What’s Wrong With America? Why Is Anyone Voting Republican?

Posted by Mark NC on October 31, 2014 at 4:37 pm. 8 Comments :

A new poll from Fox News affirms what virtually every other poll has found when people are asked to name the most important problem facing the country. And as James Carville noted long ago, “It’s the economy, stupid.”

The Fox poll had an overwhelming 43% of registered voters citing the economy as the most important issue. That was two and a half times more than the next three issues, immigration, healthcare, and foreign policy.

Nearly every economic indicator shows that the economy has been booming in recent years. The Obama administration has presided over the biggest and most enduring advance in fifty years. The Dow reached another all-time high today. Unemployment is 5.7%, nearly half of what Obama inherited from George W. Bush. GDP growth increased at an annual rate of 3.5% in the third quarter of 2014. Housing is up, interest rates are down, inflation is imperceptible, and consumer confidence rose in October to its highest level since 2007.

The only significant low points are average wages and public sector employment. In both of those matters it has been the Republican Party that has thrown obstacles into the path of progress. Democrats are universally in support of a minimum wage increase that economists agree would produce higher demand for goods and services, thus stimulating job growth. And Obama has been trying to drag the GOP along to allocate funds for infrastructure development which would not only create jobs, but improve the environment for businesses to succeed. Yet conservative naysayers continue to stifle these measures for no reason other than to hurt the President and his party.

Given the success on so many levels of the President’s economic record, and the fact that the economy is the number one issue on the minds of voters, the obvious question is: Why on Earth are Democrats struggling to hold their position in Congress? The American people ought to be rewarding success and punishing the obstacles to it. With a more cooperative legislative branch, Obama could achieve a great deal more in the last two years of his presidency.

And therein lies the answer to the question. The last thing the GOP wants is for Obama to be successful. It’s what they pledged on the eve of his first inauguration when Mitch McConnell declared that his top priority was to make Obama a one-term president. It’s what their de facto leader, Rush Limbaugh, pronounced when he said that he wants Obama to fail. It’s why they orchestrated a shutdown last year that achieved nothing but cost $24 billion. And it’s why they have a kneejerk opposition to anything that Obama proposes, even if it was originally proposed by a Republican.

Also notable is that the other issues cited as important to voters also have seen measurable improvement during the Obama years. Illegal immigration is way down, while simultaneously domestic responses to the plight of undocumented residents have become much more compassionate and rational. As for health care, more Americans are covered by insurance than ever, and at less cost. And their coverage is more comprehensive and cannot be denied due to preexisting conditions.

Nevertheless, midterm polling is inexplicably showing tight senate races in several battleground states. With all of the good news, Democrats should be running away with this. But Republicans have expertly managed a campaign of dishonest negativity that has distorted the debate and damaged the perception of Democratic candidates. They have also had the benefit of bottomless barrels of cash from billionaires like the Koch brothers with vested interests that do not align with those of ordinary Americans.

Still, in most of these states the Democrats would be leading comfortably if the poll queried the entire electorate. But when constraining the poll to “likely” voters, the numbers fall decidedly against the Democrats. That’s because many of the traditionally Democratic constituents tend to sit out midterm elections.

If Democrats can reverse that trend through voter education, and a strong ground game getting out the vote on election day, the pollsters and the Republicans and the media will be shocked by the results. But it will take money and hard work to do it. Any encouragement you can give to people you know to insure that they vote will pay off in dividends. Especially in races that are so close. And here are a couple of other ways you can help:

Contribute to or volunteer with…
MoveOn.org or Democracy for America

You’ll be glad you did. The work, calling other Democrats like yourself, is fun and rewarding. And any funds can help to expand the outreach. The alternative is to wake up Wednesday morning with the prospect of a senate run by Mitch McConnell where every committee chair is a Republican who wishes harm on this President and his agenda. Victory is not out of reach, but it will require some determination and commitment. So please consider everything that you can do to be a part of a major electoral upset that will put the Tea Party on its knees.

