Associated Press analysis proves that gerrymandering has given the GOP an unfair advantage in many state elections.

Courtesy of AP: 

The AP scrutinized the outcomes of all 435 U.S. House races and about 4,700 state House and Assembly seats up for election last year using a new statistical method of calculating partisan advantage designed to detect potential political gerrymandering. 

The analysis found four times as many states with Republican-skewed state House or Assembly districts than Democratic ones. Among the two dozen most populated states that determine the vast majority of Congress, there were nearly three times as many with Republican-tilted U.S. House districts. 

Traditional battlegrounds such as Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Florida and Virginia were among those with significant Republican advantages in their U.S. or state House races. All had districts drawn by Republicans after the last Census in 2010. 

The AP analysis also found that Republicans won as many as 22 additional U.S. House seats over what would have been expected based on the average vote share in congressional districts across the country. That helped provide the GOP with a comfortable majority that stood at 241-194 over Democrats after the 2016 elections — a 10 percentage point margin in seats, even though Republican candidates received just 1 percentage point more total votes nationwide. 

"The outcome was already cooked in, if you will, because of the way the districts were drawn," said John McGlennon, a longtime professor of government and public policy at the College of William & Mary in Virginia who ran unsuccessfully for Congress as a Democrat in the 1980s. 

A separate statistical analysis conducted for AP by the Princeton University Gerrymandering Project found the extreme Republican advantages in some states were no fluke. The Republican edge in Michigan's state House districts had only a 1-in-16,000 probability of occurring by chance; in Wisconsin's Assembly districts, there was a mere 1-in-60,000 likelihood of it happening randomly, the analysis found.

The Republicans have old fashioned, anti-progressive policy ideas, and they are facing a growing demographic that rejects their party out of hand.

The only way they can compete is by cheating.

And that has now become the go to strategy for both local and national elections.

No wonder they are not bothered by the knowledge that their party's nominee only won the presidency with the help of a foreign government that despises everything for which America stands.

Here is the old McCain campaign ad with subtitles in Spanish, that the new McCain campaign had pulled from YouTube.

Courtesy of The Hill:  

A campaign ad for Sen. John McCain's 2010 reelection bid was blocked on YouTube earlier this week, per a request from the Arizona Republican's 2016 reelection campaign. 

The ad was uploaded by the campaign of McCain challenger Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick (D-Ariz.), and it was unmodified except for the addition of Spanish subtitles. The spot shows McCain walking by the border fence and telling Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu to "complete the danged fence." 

"John McCain is trying to hide his comments and agenda from the Latino community and Arizonans now that he admits he's caught in the 'race of his life,' " said D.B. Mitchell, a Kirkpatrick campaign spokesman.

Now the McCain campaign claims that the reason they blocked the ad was due to a copyright violation.

But it that were true then why is the ad back up now?

You know if I were a suspicious feller I might just think that ole John McCain is a little embarrassed by the anti-immigrant fervor he embraced in 2010, and worried that it might do his campaign serious damage in a more enlightened 2016 campaign season.

You know, if I was a suspicious feller.

Samantha Bee talks about "numbnut" Republican laws and takes Democrats to the woodshed for sleeping through the 2010 midterms.

Courtesy of Raw Story: 

“After the 2010 landslide, policies started happening to states the way sex happens to people who drink with Bill Cosby.” Bee shows maps that color in the states that have done the most damage since 2010 restricting freedoms for everyone but gun owners. “No wonder Democrats are so hung up on appointing the next Supreme Court Justice. They need him to strike down all the sh*tty state laws that might not have passed if they’d bothered to vote in 2010.” 

Bee closes with this: “Look, I know state elections aren’t fun. They don’t have cool concerts or dank memes. But, voting in them is important. Just think of it like a mammogram. It’s painful and inconvenient, but you gotta do it. Because early prevention prevents a lot less than late stage treatment.” 

You know I totally feel Samantha Bee's pain here.

I personally feel that there are far more likely Democratic voters in this country than Republican voters by quite a large margin, but they are almost catatonic during midterm elections and seem to think that if there is no headliner to capture their attention that they can skip the party altogether without any real consequence.

But the consequences are all around us and we need to find a way to inspire, incite, and perhaps even frighten liberals to vote in every single, Municipal, State, and Federal election.

