So I'm late. Sue me. I had two small children to tuck into bed. Priorities. Now on to the results:

VA: Allen leads by 3% with 48% reporting. That's good, but he'd better have a decent margin before Fairfax county comes in, or he will be a one-termer.

The marriage amendment is winning handily, after recent polls showed it within the margin of error. I guess that's true if your margin of error is large as John Kerry's face.

Update:

1,404 of 2,443 (57 %) Precincts Reporting
George Allen 629,330 50 %
Jim Webb, Jr. 609,220 49 %

Looks like a nailbiter in the Old Dominion.

Update: Mother of God, Shumer is smiling. Smiling. It's creepy. Also, not a good sign.

Update:

1,502 of 2,443 (61 %) Precincts Reporting
George Allen 679,127 50 %
Jim Webb, Jr. 653,942 49 %

Also, it appears that Ace and Dave of Garfield Ridge are liveblogging, too. I'll stick with Virginia, because, well, I live here.

Update: I lied. Corker is up big in TN right now.

1,625 of 2,443 (66 %) Precincts Reporting
George Allen 741,790 50 %
Jim Webb, Jr. 713,794 48 %

Update: CNN just called the race for Lieberman. A Dem hold on a bad night for the GOP, but I like bitchslapping those krazy Kos kidz.

Update:

1,803 of 2,443 (73 %) Precincts Reporting
George Allen 822,186 50 %
Jim Webb, Jr. 788,704 48 %

Spoke too soon. The lead is down to a percentage point with 77% in. Starting to sweat a little bit now.

Update: Jim Geraghty thinks that Allen will win. I hope that he's right.

BTW, WTF is up with Maryland? Steele up by 11% with 1% of the votes in and they called it for Cardin? I think that I'll watch the actual count come in, thankyouverymuch.

Oh, and apparently the exit polls blow chunks. Again. Fox kicked them to the curb and took the unorthodox method of counting the actual votes.

Final update: Barone just stated that we might not know the VA senate winner for a month. Under state law, if the margin of victory is within 1% of the total cast, an automatic recount is triggered.

Go-go absentee ballots!

Posted by: Physics Geek at 08:36 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 372 words, total size 2 kb.

My guesses are of the aggregate kind. I don't feel like going through each race. Anyway, here goes:

Senate: Republicans hold serve, maintaining a 52-46-2(okay, 52-4 edge.

House: Democrats manage to wrest control from the GOP for the first time in 12 years, grabbing a grand total of 218-220 seats, which would give them a 1 to 5 vote margin.

These predictions are free, which means double your money back if I'm proven wrong.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 01:06 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 82 words, total size 1 kb.

The Defense Department implemented a program that allows members of the US military stationed abroad to submit ballots via email or fax. It's designed to make certain that our men and women in uniform get the opportunity to cast a meaningful ballot. That's a good thing, right? Apparently not if you're Democratic Rep. Rush Holt from New Jersey:

In a letter to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Democratic Rep. Rush Holt said the electronic registration and voting service is well-intentioned, but could expose troops to identity theft, or allow hackers or others to tamper with the ballots when they are in transit.

You mean like having illegal aliens or dead people vote? I'll tell you what: when you author legislation in New Jersey requiring people to show ID at the polls, I'll give you a pass. Until that day, when monkeys will be streaming out of my ass in large numbers, you can take your military vote suppressing ass-because they vote strongly Republican- somewhere and drink a nice, tall glass of STFU.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 09:17 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 176 words, total size 1 kb.

I tried to stay of the Kerry snafu. I figured that no one was dumb enough to double down on a sure loser of a hand. Apparently, I don't know Lurch all that well, because the dumbass didn't apologize about his comments, but rather complained because someone was making his comments an issue. Some former fence-sitters have now chosen a side. I give you Neal Boortz:

OK ... all bets are off.

Don't get me wrong ... I still have this deep felt desire to see the Republican's get punished by the electorate in next week's midterm election ... but suddenly the stakes seem to be too high.

What turned the tide for me? John Kerry, that's what. That insipid, haughty, pretentious jerk uttered another one of his absurd statements about our men and women in uniform ... and in a flash my fear of Democrats and their disdain for our military services overcame any desire I had to put Republicans over my knee.

You did hear what Kerry said, didn't you? Come on now .. surely you have. [refresher] For the few of you who might have been in a 48-hour coma, The Poodle was talking to a group of college students in Pasadena, California (where else?) on Monday when he said: "You know, education--if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, uh, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."

