There was so, so much more to this woman than I knew. Mainly, I knew her as the wife of the bumbling Gerald Ford, who took over the presidency after the Watergate Scandal felled Richard Nixon. I have since learned that the clumsy, klutzy depiction of Gerald Ford was the result of one trip, glorified by Chevy Chase on SNL, and forever associated with this former Michigan quarterback and US Navy veteran. Such is the power of the media, even those dedicated to spoofs (how many people still think Sarah Palin said she could see Russia from her house after Tina Fey made the comment on SNL?).

But back to Betty Ford. In her early days, she was a dancer, modern dance in particular. She even danced in New York with Martha Graham’s company at Carnegie Hall (who knew?). There is much to this woman, including how involved she was with women’s issues, and the work of the president in general:

[snip] According to their son Jack, Betty Ford not only read through the President’s briefing papers on political issues he faced, and reviewed with him those pertaining to social programs or any which affected women. She also quietly worked as a conduit on legislative and other domestic agenda issues, both to and from him to others. Although she refused to ever discuss what issues they may have disagreed on, she did admit to serving as what she called, a “sounding board,” and exercising “pillow talk” on occasion. She also admitted to reviewing his more important speeches, offering advice to make cuts and use livelier language, without the need to always spell out details but rather leave audiences with some eagerness for further clarifications. Publicly, she gave only faint enthusiasm for the public relations effort “Whip Inflation Now,” a public relations action effort by the Administration intended to encourage cost-cutting and budgeting by citizens to counter the economic inflation of 1974-1975. In the White House, Mrs. Ford emphasized that she was reducing both her family and public entertaining food costs by serving less-expensive poultry, substituting soup for the pricier fish course, having smaller portions served. Personally, she stated, she would have her older shoes dyed rather than buy new ones for each event she needed them, and purchased her cosmetics in larger bulk to keep cost down. She also signed a “consumer’s pledge” to buy “only those products and services priced at or below present levels…” [snip]

She was an amazing woman, to be sure. If you have the time and inclination, you can read all about her at the National First Ladies’ Library.

First Lady Ford’s funeral is Tuesday, July 12th. Something else I did not know is that presidents and first ladies prepare their funerals down to the detail. According to this Washington Post article, First Lady Ford knew a few years back who she wanted to deliver her eulogy:

[snip] In 2006, Cokie Roberts got a call from Ford’s daughter Susan: her mom wanted Roberts to deliver a eulogy, whenever that time came, at her funeral.

“Wow — that’s an incredible honor,” the veteran D.C. journalist replied. Then, she recalls, Susan gave Roberts her assignment: “Mother wants you to talk about the way things used to be.”

Meaning?

“A time in Washington when Democrats and Republicans used to be friends, when their families were all friends,” Roberts told us Monday. “The main message she wanted me to say is when you’re friends, government works. It’s like she planned it for this week.”

Roberts has been friends with the Fords for decades. Her father, Hale Boggs, was House majority leader when Gerald Ford was minority leader. Her mother, Lindy, teamed with Betty on various causes. The familes went to school and church together.

“They were all friends with each other,” Roberts said. When her father disappeared after an Alaska plane crash in 1972, the Fords were “devastated. . . they were so supportive.” [snip]

Ah, yes, those were the days, were they not? Sadly, they seem long gone, it seems…(There will be two other speakers at the Washington funeral, First Lady Rosalynn Carter and the Betty Ford Center’s Geoffrey Mason. First Lady Ford will have a funeral service in Michigan, too, where she will be laid to rest with her husband.)

What an amazing, complicated, dedicated woman First Lady Betty Ford was. My sincerest condolences to her family and friends. In honor of First Lady Ford being an Episcopalian, I have the following rendition of the Nunc Dimittis* is in her honor (this is one of my favorite hymns from Vespers):

Rest in peace.

* Translation:

Salva nos, Domine, vigilantes, custodi nos
dormientes, ut vigil emus cum Christo et requiescamus in pace.
Save us, O Lord, while we are awake, and guard us
when we sleep, that we may watch with Christ and rest in peace.

Nunc dimittis servum tuum, Domine, secundum verbum tuum in pace:
Quia viderunt oculi mei salutare tuum
Quod parasti ante faciem omnium populorum:
Lumen ad revelationem gentium, et gloriam plebis tuae Israel.
Now Thou dost dismiss Thy servant, O Lord, according to Thy word in peace;
Because my eyes have seen Thy salvation,
Which Thou hast prepared before the face of all peoples:
A light to the revelation of the Gentiles, and the glory of Thy people Israel.

As it turns out, about half of the adult population in Detroit is functionally illiterate. Almost HALF. That is a staggering number.

How in the sam hill can that possibly be? I am serious – how in the world, in the United States of America, can this be? Here are just some of the issues they face:

“The National Institute for Literacy estimates that 47% of adults (more than 200,000 individuals) in the City of Detroit are functionally illiterate, referring to the inability of an individual to use reading, speaking, writing, and computational skills in everyday life situations,” a report from the Detroit Regional Workforce Fund reads.

Karen Tyler-Ruiz, the Fund’s director, explained the difficulties this presents to the average illiterate.

“Not able to fill out basic forms, for getting a job — those types of basic everyday [things]. Reading a prescription; what’s on the bottle, how many you should take…just your basic everyday tasks,” she said. “I don’t really know how they get by, but they do. Are they getting by well? Well, that’s another question,” she told WWJ Newsradio 950. [snip]

Uh, yeah – not being able to fill out basic forms is a bit of a problem.

Who is to blame for this deplorable condition? Well, depending upon whom you ask, it is either the teachers’ union, or the city. Let’s start with the union:

In a town where unions rule, some have pointed to the teachers’ union as a possible reason for the city’s high illiteracy rate.

Andrew J. Coulson, director of the Cato Institute’s Center for Educational Freedom, told The Daily Caller that the teachers’ union monopoly has contributed to much of the educational deterioration in the city.

“Apparently [the school system is] not learning that the cause of the problem is the monopoly because they would have gotten rid of it by now. That is the big message from this report, [it] is not what this particular organization is doing to try to alleviate the problem,” Coulson told TheDC. “What they need to do is get rid of the monopoly.”

According to Coulson’s calculations, Detroit spent $15,945 per pupil for the 2010-2011 school year. By comparison, the average per pupil expenditure during the 2007-2008 school year nationally was $10,259.

It is embarrassing as hell for a city, and its teachers, to have this result, especially since they pay over a THIRD more per student in Detroit than the national average. Sounds to me like they are not getting their money’s worth there. Ahem. Wow.

Who do the teachers blame? The city:

The Detroit Federation of Teachers (DFT), however, is adamant that the problem actually lies with the city’s failure to effectively enforce school attendance.

“I don’t think that that the teachers’ union has a responsibility for making sure that adults can read,” DFT president Keith Johnson told TheDC.

“I think the unfairness of the criticism [against the union] comes from the fact that there is a direct correlation between student attendance and student performance,” Johnson added. “During the 2008-2009 school year, the average Detroit school student — you ready for this — missed 46 days of school. That was on average. There were 10 percent of our students that missed 100 days or more. It may shock you to know that Detroit public schools do not have an attendance standard.”

According to Detroit’s attendance policy statement in their “Orientation Kit,” students are expected to attend 92 percent of classes, or miss no more than 14 days annually. Johnson believes there have to be harsher consequences for those who miss significantly more days.

Uh huh. Okay. Well, there may be some truth in that since students do need to be there.

But there’s one more group who deserves some blame:

Some say the responsibility for the absentee epidemic falls at the feet of parents who fail to supervise their children. Richard Rivers, a counselor at Cody’s Academy of Critical Thinkers and Medicine and Community Health, said that the best way to fix the literary problem is to get parents involved.