Clinton-Hater Dick Morris May Have Just Guaranteed Hillary Clinton’s Election

Posted by Mark NC on October 13, 2014 at 4:37 pm. 1 Comments :

There is almost no one in political punditry who has been more wrong, more often than Dick Morris. He was excommunicated from the Fox News family after he laughably predicted a landslide victory for Mitt Romney just a few days before his landslide loss. He later admitted that he was lying about his prediction in order to boost the Romney campaign. But perhaps the best example of his cluelessness was his book “Condi vs. Hillary,” in which he predicted that they would be the candidates in the 2008 election. But Morris got the Democratic nominee wrong; he got the Republican nominee wrong; and the Republican who Morris said could win if he were nominated (McCain) actually was nominated and lost. He couldn’t possibly have been more wrong.

How this cretinous loser ever gets asked to pontificate on anything is a mystery. It would be difficult to come up with an example of anything he ever got right. And now, as if to cement his reputation as a recidivist crackpot, Morris is claiming that “Hillary Clinton Orchestrated Panetta’s ‘Hit’ On Obama.” And the nutballs at Fox Nation giddily published it.

Shameless self-promotion…
Get Fox Nation vs. Reality. Available now at Amazon.

Is he FRIGGIN’ kidding? This is such an absurd and unsubstantiated piece of nonsense that it elevates Morris to new heights of idiotdom. The notion that Panetta could be coerced into doing Clinton’s dirty work against President Obama, who made Panetta both Secretary of Defense and Director of the CIA, is ludicrous on its face. Likewise, the notion that Clinton has some sort of vendetta against Obama for which she is recruiting surrogates to deploy makes no sense whatsoever.

If Clinton decides to run for president in 2016, she is going to want a reserve of goodwill for the Democratic Party and its leader for eight years, Barack Obama. She is going to want to run on the successes of the Obama administration, including restoring an economy that was in full collapse, signing the first-ever health care bill, reducing unemployment from 10% to less than six, and so much more. The last thing she would want is to run against a president of her own party who was made to look bad by her own Machiavellian tactics.

In short, the theory Morris is floating can only be seen as credible by a complete moron who knows nothing about politics. That explains why Morris likes the theory. But there is something even more ridiculous in this drooling gibberish that Morris can’t possibly have noticed.

By casting Clinton as the mastermind of a clandestine plot to sink Obama, Morris has affirmed her status as a powerful, resolute, and effective leader. He is asserting that she can push around a former CIA chief, even though she currently holds no reins of power. That is a fairly positive endorsement of her leadership skills.

What’s more, Morris contends that the purpose of Clinton’s plot is bring down a president who is despised by the right-wingers who are expected to oppose her candidacy. That, of course, would immediately make her more appealing to those who would otherwise be her natural enemies. If Morris were right, then all of the people who hate Obama would have a new-found appreciation for Clinton, thus boosting her electability.

Obviously, it is not Morris’ intention to help Clinton in any way. He is just too stupid to understand the ramifications of his own blithering drivel. But the rest of us can enjoy the comic relief he provides by embarrassing himself so publicly every time he opens his scummy mouth.

So F*cking What? Wingnuts Freak Out Over Wendy Davis Ad With Wheelchair

Posted by Mark NC on October 11, 2014 at 12:47 pm. 7 Comments :

Since when is a wheelchair an attack? Since the excitable pearl-clutchers at Breitbart News (and their fainting Fionas at Fox Nation) got wind of an effective campaign ad by Wendy Davis, the Democratic candidate for Governor of Texas.

The Davis ad (video below) is a stinging indictment of her Republican opponent, Greg Abbot, who has handsomely benefited from a personal injury lawsuit, while throwing legal roadblocks in front of others seeking just compensation for similar negligent or malicious conduct. The ad reveals an abhorrent hypocrisy that deals out misery to people who have already been victimized.