So there you have it. There's your choice. According to Mr. Band-Aid Purple Heart, you either become smart, or end up serving in our armed forces.

John Kerry seems to have a deep-seated disdain (bordering on hatred) for those in uniform. Remember, please, that it was John Kerry who, many years ago, talked about our troops in Vietnam regularly committing atrocities against innocent women and children. It was also John Kerry who remarked earlier this year about American troops in Iraq "terrorizing" women and children. How dare that pompous ass suggest that it is our troops who are doing the terrorizing over there?

For the record, Kerry is dead wrong. Not that he cares. Just four days ago The Heritage Foundation issued a report by Tim Kane entitled "Who Are the Recruits? The Demographic Characteristics of U.S. Military Enlistment, 2003-2005." You have the link, go and read the report for yourself. If you do you will find that a higher percentage of military recruits have graduated from high school than the general population. In 2004 82.7% of recruits were high school graduates while another 7.03% had their GEDs. The national high school graduation rate that year was 79.8%. Even today, in 2006, the high school graduation rate for recruits is still higher than the high school graduation rate for the civilian population. Looks to me like the recruits are doing pretty well. You'll also find that "the Department of Defense reported that the mean reading level of 2004 recruits is a full grade level higher than that of the comparable youth population."

Clearly John Kerry had no idea what in the hell he was talking about .. the arrogant putz.

So .. the firestorm erupts, and here comes Kerry to the microphones to set the record straight. Did he apologize for his insult against our troops? Are you kidding? Not only did he not apologize, but he actually had the stones to try to tell us he wasn't talking about our troops, he was talking about Bush! I would ask just how stupid Kerry thinks Americans are --- but the very fact that he thinks we should have made him president indicates what his answer, were he to be truthful, would be.

These men and women are on the front lines, giving up their lives, to defend us from Islamic fascism -- and Kerry is back here talking about what intellectual failures they are. Intellectual failures that terrorize women and children in the night.

Do we hang the sins of John Kerry around the necks of all Democrats? Well, let me ask you. Did you hear of one single Democrat .. just one .. anywhere .. stepping forward to repudiate what Kerry said? Maybe some Democrat did, but I sure as hell haven't heard anything about it. Have you? A Democrat congressional candidate in Iowa has gone so far as to say Kerry's words were "inappropriate." Hardly an apology .. but he did ask Kerry to cancel a planned campaign visit to his district.

In other words ... these gutless wonders who just love to tell us how much they truly do support our troops won't even stand up to be heard when our soldiers are slandered by this rich woman's boy toy.

This is such a gift to the Republicans. It's as if Karl Rove himself paid John Kerry a large amount of money to read from a script. It couldn't be better. Here we are, on the even of the 2006 mid-term elections...in which the Democrats are poised to take over the House and maybe the Senate. Now here comes John Kerry, standard-bearer of his party in the last presidential election...to slander our troops. Bad move....even the most anti-war politician never blames the troops. It's political suicide.

So .. that's it. We're six days out, and I've come unglued. Sure, the Republicans have become just another party of big government and pork barrel spending ... but at least they don't slander the very men and women who are shedding blood every single day to defend our country.

Give me the big-spenders who support our troops over the big-spenders who slander them any day.

I'm voting Republican.

We'll just have to figure out another way to take these Republicans miscreants to the woodshed.

Good job, John. You might the guy who forces Pelosi to send her new drapes back.

Update: Jay Tea and I are on the same page.

Final update: Looks like Kerry ignored the Nutroots folks- who must be apoplectic right now- and finally did the right thing.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 01:24 PM | Comments (15) | Add Comment
Post contains 1048 words, total size 6 kb.

Michelle Malkin joins the legion of folks like me by advocating that you should Brew Your Own Beer.

Oh wait, it's a political post that mentions Miller and Anheuser Busch's support of illegal immigration. Since I don't drink their beer anyway, my new lack of support will go largely unnoticed by the two brewing giants. But my point still stands: brew your own beer. If you want some info, this archive is as good a place to start as any, in my humble opinion.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 10:53 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 94 words, total size 1 kb.