If we really want to make this country a better place we have to do the work to make that happen.

And don't forget your response to somebody working hard to keep you from exercising your rights as an American should be to work even harder to exercise those rights.

Samantha Bee reminds us of the most important election of our lifetime and how most of us missed it.

She is absolutely right about this.

Keep this in mind when 2018 rolls around.

If Democrats keeps missing these midterm elections then we are NEVER going to get the government that we want, or the government that we deserve.

Finally, Track Palin's lack of combat experience is being discussed openly by news outlets.

I went back and researched it, the first time that I shared the discharge papers above was back in November of 2010, over five long years ago.

The papers had been sent to me my a loyal reader who had simply filed a records request.

However though we discussed it here in quite some detail, and even though I posted it several more times, it did not receive much response on the interwebs.

However THAT has suddenly changed.

As of today this document has spread far and wide, and Sarah Palin's claims about her son's service are under a great deal of scrutiny.

Here are just a few places that have posted the discharge papers:

Addicting Info.

Winning Democrats.

Bipartisan Report.

Inquisitr.

And one time Fox News host Alan Colmes.

In fact many of these folks are offering a lightly modified version of the documents, which point out exactly what is missing:

You know I often receive demands that I "release everything that I know" to "bring Palin down for good."

As I have exhaustively explained numerous times that is not how any of this works.

For one thing I have shared most of what I know here on IM, and as you have seen that only has an impact once Palin herself does something which brings attention to it.

As for what remains, that will ONLY be effective coming out of the mouths of the people who were the witnesses to the events, or cover ups.

And as I have explained they simply to not want to upend their lives unless there is a compelling reason to do so.

Currently I am still waiting for the fact that Cathy Baldwin Johnson was working at Providence Hospital in Anchorage the night that she supposedly helped Sarah Palin give birth at Mat-Su Regional to finally get the attention it deserves as well.

But like I said that will probably only happen once Palin herself does something that gets people talking and investigating her lies once again.

Well personally though I am pretty satisfied with the truth about Track getting out there, I certainly hope I don't have to wait another five years for every other scandal we know of to finally see the light of day.

Look folks Sarah Palin shared something else on Facebook that turns out to be false. It must be Thursday.

So the above article was posted by Palin (Or more probably her ghostwriter.) yesterday.

However as with most things Palin it's mostly bullshit.

This according to Snopes:

Cpl. Duggan's attacker, Tracey Attaway, was jailed and charged with armed robbery, aggravated assault and possession of a knife in the commission of a crime, and in October 2011 he was sentenced to life in prison. (Attaway faced the maximum sentence on all assault and theft charges because he was a convicted felon with 30 prior arrests on his record.) 

However, what makes this incident an enduring item of interest on the Internet is an account of the crime which was circulated via e-mail in December 2010 (reproduced as the first item in the Examples section above) and presented as a 27 November Associated Press account of the incident. While that account was indeed based on an Associated Press news article, it contained a paragraph not found in the original: 

"The suspect was transported to the local hospital with two broken arms, a broken leg, possible broken ribs, assorted lacerations and bruises he obtained when he fell trying to run after stabbing the Marine."

(The audience is supposed to read between the lines in the preceding text and conclude that the suspect did not fall but rather was beaten by the other three Marines.) 

None of the news accounts, police reports, or interviews about this incident indicated that Attaway was injured, either while being subdued or afterwards. That bit was pure invention on the part of some person who inserted the additional paragraph into the news account, thereby transforming it into a "Don't mess with the Marines" object lesson. 

So not only is this story at least five years old, but the part that was supposed to impress about our military is a complete fabrication.

Kind of like Palin herself. 

An IM source from the past revealed.

Recently I happened to stumble across a post I wrote way back in 2010.

It was a very informative post, but at the time I had to keep my source secret because he was not ready to come out publicly. Which of course was not uncommon back then.

However this source, Sarah Palin's head of security Gary Wheeler, DID come out publicly in order to contribute to Joe's book "The Rogue."

It dawned on me while reading this old post, that knowing who had been my source really gave it much more of an impact.

So I thought I would go ahead and reprint the entire post right here for all of you to enjoy again, with the added knowledge that the person who provided the information is no longer just a shadowy figure.