Yet somehow, the rightist media hacks have dredged up a phony sense of outrage over the image of a wheelchair in the ad. Abbott has been confined to a wheelchair since he suffered injuries from a falling tree. The Abbott campaign joined in on the bitch-fest, issuing a furious response that oozes with artificial anger over this alleged affront:

“It is challenging to find language strong enough to condemn Sen. Davis’ disgusting television ad, which represents a historic low for someone seeking to represetn Texans,” said Abbott spokeswoman Amelia Chase. “Sen. Davis’ ad shows a disturbing lack of judgment from a desperate politician and completely disqualifies her from seeking higher office in Texas.”

Curiously, Abbott’s statement never explains what they found “disgusting” about the ad. It also never bothers to refute any of the substantive allegations that the ad presented, including Abbott’s legal efforts against a rape victim and an amputee. Those overtly anti-victim, pro-corporation actions by Abbott are ignored by his spokesperson in favor of an irrational rant about the image of a wheelchair.

Yet the reason why a wheelchair is considered insulting is unclear. It hardly seems likely that most wheelchair users regard their form of transportation as offensive or the sight of it as a smear. In fact, the implication that just showing a picture of a wheelchair constitutes an attack says more about the accuser than the party who ran the ad. It says that the wingnut press and the Abbott campaign regard a wheelchair as something objectionable and not proper to be seen in civil society. That, of course, is insane. But when a campaign has nothing else of substance to say, they will resort to absurdities like this and fake outrage.

For the record, Davis’ ad is in no way disparaging to anyone who uses a wheelchair. The ad criticizes Abbott for seeking and receiving legal redress for his injuries and then making it his mission to prevent anyone else from having the same rights. If you want to see politicians disparaging disabled people, you need to look at the Republicans like Saxby Chambliss, who morphed triple-amputee Vietnam veteran Max Cleland into Osama Bin Laden; or Rush Limbaugh who repulsively mocked Michael J. Fox’s Parkinson’s disease; or former congressmen Joe Walsh and Allen West who questioned the patriotism of another wounded warrior, Rep. Tammy Duckworth. Those are real examples of despicable disrespect, unlike the made up controversy that Abbott is peddling.

For more documented absurdities from Fox…
Get Fox Nation vs. Reality. Available now at Amazon.

[Update: 10/13/14] Fox News joins the fray asking if the Davis ad is the most offensive of the year. They must have missed the ad for GOP candidate Wendy Rogers that disgustingly exploits the execution of James Foley by ISIL terrorists. The Rogers ad follows one by another GOP candidate, Allen Weh, who did the same thing.

Is This Ad For A GOP Senate Candidate The Worst Political Ad This Year?

Posted by Mark NC on August 25, 2014 at 5:09 pm. 5 Comments :

The 2014 election cycle has produced some pretty horrific advertisements including Iowa Republican Joni Ernst’s tales of castrating hogs, the Club for Growth’s anti-Pryor (D-AR) ad featuring a pooping parrot, and even a Republican primary opponent of John Boehenr who crafted an “electile dysfunction” themed ad that said “If you have a Boehner lasting more than 21 years, seek immediate medical attention.” That one was actually pretty funny.

Now we have New Mexico Republican Allen Weh’s ad against incumbent Democratic senator Tom Udall (video below). Weh, the former chairman of the New Mexico Republican Party, has the distinction of being the first candidate grotesque enough to feature the ISIS executioner of American journalist Jim Foley in a campaign ad. However, sitting through the whole ad will reveal that Weh also includes a second shot of another execution before arriving at what must be his campaign theme: associating Sen. Udall himself with ISIS.

The visual message of compositing Udall’s face with an ISIS flag is a not-so-subtle implication that Udall is aligned with America’s enemies. And this is no accident. These ads are edited second-by-second to pack the entirety of the message into short clips. Weh’s operatives knew exactly what they were doing.

