For the record, this election is too close to call, and given the amount of outright disinformation floating around it’s well nigh to impossible for someone like me, without inside contacts at both parties, to have any kind of real knowledge of what’s actually going on out there … like that stops anybody these days. So in the spirit of irresponsible crystal ball gazing, here’s several reasons why I think we on the Right may be mighty pleased on Wednesday:

1)      Turnabout is indeed fair play: Back in 2006, the so called Democratic “Landslide” was only 2-3 points in the popular vote, which is actually a great showing in an off year election for the party of a second term President. For reasons stated below, I believe the increased conservative turnout could indeed turn the tables on this one, and we could possibly regain control of Congress.

2)      Race: It’s a factor, but not the way it’s being portrayed in the media. I understand this isn’t scientific, but for every person I know of all races that won’t vote for the black guy under any circumstances, I know several that will give him an extra benefit of the doubt … but the idea that Obama can sit in the pews with his wife and kids for 20 years and not agree with the pastor is a bit much for most of us, especially in light of his support for other grievance culture racists such as Rev. Michael Pfleger and Nation of Islam strongman Louis Farrakhan. Too many dots to connect there, and too many people of all colors believe that current programs such as Affirmative Action cross the line into reverse racism as it is. Many people see Obama as the kind of person for whom reparations for slavery would be only a first step.    

3)      Polls: The polls I’ve seen, at least the ones not paid for by ridiculous liberal propaganda outlets such as the New York Times, have McCain and Obama running in a statistical dead heat. But I think that even the most honest polls are being skewed because of over-representation of the more liberal urban Democrats over the more blue collar “Reagan” Democrats who won’t vote for an overt socialist in any event. Remember that McCain is far more of a Scoop Jackson Democrat that any kind of conservative and will be acceptable to these people. I would also speculate that the majority of any “Bradley Effect” would come  from people that are outwardly supporting Obama because they think it’s cool, or don’t want to hear the guff from their friends, but are secretly terrified of the man and what he represents. I personally know some “undecideds” that feel this way as well. This is why we have a secret ballot.

4)      I think the “Destroy the Coal Industry” quote will have traction as it completes the picture of the true Obama for a lot of people that haven’t really been paying attention up until now. Sure, you didn’t hear about it in the MSM, but talk radio has a huge audience that will pass along the information to non-listeners; and the Dittoheads aren’t afraid of what their lib co-workers think.

5)      Media Bias: While Americans have long taken for granted left wing media bias, the MSM’s pitching for the Left has grown to such proportions that you find in the general public the kind of media outrage normally associated with hard core conservative news junkies. I think that the MSM has overplayed its’ hand to the point that the traditional American love of fair play is rallying people to vote for McCain, and more specifically, Palin. Too many gotcha questions aimed at her when Obama is getting away free with obvious boldfaced lies and legitimate scandals too numerous to mention here. Indeed, the greatest current threat to the First Amendment is the MSM’s total disregard to their fiduciary responsibility under it to hold both parties’ feet equally to the fire. It is my fervent prayer that market forces (ask someone at the NYT or the Chicago Tribune) will correct those who would turn a news organization into a propaganda machine.

6)      Speaking of Palin: There’s a lot of us that are merely tolerating McCain to get the conservative governor to Washington so she can (eventually) do the woman’s work she’s best suited for – cleaning House, and Senate, and trimming the fat. McCain is a good ol’ boy from the Senate, he won’t go after the mortgage mess felons such as Dodd and Frank, but our dear Sarah will. She has a record of standing up to activist judges as well. All of us in flyover country have been praying for another movement conservative. She’s the only thing worth voting for when you stop thinking in terms of voting against Obama.

Bottom line, I’d like to think that the people are perceptive enough to notice the historic ideological battle this election represents. You want a true moderate, there’s McCain. You want a movement conservative, help Palin by voting for her ticket. But to vote for someone that wants to take everything our forefathers have built - the most free, most prosperous and most human rights oriented society man has ever created - and throw it down the toilet of failed socialism? That is just plain stupid. 