It's kind of long so I will place it behind this page break in the interest of space. Enjoy!

Support for the tea Party hits an all time low. Well finally some good news.

Courtesy of Gallup:  

Americans' support for the Tea Party has dropped to its lowest level since the movement emerged on the national political scene prior to the 2010 midterm elections. Seventeen percent of Americans now consider themselves Tea Party supporters, and a record 54% say they are neither supporters nor opponents.

The Tea Party emerged in 2009 in opposition to the fledgling Obama administration, and many Americans took sides for or against the movement in the midterm elections the next year. Support peaked at 32% in November 2010, just after those elections, in which Tea Party supporters were widely credited with helping the Republican Party gain control of the U.S. House of Representatives.

As support gradually eroded over the next year, opponents of the Tea Party gained the upper hand and have led supporters in all 10 Gallup polls measuring views of the movement since the start of 2012. Since August 2012, support has failed to reach 25%, and it has fallen below 20% in each of the last two polls.

Well that's all good news of course, and it explains why it appears that the moderate Republicans are starting to get the upper hand in the choosing of a new Speaker of House to replace John Boehner.

(Yes I know Paul Ryan sucks, but hey at least it's not Louie Gohmert!)

However here's the part that still bothers me.

If there is still 17% support for the Teabaggers, and 54% who seem agnostic towards them, then that leaves only 29% of us who are openly against them.

That seems like a much too low of a number to me.

I will not be happy until more than two thirds of the American people recognize that the Tea Party is made up of a bunch of ignorant racists, who could not pass a test on US History with a gun held to their head. 

SarahPAC released this video bragging about her political impact just a week after Palin was released from her Fox News contract.

Okay first off that is a really poorly made video.

And secondly some of the quotes don't even refer to her by name, so they could really be about anybody.

It also should be mentioned that much of what is shown is from way back in 2010 when Palin actually DID have some political clout.

I think the only people who still think she has any real influence on politics, are those who realize that her association with a candidate damages them, and her constantly dwindling handful of Palin-bots who simply refuse to see the evidence right in front of them.

Five Thirty Eight has even charted the demise of her popularity: 

Palin’s net favorability rating (favorable minus unfavorable) among all Americans1 has dropped more than 40 percentage points, from +18 percentage points to -24 points by mid-2014, according to a local regression. Meanwhile, her net favorability rating among Republicans has declined more than 55 percentage points, from +83 percentage points to +27 points by mid-2013. 

Palin has receded from the national spotlight to the extent that we have very little data since 2012. No live interview poll has asked Americans about her favorable rating in almost a year.

The fact is that today she is nothing. And to be honest that is actually an insult to nothing.

And no shoddily prepared video is going to suddenly make that untrue. 

Guess who made Time Magazine's Top 100 Influential People? And then guess who didn't.

Julianne Moore as described by fashion designer, director, and now Time Magazine contributor Tom Ford: 

Fearless. That is the first word that comes to mind when I think of Julianne Moore. Of course, the words beautiful, elegant, smart, loyal and steadfast can be used to describe her too. 

I was fortunate enough to witness Julianne’s incredible skill as an actress firsthand when we worked together on a film that I directed called A Single Man. I remember looking through the camera lens before the first take and realizing that she projects something very rare: an actual luminosity that is dazzling in life and that can be captured on film. This is the difference between an actor and a star. 

Julianne’s character off set is just as magnetic as her onscreen presence. She has an inner beauty that will never fade. She is down to earth and real. For my 50th birthday we went white-water rafting in Idaho, where we had no baths or toilets for five days. She seemed just as comfortable in the wilderness, stripped of the trappings of stardom, as she is in front of the camera. 

Julianne is one of the greatest actresses working today, but she’s also a wonderful human being. I am honored to call her my friend.

Well that is a rather glowing description. However it seems to fit the talented individual we have been hearing about for all of these years.

There are equally glowing descriptions (And some not so glowing descriptions.) of 99 more influential Titans, Pioneers, Artists, Leaders, and Icons. These include such eclectic choices such as Lorne Michaels, Janet Yellen, Emma Watson, Amy Schumer, Chris Pratt, Tim McGraw, John Oliver, Angela Merkel, Vladimir Putin, Elizabeth Warren, Hillary Clinton, Kim Jong Un, and even, believe it or not, Kim Kardashian along with many others.

