Only $33,906,000 To Go

Two woman have made it there goal to trump President Bush's decision to withold $34 million dollars in UN funds by raising it themselves. Hardly a groundswell I'd say:

Their goal is to find 34 million friends to help UNFPA continue its invaluable work as the largest international provider of family planning and maternal health care. The grassroots campaign has taken flight and the emails sent out by Lois and Jane are being forwarded to colleges, list-serves, club memberships and more...As of 19 November, UNFPA has received $94,119.90 in support.

The 43% Solution, A Pro-War Column in the Boston Globe:

Left-wing Op-Ed columnist Derrick Z. Jackson got a bit lazy this week and wrote a column 43% of which was direct quotes from Condoleeza Rice. Guess what? The liberal columnist ended up writing one of the best pro-war analyses you are likely to find. What we need are not fewer liberal columnists, just lazier ones. Here are some gems from my gal, Condi:

With Saddam Hussein, you have a potential for a homicidal dictator who has demonstrated that he is ambitious and aggressive in attacking his neighbors and gassing his own people and gassing his neighbors...

He already has other weapons of mass destruction. But a nuclear weapon, two or three or four years from now - I don't care where it is, when it is - to have that happen in a volatile region like the Middle East is most certainly a future we cannot tolerate. And so the president has to ask - if we come to that point - the American people to make the sacrifice in the way they've made the sacrifices over the centuries to defend this way of life and to defend freedom...

When I hear, `Well, if you don't bother him, he won't bother you,' I think it's a fundamental misreading of this book of history. This is somebody who has, after all, already attacked his neighbors in this century. This is somebody who has used weapons of mass destruction against his own people and against the Kurds - against the Iranians. This is someone who has tried to assassinate a former president of the United States...

I don't want him armed with a nuclear weapon. That means you don't have the luxury of waiting until he gets good at weapons of mass destruction to try to disarm him.

Israeli Cartoon Worth Looking At:

This is what make the Internet great.

When Did This Economic Downturn Begin?:

This chart says it all. Every chance I get, I'll post this link at the websites of the Lefty bloggers so that they might be properly educated.

Anti-Catholic Reporters Misreport Bishops Conference:

In what is surely a first for him, outsider priest Andrew Greeley dissects the purposeful distortions of reporters covering the current Bishops conference in Washington this week. After pointing out five specific points on which the media is reporting inaccurately, Father Greeley write:

The distortion was abetted by a few of the supposed victims' leaders who, reveling in their power and 15 minutes of fame, don't want any due process for the accused. They probably would not be satisfied if the Vatican had mandated castration for every priest in the nation.

Some of the reporting on the bishops' meeting is so filled with misinformation that it has to be either deliberately anti-Catholic or intolerably ignorant.

Few in the church have the moral standing to say such things. I'm glad Father Greeley has stepped up and started battling back against the disinformation of both the media and the "victims" groups.

A Gentle Fisking of Mr. Kristof of the NY Times:

Be Careful What You Ask For
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

Republicans are really in a pickle now.

Agreed. A week ago the Republicans were merely "no where", now they are "in a pickle", perhaps next month they will be enjoying their "salad days". All of this to say, it is better to be relevant than irrelevant.

No, it's true. Just consider the picture in the fall of 2004 as President Bush battles to hold onto Congress and his own house:
• The new Scalia Supreme Court has accepted an abortion case that could overturn Roe v. Wade and abortion rights in America. The federal budget deficit has hit $400 billion, and the expanded 2003 tax cuts mean that the federal debt is out of control. This has kept the Dow below 7,000.

Of course, it would all depend on what part of Roe was being overturned, wouldn't it? For instance, if the case were regarding partial-birth abortion, public funding of abortion, and/or the rights parents to be involved in the health decisions of their minor daughters, then, such a hot-button Supreme Court decision would be of great electoral help to President Bush. Sure, he'd lose all the support he's now getting from NARAL and NOW (by the way, how's Shannon O'Brien doing?)

As to the Federal debt, voters don't blame deficits on a lack of taxes, they blame it on overspending. Should the Democrats like the 2004 election to be about this particular issue, again, advantage Bush.

• The '02 election has emboldened conservatives to take hard-line positions and overshoot their mandate, just as they did under Newt Gingrich in 1994, so that more high school students now learn about creationism than about condoms. The result, once again, is rising public anger at right-wing ideologues.

