Michael Novak: It is easy for me to imagine the immense jubilation in the hearts of America’s African-American population. Many eyes will be shining with …. Many will feel arise in their breasts a great new sense of pride, accomplishment, and public dignity. They will feel validated as never before. That is one great blessing of this election.

National Review Editorial: The public has not embraced many of the central aspects of liberalism. President-Elect Barack Obama’s record and positions put him well to the left of any president in the last four decades. But to judge from his campaign, he is a man who wants to cut taxes, defend an individual right to own guns, take a hard line on terrorists in Pakistan, reduce the abortion rate, allow people to keep their health-care plans, and keep trade free. The polls suggest that he was wise to run in this fashion: They show that the public remains as skeptical about federal activism and social liberalism as they have been for years.

Tucker Carlson: Mitt Romney is laying the groundwork for a presidential run in 2012.

California voters approved a constitutional amendment that bans same-sex marriages overriding a recent court decision legalizing them.… The constitutional amendment—widely seen as the most momentous of the nation's 153 ballot measures—will limit marriage to heterosexual couples, the first time such a vote has taken place in a state where gay unions are legal. Gay-rights activists had a rough election elsewhere as well. Ban-gay-marriage amendments were approved in Arizona and Florida, and Arkansas voters approved a measure banning unmarried couples from serving as adoptive or foster parents.

We can win this election if every conservative, Republican, and concerned American helps get out the vote in the next two days. Make sure you vote. Get your friends to vote. Donate now to the RNC get out the vote effort - your donations will be more effective now than ever.

 

Note the polls below. They are close – a lot closer than the liberal media wants you to think. The Obama campaign and their propagandists want you discouraged and disheartened. The polls are skewed against McCain/Palin by over sampling Democrats, under sampling Republicans, overestimating the projected turnout for Democrats, underestimating the projected turnout for Republicans, and not considering “undecided voters.” The huge number of undecided voters (approximately 9%) are among likely and registered voters.

IBD/TIPP (the group that was closest in 2000 and 2004):

Obama 46.7%
McCain 44.6%

Not Yet Sure 8.7%

 

CBS poll picks Obama by 11, but it is helpful to note that the same poll picked Kerry in 2004.

 

Hugh Hewitt: “Scott Rasmussen is a superb pollster and he has Obama's 5 point lead outside of the margin of error, but he also employs a prediction model that assumes a 6.5 point Democrat turnout advantage. … It was a 2% gap in 2004.  Lots of pundits are predicting a demoralized GOP base and subsequent low turnout in support of Rasmussen's and others predictions, but having just returned from Colorado, Minnesota and Ohio where first-hand experiences with volunteers and rallies conveyed exactly the opposite, I think the potential for surprise on the turnout gap is great.”

 

McCain up 2 in Ohio:  The RCP average for Ohio is Obama +4.6, but the latest Mason-Dixon poll has McCain +2. 

 

Pennsylvania a close one: McCain fans should be excited by the fact that Rasmussen puts McCain within 4 in the Quaker state.

 

McCain has pulled back in front in Missouri.

 

Mason-Dixon Poll: Obama lead cut to 2 points in Florida!

 

The RCP Average shows Obama with a 0.3 lead over McCain in North Carolina.

 

Yesterday, McCain scolded supporters at a rally for booing Obama. McCain declared Obama “a decent man.” He added: “I admire Sen. Obama and his accomplishments."

Contrary to McCain, I do not believe Obama has any substantial accomplishments worth admiring. Nor, do I believe that a decent American would affiliate with Tony Resko, William Ayers, Bernadette Dorn, Reverend Wright, Michael Pfleger or the likes of ACORN. And, I would run the other way from a man who Farrakhan not only endorses for the Presidency, but refers to as Messianic.

It almost seems as if McCain is running more against Palin than Obama. While Palin rallies the troops toward victory, McCain signals retreat. Sarah Palin aptly plays the role of a political Petraeus, while McCain admires and respects “decent” Obama’s single accomplishment of raising the white flag of surrender.

