Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Morning Fix: What NY-23 means



Democrat Bill Owens, Conservative Doug Hoffman and Republican Dede Scozzafava are running for a special election in upstate New York. AP photos

Two things have become abundantly clear about the special election in New York's 23rd district over the past week.

The first is that Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman could win the special election next Tuesday.

The second is that neither major party knows what to think about the Hoffman candidacy and both are trying to adjust their spin to accommodate what a victory by the Conservative Party candidate would say about the national political field.

An independent poll released on Thursday showed Hoffman in a statistical dead heat with Democrat Bill Owens with state Assemblywoman Dede Scozzafava (R) lagging badly.

That survey, which was conducted for the liberal Daily Kos site by Research 2000, jibes with other private polls done recently and a general sense among Democrats and Republicans that Hoffman is the momentum candidate and the race is his to lose in the final days.

At the root of Hoffman's strength, according to the Kos poll, are independents, the bloc of voters most coveted by both major parties heading into the November midterms.

While Hoffman is in a dead heat with Owens among all voters, he carries a wide 47 percent to 28 percent edge over the Democrat among self-identified independent voters. Among those same independents, Hoffman has a 53 percent favorable rating and a 14 percent unfavorable rating, far better than the 38 percent fav/23 percent unfav number he had with the electorate as a whole in the poll.

How has Hoffman galvanized independents? His messaging has been focused almost entirely on the idea of him as a political outsider who wants to shake up the way things are being done in Washington. And, it's clearly working.

So, while Republicans will cast a Hoffman win as a victory for them (it shows an energized GOP base) and Democrats will tout it as victory for their side (it shows a deeply divided Republican party), the truth is that a Hoffman win should send shivers up the spine of anyone who carries "Representative", "Senator" or "Governor" before their name.

Hoffman's rise is a manifestation of a series of recent poll numbers that show Americans growing increasingly frustrated with and distrustful of the federal government. A recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showed that less than a quarter of American had a lot or even some trust in the government to do what's right -- an absolutely stunning finding. Roughly that same number (24 percent) approve of the job Congress is doing while 65 percent disapprove.

The strong anti-incumbent sentiment may well hurt Democrats more in 2010 simply because they hold more seats in the House and the Senate. But, a Hoffman win is rightly understood not as a rejection of either party but rather a rejection of the political system as a whole.

And, if it comes to pass, that will mean lots of competitive races and nervous incumbents next November.

Friday's Fix Picks:

1. The House Ethics Committee is very busy.
2. Milbank, Pelosi and the Public Option.
3. The Blade says "no" to 2012 (again).
4. Why would anyone want to be the governor of New Jersey?
5. Mario is going down the tubes. Or not.

Rudy Hits Campaign Trail for Christie: As the New Jersey governor's race enters its final weekend, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) is hitting the campaign trail for former U.S. attorney Chris Christie (R). Giuliani is scheduled to make stops in Passaic and Bergen counties with Christie today in hopes of taking advantage of the former mayor's popularity in the northern reaches of the Garden State that were exposed to him -- thanks to the New York City media market -- for his eight years in office. Polling released Thursday showed the race extremely close; Christie took 42 percent to 41 percent for Gov. Jon Corzine (D) and 14 percent for independent candidate Chris Daggett in a Research 2000 survey conducted for the liberal Daily Kos blog. A Democracy Corps (Democratic) poll showed Corzine ahead of Christie 43 percent to 38 percent with Daggett at 12 percent. Democratic and Republican strategists remain confident of their chances at victory though each side acknowledges that Daggett's vote total is critical. The higher Daggett goes, the better for Corzine.

McDonnell Ahead, Comfortably: A(nother) new Daily Kos poll showed former state attorney general Bob McDonnell (R) up 54 percent to 44 percent over state Sen. Creigh Deeds (D) just days before Virginia voters go to the polls to pick their next governor. The poll, which is consistent with other recent data that shows McDonnell ahead by double digits, offers little hope for a Deeds comeback; McDonnell is far better liked (58 percent favorable/39 percent unfavorable) than Deeds (46 percent fav/44 percent unfav) and the Republican holds a wide 58 percent to 40 percent edge among independents. The only outstanding issue is whether a wide Deeds loss drags down the remainder of the ticket as there are races for lieutenant governor, attorney general and the House of Delegates on the ballot on Tuesday.

Click It!: This was probably inevitable -- www.mycongressmanisnuts.com, a website started by Florida Republicans dedicated to Florida Rep. Alan Grayson (D). The problem for Republicans? A Web site can't beat an incumbent and, to date, they have (inexplicably) struggled to find a top-tier candidate to challenge the controversial Grayson.

Wilson Out in N.M.: Former representative Heather Wilson, Republicans' strongest potential candidate for governor in 2010, has decided against running. "The Governor of New Mexico has no significant national security role -- an issue area that continues to be an important part of my life," Wilson told the Santa Fe New Mexican. "Running for office and being Governor means setting these things aside." Wilson, who held the Albuquerque-based 1st district from 1998 to 2008, ran unsuccessfully for the Republican Senate nomination in 2008 against Rep. Steve Pearce (R). Without her in the race, Lt. Gov. Diane Denish (D), already a favorite, becomes the strong frontrunner to replace term limited Gov. Bill Richardson (D).

Chatter Up: If it's Friday, it's the "Live Fix" online chat. Starting at 11 a.m.-ish, we will take your questions for an hour. You can submit questions in advance or just follow along in real time.

Say What?: "If you're going to do it, at least man up and say I'm fat." -- Former U.S. Attorney Chris Christie (R) discusses corpulence (his own) during an interview with radio talk show host Don Imus.

By Chris Cillizza  |  October 30, 2009; 5:33 AM ET
Categories:  Morning Fix  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Most Important Number in Politics Today
Next: Friday House Line: A Republican wave?

Comments

Chris Cillizza said the following on November 2, 2009:

“…But a victory by Hoffman would be rightly understood not as a rejection of either party but rather a rejection of the political system as a whole. And, if it comes to pass, that will mean lots of competitive races and nervous incumbents next November.”

Considering how the election in New York’s 23rd Congressional District has little or no effect on any other district, either in New York, or any other State, just how do you justify your assertion?

In the first place, never mind what the “polls” say. Most Americans understand that Polls can say whatever their planners want them to say; all they have to do is phrase the questions properly, and they get the answers they look for.

In the second place, anyone who knows anything about politics in New York State knows that the Conservative Party is the New York Republican Party’s “Light” persona. That is, New Yorkers who are otherwise Democrats or Republicans, but cannot be seen voting with the Republicans because the Party currently has a “Moderate” slant, but has a Conservative candidate in a specific race, vote the Conservative line on the ballot because the Conservative Party mostly supports the Republican candidate, and so a vote for the Conservative candidate is a vote for the Republican party.

In this race that is not true, which is why the actual Republican candidate was forced to drop out by the Republican Base to make room for the Conservative Candidate because the Moderate Republican Candidate read the handwriting on the wall, and correctly realized that she did not have a snowball’s chance of winning in the 3-way race.

The bigger point is that this specific race MAY have consequences around the rest of Upstate New York in 2010, but it is doubtful that it will have direct consequences in the Downstate counties and New York City. Likewise, it is extremely likely that it won’t even be a blip on the radar in other Northeast States.

All this being true, it is the height of hubris to say that the election of a Representative in the 23rd Congressional District of New York will effect similar races throughout the USA in 2010, although it is certain that whoever wins in those other races — Republican or Democrat — will certainly credit their win – for better or worse – to the current New York race now that you have pointed your finger in that direction.

In other words, you have set up a self-fulfilling prophesy.

Posted by: cseon | November 2, 2009 2:18 PM | Report abuse

"If you have the 30% of the voters just to the right of center you need a smidge over 10% of the voters to the left of center and you get elected. Do that very often and you literally marginalize the Republican Party.

So why aren't there people out there doing it?"


Why did it take so long to figure out that E = MCC?


.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 30, 2009 10:49 PM | Report abuse

In comparison to Owens, Hoffman, scozzafava in NY, it seems to come out more and more that Daggett is actually something of a far right Conservative. When he takes down Christie, now centrist himself, he also encourages the far right to go on a safari looking to bag RINOs. The next year, and the two to follow, could be one great civil war between the far right and the nearer right, and the carnage could be considerable.

Could it also be enough to get the center right to bolt and organize on their own?

If you have the 30% of the voters just to the right of center you need a smidge over 10% of the voters to the left of center and you get elected. Do that very often and you literally marginalize the Republican Party.

So why aren't there people out there doing it?

Posted by: ceflynline | October 30, 2009 9:21 PM | Report abuse

What does the 23rd mean?

If Owens wins, it means a gift from the far right. He is one more vote for the Democratic majority. Maybe he gets to stay next year.

If Hoffman wins it means the Conservatives get the impetus to try that again, in quantity, in 2010. Where they can't force their way into the republican nomination over the RINO they choose to target, and if they can't get the nomination they run on the Conservative ticket.

More often than not, where they run on the conservative ticket they gut the Republicans base, and the democrat wins. In that case a win by Hoffman helps the Democrats in 2010.

Of course a loss by Hoffman doesn't mean that his stunt won't encourage imitators.

Maybe it is going to be a REALLY bad year for the republicans in 2010.

If Scozzafava wins it means that the Diebold Voting Machines haven't had their programs reset.

Posted by: ceflynline | October 30, 2009 9:07 PM | Report abuse

But, a Hoffman win is rightly understood not as a rejection of either party but rather a rejection of the political system as a whole.

==

No, a Hoffman would would be rightly understood as nothing more or less than the effect of a huge infusion out out-of-district money from the losers at Club for Growth and other propagandists.

The secondary lesson is that if someone as idelogically and visually bizarre as Hoffman can get into office, so can just about anyone.

Trig Palin '38

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 30, 2009 6:35 PM | Report abuse

snowmelt--7:30am to 5:54pm. Note to HR: please give snowmelt one hour of overtime credit for today.

You keep this up and you, too, will be a member of the Troll Hall of Fame with 37, Jake, AsperGirl, and Dianne72.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | October 30, 2009 6:20 PM | Report abuse

stupid, more like

You really need to wonder about a (chronological) adult who thinks that "Retching Madcow" is funny.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 30, 2009 6:15 PM | Report abuse

Well, some of them. Others are just banal.

Posted by: nodebris | October 30, 2009 6:00 PM | Report abuse

aren't you three missing the Wretching Madcow show right about now?

sorry ..... Dr. Retching Madcow. you know she can hardly afford to lose 20% of her audience.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 5:54 PM | Report abuse

"but the MSM is oddly protective of them"

They make good copy.

Posted by: nodebris | October 30, 2009 5:42 PM | Report abuse

"you have clearly gone round the bend,"

==

... says the bigoted mental

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 30, 2009 5:32 PM | Report abuse

It doesn't matter what we call them--birthers, tenthers, Teabaggers, Clown Hall thugs, supremacists, or secessionists--it's always the same crowd of bigoted mentals showing up with the McVeigh T-shirts and and AK-47s to "debate" the public option.

To his credit, BHO, over the last week, has been trying to marginalize these mentals, especially Fox News, but the MSM is oddly protective of them (most notably the awful Campbell Brown at CNN


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

you have clearly gone round the bend. say hi to Olbermann when you see him.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 5:28 PM | Report abuse

Isn't it amusing when a single word fits someone so well, when it is mostly unused elsewhere. I love the economy of of it all. Dither it is.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 5:18 PM | Report abuse

"The strong anti-incumbent sentiment may well hurt Democrats more in 2010 simply because they hold more seats in the House and the Senate."

Chris, I do not consider myself an expert but I think that this cycle there will be 18 seats held by Democrats and 19 held by Republicans in the Senate that will be contested. That is not a majority of Democratic seats and three of the seats held by Democrats are for less than a six year terms. It may seem minor to you overlooking things like that does not raise your credibility.

Posted by: Gator-ron | October 30, 2009 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Saying Americans are dissatisfied with government is sort of like saying grass is green. The number may rise and fall, but when was the last time a majority of Americans said they respected Congress?

As to Hoffman, your statement that his "win is rightly understood not as a rejection of either party but rather a rejection of the political system as a whole" needs a critical concluding phrase: "by Conservatives." Conservatives that have always rejected the Democrats, but now reject the GOP as well. Conservatives that have been whipped to a frenzy of dissatisfaction and distrust by the GOP, whose incompetence has led them to lose control of the direction of the emotion they have created. As a result, a Democrat has the best shot ever to win a district that has voted Republican since the Civil War. The Democratic Party isn't hurting here one bit, but doing about the same as it always does in the District.

There's certainly a lesson there, but your argument -- that Democrats have more to fear than the GOP when conservatives start abandoning the GOP and supporting independent candidates -- is highly contrived.

Posted by: nodebris | October 30, 2009 4:35 PM | Report abuse

Sigh. You got it all wrong again, CC. Maybe if you took off your republican-colored glasses..

The 'anti-incumbent' sentiment is non-existent on the Democratic side. All this is coming from the loony no-government koolaid drinking teabaggers. Do you see any democrats out marching with 'overthrow the government by force' signs and guns? No. And you won't.

You have it all wrong. What all this is about is a radical faction breaking away from the R party -- and the only people it's going to hurt are Republcians. This is the monster they created from their 'government is the problem' meme.


Posted by: drindl | October 30, 2009 11:06 AM
________
The MSM seems reluctant to admit the existence, and danger, of this fringe element: it is well funded and organized and has a highly effective PR mechanism--Fox News, Drudge, et al. It doesn't matter what we call them--birthers, tenthers, Teabaggers, Clown Hall thugs, supremacists, or secessionists--it's always the same crowd of bigoted mentals showing up with the McVeigh T-shirts and and AK-47s to "debate" the public option.

To his credit, BHO, over the last week, has been trying to marginalize these mentals, especially Fox News, but the MSM is oddly protective of them (most notably the awful Campbell Brown at CNN). At some level some of these MSMers may well buy into this agenda. Go figure.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | October 30, 2009 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Today the WaPo features three columnists on Afg. Last night I heard the young former Captain who quit the Foreign Service after five months in Afg interviewed on Lehrer. I listened to all of Kerry's speech to the FPA on POTUS.

The young Captain asserted that AQ will not return to Afg if the Taliban rule. JK's speech followed McCh all the way to the conclusion, where he PIVOTED and asserted that the unreliability of Karzai meant we should postpone counter-insurgency until, presumably, he became reliable. Both seemed to me to think of Pak as a separate theater. As for me:

The more I hear the debate, the more I believe that the Pashtuns view all of the lands near the P-A borders as "theirs"; the Taliban are exclusively Pashtun; the AQ is harbored by the Taliban; BUT that the Taliban is not a natural majority within the Pashtun.

I do understand the parallel between Karzai and Thieu but I do not see Afg as a unity. Thus half the country is composed of tribes that hate the Taliban, and the diplomatic, aid, training, and military strategies can be "concentrated" by area. I would be much relieved if the runoff turned out to be an honest election but if wishes were horses, beggars would ride. So from here, I would do what Holbrooke wants on the diplomatic side, and what McCh wants on the military side. That the ultimate result will be in the hands of Pak will remain the case if we surge; but I think it will be in the hands of Taliban if we do not.

I think Kerry shies away from this conclusion just before he reaches it, but I have never understood him very well. On the other hand, the deliberations are good, no real troop increases can come until Spring, and there is no dither, hither.

I liked Ignatius' take from his visit to Afg:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/29/AR2009102903921.html

Posted by: mark_in_austin | October 30, 2009 4:19 PM | Report abuse

This would seem to qualify him to be Quittacuda's campaign manager for 2012...maybe overqualify.

==

Quite likely, he is after all totally quitterpated over her

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 30, 2009 4:08 PM | Report abuse

You think that Republicans would have the sense to invest in a thesaurus or something. It's just hilarious how they all just started using the word "dither" within about 30 seconds of each other. I wonder who among these pundits was even aware of the word before the latest talking points fax was sent to them.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 30, 2009 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Hey gus, save your breath and time. You're trying to debate a guy whose reasoning and comportment skills have landed him in the loony bin for life. He's sitting at a PC in the dayroom lobbing spitballs at strangers and telling himself he's smarter than anyone and has everything all figured out.
Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite
------------------
This would seem to qualify him to be Quittacuda's campaign manager for 2012...maybe overqualify.

Posted by: DAMNEDGENTLEMEN | October 30, 2009 3:45 PM | Report abuse

The "Ditherers"- people who are so partisan that they are incapable of independent thought so the quote the repubs talking points as if they were actually true.

==

Hey gus, save your breath and time. You're trying to debate a guy whose reasoning and comportment skills have landed him in the loony bin for life. He's sitting at a PC in the dayroom lobbing spitballs at strangers and telling himself he's smarter than anyone and has everything all figured out.

Evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.

The rest of us mostly ignore him, don't even read his posts at all. Life is too short.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 30, 2009 3:29 PM | Report abuse

And if not, just run away and let the Taliban have it back, right?

I guess this possibility never occured to anyone before now?

Or more plausibly, the ditherer is incapable of making hard decisions. he will phone in "Present" from the golf course.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Snowbama- I think we need to coin a new term.

The "Ditherers"- people who are so partisan that they are incapable of independent thought so the quote the repubs talking points as if they were actually true.

Congrats Snowbama, you are the first official member!

Posted by: Gus4 | October 30, 2009 3:24 PM | Report abuse

"This week, the president is delaying an Afghanistan decision again"

Don't you think that waiting to determine the strategy until after Afghanistan has a new election to correct the completely corrupt election that we just had would be a good idea?

Seems to me that we should know if we have a legitmate allay of democracy as the leader of the Afghan governement before we announce our strategy.

Posted by: Gus4 | October 30, 2009 3:15 PM | Report abuse

The title of "stupidest poster ever on the Fix" is certainly in contention.

NAMBLA - you better get off your sore duff and start frantically posting all night tonight, desperately searching for a friend.

this level of idiocy requires constant maintenence. I am confident you can post 70 or 80 trite, empty texts before COB to reclaim your title.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 3:02 PM | Report abuse

Wow, I can't believe how jealous I am that I haven't been labled a stooge.
I guess when your Grand Old Old Cheese gets moved, shooting your mouth off as rapidly as possible without any worry over whether what you say is even remotely based in reality is the weapon of choice. That and repeating 'stooge' like a white noise mantra to drown out that pesky reality that's trying to find, and then creep into, your smaller than a gnat that's small for it's size brain.
Wise move, not effin with the new guy before you've determined what level of aizwhuppin' he's likely to lay on you.
Because the answer, snow, is plenty.

Posted by: DAMNEDGENTLEMEN | October 30, 2009 2:51 PM | Report abuse

http://www.politico.com/blogs/scorecard/1009/Republican_dirty_tricks_in_NY_23.html

From the 538.com article, one of the dirty tricks used by Hoffman's campaign to direct Owens voters to vote Republican.

==

I wonder if Karl Rove still gets standing ovations at his speaking engagements?

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 30, 2009 2:38 PM | Report abuse

This week, the president is delaying an Afghanistan decision again. Ten months into office, he suddenly wants an analysis of all 36 Afghan provinces, with information about which areas are governed effectively and which aren't. This is Jimmy Carter stuff, micromanaging details instead of delegating — and taking his eye off the goal. It also signals a lack of trust in the troops.

The distrust is visible in his dismissal of some defense advisers. On Friday, he'll discuss strategy with politicos like Vice President Joe Biden, Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Defense Secretary Bob Gates and National Security Adviser James Jones. Military men included earlier are now banished.

Now Obama wants to delay a decision yet again because he must take an unrelated trip to Asia on Nov. 11, according to the Washington Post, citing anonymous administration sources. Our troops will have to wait for that, too.

Uglier reasons are around too: on Foreign Policy's blog, respected defense correspondent Thomas Ricks wrote that one of his sources thinks the tight Virginia and New Jersey governors' races will also come before a decision on the war.

But as the excuses pile up, events are moving swiftly.

Meanwhile, Pakistan next door has launched its biggest military offensive since 1971, crushing the Taliban on its side. Many of those terrorists will flee to Afghanistan. Yet, Clinton, in Karachi Thursday, lectured Pakistan about missed opportunities to get al-Qaida, forgetting that Pakistan is fighting while the White House dithers.

Meanwhile, U.S. troop morale is low, our allies are discouraged, and key personnel are beginning to turn in their resignations.

The continued lack of a strategy and the endless excuses points to a disturbing lack of leadership. Out on the campaign trail, Obama spoke of finishing off al-Qaida with a gung-ho gusto, calling Afghanistan the necessary war. Today, he couldn't be further from that will to win. Witting or not, it amounts to a choice to lose.


Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 2:34 PM | Report abuse

Make that Dawdtagnan

the newest candidate for stooge. I know you Libs couldn't count to 60 but confused about three?

Larry, Curly and Mo. Maybe the newcomer could be Schemp.

the mentleman will have to wait his turn.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Hey Mo

Dartagnan is trying to unseat you.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 2:19 PM | Report abuse

that's more like it. all three stooges posting garbage the rest of the day.

==

go bother the nurses, mental-boi

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 30, 2009 2:16 PM | Report abuse

I take it the NAMBLA meet went well?

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 2:16 PM | Report abuse

that's more like it. all three stooges posting garbage the rest of the day.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Sorry shrink, the nutcase element sometimes blinds my ability to read all the way to the bottom.

==

There's your problem right there.

You need to read this blog chronologically, from the bottom up, and as soon as "Posted by: snowbama" or armpeg just keep a-scrollin' scrollin' scrollin' 'cause all you'll ever read in one of their posts is trollin' trollin' trollin'.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 30, 2009 2:08 PM | Report abuse

http://www.politico.com/blogs/scorecard/1009/Republican_dirty_tricks_in_NY_23.html

From the 538.com article, one of the dirty tricks used by Hoffman's campaign to direct Owens voters to vote Republican.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 30, 2009 2:02 PM | Report abuse

I like how all the liberals that post here keep saying a Hoffman win in NY 23 doesn't mean anything since the district is just so conservative anyway. What a laugh! You do realize Obama won by 52% here in 2008 don't you?

==

Given that the other guy was a daffy septuagenarian preoccupied with "earmarks" and "the bridge to nowhere," and his VP was a knucklewalking Rapture-believing illiterate, it's not at all surprising that a nominally GOP district would find enough responsible people to go briefly blue.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 30, 2009 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Better analysis of NY-23 now up at fivethirtyeight.com.

Posted by: mnteng | October 30, 2009 1:53 PM | Report abuse

I see that Doug "Ol' Green Teeth" Hoffman has his mouth tightly closed in the picture. Someone must have told him he was scaring voters away.

==

I wish Chris would post the Attack Chipmunk picture. And if Hoffman should win, let Attack Chipmunk be the face of social conservatism

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 30, 2009 1:50 PM | Report abuse

JakeD later today? svreader?

==

Don't tempt fate. This place has been a much better read since the preening fairy took a powder.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 30, 2009 1:36 PM | Report abuse

DG, no worries.

We have been alternately ignoring and flogging these people for years. As a silly sort of past-time, we track them, their spoor you know. In the case of bwayjoe, apparently he collects offal, evidence of the worst kind of bigoted ignorance. Neurotic? You be the judge.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 30, 2009 1:31 PM | Report abuse

The media is getting rather carried away

==

"Media" is the plural of "medium."

The media ARE.

Sheesh.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 30, 2009 1:11 PM | Report abuse

In Newsweek, the always disgusting and never compelling Mark Sanford writes a puff piece about Ayn Rand's views on government and the individual

==

Flypaper for kooks.

Really have to wonder how such shallow idiocy continues to draw admirers after so many decades. Ayn Rand put a negative sign in front of Socialism and called it something new, then traded on her notoriety as a "philosopher" to get young men into her bed.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 30, 2009 1:07 PM | Report abuse

Sorry shrink, the nutcase element sometimes blinds my ability to read all the way to the bottom.
Some of these treasonous bigmouths need to be put in the public stocks so citizens could come by and smash tomatoes into their pie holes.

Posted by: DAMNEDGENTLEMEN | October 30, 2009 1:05 PM | Report abuse

I hope he stays, he's funny.
Now that I have a new hole ripped,
I don't need to eat fiber anymore.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 30, 2009 12:52 PM | Report abuse

shrink -- he's new, i expect. not accustomed to our rituals.

Posted by: drindl | October 30, 2009 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Yeah and he spells it different too right andOstreet was not part of the ur text.

DAMMEDGENTLEMAN. From your riposte, I guess you didn't appreciate the humor in that re-post from the broadwayjoe right wing nut bar hall of shame.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 30, 2009 12:25 PM | Report abuse

What's missing from the "new" 37 is probably a private address and the freedom *not* to take his lithium.

Posted by: mikenmidland | October 30, 2009 12:24 PM | Report abuse

"I like how all the liberals that post here keep saying a Hoffman win in NY 23 doesn't mean anything since the district is just so conservative anyway. What a laugh!"

Numbnutz, the district has been in Republican hands for 150 years! You appear to be as dumb as the NY-23 voters who would elect a congressman who knows and cares nothing about them.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | October 30, 2009 12:07 PM | Report abuse

I think it's a fake 37, not the original unhinged "37". There is something in 37's classic rants that's missing in this new guy's post.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | October 30, 2009 12:06 PM | Report abuse

Nooooooooooo. It can't be. 37?????

Is this like "Candyman"; if you say 37's name three times he comes back from the depths? I didn't mean to post the retro "37" post the other day. Really. Go back to where you came from, 37. How about the incantion from the gypsy woman in "Wolfman"? Will that work on 37?

I'll try:

"The way you walked was thorny, through no fault of your own, but as the rain enters the soil, the river enters the sea, so tears run to a predestined end. Your suffering is over, 37thandO my troll. Now you will find peace."


34, 35, 36, ___, 38, 39, 40.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | October 30, 2009 12:00 PM | Report abuse

"I like how all the liberals that post here keep saying a Hoffman win in NY 23 doesn't mean anything "

Oh it means something. It means it would embolden more radical loons like hoffman to make primary runs against incumbents, costing the R party sh*tloads of money and losing them seats.

Posted by: drindl | October 30, 2009 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Guiliani? You mean the tool that still wears his FDNY hat to Yankees games?
Is there anyone on Earth, other than Bin Laden, who milks his invlovement in one of the greatest tragedies in American History more?
You'd think Rudy slapped a fifth plane out of the sky hisself.

Posted by: DAMNEDGENTLEMEN | October 30, 2009 11:47 AM | Report abuse

I like how all the liberals that post here keep saying a Hoffman win in NY 23 doesn't mean anything since the district is just so conservative anyway. What a laugh! You do realize Obama won by 52% here in 2008 don't you? You do realize that McHugh was one of more liberal members of congress even if he did have an R beside his name. I think if Hoffman wins it'll show two things: one if that the Republicans made a huge mistake nominating a woman who is so liberal that she might as well have run as a Democrat and two that a strong anti-incumbent/anti-government ground swell is coming and could crest just in time for the 2010 mid terms. By the way I'm sure the Republicans will be more than happy to have Hoffman caucas with them if he wins. He did after all try to win the Republican nomination oringinally.

Posted by: RobT1 | October 30, 2009 11:45 AM | Report abuse

It was a legitimate analytical post until the following RNC/GOP talking point:

"Hoffman's rise is a manifestation of a series of recent poll numbers that show Americans growing increasingly frustrated with and distrustful of the federal government."

This is "black helicopter"/racial proxy nonsense.

Hoffman's rise is the function of huge infusions of rightwing money (e.g., Club for Growth), extremist endorsements (see Phalin), and endless free publicity (see Fox News and this space).

The seat is in a hard-core Republican district so Hoffman or Scozzafava should win. If Democrat Owens wins, it doesn't tell us much because of the presence of the spoiler Hoffman. Regardless of who wins, the race won't tell us much and it certainly won't be a referendum on BHO's agenda, or the state of the planet, as some would have you believe.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | October 30, 2009 11:41 AM | Report abuse

"giuliani is scheduled to make stops in Passaic and Bergen counties with Christie today in hopes of taking advantage of the former mayor's popularity in the northern reaches of the Garden State that were exposed to him -- thanks to the New York City media market -- for his eight years in office. "

Wrong again. Guiliani is as much of a pariah in NJ as he is in NY. I really wonder from which out-of-touch Beltway bubblehead he gets these skewed ideas.

Guiliani with Christie will simply be seen for what it is -- two greedy thugs out to fleece the public.

Posted by: drindl | October 30, 2009 11:33 AM | Report abuse

AndyR3 writes:
"This statement
"But, a Hoffman win is rightly understood not as a rejection of either party but rather a rejection of the political system as a whole."
is just flat out wrong."

I completely agree. CC is way over-analyzing NY-23. It is but one very-red CD. If it had been left alone, then not much could be extrapolated. But people like Gingrich, Boehner, Palin, and Pawlenty and groups like the NRA and CfG decided to put their noses in the race. At best, NY-23 is a proxy fight between the moderate/realist and conservative/purist factions of the GOP. That Owens is benefiting is somewhat secondary.

Posted by: mnteng | October 30, 2009 11:25 AM | Report abuse

A vote for Doug Hoffman is like a vote for Ross Perot in 1992 -- full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. Hoffman knows nothing of the basic issues in NY-23, as the Watertown (NY) Daily Times editorial board found out (http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20091025/NEWS03/310259942). That's not entirely surprising since he doesn't live in the district, and since conservatism today is more about symbolism and emotion than policy knowledge and effective governing. If he wins, he will be a party of one in Congress. He will never chair a committee where he can be a force for his district. He will surely caucus with the GOP, but this has its limits, as the Democratic caucus was reminded this week when one of its members, independent Senator Joe Lieberman, threatened to derail the public option in the pending health care legislation. If the voters of NY-23 want to cut off their collective noses to spite their faces, that is their business.

Posted by: SilverSpring8 | October 30, 2009 11:14 AM | Report abuse

"Note to CC: Please try to figure out how to add an ignore feature to this blog. You have some juvenile posters like the basement-dwelling yellowsnow who need some help controlling themselves.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 "

Just scroll up. The reason JakeD left this blog was because 90% of the people just ignored him. He moved to somewhere else where he gets the attention he wants. You're like the only one who responds to zook. Just ignore him and he'll go away as well.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 30, 2009 11:14 AM | Report abuse

I was going to comment ON TOPIC, but I see this thread has been hijacked by snowbama/zouk, and he's brout along a couple of nutters to back up his OT rantings. I thought you celebrated Halloween tomorrow, no?

Posted by: sverigegrabb | October 30, 2009 11:12 AM | Report abuse

"The strong anti-incumbent sentiment may well hurt Democrats more in 2010 simply because they hold more seats in the House and the Senate. But, a Hoffman win is rightly understood not as a rejection of either party but rather a rejection of the political system as a whole."

Sigh. You got it all wrong again, CC. Maybe if you took off your republican-colored glasses..

The 'anti-incumbent' sentiment is non-existent on the Democratic side. All this is coming from the loony no-government koolaid drinking teabaggers. Do you see any democrats out marching with 'overthrow the government by force' signs and guns? No. And you won't.

You have it all wrong. What all this is about is a radical faction breaking away from the R party -- and the only people it's going to hurt are Republcians. This is the monster they created from their 'government is the problem' meme.

Posted by: drindl | October 30, 2009 11:06 AM | Report abuse

Sorry George Washington, we messed everything up.
Posted by: shrink2
----------------
George Washington would throat punch you for saying his name if he were alive.
The good news is, since your social interactions only include other impotent failures, blow up dolls, and fantasizing about wearing Ann Coulter's panties on your head while she whips you, it is assured that you will never reproduce.
Hell, man, if you didn't post here, your greatest accomplishment in life would be having seen every episode of Judge Judy ever televised. Way to make your mark in the world.
Now get back to contributing nothing to anything, and ponder that the when you're dead, no one will mourn or remember the bitter and irrelevant shrink2.

Posted by: DAMNEDGENTLEMEN | October 30, 2009 11:04 AM | Report abuse

the head stooge checks in. welcome back drivl.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Man, every time I come back here, it's more clogged with sewage. The resident loon yellowsnow, appears to be a meth addict, typing frantically all day long. Maybe that was what destroyed his brain.

Posted by: drindl | October 30, 2009 11:01 AM | Report abuse

How can reasonable people even contemplate electing a man (Hoffman) who doesn't even live in the district, and by his own admission before the Watertown newspaper's editorial board, admit that he knows "very little, almost nothing" about the local district issues? And funded by the Club for Growth crowd (top .5% income types) from Wall Street at the hated other end of the state, to pursue their own issues? Jeez!
The G-O-pee is the party of sore winners and sore losers, whatever the outcome.

Posted by: enough3 | October 30, 2009 10:59 AM | Report abuse

I see that Doug "Ol' Green Teeth" Hoffman has his mouth tightly closed in the picture. Someone must have told him he was scaring voters away.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | October 30, 2009 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Zouky/Snowy:

I understand the Great Recession has been tough for you.

It's difficult being out of work, I get it.

But please, you're not doing yourself any favors by sitting in front of the computer all day ranting and raving.

Check out monster.com and hotjobs.com, maybe consider going back to school to improve your skill set or get a degree.

Don't worry, things are starting to turn around.

I know you can't go back to your old company after all those bridges you burned, but I'm sure you can find an opening somewhere.

Keep hope alive, baby!

Posted by: Bondosan | October 30, 2009 10:46 AM | Report abuse

Now yellowsnow is posting crap from his favorite stroke book, the Weekly Standard. zzzzzzzzz

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | October 30, 2009 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Note to CC: Please try to figure out how to add an ignore feature to this blog. You have some juvenile posters like the basement-dwelling yellowsnow who need some help controlling themselves.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | October 30, 2009 10:39 AM | Report abuse

Pew Political IQ Poll: Republicans Consistently More Knowledgeable

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/10/pew_political_iq_poll_republic.asp

More dissappointing facts for moonbats.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 10:35 AM | Report abuse

This is rich! Hoffman in the NY-23! I can’t stop laughing! The Retards are going to elect this tin hat wearing, birther supporting, teabagger to congress in NEW YORK STATE! One of the most liberal states in the union. Not only will he be ignored by the NY congressional delegation, he will be ostracized by the Republican congressional caucus. It doesn’t get better that this! The Repugs are becoming a Doomsday cult, purifying themselves of any hint of moderations and sanity. I guess at some point those remaining will move to Mississippi and commit suicide! PRICELESS! Ha, ha, ha, LMAO, LOL!!!

Posted by: GabsDaD | October 30, 2009 10:31 AM | Report abuse

VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: The problem is that we have a president who likes to be liked. He has seldom been in a situation where when he was confronted with a very bad choice and a worse choice.. Every time he has been in that situation, and we are seeing it now in Afghanistan, he votes present. That is what worries me.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

The latest health-care bill, offered by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, is more of the same. Like every other Democratic bill before Congress, this “comprehensive reform” has two major features: First, it transforms insurance into a product that few rational people would buy. Second, it forces them to buy it. . . .

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


Pretty soon only MSDNC will be left on the approved list of White House news providers:

The Obama administration on Thursday slammed a report from The Associated Press alleging the government had overstated by thousands the number of jobs it has created or saved with federal contracts under President Obama's $787 billion recovery program.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.

Appearing on CNN Tuesday night (no word on whether anyone was actually watching), White House adviser Valerie Jarrett didn't hesitate to smear Fox as "biased" when prompted — but curiously demurred on the question of whether the same label might apply to Obama-approved MSNBC. No huge surprise there.

But in the course of her rambling answer, Jarrett said something utterly laughable. She explained that in the ongoing public debate over major policy initiatives, the administration won't hesitate to "speak truth to power" in defending its positions. Does Ms. Jarrett not realize that she's a top aide to the president of the United States of America?

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 10:31 AM | Report abuse

The only intelligence you display by your posts here, snowbama, is that you know how to cut and paste from other opinion blogs. I understand why you never give credit to those whose ideas you steal--it would make it all too obvious that you have never had an original thought of your own. At least, not one that didn't involve an ad hominem attack on a politician or another poster.

You seem incapable of admitting that a Republican can ever be wrong, unless given cover by a "true conservative." (e.g., Hoffman vs. Scozzafava) Even when they are, in fact, being investigated by the Ethics Committee, which is bipartisan.

You won't see me defending someone like Rangel, except to say he has the same right as everyone else to a fair hearing. By excusing everyone on the right, you make your attacks of the left less credible.

Posted by: mikenmidland | October 30, 2009 10:31 AM | Report abuse

I thought he was "driven from the blogosphere?"

JakeD later today? svreader?


From Fix archives. Just before Hall of Fame anti-BHO troll "37thandO" was driven from the blogosphere by the wit of "malis,"

he posted several unhinged rants here under the name "Dorchesterandcongress." Now, from November 2008, "37th and O":

"If there was a white Presidential candidate who was found to be a member of a racist church, same as the Rev. Wright's church except substitute "white values" for "black values" and visa vera, THE MEDIA WOULD BE IN TOTAL ATTACK MODE AGAINST THAT WHITE CANDIDATE.


OBAMA IS A RACIST - OBAMA HAS GIVE $20,000.00 TO A RACIST CHURCH IN ONE YEAR.


Washington Post - there are a lot of Churches in Chicago which are black and which are not racist - Obama did not have to give $20,000.00 to this one Church - STOP GIVING OBAMA A PASS ON HIS RACISM AGAINST WHITES.


WAKE UP WASHINGTON POST WAKE UP MEDIA.


WAKE UP AMERICA.


.


.


Exactly right he's racist. Just listen to Irreverend Wrong, his pastor for many, many years.


Exactly right he's socialist. Just listen to him admit it to Joe the Plumber, or his interviews in the past.


Exactly right he's a rotten human being. Just look at his abortion voting record.


Exactly right he has questionable judgment. Just look at his associations with people in his past.


Exactly right he's corrupt. Just look at the Rezko land deal.


Exactly right he's a liar. Just look at what he says about taxes vs. how he's actually voted.


Exactly right he has no executive experience. Just look at his resume -- or lack thereof.


Exactly right he's secretive. Just look at his lack of birth certificate, SAT scores, grades, etc. etc., etc.


Exactly right he'll be challenged in his first 6 months of office if elected. Just look at what he says about meeting unconditionally with world leaders.


We cannot be SERIOUS about electing this guy!! Obama in charge of nukes?! What. The.


Sorry George Washington, we messed everything up.


We stopped demanding the best people in the White House.

Posted by: DorchesterAndCongress | November 2, 2008 11:10 PM"

Posted by: broadwayjoe | October 29, 2009 7:05 PM

Posted by: shrink2 | October 30, 2009 10:27 AM | Report abuse

how do Liberals win elections?

Voter Fraud in New Jersey [Hans A. von Spakovsky]


Jim Geraghty has a good report on the efforts being made by the Democratic party in New Jersey to make it easier for them to commit absentee-ballot fraud. They want the secretary of state to restrict the ability of local county clerks to use signature comparisons to check the authenticity of absentee-ballot requests, which is the only verification procedure they have.

Of course, that is not the only kind of fraud that occurs in New Jersey. While researching a paper for the Heritage Foundation in 2008 on impersonation fraud, I ran across an incident in Hoboken, N.J., in a June 2007 city council election. The former zoning board president was headed to his polling place when he noticed a group of men on a street corner being given index cards by two people. One of those men later entered the polling place and tried to vote in the name of another registered voter who, it tuned out, no longer lived in the ward. The imposter was stopped from casting a fraudulent vote only because the zoning board president challenged his eligibility. The imposter ran out of the polling place when he was challenged and was chased and caught. The faux voter admitted to police that he was part of a group of men from a homeless shelter who had been paid $10 each to vote using other voters’ names.

If this turns out to be a very close election, there are a lot of political operatives and Democrats who profit from the patronage system that infests the New Jersey government who are going to be willing to do just about anything to make sure that Jon Corzine is reelected.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 10:23 AM | Report abuse

The democrats have the same situation in their party - the far left wing has hijacked the agenda of the party.


Even worse, the far left has convinced itself that the entire party believes their ideas, and therefore they have the votes to push through their left wing agenda.


Posted by: 37thand0street | October 30, 2009 10:21 AM | Report abuse

see what I mean - the depths you will have to dive to become one of the three most famous idiots on the fix.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 10:19 AM | Report abuse

NY-23 is the butthole of NY state. This is getting way too much attention.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | October 30, 2009 10:07 AM | Report abuse

Back to the fawning: Wow. What a president. When most people were sleeping Obama was up braving the darkness in Marine One. Arriving before the dawn, Mr. Obama stood erect brandishing a military salute in honor of the 18 servicemen killed this week in Afghanistan. The bodies were taken from the cargo plane and carried past the solemn president. Incidentally, if Obama came to privately honor the dead before the break of day why were cameras necessary?

He came. He saw. He honored. And he pulled off yet another publicity stunt to hide the fact that the dead were possibly the proximate cause of Obama’s dithering.

If the President had visited quietly and respectfully, away from the media I could appreciate and respect his gesture. His predecessor was careful to keep the notoriety of the president from reducing the dignity of our sacred fallen as they return to US soil, opting instead for the intimate and emotional meeting with the family of the deceased. No cameras, no media, no fanfare and no politics.


I am somewhat surprised he didn't read a speech from the teleprompters and urge the fallen heroes to rise up against the tyranny of Fox news. Oh wait, Biden wasn't present. but the present ident was.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 9:58 AM | Report abuse

They are not all rubes.

Heh, heh,
The meaning of NY23? They all rubes,
or not.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 30, 2009 9:54 AM | Report abuse

A Balloon Boy Quality to NY-23rd Media Coverage?

Do the math. In a three-way race, it will be VERY difficult for the third-party candidate to prevail. Ms. Scozzafava's poll numbers are being underestimated. Those who have voted GOP or Dem in the past possess a natural inclination to pull the Big Party lever (or push the electronic machine button). In a tight race between Owens and Hoffman, that inclination advantages the Democrat, and augers against the third party candidate.

This Hoffman "media bubble" has a very Palinesque, Balloon Boy favor. Perhaps upstate voters will let the gas out of the bag on Tuesday. They are not all rubes.


***

GOV'T TORTURES ME WITH SILENT MICROWAVE WEAPONS, SAYS OUSTED HONDURAS PREZ

• Deposed Honduras President Manuel Zaleya confirms the essence what unjustly targeted citizens worldwide -- including this journalist -- have been reporting for years...

...MILITARY, SECRET SERVICES, AND INTEL AGENCIES of many nations, including the U.S., silently assault and torture "targeted individuals," including those regarded as "dissenters" or slandered as undesirables, with debilitating, health-degrading, "slow-kill" electromagnetic microwave and laser radiation weapons systems -- reported to include a nationwide installation disguised as cell towers.

ATTENTION FIX READERS: Will someone here please post this item to Naomi Wolf's blog at huffpost.com/naomi-wolf ? Thank you. I am being blocked from posting there -- apparently by government surveillance operatives who use warrantless surveillance as a pretext to censor and harass via telecommunications.

http://nowpublic.com/world/govt-tortures-me-silent-microwave-weapons-ousted-s-prez

OR (if link is corrupted): http://NowPublic.com/scrivener RE: "Gov't Tortures" and "Gestapo USA."

Posted by: scrivener50 | October 30, 2009 9:49 AM | Report abuse

he's a bigger stooge, idiot, and moron than any ten other posters.
-Loud and Dumb

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
the result of two days of research and analysis by curly. stand by for more incite.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 9:45 AM | Report abuse

This has to be one of the most meaningless races in the country. Not only is it an off year election, it is a special election to replace former Congressman Hughes who Obama nominated to an important foreign post. Which means that this will be a low turnout election in one of the most conservative districts in the country.

A loss for Hoffman here would be enormously surprising. It certainly does not mean that suddenly, Sarah Palin is a political genius as I am certain Chris will be gushing forth on if Hoffman wins. They guy is in an even bigger swoon over Palin that Bill Kristol. And Kristol licks her boots every day.

Posted by: jaxas | October 30, 2009 9:45 AM | Report abuse

Obama has lost popularity because it was unrealistically high to begin with. At the start of his presidency, some people who would never vote for him said they approved because it seemed not PC to diss the first African-American President until he did something.

And part of Obama's popularity was simply that he was not Bush. In fact, if GWB had better numbers in his last two years, Obama probably wouldn't be president. It might be the Clinton/Obama administration, or McCain/Ridge.

Posted by: mikenmidland | October 30, 2009 9:44 AM | Report abuse

sorry to inform you but there are already four stooges (three is traditional) on this blog. you will have to get in line behind DDAWD if you want entrance to that club. Our stooges are usually very prolific and you will have to be more ignorant than that if you want to even stand a chance. although I must admit you have certainly met the stupidity criteria.

Try posting the same thing three times in a row like Loud and Dumb if you really want to show how foolish you are.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 9:42 AM | Report abuse

yellowsnow is too stupid to understand that he's a bigger stooge, idiot, and moron than any ten other posters.

Now I know why joked no longer posts. He realized how pathetic he looked being associated with the brain-dead yellowsnow.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | October 30, 2009 9:41 AM | Report abuse

Elrodin, I think you are greatly overestimating the influence of liberals in the NY-23rd district. I will agree that there is a contigent of liberal democrats in the adirondacks, but they are greatly outnumbered by the hard-line rightwingers.
Owens wouldn't be my first choice either but if he does win, he has a real chance of holding the seat next year if he shows himself to be a moderate Dem.

And to your point about the SUNY system. The Fort Drum websites says
"Fort Drum is the largest employer in Northern New York. In FY07, 16,950 Soldiers and 3,960 civilians were employed on Fort Drum. Civilian (includes tenants and contractors) and military payrolls totaled $135,259,757 and $795,412,672 respectively."
And that doesn't even include the people who work indirectly for the Base.

Posted by: AndyR3 | October 30, 2009 9:41 AM | Report abuse

yellowsnow: Sorry, ace, but you said "All Democrats."

Numbnutz, those people I named are among the 30. You lie. Of course.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | October 30, 2009 9:39 AM | Report abuse

another interesting fact about corruption. tom Delay has been gone for years, still no actual conviction or proof. just the whiff of stench was enough. But for liberals, you can soldier on for years with the cloud hanging over your head. Just how long does it take to prove Wrangle is a total cheat? since he's a black dem, the answer is - forever.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 9:38 AM | Report abuse

Snowbama wrote-
Is there anything he hasn't blamed George W. Bush for? The economy, global warming, the credit crisis, Middle East stalemate, the deficit, anti-Americanism abroad...
------------------
Is there any one of those things Bush shouldn't be blamed for? No.
Heck, you left out the EPA, DOJ, stem cell research (lack thereof), the marginalization of the Constitution, FE(eble)MA, No Child Left Educated, blatant mixing of Church and State...Since I don't have five hours I'll leave it at that extremely tiny sample.

Eight years of ruination doesn't get fixed in 9 months, Snow.
You know, the 9 months that you and the other teabirthers have blamed Obama for everything INCLUDING the swine flu.

Posted by: DAMNEDGENTLEMEN | October 30, 2009 9:38 AM | Report abuse

Chris, you need to engage in a little more critical thinking here. A Hoffman win in this district holds no important message. Not only is this regarded under normal circumstances as a safe republican district, it is one of the most conservative districts in the entire state of New York. The real surprise here would be a dem pickup.

Of course I understand that you are invested in Palin so quite obviously you would look at a Hoffman win as a great victory for her. And, like so many others in the media, you are attracted to this notion that there is some sort of right wing populist uprising out there and tend to exaggerate any event that would seem to corroborate that.

I'm not buying it. When I see Rick Santorum and Fred THompson allied with Dick Armey, I know I am dealing with fraudulent charlatans who are into peddling the conspiratorial claptrap Glenn Beck is harping on every day, to wit: That Americans need to take to the streets to fight this "socialst, fascist" in the White House.

If a majority of Americans are moving in this direction, then indeed we are headed for a Fourth Reich!

Posted by: jaxas | October 30, 2009 9:37 AM | Report abuse

here's the part the idiot edited out:

The Post said others whose names were in the report included Reps. Norm Dicks, D-Wash., Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio, C.W. Bill Young, R-Fla., and Todd Tiahrt, R-Kan.

The committee, however, has not announced an investigation of any of these lawmakers.

The committee ended an investigation of Rep. Sam Graves, R-Mo., and released a report finding no ethical violations.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 9:35 AM | Report abuse

One factor missing from the analysis: Bill Owens is NOT well liked among NY-23 Democrats. He's a pro-life DLC type and Democratic activists are not enamored with him at all. He's quite conservative and would immediately place himself in the Blue Dog coalition.

You have to remember that Obama essentially tied McCain in NY-23. It's not THAT conservative a district. Fort Drum is not the sizable employer it once was. Arguably, SUNY-Plattsburg, SUNY-Potsdam and St. Lawrence University are as big employers as Fort Drum - and they are more solidly liberal than Fort Drum is conservative.

If you want to know how liberal Democratic base voters in Northern New York feel about him, look at what Kos says - He actually wanted Scozzofazza to win because she'd be more liberal than Owens.

If NY-23 had nominated a more conventionally liberal Democrat then the Dem would have gotten 38% of the vote with ease - and would have turned out. Hoffman and Dede could have scrummed for the rest and the district would be turning blue. Instead, Owens is going to have count on liberal Dems holding their noses.

Posted by: ElrodinTennessee | October 30, 2009 9:32 AM | Report abuse

with the appearance fo the third stooge Loud and Dumb, the repreive from idiocy is hereby ended.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 9:28 AM | Report abuse

why the Libs are losing - easy - they have demonstrated the qualities of a sore loser:

The Obama administration has gone after both Rush Limbaugh and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce -- showing an inability to distinguish between the burning of heretics and the burning of bridges. It has courted insurance companies, then publicly demonized them for showing independence. Obama has tended to define all opposition, particularly on health care, as resulting from fear, cowardice and selfishness -- instead of admitting genuine disagreement. At a recent fundraiser, he mocked Republicans as robots who "do what they're told." He has engaged in consistent, classless, self-excusing criticism of his predecessor. Other presidents have been known for a war on totalitarianism or a war on terror. Obama is known for a war on Fox News.


Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander -- a conservative, but not normally an angry one -- describes these tactics as behavior "typical of street brawls and political campaign consultants." It is also behavior typical of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who called town hall protesters "evil-mongers," and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who labeled them as "simply un-American."

There are many reasons why Obama, according to Gallup, has suffered the largest decline in approval, at this portion in his term, of any elected president since 1953 -- and why more Americans believe in UFOs than approve of the job done by Congress. But one reason is surely the bitter, brittle tone of the new Democratic establishment -- highlighted by the promise they have raised and disappointed.

How did the tonal candidate become so tone-deaf? We have always known that there are two Obamas. One is the thoughtful, Niebuhr-quoting professor, who listens to every side and speaks inspiring words of unity. The other Obama comes from Chicago, and suffers from an excess of Chicagoans around him. Many Democrats seem to like the street-brawling side of Obama and his team. Many independents and Republicans seem less enthusiastic that Mr. Hyde has moved in his furniture and clearly plans to stay.


America in 2008 and Virginia in 2009 show that tone is an underestimated factor in American politics. Positive candidates in these races have looked like leaders and winners. Negativity has seemed trivial. Virginians seem to be deciding that Deeds is too small to be governor. Obama seems intent on proving that he is too small to be an effective president.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 9:26 AM | Report abuse

The media is getting rather carried away by all of this. And everyone is reading far too much into these off year elections. I distinctly remember 2001 and 2002 and how the media ran off and concluded that Karl Rove was absolutely right that the GOP was now in the ascendancy and were well into an enduring majority for decades.

Look. In the economic environment we are in at the moment, independent or third party candidates might do well because the mood in the country at the moment is against both parties. But these things can change on a dime.

If there is one thing I have learned about American voters it is that they are fickle and impatient and tend to make decisions based on the heated emotions of the moment. And usually they wake up to regret it later. If Hoffman wins, I would bet on his being a one termer because it is clear that he is pretty shallow when confronted about local issues.

And as for Chris, he is crossing his fingers and legs for Hoffman because he is invested so much in a Palin Presidential run. I think the guy has a crush on that horsey smile of hers.

Posted by: jaxas | October 30, 2009 9:25 AM | Report abuse

"All Democrats. Hence the secrecy."

To quote one of yellowsnow's heroes, "You lie!" Not that that's a surprise.

"Records show that members under scrutiny are Reps. Pete Visclosky (D-Ind.), left, John Murtha (D-Pa.), right, and Jim Moran (D-Va.), Norm Dicks (D-Wash.), Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.) and Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.). (Photos: Post/AP)"

If you can't even admit there are slimeballs in both parties, then you're even more pathetic and gutless than we already think you are.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | October 30, 2009 9:25 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | October 30, 2009 9:22 AM | Report abuse

Dr K rules the roost:

In the Barack Obama version, there are 50 or so such blame-Bush free passes before the gig is up. By my calculation, Obama has already burned through a good 49. Is there anything he hasn't blamed George W. Bush for? The economy, global warming, the credit crisis, Middle East stalemate, the deficit, anti-Americanism abroad -- everything but swine flu.

It's as if Obama's presidency hasn't really started. He's still taking inventory of the Bush years. Just this Monday, he referred to "long years of drift" in Afghanistan in order to, I suppose, explain away his own, well, yearlong drift on Afghanistan.

This compulsion to attack his predecessor is as stale as it is unseemly. Obama was elected a year ago. He became commander in chief two months later. He then solemnly announced his own "comprehensive new strategy" for Afghanistan seven months ago. And it was not an off-the-cuff decision. "My administration has heard from our military commanders, as well as our diplomats," the president assured us. "We've consulted with the Afghan and Pakistani governments, with our partners and our NATO allies, and with other donors and international organizations" and "with members of Congress."


Obama is obviously unhappy with the path he himself chose in March. Fine. He has every right -- indeed, duty -- to reconsider. But what Obama is reacting to is the failure of his own strategy.

Obama is facing the same decision on Afghanistan that Bush faced in late 2006 in deciding to surge in Iraq.

In both places, the deterioration of the military situation was not the result of "drift," but of considered policies that seemed reasonable, cautious and culturally sensitive at the time but that ultimately turned out to be wrong.

Which is evidently what Obama now thinks of the policy choice he made on March 27.

He is to be commended for reconsidering. But it is time he acted like a president and decided. Afghanistan is his. He's used up his envelopes.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 9:13 AM | Report abuse

All this yammer about throwing the bums out...to be replaced by who?
Because it sure as fuji ain't Quittacuda.
Have you ever been upstate? No? Keep it that way if you don't want to re-enact 'Deliverance', with you as Ned Beatty.
Who gives a mouse poop what the 93% white (and I mean that in the whitest sense) population of the wilderness of New York does?
The outcome of this race is about as relevant to the politics of actual America as the struggle for Honduras (save your 'Honduras IS important!' replies...it ain't). You may as well track the race for Grand Dragon of the KKK in Alabama and extrapolate the result into some template for 2010. Insulting implication intended (David Dukes worked out of Boston, for those of you naive enough to think white supremacy is the sole bailiwick of the South).
Rub your Hoffman beads and prostrate yourself before Jesus Beck all you want tea birthers, you will still never stop abortion, gayness, pot smokers, interracial marriage, Harry Potter, science, pornography, gambling, education (the kind where the Bible isn't the history book), trees, pre-, post-, and extra-marital sex, rock and roll, or compassion for your fellow man (which teabirthers especially disdain).
America- Run by a guy who pronounces 'nuclear' correctly since 2009.

Posted by: DAMNEDGENTLEMEN | October 30, 2009 9:13 AM | Report abuse

House ethics investigators have scrutinized the activities of more than 30 lawmakers and several aides in inquiries about issues including defense lobbying and corporate influence peddling, according to a confidential House ethics committee report prepared in July. The report, disclosed on a publicly accessible computer network, was made available to The Washington Post by a source familiar with such networks.


All Democrats. Hence the secrecy.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 9:07 AM | Report abuse

mwhoke, pretty good spin on Pelosi's statement, but it doesn't pass the smell test. So 30 lawmakers are being investigated, which is how many more than when the GOP held the House? And please note that it is investiging members of both parties? so she didn't lie, she is holding all lawmakers to ethical standards, and she seriously snubbed Murtha when she became speaker, not wanting to be seen as supporting that dinosaur who like alot of old, white, males of both sides, don't get it that times have changed.

Posted by: katem1 | October 30, 2009 9:07 AM | Report abuse

conclusion: running as a middle of the road squish, a RINO., like McCain, gets you the same result he got.

Dare to be conservative. win or at least go down in glory, defending the proper principles. the ebb and flow of liberalism is certainly ebbing now.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 9:06 AM | Report abuse

On Heather Wilson, "The Governor of New Mexico has no significant national security role -- an issue area that continues to be an important part of my life"
Except they are the Governor of one of the largest borders with Mexico in the country, and what are you doing now as a private citizen to protect our national security? Other than not making bad decisions as a member of congress like attacking Iraq like you were before.

Posted by: AndyR3 | October 30, 2009 9:00 AM | Report abuse

polls, polls, polls, the only ones that count are on election day. 1000-1700 people are representitive of a country of 300 million? Do we know what the actual questions were? How about the biased poll by the Centre for Growth that Chris was touting a few days ago? Nov./08 showed how very meaningless polls are. The polls were alot closer than the election results. Look how wrong all of the pundits were about the public option viability and acceptance. And exactly how is it that Hoffman thinks he can "change" washington? The Prez goes against the media movers and shakers that normally set the conventional wisdom of a presidency, and if that isn't change in washington, I don't know what could be. Worse than politicians running around trying to make themselves relevant is media types trying to be relevant with stupid articles that start with suppositions like Maybe...or are lazy and use their competitions stories that have a political bent, as evidenced by Shear's unbalanced "reporting" of a story in WashTimes about access to the Prez by big DNC donors. To balance the story all Shear had to do is mention how former VP Cheney is still fighting to keep his visitor logs secret. Considering that this WH is releasing records at month's end, it is definitely unbalanced reporting, and yes, lazy.

Posted by: katem1 | October 30, 2009 8:55 AM | Report abuse

Also, when Hoffman was named by the Conservative party chaiman his speach was a skewering of the State party for choosing such a moderate candidate.

This article by the Watertown Daily times is very telling about how this process started.
http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20090803/NEWS03/308039962

Posted by: AndyR3 | October 30, 2009 8:52 AM | Report abuse

Good point, Andy.

Turnout will be key. A lot of soft supporters won't turn out if the weather is bad. Perhaps Owens should pray for freezing rain?

Posted by: mikenmidland | October 30, 2009 8:48 AM | Report abuse

Let's not forget, the Conservative Party elected a US Senator, James Buckley in 1970, he beat unelected far-left Republican senator Charles Goodell (yes, the father of the NFL commissioner). They are a presence in NY and can win when the Republicans run a leftist or uninspiring candidate and the Democrats don't have much support.

Posted by: ggreenbaum | October 30, 2009 8:43 AM | Report abuse

Chris, what it says is we're pissed with both parties.

Republicans for being the party of no.
Democrats for the party of can't do.

And I'm a Dem. I'll be voting third party here in MD against Chris Van Hollen come November next year.

We need 3rd, 4th and 5th parties. This two party system is a failure. Moderates and conservatives block everything.

Posted by: anarcho-liberal-tarian | October 30, 2009 8:41 AM | Report abuse

CC, I have to take issue with your analysis of the NY-23 race.
This statement
"But, a Hoffman win is rightly understood not as a rejection of either party but rather a rejection of the political system as a whole."
is just flat out wrong. With Fort Drum as the main empolyer and the district being almost competely rural other than Watertown, the NY-23 is one of the reddest districts in the country. If Hoffman had been the Republican nominee than he would have won with 60% of the vote. The 26% who identified as independents in this poll are really republicans if past voting is any indication. Therefore, the 'independent' support of Hoffman should not be over analyzed as a dismissal of the whole system, but of the republican party nominee and by extension the Republican Party leadership (State and Federal).

Some of the the LOCAL GOP leaders were the ones who convinced Hoffman to run as the conservative party nominee when he wasn't chosen by the State party. Therefore, IMO Hoffman's rise isn't a troubling sign for the Democrats (who are pretty unified right now) but it is a horrible sign for the Republican party. This type of division between the right-wing and the moderates has always been tenous and now it is showing signs of splintering.

That being said, my prediction is that Owens wins with 37% over Hoffman at 34% and Scozzafava at 28% and because special elections are all about turnout and these independents who support Hoffman are a mile wide and an inch deep. Where as the Democrats and Republicans are committed loyal party members who historically vote in these type of elections.

Posted by: AndyR3 | October 30, 2009 8:36 AM | Report abuse

Yes, there was a chance (and still is) that the Republican vote would split evenly between Hoffman and Scozzafava, allowing Owens to win with less than 40% of the vote. But he was never likely to get more than 40% of the vote.

Voters have seen enough polls to know that Scozzafava will not win, and those inclined to vote for her will now have to decide what to do with their vote--vote their principles (whether GOP loyalty or Dede affinity) or to reward or punish the Club for Growth for hijacking their election.

Whatever happens in NY-23, it has very little to do with the Democratic party. After all, that district has gone Republican since the Civil War.

Posted by: mikenmidland | October 30, 2009 8:36 AM | Report abuse

Looking over the Kos poll, it's fun to note that of Hoffman's backers, 5% would vote for Owens, the Democrat, as their second choice. This reminds me of the young Virginian woman quoted in the Post last week -- she supported Obama last year, but THIS year she's supporting McDonnell.
The Conservatives and Club for Growth are proving that if you make enough noise you can plant a name in the mind of 5% or so of the inattentive electorate.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | October 30, 2009 8:29 AM | Report abuse

As a liberal, I do not fear this election and will not be upset by the election of Hoffman. Let's have it out, liberals vs. the right-wing, no more Blue Dog Democrats and Senators like Lieberman, Nelson, Landrieu, and Lincoln. Should the American people choose the party of Buchanan, Palin, and Coburn, it will be a great lesson for them. As we in Arizona are learning, an extremist right-wing government can do nothing right and leads to pain for everybody.The reaction to a victory for the Limbaugh-Beck crowd will be quick disappointment and a move toward real reformers not the corporate errand boys and girls that today's Democrats are.

Posted by: Desertstraw | October 30, 2009 8:27 AM | Report abuse

Just because you elect a new speaker does not mean all 435 members of congress suddenly stop talking to lobbyists. Some of the inquiries have to do with *possible* violations of the new rules Pelosi put in place, such as barring lobbyists from paying for congressional travel.

As the piece says, the Ethics Committee is "very busy." Which means they are doing their job, looking for violations instead of looking the other way. Cleaning up the system will take time.

Oh, and although it seems trite to have to say it, just because someone is being investigated, does not mean they're dirty.

Posted by: mikenmidland | October 30, 2009 8:25 AM | Report abuse

One more thing and then I'll shut up and go to work.

In Newsweek, the always disgusting and never compelling Mark Sanford writes a puff piece about Ayn Rand's views on government and the individual; then past a brutal segue, he develops an all too obvious homage to himself on the plinth of human frailty.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 30, 2009 8:24 AM | Report abuse

Here is an inspirational political art project worth your time perhaps.

http://kalman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/29/e-pluribus-unum/

Posted by: shrink2 | October 30, 2009 8:15 AM | Report abuse

a great new trend...
a Conservative winning by getting the votes of independents...

Posted by: DwightCollins | October 30, 2009 7:54 AM | Report abuse

I stew over the insanity that our government is projecting on all of us and agonize over what I can do to stop it. After the McCain nomination, I changed my party affiliation from Republican (life-long) to Independent. I no longer care about the Republican party as they do not represent the ideals that they claim to. I have attended a townhall meeting and write and call my congressman and senators who could care less. When I read/heard about Doug Hoffman's campaign I felt compelled to contribute. This was my first political contribution. I sincerely hope that he wins because the message will be loud and clear. America has not yet fallen into the abyss and those of us who love this country and remember a better day, are fighting like crazy to preserve the good!

Posted by: moveestimator | October 30, 2009 7:52 AM | Report abuse

Steven Pearlstein paints Wall Street investment bankers as parasites this morning. This while Americans are once again shocked, shocked by our two party, pay to play, crony capitalist system doing its thing in the halls of congress.

mwhoke says throw them out. Too late buddy, the system is what it is. But at least our own investment bankers, the ones whose money we borrowed to post gdp growth last quarter are crony capitalists too.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 30, 2009 7:43 AM | Report abuse

Tied in ny. Tied in nj. Repub way ahead in va. Libs are drowning in incompetence. The buyers remorse has set in as the effects of leftism set in. Lame duck in less than a year. The reward for inexperience.

Was there some borderline personality convention yesterday. This blog was stooge free with the usual gang of idiots conspicuously absent. Cc must be doing handsprings. The average iq soared.

Posted by: snowbama | October 30, 2009 7:30 AM | Report abuse

The headlines in today's Washington Post show why Americans believe government is failing.

It appears our politicians are more beholding to special interests and campaign contributions than they are to the taxpayers.

Speaker Pelosi promised us an "ethical and transparent House of Representatives" when she assumed her current leadership position. It appears she fibbed!

It is time to throw the rascals out.

Posted by: mwhoke | October 30, 2009 7:29 AM | Report abuse

"If you're going to do it, at least man up and say I'm fat."

The visual and the tone are important here. What is the relative corpulence of registered voters in NJ? Is Christie playing to the silent rage of of the chubby ones, or to the political correctness of the refined and dignified?

Oh, wait - this is in NJ. Rage is public 24/7, and dignity is in short supply.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | October 30, 2009 7:23 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company