Oh my gosh, I agree with our fine writer Saint Nick. If high school students begin to learn more about Creationism then it would be a terrible negative against Bush especially if such a wave of Creationist frenzy emanated from the halls of the federal Department of Education. Hey, since we are imagining silly things, I propose we imagine that in order to reel in the dangers of the anti-Darwin forces at DOE, Bush simply abolishes the Department altogether. Thanks for the suggestion, Nicky…advantage Bush.

• In response to huge budget deficits, states have had to slash school spending. Test scores are dropping, and a growing number of children are being left behind. Even centrists are angered by logging of old-growth forests and the administration's fervent push to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

School budgets are now, and at least for the next two years, will be, the domain of local governments (with a tad of state dollars thrown in for sure). Highly unlikely that our dear President will cough up another pretzel just because East Podunk Jr. High had to cut Bilingual Phys Ed.

As for the old growth forests and the oil, it all depends how cold it is in November 2004. Given that Global Warming is such a crock, I imagine many an American in that coming election will be looking to stay toasty…advantage Bush

• The occupation of Iraq is increasingly unpopular at home, with an average of one American killed there every two weeks and Iran gaining influence in the anarchic south. The catastrophic failure to engage North Korea has led that country to start up its Yongbyon reactor, churn out many nuclear weapons and test its new three-stage Taepodong 2 missile, which can reach New York.

Oooh, St. Nick, thanks for coming to my strongest points. Hmmm, whose Korea policy will the voters support Neville Chamberlain Jimmy Carter or President Bush of Baghdad? As I see it, now that the Bush had the North Koreans pegged as untrustworthy weasels from day one of his Administration, I say the voters will pull the lever for the Conqueror of Mesopotamia. Also, if the occupation of Iraq is responsible for 26 American deaths a year, I venture to say that might be the lowest death toll of any occupying army in the history of man…advantage Bush.

The above paragraphs will self-destruct next year, well before they could embarrass me by being juxtaposed with reality. As Mark Twain said, the art of prophecy is difficult, especially with regard to the future. But it does seem plausible that Republicans will overinterpret their mandate (if 22,000 votes had gone differently, the Senate could have remained Democratic in January).

Of course, given that every commentator, every pundit, every Congressman, every Senator and even the President himself has warned about the dangers of gloating and overreaching, I should say that, indeed, it is NOT very "plausible" the Republicans will over-interpret their mandate. Far from, it is more plausible that they will under-interpret. That Bush, he's so humble…advantage.

President Bush is, like President Reagan but unlike his father, a natural leader who is unafraid to use political capital and even borrow some from the bank. If he pushed an aggressive platform before, with a minority of the popular vote and a divided Congress, imagine what he'll seek now. Already the Republicans are oozing hubris.

"Oozing hubris" Definitions: Oozing - To flow or leak out slowly…Hubris - Overbearing pride or presumption; arrogance. Let's put it this way, Little Nicky, if George Bush runs in 2004 on with a bumper sticker that read "Bush: Leaks Arrogance", he'd still beat Nancy Pelosi by eight points in Missouri.

(You can't much blame them. As David Letterman observed about the Democrats, You know you're in trouble when your bright young star of the future is Frank Lautenberg.)

Yet the reality is that this will be an excruciating economic climate in which to govern. New York State alone will face a $6 billion shortfall next year, and war spending and tax cuts could easily push the federal deficit to between $200 billion and $400 billion in 2004, up to a precarious 4 percent of G.N.P. Services and school programs around the country will be cut, and voters will find someone to blame in two years' time. The Democrats, out of power, won't make a convenient whipping boy.

On the contrary, Comrade Kristof, if there is one thing I am certain of is that the Democrats will no doubt FIND a way to make themselves a convenient whipping boy. Let's say…by raising incoming taxes and lowering social security taxes thereby extending the adding two years to the retirement age and having to tax more of the Social Security benefits of the retired middle class. This even before we get to reparation for Slavery and Al Sharpton's speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention.

John Ellis, a Bush cousin and longtime conservative political analyst, gets it exactly right on his Weblog: "The 2002 result is a strong vote of confidence for the Bush administration. It is not a mandate. The great danger that now looms for the G.O.P. is that it will mistake the vote of confidence for a mandate."

Doesn't this prove MY previous point that 'everyone and his cousin' (hey, this time it's more than just a figure of speech…neato) all agree not to repeat 1994?