However one name missing from the list, as it has since 2010, is Sarah Louise Palin.

You know it's almost as if constantly teasing that you might consider running for high office, and then never actually going through with it, while repeatedly taking to Facebook in an obvious attempt get attention by attacking more accomplished people than yourself, over time diminishes your credibility in some way.

But that would mean the entire Sarah Palin model for continued relevance was flawed in some way.

And that can't be right. Can it?

A blast from the past. Christine O'Donnell is being sued for breaking campaign finance laws in 2010.

Courtesy of HuffPo:  

The Federal Election Commission filed suit Monday against former Republican Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell for allegedly using campaign funds for personal purposes. 

The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for Delaware, claims that O'Donnell and then-campaign treasurer Matthew Moran illegally used $20,000 in funds raised for her 2010 Senate campaign to pay for her personal rent and utility bills during and after the election. The watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington originally filed a complaint with the FEC containing those allegations in September 2010. 

From 2010 through 2011, the complaint alleges, O'Donnell and Moran spent at least $20,000 on rent and utilities at O'Donnell's townhouse in Greenville, Delaware, which doubled as her campaign headquarters. Federal campaign finance laws forbid the use of campaign funds to pay rent on a personal residence. 

Lawyers for the FEC ask the court to force O'Donnell to repay the $20,000 in expenses spent on her housing, and to find an appropriate civil penalty for both O'Donnell and Moran for breaking the campaign finance law. The suit also notes that the FEC has attempted to settle with O'Donnell and Moran for payment of the $20,000, but was rebuffed.

There was a time when Christine O'Donnell was my favorite incompetent teabagger politician, and I wrote about her often.

But then she lost to Chris Coons, which was appropriate, and I stopped giving a shit.

However seeing her in the news due to a lawsuit for breaking campaign finance rules, just made her more interesting again.

And let's face it the news could be worse. At least she's not a witch.

Though come to think of it being a witch and NOT a criminal who misused campaign funds given to her by ignorant under educated morons who actually thought she could be a Senator might be better.

The duplicity of Lisa Murkowski, and why moderates should wash their hands of her.

This editorial was written by Fairbanks resident and political activist Sean McGuire. And it comes to us courtesy of the Fairbanks Newsminer:  

Let’s go back four years to August 2010. In what many view as the biggest upset in Alaska political history, Sen. Murkowski was defeated in the primary by the far-right candidate, Joe Miller. She was beaten fair and square. 

What did she do? She spent the next two-plus months running around Alaska pleading with Native Alaskans and moderate Democrats to save her political life with a write-in campaign. She promised she would represent those moderate voters’ interests. Sen. Mark Begich didn’t attempt to interfere; he let Alaskans decide who they wanted. In the end, Natives and Democrats did indeed save her. 

During the next six years, Alaska’s two senators apparently worked well together, collaborating on many issues and voting the same way more than any other split-party senators in the nation. 

Fast forward four years to this election. Sen. Begich, the champion of the Natives — overwhelmingly endorsed by AFN, and a true moderate — was fighting for his political life. 

What did Sen. Murkowski do? When Begich was most vulnerable, she stuck a knife in his back, going on TV and saying she didn’t have a good partner in the Senate. And just as dishonorably, she betrayed all those moderate Democrats who had come to her rescue when her political life was hanging by a thread. 

Politics is a nasty business. But in my opinion, the dishonor Sen. Murkowski displayed is several levels deep. It’s not only that she betrayed those who saved her. There’s a longstanding tradition in the U.S. Senate: you don’t turn on your colleague in an election.

There's more but I think that this really captures the meat of Mr. McGuire's point.

And it is quite a valid point.

Murkowski has demonstrated herself to be a cagey political operative, who quickly calculates where she needs to position herself in order to retain her Senate seat and garner support for the future.

When she needed moderates, she was moderate. And when she believes she needs conservatives, well...she IS still daddy's little girl.

Clearly she recognized that the Republicans would most likely capture the Senate in this elections cycle, and positioned herself accordingly. I am sure in her mind Begich's lost Senate seat is simply an acceptable casualty in her strategy to gain more power.

