ginandtacos.com - shut up and drink the gin

THE GREATEST GIFT OF ALL

As of this morning, I have been alive for 28 years. Quite a miracle, when you stop to think about it. At the close of the 19th century, the global life expectancy for a male was 35 years. In ancient Rome and Greece, life expectancy was 28 years (so Jesus both died young and beat the odds by 5 years). Today, in the three lowest life expectancy nations of sub-Saharan Africa (Swaziland, Lesotho, and Botswana) the average male can expect 32 years on this Earth - compared to 81 in Japan or 77 in the US of A.

Furthermore, my status as a free man here in 'merica is equally remarkable. If you take the cohort of african-american males born in any given year and then check back on them in 28 years, 22% of them will be dead or incarcerated. For white males, the same figure is 4%. Thanks, entrenched social inequality!

I could recount the extensive list of great people who accomplished great things and checked out before they turned 28, but suffice it to say that birthdays cease to be fun once you get out of college. Aside from the fact that you end up working on 5 out of every 7 birthdays after that point, it turns into a rather melancholy reminder that you're A) getting closer to dying and B) you haven't really accomplished anything. No one actually expects you to have done anything when you turn 19. But turning 28 - or 30, or 35, or 40 - and saying "Wow, I make minimum wage and can't really point to anything noteworthy I've done"....well, that's just not worth celebrating.

So here's to 28 years of me. One year closer to losing my hair. If nothing else, I'll celebrate by considering the fact that the national GOP is having to spend millions to protect House seats in Wyoming, Nebraska, and Idaho to be a birthday gift from the Lord. I'll consider the fact that I have to start teaching a 3-hour night class tonight (after my regular 75-minute lecture) to be....what's the opposite of a gift from the Lord?

Oh, right: a swift kick in the nads.

MENTAL NOTE: KERRY = ASSHOLE

What do John Kerry, Evan Bayh, Marty Meehan, Frank Pallone, Bob Andrews, and Lloyd Doggett have in common? They're all 100% safe Democratic incumbents in Congress who are unopposed in 2006. They also have more than $2,000,000 in their campaign funds yet won't kick any of it out to the DNCC or highly competitive races elsewhere.

It's not like the Democratic Party is habitually outspent by the GOP, and it's not as if there are a bunch of competitive or open races going on right now. Heavens no. Evan Bayh certainly doesn't live in a state in which the two most expensive House races in the nation are taking place. Heavens no.

While Kerry and Bayh are hoarding their money for a 2008 Presidential run, the House members sitting on piles of cash right now have no excuses. None. And hoarding for a presidential run isn't exactly a good excuse. We'll remember this in a few years, guys. I'm guessing your fellow Democrats will too. Something tells me that Evan Bayh could afford to pony up half a million bucks for IN-8 and IN-9 and still have plenty of change. And every safe/unopposed/incumbent Democrat in both chambers could easily afford to pony up $500 apiece for ID-1 and WY-At Large. Will they?

BUT SHE WAS THE PRO-FAMILY KIND OF FUCKBUDDY

Voter guides. God, how I love voter guides. They're the very best kind of comedy, and best of all they're free.

If you're not familiar, voter guides are "scorecards" put out by most major politically-active interest groups and non-profits. So, for example, the NRA will distribute guides to its members (and anyone else who's interested) in which incumbents and challengers are rated, either by letter grade or percentage.

Why are they so goddamn funny? Because the "ratings" are based on the select issues of interest to the organization issuing the ratings. And nothing more. So, for example, the NRA voter guide might give Mark Foley a 100% Super-Duper A++ because their ratings only count his votes on gun-related issues. How he votes on anything else (or who he tries to bang) is irrelevant to the NRA. Therein lies the potential for comedy.

To wit: Don Sherwood. If you're not familiar with Congressman Choker, in 2004 his mistress made a 911 call frantically asking for police to come to the hotel where she and Sherwood were screwing. Apparently Donnie saw fit to beat and choke his mistress for reasons known only to him. After attempting to deny that he and Ms. Cynthia Ore were anything but friends, he finally admitted a 5 year extra-marital affair with her.

Sounds pretty "anti-family" in the language of the GOP, doesn't it? Not according to James Dobson! In the eyes of Focus on the Family's Family Research Council, Don Sherwood gets an 85% rating and a strong recommendation. See, as long as the member in question votes appropriately on a small sample of abortion and gay marriage related issues, he or she is pro-family. Amazing, isn't it?