In his press conference yesterday, Mr. Bush gave no sign he is intoxicated by election vapors; even when goaded by reporters looking for a good story, he didn't speak dreamily about appointing John Ashcroft to the Supreme Court, drilling for oil in Yellowstone or exiling liberals to Guantánamo. The key test, though, will be in the coming weeks as we see whether he reads the soon-to-be-passed U.N. resolution on Iraq the same way everyone else does.

Okay, what's going on here Czar Nicholas? Do you intend to make all of my points for me again? You write that Bush is not speaking dreamily about an Ashcroft court seat nor about oil in Yellowstone nor about sending you Guantanamo. Hey, whose side are you on any way? Also, please note that President Bush hasn't given a "sign he is intoxicated" in over a decade, wise ass.

Mr. Bush's problem is that he has launched a diplomatic process in which he has little faith. The reality is that he went to the U.N. to get international legitimacy, not weapons inspections. So he may soon be tempted to short-circuit the diplomatic process.

Dearest me, you mean the President might subvert the will of the UN to protect the US national interest. My goodness that might just lose the GOP the electoral votes of Washington DC and Massachusetts!

The resolution, as it is presently drafted, requires Saddam Hussein to make a full declaration of his secret programs within 30 days. It's a good bet that there'll be a lot of doubt that his declaration is completely truthful, and so hawks will encourage Mr. Bush to launch a war at that time. They will urge him to announce that the declaration is false and constitutes a "material breach" — and then send the bombers. If that happens, we could be at war by year's end. We might be paying for such hubris for years to come.

Yes, but will we be OOZING hubris for years to come? Perhaps you might expound upon that in your next insightful column…advantage Bush.

Salon.Com Wants It Both Ways:

After weeks of decrying President Bush's unilateralism, Eric Boehlert of Salon is now decrying Bush multi-lateralism:

Nonetheless, because of the compromise, it's the U.N. -- not the U.S. -- that will shape the conflict for weeks and perhaps months to come. Bush still has the power to act whenever he wants, but instead of Americans deciding whether Iraq is complying with inspections, that crucial task now largely rests with chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix, a 72-year-old Swedish diplomat.

I believe President Bush is playing the UN like a violin. During the summer he did his "I'm a crazy cowboy ready to kill" routine and the Europeans fell for it. Of course, the Euros freaked and they lurched hard to the right just to keep the President in their orbit. Instantly, the debate began over the exact wording of the kick-ass resolution not whether there SHOULD be a kick-ass resolution. As Mr. Burns would say, "Excellent..."

Return of the San Fransisco Democrats:

Jeanne Kirkpatrick used the term "San Fransisco Democrats" as a double-entendre against the Dems in 1988. It was the city of the Democratic Convention, but the use of the quirky city's name as an adjective for "Democrat" struck a nerve with voters in a different way too, conjuring up images of men in drag and women kissing women. Now there really is a left liberal Democrat from San Fransisco ready to take over the leadership of the House Democrats and things should get interesting. Welcome Nancy Pelosi! Okay okay, how about a quote from Nancy when she was on NPR recently:

It's my view that the cause for war that the president has presented, that the Iraqis have some nuclear capability to strike the United States, is not real. We have not seen the evidence for that. The administration may have it and upon seeing it people may have a different view. But right now the cause of war that is being put forth, honestly, is not documented.

Romney Should (and Can) Help Build the Party:

I've never been one to hold out much hope on the ability of Massachusetts' Republican Governors to rebuild the Republican party, but I now have cause for optimism and his name is Mitt Romney. It is my hope that Governor-Elect Romney will be able to do what WeldUcciWift was never able to accomplish for these reasons:

1- Weld's first election was a win for "liberals" who voted to reject the more conservative Silber in favor of the ardent social liberal Weld. Most Republicans were uncomfortable being enthusiastic in their support for a Governor Weld whose views about abortion were from a NARAL campaign book and views toward homosexual rights were akin to those of ACTUP! Therefore, Weld was a most unlikely candidate to build the party.

2- Cellucci's electoral victory was a cobbling together of union support and ethnic Democrat mayors. Again, not the kind of campaign around which many real Republicans could rally.

3- Swift is Swift.

With Romeny's recent win, I strongly believe the rebuilding process can now go forward.

Romney won the race as a conservative not a social liberal. Although Romney was a moderate pro-choice candidate and was in no way hostile to mainstream gay rights efforts, he appeared agonized over these positions in the same way that many, many Republicans and Independents are also torn by these issues. Weld and Cellucci always seemed so smug and confident in their pro-abortion and pro-gay positions that average people wondered if these two guys were either clueless to the moral issues involved or just political phonies taking positions simply to win liberal Democratic votes.