“I talk to truants all the time, and I call their parents,” he told the Detroit Free Press. “I do believe that truancy can be prevented when parents are working with me to get the students to school every day and on time.” [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Indeed, parents must be active participants in the education of their children, especially when it is something so basic, so necessary, as literacy.

It sounds to me like there is plenty of blame to go around. The citizens of Detroit are certainly not getting their money’s worth, not with this outcome. Whatever the truancy policy is, it sounds like it might use some revamping. And parents need to get involved with their own children and what they are learning (or not). Regardless of with whom the lion’s share of blame lies, something needs to change, and now.

Speaking of reading, I just have to quickly share this article with you. My aunt sent it to me yesterday, and I just could not believe my eyes. Here is the headline: ‘Burn a Bush’? Michelle Obama Invites Rapper Common To A Poetry Reading.

Say wha? Oh, yes:

[snip] First Lady Michelle Obama has scheduled a poetry evening for Wednesday, and she’s invited several poets, including a successful Chicago poet and rapper, Lonnie Rashid Lynn, Jr., AKA “Common.” However, Lynn is quite controversial, in part because his poetry includes threats to shoot police and at least one passage calling for the “burn[ing]” of then-President George W. Bush.

[...]

By the way, ‘Uzi’ is slang for a compact machine gun:

A Letter to the Law

Dem boy wanna talk… [indistinguishable]

Whatcha gon do if ya got one gun?

I sing a song for the hero unsung

with faces on the mural of the revolution

No looking back cos’ in back is what’s done

Tell the preacher, god got more than one son

Tell the law, my Uzi weighs a ton

I walk like a warrior,

from them I won’t run

On the streets, they try to beat us like a drum

In Cincinnati, another brother hung

A guinea won’t see the sun

with his family stung

They want us to hold justice

but you handed me none

The same they did to Kobe and Michael Jackson

make them the main attraction

Turn around and attack them

Black gem in the rough

You’re rugged enough

Use your mind and nine-power, get the government touch

Them boys chat-chat on how him pop gun

I got the black strap to make the cops run

They watching me, I’m watching them

Them dick boys got a lock of cock in them

My people on the block got a lot of pok* in them

and when we roll together

we be rocking them to sleep

No time for that, because there’s things to be done

Stay true to what I do so the youth dream come

from project building

Seeing a fiend being hung

With that happening, why they messing with Saddam?

Burn a Bush cos’ for peace he no push no button

Killing over oil and grease

no weapons of destruction

How can we follow a leader when this a corrupt one

The government’s a g-unit and they might buck young black people

Black people In the urban area one

I hold up a peace sign, but I carry a gun.

Peace, ya’ll.”

Wowie zowie. Gosh, so glad the Lefties got Laura Bush to cancel HER scheduled poetry reading of Emily Dickinson, Langston Hughes, and Walt Whitman, those crazy rabble rousers (and I oughta know. Cough, cough.)

Who here is surprised by this? Yeah, me neither. As my aunt noted, such a classy, classy bunch the Obamas are. Not. And, I might add, this is what passes for poetry these days? Yikes. I’ll stick with my Maya Angelou, Willa Cather, Emily Dickinson…

Here are the details:

Rep. Bart Stupak To Retire After Last-Second Deal On Healthcare

Rep. Bart Stupak is expected to announce his retirement Friday, weeks after his critical role in healthcare’s passage.

Stupak, the centrist Michigan Democrat who crafted a last-second deal on abortion that allowed President Barack Obama’s healthcare bill to pass the house and become law, will say during a press conference this morning that he won’t pursue reelection this fall.

Stupak has been wrestling with whether to retire for weeks, and the brutal healthcare fight certainly played a role in his decision.

Stupak told The Hill that fighting the healthcare bill had been “a living hell” a little more than a week before the bill was approved by the House.

Telephone lines to his office were jammed, and he and his wife received nasty calls at home.

“All the phones are unplugged at our house — tired of the obscene calls and threats. She won’t watch TV,” Stupak said during the interview. “People saying they’re going to spit on you and all this. That’s just not fun.”

Bear in mind, this was BEFORE he voted yes on the bill. Just to be clear. Then there was the “Yes” vote:

Things didn’t get easier for Stupak after he reached a deal with Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and other Democrats that allowed his group of anti-abortion rights centrist Democrats to vote for the healthcare bill.

After the bill was approved, Stupak gave the Democrats argument on the House floor against a GOP motion to kill the bill.

A Republican lawmaker, Rep. Randy Neugebauer (Texas), shouted “baby killer” as Stupak was speaking. Neugebauer later apologized and said he was referring to the bill and had said it was a baby killer.

Stupak, first elected in 1992, opposed the Senate-approved healthcare bill under consideration by the House because he believed it would not prevent federal funds from subsidizing insurance plans that would cover abortion services. He and a small bloc of fellow Democrats said they would not vote for the bill unless it was changed.

To win Stupak and his core group over, Obama issued an executive order that said the healthcare bill would not change existing law preventing federal funds from going to abortion services.

Several anti-abortion rights groups said that was not enough, and accused Stupak of selling out.

Abortion rights supporters were also irked by the executive order decision.

Well, it was a win for Obamacare, not for Americans, and these backroom deals continue to feed the anger about the bill’s passage. Stupak’s retiring won’t change that. Or maybe it’s because he knew he couldn’t win again:

Stupak had drawn challengers in this cycle, and fueled speculation that he might retire earlier this week by saying that he’d consult with his family before deciding to run for office again. Stupak’s wife had reported receiving death threats in the wake of his healthcare vote.

The congressman also suffered a personal tragedy in 2000 when his 17-year-old son killed himself the morning after his prom. Stupak subsequently held a hearing on Accutane, a prescription drug used by his son to treat acne that can have have adverse psychological effects, including suicide attempts. Restrictions on the use of the drug were tightened by the Federal Drug Administration in the wake of the hearing.

Stupake’s decision to retire adds another difficult seat to defend for Democrats already facing a tough election environment.

Stupak’s district includes much of northern Michigan, including the state’s Upper Peninsula, a rural area that is seen as Republican-leaning. Republicans will hope to pick up the seat, though The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder reports that Charlevoix County Commissioner Connie Saltonstall is the leading Democrat to fill Stupak’s spot in the race.

Obama won 50 percent of the presidential vote in Stupak’s district in 2008, compared to 48 percent for GOP candidate Sen. John McCain (Ariz.).

That is a tragic story about his son, though I am not sure why his son’s death 10 years ago would affect his running for re-election NOW. Clearly, he has stood for re-election since that time. And again, while he received threats post-vote, he also received them pre-vote. Not that there is any justification for anyone being threatened, but it is important to keep the facts from being revised.

And maybe Stupak knew he didn’t have much of a chance at re-election not just because of his soul-selling for money vote, but because the DNC ain’t what it used to be. Indeed, according to Gallup, the “Democratic Party Image Drops To A New Low.” But, but, but, wait – didn’t Obama HAND PICK the new DNC chair?? Yet:

Americans’ favorable rating of the Democratic Party dropped to 41% in a late March USA Today/Gallup poll, the lowest point in the 18-year history of this measure. Favorable impressions of the Republican Party are now at 42%, thus closing the gap between the two parties’ images that has prevailed for the past four years.

Oh dear. I can’t wait to see how The One’s minions are going to try and scramble on THIS one. It isn’t Rasmussen (which has been pretty consistently correct, though that hasn’t stopped Obama’s supporters from trying to belittle it as “Conservative”). Nope – this is Gallup:

Gallup last measured party images in late August/early September of last year. At that point, the Democratic Party enjoyed an 11-point favorable image advantage over the Republican Party. Now, the favorable ratings of the two parties are essentially tied.

