Can’t get much worse than this:

As you may know, Harry Reid is up for re-election in 2010. Do you think he should be the Democratic nominee again or is it time for someone new to represent Democrats?

26% He should be the nominee, 39% Time for someone new

That’s gonna leave a mark – now, the problem is that the two best-known GOPers in the race (Lowden and Tarkanian) only poll 47% and 46%, respectively, against Harry Reid. This is good in that they both beat Reid in the polling, bad that they aren’t 10-20 percentage points ahead. Reid is the most beatable Democrat out there – but the relative weakness of the two leading GOPers shows the need for a fresh approach. Better for an outsider to be the nominee – someone not tied to the old politics.

Containment:

I can appreciate the Wow quality of someone, Ben Smith at Politico in this case, quickly and concisely naming what we’ve been debating for some time – why is the WH focusing so much on Fox News push back? The reality is, it’s still a bad idea because of this WH’s limited, top down view of the world.

But I think Mike Allen and Josh Gerstein nail the real explanation in their story today: The White House is working to prevent stories born on Fox from crossing over into more widely-viewed media. Most Americans still haven’t heard of Van Jones, for instance; and the strategy is now all about containment…

So what if Fox and some others, Right wing talk, for example, are effectively walled off, somehow? In the first place it likely won’t work. But even if it did, it’s still the American people with ever more media and sources to get their news that you ultimately have to control.

The American people are smarter than this White House in my opinion. They have an inherent ability to see and appreciate good information and BS when they come upon them, no matter where it turns up. That’s why more and more people have already begun tuning into Fox.

That sounds about right – and I agree it won’t work. In the throws of a national, political campaign, the Obama team managed to finesse its way around Obama’s cowardice, ignorance and radicalism…but now its just all about Obama, and the Administration doesn’t want people getting too long and good a look at just what is happening. Able to rely on the dying MSM, Team Obama has decided if they can just knock off Fox, they’ll have the functional equivalent of Orwell’s Ministry of Truth: the true goal of all good liberals.

But, the cat is already out of the bag – and let loose, in the final analysis, by Obama, himself. The fundamental problem is that in order to finesse their way around Obama’s flaws in 2008, Team Obama had to get Obama to say things in direct opposition to what Obama is currently up to. We’re supposed to be going all out to win Afghanistan; we’re supposed to already be out of Iraq; we’re supposed to be watching the Democrats and Republicans negotiating together (on TV!) about the way forward; we’re supposed to be coming together in gigantic, loving embrace. None of this was on the actual agenda, but it is what Obama was made to say. And now they are hoist upon their own petard – and are absurdly hoping that if they can just derail Fox, all will be well.

Ah, what tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive – nothing will give me greater pleasure than to watch Obama and Co fall flat on their face, tripped up by their own lies.

Mish explains:

…you can’t lose what you did not have. Capitalism did not fail, government regulation as it inevitably does, failed.

Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, FDIC, Social Security, government bailouts of failed institutions have nothing to do with capitalism. Nor do tax breaks that favor housing over rent, nor does a government running HUG or FHA to support social goals.

The SEC took a perfectly fine credit rating system based on actual performance and turned it into sponsorship of Moody’s, Fitch, and the S&P. After SEC sponsorship, the “Big Three” got paid on the basis of the volume of business they did instead of how accurately they did business.

Virtually everything that failed can be traced back to government intervention into the free markets, especially the creation of the Fed itself.

Of course, when we say “capitalism” we really mean, “free markets”. The word “capitalism” is a socialist concept – an assertion that in a free market, there is actually a central control using its power to exploit the masses. Actually, in a free market, things are free and while individual con artists might sucker some individuals, there is no means to, say, create a Fannie Mae or Goldman Sachs to loot the economy. To be entirely honest about it, the capitalists started the ball rolling towards non-capitalism – in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when the Trusts were created to restrain trade and drive up prices. Teddy Roosevelt took a stab at them, but eventually they were smart enough to get on side with Big Government, and the two grew together. At this point, there’s no difference in functional terms between Big Government and Big Corporation outside of a slightly better efficiency in Big Corporation (and it really is only slight).

Our task, as conservatives, is to reform this – to return our economy back to a genuine free market, and then conserve that for future generations. We have to break up both Big Government and Big Corporation – if we can do that, then we, the people, can start creating wealth again for ourselves, rather than the maw of Big Government, or the pockets of Big Corporation.

UPDATE: The Myth of the Multiplier; case closed against the asinine concepts of Keynes.

Good job, Barry:

The table below compares the White House’s February 2009 projection of the number of jobs that would be created by the 2009 stimulus law (through the end of 2010) with the actual change in state payroll employment through September 2009 (the latest figures available). According to the data, 49 States and the District of Columbia have lost jobs since stimulus was enacted. Only North Dakota has seen net job creation following the February 2009 stimulus. While President Obama claimed the result of his stimulus bill would be the creation of 3.5 million jobs, the Nation has already lost a total of 2.7 million – a difference of 6.2 million jobs.

A link to the aforementioned table.

Out here in Nevada, we’re close to 68,000 jobs short of what Obama and his Democrats promised. And, remember, we had to rush, rush, RUSH the Spendulus through because if we didn’t, there would be massive job losses.

From NRO’s The Corner:

…“I endorsed the Republican who has been endorsed by the National Rifle Association, opposes the Obama health plan, signed the ‘no-tax-increase’ pledge, and supports a comprehensive energy plan like I do,” says Gingrich.

Third-party candidates like conservative Doug Hoffman, Scozzafava’s challenger, often serve only to divide the GOP, says Gingrich. “Just look at what’s happening in New Jersey’s gubernatorial race,” he says, pointing to the campaign of independent candidate Chris Daggett, who has siphoned support from Republican candidate Chris Christie. “What’s happening in New York and in New Jersey should be a sober warning to every purist in this country.”

