Thursday - January 27, 2011
Oh Look
The 1954 Supreme Court decision on Brown v. Topeka Board of Education ruled that “Separate But Equal” schools aren’t. This led the way to de-segregation, and was one of the key decisions that kicked the Civil Rights Movement into high gear.
Here’s a map from Wikipedia:
Golly, that division looks pretty familiar doesn’t it? It almost looks like
from 90 years before. Note that California and Oregon were also part of the Union, and that Oklahoma was not actually a state until 1907. Also see here and here for maps of the CSA that show how Missouri, Kentucky, and the Indian Territories (Oklahoma) were claimed by the Confederacy, along with the southern halves of the Arizona and New Mexico territories. If you consider those “border states” as “indecisive” or “mixed opinion”, then the relationship from back then to the 1954 realities of segregation are quite stunning. Don’t forget that Kansas was an actual battleground over abolition even before the war started.
It would take perhaps an hour to make another map or two, circa 1964; one would show states that historically were Democrat controlled at that point, the other one would show how that state voted on the Civil Rights Acts. I’d bet you’d have at least 80% congruence.
All of this history ... and just last year the Republican Party had a black guy as chairman who said that he couldn’t find a single reason why any black person would vote for his party. Unreal.
Posted by Drew458
on 01/27/2011 at 09:47 AM
Filed Under: • History • Politics • Racism and race relations •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Friday - January 14, 2011
sic semper tyrannis?
A few hours ago:
Tunisian President Zine al-Abedine Ben Ali fired his government and called an early parliamentary election on Friday in an increasingly frantic effort to quell the worst unrest in his two decades in power.
Authorities declared a state of emergency and an overnight curfew. Gatherings of more than three people were banned and state television warned that “arms will be used” if the orders of the security forces are not obeyed.
The announcements came as police fired teargas and gunshots rang out to disperse crowds in central Tunis demanding the veteran ruler’s immediate resignation despite his promise on Thursday to step down in 2014.
Medical sources and a witness said 12 more people were killed in overnight clashes in the capital and the northeastern town of Ras Jebel.
Before the latest deaths emerged, the official death toll in almost a month of violence was 23, while the Paris-based International Federation for Human Rights said it had a list of at least 66 people killed.
The 74-year-old president announced in a television address on Thursday evening that he would not seek a sixth term as expected in 2014, following a month of violent protests against unemployment, repression and corruption.
While Tunisia’s problems are shared by other countries in the region, the latest unrest was sparked when police prevented an unemployed graduate from selling fruit without a license and he set fire to himself, dying shortly afterwards of his burns.
In power since 1987, Ben Ali made sweeping concessions, saying security forces would no longer use live ammunition against protesters and promising freedom of the press and an end to Internet censorship. He also said the prices of sugar, milk and bread would be cut.
On Friday, state television flashed the announcement: “The president has decided to dismiss the government and to hold legislative elections within six months.” It gave no details.
But protests continued in the capital and other cities on Friday. Around 8,000 people rallied outside the interior ministry in central Tunis, chanting “Ben Ali, leave!” and “Ben Ali, assassin!”
After police fired teargas and wielded their truncheons, crowds of youths retreated a little way from the building and started throwing stones at the police, who responded with more tear gas grenades. Reporters also heard gunfire nearby.
Minutes ago:
Tunisian president flees; PM announces he’s taking over
After declaring state of emergency and dismissing entire government, Ben Ali reportedly in France; military closes Tunisian airspace.
Speaking at a press conference Friday, Tunisian Prime Minister Mohammed Ghannouchi said that the country’s president, Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, had fled the country, reportedly to France. The prime minister added that he was taking over the government.Following the president’s departure, the Tunisian army seized the airport and closed Tunisian airspace to all traffic.
Tunisia is where Carthage was. It is a small country on the north shore of Africa, west of Libya, east of Algeria, due south of Sardinia, and south west of Sicily. According to Wikipedia:
Today Tunisia has an authoritarian regime. It is an export-oriented country, in the process of liberalizing and privatizing its economy but has rife corruption benefiting the president’s family. The country operates as a nominal republic under the leadership of President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali who has governed since 1987. The Tunisian economy has averaged 5% GDP growth since the early 1990s. A popular revolution is currently underway.
So let’s see if this revolution gets as far as democracy and capitalism, or if this is another more example of one tinpot dictator replacing another. Tunisia has been an ally in the GWOT so far. No word on whether the insurrection / popular revolution is a call for another islamic republic.
Tunisia is an oil exporting nation, along with fertilizer and some manufacturing. They are one of the most productive nations in Africa, eclipsing Greece, Italy, and Portugal in terms of economic competitiveness, and a 2009 per capita GDP of over $8250.
Liveblog of the situation in Tunisia can be found here, and Al Jazeera is covering this fully. Oh, if only Fox News had an African American subdivision!
Posted by Drew458
on 01/14/2011 at 01:01 PM
Filed Under: • Africa • FREEDOM • Politics •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Can We Just Lay This To Rest Now Please?