The images of the two major parties have particular significance in a midterm election year. For example, the favorable rating of the Democratic Party exceeded that of the Republican Party by 52% to 37% just prior to the 2006 midterm elections, in which the Democrats gained 31 House seats.

Americans’ current 41% favorable rating of the Democratic Party is five points lower than the party’s previous low, recorded twice in 2005.

By contrast, the Republican Party’s image reached its all-time low of 31% in December 1998 — just after the House of Representatives voted to impeach President Bill Clinton. The Republicans’ current rating is improved from a pair of 34% ratings Gallup measured in late 2008 and in May 2009.

I hope Stupak is proud of his career, and his accomplishments. I don’t know how someone lives with themselves after making such a big deal out of a moral conviction, to then cave for earmarks, but that’s just me. I wish him and his family well.

All I can say is, 2010 is shaping up to be mighty interesting, isn’t it?

Wow. So Ellen and Portia are still A-okay, it seems, along with 18,000 other people. And how about the rest of the people there?

This is disconcerting, to be sure, though not unexpected, I have to say. I wish it was different, but it isn’t.

What I do find incredibly curious is that NO ONE talks about Amendment 2 in Florida, which is equally as bad, if not worse. Why is that? It passed during the 2008 election, too, yet it is completely ignored. This was the concern in FL (and note the state that also has a ban mentioned in the following):

But opponents say the Florida Marriage Protection Amendment isn’t a gay issue, but rather a measure that could negatively affect many heterosexual couples as well.

They point to particular wording in the amendment that they say could lead to unmarried couples — gay and straight — losing hospital visitation rights, the ability to make emergency medical decisions, and domestic partner health benefits provided by employers.

The proof, they say, is what has happened in other states where similar amendments have passed.

Since Michigan voters approved a ”marriage protection” amendment in 2004, the state Supreme Court has struck down domestic partner benefits, including health insurance and pensions. A battle is also under way in Kentucky to eliminate domestic partner benefits for employees of state universities because of similar legislation.

”This amendment says that because marriage is between a man and a woman, nothing else counts,” said Derek Newton, campaign manager for Florida Red & Blue, the bipartisan organization running the SayNo2 campaign to defeat the amendment. “It could take away existing rights and benefits of Floridians.”

Wow – Michigan, too. And Virgina. South Carolina. A total of forty-one (41) states have defined marriage between a man and a woman.

I know we are supposed to be all excited that a whopping FIVE states consider LGBT people to be equal, but it seems with every step forward, there’s at least one step back. I guess all we can do is keep fighting for equal rights for all people. One day at a time, I reckon…

Someone PLEASE tell me how, in just FOUR SHORT MONTHS, Obama has managed to take over the banks, kick out the CEO of a private company, hand over a private company, financed with OUR money, to a union? Oh, and let’s not forget his handing over CA to another union, SEIU? How?? How has this happened???

Oh, wait – and how about those of us who pay back our credit card bills regularly now being saddled with having to support the losers who act in bad faith? Why do we have to constantly bail out, and ENABLE, those people who go over their means, be it credit cards or mortgages or car loans? And the Senate can stop acting like they give a crap about this issue – Obama VOTED to enable the credit card companies while a senator, along with many other Democrats. So just stop the charade – and stop laying the burden of irresponsible behavior on those of us who have good credit, or else WE might not have that any longer, either.

If you have not already read it, I recommend to you the following post by my good friend, SusanUnPC, “A Personal Note Only For Those Who Voted For Obama.” And I would add, not only “ditto,” but in the most pastoral way possible to those who did vote for Obama, you can just bite me for what you have unleashed on this country. If only there was a way to make only those people support the UAW/GM, pay the ne’er-do-wells’ credit card bills, etc.

Hmm – that’s a thought – let’s figure out how to do just that – let them pay for Obama’s taking over private companies, banks, and kowtowing to the unions (again – I am not anti-union in general, just when they try to take over states or private companies). A pipe dream, I know, but for this moment, it helps to keep my head from exploding…

The crusty CNN newsman/commentator Lou Dobbs takes a depressing look at unemployment figures and how taxpayers are being HAMMERED:

California’s Burden: Workers Pay the Price
Workers in California are worrying about losing even more money. The unemployment rate is in the double-digits and climbing. Those who have jobs in the state are bearing an increasingly heavy burden and their tax rates are rising as well. Casey Wian has the report.

Even Maddow had a segment on unemployment, which some have noted does NOT include all of the people forced to work at part-time jobs or those who’ve given up entirely:

The President is doing “everything in his power”? Uh, like what? Well, the unemployment benefits are good — the infusion of cash into the economy also helps. Maddow, to her credit, asks some important questions of Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, who supplies some solid answers but not any real solutions.

All this talk about the BIG SQUEEZE on the average working person — both from employment crises and increasing taxes — reminded me of a segment I watched earlier Tuesday evening on Hannity:

As I was preparing this story, I stopped by the YouTube channel of Rep. Thaddeus McCotter of Michigan — I’ve subscribed to his channel because I KNOW that the economy and jobs are foremost in his mind — mainly the 750,000 jobs that the state of Michigan expects to lose by the end of 2009. That’s a staggering number of lost jobs. Here’s Fox News’s Geraldo interviewing Rep. McCotter over the weekend:

750,000 jobs. That’s one and a half times the entire population of Lansing, Michigan.

“A cherished way of life is being lost,” says Rep. McCotter.

And future generations will have nothing to show for current slapdash solutions except a massive debt they’ll have to try to struggle to repay through exorbitant taxes that prohibit their achieving a decent standard of living.

It’s not such a rosy picture after all, is it.

Good news for Michigan and Florida Democrats. You might not get cut out of the party’s messy primary voting process again in 2012.

Of course, with an incumbent Barack Obama, the Democrats’ presidential-candidate-picking process may be moot:

Assuming the rookie Great Change Agent quickly fills five dozen empty slots at Treasury, fixes the nation’s economy, creates multiple millions of jobs, reforms the country’s entire education system, makes it affordable to ever Missouri Democratic Senator Claire McCaskilly American, creates a thriving green economy, reduces dependence on foreign oil, solves the housing crisis, keeps interest rates low, prevents inflation, avoids an Afghan quagmire, cuts taxes for 95% of Americans, screws over the other 5% and halves the national debt.

Oh, and cleanses the culture of greed and entitlement on every U.S. street including the one named Wall.

Last year’s Democratic primaries were hardfought even bitter affairs, not helped by the initial banning of the results of those important twin states, which denied Hillary Clinton two crucial albeit sneaky victories.

What the hell does THAT mean?? The only one who was SNEAKY in this process was OBAMA!! He’s the one who took his name taken off the ballot, and encouraged others to do so as well, to try and embarrass Clinton out of the win! He’s the ONLY one who campaigned in Florida, and Clinton still won in a landslide. And SHE’S the one who is sneaky? Okay – I see how they are revising history on this one. Because we can’t have anyone better than Precious, can we? Ah, yes, because EVERYONE wanted Obama, apparently – except for the majority who voted for Clinton, but let’s not allow facts to influence the storyline. Ahem.

Back to the article:

And all presided over by another former unsuccessful Democratic presidential candidate, Howard Dean.

Dean is gone now, unceremoniously dumped and denied a Cabinet job by the Obama camp, in favor of parttime chair, Gov. Tim Kaine of Virginia. He”ll take over fulltime next year to earn his D.C. chops and, come 2012, probably replace aging Joe Biden as Obama’s VP who, you may remember, was a senator way back when Obama was a sixth grader. (Although keep your eyes on Missouri’s most Twittering senator.)