Mr. Obama, and the thinly veiled socialism he represents, means only extorting the wealth of those who've earned it to buy the votes of those who haven't.  Remember, we could completely confiscate the wealth of the top 40% (in net worth) of people in this country and it wouldn't even keep the Federal Government going for a year. We've "spread the wealth around" to the tune of 6 to 7 TRILLION DOLLARS since LBJ started large scale indiscriminate welfare and the poverty rates have remained between the same 4 percentage points since he left office ... astounding considering that we've seen the largest economic expansion in human history during that period.  Anybody that tells you they're going to make a dent in real poverty through socialist redistribution, which has been endlessly tried and has never once worked, might as well be selling you a bridge.  The first modern welfare state was created by Bismarck (yes, the guy the Nazis named the battleship after) to make people so dependent on the government that they didn't dare question it.  Not much has changed. 

Speaking of a permanent Democrat voting underclass, if Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million illegal aliens and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA as we know it within a few election cycles.

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/obama_change/2008/10/21/142554.html?s=al&promo_code=6DC0-1

You know, just once when I ask an Obama supporter what they see in the guy, I'd like to hear something along the lines of "Yeah, he's pretty thin on actual accomplishments, but I've been waiting a long time for a grievance culture racist that's gonna take the country hard socialist."  It seems to me that I haven't personally met any Obama supporter that has the foggiest notion of what their candidate actually stands for, they just like to listen to the pretty words and feel some sort of emotional fulfillment.  I used to wonder how the Germans fell for Hitler ... you know, a strong, charismatic speaker that while light on resume and long on radical connections still manages to give his supporters the warm and fuzzies.  I don't anymore.

From here on out I think I'll take the contrarian approach whenever someone wants to talk politics with me ... at least until Nov. 5.  Come out strong for what Obama really stands for.  “Hey, I don’t care how much money he took from Fannie and Freddie, they’re starting to buy up the banks and that’ll fix everything.” Modern Liberalism is an emotional conviction that easily resists mere facts and rationality, but at least I can perhaps provide some instructive context.

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Des_Moines_Register,_Hill/2007/12/15/57268.html?s=al&promo_code=4170-1

I’m seriously considering an apology to everyone for calling Hillary a mediocrity.  Really now, do you think that a female, liberal mediocrity with decades of at least closely observing one of the great politicians of our time would be able to effectively charm an endorsement out of a group of female, liberal newspaper people?  I should certainly think so, and without having to resort to calling a variety of Democrat heavyweights to overcome a failed attempt so “pretty intense” that her staff had to apologize.

Hillary’s not a mediocrity, she’s incompetent; and all the fawning press coverage (from people she’s working overtime to alienate) and starry eyed wishful thinking (ditto) isn’t going to change any of it.  Her house of cards - the spin, fabrications and outright lies that make up her public persona – is crumbling fast.  Try as she might to hide in the rubble, the bottom line is that this is a person we knew all too well even before it came painfully obvious even to liberal Kool-Aid guzzlers that she hasn’t learned much from all her “experience” at her husband’s side … or that perhaps she just isn’t smart enough to really benefit from it.

For the increasingly unlikely event that Hillary gets the nomination, and then by some satanic miracle wins the election, I have a further nightmare scenario:

BILL CLINTON: (At his first moment alone with his wife after her inauguration)  Congratulations, baby!  (Going in for a big hug)  We did it!

PRESIDENT CLINTON:  (Pushing him away)  I did it you mean.  I’m driving the bus now, and don’t you forget it!  From here on out you sit down, shut up, and do as you’re told.  Remember all those years I let you humiliate me?  (slowly developing a wide, demonic smile) Well I now have what I was waiting for … and it’s payback time, you *expletive deleted*!

http://www.nme.com/news/led-zeppelin/33079

This hasn’t been at the top of my mind, but I was getting into a car with my girlfriend today, realized what day and time it was, and exclaimed “My God, Led Zeppelin is on stage right now!  The first full show since the eighties is going on as we speak!”

Led Zeppelin is not only the most maligned superband, but also perhaps the best.  Only the Beatles have sold more albums in the U.S., and you’d be hard pressed to name any other group with anywhere near the same influence on music in general.   Not just on the wailing hair bands mind you.  Everyone from Nashville crooners to Hip – Hop sampler mavens praise their enduring genius.  Zep is one of the few artists/bands – you could probably count them on your fingers – that without in some way quoting is nearly impossible to play or even market modern popular music.  Before Zeppelin, record companies and concert promoters made far more money than the artists themselves.  Zeppelin and their manager, Peter Grant, changed all that. 