The audio on the ad is comprised almost entirely of a snippet from an Obama interview conducted before he was a candidate for president, and another repeated snippet of Udall saying “I know, as far as I feel, this diplomatic path that we’re on right now is a good one.” Udall’s comment was not sourced, but it turns it that it came from an interview on September 11, 2013 on CNN’s The Lead with Jake Tapper. It was also not place in context.

Weh’s ad sought to associate Udall with both ISIS and Obama, creating an ancillary connection between ISIS and Obama as well. However, Udall was responding to Tapper’s question about the speech Obama gave on September 10, 2013 regarding Syria’s chemical weapons. The President spoke about his determination to force Syria to abandon their chemical arsenal, his initial intention to seek authorization from Congress, and his ultimate decision to let the diplomatic efforts run their course.

“Over the last few days, we’ve seen some encouraging signs. In part because of the credible threat of U.S. military action, as well as constructive talks that I had with President Putin, the Russian government has indicated a willingness to join with the international community in pushing Assad to give up his chemical weapons. The Assad regime has now admitted that it has these weapons, and even said they’d join the Chemical Weapons Convention, which prohibits their use.

“It’s too early to tell whether this offer will succeed, and any agreement must verify that the Assad regime keeps its commitments. But this initiative has the potential to remove the threat of chemical weapons without the use of force, particularly because Russia is one of Assad’s strongest allies. I have, therefore, asked the leaders of Congress to postpone a vote to authorize the use of force while we pursue this diplomatic path.”

In context, Udall’s comments were in support of a process that eventually succeeded in collecting and neutralizing Syria’s chemical warfare capability that was already responsible for killing thousands of Syrians, including hundreds of children.

So Weh’s ad completely misrepresented Udall’s words, but the worst part was its blatant and nauseating exploitation of Foley, a victim of terrorist brutality less than a week ago. And compounding that repulsiveness, Weh plastered the flag of Foley’s murderers on Udall’s face. If there is an award for reprehensible defamation in political advertising, Weh is currently the runaway winner this year – so far.

Be Sure To “LIKE” News Corpse On Facebook

Crybaby McDaniel Caught Lying About Black Votes

Posted by Mark NC on June 27, 2014 at 12:59 pm. 7 Comments :

Last week’s Republican primary in Mississippi has stirred a frenzied response from Tea Party wackos who are convinced that the nomination was stolen by brigades of law-breaking African-Americans (is there any other kind to the right?). Loser Chris McDaniel has still refused to concede the race to incumbent Thad Cochran.

AT&T and Verizon users: Stop funding the Tea Party.
Switch to CREDO Mobile, the progressive cell phone company, today!

McDaniel appeared on Fox News last night with ardent support Sean Hannity. He told Hannity of his suspicions of massive electoral foul play, although he offered no evidence. McDaniel said that…

“We’re looking into the issue of whether or not people who participated in the June the 3rd Democratic primary crossed over into the Republican primary this Tuesday night. And we’ve already found more than a thousand examples of that in one county alone.”

This morning Pete Perry, the Republican Party Chairman of Hinds County, to which McDaniel was referring, issued a statement refuting the unfounded charges. In the statement Perry included an example of just how far removed McDaniel is from reality.

“As a committee, we are still in the process of going through the election results before they can be certified, but this morning we can discuss some of the specific examples that were raised yesterday.

“As an example in Precinct 14, the Fondren Presbyterian Church precinct, the numbers cited by the McDaniel campaign yesterday included 192 ‘illegal votes’ – people that they claimed had voted in the Democrat primary on June 3rd but then voted in the Republican run-off. That is impossible. According to the certified results of the June 3rd Democrat primary, there were only 37 total Democrat primary voters at that particular precinct.”

So McDaniel claimed that there were 192 illegal Democratic votes in a precinct that had only 37 Democratic votes total. That’s a pretty good indication that McDaniel’s complaints are pile of certified rubbish. He is just an egomaniacal sore loser who is certain that a secret cabal of Republicans and Democrats are conspiring against his holy Teabagger crusade. When all that actually happened is that voters acted lawfully to choose a candidate that is not McDaniel, and Cochran was smart enough to employ all legal measures to achieve his victory.