But watch out. CNBC announced today that Dean has signed on there as a commentator. Now, all that cable channel needs is some viewers and Dean can be heard to get even on-air.

Oh, yippee. But this is where is gets good:

The 37-member Democratic Change Commission will be headed by Sen. Claire McCaskill (who likes to Twitter) and Rep. James Clyburn, both ardent Obama backers. And Obama’s ex-campaign manager David Plouffe is also on.

The goal, Kaine says, is “to put voters first and ensure that as many people as possible can participate.” A complete list of commission members is below; scroll down or click on the “Read more” line.

The commission, which grows from a convention resolution by Obama last August, will have three goals: chop the number of superdelegates, reform the caucus system and change “the window of time” for caucuses and primaries. Should Iowa and New Hampshire be worried?

The commission’s report is due by next New Years Day.

I’m sorry, but how are the same people who created the problems we had this past Primary going to REFORM it?? You have my back-stabbing, lying, conniving representative, James Clyburn in there, the one who pushed the meme that the Clinton’s were racist. And DAVID PLOUFFE!!!! The man who orchestrated Obama’s campaign, the one in which he engaged massive caucus fraud, and the above mentioned shenanigans.

This is just great. I wonder how they are going to reform it, exactly? Abolish it completely so Precious can forever on out be the Democratic Nominee?? Having these folks on this committee is a whole lot like having the foxes guard the chicken coop. I am not expecting a whole lot of protecting our votes here since this was the tack Plouffe took during the vote controversy: What we’re interested in is a fair resolution; we don’t think it’s fair to seat them fully,” Plouffe said.

“We’re not going to support something that gives her too many delegates. We all last year played by the rules. It was only after the fact when they needed the delegates that they tried to change the rules. I don’t think you can at the 11th hour change the rules that you try to live by because it benefits you.” But Obama’s stance on the issue, like his opponent’s, has just as much to do with politics as principle; the Obama campaign clearly doesn’t want Clinton to close the delegate gap enough that she can possibly convince enough superdelegates to throw their support her way, or give her a chance to claim a victory in the popular vote.

The One was the one who was trying to change things, but the key statement is the first one, “We’re not going to support something that gives her too many delegates.” Never mind that she WON those delegates with OUR votes. And taking lawfully cast and certified votes from one candidate to give to another is so far from any sense of fairness and decency, that I cannot imagine how someone like David Plouffe is going to “reform” the nominating process. All primaries will now be caucuses with ACORN running them? All voting precincts will be staffed with ACORN members, or Obama Army personnel? Only people whose last name beings with “O” and end in “a” can run? Whatever it it, I think they just may have to remove that pesky word from title – you know the one, “Democratic.”

Here’s the rest of the gang:

Membership of the 2009 Democratic Party Commission on Change:

Co-Chairs: Sen. Claire McCaskill, Missouri, and Rep. James Clyburn, South Carolina.

Members: Jeremy Alters, Florida; Jeff Berman, Washington, D.C; Ashley Bliss, Georgia; State Rep. Dan Blue, North Carolina; Bill Carrick, Los Angeles; Mayor Michael Coleman, Columbus, Ohio; Jeff Forbes, Washington; Joan Garry, New Jersey; Kansas state chairman Larry Gates; Adelita Grijalva, Arizona; Rob Hampshire, Pennsylvania; Ned Helms, New Hampshire.

Also on the commission: Alexis Herman, Virginia; Tribal Chairman Ron His Horse Is Thunder, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe; Teamsters Pres. James Hoffa, Michigan; Roseanne Hope, Minnesota; Nevada state senator Steven Horsford; Suzie LeVine, Seattle; UAW CAP Director Dick Long, Michigan; Andres Lopez, Puerto Rico; Patricia Madrid, New Mexico; Debbie Marquez, Colorado; Illinois state senator Iris Martinez; Jennifer McClellan, Virginia; Montana secretary of State Linda McCulloch.

Also: Iowa attorney general Tim Miller; Minyon Moore, Washington; Sunah Park, Pennsylvania; Plouffe, Washington; Rebecca Prozan, California; James Roosevelt, Jr., Massachusetts; Rep. Linda Sanchez, California; Randi Weingarten, New York; Oregon state chair Meredith Wood Smith; Martin Yeung, South Dakota.

Whoopsie—The Democratic National Committee’s hood ornament got ..er..unscrewed and bounced into the street. Of course, it was loosened up a long while back when the DNC moved itself mostly to Chicago two months before the Democratic Convention. That right there tells you a lot about the DNC. (I think the “D” should be removed—it doesn’t belong there any more.)

Kirsten Powers concludes that DNC Chair, Howard Dean, was helpful to Obama for one reason—staying out of the way.

Dean had high level detractors. Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s new Chief of Staff, publicly feuded with Dean over how to spend funds for House races, asserting that Dean was wasting money by spreading it around to all 50 states.

James Carville described Dean’s leadership as “almost Rumsfeldian in its incompetence.”

Paul Begala charged that Dean was “apparently . . . just hiring a bunch of staff people to wander around Utah and Mississippi and pick their noses.” (More here.)

Then there was Dean’s decision to strip Florida and Michigan of their delegates for holding their primaries early, only to give both states a reprieve after it was too late for Hillary Clinton to have an honest shot at the nomination.

And Dean gets an “F” for remaining silent while sexism and misogyny ran rampant within the Democratic Party. (Sorry, Howie, the weak admission after it was all over didn’t cut it for anyone.).

But Obama and company should be very grateful to Howard Dean for pushing that 50 state strategy, one that probably helped account for Obama’s win in some previously red states. Whether Dean gets rewarded or stays flopping about in the street as the DNC limo speeds off remains yet to be seen.

Throughout this campaign season, any attempts to discern the “content of (Obama’s) character” have been thwarted by the Propaganda Machine, formerly known as the Fourth Estate, his handlers, the DNC, and his followers who claim, irrationally, I might add, the “Obama will heal us!” as Cher did on The Ellen Degeneres Show Nov. 3rd, as if he truly IS the Obamessiah, ignoring the tremendous splitting of the country, of the Democratic Party itself.

For the first time in memory, a candidate was NOT “known by the company he keeps,” “the birds of a feather which flocked together.” Rather, any mention of Bill Ayers was met, even by university professors with the illogical justification that Obama was only 8 when Bill Ayers and his compatriot, Bernadine Dorhn, were bombing the US Capitol, Pentagon, and other US buildings.

That may be so, but the ideology which drove Ayers and Dorhn is the ideology to which they still adhere. Obama has chosen to have them in his life, to live near them, work with them, and seek them out, as we recently learned for sure (as many of us suspected, and confirmed in this article by Steve Diamond at No Quarter, “Ayers and Obama In Regular Contact Says Source Close to Obama Candidacy“).

The list of his close associates in addition to Ayers and Dorhn are troubling: Rezko, Wright, Khalidi, Kilpatrick, Farakkhan, Blogajevich, et al, a list that contains convicted felons and one under investigation. I have said before, and will say again, any ONE of these people would have sunk any other candidacy, yet in the case of Obama, they were brushed aside as irrelevant. As was the glaring reality that Obama took the majority of his policy positions, often lock, stock, and barrel, from Hillary Clinton. But the Propaganda arm flipped it around, and his minions, again, many university professors, brushed aside his plagiarism as inconsequential. What a great lesson they are teaching their students, and their children.

Along those lines, I am in disbelief that adults, people who would not hire Obama at their own universities or businesses with his refusal to provide ANY documentation of his academic life, or allow friends, families, or fellow students to discuss him to ANYONE trying to get information on this first term senator running for the highest office in the land, would gladly give this man their votes.