More importantly, Romney won his race in the face of fierce Union and Democratic mayor/legislator opposition. Rather than the go-along-get-along race Cellucci won in 1998, Romney won this race with only those parts of the electorate needed to build a Republican base - Independents and Republicans. With the foundation laid, Romney should now handpick a professional party builder (no hacks need apply) to identify and solidify these votes for the legislative races of 2004. This cannot happen quickly enough.

An Emerging Majority Doesn't "Just Happen":

Blogger Patrick Ruffini has a great piece today. Read the whole thing, but here is a taste:

For eight years, all the dynamism in the Democratic Party, intellectually and financially, was wrapped up in one way or another in the Clinton Administration. And must as they're loath to admit it, Clintonites out of power are quite enjoying their comfortably appointed K Street offices and think tank fellowships (not to mention their new BMWs and getting home at a decent hour). The mood among those who would lend their intellectual imprimatur to reshaping the Democratic Party is not exactly one of urgency.

Building a majority is hard work and that work is not particularly glamorous. The Democrats have to wonder if they have it in them to do that work.

Poor-Hating, Wealthy-Coddling British Regressive Tax:

How come you never hear about this? In Britain the top 1% of taxpayers contribute 23% of tax revenues and the top 10% contribute 53%. The US tax code is significantly more progressive where the top 1% contributes 35% of tax revenues and the top 10% contributes above 65%. Damn, those right-wing Labour Party policy wonks.

Good Advice for the UN from The Times of London:

Now this kind of British analysis makes some sense:

If other actors ever doubted that Mr Bush had the standing at home to pursue President Saddam Hussein with or without the explicit approval of the United Nations, then they will have been disabused of that notion. Those who wield vetoes on the Security Council would be wise to end their filibustering and should be prepared for certain military action if Iraq obstructs the UN weapons inspectors....

Mr Bush will be viewed differently today by Democrats. His personal popularity since September 11 last year has been spectacular but the suspicion remained that it might also be fragile. This Republican triumph will make some of those who were contemplating challenging him in 2004 reconsider their options. They may rightly conclude that only a badly damaged economy could deny the President a second term. Mr Bush should reduce that danger by swiftly changing some of his key personnel in this area and dealing decisively with the allegations of business excess that have increased corporate uncertainty.

The Democrats may be about to compound Mr Bush's victory. The instant reaction of many in the party has been to claim that their defeat was due to the failure to articulate a national message and a reluctance to challenge the President more vigorously. On this logic, they would turn sharply to the left and use more populist rhetoric. This would be a serious mistake as it would concede the centre ground to the White House. The awkward truth is that the Democrats would have lost even more seats if they had stood for higher taxes and a reluctance to back regime change in Iraq.

Bush Leads, The World Doesn't Follow - The Guardian

Our commentator friends at The Guardian are at it again with another misreading of America.

Now that he controls all the political institutions - House, Senate, White House - Bush can move to infiltrate the judiciary. Dozens of conservative federal judges with lifetime tenure await confirmation they can now expect to get. This will permanently reorient constitutional trends. The slashing of forests and the drilling of wilderness, by timber and oil interests newly let loose, will be still less reversible. The rich men's tax cuts of 2001 will be secured against revision, and other tax cuts added. The 40 million Americans without health insurance can expect to remain that way. Axioms of inequality will be engraved deeper into the pillars of American society. None of these preferences has much appeal to many Europeans, and the best exemplar of this is not German social democracy but British conservatism. The Republicans confirm themselves as a role model the Tories cannot follow.

There has never been an instant when any American voter has considered their vote in light of mentoring European political parties. In fact, we don't want Europe to follow our successful rugged individualism. We would rather see Europe slide slowly, slowly into the morass of a perpetually stagnant economy so that the best and brightest will continue to come to the US in search of real economic opportunity. I guess my message to the EU is, "We love you just the way your are."

New Jersey Supreme Court Decision was a Factor

I know I'm still harping on this, but now I have data to prove it. A Public Opinion Strategies report says, "the handling of Senator Wellstone's memorial service and the way the ballot situation was handled in New Jersey was clearly a factor in helping drive Republican intensity in this election." As I've said, no bad deed goes unpunished.