Closeted child molestor? Adulterer? Abuser? Alcoholic? It doesn't matter! Just vote against gay marriage (and for protecting the pledge of allegiance, which is apparently somehow relevant) and you're well on your way to being Offically Certified as Pro-Family. By no less of an authority than James Dobson!

And before you ask, they quickly took Mark Foley off their sheet last week. But fear not, archived copies of the guide reveal that he got a 42%. Not great, but ahead of over 200 Democrats - the overwhelming majority of whom got 0%.

In summary:

Closet gay child-sex predator = moderately pro-family

Adulterer who abuses women = super-duper pro-family

Every Democrat on Earth = 100% anti-family

Questions?

Posted by Ed at 01:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

DESPERATION

Now that the national Republican apparatus is starting to realize just how badly things are going to go in November they're attempting to set up a "firewall" in the Senate. That is, they've written off the House. It's already gone. But now they're contingency-planning for the unthinkable, which is losing the Senate as well. As ginandtacos predicted a few weeks ago, the possibility of a 50-50 Senate - or even a small Democratic majority - is very real.

So the GOP has decided to set up its firewall around three (OK, two. More on that in a minute) Senate races to make sure that doesn't happen. States in which it was previously unthinkable that the GOP could lose now need to be saved, triage style, at any cost. Virginia, Tennessee, and Ohio used to be GOP slam-dunks. Now they're desperately trying to hold on.

That means that all pretense of fairness and decency are tossed out the window. Ginandtacos has highlighted how the language of the GOP has resorted to race-baiting, gay-bashing, and rural-urban division in the last few weeks. But it's failing in Ohio. Sherrod Brown has a big lead (as much as 9 to 12 points in recent polls) and that's being written off as a loss per Ken Mehlman's comments on Meet the Press last Sunday.

So they're really, really getting desperate in Virginia (where George "macaca" Allen is treading water) and Tennessee. So desperate, in fact, that they've decided to throw caution to the wind and engage in some blatant racist pandering in the Ford-Corker race.

Now, the ad in question is nowhere near as racist as, say Willie Horton or Helms-Gantt (the most despicable ad of my lifetime, hands down). But really, short of painting someone in blackface and showing them cashing a welfare check while eating watermelon, nothing could be more racist than Helms-Gantt.

Nevertheless, this RNC ad from Tennessee shouldn't feel too bad. It's still really racist! Top work, guys.

Can you believe there are still two more weeks in which this can get worse? I'm really afraid that by early November they'll be making ads that say "Look, if you don't vote Republican, negroes are going to rape your daughter and Jews are going to sacrifice your sons for their heathen blood rituals."

YOUR VALUABLE WEB-BROWSING TIME

Ennoble your internet-instead-of-working time by devoting 8 minutes of your life to watching this.

The Iraqi Army - standing up so we can stand down!^(tm)

Freedom is on the march!^(tm)

We're winning!^(tm)

WELL, I DO HAVE A BIRTHDAY COMING UP...

Cost: $6000
Composition: solid steel
Weight: ~400 pounds
Practicality: nil
Being able to do this: priceless

Why play a bass drum when you could be playing a bass drum that's audible from space?

IT'S TRUE. THE MAN LOVES MCDONALD'S.

I want you all to know that I had an opportunity to be in this man's video and I turned it down. Given that the only other person in the video is a talking hamburger puppet, it looks like everyone else turned down the opportunity too.

IF THEY GET ANY MORE SUBTLE, THEY'LL DISAPPEAR

On the heels of yesterday's post re: the phenomenal level of subtlety among right-wingers, I present some comments from our Vice President.

He offers his standard homage to tax cuts, a warning about how terrorists are still trying desperately “to cause mass death here in the United States” and a derisive cataloging of the various “Dean Democrats,” congressmen including Charles B. Rangel of New York, Henry A. Waxman of California and Barney Frank of Massachusetts, whose influence would grow if the apocalypse came and Democrats took over Congress.

The crowd boos. “Don’t hold back,” Mr. Cheney urges.

The crowd laughs.