I know that I've said many times that the Republicans deserve to lose their majority this fall. This editorial from Opinionjournal.com does give me pause, though. Excerpt:

Consider the man likely to run the Judiciary Committee, Michigan's John Conyers, from the Congressional class of 1964. He recently made his plans clear in a 370-page report, "The Constitution in Crisis: The Downing Street Minutes and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retribution and Coverup in the Iraq War, and Illegal Domestic Surveillance." The report accuses the Administration of violating no fewer than 26 laws and regulations, and is a road map of Mr. Conyers's explicit intention to investigate grounds for impeaching President Bush.
...
Ways and Means, the chief economic policy panel, would go to New York's Charlie Rangel (1970), who opposed the Bush tax cuts and recently voted against free trade with tiny Oman. His committee's crucial health care subcommittee would be run by California's Pete Stark (1972), who in 1993 criticized Hillary Clinton's health care proposal because the government wasn't dominant enough. Over at Financial Services, the ascension of Barney Frank (1980) would mean a reprieve for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, despite $16 billion in accounting scandals. His main reform priority has been to carve out a new affordable housing fund from the two companies' profits. And forget about any major review of Sarbanes-Oxley.
...
And then there's Alcee Hastings, who, should Ms. Pelosi succeed in pushing aside current ranking Member Jane Harman, would take over the House Intelligence Committee. Before he won his Florida seat in 1992, Mr. Hastings had been a federal judge who was impeached and convicted by a Democratic Congress for lying to beat a bribery rap. He would handle America's most vital national secrets.

I have nothing useful to add to this except ugh.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 07:43 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 304 words, total size 2 kb.

Today's Pig of the Day

It looks like we have a winner: Ted Stevens(R-AK), come on down! You're the final contestant on Who's a Whiny, Obnoxious, Petulant, Self-Important Senatorial Prick.

Actually, Senator Stevens has provided an invaluable service for me: I had promised to blog frequently pigs, if for no other reason than to aggravate the many jihadists who keep hacking Aaron's site. And I have to admit that I had fallen down on the job. Congratulations, Ted. You've just reminded me that the biggest oinkers feed at the federal trough.

Oh no, did I post this within 60 days on an election? No? Then I guess that I'll have to repost it on or after September 8 of this year.

I'd like to point out that I don't actually enjoy blogging about politics(and others do it much better). I started out blogging about the things that interested/entertained me: brewing beer, old(bad) jokes, technology/computer issues. But I will be damned if I let such a blatently unconstitutional law prevent me from blogging about whatever I feel like. Starting September 8, almost every post on this site will involve politics. I will post free political ads to whomever asks me(I'm not kidding myself- almost no one knows that this site exists); I will post commentary on the views/votes of politicians; and I will mercilessly mock those running for office. Will these activities run me afoul of McCain-Feingold? Good. I'll bet that I won't be the only one.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 11:46 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 252 words, total size 2 kb.

Kim du Toit just reminded me that we, the American people, are about to be subjected to the "no political ads within 60 days of an election" bullshit of the McCain-Feingold Act. And he has a dandy idea for any and all political persuasions who believe that the First Amendment means what it says:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

In Kim's words:

HereÂ’s my promise: If a conservative organization wants to run a political ad criticizing any Congressman up for re-election during that 60-day window, IÂ’ll let them run one on this website, for free, right up until Election Day.

And if Congress or for that matter law enforcement think that IÂ’m going to refrain from criticizing an elected or wannabe-elected official, ever, theyÂ’re sadly mistaken.

Sounds good to me. Anyone want to put a political ad on my blog free of charge? Not surprisingly, Misha is on board as well.

I just remembered something that Stephen Macklin posted in the comments to this post of mine. I'll repeat it here because it's too good not to share:

My blog will change in response to FEC rules. No more quizzes, no more book or movie memes. All political advocacy all the time.

Damn right.

Update: Dean sports the blue version of the image above, which is entirely appropriate. This is an area where the left and the right have the same goal in mind: free speech unregulated by Congress, just as the Constitution demands.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 11:42 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 292 words, total size 2 kb.

I'd like to thank Jonah for persuing the Democratic Underground for me; I value my sanity far too much to wade into the fever swamps. Anyway, the post in question proves that burning jet fuel could not have possible caused the Twin Towers to collapse.

I leave it as an exercise to the reader to point out the numerous holes in this dipshit's methodology.

Update: Of course I would mis-type a word in the title of post in which I mock the idiocy of others. Of course I would.

Update: Mike poses what is, I believe, the appropriate question:

Sweet leapinÂ’ Jesus, can they really be this stupid? I mean, really?

It was, of course, a rhetorical question.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 02:58 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 124 words, total size 1 kb.