Merciful God in Heaven I am so unbelievably sick and tired of the never ending 24-7 claptrap over the politicization of the murderous rampage in Tucson. But it is still going on, even after Fearless Reader told everyone to stop it - his remarks coming at a rather disgusting memorial service that was as much a pep rally for the Left and a campaign kick-off point for him. Yes, he called out for a halt to all the crap, but only after his minions played the game for a week and then found that they were getting their asses kicked. But it’s still going on. I can’t take it anymore. But if you can, if you really thrive on this merde, here are several more links:
Michelle Malkin points out that this is the Nth time that this kind of false attribution has been made against Conservatives. Because none of us have cottoned to the fact that the “Blame Bush” meme is total crap.
David Harsanyi gets to print many column inches on the “blood libel” garbage because he is Jewish. I agree with him, but I hate to see the “Cindy Sheehan High Moral Authority” Card played by anyone, Right or Left. The comments there are full-tilt insane, showing that the lunatic Left has not given one inch on this one, no matter how many times it has been shown that they don’t have a leg to stand on. This is not going away. We are a nation of crazy people.
Diana West tries to find common ground by castigating both sides. Nice try, D, but you’re wrong. But you are right to fight the Big Lie.
In the end, though, what’s worse than the Big Lie itself is the failure to reject and expose it—the failure, in this case, to identity the lie as a naked influence operation to mute conservative political expression. This failure is the crime Republicans are guilty of each time they stoop to defend themselves within the phony terms of the lie itself.
When House Speaker John Boehner canceled all House votes this week, including the all-important first round on repealing Obamacare, the message was: Yes, maybe there is a bona fide link between congressional debate in Washington and the internal monologue that drove a man to kill in Tuscon. Sarah Palin, too, protested way too much in her response to the Left’s “blood libel” against her. It’s not a civics lesson that’s required to bring the Left to “reason.” Where there are no facts, there is no reason, and any painstakingly logical arguments against disreputable falsehoods only further extend the charade.
A great unmasking is what’s needed here. Having twisted an unspeakable crime into a gag for their opposition, the Left must be called out, and it’s the job of the Right to do it. Otherwise, as with every Big Lie, silence turns everyone into a Big Liar.
Armstrong Williams notes that the media’s Fear Machine amped up this entire situation. No kidding. They don’t report news; they only feed the Machine. Yeah, the blogosphere did too, but let’s face the fact that the blog world is a small fringe group at best. MSM reaches billions.
And these are the voices of reason. My advice is to just turn it off. Watch the weather, get your local traffic reports, and that’s it. If you have to keep abreast of world events - because, believe it or not, there is a whole planet out there, doing stuff every hour of every day!! - then watch some international news program like BBC World News.
Let the dead lie in peace. Pray for the wounded to recover. And that’s it. No, it isn’t. I wish that it was. The truth is that the New Conservative Movement will NOT turn the other cheek. We will fight back against every false claim and fraudulent maneuver played against us. And keep fighting until victory is won. To do anything else is to let the Big Lie live. The days of “ignore them and they’ll go away” are over.
But I am so tired of this.
Posted by Drew458
on 01/14/2011 at 11:06 AM
Filed Under: • Politics •
• Comments (5)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Wednesday - January 12, 2011
america’s newest best friend. one frenchman, as president obama shoots us in the diplomatic foot.
Hardly know where to begin.
OK, President Sarko of France is very pro American. He really likes us. I’m not certain about his wife, but he does like America. So I guess President Obama had to be kind, and why not? Thing is, I’m not too certain Sarko speaks for most French ppl with regard to the USA. Please don’t read anything sinister in that remark. I have no certain way of knowing. Hell, I’ve only ever spent two days in France so I’m not to be relied upon on that score. Actually, I’ve always had this gut feeling that the French don’t like the French too much either, it’s just that they dislike foreigners more.
On the plus side and only according to what I have read, lots of Brits who have left these shores for La Belle France are happier there. They write back in glowing terms about France. And one thing really stands out in everything these ex-pats write. The French will accept you over time if you try to fit in. Learn their language and don’t try and get them to favor your culture over theirs. Not long ago in fact, Drew alluded to much the same about the French. So then, this is not a rant against France or the people. Rather ... it might be gentle slap upside the head (verbally) of our own president who has managed to shoot our own beloved USA in the foot, and has I think possibly offended the Brits.
Brits have been fighting along side us since 9/11 and I think we owe em a bit more respect then that shown, if I can believe the press, then he has to date.
True, there’s a strong loony tune left here that’s anti-US and they are maddening. But we still owe some respect or at least not make these folks feel the way Stephen Glover describes things in his article.
Take a look.
Obama’s right. There is no special relationship… and the sooner we realise that the better
By Stephen GloverPresident Barack Obama will have caused more than a few palpitations in Whitehall by suggesting that France, not Britain, is the United States’ most important ally. ‘We don’t have a stronger friend and stronger ally than Nicolas Sarkozy and the French people,’ he told the French President on Monday.