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10962851/zep_eternal_why_is_led_zeppelin_still_popular

So here they are again, and I’m rooting for them.  If this, as the official version reads, is merely a one off show to honor the memory of an old friend that incidentally was a major player in all that history, then good for them.  If there’s a concert recording that comes out of this, as one may reasonably assume since they reportedly came into this loaded for bear and played substantially longer than requested, all the better.  I’ll be among the first to buy one and wish them well for whatever lives they choose from here on out.  But as nice as another live DVD would be, Led Zeppelin owes history, or its’ fans for that matter, nothing more at this point.

If the desire is there however, and they can set aside all the water that inevitably goes under the bridge, and the old magic returns, something very rare and special could happen.  Sure, seeing as I was still on the sunny side of eleven when they last played live in the U.S., I’d love to see a tour.  I’d happily pay a sum with a comma in it for really good seats.  But the thousand pound gorilla in the room, and possibly what Robert Plant was referring to in this month’s issue of Rolling Stone when he said that he doesn’t want the Zep reunion to turn into a “big deal” is this: the certain hopes and expectations associated with any new album.  We’d expect it to be good; maybe very good indeed.  There’s pressure enough for the band in that.  But Zeppelin may be alone amongst the “grandpa bands” in the potential to produce a document worthy of a group of living legends.  Something that could stop all the young whippersnappers in their tracks to say, “Wow … someday I hope to come up with something like that.”

Rock and Roll has always been an instrument by and for youth.  It does not, by it’s very nature, have “old masters” in quite the same sense as any other art form.  The heroes of Rock die young, as did Hendrix, fail to evolve like AC/DC, or go soft and mushy like Rod Stewart.  Clapton is pretty much a bluesman these days, and the Eagles seem content to play it safe.  At worst they become parodies of past greatness, such as the Stones.  But we don’t see any rock Michaelangelos designing domes and painting frescoes of any lasting value at an advanced age.  You don’t see them dancing around - and past – sixty years old talking about how they’re determined to make this coming one-off benefit show an example of their best work.  Win, lose or draw, Zep never got soft, let the moss grow, or just played it safe at any point.  If they have any of those inclinations now the smart play would be just to sail away into already well earned immortality without any needless new album boat rocking.

Personally though, I’d like to see them take the high road of risk for no other reason than as a shining example of how even in the most youth obsessed segment of our youth obsessed culture you don’t have to become a dinosaur.  Show us some smart, finesse-full music that really rocks!  Let’s hear some new music of real value in a day when the kids are tuning in to “Classic Rock” because there’s so little else on the radio worth listening to.  I’d like to see the comeback of a band that the fans never really allowed to fade away, see them be the Biggest Band In The World once again.  Let me chuckle to see the kids bleaching their hair white to be like Jimmy Page, and realizing that “old” and “cool” are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

As a forty-something guitar slinger myself, I’d like that.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/fashion/02oprah.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Oprah’s going to give dissatisfied Hillary voters another reason to switch sides in the primaries, but come the general election she can’t make him substantial … he’s still going to be Bland Obama prattling on in generalities.  Actually, I don't know which saddens me more, the vast array of empty suits the Democrats are running, or the vast array of moderate fence straddlers we're getting from the Republicans that will be perhaps too milqtoast uninspiring to defeat them.

My kingdom for a truly conservative nominee!!!  Go Fred Thompson!!!

http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2007/11/14/hillary/index.html

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=6e01fdce-ad97-4dab-a07d-bf98dc52f681

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/29/AR2007112902165_pf.html

It’s often been noticed, on both sides of the political fence, that Bill and Hillary Clinton are beyond all else a political partnership.  It’s also been well discussed that ’08 is Hillary’s turn to carry the standard forward for the next round of the Co-Presidency.  She’s certainly running the standard Clinton Playbook.  Yet despite her extensively borrowed “experience”, a largely sycophantic media (who else could have talked CNN into using questions from obvious plants such as Brig. Gen. Keith Kerr), and mammoth celebrity, her “inevitable” turn at President seems ever more questionable as the campaign heats up.  Why? 
 