Palin won the debate. She presented a fresh and lucid rationale for her principles. Biden’s style showed a command of the "facts," though often distorted and even blatantly wrong. For example, Joe Biden, in his typically brash, rapid-fire manner, skewered Dick Cheney’s views concerning the constitutional role of the Vice-presidency with this claim:

Somebody please get Senator Biden obtain a copy of the United States Constitution. Article I of the Constitution focuses on the legislative branch. Article 2 defines the executive branch of the Federal Government. The first mention of the office of the Vice President in the Constitution is appears in Article I, section 3, clause 4 is the first time the Vice President is mentioned in the Constitution. This clause states: “The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.”

Contrary to Biden’s claim, this section briefly develops, explicitly and implicitly, the relationship of the Vice-President to the Senate. A recent article by University of Tennessee College of Law Professor, Glenn Harlan Reynolds, argues that that the "Vice-Presidency's legislative character" is "significant" (Northwestern University Law Review, Vol. 102, 2007).

Article 2 covers the Executive Branch and briefly notes that how the Vice-President is elected with the President. It does not, however, enumerate a specific job description of the Vice-Presidency.

This is just one example of many showing that much of Biden’s blustering is actually bloviating bull.

Palin won the debate. She connected with American’s like Biden never will.

The Gallup Daily Tracking Poll came out over the weekend indicating that “U.S. voters are closely divided in their 2008 presidential preferences, with 47% favoring Barack Obama and 44% backing John McCain.” How does this Daily Tracking Poll square with the numbers reported earlier by the Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll showing a McCain–Obama tie at 48%?

Take a close look at the internal numbers. Rush Limbaugh spent time today reviewing the D.J. Drummond’s article on WhizBang.com, “How Liberal Trolls Are Working to Get McCain Elected President.”  This is a great article, and should be read in full. A more succinct article, “Gallup’s Internals and Our Nations” by Richard Miniter actually summarizes the extensive Drummond piece. Rush relies heavily on Miniter for his report. For now, we will suffice with Rush Limbaugh’s report of the findings:

When the numbers were reweighted to match the ratios established by exit polls over the past few presidential elections the results varied significantly from those reported by Gallup. The result for the same poll is McCain leads with 45% to Obama’s 39%.

Limbaugh paraphrased Richard Miniter:  “Could they be right?  If voter turnout doesn't change substantially, yeah, it could be right.”

Good: Rasmussen’s daily tracking poll has McCain and Obama once again tied at 48 percent. The Rasmussen Report Electoral College update is not the best news for the Republicans, but it is still close. Maybe too close.

Bad: With the Electoral College vote so close, The Washington Times present a doomsday scenario – and it really is! Can you imagine what would happen to this country if the election results in a 269 tie in the Electoral College?

Ugly: As if they are preparing for even worse results, the Democrats, according to Dennis Prager, are stoking the racist fires.

Obama made the point yesterday that if anyone was “promulgating negative ads that are completely unrelated to the issues at hand, I think I win that contest pretty handily.” I’m hoping he misspoke. He probably meant to say, as the candidate of change and hope, he would not stoop so low as to put out a negative ad – which would only continue the “same old failed politics of the past.”

We should excuse the gaffe as the result of being flustered when asked by “Good Morning America” why he put out an ad calling McCain old. Obama insisted “that his campaign commercial pointing out that Republican Sen. John McCain doesn't know how to use a computer wasn't a sly shot at his rival's age.”

Obama, the candidate promising to bring people together, argued: “I didn't say that. What I said was ... that John McCain is out of touch.”

In an Associated Press release, entitled “Obama mocks McCain as computer illiterate,” Nedra Pickler describes the ad:

It matters little whether Obama meant to attack McCain for being “out of touch” or just old. The commercial reveals a bewildered Obama campaign in panic mode. The ad was obviously not vetted. The fact that Obama approved the ad shows him to be ignorant, insensitive, and just like the rest of the political hacks running Chicago’s south-side. No decent American would put out this commercial while knowing the reasons behind McCain’s lack of e-mail history. Obama’s refusal to apologize or pull the ad says plenty about who is actually “out of touch.”  

I’m not sure I really care if the President of the United States sends e-mails. He has subordinates that take care of that task. It is reported that Clinton sent two e-mails during his entire presidency.

The reason John McCain doesn't send email, according to Jonah Goldberg, is that he can't use a keyboard because of the relentless beatings he received from the Viet Cong in service to our country.

