


• Some of those interviewed were considered reluctant supporters, who didn't trust politicians to carry out the reforms.

The polling company's president and the U-T editor disingenuously stated that the poll wasn't meant to be predictive. My rear! Why would one go to the bother. Anyway, when you look at polls, you have to consider if the pollsters are asking likely voters and what their turnout model is.

Exit question, was the U-T shilling for the proposition, releasing a poll whose method was knowingly flawed, to generate momentum for Prop D?

More Proof That This City Council Can't Be Trusted

One of the successful arguments against Proposition D was that we couldn't trust this city council and mayor to deliver on their promises to reform city government. The day after Prop D went down to defeat, Todd Gloria introduced legislation to ban Walmart Supercenters in San Diego. And the Democrats on the City Council mimic the underhanded methods used by their fellow partisans in Congress in passing Obamacare. From the U-T (the whole editorial is worth a read):

But if it is so benign, why did Gloria and his City Council allies put the measure on a fast track with few if any precedents? Why did they ignore complaints from members of the Planning Commission that the rushed process didn’t allow for a proper vetting of the proposal? And why did Council President Ben Hueso already schedule a vote early next month to override Mayor Jerry Sanders’ expected veto of the ordinance just before Hueso and another council Democrat, Donna Frye, depart office?

So what's the damage from Walmart Supercenters? The real answer is that they threaten the one area where private sector unions still hold sway, grocery stores. The alleged reason is that they destroy small businesses. And how do they do that? By offering lower prices than their competitors. So let me get this straight, when the federal government negotiates lower prices on drugs for medicare patients, buying from the low cost provider, that's good. When you want lower prices on groceries and go to WalMart, that's bad? Why? Because you are a selfish racist, but the federal government is only filled with noble purpose, dedicated to helping others. Get it? This is the narrative the left always uses. If the government is helping people, its all good. But people helping themselves? Clearly evil.

If this passes, who is up for a proposition to overturn this law?

Best Campaign?

Over at DailyKos, brooklynbadboy is crowing over the way that Harry Reid won the Senate race over Sharon Angle.

The best campaign this cycle, as many pundits are noting, was run by Senator Harry Reid. He was always confident of victory. He never once backed away from anything he did. He stood his ground and stuck with his president. Most importantly, he turned to his base the old-fashioned way and used political tactics straight out of the old-school Democratic Boss playbook. . . . Reid's frontal assault on GOP racism isn't textbook DLC "be like a Republican" stuff or even textbook Obama "let's all get along" stuff. It is old school, hardball, walkin-around money, ward boss "whose side are you on?" kill-the-enemy Democratic politics. I love it. God help me, I love it.

That's the way they want to play, we have to energize the American people and give them candidates who don't give the opposition any openings, I'm thinking Marco Rubio here. Hope and change from the Dems? That's so 2008, we're about raw power politics now, baby.

My Favorite Result from Last Night

PROP D-CITY OF SAN DIEGO Temp. One-Half Cent Sales Tax

NO
160,154
62.05%

YES
97950
37.95%

Message to pols: We don't trust you, get to work and earn our trust.

What was up with the U-T poll calling it a dead heat? Did the desired results skew the actual results for their polling firm? That much of a difference is not explained by mere anomolies of polling.

Congratulations to Lorie Zapf

The results this morning from the San Diego Country Registrar of Voters showed Lorie Zapf winning with 52.45% of the vote and all precincts reporting. I am sure there are more absentee and provisional ballots to be counted, but her current lead of about 1,500 should hold up. Although I endorsed her, I had been critical of her campaign. I have to give her credit for the last minute blitz of mailers, calls and advertising, including internet advertising, that painted her opponent as a tool of the government labor unions. I was very concerned at the end as I saw many more Howard Wayne lawn signs and the negative coverage that she received in the City Beat and other local news outlets.

Hopefully, she can join Carl DeMaio and Kevin Faulconer as voices of reason on the City Council and start by outsourcing jobs under managed competition.

No Election Night Blogging

It's going to take a while to digest the results of tonight's election. The overall results seem too close to predicted, so I am not sure what I can add. Further, there are reasons to believe that tonight's results is just round 2 in a 15 round heavyweight bout expected to go to the final bell, round 1 being the primaries that purged a number of elitist Republicans.