Governor-Elect Romney is a Mormon

Why do I mention (again) that Mitt is a Mormon? Because in some countries of this world the election of a religious minority to an important post would be either a) impossible, or b) cause for riot and murder. We are damn lucky to live in the USA and all those anti-Americans who think our nation is filled with intolerance and bigotry should take a look at Massachusetts.

A Word from Across the Pond:

From The Guardian, about why Bush scored such a victory in the mid-terms -

One last explanation: Bush himself. Even those who oppose every one of his policies, at home and abroad, must surely now face up to the fact that this president has become a formidable politician.

Damn straight. And don't you forget it.

Goodbye South Dakota...Hello, Louisiana?

Will the runnoff voters of Louisiana learn from the mistakes of South Dakota?

Pssst, Louisiana....vote for real power...vote Republican.

South Dakota Sends Two Senators....to Serve in the Minority

Politics is brutal. How many South Dakotans voted for Senator Johnson in the belief that it would strengthen their state's power in the leadership of the Senate. Do you think it was more than 528 voters that made this fateful decision? I'd bet my horse on it. If it had been known that the Senate was going to switch control, this SD election would have gone for Thune.

Congratulations, South Dakotans you just cost your state tens and tens and tens of millions of dollars. To the victor goes the spoils! For SD? No soup for you!

Crow Eating Time:

Semi-apologies to Senator-elect Sununu - I underestimated your strength in a state I was certain was trending Democrat. However, voting for elimination of the home mortgage deduction was still stupid.

Apologies to Senator-elect Chambliss - I thought you'd come real close, but never thought you'd actually pull it out. I was in Atlanta about six weeks ago and didn't get a feel for the seismic events that were to come.

Apologies to Norm Coleman - You did it with class. If anyone deserved to win, it was you.

Some kudos for me, though, I picked Ehrlich and Romney...

After the Deluge: The Nation

I'll eat crow on some of my Senate predictions later today, but I see a couple of turning points that shaped this election:

- NJ Supreme Court allowing last minute switcheroo helped NJ Dems, but fired up the Republican base everywhere else (no bad deed goes unpunished).

- Wellstone memorial service disinviting Cheney and using the occassion to boo Republicans who came to grieve fired up the Republican base everywhere in the nation.

- Increased voter sophistication about the cyclical nature of our economy makes attempts to blame economic woes on just one person unpersuasive.

- The existance of a hard-core Liberal anti-Americanism that is never repudiated by Democratic leaders make the average person question Democrats' ability to handle the war against terror.

- George Bush is a nice guy (compare him to the pompous ass who is President on The West Wing and you have all the info you need to about why Hollywood doesn't get "it".)

After the Deluge: Massachusetts

Shannon O'Brien made a number of tactical mistakes in her campaign:

- arguing in favor of reducing the age of consent for abortions from age 18 to age 16

- flip flopping on gay marriage

- playing the gender card, and

- being seen with too many cigar chomping machine politicians (Clinton, Kennedy, and many, many union thugs).

These mistakes alienated her from the Independents she needed to convert.
In Romney's favor, he decided about mid-way through the election to run a race for Governor rather than a coronation as Emperor. Once he got the fire in his belly, the lessons he learned from his loss to Teddy came in very handy.

Massachusetts Race for Governor Returns: Percentage of returns 91%
note on notes: newest reports will be added to the front of the paragraph, older reports are the rest of the paragraph.

Mitt Romney Wins

At 91% - Blamo! Romney wins Framingham, largest town in America!

At 79% - Romney wins heavily Democratic, old Irish town of Clinton. At 70% - Wellesley goes heavily for Romney, very soccer mom-ish, could have been big for O'Brien but she never connected. At 59% - I'm off to follow other races. Congrats Mitt on a wonderful race! At 56% - wow, Mitt loses Revere by just a few points, folks these type of cities have to be 2 to 1 for Dems to win.At 50% - yikes, Mitt loses Lynn by just a few points that's got to hurt the Dems.At 46% - Ouch, Shannon loses hometown of Whitman....At 41% of state precincts reporting, Mitt is doing better than 36%, which is more than expected... This race if over, but I'll follow the returns with 36% in, there just aren't enough votes in Boston to help Shannon now. BAM! This might be over soon, Mitt runs at 48% in Brockton! Little bits of Boston coming in...Mitt losing 2 to 1...hold tight - Shannon running at 43% in Mitt's hometown of Belmont. Alert, these numbers include New Bedford which Mitt lost 3 to 1, as expected as Clinton was there yesteday. Romney running neck and neck in heavily Democratic city of Medford, good for Mitt. O'Brien NOT winning city of Sprinfield by more than 2 to 1, this might be good news for Mitt. Romney running even with O'Brien in Quincy with 1/3 precincts reporting...very good showing. Rumor of Romney upset in Everett, a very blue color Democratic town. Romney and O'Brien tied in Concord but Mitt will have to show more suburban strength than that to offset Boston and other large cities .