I've avoided mentioning the Times-squared publishing the details of SWIFT, mainly because others have beaten the issue to death. Suffice it to say, despite protestions to the contrary, not ALL the terrorists worldwide knew about the program at all. God bless the Times-squared, though, because Osama-Muhammed-Achmed-Brunhilde-Grendel-Zarqawi-BinLaden-Hussein-Casper-the-friendly-ghost knows every intimate detail now. So much so, in fact, that they can probably avoid being caught by this program for, well, forever.

Lileks weighs in, as only he can. Excerpt:

September 10, 2006: The New York Times runs a story about a CIA agent named Mohammed Al-Ghouri, 1034 Summit Park, Evanston Illinois, who is attempting to penetrate a radical sleeper cell suspected of having 19 liters of homemade mustard gas. The series concludes with the agent’s obituary, and a moving quote from a CIA historian who notes that the “al-Ghouri was one of rare, brave breed whose names and deeds are rarely known. Except in this case, of course.”

Criticized for blowing the agent’s cover, a Times spokesman tartly noted that “this man is – sorry, was a government employee, and if he’s using taxpayer money to take terrorists out to lunch, we think the people ought to know, if only so they judge the menu items chosen on behalf of the government. Was veal consumed? Because a lot of people are sensitive to the veal issue.”

I can't even work up a "mheh" to this post, because it strikes me as strangely prescient, rather than mocking.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 10:41 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 250 words, total size 2 kb.

Goldstein? Two.

Best description of Sullivan that I've seen in a long time:

HereÂ’s the thing: Sullivan claims heÂ’s quite familiar with homophobic attacks from the gay left (whatever that now is), and yet he doesnÂ’t appear to have much of a problem with a progressivist agenda that, while it might ultimately push through the policy he wants (legalization of gay marriage), will do so at a price that would be more than a little damaging to the conservatism Sullivan claims to embrace. No doubt he sees himself as being pragmatic when he selectively embraces constitutionally dubious methodologies; me, I just see a guy whoÂ’s spent the last several years throwing a very public temper tantrum.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 03:44 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 122 words, total size 1 kb.

Just move along, folks. Keep moving. No WMD here. Excerpt from Neal Boortz's take:

We've known for several months that weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq. Despite the mainstream media and the Democrats' lying to the contrary, several chemical weapons have been found that qualify as WMD. But people have ignored the evidence...since it would blow a hole in their 'Bush Lied, people died' nonsense. To be fair, the Bush Administration has done little to correct the record on this issue.

Now a new report from the Pentagon sheds some light on just how many WMDs have been found, and it's a lot. We're not just talking an old Sarin shell here and there. No less than 500 chemical weapons have been found since 2003, according to a recently declassified defense department intelligence report. The weapons are of the mustard gas and Sarin nerve gas variety...nasty stuff.
So why isn't this major breaking news?

Because the WMDs are said to be manufactured before 1991....not in recent years. Therefore, the mainstream media and the Democrats don't count those. For some reason, they want WMDs made in recent years. Evidently the left likes their mustard gas just a little fresher. But that's not the point. This stuff can kill ... but to the left it's harmless.

All that matters is Saddam Hussein was lying when he said he got rid of all his WMDs. He clearly did not. Also, what do you suppose would have happened had Hussein sold some of these WMD's to Islamic terrorists? It wouldn't have been pretty. But this story will be ignored...and the leftist propaganda machine that says Saddam Hussein wasn't a threat will roll on.

I question the timing.

Update: Found these links over in the comment section of this post by Ace: here, here and here. I can't remember where I saw another collection of WMD links, but I'll post it when it comes to me.

Update: See-Dubya pulls this link from the archives:

An official involved in the inquiry in Jordan told AFP news agency: “We found primary materials to make a chemical bomb which, if it had exploded, would have made nearly 20,000 deaths … in an area of one square kilometre. “The target of this bomb was the headquarters of the Intelligence Services,” situated on a hill in the western suburb of Amman, he added.

Here that ripping sound? That's the sound of goalposts being moved.

Final update: From Bill Quick: Which is, of course, not just moving the goalposts down the field, but over to another planet.

What he said.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 08:03 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 440 words, total size 3 kb.

The following statement about Dan Rather from Bill Quick echoes my own sentiments. Minus the excessive profanity, of course.

Nobody wants to see your sagging mug or watch your lying lips, especially not in high definition.

Go home. Go to bed. Or go watch nostalgia movies about a time that never existed, over and over again, all alone.

