Skip to comments.The Premature Pre-Party......If only the media were on the ballot
Posted on 10/25/2006 9:11:58 AM PDT by IrishMike
If conservatives have engaged in pre-criminations over what went wrong in this election, the media have engaged in pre-celebration. It was predictable that Nancy Pelosi would get a honeymoon from the press if Democrats took the House. What has been surprising is that the honeymoon has begun even before the blessed event. Pelosi has held her caucus together to block major Republican initiatives over the last two years, while throwing every name in the book at her opponents (immoral, corrupt, incompetent; shes even said theyre running a criminal enterprise). In the medias typical terminology, this should make Pelosi a partisan obstructionist, and probably mean-spirited to boot. At least it would if she werent a liberal Democrat on the verge of taking over the House for the first time in twelve years.
In 1994, the media portrayed Newt Gingrich as a fire-breathing, radical right-winger. The week of the election, Time put a red-faced Gingrich on its cover with the headline Mad As Hell. By contrast, when Pelosi isnt warm and cuddly, shes a master politician. To wit, a recent profile of Pelosi that aired on NBCs Today opened with these words: She often introduces herself as a mother and grandmother, and is known for her trademark smile. But dont be fooled. At 66, she is ambitious, effective, and has made an art form of staying on message.
The media havent been able to conceal their rooting interest in this election.
(Excerpt) Read more at article.nationalreview.com ...
The media are not supposed to be cheerleaders for anyone running. I agree they shouldn't be talking like this election is over. Yes it's a tough election season for the Republicans. But let's just wait and count the votes and see where we stand when it's all over.
I think they want to pump up Dem. expectations. Then, if Republicans do better than expected, they will jump in with stories of voting irregularities and stolen elections. Just wait and see.
Left WIDE open for salacious FReeper comments.
The LIE-BERAL MEDIA is as usual trying to cover up the extremism of the Democrat leadership.
Here's our new Speaker...
Nancy Pelosi (D California) will likely be the new Speaker of the House. (that's 3rd in line to the Presidency)
Pelosi voted against every Republican tax cut.
Pelosi voted for the largest tax increase in history.
Pelosi voted 19 times against eliminating the death tax.
Pelosi voted five times for raising gasoline taxes
Pelosi is so pro-high taxes she was one of only 27 members to vote against tax relief for poor neighborhoods in the inner city (presumably including her constituents in San Francisco ).
Pelosi voted against the historic Welfare Reform Bill and later voted against its reauthorization.
Pelosi voted against protecting the right to say "one nation under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Pelosi voted against requiring that voters be identified so we could ensure only legal citizens are voting.
Pelosi voted against requiring English on ballots.
Pelosi refused to side with homeowners against the Kelo decision that allows cities to seize private property for profitable ventures, even though 365 members voted to stop cities from taking private property.
Pelosi has voted at least 12 times against the death penalty.
Pelosi was one of only 67 House members to vote against the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).
Pelosi has voted at least eight times against banning partial-birth abortion, at least three times against the Unborn Victims of Violence Act (Laci's law), and scored a perfect 100 percent rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America.
Pelosi voted against a bill that would "[b]ar the transportation of a minor girl across state lines to obtain an abortion without the consent of a parent, guardian or judge."
Pelosi voted at least 31 times for using local or federal taxpayer dollars to fund abortions.
Pelosi voted against building a fence on the border to protect America from terrorists.
Before 9/11, Pelosi repeatedly voted to cut intelligence (in 1993 by $500 million) and after 9/11 she has still voted to cut intelligence (in 2004 she voted to withhold 25 percent of intelligence funds).
When you ask why we were not more prepared for 9/11, remember that six months before Sept. 11, 2001, Pelosi voted to decrease proposed defense spending by $65 billion.
The next time you think about North Korean nuclear tests and North Korean efforts to develop an intercontinental ballistic missile to reach the United States , remember that in 2002, Pelosi voted for an amendment to the FY 2003 Defense authorization that would block FY 2003 funding for space-based missile defense programs.
Pelosi led a faction of 124 House Democrats who voted against final passage of the Patriot Act's reauthorization.
Pelosi voted against the $87-billion Iraq/Afghanistan supplemental that included extra money for body armor for our soldiers.
Pelosi voted against creation of Homeland Security Department.
Pelosi was one of only 33 members to vote against prohibiting U.S. citizens and companies from conducting any financial transaction with countries that have been identified by the State Department as active sponsors of terrorism.
In 2004, Pelosi voted against House passage of the intelligence overhaul bill, which reorganized 15 intelligence agencies under one Director of National Intelligence.
Scary post of the day !
Have you seen the cover of Time? It displays the rear-end of the Republican elephant and asks the question, "Will a sleazy sex scandal destroy the republican majority?" (I am paraphrasing.) When the Dems were in trouble, did Time ever display the rear-end of the Democratic donkey in its cover? Just wondering.
Unfortunately, the Trademark is registered by some plastic reconstruction medical corporation.
As a matter of fact...
The democratic LIBERAL response to that litany of info...
So what? Big deal!
The democrats (liberals) will claim a victory on November 8th regardless if they take over the majority or not...Even if they only win 1 seat...
They've actually already one a couple of them, and it took them years and countless underhanded tactics to accompliash that...And not one election helped them do it...
Just more examples, in a long line a smelly stuff, that should remind us that every election is important...
They know it, and we've had some leadership that has ignored, and sat on a lot of opportunities to maintain the majority...
I kinda hope this will all turn out to be a "near miss" this time...
Pre-mature hijack election?........
I think there will be wailing and the gnashing of teeth by the Dems if they don't win at least the Senate or House. I think they will be very disappointed if they pick up fewer than 10 seats in the House and three in the Senate.
Pre-mature elect elation?.........
"The democrats (liberals) will claim a victory on November 8th regardless if they take over the majority or not...Even if they only win 1 seat..."
Goodie. We can all claim victory with that outcome.
"I kinda hope this will all turn out to be a "near miss" this time..."
That's the more hopeful scenario at this point.
the over/under from pollster and tradesports is giving us LESS than 50/50 chance of retaining the GOP House. I dont quite believe it, it would be lunacy for voters to let that happen, but then I'm not an objective observer.
This is arace between the reality and media-created perception - we have 14 days to catch up a lot of ground:
Really? And who made you king? Ever hear of the 1st ammendment? The problem isn't that the media is biased - it's supposed to be. No, the problem is media concentration. While TV is inherently monopolistic, it used to be that most major cities had two newspapers, each taking the other side.
Along with TV since the 50s, for a relatively short-term (since the 80s), many cities have had only one major newspaper. But as we all now know, talk radio & the 'Net have killed off their monopoly.
The simple fact is that their days are numbered. There is simply no way for the MSM to recover. So the end result is they are quickly becoming irrelevant on the way to becoming completely obsolete.
You know I went yesterday and early voted...
I was really amazed and encouraged that the eSlate machines were getting a workout this time...You could tell thats where most people were working the thing...
That boads well for the "write-in" in CD22...
I always believed, in this case, that the people will go through the trouble to do this regardless of what had been given out as a wasted effort...
Bottom line is that I'd much rather not have to say U.S. Congressman Nick Lampson for 2 years...
OHHH!!! I'll post this on the state forum too...
The LaRouche freak in Clear Lake was out there at the polls yesterday...
He asked me if I'd like to sign in and take some literature...
I'll give you a chance to think of some colorful metaphors I presented to that person...
I was not a very nice person at that particular juncture...
"hat boads well for the "write-in" in CD22..."
It takes at least 30 minutes to an hour our of one's busy schedule to go vote. First, take the trip there, 10-15 mins; then wait on line for 3-10mins, sign the form, get the ticket, get in the booth. Then it takes at least 5 minutes to vote.
Since you went through all that trouble, would any real Republican then say "ya, know, I went through all this trouble to vote, but I wont take the extra 60 seconds it would take to punch the 'write-in' line for TX-22 CD race and dial in "GIBBS" - I just wont do it. takes too long."
Um, I dont think so. EVERY REPUBLICAN SHOULD TAKE THE TIME TO VOTE RIGHT ON TX CD-22! The REAL problem will be those not-too-informed voting people thinking "How do I spell Shelley Sekula-Gibbs?" so you need a LOT of signs and coverage to make it obvious, or independents thinking "screw the Republicans, if they cant put a candidate up, I aint voting for him/her." or "I dont like the GOP candidate enough to bother, I'll just go LP". Dont know how much backlash there is in voters minds still.
BUT, there is hope. A simple message of
"Take 60 seconds to write in "GIBBS", and you wont have PELOSI as Speaker" ... may be enough to nudge those who oppose Pelosi's pro-gay-marriage pro-higher-taxes and pro-abortion and anti-patriot-act and cut-n-run stance on issues to think hard about letting this race 'go'. A vote for the Democrat *or* a non-voteor3rd-party-throwaway vote will mean Lampson-Pelosi ticket wins.
"I always believed, in this case, that the people will go through the trouble to do this regardless of what had been given out as a wasted effort..."
History shows that it usually is quite difficult to win write-in races... but history didnt have a case where a write-in race could decide who is speaker of the House!
We make history through our actions.
I would just ask the Houston smoking lobby to, er, put that in their pipe and smoke it.
"I think there will be wailing and the gnashing of teeth by the Dems if they don't win at least the Senate or House. I think they will be very disappointed if they pick up fewer than 10 seats in the House and three in the Senate."
One more good reason to fight for a Republican Congress!
Who is most intent on defeating the Republicans?
The 'defeat-and-retreat' leftwingers who want higher taxes, Kyoto imposed, no drilling anywhere, US to lose in Iraq, and to coddle the terrorists (against patriot Act etc.)
Wow, I hadn't seen that cover before. Two things jump right out at me.
First, apparently conventional photo manipulation didn't clean her up enough, so they resorted to painting (or photo manipulation made to look like a painting).
Also, her outfit looks like something popularized in Red China.