Years ago, the Boston Globe (March 4, 2000) explained:

Basically, Obama’s ad mocks McCain for the consequences of his injuries wrought as a POW while in the service of his country. Obama probably did not intend this message. Likely, he simply wanted to mock something else about McCain. Obama seems to be often misunderstood (e.g., his lipstick on a pig “metaphor”). Then again, maybe Obama’s braggadocio promotion of his negative ads against McCain wasn’t actually a gaffe. It could be that Obama was telling the truth when he bragged that if anyone was “promulgating negative ads that are completely unrelated to the issues at hand, I think I win that contest pretty handily.”

The Obama campaign should consider as a new theme song, the Richard Burton tune from Camelot: "How to Handle a Woman." And one quick piece of advice along these same lines: do not call Governor Sarah Palin a pig, with or without lipstick.

It’s hard to imagine that it was only one week ago that Governor Sarah Palin burst Barack’s bubble! She uttered a few deft lines mocking his pompous presumptuousness. And, pop went the weasel. Arguments have actually ensued over which were her best zingers. Was it her line about Barack’s authoring of “two memoirs but not a single major law or even a reform, not even in the state Senate?” Or when she reminded us that Obama was the kind of “a man who can give an entire speech about the wars America is fighting and never use the word ‘Victory,’ except when he's talking about his own campaign?” My personal favorite was her warning that “when the cloud of rhetoric has passed, when the roar of the crowd fades away, when the stadium lights go out and those styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot... When that happens, what exactly is our opponent's plan? What does he actually seek to accomplish after he's done turning back the waters and healing the planet.”

Still, who would have ever imagined that Obama candidacy could sink so fast? By comparison, the Titanic even looks like a better ride. Palin is evidently the iceberg the Obama campaign never expected. When hit, rather than bailing the flood of incoming water, Barack’s bucket brigade frantically grabs the fire hoses to put out the Palin fire, while their ship sinks. Meanwhile, his passengers are jumping ship at an alarming rate.

Governor Palin may be the General Petraeus of the 2008 election battle. Recent polls show a dramatic surge upward for the McCain/Palin ticket. The RealClearPolics.com polling average now has McCain leading Obama by 2.3 percentage points. According to the L.A. Times, “Democrats expressed anxiety about the new challenge suggested by recent surveys showing McCain has gained ground among independent voters and women, who could decide the race in states such as Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Virginia.” The Times cites the Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll released Tuesday showing that “McCain is now winning among white women 52% to 41% after having been statistically tied with Obama in that crucial category just a month ago.” Congressman Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.), a strong Obama backer, anxiously worried: “Whenever you see that kind of movement, you ought to be concerned; you ought to try to address it.”

Based on yesterday’s news, the Obama camp has not yet figured out how to address the problem of Sarah Palin. Obama was quoted on an ABC blog as saying: "You know, you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig." Considering Palin’s oft-told joke about the only difference between a hockey mom and a pit-bull is lipstick, one need not make too much of a leap to conclude that Obama was calling the Republican vice presidential nominee a pig. At least that is how many women are interpreting the comment. The lipstick smear must have been part of that morning’s Obama campaign’s talking-point memo. According to Politico, Democratic Congressman Russ Carnahan introduced Joe Biden at a campaign event and referred to Governor Palin’s record with slightly different lipstick reference. He said: “There’s no way you can dress up that record, even with a lot of lipstick.”

Many pundits, including those at Power Line, are now wondering aloud “whether Obama is starting to come apart at the seams. As his party's Presidential nominee, he should be doing battle with John McCain, not Sarah Palin. But he seemingly can't help himself. Over the last couple of days, several generally apolitical people have told me that they think Obama has been melting down ever since Palin's nomination was announced. Hysteria does appear to be sweeping the Obama camp, with over the top attacks on both Palin and McCain. One wonders whether their internal polling numbers are really, really bad.”

Paul Mirengoff suggests that “McCain threw Obama a curve-ball when he selected Palin, and it has Obama off-balance. Actually, the Palin pick might better be seen as a knuckle-curve. The curve ball consists of the gender card, not completely unexpected but still difficult to deal with. The knuckler consists of Palin's instant celebrity status. Surely, Obama did not expect to face the prospect of being matched, or even overshadowed, in this category.”