Oddly enough, I agree with McDaniel’s opposition to Democrats selecting Republican candidates, and vice versa. This is only possible due to the enactment of open primaries where people from any party are permitted to vote regardless of their registration. This was never a good idea because political party candidates should only be selected by members of their own parties. Why on earth should a Democrat get to choose who the GOP puts up for office? However, the open primary movement was a creation of right-wingers who saw it as a method of unseating entrenched Democratic incumbents. For instance, in California in 2010, open primaries were enacted via an initiative that was put on the ballot by a Republican state senator and supported by GOP governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Now that this hare-brained concept has come back to bite them in the ass, the Tea Party is furious at what a perversion of democracy their idea actually is. So what do they do in response? Do they retract their support for open primaries and commence a campaign to end them? Of course not. They claim that black criminals have perverted the electoral process and steps must be taken to invalidate their votes. That should help the GOP’s outreach to minority constituents as much as flying a Confederate flag at their campaign rallies will.

The upside of this affair is that the Democratic senate candidate in Mississippi, Travis Childers, just saw his chances of winning in a deep red state increase substantially. McDaniel’s delusional supporters are so upset at Cochran that many of them are already declaring that they will not vote for him in November. Some are even talking about a write-in candidacy for McDaniel, or launching a third Party campaign, which Sarah Palin has been hinting at. When this is all over, the Democrats may have to send McDaniel a thank you card.

Where’s The Outrage? On The Tenth Anniversary Of Ronald Reagan’s Death

Posted by Mark NC on June 5, 2014 at 3:41 pm. 1 Comments :

Ten years ago, on June 5, 2004, former president Ronald Reagan died after a long illness including severe Alzheimer’s disease. It’s a curious fluke of timing that this anniversary should occur just as some prominent events have sprung up in the news that parallel notable capstones of his term in office. And while many of these affairs have erupted into frenzied allegations of high crimes and misdemeanors on the part of President Obama, they generated a far more sedate reaction from Republicans of that era.

Shameless self-promotion…
Get Fox Nation vs. Reality. Available now at Amazon.

Embassy Attacks

For almost two years now, the GOP has been furiously scratching at the walls to find something incriminating with regard to the tragic attack on the U.S. diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya. In all that time, and after numerous congressional hearings and independent investigations, they have turned up nothing. So of course they decided to launch a new Select Committee on the Politicization of Benghazi in order to continue their fruitless and frivolous charade.

Perhaps on this day of remembrance, Republicans might take into consideration the fact that there were more embassy attacks, with greater loss of life, during the Reagan administration. And yet, there was never the degree of vitriol directed at Reagan for such deadly serious incidents as this:

“In April 1983, radical Shiite suicide bombers blew up the US embassy in Beirut, killing 63. Reagan did nothing to prevent this attack, and his ultimate response to it and a later deadly attack on US Marines in Beirut was to quietly withdraw from Lebanon.”

Climate Change

Last week President Obama announced an initiative to address the persistent problem of Climate Change that threatens to cause profound damage to our environment and our economy, while triggering profound national security risks. The Republican response to that was typically hostile, with rants about unlawfully overstepping his authority and deliberately attempting to sabotage the economy. However, no such rants were ever issued when Reagan said this in a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate requesting increased funding of nearly $500 million:

“Because changes in the earth’s natural systems can have tremendous economic and social effects, global climate change is becoming a critical concern.”

Voting Rights

A constant burr in the right’s britches has been their faulty analysis of alleged election fraud. Despite years of complaints, they have failed to turn up anything but trivial evidence of a handful of infractions, which they use to deny voting rights to tens of millions of citizens. Obama’s support for reform has yielded accusations of tyranny and advocacy of fraud. Recently the conservative-dominated Supreme Court drastically scaled back the scope of the seminal Voting Rights Act of 1965. Reagan opposed the legislation at the time, but during his presidency he had a somewhat different view that failed to garner the insults that Obama has suffered:

“To protect all our citizens, I believe the Voting Rights Act should and must be extended. […] The Voting Rights Act is important to the sense of trust many Americans place in their government’s commitment to equal rights.”