Not America’s best buddy? The best brains in the Foreign Office will be trying to persuade themselves Mr Obama did not really mean it. They will say he was only trying to be nice to Mr Sarkozy during the French President’s visit to Washington.
But what if he really meant what he said? During visits to the U.S. by Gordon Brown and David Cameron, Mr Obama has had every opportunity to say Britain was America’s strongest ally, but did not take it. Indeed, he seemed to go out of his way to snub Mr Brown by refusing to meet him.
There are other bits of evidence that Mr Obama does not cherish the ‘special relationship’ so dear to the hearts of policymakers in Whitehall. As soon as he entered the Oval Office, he removed the bust of Winston Churchill that had been loaned to George W. Bush by the British government.
During Britain’s stand-off with Argentina over the Falkland Islands, the Obama administration has been at best neutral, at worst pro-Argentine. And throughout the Gulf of Mexico oil spill last year, the American President was keen to emphasise the British provenance of BP, the chief perpetrator, and to make it pay.
Despite what the Foreign Office Johnnies may argue to themselves, there is enough evidence to suggest that Britain is not greatly valued by Mr Obama. And although there might be personal reasons for this — the American President claims his grandfather was tortured by the British during the Mau Mau rebellion in Kenya — I would suggest his standpoint is shared by more American politicians than we might care to admit.
For most of the time we are regarded with indifference: an ally at once so loyal, dependable and uncritical that we can be taken for granted. The special relationship, about which our politicians obsess, is scarcely ever mentioned even by Britain’s friends in the U.S.
If France is more important than Britain to Washington, might this be because French policymakers have robustly pursued a line independent of the U.S. and the British have not? After the Suez debacle of 1956 — when America pulled the plug on the militarily successful Anglo-French invasion of Egypt — the two European countries responded in diametrically different ways.
While Britain grew ever closer to America, relying on American technology to produce its supposedly independent nuclear deterrent, France increasingly went its own separate way. It developed its own nuclear arsenal — admittedly never proven — called the force de frappe, because it did not believe it could always rely on America to defend it from the Soviet threat.
There’s a lot more at the link and it makes for some interesting reading. See what you think.
Posted by peiper
on 01/12/2011 at 02:24 PM
Filed Under: • FRANCE • Politics •
• Comments (5)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - January 11, 2011
America’s elite hijacked a massacre to take revenge on Sarah Palin.
Drew is the only other one posting here at this time, so that makes him the only one with any self discipline.
I don’t want to harp on this subject, really I do not. But I think I’ve become a bit thin skinned or too sensitive or something. I’m so damn PO’d at what the left is doing and feel so bad for what happened in AZ. I think too often I take some things personally. Or it feels that way. And of course I can’t help seeing the comments and headlines with regard to gun mad America. I won’t rehash all that. Some of you have seen what I’m referring to. It’s bad enough we have to hear it from foreigners, but when it also comes from our own people, smoke starts streaming out my ears and my eyes bleed.
When the news first broke over here, the husband was quoted as blaming the TP and the right. And then ... the damn sheriff weighed in with his two cents worth and set the stage for all that followed. Suddenly it’s my fault, and BMEWS and Sarah Palin and all of us on the right are blood thirsty, gun happy extremist loons drinking blood. Mrs. Plain has blood on her hands screams the ignorant half baked anti-American trolls over here. Yes answers the idiot left in the USA.
See? Kinda hard to to keep things on the rails verbally without coming off like some bloodthirsty right wing gun nut. Someone actually wrote that the TP was a greater danger to the USA then muslim extremists. How can I see that crazy kind of thing and not be damned angry?
Which brings me to a few things. Like this piece by Tom Leonard.
How America’s elite hijacked a massacre to take revenge on Sarah PalinBy Tom Leonard
Daily MailThe rush to make political capital out of a mass shooting shows just how nasty U.S. politics has become. Under Barack Obama, America is more polarised than it has been for 40 years.
Conservatives have come to despise liberals, and vice versa, with an intensity the like of which few can recall. Right-wing anger with the high-spending Obama administration’s handling of the financial crisis, a weak economy and high unemployment has prompted thousands of ordinary Americans to break away from conventional two-party politics to support the Tea Party movement with its call for small government.
Rahm Emanuel, Mr Obama’s former chief of staff and a figure compared to Labour’s Alastair Campbell, once said: ‘You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.’
And those on his side of the political divide have clearly seen the Tucson tragedy as an opportunity to score points and settle scores.
None more so than with Sarah Palin, a politician who is almost as divisive as the President. The former Republican vice-presidential contender has become a spiritual figurehead for many Tea Party supporters, but is loathed by many on the Left.So it was that within minutes of the Tucson shooting, anti-Palin internet bloggers and Twitter users were highlighting a so-called ‘target map’ Mrs Palin had posted on her Facebook page last March.