I despair that adults, and their children, believe that the means justify the ends, that hundreds of thousands of fraudulent voter registrations, over 200,000 in Ohio, and 212,000 discovered in Georgia, in which voters were registered in GA, as well as OH or FL, are dismissed because as one neighbor, a retired university professor said, “ACORN does great work.” The level of voter registration fraud was through the ceiling, as the 16 investigations into ACORN indicate, yet the Propagandists say NOTHING about this as Obama “wins” contests in states where voter registration fraud was rampant. Even duplicate voting is brushed aside, as this video demonstrates (and h/t to a listener of Truthteller’s Election Night Radio Show mentioned):

Um, no – it is NOT okay for anyone to vote more than once in an election. It is FRAUD, and it is ILLEGAL!! But we already know there were instances of this in OH and FL. Heck, in VA, felons were allowed, no, RECRUITED, to vote for Obama, but absentee ballots to our military serving abroad went out late, sparking a lawsuit to make sure THEIR votes were counted. And on and on it goes.

As I said, I despair that adults are teaching our young people that you cheat, lie, and steal to get what you want. While you are at it, make sure you are a sore loser, hammering away at the vanquished in a juvenile, mean-spirited manner, never having learned the concept of gracious winning (especially when the “winning” is suspect). These are the same people who said NOTHING, or were SUPPORTIVE, of the Democratic Party forever smearing its very name by stealing votes from one candidate to give to another. The ends justify the means, and if that means we tarnish, tear down, belittle, smear, and steal from a candidate to win, so be it. Oh – and blame them for it, too, while we are at it as the NY Times did in an incredibly offensive editorial it had up last night celebrating Obama’s defeat of Clinton (I won’t link to it – go find it yourself if you want to read that dribble). We have now taught our young people that you can register as many times as you want, and vote as often as you want – just like on “American Idol”! – to make sure YOUR candidate wins. Fair and square is old school. Now it is win at all and any costs, and belittle your opponent while you are at it.

Then there are the issues of misogyny and race-baiting that sustained this campaign, with the willing participation of the Propaganda Arm, Obama, and the DNC. The treatment of women during this campaign was a low I have not seen in DECADES, yet many women were willing participants to this abuse, claiming even as Obama contradicted them, that he was going to be great for women. Ask Hillary. Ask Sarah. Ask those folks wearing, “Sarah Palin Is a C–t” t-shirts, or the organization that used the “C-word” as its acronym regarding Hillary. Women were treated as not just objects, but as sexual anatomy period, in a most vulgar and derogatory way. Still, since it was the DNC, too many women accepted this treatment from the very party of which they are the majority. How they can celebrate the future presidency of a man who treats women in such a hostile manner is beyond me. That goes for the GLBT community, too. But hey – they got their “Bro Before Ho,” so I know they are happy.

The race baiting that was used to tear down our only two term Democratic president in decades was horrendous to watch, especially as members serving in Congress, people whom President Clinton had helped personally, went out of their way to paint him with the stigma of being racist. Hillary, too. Two people who have worked TIRELESSLY to end discrimination in this people were called racists, and it stuck. Then anyone who would not, could not, imagine voting for the most inexperienced, unqualified candidate who was taking Chicago-style politics national, with his thugs attacking people around the country, were labeled, no, BRANDED racists if they did not support Obama. As women’s rights have been set back decades after this election season, so have been race relations. All in the service of getting this man elected because of the color of his skin, not the content of his character, which is still largely ignored or unexplored by the electorate and the Propagandists.

I do not think this is what Dr. King had in mind. I do not think this is what our founders had in mind, either. This election, with its win at all costs, even if it means cheating, lying, and stealing, is not democracy. It surely isn’t decent. And it is not the American Way. At the moment, I can’t see how this will change – how we will regain any semblance of justice, of knowing right from wrong, of being ethical, moral, good. Yes, we made history last night, but I ask you, at what cost to us, to our country? I weep for us today, at what we have become. I have to hope, and pray, that we will regain what we have lost, but for today, grief overwhelms me.

Hot off the presses is this final report from Peniel Cronin, the author of an incredible study, “2008 Democratic Presidential Preference Election: Primary versus Caucus: How millions of voters were systematically disenfranchised and election results were skewed,” available at Dr. Lynette Long’s site, which contains a great deal of information on issues of caucus fraud.

Ms. Cronin’s final study, “2008 Democratic Presidential Preference Election: The People’s Vote: Delegate Allocation Per Original Votes Cast” is an eye-opener (and is available at the bottom of this post). No Quarter is quite fortunate that Ms. Cronin is allowing US to break this story! Thank you!!

The bottom line is this – had the RBC not interfered, the difference between the PLEDGED delegates would have been – wait for it – 4 (FOUR). Yes, I said 4. And, while caucuses accounted for only 2.9% of voters, they accounted for over 14% of pledged delegates. Never even mind all of the massive caucus irregularities that benefited one person – Obama. Still, the bottom line difference: 4 delegates, AND Clinton won the popular vote. Holy smokes.

Before I go further, allow me to introduce Ms. Cronin to you, and present her credentials:

Peniel Cronin has been President & CEO of Global Basics since 1993. Cronin holds a B.S. in Accounting from Arizona State University and has over 16 years experience as an accountant and Director of Marketing for several SMEs.

Cronin directs product development and market research and developed the algorithms that power the eNameWiz multilingual domain creation and advanced Name Analytics technology.

Enterprise clients through Global Basics have included the Arizona Office of Tourism, the Nevada Commission on Tourism, the Arizona Shopping Consortium, Shop America Alliance, America West Airlines, Southwest Airlines, AeroMexico and numerous other travel and domain industry organizations. Cronin holds three US & German Patents, several trademarks and numerous copyrights.

Cronin has had a disability for 43 years since a car accident in 1965. She was the Director of Marketing for one of the largest Independent Living Centers in the US for over 5 years and is a disability rights activist, speaker, trainer, and peer mentor to both people with disabilities and minority/women business owners.

What an amazing woman she is!

And now to the results Ms. Cronin has compiled. It will knock your socks off to see the actual numbers, the graphs, and machinations involved to get Obama the nomination. Many of us are aware of the level of caucus fraud that occurred over the Democratic Primaries, but the Numbers Don’t Lie, and here they are, including a spreadsheet of the votes state-by-state (click on the page to enlarge it):

Wow, right? There is more in this excellent report, but I thought this was of particular interest regarding the whole caucus returns:

Perhaps most troubling of all the elements that impacted the final delegate count was the lack of reliable election results –i.e., the undisclosed voter attendance data and non-certified caucus vote counts from 4 of the 6 largest caucus states in terms of votes cast. Iowa, Nevada, Washington and Maine did not even report total voter turnout and votes.

Together, these states cast an estimated 558,000 of the 1,057,136 million total caucus votes for Obama and Clinton. Thus, 53% of the total votes reported from the 13 caucus states were a guesstimate based on state Democratic Party estimates of voter turnout or based on projections by various researchers and news organizations.

Notably, the reported vote totals varied depending on the projection made by different news organizations and election researchers. There was no certification of results (and probably no solid audit trail) that would provide an exact vote count
as required to be reported through a primary voting system.

In addition to these 4 states, there were no solid vote-count numbers presented for the Texas caucus. In fact, the election vote tally there stopped after approximately 41% of the precincts had reported results.

From a delegate standpoint, these 4 caucus states plus the Texas caucus accounted for 239 pledged delegates – 48% of the total 498 pledged allocated to all caucuses.

Holy moly. Who knew that these were “ESTIMATES” and not actual counts for these caucuses? So let me understand this – not only did Obama have these caucuses gamed, but in most of them, they didn’t even bother to COUNT them all?? Um, counting isn’t rocket science, after all – addition is something you learn early on in grammar school. But it didn’t happen in this election. That seems to be a theme for the Democratic Primaries – “let’s not bother to count all of the votes this year, okey dokie?” Uh, yeah.