But what have we won? Certainly, we will bring the Obama agenda to a halt, but how much can be undone? There are signs that the Tea Party candidates may not have the stomach to deal with Medicare and Social Security, for example:

For starters, polls by the New York Times and Bloomberg have found that although a vast majority of Tea Party supporters favor smaller government, they don’t want cuts in their Medicare or Social Security. . .
Literally all of the others are equivocating if not completely backing off from their original plans to give at least partial ownership of Medicare and Social Security to individuals themselves—the only realistic way of limiting the government’s liabilities without completely screwing over future seniors or taxpayers or the economy.

The whole article has some flaws, but we need to take seriously the need to deal with entitlements in a way that is fair to both current retirees without totally screwing future generations. If we in the Tea Party don't find a way to deal with this issue, then the political class will reach for tax increases to solve these problems.

Fortunately, there are some easy things to do first. If the newly elected Republicans don't do the easy stuff now, then we need to hold their feet to the fire and threaten to give them the boot in 2012.

My previous nominations for the easy button:

• End all stimulus spending. Return all unspent funds to the Treasury.
• End all TARP spending. Return all unspent funds to the Treasury.
• Freeze the pay of federal workers, since the CPI stayed flat last year, so too should have federal pay, but it went up. (Full disclosure, I work for the federal government.)
  
• De-Fund all of the committees, czars and regulatory boards for Obamacare.
• De-fund the Department of Education, for starters, since it doesn't educate anyone.

The President Retracts, Does not Apologize

I chided the President for suggesting that one group of Americans, Latinos, should consider another group of Americans, Republicans, their enemies. As I stated, we are all Americans, we are not each others enemies. Today the President retracted his use of the word:

Obama, in an interview with talk radio host Michael Baisden, said, "I probably should have used the word 'opponents' instead of enemies."

I agree that he should have used different words, but note that he does not apologize. It is another example that shows that he is unfit to lead. He does not understand that his party was not given a blank check for four years, that working with the opposite party can bring great rewards, think Reagan and Rostenkowski on taxes.

"I don't want the folks who created this mess to do a lot of talking," he tells Republicans to basically shut up. He invites McCain and others to the White House to talk over health care and won't listen, tough I won. He doesn't understand that he is President of all the people and needs to listen. He listens Ahmadinejad more than he listens to fellow citizens who happen to be Republican. His agenda needs to be defeated and he should be made a one term President, like his Democratic predecessors Jimmy Carter and James Buchanan. He displays an understanding of politics rooted in tribalism that doesn't believe that we are first and foremost Americans. His slips of the tongue are revealing, and what they reveal is a man not fit to lead.

John Boehner gets it right when he says:

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a president in the White House who referred to Americans who disagree with him as ‘our enemies.' Think about that. He actually used that word. When Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush used the word ‘enemy,' they reserved it for global terrorists and foreign dictators -- enemies of the United States. Enemies of freedom. Enemies of our country. Today, sadly, we have president who uses the word ‘enemy' for fellow Americans -- fellow citizens. He uses it for people who disagree with his agenda of bigger government -- people speaking out for a smaller, more accountable government that respects freedom and allows small businesses to create jobs. Mr. President, there's a word for people who have the audacity to speak up in defense of freedom, the Constitution, and the values of limited government that made our country great. We don't call them ‘enemies.' We call them ‘patriots.'

Organizing for America Reminded Me to Vote

I signed up for Organizing for America because I think the Coffee Party people gave them my BDaddy email. In an earlier poll, they asked me why I was going to vote and I replied. Today, I received an email reminding me to do so (click for larger image):



Good marks for automation, bad marks for vetting content.

By the way, I already voted.

Preparing to Govern

The Tea Party has already shaped the political agenda of the next Congress and achieved impressive victories. Some quotes from this weekend's The Economist:

Whether they have worked hard enough they will not know until votes are counted after next week’s mid-terms, but in one way their labours have already borne fruit. In primaries all over the country they have secured the election of Republican candidates who are “true” conservatives, not the big-spending counterfeit Republicans whom they blame for leading the party astray under George Bush.

The article goes on to compare the American Tea Party protests to those in France, and quite favorably to our side, I might add. But the article ends up asking some challenging questions that we need to be ready to answer.