A quick review of liberal and leftist news-outlets reveals serious concerns from the established elites. Liberal pundits at The New Republic, for example, were “alarmed” at the strength of Palin’s speech. Senate-Majority Leader Harry Reid’s spokesman denounced Governor Palin’s speech as "shrill and sarcastic." Many Democrat leaders, including official sources from the Obama Camp, were quick to point out that Governor Palin used a speechwriter [a shocking revelation] – and worse, one previously employed by President Bush!

Much of the liberal criticism seemed predictable. Gloria Steinem, for example, referred to Sarah Palin as nothing but a Phyllis Schlafly, only younger. On the less-predictable fringe, CNN reported that community organizers were highly offended by her speech. And even more odd, but just as ideologically partisan, Lauren Beckham Falcone hated Palin’s hair – considers it 20 years out of date, much like her policies.

Do not assume that the liberals and the left will sit around wringing their hands in anxious concern over this new Republican gunslinger. Newsweek’s Jonathan Alter has already given the challenge. A gunfight is in order, but it will likely not be a duel of honor. The press has a responsibility, claims Alter, to show the public what Palin really is. She must be “forced to submit to real interviews with real questions that show whether her real-life experience is any preparation for assuming high office.” He considers this as much a test of the media as it is of Palin. In other words, Governor Palin better load up, because the media is planning an ambush.

News surfaced this past Labor Day Weekend that Sarah Palin’s seventeen-year-old daughter, Bristol, is pregnant. Her decision after counseling with her parents is that she will marry her boyfriend, the baby’s father, and raise the baby. The main-stream media is in a fevered frenzy over the revelation. Already, the public has been barraged with over 3000 news articles after the story broke this past weekend.

The mainstream spin on this story provides an example of media bias. The New York Times has yet to run a story connecting Obama and Tony Rezko. Nor have they published anything on the connection between Obama and William Ayers. The Times has not covered Obama’s votes opposing the Born-Alive Act. They have completely neglected Obama’s support for $3.4 million in earmarks for a lobbyist who happens to be Sen. Biden's son. The New York Times acknowledged the John Edwards’ affair with Rielle Hunter long after they had the details; and then, only begrudgingly after Edwards’ public admission. Senator Joe Biden’s plagiarism that forced him out of the presidential race three decades ago is simply portrayed as old and irrelevant news. Yet, Today’s edition of the New York Times is running three top stories on the 2008 Republican Convention – all pertaining to Bristol’s baby.

Liberal orthodoxy and intolerance are on display. Although the McCain camp indicated that they became aware of Bristol’s pregnancy while they were vetting her mother for the Vice Presidency. It was not considered an obstacle. However, many in the liberal press, the leftist blogs, and the Democrat Party consider it a major concern. The problem to “progressives” was not that there was sex among unmarried minors. The real affront to liberal sensibilities is that this intimacy may lead to life. And even worse, the Palin parents actually participated in decisions for Bristol and her boyfriend to marry and provide the baby with a loving family. To the left this only showcases Sarah Palin’s “controversial” world view, which includes support for abstinence education, but not reproductive privacy (i.e., meaning children’s right to sex education, birth control, and abortion without the knowledge and permission of their parents). (See, for example, Jane Smiley’s “Women’s Issue,” on Huffington Post).

Some of the same critics argue that Bristol’s pregnancy provides evidence of Governor Palin’s poor judgment. They contend that Palin should not have accepted the Veep nomination with all that is going on in her family, especially Trig Palin’s Down Syndrome and Bristol’s pregnancy. Such arguments seem hypocritical coming from those who have persistently advocated women’s rights at all costs, and no rights for the defenseless unborn.

As to the direct issue of Sarah Palin’s judgment: Is it better judgment to consider life a divine gift and to rejoice in the birth of a newborn with Down Syndrome as a “perfect” miracle from God? Or, is it better judgment to declare at a town hall meeting in Johnson, Pennsylvania in March of this year, as Barak Obama did that if [his girls] “make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby.” That’s right; he does not want them to be “punished with a baby.” How is that for good judgment?