Romney (R) 50%

O'Brien (D) 45%

Stein (G) 3%

Howell (L) 1%

Johnson (I) 1%

Union Voting Irregularities are "Much Ado About Nothing", say Mass. Dem:

Secretary of State William Galvin said labor union voter intimidation reports were "much ado about nothing". The AP writes,

"Secretary of State William Galvin says he investigated the complaint, and found only one person who was approaching voters and offering translation services. Election officials asked that person to stay at least 150 feet away from the polling place, as required by law.

One must wonder what kind of "translation services" union thugs offer nowadays..."You don't understand? Why don't I MAKE you understand!"

Heavy Voting on Cape Cod:

Cape Cod Times reports heavy voting. That is good for Republican Mitt Romney as the Cape has the state's highest percentage of Republicans and Independents.

Labor Unions Intimidating Voters in Boston Wards:

Associated Press reporting:

"Republican Mitt Romney's campaign filed a complaint several hours after polls opened Tuesday, saying union workers were improperly influencing voters in the city's Jamaica Plain section. Romney campaign adviser Rob Gray said officials with the Service Employees International Union were seen entering voting booths with some voters in Ward 11, Precinct 4 of Jamaica Plain. ''We've got union officials going into the booth with people and telling them how to vote,'' Gray said. Silvia Panfil, a spokeswoman for SEIU in Massachusetts, said the union was not aware of any wrongdoing and it had not received any notice of a complaint. Secretary of State William Galvin was reviewing the complaint, said spokesman Brian McNiff."

This is pretty much how most of the corrupt unions in Massachusetts work. It has been a continuing problem but the Democrat politicians in charge tend to just look the other way.

My Final Senate Predictions: Democrats Keep the Senate

Arkansas: Disgraceful phony, Republican Tim Hutchinson loses to Democrat Pryor. Tim Hutchinson will be the reason the Republicans won't take back the Senate. The entire future of the US Supreme Court will change because this guy couldn't keep his manhood in his pants. It's one thing for a dirt bag like Clinton to go scamming for chicks, its another thing entirely when a Conservative Preacherman, family-values, Republican Senator embarrasses the rest of us with his hypocrisy. Good riddance.

Colorado: The Republicans will lose either here or in NH, but since I have to make a pick, I'll say Republican Allard eeks out a win here. Note to Senate Republicans: when you have a bland Senator like Allard sitting around for six years, give him something to do. Name a committe report after him like "The Allard Commission on Helping the Old and Preventing Terrorism" and make a splash, make him seem important. Throw him a bone, will ya? You can't let these new guys fly under the radar for six years and expect them to win close elections. But will give the win to Allard anyway, but just by a hair.

Georgia: Great try by Republican Saxby Chambliss, but he'll fall 2% points shy of the the war hero, Democrat Senator Max Cleland.

Louisiana: Democrat Senator Landrieu won't get the 50% she needs to avoid a runoff, but it won't make a difference. She'll win next month in the final election anyway.

Minnesota: Yikes, I'd love to see Norm Coleman win this one but I predict alot of undecideds who are 50, 60, 70 years old lining up to pull the lever for ol' Fritz just one last time. Mondale in a real squeaker.

Missouri: A good candidate running a good campaign with a good message should win most elections in a 50/50 state like Missouri. That gives the deciding edge to Jim Talent in a race that won't be as close as the Ashcroft/Carnahan debacle of four years ago.

New Hampshire: Sununu loses a race he could have one, but it's really not his fault. Listen up, Republican leaders (aka, complete idiots) never, never, never, allow any of your bright up-and-commers to take "principled" votes like Sununu did on a bill that flattens the tax but takes away the home mortgage deduction. Take away the home mortgage deduction? Are you completely nuts? Yes, I know all about the flat tax and what it does and how it benefits the middle class, but this is about winning political races and you will NEVER win a race if you EVER vote to take away the home mortgage deduction. Where the hell was Republican leadership when this vote was going on? Why didn't someone pull Sununu aside and tell him that he was putting an electoral shotgun in his mouth?