Not French, not fabricated and not as flaky as their detractors aver: these are the positives. Another one: in how many other countries would a powerful populist movement demand less of government, rather than endlessly and expensively more? Much of what is exceptional about America is its ideology of small government, free enterprise and self reliance. If that is what the tea-party movement is for, more power to its elbow.

Can they be serious?

Ideology is one thing. But if the tea-partiers do well next week, especially if the Republicans capture the House, they need to move past ideology into the realm of practical policy. This means having something serious to say about how actually to bring spending under control.

The early agenda will be easy, as I have previously discussed. Ending stimulus, returning unused porkulus to the treasury and repealing Obamacare are the easy pieces of the work ahead. But this will only bring the deficits to the levels of the last years of the Bush administration, when Democrats controlled the Congress. What else is to be done?

I have some suggestions that I hope to roll out in subsequent posts. A quick synopsis of a couple ideas follow:

1. Tie the doctor fix to repealing a portion of Obamacare. If the Democrats want to renege on the budget estimates they used to pass Obamacare, they should have to pay the price for defunding the exact portion of Obamacare needed to fund doctors to appropriate compensation levels under Medicare.
2. Save social security. This doesn't sound very Tea Party, but I have a long term plan. We need to shrink the reliance on social security both in percentage terms as part of an individuals portfolio and by reducing the numbers who depend on it for their primary income.
   
3. Defund huge and useless portions of the budget that also funnel money to left wing causes. Start with the Department of Education.
   

More to follow.

Weekend Music Chill

It's Halloween Weekend and the last weekend before the election. See picture below for someone who get scarier every week. Our weekend's music is David Bowie singing his Halloween classic "Scary Monsters" but introduced in French.

Referendum on Obama

No Mr. President, it's we who should be angry with you. We are all Americans, we are not each others enemies.

Let me be clear, this election is a referendum on the Presidency of Barack Obama. From the Hill, Looming anti-Obama mid-term vote may not carry through to 2012:

Seventy percent of respondents in The Hill’s latest survey of 10 battleground districts said their feelings about President Obama will play an important role in how they vote on Nov. 2.

From The Economist, Obama and the Mid-Terms, How did it come to this?

At his swearing-in in 2009, the Democrats enjoyed comfortable majorities in the House and the Senate and Mr Obama himself basked in a worldwide sunshower of goodwill. Pundits started to wonder whether the defeated Republicans had been smashed for a generation. How is it possible, just 21 months later, that the Democrats are expecting a thrashing next week and the Republicans look poised to take control of the House of Representatives, and maybe even the Senate?

Both linked articles say that the public blames him for moving too far to the left on health care, especially, and ignoring the economy. He's reputedly a smart guy, so why did he ignore the economy and focus on health care? Because he is ultimately ideologically driven in a way that is incompatible with a free market. This has led him to make policy errors that the public understands. I believe that the internet has allowed understanding of free market economics to spread in the public. The same anger that gave rise to the nascent Tea Party even before George Bush had left office is now channeled at Obama's policies. It has nothing to do with racism, and everything to do with policies that are antithetical to American traditions of free markets and Obama's ignorance of basic economic principles. (The link is to a nice history of the origins of the Tea Party movement in today's WSJ. I would love to hear what Dawn, Leslie or Sarah think.)

People knew instinctively that politics as usual had failed them when they elected Barack Obama in 2008. The Republicans had cast away all principle and the Democrats were already starting to ratchet up the spending through their control of the Congress. Obama promised tax cuts and a change to the culture of corruption of Washington DC. Instead he delivered more deficit spending, which the public understands will mean tax hikes down the road. He also delivered a health care bill characterized by give-aways to special interests, corrupt back room deals and soaring insurance costs for the average American. He demonstrated that he cared not one whit about their concerns which center around getting the economy, so that people can go back to work and small businesses can make a profit. For these reasons, I propose voting Republican, for the most part (not you Abel Maldonado), to send a stinging rebuke to a President who failed to deliver on his promises and a Congress that also violated its promises concerning ethics and deficits.

Lost in all the Hubbub - Unemployment vs. Deficits

Little notice facts about unemployment and the deficit, Mr. Krugman, take note. Germany's unemployment rate fell to an 18 year low, in spite of, no, because of a budget deficit that is a paltry 4.39% of GDP.