Controversially, it used gunstyle crosshair targets to flag up Democrat politicians whom Palin felt could be vulnerable at the polls: Miss Giffords was one.
Despite the lack of any evidence that the Tucson gunman had supported Mrs Palin, let alone seen the graphic, critics — including senior Democrats in Congress — have decreed she is somehow culpable.Yet her critics choose to forget the crosshairs could be all a part of her image as a hunter of big game. (It is worth noting, too, that Miss Giffords had been photographed handling a semi-automatic weapon — no doubt aware it would appeal to a certain voting constituency.)
Palin’s favourite maxim — inherited from her father — is ‘Don’t Retreat, Reload’, a typically bullish phrase she’s been trotting out for months as an injunction on the faithful to stick to their political principles.Since the Tucson shooting, Left-wing critics have leapt on the words as some kind of proof that she was encouraging supporters to use real weapons.
Other far more loaded Republican comments are being quoted by those keen to make a connection between the Tucson shooting and inflammatory political rhetoric.Liberals have made much of the words of the Tucson sheriff, Clarence Dupnik, who yesterday launched into a diatribe about the ‘vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government’.
Even the actress and activist Jane Fonda waded into the row with a succession of internet tweets blaming Mrs Palin, the Tea Party and Glenn Beck, a rabble-rousing broadcaster on Fox News, for the shooting.
The Tea Party leaders have been rushing to condemn the shooting and distance themselves from the gunman.
Whether they should really have to do so is another matter. The reality is that there is as yet no evidence that the political Right, and the Tea Party in particular, has — as its opponents say — ‘blood on its hands’ over the Tucson murders.While some liberals have slyly implied that Loughner was a Tea Party supporter, former classmates remember him as being ‘Left-wing’ and ‘liberal’.
Please note, I have done some chopping on this editorial, UNEDITED VERSION IS HERE
Posted by peiper
on 01/11/2011 at 11:09 AM
Filed Under: • Politics • USA •
• Comments (5)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Saturday - November 27, 2010
comrade teachers and MPs call out students for people’s demonstration
I did a smattering of this last week, but I have more here. I want people to see what’s happened and the promise made for more of the same.
The outrage is that some politicians (left) and professors (left) have encouraged the vandals.
Honest protest is one thing. But when police are physically attacked and property damage occurs, that passes protest and become assault and criminal damage.
Here. Take a look at what some profs and Labour Party MPs have said is perfectly okay.
And these are a few of the comrade commissars who say right on. Good show gallant students. These are a few of the pols who make the laws and profs. who are responsible for the teaching indoctrination of comrade students, who have a god given right to an affordable college education.
# Lecturers ‘congratulate staff and students on magnificent demonstration’
# Sussex University academic boasts he planned the attack a fortnight ago
And here are a few of the choice words they had to impart to the “students.”
Violent protests were ‘marvellous’ says veteran Labour MP as students announce next demonstration
By Daily Mail Reporter
* More protests planned for November 30
* Students critical of being held for hours in coldA veteran Labour MP has been criticised for describing Tuesday’s student protests as ‘marvellous’.
David Winnick’s controversial remarks came as students announced they would take to the streets again on November 30 in protest at the Government’s planned increase in tuition fees.
Mr Winnick, the MP for Walsall North and a member of the Home Affairs Select Committee, said ‘As far as yesterday’s demonstration is concerned it was marvellous and gives a lead to others to follow.’
more here and more pix There’s a bit of video as well.
Labour MPs cheered on student vandals on Twitter as they smashed up Tory headquarters
# Lecturers ‘congratulate staff and students on magnificent demonstration’
# Sussex University academic boasts he planned the attack a fortnight ago
As protesters started destroying the entrance to the Westminster building, MP Alex Cunningham tweeted: ‘Well done our students – thousands outside the office getting stuck into the LibDem / Tory government.’
“WELL DONE OUR STUDENTS”
Stay Tuned .... they promised more in three days. I wonder if the jerks and irresponsible lefty dirt bag politicians and professors would be willing to pay for all the damage they encourage. Course not.
That’s what T A X P A Y E R S are for.
Posted by peiper
on 11/27/2010 at 10:33 AM
Filed Under: • Colleges-Professors • Commies • Politics • UK •
• Comments (4)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Wednesday - November 10, 2010
My 2¢
The Alaska thing: counting the absentee ballots for the Miller/Murkowski Senate Race
Lisa Murkowski is the incumbent Republican Senator for Alaska. She was defeated in the primaries by Joe Miller, a Republican who has the backing of the Tea Party Express people. Miller’s name went on the ballot as the Republican candidate. So good so far.
Murkowski was not happy being defeated in the primaries, so she decided to run on her own. Not as the representative of some independent party, but as a write-in candidate. So she campaigned as much as she could, but in the end her name was not directly visible on the ballot. To get around this, she asked that voters be given a list of the write-in candidates.