North Carolina: I will say Republican Dole will win this contest in an unnecessarily tight race, but I do not do so with alot of conviction. If the Republicans don't get their act together here, this state could be lost to the Democrats for a generation.

Texas: Republican Cornyn should win this one. Democrat Kirk is depending on a large surge in minority voters to make the difference today, but such minority surges are historically infrequent so the race leans to Cornyn.

South Dakota: The true test of Bush's political strength. If Republican Thune wins this, Bush can claim a huge win for his own coat-tails. If not here, then where? If not now, then when? Thune wins.

Massachusetts Election Day Weather Report:

A great day for voting!! From the Boston Globe: "A beautiful mid-autumn day is forecast for the region. Plenty of sunshine, continued unseasonably cool. Passing fair-weather clouds may develop Tuesday afternoon and evening. High 43 to 48. Partly cloudy and cool Tuesday night. Increasing cloudiness develops after midnight. Rain or showers likely by daybreak. Low 37 to 42"

US Blasts 6 al-Qaida Terrorists Using Secret Weapon, Media Ignores:

Tremendous military coup for President Bush and the forces he leads as a CIA drone blasts six terrorists to kingdom come. But where is the national media? Remember when President Clinton blew up a bunch of tents in Afghanistan and the wall-to-wall coverage? No such interest now. Hmmm, I wonder why?
UPDATE: CNN is now mentioning the attack, still no play at Boston Globe online. Surprised?

Massachusetts Turnout May Top 70%:

Massachusetts Secretary of State announced this morning that voter turnout in the Commonwealth may top 70%. The Secretary said the high numbers will be generated by intense interest in the state's governor's race. Who knows how this might affect the race, but if Democrat hopeful Shannon O'Brien is counting on organized labor's get-out the vote efforts, she might be swamped by a tide of Independents stopping by to pull the lever for Republican Mitt Romney.

Finally, a Decent Column By Mary McGrory:

Mary McGrory has awoken from her decades long slumber to provide some meaningful insight to the Massachusetts Governor's race.

Greatly to Shannon O'Brien's advantage, the Boston Irish have finally figured something out: If they knife a Democratic candidate they get a Republican governor, despite the overwhelming preponderance of registered Democrats in the state. Massachusetts has had a Republican governor for the past 12 years. In the last debate of her campaign, the state treasurer didn't seem to appreciate her luck. She played to her sisterhood rather than to her ethnic base, having in mind the National Organization for Women rather than the Knights of Columbus......She had already made it hard for the Irish by her support of gay marriage, an alien concept in the pious suburbs of Boston, and her doctrinaire debate presentation of the case for lowering the age for abortion without parental consent from 18 to 16 made it harder....One liberal Democrat, a stay-at-home mother of two who didn't want to give her name, was disgusted by the debate and said, "She's too rude to be governor of Massachusetts." The soccer mom was deeply offended by O'Brien's "cavalier" attitude on abortion -- "We accept abortion, but we don't want to go that far."...

Hello Republicans everywhere, read the above passage and understand what is going on here. The vast majority of America is the 80% in the middle of the abortion debate and believes that, in the US, women should have a general right to abortion, but with limits (parental notification, no late-term abortions, no public payment, etc.) Republicans should seize this moment to move right in to that 80% and leave their 10% of the crazies that believe "no-abortion ever" behind for good. That will leave the likes of Shannon O'Brien, Hillary and the rest of the Left defending third-term abortions and 15 year old girls sneaking behind their parents' back to go under the knife. That "cavalier" attitude just won't fly, even in the increasingly Democratic Northeast.

Neck and Neck in Massachusetts:

Tomorrow might be a very good day for Mitt Romney in Massachusetts. Internal polls (I got from a mole) from the Democrat side indicate that late-deciding Independent men are breaking 70/30 for Romney while similar women are breaking at a rate of 50/50. If this race was truly neck-and-neck three days ago as some polls showed, then this will be a Romney win. However, if Romney was down three points a couple of days ago, then this momentum might be too little, too late.

Down in the Pitts

Harvey Pitt, head of the SEC, should be fired (right after the campaign). He is clueless as to what the nation is looking for in the leaders of the SEC and, specifically, the auditing oversight committee. People want honesty and good judgement. Pitt lacks both. Goodbye, please.