Your generous
donations help keep
this site running.
Visa/MC/PayPal accepted.
At the risk of appearing slightly delusional, allow me to predict the 2008 election. No, not the main Hillary / McCain / Obama / Giuliani fracas, as that field is pretty crowded with wild predictions already. Pundits everywhere are focused on the presidential horserace, but there's going to be a bigger battle fought in 2008 for the Hill.
So I'd much rather attempt to predict the outcome of the Senate.
I'm here in Washington on assignment, my editor having provided me with a ticket to what he swears is the best Thanksgiving party inside the Beltway.
I walk into the entrance lobby, and am immediately confronted by two doors -- one which obviously leads to the main hall, and one prominently marked "The Closet." I shrug off my winter coat, walk over to the closet door, and pull it open.
"Close the door!" yells Mark Foley from deep within. Pastor Ted Haggard steps from the shadows to the doorway and berates me: "Oh, look, it's the Vast Left Wing Media Conspiracy here to shine light into our closet! Don't you have anything better to do?" He slams the door shut in my face.
Sonoma State University have released their annual list of under-reported news stories, somewhat deceptively titled "Top 25 Censored Stories of 2007." This is misleading (since 2007 hasn't even started yet) so either they have learned to see into the future at Sonoma State, or they meant to say "2006." The use of the term "Censored" is also misleading, since none of the stories has gone through the dictionary definition of "censorship," but then the group that puts out this annual list is called "Project Censored," so I guess they get some leeway on that account.
If you're sick of politics and post-election news, check out the Project Censored website. It's a fascinating place to browse around, chock full of stories to either chill your bones or light the fires of rage within. Or you can go straight to their Top 25 page to see this year's crop of stories.
Everyone ready to sing along? All together now...
Happy days are here again
The skies above are clear again
So let's sing a song of cheer again
Happy days are here again
[Click here for a tinkly piano soundtrack to sing along with, ironically enough delivered by your federal tax dollars at work.]
Sorry, I just had to get that out of my system.
Oh, and check out this Tom Toles cartoon -- it's priceless.
But after all the confetti's been swept up and all the victory balloons have shriveled, Democrats need to carefully decide what to do with their newly-won power. The good news is that Nancy Pelosi -- who has lived and breathed politics her entire life -- appears shrewd enough to know what to do, and (more importantly) what not to do.
I have been disappointed by the many pundits who are not willing to put their election predictions up for public display. While there have been exceptions, most commentators are busily hedging bets and couching their predictions in vague and plausibly deniable language, and otherwise running away from the challenge of predicting the outcome of tomorrow's election.
So I am bravely offering my predictions (at the end of this column), and asking you to chime in with your own take on where we will stand, come the morning of November 8th. "Put up or shut up" is the gauntlet I throw down to all and sundry -- rabid lefties, rightwing trolls, and undecided voters (UDVs?) -- all are welcome to predict the makeup of the 110th Congress.
My 2006 Jack O'Lanterns. Spooky, eh?
[Today's column is in two parts -- one frightful tale for each side of the aisle.]
Immediately after the polls close (it seems), the mainstream media will inevitably name one particular group of voters the "deciding factor" in the election. We've already had "soccer moms" and "NASCAR dads." Last time around it was "values voters." The question now is: will 2006 be the "year of the Latino voter?"
The discussion must begin with the admission that these media anointments are (to a debatable degree) a false construct of the media itself. Many have disclaimed the "values voters" announcement from 2004 as being an inaccurate label, or just lazy journalism. The term itself is ridiculous since 100% of voters would likely agree that they have "values" when they vote. It was used as shorthand, perhaps because "Evangelical Christian voters" didn't have the same ring (or might have been considered offensive). It's hard to divine what goes through the minds of the big media editors and producers who come up with these catchy labels.
The voters of California (an extremely blue state) seem to have caught a bad case of Gonorrhea Lectim (pronounced: "gonna re-elect him") when it comes to Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. Sadly, for Democrats, the Governator "will be back." This would have been a more interesting race, though, if Warren Beatty had thrown his hat in the ring as a Democrat.
Think: Battle of the Hollywood Stars!
But Beatty ultimately decided not to run. This seems to be a pattern among showbiz Democrats. There's a real dichotomy between the ultra-liberal entertainment industry, and the fact that almost every Hollywood star that goes into politics is Republican. Consider the following list:
Democrats are barely containing their glee at the Foley follies, and are acting as though their biggest problem is putting enough champagne on ice for their November victory parties. Such complacency is dangerous. They need to remember that just before the scandal broke, Karl Rove was bragging about the October Surprise he's got up his sleeve.
With less than a month to go, Republicans are down -- but not out. Not quite yet.
A word of caution for all on the left who would seize upon the Foley scandal as a way to make political hay: there's a right way and a wrong way to go about it. From what I've read in the blogosphere so far, most are proposing the wrong way.
Sure, you could attack the issue head-on -- by running ads (for instance) with the immortal words of former Louisiana Governor Edwin Edwards: "The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy."