There is more, and I highly recommend you read the rest of it (it is short, but powerful). In conclusion, Ms. Cronin offers these thoughts (with slight corrections to web addresses):

With the overall election results being so starkly different between the two voting systems used – primary versus caucus,and given all the reports (and actual signed affidavits) of irregularities and fraud, why didn’t the DNC call for an investigation into the caucus results?

With so many complaints of irregularities, why didn’t superdelegates stop and question the legitimacy of the delegate count reported? As representatives of the people, why didn’t they look back to the pledged delegate count as determined
by the People’s Vote – the original votes cast and take note of Clinton’s 175,000 vote-victory margin over Obama and consider the flawed nature of the caucus system along with the small number of total votes the caucus-goers represented – before casting their votes which in the end selected Obama as the presumptive Democratic nominee? *

Think about it: 239 delegates, nearly half of all caucus pledged delegates, were impacted! That is more than enough to skew or sway any competitive election. And with what justification: under-funded, Party-financed elections, inadequate
volunteers to staff and monitor the caucuses, sloppy audit and paper trail systems? The State Democratic parties that run and finance caucus elections should not follow a separate, less-compliant set of rules. The DNC should act quickly to reform caucus voting systems and State Parties must be mandated to comply or get out of the electioneering business.

How is Democracy or the American voter served by the flawed caucus voting system or the Party’s blindness to it? Caucuses, while exemplary as a forum of debate and discussion, must be reformed or abandoned as a voting system before the next election cycle. Never again should the will of the majority of voters be thwarted by the will of the minority.

To read my original research entitled “2008 Democratic Presidential Preference Election: Primary versus Caucus: How millions of voters were systemically disenfranchised and election results were skewed” and to investigate caucus fraud issues further, go to: http://www.lynettelong.com/caucusfraud/statistics/ and http://www.wewillnotbesilenced2008.com/. I also recommend “Has America Outgrown the Caucus?” by Tova Wang a Democracy Fellow at The Century Foundation.

Another point to be made in terms of why the superdelegates did (or did not) do as they did was money, hence the *. I recommend this video by HRCinO8 to you – it is one you may have seen before, but it emphasizes how much money Obama shelled out to superdelegates.

These are excellent questions, Ms. Cronin. Another question raised in our email exchanges prior to this article was: Did ACORN have any involvement in the rampant caucus fraud that occurred this year? As of yet, I have no proof one way or the other, and would certainly be interested in any certifiable, authentic connections. It does seem plausible to me, though, given the extent of their voter registration fraud. Why would they do one and not the other?

And given the extent of that voter registration fraud, Ms. Cronin also questioned voting Third Party this year since the potential fraud is so pervasive that every vote against corruption is critical. While we know Gore actually won FL, the votes siphoned off to Nader made it easier to ignore the actual recount tally (post-Supreme Court decision). I think Ms. Cronin makes a good point regarding third party voting and the query about any connection to ACORN. I would like to thank her for making sense of all of the caucus irregularities and for showing, clearly, what we all suspected and knew in our hearts – that the DNC appointed Obama its nominee, not the votes or will of the people. For that, they have some ‘splaining to do…

GREEN BAY, Wis. — Hoping to shore up support in his suddenly undependable backyard, Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama flew here Monday to talk about how he’d handle economic crises as president.

Recent polls have shown that Wisconsin — once pretty solidly in Obama’s column — is now a statistical dead heat between Obama and Republican John McCain.

“You all know that you hold this election in your hands,” Sen. Russ Feingold, a Democrat who said he worked on ethics legislation with Obama, told a crowd of about 6,000 cheering Obama fans in the arena next to Lambeau Field. “We just barely won this state for Al Gore in 2000 and we just barely won this state for John Kerry in 2004.”

While it’s true that Obama has had an uptick in national polls over the last week, he is also on the defensive in more blue states. John McCain is locking down states like Ohio and Florida, and is now expanding the map into Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Minnesota. Obama, it appears, has a small advantage in New Mexico and Colorado.

National Public Radio reports that the battleground states are becoming fewer:

The number of battleground states has shrunk — from 19 to 14 — as Alaska, Georgia, North Dakota and Montana returned to their Republican roots.

In August, Obama led in the 14 states by 3 points. Now McCain leads in those states by 2, and the underlying political landscape has shifted a bit as well.

If national polls swing back to McCain, and there’s no reason to think they won’t, then we should expect McCain to take a small lead in Minnesota, Wisconsin and, perhaps, Pennsylvania.

Kerry beat Bush in Wisconsin by a razor-thin .38% or 11,384 votes of nearly 3 million cast, while Ralph Nader received just over 16,000 votes. The Nader campaign recently announced that Nader will be on the ballot in Wisconsin this year, having collected 3,500 signatures.

Although not as close as Wisconsin, two other swing states are worth watching. In 2004, Kerry beat Bush by 98,319 votes in Minnesota of almost 3 million cast, and in Pennsylvania by 144,248 votes out of 6 million cast, a 2.5% margin.

What is causing Obama such problems in swing states? NPR says it’s The Clinton Factor:

something else is holding Obama back: He still hasn’t won over enough of Hillary Clinton’s voters.

“One thing that Obama tried to do in his convention was unite the Democratic vote behind him, and it still hasn’t completely happened,” Bolger said. “Our survey found that of the voters who said they voted for Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary, 20 percent of them are still voting for John McCain.”

One Clinton voter is Louis Brandenburg, a heavy-equipment operator from Avella, Pa. He said he has made up his mind for November.

“Yeah, I guess so: Mr. Obama, I guess. I have no choice,” he said.

Even with little enthusiasm, Brandenburg — a Democrat — is sticking with his party. But plenty of his friends in southwestern Pennsylvania are very enthusiastic about Sarah Palin.

“There’s a lot of them who are going to vote for her and McCain because of the hunting issue,” he said. “I can’t understand what happened to our party; it just seems like the Republican Party is always the ones who back hunters and sportsmen, and all we get from the other one is flack about hunting and guns.”

————————————————————
Photographs of empty seats at the Obama rally in Green Bay, Wisconsin:

According to Jake Tapper of ABC News, “Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin packed the house last week in Green Bay, Wis., at the Resch Center.”

A new poll in Michigan (link is to US Census demographic data) from WXYZ and the Detroit Free Press points to tight and tightening race with Senator Obama leading Senator McCain by three points. The previous poll from Rasmussen Reports had Obama leading by five points. This new poll seems consistent with the dynamic at play in Michigan.

Michigan voters are weighing in on the race for the White House. The latest results are in from an exclusive WXYZ-TV/Detroit News poll which shows that the presidential race is extremely tight. Experts say it could all come down to Michigan in this historic election.

The exclusive poll shows the race getting even closer, with Barack Obama leading John McCain 43% to 42% with a 4 point margin of error. When Michigan voters were asked to consider both tickets, now that both running mates have been chosen, Obama’s lead jumps slightly to 45% compared to McCain’s 42%.

For the first time, our exclusive poll is showing how Michigan voters feel about McCain’s Vice Presidential Pick, Sarah Palin. When asked if Sarah Palin should John McCain not be able to serve out his term, 43% of Michigan voters polled said yes compared to 47% who said no.

According to the poll, an overwhelming 73% of voters are convinced that the U.S. is headed in the wrong direction, while 80% believe Michigan is on the wrong track.
Three issues concern Michigan voters the most, according to latest poll results. The economy is at the top of the list, followed by protecting America from terrorism and health care.

THE ENTIRE POLL IS POSTED BELOW WITH THE ACTUAL QUESTIONS THAT VOTERS WERE ASKED. 602 PEOPLE WERE SURVEYED AND THERE IS A MARGIN OF ERROR OF ±4%.

Overall, would you say that things in the United States are generally headed in the right direction, or have things pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track?

17% Right direction
73% Wrong track
10% Undecided / Don’t know / Refused

How about in Michigan – are things in Michigan generally headed in the right direction, or are things pretty seriously off on the wrong track?

11% Right direction
80% Wrong track
9% Undecided / Don’t know / Refused

Now I am going to read a list of the top 10 national problems or issues people say they are most concerned about. After I read the whole list, please tell me which one problem or issue you are personally concerned about the most?

43% Improving the nation’s economy and providing jobs
13% Protecting America from terrorism
9% Making quality health care affordable and accessible
8% Promoting morality and family values
7% Fighting the ongoing war in Iraq
6% Reducing the price of gasoline
5% Improving education
4% Keeping federal taxes low
2% Protecting our air and water
1% Controlling crime and drugs
1% More than one
1% Undecided / Don’t know / Refused

Here is a list of several political figures. For each one, please tell me if you recognize the name, and if you do, whether you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of that person.

George W. Bush
Total Favorable – 25%
Total Unfavorable – 62%

Jennifer Granholm
Total Favorable – 50%
Total Unfavorable – 41%

John McCain
Total Favorable – 51%
Total Unfavorable – 42%

Barack Obama
Total Favorable – 54%
Total Unfavorable – 36%

Sarah Palin
Total Favorable – 48%
Total Unfavorable – 35%

Joe Biden
Total Favorable – 47%
Total Unfavorable – 30%

Carl Levin
Total Favorable – 55%
Total Unfavorable – 25%

Jack Hoogendyk
Total Favorable – 5%
Total Unfavorable – 6%

Do you think the U.S. economy is getting stronger, getting weaker, or staying about the same?

5% Getting stronger
68% Getting weaker
24% Staying about the same
3% Undecided/Don’t know/Refused

In the election for President, if the election were held today, would you vote for John McCain the Republican, Barack Obama the Democrat, Ralph Nader the Independent, or Bob Barr the Libertarian? If you are undecided and the election were held today and you had to decide right now, which candidate would you lean toward, Obama, McCain, Nader or Barr?

43% Total Obama
42% Total McCain
2% Total Nader
2% Total Barr
10% Undecided / Don’t know / Refused

Have you ruled out voting for Barack Obama the Democrat and are pretty certain that you will vote for John McCain the Republican, or, are you still considering Barack Obama and might change your mind and vote for him?

81% Ruled out Obama and certain to be voting for McCain
17% Still considering Obama and may change mind
2% Undecided/Don’t know/Refused

What is the main reason why you are voting for John McCain?

21% His Position on Issues – In General
18% He’s Conservative
17% Experience
13% Best Candidate
7% Abortion Position
6% Like Him – In General
6% Strong Leader
5% National Security Position
3% Taxes Position
3% War In Iraq Position
2% Running Mate – Palin
— Undecided / Don’t know / Refused

What would you say is the main reason why you are NOT voting for Barack Obama?

28% Lacks Experience
14% Too Liberal
12% Disagree with His Ideas
10% Abortion Position
8% Do Not Trust Him
7% Taxes Position
4% False Promises
4% Like McCain More – In General
4% Track Record
3% Would Ruin The Country
2% War In Iraq Position
1% Dislike Him – In General
1% Health Care Position
1% Religion
2% Undecided / Don’t know / Refused

Have you ruled out voting for John McCain the Republican and are pretty certain that you will vote for Barack Obama the Democrat, or, are you still considering John McCain and might change your mind and vote for him?

85% Ruled out McCain and certain to be voting for Obama
15% Still considering McCain and may change mind
— Undecided/ Don’t know/ Refused

What is the main reason why you are voting for Barack Obama?

41% Represents Change
19% Democrat
15% His Position on Issues – In General
13% Economy Position
6% Trust Him
3% Taxes Position
3% Abortion Position

What would you say is the main reason why you are NOT voting for John McCain?

42% More Bush Policy – Same
9% Age
9% Republican
6% Do Not Trust Him
6% Does Not Understand The Middle Class
5% Economy Position
5% False Promises
5% Running Mate – Palin
3% Health Care Position
3% Like Obama More – In General
2% War in Iraq Position
2% Abortion Position
2% Taxes Position

If you were not voting for (Bob Barr/Ralph Nader), which of the two major party candidates would you vote for – John McCain the Republican or Barack Obama the Democrat? If undecided, and the election were held today and you had to decide right now, which candidate would you lean toward, Obama or McCain?

11% – Total Obama
36% – Total McCain
53% – Undecided / Don’t know / Refused

If the November general election for U.S. Senate were held today, would you vote for Jack Hoogendyk the Republican or Carl Levin the Democrat?

56% Total Levin
28% Total Hoogendyk
16% Undecided / Don’t know/ Refused

For each word or phrase I read, please tell me whether you think it is a better description of John McCain the Republican or Barack Obama the Democrat?

Someone you can trust.
43% – McCain
39% – Obama

He shares my values.
44% – McCain
42% – Obama

Cares about someone like me.
33% – McCain
47% – Obama

Has the right kind of experience.
61% – McCain
26% – Obama

Will bring about needed change.
31% – McCain
51% – Obama

Will work for bipartisan solutions.
41% – McCain
41% – Obama

Will be able to inspire people.
25% – McCain
62% – Obama

Will be a strong leader.
45% – McCain
39% – Obama

Will protect American interests.
48% – McCain
36% – Obama

If John McCain is elected, how comfortable are you with the thought of having him as President – very comfortable, mostly comfortable, only somewhat comfortable, or not really comfortable at all?

42% Total Comfortable
25% Only somewhat comfortable
30% Not really comfortable at all
3% Undecided/Don’t know/Refused

If Barack Obama is elected, how comfortable are you with the thought of having him as President – very comfortable, mostly comfortable, only somewhat comfortable, or not really comfortable at all?

48% Total Comfortable
21% Only somewhat comfortable
28% Not really comfortable at all
3% Undecided / Don’t know / Refused

Did the selection of Sarah Palin as the candidate for Vice President make you more likely to vote for John McCain, less likely to vote for him, or, would you say that the selection of Sarah Palin really didn’t influence you one way or the other?

26% More Likely
47% No influence one way or the other
25% Less Likely
2% Undecided/Don’t know/Refused

Did the selection of Joe Biden as the candidate for Vice President make you more likely to vote for Barack Obama, less likely to vote for him, or, would you say that the selection of Joe Biden really didn’t influence you one way or the other?

23% More Likely
58% No influence one way or the other
16% Less Likely
3% Undecided / Don’t know / Refused

Thinking about the two tickets for President, if the election were held today, would you vote for John McCain and Sarah Palin the Republicans, Barack Obama and Joe Biden the Democrats, Ralph Nader the Independent, or Bob Barr the Libertarian?

45% Total Obama – Biden
42% Total McCain – Palin
2% Total Nader
2% Total Barr
9% Undecided/Don’t know/Refused

If John McCain were elected President and he was not able to serve for his entire term of office, do you think that Sarah Palin is qualified enough to be able to step in as President, or not?

43% Yes, she is qualified to be President
47% No, she is not qualified to be President
10% decided/Don’t know/Refused

Based on what you know or have heard or read, what do you think John McCain’s religion is?

21% Protestant (Methodist, Baptist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, or Episcopalian)
6% Roman Catholic or Catholic
2% Other
2% Christian – Non Denominational (volunteered)
29% None (volunteered)
40% Undecided/Don’t know/Refused

Based on what you know or have heard of read, what do you think Barack Obama’s religion is?