For those of you who aren't familiar with these more-obscure members of Congress, let me summarize what just happened here. The Vice-President, who I believe is a white guy, stood up in front of a room full of white Christian rednecks in Kansas and told them that if the Republicans lose control of Congress it will hand the nation over to Rangel (black), Waxman (Jewish), and Frank (gay).

Once again, so subtle! Too subtle! Stop with the subtle, it hurts! And so plausibly deniable! "What do you mean? I just picked those three names at random!" There was no intent on our Vice President's part, of course, to gain any mileage from rural redenecked Kansans' feelings about blacks, Jews, and homosexuals. None. In fact, the Vice President isn't even sure how Republican Kansans feel about those groups. Do they dislike them or something?

I can't tell if this is a 2006 midterm election or the 1952 Alabama governor's race.

SOME MOTHERFUCKERS ARE ALWAYS TRYIN'....

...to ice skate uphill.

Blade's going to jail! Cue Stephen Dorff: "You used to be the Daywalker. Now look at you. You're a little bitch."

SUBTLETY

You have to hand it to the far right. If nothing else, they're phenomenally subtle.

Case in point: as the Republican loss of power in the House appears inevitable, the NRCC, the RNC, and assorted other right-wing blowhards have started trying to turn the election into a referendum on Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House. Part and parcel of this strategy is frequently using the "San Francisco liberal" epithet at every possible opportunity.

Now, Nancy Pelosi is an idiot. Approximately 90 seconds of conversation is more than enough to exhaust her knowledge of any single issue. But in this case I'm more bemused by the Republicans' "clever" rhetorical strategy than I am turned off by Pelosi.

"San Francisco liberal?" Get it? GET IT? (*nudge* *wink*). We know you rural folk don't like them "San Francisco" types! Isn't it awesome how well that term allows you to feign ignorance when people call you a homophobe?

Why, whoever said anything about gays? We were just talking about those "San Francisco" liberals! Hee hee!

Cute. So cute.

THAT DARNED LIBERAL MEDIA

Here's a story that the raging-liberal American media has done an excellent job of sweeping under the rug to appease the higher-ups in the Pentagon. Apparently the military has devised a new way to stop the reporting of unfavorable information: killing journalists.

Now, it's a bit hypocritical to suddenly be up in arms over the deaths of western journalists at the hands of the US military; they've been lighting up middle eastern journalists by the dozen for three years now. Nevertheless it's pretty shocking to see how the Department of Defense allows its American Heroes to murder journalists for having the gall to actually do investigative journalism (i.e., anything beyond sitting in the Green Zone and regurgitating Pentagon press releases). Top work, guys! These "accidents" have a way of "happening," after all.

THE ANGEL GETS ITS WINGS

We're a real band now. After 5 years, we have finally got around to acquiring t-shirts. Buy one (bottom left of the store page). They're reasonably priced, suited for use as cleaning rags, they make great gifts, and they comply with anti-toplessness regulations in all 50 states (and Puerto Rico).

Yes, we'll come up with something that's actually funny next time

Buy a shirt or I'll make 110 dead bodies turn up in Baghdad tomorrow. Oh wait, that'll happen anyway. For the next four years, apparently. But don't let that change the fact that you need to buy a shirt.

FLACCIDITY

On the topic of this nuclear test, let me do a little disclosure and say that I am unhealthily obsessed with nuclear weapons and the Cold War. I have 100 Suns as a coffee table book. One of my favorite films is Trinity and Beyond (mit Shatner und Teller!). I've read On the Beach, Warday, and Canticle for Liebowitz a few too many times.

That said, this test was a dud. I'm no expert, but given the reported magnitude of the geological disturbance (variously reported between 3.47 and 4.2 Richter) it was either a phenomenally small bomb or a fizzle on a larger device. Based on a rather casual perusal of the history of underground testing (and yes, I have that site bookmarked) it appears that my suspicion is not totally without merit.

And people way smarter than me are already saying the same thing. So the DPRK may have violated the first rule of gunboat diplomacy - when using weapon tests as saber-rattling, make sure the fucking thing works. But in the long run this doesn't mean much. The gap between partially detonated nuke and functional one is small. It is rumored that they were refining plutonium for an implosion weapon, but if they have the raw materials the average college engineering student could put together a less-complicated (and less-powerful, but simpler to produce) gun-style bomb.