And she has indeed gained that power.

She will now be given the chairmanship of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, which will allow her to once again campaign for the opening of ANWR, even as we are faced with information about climate change which should dissuade any reasonable person from even entertaining such an idea. (To be fair Mark Begich also promoted the opening of ANWR. You really cannot get elected up here if you are against it.)

The President will of course veto the proposal and it will never happen, but it is once again a move that puts her in alignment with the Republican platform.

And there she will remain right up until it works against her in retaining her seat, and then my friends we will see the Murkowski's political chameleon act once again.

We deserve better that is for sure, however I reiterate once again that Murkowski will undoubtedly hold onto her seat right up until she no longer wants it, or until some unforeseen scandal knocks her out of the running. 

Because that's just the way things work in Alaska.

The Washington Post analyzes Sarah Palin's endorsement record this year. Can you say "sucks balls?"

Courtesy of the Washington Post: 

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) was in Kansas on Thursday, helping incumbent Sen. Pat Roberts (R) rally his base in the face of a surprisingly tough reelection fight against independent candidate Greg Orman. The question that immediately came to mind, though, was: Can Palin help? 

There's a conventional wisdom that what Palin brings to a race is grassroots energy, particularly among more conservative voters. In a midterm election that most indicators suggest will see heavier Republican turnout than two years ago, getting Palin to work that magic on Kansas conservatives seems like a winning strategy. 

But is the conventional wisdom correct? Or, more to the point from Roberts' standpoint: Can she deliver a victory?

The Post then goes on to share this graphic which indicates how Palin's endorsements have fared during the last three election cycles.

Ouch!

The Post then goes on to sum up the article like this: 

When Palin's candidates have won, they've won big:  

Sasse and Ernst, for example, each won their primaries by over 25 points. And when her candidates have lost, they've generally lost pretty handily, too. 

Experienced political watchers can read something else into this data point: In races that aren't as close, Palin's endorsement doesn't mean as much. Political endorsements aren't unimportant, but they aren't going to give a candidate a ten-point bump in the final results. Which means that it's hard to judge the influence of Palin, if any, on these races. Or, put another way: Even in the wins, Palin's influence probably didn't play a significant role.

Personally I think it's even worse than the  Washington Post is indicating.

I think that when the candidate is well ahead a Palin endorsement does not either give them a bump or kneecap them. But if it is close, it seems to me that Palin usually provides the final kiss of death.

Which by the way is not particularly good news for the next victim candidate on her list:  

Republican U.S. Senate candidate Rob Maness is getting campaign help this weekend from former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. 

The Maness campaign says Palin will visit a Jefferson Parish restaurant on Saturday to eat alligator with Maness. The event is a nod to a Maness TV ad that compares his campaign against two members of Congress to facing down alligators in a Louisiana swamp.

Wait, Palin is going to devour cold blooded reptiles with Manness? 

Isn't that cannibalism?

Alaskan Senate hopeful Joe Miller issues statement agreeing with Sarah Palin. Well this ought to be interesting.

Courtesy of HuffPo: 

Joe Miller, who is running in the Republican primary for the opportunity to challenge Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska), has called for President Barack Obama's impeachment, his campaign said this week. 

"Sarah Palin is right; it’s time to impeach this President for dereliction of duty, selectively enforcing the law, and usurping powers that the Constitution does not authorize," he said in a press release. "He is willfully undermining the rule of law and creating chaos."

Some have suggested that the reason that Sarah Palin has NOT endorsed anybody in Alaska since 2010, nor donated any money to an Alaskan campaign, is because she has not yet made up her mind.

But that's not the reason.

The reason is because even somebody as incredible thick headed as she clearly is recognizes that in Alaska her support would be the kiss of death for a candidate.

If she even hints that she is on Miller's side, or Sullivan's, or Treadwell's, she will doom any chances that they will emerge victorious.

However if I did not know any better it almost seems like Miller is angling for her support, which indicates to me that he may be even MORE stupid than the Queen of Stupidity herself.

Here's more from Miller:

"Mark Begich has not even deemed the crisis on our southern border worthy of a press release," he said. "There is no doubt that he is complicit with the President in encouraging and empowering this illegal invasion, both from a policy perspective by voting for amnesty, and by virtue of his refusal to hold Barack Obama accountable for dereliction of duty and usurpation of Congressional authority."

First off that was NOT a vote for amnesty, and second Begich has not issued a press release because Alaskans typically do not give a shit about what happens on the southern border of America.

Those undocumented immigrants rarely make it up here, and if they do it is in such small numbers we don't even notice.

So Miller is arguing a partisan position that might make a big difference to out of state supporters, but mean virtually nothing to the people who will be doing he actual voting.

Hey I hope that Palin actually DOES endorse Miller again, though considering what happened in 2010 that would seem incredibly doubtful, because I would really LOVE to watch him crash and burn again and watch her reputation sink even lower into the abyss right along with his hopes of ever making it to the Senate.

Does that seem wrong?

Sarah Palin hits the campaign trail for Karen Handel. For the second time.

Sarah Palin doing her impression of a deer caught in the headlights of an oncoming car.

Courtesy of the Washington Post:  

Sarah Palin forcefully defended the only woman fighting for the Republican nomination for Georgia’s open Senate seat and hit back Thursday against a rival’s apparent dismissal of Karen Handel’s high school education.

David Perdue, the former Dollar General CEO, said that “there’s a high school graduate in this race, OK? I’m sorry but these issues are so much broader, so complex” as he talked about the economy and the federal deficit during a January meeting captured on video.

Appearing at a county women’s group Thursday, Palin said Perdue’s comments were disappointing and praised Handel’s ability to overcome the struggles of her youth. Handel, a former secretary of state, has said she left an abusive home as a teen, using a message of overcoming obstacles as a key element of her campaigns. 

“She pulled herself up. Nothing was handed to her on a platter, fed to her on a silver spoon,” Palin said of Handel. “For those who would criticize and mock that, it really makes me question their judgment.”

"Oh my God, what's on her head?"

Yes Sarah Palin is very sensitive about people being judged due to a lack of education.

Cannot imagine why.

I think many of you will remember that it was Karen Handel who was behind the Komen for the Cure/Planned Parenthood debacle, and who unsuccessfully ran for Governor of Georgia back in 2010.

Palin showed up for THAT race as well.

Obviously that did not help then, and chances are it will not help this time either, as Handel is one of seven candidates vying for this GOP nomination.

And speaking of not helping, I don't think that whoever did Palin's hair for this event did her any favors either.

I mean seriously does it look like the top hair matches the bottom hair even a little bit?

You would think that if Palin REALLY wanted to help Handel win, that the least she could do was to put on her "going out in public" hair.

Democrats push back on Nate Silver's prediction of a "slight" Republican advantage in 2014.

Courtesy of the National Journal:  

Democrats aren't taking Nate Silver's latest Senate prediction lying down. 

In an unusual step, the executive director of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee on Monday issued a rebuttal the famed statistician's prediction—made a day earlier—that Republicans were a "slight favorite" to retake the Senate. Silver was wrong in 2012, the political committee's Guy Cecil wrote in a memo, and he'll be wrong again in 2014. 

"In fact, in August of 2012 Silver forecast a 61 percent likelihood that Republicans would pick up enough seats to claim the majority," Cecil said. "Three months later, Democrats went on to win 55 seats." 

The DSCC memo took pains to compliment Silver, saying his work at newly launched FiveThirtyEight was "groundbreaking." And the group's main critique—that Silver's model relies on a smattering of haphazard early polling in battleground states—is one that he himself acknowledges is a limitation. 

But the comprehensive pushback from Cecil, the powerful committee's key staffer, is a testament both to the influence Silver wields and the sensitivity of Senate Democrats to the perception they're losing their grip on the upper chamber. Other outlets have suggested similar odds on the Senate, but none have earned this kind of rebuttal.

You know I have to say I am gratified to see the Democrats getting angry and pushing back against this perception that they are not motivated to turn out in 2014.

That is exactly the kind of defiance that we need to hang onto our seats, and perhaps even gain a few more. 

There are some who have suggested that this is just a case of reverse psychology by Silver in order to energize the Democratic base, but I disagree with that.

I don't know if Nate Silver is a religious man or not, but if he is I would bet that he prays to the gods of math, data crunching, and logic.

He is not somebody who would fudge numbers in order to make a point, he has too much respect for them to do that.

So I believe that he believes his calculations are correct.

The only question remaining is are the progressives out there willing to see a replay of 2010, or are they ready to make people like Sarah Palin, Sean Hannity, and now Nate Silver eat crow?

I know my answer.

Sarah Palin thanks everybody for finally paying attention to her. It's been SO very, very long.

Courtesy of the ambulatory bag of rank resentment's Facebook page:  

Thank you so much to every one who joined us yesterday in D.C. It was wonderful meeting so many energized folks at CPAC and many wonderful staff members. Keep the faith and work hard to make a difference! Sincere thanks to the NRA and ACU and all other event organizers who made the conference possible. God bless, and when we meet again next year, let's have an historic election victory to celebrate! 

- Sarah Palin

Yeah I wouldn't start blowing up balloons or renting out the party room yet you Tundra Twattle.

There is much that can happen in this next election cycle, and I am one to think that after 2010 that liberals are far less likely this go around to sit on their asses while conservatives grab up more seats in the Senate and the House.

Palin may be able to hypnotize the Right Wing mouth breathers with her road kill fright wigs and constantly fluctuating chesticles, but that shit does not fly with those of us who see right through the conservative spin jockeys and Fox News propagandists.

Yeah this election COULD be yet another chance for the Republican party to take a victory lap and once again proclaim that this country leans right of center, despite all evidence to the contrary.

Personally as a proud Liberal I would like very much to make Palin and her cohorts choke on their predictions of a low turnout from minorities, young people, and liberals in this next election cycle.

A prediction by the way that conservatives made for 2012 as well, only in that case there were even fewer white votes for Mitt Romney than for John McCain and Sarah Palin, and Obama won handily.

As for Sarah Palin and CPAC, well Palin's speech was almost as full of barbs directed at the Republican establishment as toward the Liberals and Obama.

In other words she wants victory, but that victory is NOT for the Republican party. That victory is for her twisted idea of what constitutes a REAL American. You know, an under educated conservative, who gets an erection during the national anthem, and masturbates while reading the Constitution.

And that is a candidate who cannot win in an election where there is a good turnout.

So what do you say America?

Between 2011 and 2013 states passed abortion restrictions.

Courtesy of the Washington Post:  

This comparison comes from the Guttmacher Institute, which finds that states passed 205 abortion restrictions between 2011 and 2013, more than the 189 laws passed between 2001 and 2010. Nearly half of the laws - 45 percent - fell into three categories: targeted regulations of abortion providers, bans on abortions after 20 weeks and restrictions on medical abortions. "States enacted 93 measures in these four categories from 2011 through 2013, compared with 22 during the previous decade," the Guttmacher analysis finds. 

What made 2010 such a boom year for abortion restrictions? It's hard to pinpoint a particular reason, but a few factors do stand out. First, Republicans took control of lots of state legislatures in the 2010 midterm elections, allowing them to pass more restrictions than was politically feasible in the past. The Affordable Care Act also ignited a fight over abortion policy, particularly whether federal funds would help pay for abortions (when Americans used their tax subsidies to purchase health insurance coverage). That fight spilled over to state legislatures - the ones that Republicans had recently come to control - and many passed laws restricting insurance coverage of abortion.

But remember, there is NO War on Women. 

This is the kind of thing that should be driving women to the polls by the millions in 2014. And hopefully it will.

Joe Miller, the "Barely Bearded One," is asking the FEC for permission use campaign funds to pay legal costs that he owes to the Alaska Dispatch.

Courtesy of ADN:  

Federal elections regulators are set to decide whether to adopt a draft advisory opinion that would allow Joe Miller to use campaign funds to pay a legal judgment in a case stemming from his unsuccessful 2010 U.S. Senate run in Alaska. 

During Thursday's meeting the Federal Election Commission could also opt to make changes to the opinion. Public comment is being accepted in the lead-up to the meeting. 

State court Judge Stephanie Joannides in May ordered Miller to pay more than $85,000 in legal costs to the Alaska Dispatch, which was among the media organizations that sued during the 2010 campaign to obtain records from Miller's personnel file from his time with the Fairbanks North Star Borough. 

Joannides found Miller's conduct in the case caused unnecessary delays and costs for the Dispatch and Fairbanks North Star Borough. She also found there were significant matters at stake in the case, with the records emerging near the end of the 2010 campaign. Miller lost the race to incumbent Lisa Murkowski, who mounted a write-in campaign after losing the GOP primary to Miller. 

Miller was a part-time borough attorney for seven years. He was disciplined in 2008 for using work computers for political purposes, information revealed in his personnel file. 

He is appealing Joannides' ruling and through an attorney, asked the FEC whether campaign funds could be used as a cash deposit that would be held while Miller appeals the judgment against him. Miller also asked if he could use campaign funds to pay the judgment if his appeal fails, a request the opinion suggests should be granted. 

Can you believe this guy?

Miller did everything he could to stop the Alaska Dispatch from revealing to the Alaska citizens what was in Miller's employee file from his days working at the North Star Bureau. And his actions were indefensible in the eyes of Judge Joannides:  

“Miller’s conduct, which included taking inconsistent positions, failing to disclose information during discovery, and his procedural filing, which the record did not support, all caused unnecessary delay and costs for both Alaska Dispatch” and the Fairbanks North Star Borough, the judge wrote in her ruling.

The court costs for the Alaska Dispatch were $112,375. Miller was ordered to pay 75% of that, $85,000. (At the time of the ruling Miller had almost half a million dollars in his campaign war chest.)

Of course in the end Miller failed in his bid to block access to those records and we all got to learn that he broke into the computers of his fellow employees and used them to vote in his own straw poll in an attempt, along with then Governor Sarah Palin, to oust party chairman Randy Reuderich.

Ultimately that damaged his character enough to allow Lisa Murkowski to beat him in the general with a write in campaign.

And remember, this guy is STILL trying to run for office in Alaska, and is currently mounting a campaign for the GOP nomination to run against Mark Begich for his Senate seat.

Even as the Republicans cave to Tea Party pressure the Teabagger's popularity drops to new lows with the American people.

Courtesy of HuffPo: 

Support for the tea party is nearly as low as it's been since the movement's creation, according to a Gallup poll released Thursday. 

Twenty-two percent of those polled consider themselves supporters of the tea party, while 27 percent of respondents say they oppose the movement. The remaining 51 percent say they're neither, or don't have an opinion. Those who say they "strongly oppose" the tea party also outnumber those who "strongly support" it, 17 percent to 11 percent. 

Overall support is down 10 points from the 32 percent who supported the tea party in the days after the 2010 midterm election, and nearly tied with the record low support for the movement in late 2011, as measured by Gallup. 

While Republicans continue to have the closest ties to the tea party, their level of support is far lower than it was in the movement's heyday. Thirty-eight percent of Republicans support the tea party, while 7 percent of them oppose it and a majority 55 percent is ambivalent. In November 2010, 65 percent of Republicans identified with the Tea Party.

Perhaps just as interesting is that the Teabaggers have the same issues with the Republicans as they have with them:  

On the flip side, tea party members are less than unanimously pleased with the GOP; while 55 percent of members view the Republican Party favorably, 43 percent of them view it unfavorably. 

"U.S. support for the Tea Party is at a low ebb at a time when key issues of concern for the movement -- funding for the Affordable Care Act and raising the U.S. debt ceiling -- are focal points in Washington, with Tea Party-backed Sen. Ted Cruz prominently fighting both policies," Gallup senior editor Lydia Saad wrote. "The discomfort he has created in the Republican caucus is merely emblematic of the ambivalence national Republicans feel toward the movement. Although few Republicans outright oppose the Tea Party, far more are neutral toward it than support it."

Sarah Palin recently claimed that Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, Rand Paul, and other Tea Party politicians have essentially become a third party. This is something that I have been hesitantly predicting for a few years now, but have always maintained that it would be an extremely dangerous and politically costly endeavor for the Republicans if it were to occur.

With the polling numbers so low it would seem that it is less likely than before, but so long as the Koch brothers and the Heritage Foundation keeping sending it money it will not go away completely. And who knows it just might prove impossible for the GOP to completely isolate them before their tentacles spread so far into the party that attempts to kill it may cost the life of its host as well.

Sounds like good news for the liberals.