Some interesting comparisons:



Note how high deficits do not seem to be correlated with preventing unemployment. Some of the nations most similar to the U.S. that have the lowest deficits also have the lowest unemployment rate. I'll be asking Mr. Krugman for a nomination for that prize.

Exit question: Which party is advocating more and larger deficits? This is all you need to know to vote Republican.

Projected U.S. Budget Deficits Under Obama

Tea Party Ballot Recommendations Recap - Propositions and Candidates

Since many of you are voting by mail right now, I am providing a convenient summary of unofficial Tea Party ballot recommendations with links to more detail. Please get your votes in soon. It won't be enough for us to win, we have to win by more than the margin of fraud.

California Propositions

Prop 19 - Yes* (Marijuana Decriminalized)
Prop 20 - Yes (Resdistricting commission)
Prop 21 - No (Vehicle License fee for parks)
Prop 22 - No (Transport and other tricky provisions)
Prop 23 - YES, Heck Yes (Suspend Cap and Trade)
Prop 24 - No (Repeal of Tax changes)
Prop 25 - No, Heck No (Legislative majority on budget)
Prop 26 - Yes (Supermajority for new taxes and fees)
Prop 27 - No (Eliminate redistricting commission)

*B-Daddy and SoCalTaxRevolt not agreeing on this one.


San Diego Propositions

Prop A - Yes (Prohibit County project labor agreements)
Prop B - Yes (City Attorneys like civil servants) (my weakest recommendation)
Prop C - Yes (Pacific Highlands Ranch development)
Prop D - NO, Heck NO (Half Cent Sales Tax)
Prop J - No (Parcel tax increase for schrools)

Richard Rider adds:

Prop G - Yes (Citizen vote to raise pensions) Carlsbad
Prop H - No (Raise phone tax) Chula Vista
Prop K - No (School bond) San Marcos
Prop L - No (School bond) Julian
Prop M - No (School bond) Dehesa
Prop O - No (School parcel tax) South Bay
Prop P - No (School bond) Encinitas


California Statewide Office (This is more from W.C. Varones than me, I note my changes with asterisks*.)

Governor - Meg Whitman* (She made the right enemy: SEIU)
Lt Gov - Karen England (Write In)
Senator - Carly Fiorina
Secretary of State - Damon Dunn
Controller - Tony Strickland
Treasurer - Mimi Walters
Attorny Gen - Steve Cooley
Insurance Commissioner - Dave Jones (Perhaps only Dem I have ever endorsed.)


San Diego Candidates:

City Council District 6 - Lorie Zapf (Not a great campaign, but unions are heavy for Wayne)

San Diego School Board - Steve Rosen (only candidate opposing Prop J)


I realize that this isn't every race, but I don't have more to say, and "better is the enemy of good enough."

Speculation About the Birth Certificate and Other Scandals

Let me be clear, our President was born in Hawaii, but there is still something amiss with his birth certificate. This link to Hillbuzz is for longtime reader and commenter Road Dawg, who complains occasionally about this issue. It's possible that the President is an American citizen by birth, but is still hiding something or things. See Hillbuzz for heaps of gory speculation. It is so speculative that I hesitate to link, but it also makes too much sense.

The one set of quotes that does not seem speculative, merely observational:

He married a crass, stereotypical, big-bottomed black woman name Michelle LaVaughn Robinson whose family was not only part of the Daley Machine, but was close with Jesse Jackson. At every step of the way, Obama cultivated as many ties as possible to black leaders so that he would not be seen as an outsider. Michelle’s crassness was the most important aspect of all this — her abrasiveness and scowling, grievance-driven demeanor, when carried on his arm, made Obama seem “Southside black” in her company.

U-T Endorses Proposition D - But Not Enthusiastically

Today's U-T editorial headline was "Prop D's Advocates Must Step Up Their Game" as if it is lack of game that has the electorate doubting the efficacy of handing over $100 million more in taxes in return for promises from politicians. The editorial makes the case for why these guys can't be trusted:

The mayor worked with Assemblyman Nathan Fletcher, R-San Diego, to get the Legislature to pass with zero scrutiny or public debate a bill lifting the limit on how much property tax revenue the city could divert to downtown redevelopment, possibly clearing the way for a new Chargers stadium.
. . .
The same holds for the City Council’s moves to block Walmart from selling groceries despite warnings from planning commissioners that it was acting hastily and without following normal procedures.