I call it the Charisma Gap.

While Hillary has shown evident success improving her questionable warmth, it isn’t enough if she’s going to play the family game of changing her story from speech to speech.  She needs, like her husband did, to charm people into wanting to believe despite her tattered credibility; most specifically people that aren’t voting for her just because of who she is.  She’s still brittle, easily flustered, and doesn’t think well on her feet.   Not the kind of thing most people look for in a President.  She must try to stay in staged, scripted situations as often as possible.  On the rare occasion Bill got a tough question, he was usually able to spin it off in a warm and convincing fashion, even if he was playing fast and loose with the facts.  Hillary smiles, but usually comes off like Lady Macbeth greeting King Duncan.  If the news media makes the smart play to redeem itself from recent scandals by hitting Democrats with anything near the kind of questions that Republicans take for granted, Hillary will be in deep trouble.

But even if reporters refuse to put her feet to the fire, the GOP will.  Having a lock on the traditional mainstream media isn’t the gilt edged protection that it used to be.  If she couldn’t politically handle Bill’s “bimbo eruptions” gracefully, how well do you think she’s going to deal with sudden, uncomfortable questions regarding the Rose Law Firm, her investments, or numerous other personal scandals?  Think of the debates.  Imagine her reaction when Rudy Giuliani, a Brooklyn native, starts roasting her about New York bonafides, and her husband’s incredibly weak performance leading up to 9/11.  Imagine Fred Thompson, calm and jovial, tying her into knots as she glares and spits out her ineffective evasions to even moderately tough questions.  The only thing she’s been good at on her own is as a Democratic fundraiser, and even then just staying a short step ahead of the Grand Jury on several scandals down the years.  Imagine her having to answer about that.  Her nearly total lack of solid, verifiable accomplishments require her to run on her husband’s record which even the former President, with his immense political skills, has difficulty defending without throwing a fit when the tough questions arise.  In short, Hillary can only survive politically when the fix is in, and even the Clintons can’t guarantee gentle handling enough to win on when around half the electorate refuses to vote for her under any circumstances.

Hillary is the latest in a long line of “spin over substance” Democrat Presidential contenders and nominees … but if she’s going to run the Clinton Playbook, she needs the Clinton charisma.  Otherwise, she’s just the latest mediocrity with no record worth running on trying to play President.

Incidentally, if she can’t handle Chris Matthews, how is she going to deal with Bin Laden, nuclear Iran and a resurgent China?  Just curious …

Here in Red State / flyover country we have a pretty clear idea about how political thought and the general worldview runs among the entertainment elites.  While most of us agree those views run from silly to suicidal, for the most part we’ve learned to overlook them.  We’re generally happy to allow you a genteel chuckle as you try to whiz your leftist brainwashing past us in the entertainment you produce … we’re not like other folks who want to destroy anyone that disagrees with them.

We would like you to understand something though. While most of us are fairly tolerant of your views, there is a point where enough is quite enough.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/11252007/gossip/pagesix/de_palma_iraq_flick_bombs_582058.htm

 http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/countymap.htm

Please consider how many movie theatres, TV sets, CD players, etc. there are in all those Red counties, and how the attitudes of the people there effect your bottom line.  We like good old reluctant hero Sgt. Murtaugh, doing the right thing when the bad guys threaten innocent people, but once we associate Mr. Glover’s face with Castro, Chavez and other dangerous leftist nonsense, we can live quite happily without him.  Ask Martin Sheen about that, too.  When our most precious values are attacked, our collective memory can grow very long indeed .

Bottom line, we look at your moveon.org brand of politics in about the same light as we view your fad diets, fad religions, and $10,000 handbags: the foibles of people with too many resources and not enough sense.  A little is fine, a bit of eccentricity is expected in artists, and few of us look to you for anything approaching heavy thought anyway.  But do bear in mind that your First Amendment right to express yourselves doesn’t guarantee the right to be taken seriously, or indeed even listened to.  It certainly doesn’t cover loss of income when people - your customers - walk away because you’ve insulted their intelligence a few too many times.