Veterans Administration

Another hot topic on the GOP outrage agenda is the news that some of the Veterans Administration facilities have badly failed the soldiers they are intended to serve. While most of the veteran community report that they are “highly satisfied” with the service they receive, the disclosures of malfeasance are serious and unforgivable. The problems appear to be locally based, yet that hasn’t stopped Republicans from placing the blame directly at the feet of the President. Funny, they never did that to Reagan when these VA fiascoes plagued his term:

In 1981 a former Marine committed suicide after claiming the VA had failed to attend to his service-related disabilities. In 1982 VA director Robert Nimmo was “criticized for wasteful spending, including use of a chauffeured car and an expensive office redecorating project,” after failing to address veterans problems with Agent Orange. in 1984 “Congressional investigators find evidence that VA officials had diverted or refused to spend more than $40 million that Congress approved to help Vietnam veterans with readjustment problems.”

Negotiating With Terrorists

More recently, Obama’s decision to rescue Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl from five years of captivity by agreeing to release some aging former Taliban leaders has resulted in political attacks against the soldier, his family, and calls for Obama’s impeachment. Right-wingers complain that there is no justification for negotiating with terrorists and that Obama has violated a long-standing policy not to do so. That, however, is totally false, as proven by Reagan himself. The notorious Iran-Contra scandal was centered around Reagan’s initiative to free hostages in Iran by agreeing to sell the terrorist nation over 1,500 missiles. The proceeds from that deal were then illegally funneled to anti-Sandinista death squads in Nicaragua. Reagan’s surreal confession to these acts continues to strain credulity:

“A few months ago I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that’s true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not.”

2016

Special Bonus Outrage: Setting up a future political battle, Republicans are going after presumptive Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Their fear of her is palpable as they struggle to bring down her popularity with the American people. A new survey shows her handily beating every GOP candidate she is matched against. Consequently, the right has gone all in to cast Clinton as “old and stale” (as Karl Rove said). Rove also suggested that Clinton was suffering from brain damage. Then the Drudge Report hilariously misinterpreted a People Magazine cover of Clinton leaning on a chair, which Drudge imagined was a walker.

All of this ignores the reality that Clinton is, by all credible accounts, in good health. But more to the point, she would be younger at inauguration than GOP pols like John McCain, Bob Dole, and, yes, you guessed it, Ronald Reagan, who still stands as the nation’s oldest president. This might be a good time to recall Reagan’s retort to rival Walter Mondale, who made some sly references to Reagan’s age:

“I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent’s youth and inexperience.”

While remembering the legacy of Ronald Reagan, which is fraught with disagreement and controversy, on this, the anniversary of his death, it would worthwhile to recognize the hypocrisy of contemporary Republicans who seem to have forgotten history entirely.

Late Additions

Immigration: Reagan granted amnesty to three million undocumented residents.
Al Qaeda: Reagan funded the Mujaheddin, from whom sprung the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden.
Gun Control: Reagan signed the Firearm Owners’ Protection Act that banned fully automatic rifles.

GUILTY! Republican Huckster Admits To Election Fraud

Posted by Mark NC on May 20, 2014 at 11:26 am. 3 Comments :

For several years now, Republicans have been engaged in a prolonged and determined campaign to suppress the votes of citizens whom they believe are inclined to vote for Democrats. They pretend that their mission is to prevent election fraud, even though they can’t document more than a handful of cases. So why is it that almost every time actual election fraud is uncovered, it happens to be by Republicans?