I have never voted for a write-in, so I didn’t know how the process worked. I’ve read the detailed voting results of some of our local elections, and seeing votes for Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck lead me to believe that other people don’t either. Yes, it’s likely that you can take a pencil and write in whatever name you want, and somewhere someone is going to tabulate that vote. But even if Mickey Mouse won 98% of the popular vote, he would not win the election. Because he was not registered as a candidate. That’s how New Jersey’s system works, and it’s how Alaska’s system works as well. If you want to be an actual official candidate, you and your people have to go around door to door and collect signatures on a petition. Once X number of people have signed a statement saying that they think you should be a viable choice for the elected position, you’re in. Well, you have to turn in those forms, someone in the election office will spot check at least a few of them for validity (one hopes), and make sure that you have enough signatures to meet your state’s required minimum number. I bet there’s a fee and some sort of licensing involved too, at least in NJ. But that’s all it takes.
Prior to this election, Alaska (and for all I know, New Jersey as well) had no law that said that the voters could ask for or be given a list of the valid write-in candidates. This was wrong. Not fair. Every valid candidate must be treated equally by the elections board. Granted, not every candidate can get his or her name on the ballot. Each state must somewhere have a law that figures out who gets on it. Perhaps it’s based on the number of signatures collected. That would work; if I get 5 million people to sign off on me, then you’re darn tootin’ my name should show up on the thing. If you want to run, and only need 50 signatures, and you turn in 52, and 5002 other people also turn in 52, then your name is going on the write-in list. So somewhere a decision is made, a law is written, long in advance, that only 4 or 6 or 8 or whatever number of names, and the political parties that they are associated with, show up on the main ballot for that office.
So Murkowski petitioned the Alaskan Elections Board to have a write-in list drawn up, and either distributed or given out on demand. And they agreed. Great. Then a lower court shot that decision down. It doesn’t matter why ( it was a spurious charge of advocacy), because hours later the Alaskan Supreme Court turned that over, and said that such a list was right and proper. But to play Solomon and cut the baby in half, they decided that the affiliated political parties would not be mentioned. I disagree. This was wrong. If you have a ballot that shows the political party for some candidates, then you have to have a full ballot - that includes all the valid write-ins - that shows the parties for all of them. Fair is fair. But that’s a side issue.
So comes Election Day in Alaska, and it’s a mess. With a population of less than three quarters of a million, there are only a few hundred thousand actual voters. Maybe they count votes up there by making piles of caribou antlers, and whoever has the biggest pile wins. Maybe ballots are sent in by dogsled from the outlying areas. Whatever, it’s a mess, and they are still counting the ballots up there. Thank God they didn’t invite Chad from the 2000 Florida election.
Linda Murkowski may or may not have the lead right now, depending on who you listen to. But Joe Miller has filed suit to ensure that none of this mysterious “voter intent” crap gets done, and I think he is right to do so. Given that the voters had, or at least could have had, a copy of the write-in list right in front of them when they voted, whether they voted at a polling station or by absentee ballot, Miller has sued that Alaska enforce it’s laws as written, and that only votes for Murkowski that are spelled “Murkowski” be counted.
Joe Miller’s campaign filed a lawsuit yesterday, asking that the Alaska Division of Elections be allowed to count only correctly spelled write-ins for Sen. Lisa Murkowski as votes for her. The campaign requested that a hearing be set for this afternoon.
After 27,000 absentee ballots were counted yesterday, the gap between Miller and write-in votes had narrowed to 11,333 from 13,439. But with only 12,400 absentee ballots remaining, it’s unlikely that Miller will close the gap, making the outcome of the lawsuit crucial.
The Miller campaign is asserting that Alaskan law only permits correct spellings, citing this passage from state law, “A vote for a write-in candidate … shall be counted if the oval is filled in for that candidate and if the name, as it appears on the write-in declaration of candidacy, of the candidate or the last name of the candidate is written in the space provided.”
Hey, if you are too stupid to be unable to transcribe M U R K O W S K I from the write-in page to your ballot, then you’re really too stupid to vote. Naturally, the left winger side sees this as an attempt as “disenfranchisement” ( a word now as overused and meaningless as “racism” ), and how Alaska has a long history of attempting to discern voter intent. Hey, Colorado has a long history of murder. So does Los Angeles. Does that make it Ok?
Alaskan lieutenant governor Craig Campbell said “The courts have been very clear for the last 25 years that voter intent is important. You do not want to disenfranchise voters over a technicality.”
If no list had been allowed, then “mircosky” “morecowsti” or even “Linda M” ought to have been allowed. Some crystal ball gazing for Intent. But the law says “as it appears” and “or the last name” (Another side issue: what happens to that law when Alaska has 2 write-ins both named Smith?), so the thing to do is follow the law. If I were an Alaskan who wanted to vote for this woman, I would have learned how to spell her name. Or written it down on a scrap of paper. Or kept one of the hundreds of flyers she sent me in the mail with her name on it, so I could fill out my absentee ballot correctly. If my handwriting sucked, I’d practice writing her name until it was Palmer Manuscript perfect. Because EVERYONE in the country knows full well - especially since the 2000 elections - that if you want your vote to count, you make doubly damn sure your ballot is filled out perfectly before you turn it in.
Under state law, the write-in oval must be filled in and either a candidate’s last name or the name as it appears on her candidacy declaration has to be written in. Miller’s attorney, Thomas Van Flein, said he intends to hold the state to that standard.
Election officials made clear Monday that they will use discretion in determining voter intent where the written name “appears to be a variation or misspelling” of Murkowski or Lisa Murkowski. Van Flein called that practice unacceptable.
Van Flein filed a lawsuit Tuesday asking a federal judge to uphold that law.
You’re damn right. “Discretion” is a double-speak word that means “cheating”. Do it right, or it doesn’t count. Period. You can’t “almost land” an airplane, and you can’t be “nearly pregnant”. You is, or you ain’t.
Now, some other voices are saying that Team Miller made things too complicated for the poor stupid voters there, because 160 people were on the list of write-ins. So what? Horse apples! Has anyone in Alaska ever heard of alphabetization? Or even of looking through the list looking for names that start with M?
As a third side issue, this is one more reason for a digital voting machine. Given a decent EPROM chip and some RAM, you can have thousands of candidates running for every electable position. So what? It takes no real space. It’s just another counter in the code. Add a MORE button, or a scroll key, under each column on the display. Easy.
So don’t expect any certifiable results from the land of Palin yet. When Miller wins his suit they’ll have to go and count everything all over again.
Um, what about the Democrat who was running for their Senate seat? Scott McAdams pulled in 24% of the vote, so he’s long out of it. And no matter how you spell it, Murkowski is still ahead.
If Sen. Lisa Murkowski emerges as the victor in when the Alaska Senate race results are fully tallied – as seems increasingly likely – she will have pulled off a bigger upset than her main opponent, Republican Joe Miller, did when he defeated her in the GOP primary two months ago.
She would become the first person elected to the Senate as a write-in candidate since Strom Thurmond in 1954 – the only time it’s been done.
As of Wednesday afternoon, “write-in” had 41 percent of the vote to Mr. Miller’s 34 percent (Democrat Scott McAdams had 24 percent) – presumably a big enough cushion to stave off legal challenges, though it will take a long time for the vote to be certified and write-in ballots tabulated. A final ruling may not happen for weeks.
In a count of more than 27,000 absentee and early cast ballots counted Tuesday, Miller showed a gain of 2,106 votes on the write-in candidates. Nearly 12,400 absentee ballots remain to be counted, plus a similar amount of questioned ballots to be reviewed.
Posted by Drew458
on 11/10/2010 at 12:40 PM
Filed Under: • Politics •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Saturday - November 06, 2010
hurray for our side and SCREW our critics on Any Questions in Scotland. Brits will understand.
Posted by peiper
on 11/06/2010 at 08:59 AM
Filed Under: • Personal • Politics • USA •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Wednesday - November 03, 2010
Out of touch and out of favour: the future looks bleak for Barack Obama…
Simon Heffer reports on American elections ... No further comment from me, but when you read all he has to say, you might have a thing or two to add.
Heffer is btw, a conservative. But keep in mind that often times Brit cons and American cons aren’t always the same animal. But rest assured, this fellow is no weepy eyed liberal.
This has been edited so see the link for all of it in full.
America has taken stock of Mr Obama’s presidency – and it doesn’t like what it sees.By Simon Heffer .
In recent days both the President and his rather clumsy Vice-President, Joe Biden, have been touring America trying to get the Democratic vote out. They do not appear to have been very successful.
The combination of corporatism and overconfidence, and the economic failure it brings, are familiar to Britons from Leftist governments of both main parties since the war. Harder for us to understand is how the head of government has, in the past two years, become a prisoner of Congress, particularly since it is a Congress that, until today, his own party dominated. Self-interest on the part of many in the American political class ensured that the $787 billion stimulus package was spent unwisely and unproductively.
Mr Obama should have dealt more firmly with his congressmen, but he didn’t. His failure to communicate with his electors has been matched by a failure to engage with his colleagues, many of whom spent the election campaign trying to distance themselves from him in the hope of being returned.
He has a historically low 37 per cent approval rating. Towns all over America are blighted by poverty and dereliction. The black community, which so closely identified with Mr Obama, is especially hard hit. But the suffering is widespread. In the past three years, 2.5 million homes have been repossessed and average incomes have come down by five per cent. Fifty million people have no health insurance, a 25 per cent increase in 10 years.
Mr Obama’s apologists maintain that he has prevented a second Great Depression. However, the problem is that his supporters in 2008 expected more than that. There has been a haemorrhage of confidence in America’s future. The surge of the Tea Party reflects the common observation by formerly apolitical middle Americans that “we’ve forgotten who we are”. Such people imagine they have lost their national identity. They see a culture of freedom being wiped out by what they call “socialism”: an ideology of which the health care act is the prime symbol.
Posted by peiper
on 11/03/2010 at 11:32 AM
Filed Under: • Politics • USA •
• Comments (0)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Monday - November 01, 2010
you guys ready?
H/T VILMAR where I stole it from, with thanks.
Posted by peiper
on 11/01/2010 at 01:14 PM
Filed Under: • Politics • USA •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Nov. 2nd …
Posted by peiper
on 11/01/2010 at 10:03 AM
Filed Under: • Politics •
• Comments (1)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Sunday - October 31, 2010
the coming revolution in american politics …
To BMEWS readers ..... what I have here is a much edited version of her editorial. I would urge you to go to the link and read all of it. It’s worth your time.
Maybe the naacp should read it and learn something other then the race card.
Midterm elections 2010: Prepare for a new American revolutionPopular rage against the elite could change the nature of US politics
By Janet Daley, Sunday Telegraph
More than three centuries ago, the residents of America staged a rebellion against an oppressive ruler who taxed them unjustly, ignored their discontents and treated their longing for freedom with contempt. They are about to revisit that tradition this week, when their anger and exasperation sweep through Congress like avenging angels. This time the hated oppressor isn’t a foreign colonial government, but their own professional political class.
In New York last week I was struck by the startling shift of mood since my last visit, during Barack Obama’s first year in office. This phenomenon took varying forms, of course, depending on the political orientation of my interlocutor, but the underlying theme of despair and disgust was almost universal. Liberal Democrats (who hugely outnumber most other factions in that city) were despondent and disappointed with the collapse of Obama’s popularity. A few of them (remarkably few, actually) were ready to blame this on a “Right-wing conspiracy” of vaguely racist motivation.
But contrary to the superficial British assumption (heavily promoted by the BBC), they were not devoting their excoriation exclusively to the Obama Administration – or even to its clique of Congressional henchmen, led by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. That they were opposed to the Big State, European social democratic model of government which Obama had imported to Washington went almost without saying. But they were at least as angry with the leadership of their own party for having conceded far too much of the argument.
And this anger – again, contrary to the general understanding in Britain – is not new: it goes all the way back to the Bush presidency. It was widely known in Europe that the American Left hated George Bush (and even more, Dick Cheney) because of his military adventurism. What was less understood was that the Right disliked him almost as much for selling the pass over government spending, bailing out the banks, and failing to keep faith with the fundamental Republican principle of containing the power of central government.
Republicans are, if anything, as much in revolt against the establishment within their own party as they are against the Democrats. And this is what the Tea Parties (which should always be referred to in the plural, because they are not a monolithic movement) are all about: they are not just a reaction against a Left-liberal president but a repudiation of the official Opposition as well.
Nor are they simply the embodiment of reactionary social conservatism, which has been the last redoubt of the traditional Republican Right. There were plenty of people in New York who wanted to believe that Tea Partiers were just a new incarnation of the gun-totin’, gay-bashing right-to-lifers whom they found it so easy to dismiss as risible throwbacks. This is a huge political miscalculation, which quite misses the point of what makes the Congressional midterm elections this week such an interesting and historic political event.
Posted by peiper
on 10/31/2010 at 12:30 PM
Filed Under: • Politics • USA •
• Comments (6)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Friday - October 29, 2010
Now that’s a real New York attitude
Ballot irregularities ( gee, that’s a surprise, right? ) forced the NYC Term Limits referendum question to the back side of the ballot. So to make sure people know about it, there is a new ad running on TV. Seeing how just about everyone wants to flip off the politicians these days, I think it’s going to be a success.
An odd trio of Conservative Party chairman Mike Long, New York Civic founder Henry Stern and billionaire cosmetics heir Ron Lauder gathered on the steps of City Hall today to start a campaign to make sure that once again local voters decide to institute term limits.
“The voters of the city of New York have voted twice for term limits,” Long said after the press conference. “Three strikes and you’re out- if you don’t listen to the people then you shouldn’t be in office,” he said referring to the previous two decisions.
The three are concerned that the placement of the term limit—on the flip side of the ballot—will mean that many voters ignore it.
“The difficulty is that it’s on the back of the ballot. If people are informed about it though, they’ll know to turn it over and vote yes to question number one,” Long said.
Stern said that he hopes voters recall that the city council overturned their previous expressed will in two citywide referendums.
“What we have here is a moral outrage,” Stern said. “The issue is that the people spoke out twice and the Mayor arrogated it twice.”
New Yorkers for Term Limits, a group financed through individual donations including reportedly million dollar donations by Lauder, created two 10-second television ads. The ads play on the anti-incumbency theme that has been so prevalent in this year’s races, saying “Politicians are so scared of bringing back term limits, they hid the question on the back of the ballot,” and telling voters to “Flip over the ballot. Flip off the politicians”.