DEFENDING THE WORLD FROM YELLOWCAKE

Well, to absolutely no one's surprise, the DPRK is now nukeular. Good thing we've spent the last 3 years pissing away our resources and credibility in Iraq. After all, we had some very reliable Russian intelligence (which turned out to be forged, of course) indicating that they were trying to buy low-grade enriched uraniaum from the Sudan. And aluminum tubes. TUBES, people. Tubes. That's some serious shit.

That obviously posed a much more serious threat than North Korea's real, honest-to-god nuclear weapons program at Yongbon, the existence of which was confirmed during Clinton's first term.

For the record, I hope you're all aware that North Korean nuclear weapons pose no direct threat to the United States. That is, they don't have the capability to deliver them to the lower 48. The Nodong-2 (Ahahaha. No dong. Whee.) is a modified Scud missile, meaning it's about as accurate as a medieval catapult and has barely as much range. The Taepodong-2 is three-stage and has theoretical range to hit the US, but it's yet to experience a successful test. So North Korean ballistic missile technology is just about to the point American technology reached in 1948. Good work, retards.

So the "threat" to the United States is minimal. But Japan, South Korea, Southeast Asia, and American soil in the Pacific rim....that's another story altogether. They might want to stock up on SPF 100,000 sunblock.

Bravo, George. Thanks for being officially asleep at the switch on this one.

SMOKIN' POLL

There's only one thing a blogger can do in response to a post that bores the living shit out of everyone who lays eyes on it - do a follow-up a few months later.

So now that the primaries are over, let's take another look at them there Senate races. I'll take a look at my predictions from May, make fun of them where appropriate, and talk about where we stand for November 8. Please note that I'm getting poll numbers from a number of excellent sources of aggregated public opinion research, including this one, Rasmussen, and Real Clear.

Overview
Discussing how things don't look to rosy for the GOP at this point is fruitless, breeds over-confidence, and promotes eventual disappointment. Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity. Don't forget that about 35% of this country will vote Republican no matter what. Dennis Hastert could go on C-SPAN and snort lines of coke off a 14 year-old page's ass and he'd still get a few hundred thousand pro-life votes.

So don't get cocky.

That said, Republicans in every close Senate race are losing. But polls are a cruel mistress. Let's see where the individual races stand.

Utterly Pointless Races

Indiana - Dick Lugar. (R) Unopposed.

Hawaii - Daniel Akaka. (D) Weakly opposed after crushing a primary challenger.

California - Dianne Feinstein (D). Yep.

New York - Hilary Clinton. Every year the GOP puts up a fuss about some great challenger for NY's Senate seats, and it never happens.

Massachusetts - Ted Kennedy. Lifetime appointment.

Delaware - Tom Carper (D), former Governor, a lock for re-election.

Wyoming - Craig Thomas (R) is a lock.

Utah - Orrin Hatch (R) is essentially unopposed.

Wisconsin - Herb Kohl (D) has more money than God and is nearly as popular.

Arizona - John Kyl (R) has a decent opponent but will not blow it.

Mississippi - Trent Lott (R) is the only person who can sink Trent Lott.

Texas - Kay Bailey Hutchinson. Try to guess which party she's in.

Connecticut - Joe Lieberman. Wow. Looks like I blew this one. In my defense, let me point out that in the last 50 years of American politics, not one previously-elected (that is, not appointed) incumbent Senator has lost to a primary challenger in his own party. Not one. So as much as Lieberman blows, it was realistic to expect that he would hang on. Well, I guess he just blows that much and more. We'll talk about this race below with the toss-ups.

Safe, but not 100%
These races feature incumbents that are somewhat safe but have either strong challengers or could be in trouble if the GOP suffers too much at the national level.

Washington - Maria Cantwell (D) is widely known to be a very weak incumbent, but in a Democratic-leaning year and in a liberal state she should be able to hang on. Challenger Mike McGavick is a multi-millionaire and is throwing everything he can into this race, but most polls have him 10 points back.

Nevada - John Ensign (R) is pretty safe, but the demographics of the state are changing so radically (and rapidly) that no incumbent can take things for granted. Jimmy Carter's son (!!!) Jack is the challenger, and he's actually pulling close to the MOE in recent polls. Looks like Ensign holds on, though.

New Mexico - The state isn't terribly liberal, but Jeff Bingaman (D) scared off the strong GOP challenger (Heather Wilson, Congresswoman) and is running against a punching bag Allen McCullough. Bingaman walks.

Nebraska - Ben Nelson (D) is about as liberal as Tucker Carlson, but Bush's utter stupidity - naming popular Nebraska Governor Mike Johanns to his cabinet - took care of Nelson's only real competition.

Michigan - The Democratic iron grip on the state is fading, but Debbie Stabenow (D) scared off potential opponents by winning a brutal race back in 2000. Mike Bouchard has done his damnest but still trails by about 8 points - and that was before Congressman Boy Ass came up.

N. Dakota - Kent Conrad (D) walks. I can't believe the GOP can't win in this state. What the fuck.

West Virginia - Robert Byrd (D) is 89 and still a lock. Thirty point lead.

Florida - Bill Nelson (D) was shitting himself in fear until he realized that his likely opponent (thanks to a couple million she inherited from her daddy) is the hideous Katherine Harris. She is this year's Alan Keyes. Nelson by about 30 points.

Virginia - George "I hate the negroes" Allen (R) was doing alright until the whole "macaca" thing. Smart thinking, Georgie. You're a real rocket scientist. The question now is whether the DNC and DSCC can close the deal. If I were Chuck Schumer, I'd be pissing money into this race. The national party has had a lot of words of support for Webb (a quality candidate who was polling about 40% even before the incident) but what he really needs is for them to send him Ryder trucks full of money. Latest polls are dead-even. Remember that scene in Return of the King where the big war elephant is stumbling around while King Theoden keeps yelling "BRING HIM DOWN! BRING HIM DOWN!"? That's what I picture when I see this race. If the DSCC is relentless, they can bring Allen down.

Maine - Olympia Snowe (R). This race didn't become competitive like I suspected.

Incumbents in Trouble
This election features an uncharacteristically high number of incumbents in serious trouble. A few are actually underdogs in their respective races, and the rest are burning through their state's supply of Tums and Early Times whiskey.

Montana - Conrad Burns (R) is fucked. He trails Jon Tester - and you heard it here first, he's a future Presidential candidate - by 7 points. More importantly, he's lost ground steadily over a period of about 10 weeks. Burns is one of the most heavily involved Senators in the Jack Abramoff lobbying mess. The Governor and Burns' fellow Senator (Max Baucus) are Democrats. Tester had the quote of Election 2006 when Burns started needling him as "soft on terror" - "Let me be clear in that I don't intend to soften the Patriot Act. I intend to repeal it." The Republicans are losing the mountain west.

Ohio - Mike DeWine (R) is the wrong man in the wrong place. GOP Governor Bobby Taft has been indicted, GOP Congressman Bob Ney has been indicted and disgraced, and now the GOP Page scandal. It's just going to be too much for him. He's already trailing popular black Congressman Sherrod Brown (but within the MOE) and recent days' events will only make things worse. The national Democratic party should take notes on how Brown has successfully tied DeWine to President Bush as the latter sinks like a stone. He's like Tester - another guy who responds to the "soft on national security" accusations with a big Fuck You. If Brown turns out black urban voters, this could be ugly for DeWine.

Pennsylvania - Rick Santorum (R) has never really been in this race, which is very odd for an incumbent. Not only is he "in trouble" but he's actually the significant underdog. Polling indicates a consistent 12-15% advantage for his opponent, popular state political mainstay Bob Casey. Santorum's re-election would actually be an upset at this point.

Missouri - Jim Talent (R) is now officially in a toss-up race. His problem is that he is virtually anonymous, even in his own state. His challenger (Claire McCaskill) is mediocre, but 3rd-party candidate Frank Gilmore is hurting Talent among suburban Republicans. This is another race in which the DNC needs to pour money. It's basically two bad candidates and it will come down to who turns out more of the base. My money is on McCaskill unless Gilmore drops out, which looks unlikely. He loathes Talent and won't do much to help him.

Rhode Island - Lincoln Chaffee's (R) luck may finally run out. He nearly lost to a far-right challenger in the primary and now he trails popular Democratic AG Sheldon Whitehouse in a very liberal state. Chaffee has always lived on a razor's edge, convincing RI voters to ignore the national GOP and pay attention to his moderate positions. Whitehouse, however, is getting a lot of mileage out of the "a vote for Chaffee helps Bush and Frist" tactic. Chaffee has less than stellar backing from the national GOP.

Open Seats
The following races feature no incumbent. For the most part they are middle-of-the-road states, which guarantees that almost all of the open seat races will be barn-burners.

Tennessee - Bill Frist (R) is retiring to begin sucking James Dobson's wang in preparation for 2008, and surprisingly the GOP doesn't seem to have given much thought to grooming his replacement. Chattanooga mayor Bob Corker, the default GOP nominee, and Harold Ford, Jr. have been in a statistical dead-heat for some time. Ford is not only a rising star in the national Democratic party but he's also one of the state's most popular and magnetic politicians. This is really just too close to call. National celebrities (Cheney, Gore, etc) are starting to make their appearances. Ford has Memphis and most of the western half of the state. That may be enough.

Minnesota - Mark Dayton (D) has become a punchline in the state and is therefore retiring. State's Attorney Amy Klouchbar is the nominee against ultra-conservative Congressman Mark Kennedy. Talk about two shitty candidates vying to replace a shitty Senator. Klouchbar is a nobody, but this is a historically liberal state that voted for Kerry (hell, they voted for Mondale) and I can't see Kennedy carrying the Twin Cities. Recent polls, which are no doubt exaggerated, show Klouchbar ahead by 18 points despite having no recognizable or noteworthy characteristics.

Vermont - Local political god Jim Jeffords (I) is retiring, but House independent and liberal Bernie Sanders (I) is a virtual lock to step up to the Senate and take his place. His only serious challenger is a Democrat.

Maryland - Paul Sarbanes (D) retired. I called NAACP head Kwesi Mfume a lock to win the nomination to replace him. He lost. Mfume's hanky-panky scandals finally sank him. Ben Cardin is a weaker replacement, and the GOP is trotting out one of its strongest challengers, black Lt. Governor Mike Steele. Steele has tremendous popularity on a personal level, but the question is whether he can overcome A) being in a very liberal state and B) the albatross of Bush and the national GOP. This is a real ugly race. The RNC ran a patently offensive radio ad (calling the KKK a Democratic organization and claiming MLK was a Republican) that infuriated Steele and other black voters, but a Cardin aide also was found to make some George Allen-like racist comments online. Whoops. This has become a nasty, nasty race. Cardin looks like the winner but I would not count Steele out.

New Jersey - Jon Corzine (D) is now Governor, emerging victorious from the most brutal, ugly, and distasteful race in American political history two years ago. His appointed Senate fill-in Bob Menendez is technically an incumbent in this race, but he has never stood for statewide election before. Menendez should be walking in this liberal state, but there are two problems. First, his opponent is Tom Kean Jr., son of extraordinarily popular former governor Tom Kean. Second, Menendez is a piece of shit. He's a dirty, corrupt little thug who has run an amateurish campaign. Corzine didn't put much thought into appointing a replacement. Kean wins unless the burdens of the national GOP become too great - and they might.

Connecticut - Joe Lieberman (D) lost but won't quit. The lost fact in this fiasco is that Lieberman said he will not switch parties if he wins. So either way the Democrats retain this seat (at least for the purposes of their majority, since Joe votes like a Republican). The media coverage makes the odd assumption that legions of Republicans are going to tip the balance to Lieberman, but it's fuckin' Connecticut. It's like 80% Democratic. There aren't an awful lot of Republicans in play, and a consistent 10% of them are still polling for GOP Al Schlesinger. Do not be surprised if Lamont wins in another upset, but don't bet money on it.

Final Thoughts

Pointless races - 6 GOP, 6 Democratic

Safe, but not 100% - Time for some predictions. OK. Let's assume Ensign holds in NV and George Allen somehow hangs on to VA. That gives us 3 GOP, 7 Democratic.

Incumbents in trouble - Brown, Tester, Casey, and Whitehouse defeat DeWine, Burns, Santorum, and Chaffee. I'm being real generous and giving MO to Talent even though he trails at the moment. 1 GOP, 4 Democratic.

Open seats - Let's give TN to Corker; it's a conservative state and Ford's lead is slim. I think Kean will continue to out-campaign Menendez as well. Dayton, Sanders, and either CT Democrat look like winners. Cardin has MD and should be able to hold it. Ford (TN), Menendez (NJ) and Steele (MD) are all still in it. But for now, let's call this 2 GOP, 4 Democratic.

That results in totals of 12 GOP, 21 Democratic. The GOP gains NJ, while the Democrats pick up PA, OH, RI, and MT. Which would give you a Senate of 52 GOP, 48 Democrats (including Sanders-VT and Lieberman-CT with the Democrats).

However.

Please note that it is only with great hesitation and in fear of being excessively partisan that I gave MO to Talent. McCaskill has the lead right now, as does Menendez in NJ. Harold Ford also leads Corker in TN. By calling those races Republican at the moment, I'm trying to balance out recent anecdotal examples of polling that is overly favorable to the Democratic Party. But if the polls are accurate, then it's 51 Democrats and 49 GOP. And let's not forget "Macaca" Allen, who isn't exactly on solid ground....52-48?

Then the real fun begins. The GOP will go absolutely ape-shit putting a full-court press on Ben Nelson (D-NE) and Lieberman (I-CT) to switch parties. Nelson was previously offered a cabinet post in the Bush administration, and we know Lieberman is the White House's pal. If the Senate is either tied or weakly held by the Democrats (a 51-49 scenario) party switching is going to be a real hot topic for a few weeks. If only I could get my article on it published (shameless self promotion).

Comment!

Posted by Ed at 11:43 AM | Permalink | Comments (8)

SAVE YOUR MONEY, FOOL

Woodward's "State of Denial" is by no means a bad book. Nor is it a book you'd fail to find informative and thoughtful. I'm just not convinced that you will learn all that much new information. And there are easier, cheaper, and quicker ways to get yourself all pissed off. Like clicking here. Did it work? Isn't that amazing?

At the risk of getting nasty phone calls from Woodward's lawyers (don't worry guys, this site has like 4 readers), let me spoilerize the book:

1. George W. Bush is completely surrounded with yes-men, and he immediately expunges anyone who questions (or fails to affirm) his pre-programmed conception of reality like a body rejecting a donor organ.

2. Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld are far, far more concerned with handing out war profiteering deals from the "Rebuilding Iraq" cookie jar than they are with the constant stream of contradictory information from people on the ground.

3. The Neocon Economic Year Zero for Iraq plan has very quietly been admitted an abject failure. For example, the book's subjects are shocked to learn that terminating the jobs of 400,000 people who worked for the Iraqi government without offering alternative employment (because Iraq was a lab experiment to show that the private sector will do that, kids!) has resulted in A) abject poverty and B) a whole lot of those destitute people heading over to the insurgent camp so they could be, you know, fed and clothed. And sorry Bob, Naomi Klein nailed this one a long time ago.

Now, did you really not know any of that? Spend your time on the internet doing much more important and hilarious things.

ps - 22 American soldiers, mostly Marines, killed in Iraq in the last 72 hours. But it's alright, killing Zarqawi was the nail in the coffin of the insurgency.

CULTURE OF BOY ASS

Pull up a chair and watch the GOP House leadership try to turn Mark Foley's fiasco into Watergate or Iran-Contra: that is, who knew what and when did they know it?

In essence, Hastert, Reynolds, et al are arguing that they didn't have access to the "sexually explicit" electronic messages Foley sent to underage male pages until after his resignation. Prior to that, they merely knew that he had "overly friendly" communication with the pages. Which is apparently OK.

To sum up: it is alright for a married, 50 year-old Congressman in the party that practically trips over itself bringing up "family values" every 10 minutes to hit on or otherwise get "overly friendly" with 16 year old boys so long as any communication is not sexually explicit. It's OK to be creepy, just don't leave any smoking-gun evidence. Intellectually, this argument (coming forth from Hastert, Boehner, and Reynolds) means that the leadership is not concerned with whether or not Foley's behavior was inappropriate. They were concerned about how much evidence he left behind and whether or not they could safely ignore it. Plausible deniability. Iran-Contra.

This is officially gut-check time for the GOP. Do Republican voters hold their party accountable to the family values they hold dear? Or do they just ignore the fact that their leaders don't give two flying fucks about family values but instead are willing to say, do, and conceal anything and everything in the interest of maintaining power?

I think the answer is obvious - they blame it all on the Democrats and stay the course.

JUST BECAUSE

I think it's clear that we need some sort of official seal. Need no more.