“If you seek to be a perfect minority, you’ll remain a minority,” says Gingrich. “That’s not how Reagan built his revolution or how we won back the House in 1994.”

I don’t think we’re searching for a perfect minority – but we are searching for a cohesive party which is absolutely committed to liberty as the Founders envisioned. Mrs. Scozzafava has indicated support for the fascistic “card check” legislation; only grudgingly signed the no-new-taxes pledge; has not committed to running as a GOPer in 2010; is the most liberal Republican in the New York State legislature – this is someone who is almost certain to cut us off at the knees when the chips are down on core, Republican principles. The rank-and-file are tired of pouring out sweat and treasure on behalf of leadership-approved Republicans who then drop dime on us at the worst possible moment – no more Specters, no more Chaffees. If we are to work for GOP victory, then we want absolute assurance that when the votes are cast, our House and Senate members vote against taxes, against profligate spending, against anti-democratic measures.

If we can’t win on a platform of low taxes, low spending and liberty, then what is the point of winning? It might make senior leaders feel good to be called “Mr. Chairman”, but it doesn’t do us any good if the legislation coming out of Congress is antithetical to GOP ideals.

And, also, I think that this is the path to victory – the people want a party which has strong beliefs and sticks to them. Part of the unpopularity of Congress is directly traceable to the Democrats abandoning their own base in favor of political expediency. Say what you like about our liberal friends, but they believe in the “public option” and are enraged that a health care bill might clear Congress without it. Justifiably, they are wondering why the put all that effort in to victory in 2008, only to have their side run screaming from a core, liberal belief. The Democrats are set to limp in to 2010 with a weak economy, and increasingly unpopular President and a base which is dispirited – just as the GOP base became dispirited from 2005 forward as the GOP leadership threw over core GOP beliefs in favor of political expediency.

If we believe our ideals are correct, then we should unashamedly advance them – not pausing to wonder if such adherence is alienating some voters. Some voters will be alienated – there’s no way around that. Unanimity is not possible in a Republic. To be sure, we should use patience and tact; we should express love and forgiveness for those we oppose; we must shape our message in to the most palatable terms possible – but when push comes to shove, we must show an iron determination that our views will prevail. And we can’t do this if we’re busily electing people with an “R” after their name who will vote against us at the crucial moment.

Gingrich is a wise and intelligent observer of politics, but he’s missing the bus on this new political dynamic. It is a revolutionary time – and the people don’t want weak excuses, but clear action.

I’m sure we’re all shaking in our boots:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is prepared to run a sharply negative campaign if that’s what it takes to win reelection next year, with a top adviser predicting that the Nevada Democrat will “vaporize” his Republican challengers with attack ads.

This is the Majority Leader of the United States Senate? We can and must do much better.

Sage advice on why we shouldn’t let the enemy prevail in Afghanistan:

Experience teaches us that it is much easier to prevent an enemy from posting themselves than it is to dislodge them after they have got possession. – George Washington

Victor Davis Hanson gives an excellent run down on all the good reasons to send the troops and prevail in Afghanistan. There really is no downside to giving McChrystal what he wants. So, why is Obama dithering?

Is he just so ignorant of military affairs that he can’t tell who is giving him good or bad advice?

Is it that he’s just such a leftist that he can’t stand the thought of America having a clear cut, military victory?

Or, is he just a coward afraid to make up his mind?

Unless he acts quite soon, the answer will have to be one of the above…

San Francisco? Are you kidding me? Nope – there really was such an event. Happened on October 15th. Zomblog has the pictures. One of the groups present was Bay Area Patriots:

Bay Area Patriots are citizens who participated or expressed an interest in participating in one of the Tea Parties that took place in the Bay Area on April 15, 2009. The nationwide Tea Party protests were born out of grassroots frustration about excessive government spending in the form of bailouts and stimulus packages and the exponential growth in the size of government occurring in the short time the Obama Administration has been in place.

Bay Area Patriots come in all shapes and sizes, colors, religions, party affiliations, genders and income levels. We are united by the core principles of limited government; controlled government spending at the local, state and federal levels; and lower taxes–all of which are necessary to ensure true liberty and future prosperity for this country.

Bay Area Patriots have members predominantly in the greater Bay Area, including San Francisco, the North Bay, the East Bay, the Peninsula and the South Bay…

I’m telling you, fellow GOPers and conservatives, we have a fantastic opportunity to move in to the liberal strongholds. No, we’re not going to get a lot of traction by opening up branch offices of Focus on the Family or Knights of Columbus (though both organizations are not unknown in the Bay Area) – but we can have an effect with a strongly libertarian program. Not, perhaps, as the GOP but certainly as an alternative to the dreadful, stultifying conformism of the left which rules such areas. An alliance, as it were, with those people of the Bay Area who are not with us on all issues, but are with us in the defense of liberty.

Now is the time for all good men (and women…and, given this is San Francisco, “other”) to come to the aid of their country. We daren’t let this opportunity pass – we can entirely reform our government and make it what our Founders intended. That done, we can have all the arguments we want over gay marriage – but if we don’t defend our freedom, then all our arguments are moot.

Childish and weak, Democrats:

Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.) locked Republicans out of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee room to keep them from meeting when Democrats aren’t present.

Towns’ action came after repeated public ridicule from the leading Republican on the committee, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), over Towns’s failure to launch an investigation into Countrywide Mortgage’s reported sweetheart deals to VIPs.

And there’s the really bad part of it – Democrats are engaging in this nonsense in order to protect their own corrupt members, and their fat cat, corporate buddies.

Just disgusting…