I rather like that image, by the way: You, sitting in a darkened movie theater, a stray tear leaking down your raddled cheek over what might have been, might have been, but never will be again. All...alone.

Makes me feel all warm and happy inside.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 01:11 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 117 words, total size 1 kb.

I've waited patiently for some actual facts to appear in the Duke lacrosse case. Statements by the DA and/or Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton do not qualify as such. Apparently, plenty of facts have been unearthed. Unfortunately for the DA, they do not support his publicly stated position.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 04:41 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 48 words, total size 1 kb.

From Vox:

UPDATE - Podhoretz the Younger does not disappoint with the eminently predictable reaction to Noonan's column:

In my book, Can She Be Stopped?, I specifically warn Republicans and conservatives about the temptation to listen to the "siren song of schism" — the notion that they would be better off casting a protest or third-party vote in 2008. Such a vote, no matter how principled it might seem, would have only one result, and that is to elect Hillary Clinton. It is a default vote for Hillary Clinton....

If people cannot stomach voting Republican and need to cast a protest vote, that is their right. But nobody should be under any illusions about what it means. It means Democratic rule.

Which differs from the current rule in precisely what regards? Ignoring the Constitution 90 percent of the time instead of 75 percent? Signing up for 100 percent of globalist decrees instead of 85 percent of them? Invading and occupying countries without oil instead of countries with oil?

Better an open enemy that faces you than the false friend who stabs you in the back.

I'm beginning to think that it's time to resurrect the Howard the Duck campaign.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 09:50 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 205 words, total size 1 kb.

In today's Washington Times comes this little article which you're just going to love. Excerpt:

The Senate voted yesterday to allow illegal aliens to collect Social Security benefits based on past illegal employment -- even if the job was obtained through forged or stolen documents.

Are you kidding me? Are you fucking kidding me? And this result would have been different HOW if Democrats were in charge of the Senate? Anyway, it continues.

"There was a felony they were committing, and now they can't be prosecuted. That sounds like amnesty to me," said Sen. John Ensign, the Nevada Republican who offered the amendment yesterday to strip out those provisions of the immigration reform bill. "It just boggles the mind how people could be against this amendment."

The Ensign amendment was defeated on a 50-49 vote.

"We all know that millions of undocumented immigrants pay Social Security and Medicare taxes for years and sometimes decades while they work to contribute to our economy," said Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican.

"The Ensign amendment would undermine the work of these people by preventing lawfully present immigrant workers from claiming Social Security benefits that they earned before they were authorized to work in our community," he said. "If this amendment were enacted, the nest egg that these immigrants have worked hard for would be taken from them and their families."

Senator McCain, let me clue you in on a little secret: you will never, never, NEVER become president. The Democrats only pretend to like you because you oppose the actual conservative Republicans; they will never vote for you. And the Republicans hate you more and more each day.

What's that you say? I'm breaking your unConstitutional law by posting an overtly political post on my blog? Go fuck yourself, you pretentious fop.

Hey, I just used profanity. That should protect this post. However, if I need actual pornography to prevent legal action, I'll Photoshop a picture of Senator RINO fellating a pig and Googlebomb the damned thing so that every search for Johnny boy finds that image.

Update: Not surprisingly, Michelle Malkin is all over this issue. I especially liked Mary Katherine Ham's response:

Seriously, if you could see me now, I'm very Yosemite Sam. Very stampy and tantrumy and incoherent.

Unlike me, she manages to comment on this Senatorial debacle without cursing. Then again, I believe that she's missing a golden opportunity here. Some things are worth a few choice Anglo-Saxon expletives.

Update: Not surprisingly, Kim du Toit is a bit unhappy.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 10:29 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 429 words, total size 3 kb.

I was driving home when CNN accidentally cut in to Bush's warmup. Nice work, guys. I've got some belly button lint that has the IQ to replace you. Anyway, I listened to most of the speech in the car and then watched the end on TV. I believe that I can break it down to its barest bones:

I pretend that I don't like amnesty, but everyone knows that we're going to do it anyway.

I'm going to secure the borders by sending some National Guardsmen down to push some pencils around. That'll really, really scare the illegal immigrants.

Catch-and-release is a failure which I'll end right after amnesty makes all of the illegals legal.

The hi-tech fence we're building at some point in the future won't be completed during my term, so don't worry if you see nothing being done. It's a feature, not a bug.

Finally, if you heard anything different during this speech than you did back in 2001, please stay asleep. I'm counting on it.

Thank you, and good night. Now go away and stop bothering me.

You might say that I'm a bit underwhelmed. Apparently I'm not the only one.

Mrs. IMAO(the artist formerly known as Sarah K.) was not impressed.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 10:37 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 212 words, total size 1 kb.

I started this humble blog as an outlet for things that interest me: making beer, telling (bad) jokes, and general geekery. The 2004 election pulled me kicking an screaming into political blogging which, I might add, isn't something I actually excel at. However, Jim Geraghty reiterates his point that conservatives who choose to sit out the November elections are umm, what's the phrase? Oh yeah, here it is: fucking morons. Mr. Geraghty uses more appropriate language, of course, but it's still sounds pretty damned condescending to me. Excerpt:

doubted the strategic wisdom of conservatives sitting out this election to “teach Republicans a lesson”; several bloggers have responded.

There are still doubters and skeptics, though. WhatÂ’s really stunning is this absolute certainty of angry conservatives that A) Republicans will learn the right lessons from the defeat, and not, say, respond in a panic by embracing their inner RINO and flailing around for MSM approval and B) that the Republicans can easily win back Congress in 2008, just by stiffening their spines and pledging to return to their conservative roots.

I have my doubts on both counts. For starters, why would Republicans get the message that “we need to be more conservative” in a year that conservatives were knocked out?

Who are the Republican lawmakers most angering the conservative base? Well, let’s say Sens. Trent “I’m tired of hearing about Porkbusters” Lott, Ted “Bridge to Nowhere” Stevens, John McCain for cosponsoring Kennedy’s immigration bill and campaign finance reform, Arlen Specter for being a pain in the tushie over judges, Chuck Hagel for being the New York Times’ favorite Republican senator to criticize Bush, and other minimally-conservative Republicans like Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins. Well, they’re not going to lose in 2006. Most of ‘em aren’t even up for reelection this year.

Look at the Republicans most in jeopardy in 2006. (IÂ’m using National JournalÂ’s most recent rankings.)

In the Senate, a bad year for the Republicans would mean the loss of Rick Santorum (who has lifetime American Conservative Union rating of 88 out of a possible 100, and a 92 in 2005) in Pennsylvania, Jim Talent (93 rating lifetime, and a 96 in 2005) in Missouri, Conrad Burns (91, and a perfect 100 in 2005) in Montana and Mike DeWine (80 lifetime, only 56 in 2005) in Ohio. Of course, Ohio voters who sit this one out will replace DeWine with Sherrod Brown, who has a lifetime rating of 8 and 4 for 2005. And they wonÂ’t get to revisit that decision until 2012.
...
Nice job, guys. Your effort to re-conservativize the Republican Party in Washington by staying home this year will have the effect of massacring the actual conservatives and empowering the moderates who you disdain. Perhaps we can call this counterproductive maneuver “RINO-plasty.”

But thatÂ’s okay, the staying-at-home-conservatives insist. The GOP will win back the House and Senate in 2008, establishing a true conservative majority.

Maybe. But as I mentioned, what kind of lengths do you think the Democrats will go to in order to keep power once they’ve got it? Does the “Fairness Doctrine” ring a bell? You think Pelosi and Reid wouldn’t try that tactic to hinder conservative talk radio? How about McCain-Feingold 2.0, with a particular focus on controlling “unregulated speech” on the Internet and blogs?

Think the MSM was cheerleading for Democrats in 2004? How much more fair and balanced do you think theyÂ’ll be when their task is to defend Democratic House and Senate majorities AND elect President Hillary Rodham Clinton? My guess is, theyÂ’ll make the CBS memo story look accurate and evenhanded by comparison.

Think the GOP can prevail in close races once theyÂ’re out of power? Ask the members of the military who had their ballots in Florida blocked. Ask Doug Forrester how well his anti-Torricelli campaign worked when he suddenly faced Frank Lautenberg at the last minute. Ask Dino Rossi. Ask Democrat Tim Johnson if heÂ’s glad the last county in South Dakota to report its results just happened to have enough of a Democratic margin to put him over the top in 2002.
...
We usually like looking at the Daily Kos crowd insisting for an immediate pullout of the troops or impeachment hearings right this second and we laugh at them for their ludicrously unrealistic expectations.

But apparently the Kos are not the only ones with an all-or-nothing mentality. Sometimes in life you have to use the West Coast offense, nickel and diming your way down the field instead of going for the long bomb. If I want a more conservative government, I get it by electing the more conservative of the two choices, even if he isnÂ’t as conservative as I would like. I do not get it by sitting on the sidelines and pouting, and letting the less conservative guy take the reigns of power.

For this I get labeled a “bamboobzled [sic] boob” by the likes of Bill Quick. Yeah, I’m the unreasonable one.

I will concede the point that the Democrats, once back in power, are likely to pass numerous laws which will make it more difficult for them to lose that power. Democrats will likely pass laws which further curtail our freedoms, most notably freedom of speech, and likely increase the flood of illegal immigration. And that's different from today how? Let me list what I see as the good things that have come from having Republicans control DC:

1) Nomination 2 judges for SCOTUS that look pretty good philosophically

2) Taking the fight to the enemy

That's about it. Everything else blows great big freaking chunks. I'm sick and tired of being forced to swallow my own vomit while being told that it's yummy milkshake. And for what it's worth, lecturing to me as to a small child on how stupid and irresponsible I am probably isn't the best tack to take. Want to persuade me? Don't spend all of your time telling me how bad things will get under Democrat leadership. I already know. Tell me how much better things will get if we re-elect the current Republican leadership.

What's that? I can't hear you. Cat got your tongue?

Republicans have become Democrat-lite. Increasingly, that "light" distinction has gotten heavier, like someone working his way up from skim milk to half-and-half. And I'm sick of it. If you're pushing me down the path to Hell, speed up. When the journey progresses slowly, people tend not to notice until it's much too late. If, instead, you grease the skids so that we hit rock bottom quickly, people might actually wake up and do something. Everything turning to shit usually gets attention. If not, we're lost already and we might as well get on with how things are going to turn out anyway.

So let's get it on this November. I'm ready for whatever happens and, unlike Mr. Geraghty, am unlikely to complain about the intellectual inferiority or emotional instability of the voters should they vote differently than I'd like them to. This is due, in part, to the fact that I'm an adult and don't expect things to always go my way. But hey, your mileage may vary.

Update: The Emperor suggests an idea that I can support.

If youÂ’re lucky enough to live in a State or a District whose representative is a true conservative, and that goes for all of us who might be that lucky, vote for him or her. DO get out the vote and make your voices heard. This is NOT about stomping our feet and being silly, we leave that to the other side.

If not, however, if you happen to have an incumbent who is about as “conservative” as Harry Reid, let’s find a conservative counter-candidate for the primaries that we can back up and stump for until our fingers bleed. I volunteer whatever clout I may have for the cause and I will do anything (short of breaking the law, and the CFR doesn’t count since it’s un-Constitutional and thus I am not bound by my oath to uphold it, as a matter of fact I’m bound by it to do the exact oppposite) to boost their campaign.

LetÂ’s get some true conservatives on the ballot, and letÂ’s use our strength to work together, not against each other.

But if our guys don’t prevail in the primaries, don’t expect me to back the RINO “because he’s not Pelosi”, because I’m a little bit too mature to fall for Democrat campaign slogans. I’m staying at home.

Update:Mark Tapscott discusses the issue eloquently. Go there now.

Update: Good illustration over here. My only argument is that it doesn't show the critter with both heads up its own ass.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 11:36 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 1456 words, total size 9 kb.

I've shied away from posting about the whole Minutemen/Mexico bruhaha because others have covered in great detail. However, I couldn't resist posting Neal Boortz's take on it:

There were reports yesterday that our government is telling the Mexican government where the Minutemen are gathering to monitor illegal crossings of our border. Our government denies it. So .. whom to believe?

OK .. a little cogitation here.

The charge made by reporter Sara Carter is that the U.S. Border Patrol is telling the Mexican government where the Minutemen are staging their vigils. The Border Patrol says it isn't so.

Now you tell me ... what branch of our government oversees the U.S. Border Patrol? Now remember, there are only four branches of the government in Washington. Can you name them? Well ... if you're fresh from your experience at government education, probably not. But they are the Executive Branch, the Legislative Branch, the Judicial Branch and the Lobbyist Branch. Now, of these four branches, which is the only branch that has shown no inclination to do anything about the thousands of invaders who are crashing our border with Mexico? Well, actually there are two. It's not the Legislative Branch. Both houses of Congress are currently discussing proposals to shut down the borders. It's not the Judicial Branch. They merely interpret and enforce the laws set forth by the other branches. What does that leave? The Lobbyist Branch and the Executive Branch. The Lobbyist Branch is busy working for those businesses in this country who benefit from the Mexican invasion. The problem is, the Lobbyist Branch has no operational control over the Border Patrol. That leaves the Executive Branch. Clearly George Bush, who runs the Executive Branch, has shown absolutely no inclination whatsoever to take even the smallest step to stop this massive invasion of the American homeland, and it's George Bush who exercises the executive control over the policies and activities of the Border Patrol. So ... what do you think? Here we have a president with no interest in stopping the invasion, and we have a Border Patrol under his control that is reported to be handing information to the Mexican government regarding the locations of the Minutemen operations? Draw your own conclusions.

The next question is why? Why would our government tell the Mexican government where the Minutemen are? Well, we know that the Mexican government is complicit in the invasion. Mexicans are openly encouraged by the Mexican government to cross the border into the US so that they can get higher-paying jobs and send money back to Mexico. Right now that money totals about $20 billion a year. Now if the Mexican government knew just where the Minutemen were, they could either hold back the invaders in those areas, or send them to areas where the Minutemen aren't. Simply put -- if we have people in our own government who are giving the enemy the locations of our border defense forces, there could only be one reason --- to enable the invasion.

Unless it can be proven that GWB had no knowledge about, and did not grant approval for, this crap, it's time to start impeachment proceedings.

I guess that it's a sign of the End Times when I'm in agreement with the Kosmonauts. It's the whole broken, fucked up, asshat clock thing.

Update: John Derbyshire puts it rather succinctly:

This thing about our govt. colluding with Narcistan — sorry, I mean Mexico — to keep the flow of illegal immigrants coming, is the last straw. Either our govt. is criminally incompetent, or else it is maliciously hostile to ordinary American citizens. Or both.

I kept my mouth pretty well shut when the splendid whack-'em'upside-the-head assault on Iraq turned into a ludicrous and apologetic "nation-building" exercise. I bellyached in a restrained fashion at the Harriet Miers farce. I kept my grumbling over Medicaid, the budget bloat, and border security at a decently low volume. This one, though, I can't take.

I can't think of a single thing to say in favor of the national Republican party, its senators, representatives, governors, and administration. I can't think of a single reason why, right now, I should vote for any of them.

I could never vote for the liberal mob; but if a conservative third party comes up between now and 2008, they'll have my full attention — likely my money and my vote, too. We are on the last page of Animal Farm here; I can no longer tell the men from the pigs.

Oink, oink baby.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 09:33 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 763 words, total size 5 kb.

I can usually count on Ace to provide me with the latest in dick and fart jokes. He takes a somewhat different tack today. Excerpt:

Some people actually chose to become, as Slate dubbed them, "shark apolgists." In a territorial dispute between sharks, which wanted to eat people, and human swimmers, who wanted to not be eaten, some biologists and environmentalists actually argued in favor of the sharks' "right" to chow down on 11-year-old boys. After all-- it's their territory. They have to eat too, right?

It was a sickening example of the Moral Vanity of Objectivity being taken to the next level -- not only are Americans not to be favored over non-Americans, but now human beings (and children, too!) are not even to be favored over non-human, non-sentinent aquatic predators.

Hey-- let's just take the fact that we're human, and have, of course, an "irrational bias" in favor of humanity, out of the equation. Viewed in "objective" terms, in which we don't favor humans just because we're humans -- viewing things as if we were space aliens, in other words, and space aliens who further don't favor the sentient over non-sentient -- there is no special objective reason to favor human children over sharks, right?

Liberals and leftists are forever patting themselves on the back for removing their natural affinities from the moral equation -- or at least pretending to -- and they praise themselves so highly for this habit that they scarcely realize what they are urging is not a "higher morality," but a moral obscenity.

If you are so far gone that you cannot privilege human beings over a goddamned shark, for crying out loud-- congratulations. You have, in moral terms, more or less removed yourself from the human race. Almost every other human being would favor you over an unthinking shark; but you do not return the favor, even out of respect for an implied compact (you favor me over the sharks, so, in return, I will favor you, even if I don't really agree with the principle behind that "humanocentric" favoritism).

And yes: If you cannot privilege your fellow Americans over non-Americans in your moral calculus -- even knowing you receive the benefit of that favoritism from the vast majority of your fellow Americans, who would of course save an American's life over a foreigner's, if they had to choose, and all other considerations being equal -- then you've effectively removed yourself from true citizenship and community with your fellow Americans.

But don't question their patriotism. They hate when you do that.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 03:02 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 436 words, total size 3 kb.