19% Protestant (Methodist, Baptist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, or Episcopalian)
1% Roman Catholic or Catholic
7% Muslim
2% Christian – Non Denominational (volunteered)
33% None (volunteered)
37% Undecided / Don’t know / Refused

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? American voters are not ready yet to elect a candidate for president who is a black man?

14% Agree
78% Disagree
8% Undecided/Don’t know/Refused

Do you think of yourself as pro-choice, meaning that you support allowing women to have the right to an abortion, or do you consider yourself pro-life, meaning that you oppose abortions except where it is necessary to save the life of the mother?

50% Pro-choice
46% Pro-life
4% Undecided/Don’t know/Refused

Takeaways
Michigan went both for Al Gore in 2000 and for John Kerry in 2004. Senator Kerry carried Michigan by 3.42%. Obama has to hold both Michigan and Pennsylvania and pry away one other state with at least five Electoral College votes into his column. So far, that seems doable if not likely with races in Virginia and Colorado running neck and neck. For McCain right now Pennsylvania, where the race is in a dead heat, seems the likelier bet to secure the White House.

Worrisome for McCain is the fact that 73% of Michigan voters think that country is headed in the wrong direction and that 42% tied McCain to the policies of the Bush Administration. The biggest negative for Obama was his perceived lack of experience but even then only 28% saw that as a problem. Michigan may well likely be one of the few states that decide the race and at this point reading the numbers underneath the overall number show Obama likely holding onto Michigan and thus probably winning the White House. The other state to watch is Pennsylvania.

Michigan has 17 Electoral College votes.

From my blog, By The Fault.

The McCain campaign released yet another ad this afternoon, its eighth in the past 24 hours. This ad is entitled Overseas and is tailored for the Michigan market. The ad is a 30 second spot. It hits Senator Obama and the Democratic party over the flight of Michigan jobs overseas.

Michigan has 17 Electoral College votes and it is shaping up to be one of the more contested battleground states and as of right now it is seeing some of the most heavy ad buys by both campaigns.

From my blog, By The Fault.

Barack Obama is not the “map changer” CNN and all the discredited Democratic blogs claimed he would be; he is a supercilious underachiever who promises to color the entire nation red, not blue. He is tied with McCain in Minnesota and Pennsylvania; he is trailing McCain in Ohio AND MICHIGAN; he is CLINGING to a lead in New Jersey; and women in New York state are abandoning the Democratic ticket, thereby catapulting McCain-Palin within striking distance of Obama-Biden in a state Gore and Kerry won by 25 and 17 points respectively: portentous numbers, these, but the Democratic Party refused to listen when we warned them about this during the primary season. Democrats, I guess, want to lose. Indeed, they seem to enjoy it.

So now Obama must invest precious and finite resources in states such as New Jersey and New York. And instead of campaigning in Arkansas, Nevada, Florida or Louisiana, he will hold events in Minnesota, a state that should be solidly Democratic in the current political climate. He may even have to campaign in New York now that McCain is within five points of the underperforming Obama. A Democratic strategist quoted in the New York Post article I cite above summarizes this state of affairs succinctly. I quote:

“If it winds up being tight in New York, that means McCain wins the election nationally,” said a prominent Democrat familiar with some of the polling data.

I hope Nancy Pelosi, Howard Dean, Donna Brazile and all the venal bloggers and operatives who manufactured support for Obama online are satisfied. For once McCain wins, and he will win, it will be time for real Democrats who enjoy winning elections to reform OUR presently defunct Party apparatus from within and from without. We have worked too hard for this Party to allow them to squander opportunity after opportunity in order to satisfy the warped desires of a small band of elitist mediocrities who again and again take those of us who comprise the Democratic base for granted.

216 for McCain-Palin, 217 for Obama-Biden, 105 Toss Ups: Obama’s lead in the electoral college has officially eroded. Here is Survey USA’s report about the state of electoral affairs in Washington state:

Democrat Barack Obama’s once double-digit lead in Washington state is no more, according to this latest SurveyUSA poll conducted exclusively for KING-TV Seattle and KATU-TV Portland Oregon. In an election today, eight weeks till votes are counted, it’s Obama 49%, McCain 45%. Compared to an identical SurveyUSA poll 4 weeks ago (before both candidates had named their running mates), Obama is down 2 points; McCain is up 1. Compared to an identical SurveyUSA poll 8 weeks ago, Obama is down 6; McCain is up 6. Obama led by 17 points in June, led by 16 points in July, led 8 points in August, leads 4 points today.

Among voters with no college education, there is continuing movement to McCain. Obama led by 15 points in July, now trails by 8, a 23-point erosion. Among voters who earn less than $50K a year, there is continuing movement to McCain. Obama’s once 26-point lead among the lower-income group is now 5 points, a 21-point erosion. Among voters older than McCain, Obama had led by 24 points in July, now trails by 1, a 25-point erosion. McCain always has run well among Conservatives, but his advantage among Conservatives has grown from 4:1 in May to 11:1 today. In Eastern Washington state, Obama led 5:4 in June, but McCain leads 2:1 today.

The erosion of Obama’s once staggering lead is not limited to Washington state; it has also altered the landscape of Montana. I quote Rasmussen Reports:

John McCain has opened a double digit lead over Barack Obama in Montana. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the Treasure State finds McCain leading by eleven, 53% to 42%.

That’s quite a change from late July when the race was a toss-up. Montana has voted for a Republican candidate in nine of the last ten presidential elections but Obama had made clear his intention to compete for the state’s three Electoral College votes. The candidate himself spent the Fourth of July in Butte, Montana and his campaign ran significant television advertising in the state. However, just before the Democratic National Convention, Obama stopped advertising in Montana and several other traditionally Republican states.

The erosion is also occuring in North Dakota. I quote Rasmussen Reports again:

Like neighboring Montana, North Dakota has become a lot friendlier to John McCain in the first polling conducted since Sarah Palin was nominated to be the Republican Vice Presidential nominee.
The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of North Dakota voters shows McCain with a 14-percentage point lead over Barack Obama, 55% to 41%. In early July, the candidates were tied in the state and Obama was looking to the Dakotas and Montana as a way to expand the electoral map for Democrats. Now, the Democratic nominee appears to be more focused on traditional battleground states.

But North Carolina really bore the brunt of this displacement of geological proportions. I quote ABC 11 News in Raleigh-Durham:

In 3 previous SurveyUSA NC tracking polls, McCain had led by 8, 5, and 4 points. Today: 20. McCain has gained ground in every demographic group. Among men, McCain led by 9 last month, 27 today. Among women, Obama led by 2 last month, trails by 12 today. McCain holds 9 of 10 Republican voters; Obama holds 3 of 4 Democratic voters; independents, who were split last month, break today crisply for McCain, where, in the blink of an eye, he is up by 25.

In a blink of an eye, a veritable avalanche followed in the wake of Sarah Palin’s emergence. States once competitive were swept into McCain’s columns, while others, particularly those “traditional battleground states,” are quickly sliding toward the precipice. McCain is hovering above the fifty percent threshold in Missouri; he leads Obama by 1 point in Nevada; he is inching ahead of Obama in Michigan; McCain-Palin trounces the Democratic ticket in Florida by a seemingly insurmountable 8 points; the gap separating Obama and McCain in New Jersey is closing; and Ohio is teetering on the brink: unless Obama can move mountains, the prospect of a Democratic victory will be nothing more than a pebble plummeting into a Republican abyss.

No wonder why Democrats on Capitol Hill are panicking. And no wonder why Obama is resorting to some of the most deplorable tactics imaginable. But Obama is desperate, and desperate candidates will do and say anything in a vain attempt to reverse a course that can only be described as inexorable.