Today a bona fide example of criminal election activity has emerged in the form of a guilty plea by Republican author and filmmaker, Dinesh D’Souza. D’Souza admitted in court that he unlawfully reimbursed friends who made donations to a New York senatorial candidate saying that he “knew that causing a campaign contribution to be made in the name of another was wrong and something the law forbids.”

Be Sure To “LIKE” News Corpse On Facebook

In the harsh glare of the courtroom light, D’Souza is singing a very different tune. Earlier this year, when the charges were brought against him, he complained that he was being singled out for his anti-Obama writing and films. The news of his indictment stirred an outpouring of support from conservative media who alleged that President Obama was behind this political plot to silence his critics. D’Souza appeared several times on Fox News to assert his victimhood but, curiously, came short of asserting his innocence. He did, however, tell Sean Hannity that the prosecution may be “payback” by Obama for his aggressively negative, although thinly researched and easily debunked, screeds against the President. And Hannity was not alone in his defense of D’Souza. The lie-riddled Fox Nation website featured a commentary by Charles Hurt of Breitbart News that literally excused D’Souza’s crimes, even if it turned out that he were guilty – which we now know that he is.

Federal law includes sentencing guidelines that could result in a prison term of ten to sixteen months. D’Souza’s attorney, however, plans to ask the judge to waive any jail time because he says that his client is a “fundamentally honorable man” who had committed an “isolated instance of wrongdoing.” That’s if you consider someone whose books and films have been proven to be filled with lies, and who was forced to resign as the dean of a Catholic university because of marital infidelity, to be fundamentally honorable. It’s also difficult to regard paying off four different people to be an isolated instance of wrongdoing. But that’s the Republican perspective on law and order. It’s only really a crime if a Democrat does it.

HEY AMERICA: Today is National Voter Registration Day

Posted by Mark NC on September 25, 2012 at 9:27 am. NO Comments :

From NationalVoterRegistrationDay.com:

In 2008, 6 million Americans didn’t vote because they missed a registration deadline or didn’t know how to register. In 2012, we want to make sure no one is left out.

On September 25, 2012, volunteers, celebrities, and organizations from all over the country will “hit the streets” for National Voter Registration Day. This single day of coordinated ?eld, technology and media efforts will create pervasive awareness of voter registration opportunities–allowing us to reach tens of thousands of voters or more who we could not reach otherwise.

Over 1,000 organizations, including Facebook, Google, and Rolling Stone, are coming together to set up what will be an unprecedented online and offline effort to make sure voters are registered. News Corpse is participating in this nationwide exercise in patriotism by providing an opportunity for readers to register and get information specific to each state’s laws and procedures.

The GOP is working overtime to suppress the vote. They are passing laws that disenfranchise seniors, minorities, students, and other legitimate voters who just happen to lean Democratic. But if we counter those efforts in the courts and the public arena, we can defeat them and ensure that all eligible citizens get to express themselves in this election.

Use this form register or get more information. And pass it along to your friends and family.

What’s next? Visit GottaVote.com

Plan to vote: Find out what you need to vote, what rules your state has about voting, the details about absentee voting, and other important dates and deadlines.
Early vote: Check if your state allows early voting – and when early voting begins. [This is important as it frees up resources to get out the vote on election day]
Commit to vote: Commit to vote in this election – and send yourself a reminder to vote once the polls are open.
Find your polling place: Find out where you vote on election day and what hours your polling place is open.
Mark your calendar: Add important dates and deadlines to your phone or personal calendar.
Tell your friends: Share important information about registering to vote and how to vote with your friends.

Spread the word and don’t let your voice be silenced.

Pundits Make Electoral College Vote Predictions

Posted by Mark NC on November 2, 2008 at 2:05 pm. NO Comments :

As the 2008 campaign winds to close, the pundit class is weighing with their electoral vote calls. It’s bad news for John McCain when everyone is predicting a Barack Obama win and the Republicans give Obama bigger victory margins than the Democrats. Below are the predicted Electoral College votes for Obama (270 needed to win).