Hmm . . . violating procedures, cutting back room deals, rewarding your labor union supporters. And we're just supposed to hand over our hard earned cash to these jokers on their promise that they'll certify they have met specific conditions? As I quoted earlier:

Sanders acknowledged the financial thresholds in the resolution aren’t binding legally.

Yes, the same mayor urging you to vote yes on D.

Here's the deal with this election. The political class in this country has broken faith with the people. They have rewarded government labor unions with sweetheart salaries and pensions, they have refused to enforce the borders, they have spent your grandkid's and great-grandkid's money. Kick those bums out. Don't give them another cent until they take action on behalf of "we the people." That is why I am voting No on D, why I support Lorie Zapf over Howard Wayne, and even Christine O'Donnell, who lacks a compelling record of achievement. Anyone who has sided with the political class or government employees' unions such as the supporters of Proposition D, Howard Wayne or Chris Coons does not deserve office. It's our country, these people asked for our trust and rewarded it with treachery, throw them out or keep them out of office.

The Perfect Closing Argument - UPDATE

P.J. O'Rourke makes the perfect closing argument this election season as to why one should vote Republican, and surprise, it's not because Republicans are so worthy of our love and devotion, because they aren't. Please allow this little rant. They ran up deficits and expanded government power through Medicare Part D and extra-legal of the prosecution of the war on terror. They invented TARP and the first bailouts. They took the public good will over the war on terror and used it feather their own nests and further their own power. They caved on free trade. Their total incompetence made the supermajorities that Obama enjoyed, the vehicle on which the largest power grab in American history was transported. They sucked eggs and deserved to be thrown out of office for the bums they were.

So after that resounding endorsement, why should we vote for "dese bums?" 'Casue dose uddah bums are worser. As P.J. O'Rourke points out in his inimitable style, Democrats hate you:

Democrats hate Democrats most of all. Witness the policies that Democrats have inflicted on their core constituencies, resulting in vile schools, lawless slums, economic stagnation, and social immobility. Democrats will do anything to make sure that Democratic voters stay helpless and hopeless enough to vote for Democrats.

. . .

Democrats hate immigrants. Immigrants can’t stay illegal because illegality puts immigrants outside the legal monopoly on force. But immigrants can’t become legal either. They’d prosper and vote Republican.

Democrats hate America being a world power because world power gives power to the nation instead of to Democrats.

And Democrats hate the military, of course. Soldiers set a bad example. Here are men and women who possess what, if they chose, could be complete control over power. Yet they treat power with honor and respect. Members of the armed forces fight not to seize power for themselves but to ensure that power can bestow its favors upon all Americans.

This is not an election on November 2. This is a restraining order. Power has been trapped, abused and exploited by Democrats. Go to the ballot box and put an end to this abusive relationship. And let’s not hear any nonsense about letting the Democrats off if they promise to get counseling.

The whole article is worth a read. My closing argument? Nancy Pelosi makes my case for me:



UPDATE

Ed Koch, former Democrat Mayor of New York, must be channeling P.J. as he predicts a Republican tsunami because of Democrat ineptitude. He says that if the Republicans had any decent leadership it would have been worse. Worse? Just read the article.

Close Vote on Proposition D

Today's U-T reports that the survey it commissioned shows the vote on Proposition D, the half cent sales tax increase, is a very tight contest. Unlike Proposition J, this only needs a 50% vote to pass. That's actually all of the bad news, because I see quite a bit of good news in the survey.

• The survey shows that the more people know about the proposition the less likely they are to vote for it.


• The survey is of registered voters, not likely voters. My belief is that Tea Party energy makes the No's more likely to vote.


• Some of those interviewed were considered reluctant supporters, who didn't trust politicians to carry out the reforms.

This last bullet reinforces my point that the best way to argue against this proposition is to demand that the politicians first keep their promises to us and pass all of the reforms that are purportedly part of the package before we give them more money. For all the reasons to vote No, please see the No on D website, and get a yard sign or donate.


Graphic courtesy of San Diego Union-Tribune.