Current NYC Mayor Bloomberg is said to be in favor of term limits too. Not that that stopped him from bending the rules for himself so that he could be the only 3 term mayor the city has ever had.
But the ballots themselves - or about half a million of them at any rate - are messed up. They have check boxes underneath the candidate’s area, but the printed instructions say to fill in the oval above or next to the candidate’s name. Guess they should have uses a non-union proofreader.
The Board of Elections said at an emergency meeting Friday that it will take action to avoid voter confusion about new ballots with misleading instructions.
Instructions on the paper ballots for the election on November 2 say that voters should cast a vote by filling in the oval above or next to the name of the candidate.
However, the ovals are actually below the candidates’ names.
“We are doing everything in accordance with the law. This is just the ballot the way it is and if you ask me if there is confusion? I don’t see any confusion,” said BOE Executive Director George Gonzalez.
Gonzalez said he does not anticipate a problem, but said there will be flyers inside booths clarifying how to vote and staff on hand to answer questions.
“This is the same ballot that was used in the September 2010 primary election. Over 400,000 cast their vote using this ballot. That specific issue was not brought to our attention,” said Gonzalez. “But again, to make sure that everything goes smoothly and minimal confusion for November 2, we’re taking every effort and step to take corrective action to minimize any possible problem the voter may have.”
BOE officials said it is too late to reprint the ballots for November 2, but they will correct the issue in future elections.
The ballot trouble is the latest mess to hit the Elections Board. Mayor Michael Bloomberg called the BOE’s performance on Primary Day a “royal screw-up.” Also, this week State Comptroller Tom DiNapoli released a scathing report this week detailing the mistakes.
I think the real anger is yet to come. Most New Yorkers don’t know that the new term limits question exempts the top 33 elected officials. So they can all run again if they want. And leave everyone wondering if they’ll just ignore this iteration of the will of the people as well.
Goldstein is taking some heat himself over the ballot questions, specifically the one on term limits. It asks voters if they want to return to a two-term limit for city officials, but sitting lawmakers will be exempt from any change.
“When people learn about this exception being made for 33 elected officials, they’re outraged,” said Morgan Pehme of New York Civic.
Posted by Drew458
on 10/29/2010 at 06:20 PM
Filed Under: • Humor • Politics •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Thursday - October 28, 2010
Tea Party’s misplaced rage ??
Yeah. That was the short headline in a paper today for a very brief thing they got from The Washington Post. Which I now may assume is a liberal paper. Right?
But wait ... George Will writes for that paper as well and he sure as heck is not a libtard. No way.
Would like to get some feedback and see what BMEWS makes of this statement.
Tea Party’s Misplaced RageAs battle cries go, the Tea Party’s “Take our country back” is a pretty good one. It’s short and punchy and it addresses a very widespread sense that the nation that American’s once lived in has changed – and not for the better.
When the Tea Players get around to identifying how America has changed and to whose benefit, however, they get it almost all wrong.(Harold Meyerson, Washington Post)
I have no idea if that was part of a larger quote as going to the post got me nowhere. And there isn’t any link to the above that I could find.But no matter. I copied it word for word.
Thing that bothers me is, he does not as you can see here, tell us what exactly the party gets almost all wrong. That’d help understanding him better if that were stated. Or maybe it was in the original. Naturally enough, many will read this kind of thing over here, and make the assumption that the Tea Party is some sort of unified political party with a central command and one speaker for all of it. Might be better if it were but so far it doesn’t seem to be doing too badly.
Posted by peiper
on 10/28/2010 at 11:16 AM
Filed Under: • Politics • USA •
• Comments (1)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Five Most Recent Trackbacks:
LAAR She Blows! Part One
(2 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Planes Ideas Blog
[...] CABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEB [...]
On: 07/12/11 01:57
The Tactical Cowboy
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Sights Service Blog
[...] E LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE [...]
On: 07/10/11 08:30
Nasty Dirty Money
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Money Reviews Blog
[...] ONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLES [...]
On: 06/17/11 08:31
Amazing aerial images taken by daring Allied pilots on secret missions during WW 2
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Hookers and Booze
peiper over at Barking Moonbat EWS found some absolutely kickass aerial photos from WWII. I grabbed this one because I’m a big fan of the movie A Bridge Too Far.…
On: 11/23/09 04:14
Clear Thinking and Straight Talk
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at baldilocks
Let Them Fight or Bring Them Home Read all of it--and tell every American you know to do so. (Thanks to BMEWS) UPDATE: The author of the above blog is…
On: 10/02/09 09:29
DISCLAIMER
THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.
Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:
It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.
- Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
- Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
- Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
- Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere
THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.
Copyright © 2004-2008 Domain Owner
Oh, and here's some kind of visitor flag counter thingy. Hey, all the cool blogs have one, so I should too. The Visitors Online thingy up at the top doesn't count anything, but it looks neat. It had better, since I paid actual money for it.
RSS 2.0 
Atom 