Democrats:
Arianna Huffington: 318
Paul Begala: 325
Hilary Rosen: 333
Donna Brazile: 343
Eleanor Clift: 349
James Carville: 365
Democratic Average: 338.8

Republicans:
Alex Castellanos: 318
Matthew Dowd: 338
Ed Rollins: 352
George Will: 378
Republican Average: 346.5

Media
Chris Cillizza, Washington Post: 312
Craig Crawford, Congressional Quarterly: 333
David Gergen, CNN: 338
Mark Halperin, Time Magazine: 349
George Stephanopoulos, ABC: 353
Larry Sabato, UVA: 364
Media Average: 341.5

If you exempt McCain campaign operatives and rightist pod-people like Hannity, O’Reilly and Limbaugh, there are few Republican advocates expressing much hope. Last week Fox News Executive VP John Moody pronounced McCain’s campaign over. Even Rupert Murdoch predicted a landslide victory for Obama way back in May.

Are Republicans in some sort of shock? What does it mean when uber-conservative George Will puts Obama in landslide territory and suggests a stronger outcome for Obama than Democratic icon James Carville? Maybe it doesn’t mean a thing. Most of these people are wrong more often that not, so we shouldn’t put too much emphasis on what they are saying today. Still, it will be interesting to store this for future reference to see how these predictions compare with the actual results.

Fox News Is Scared Of Ron Paul

Posted by Mark NC on January 1, 2008 at 1:04 pm. 3 Comments :

Fox canceled A Republican presidential primary forum in New Hampshire is set to proceed on January 8, two days before the New Hampshire primary, without the participation of Ron Paul. Paul’s exclusion has understandably infuriated his supporters but it has also revealed a(nother) gaping hypocrisy at Fox News.

Never mind for the moment that Paul is polling ahead of Fred Thompson, who has been invited to participate. And set aside the fact that Paul has broken fund raising records, accumulating over $19 million dollars in the last quarter.

The part of this story that I find noteworthy is that Fox News, who has lambasted Democrats for declining to appear in Fox-sponsored debates, is now using questionable criteria to decide whom they will permit to grace their debate stage. Fox thinks it’s inexcusable for Democrats to voluntarily refuse to subject themselves to the abuse of a network that has been overtly hostile to them, but that it’s perfectly swell for the network to involuntarily refuse to allow viable candidates to take part in their supposedly public forums.

Fox News, and their disciples, has said that Democrats are just scared to appear on the network. Now Paul has accused the network of being scared of him:

“They are scared of me and don’t want my message to get out, but it will. They are propagandists for this war and I challenge them on the notion that they are conservative.”

Chris Wallace, the host of Fox News Sunday, will be the moderator of the New Hampshire forum. But he and Fox News have declined to comment on the Paul controversy. Wallace didn’t have any such hesitation when called upon to comment on the Democrats:

“I think the Democrats are damn fools [for] not coming on Fox News.”

Well, Ron Paul wants to come on Fox News but Fox won’t let him. This is a thorough vindication of the Democrat’s decision to shun Fox. Now it’s the Republicans turn to suffer the prejudices practiced by Murdoch, Ailes, Wallace, etc. It serves them right. Perhaps now they will realize that a network that traffics in propaganda and bias is not beneficial even it is slanted your favor. If Republicans were interested in doing the right thing (for once), they would join the Democrats’ embargo on Fox and steer their candidates away. [For more on why all Democrats and progressives should stay the Hell off of Fox, read Starve The Beast]

Now, I’m no disciple of Ron Paul. In fact, I regard him as a dangerous political anachronism who would roll back gains in civil rights, foreign affairs, economic justice, and more. He advocates a deregulation agenda that would permit corporations to run roughshod over public interests including abandoning Net Neutrality. But Republican voters have made him a contender in their primary process and it isn’t up to Fox News to weed him out.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Embassy Attacks

Climate Change

Voting Rights

Veterans Administration

Negotiating With Terrorists

2016

Late Additions

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: