I've been making the case the last couple of weeks that we can't just focus on winning in November, but that we have an imperative to take advantage of a historic opportunity to break the conservative movement's backs and crush their spirits. In the White House, that means getting Obama a broad popular and geographic mandate for change. In the House, that means annihilating the Republican caucus and working toward a 100-seat Democratic majority. In the Senate it means getting to a 60-seat filibuster proof majority.

Republicans will claim that McCain wasn't one of them, hence rationalizing away their loss. But if we decimate their ranks, including their conservative icons, it'll make it harder for them to justify their spin. Remember, we want them broken, their ranks thinned, their treasury in heavy debt, their morale in the gutter, void of any leadership, discredited in the eyes of the public.

Hence our need this year to take advantage of this perfect Democratic storm to not just win, but to utterly wipe the board clear of as many Republicans as we can catch in this wave.

A key component of this effort is to destroy their most beloved leaders. And in that sense, our Orange to Blue fundraising list targets some of the conservative movement's top leaders. Don't take my word for it, take that of conservative blogger/operative Patrick Ruffini, freaking out about the tsunami about to hit:

And while we all to some extent will continue to fixate on the Presidential race, we need to understand the very real consequences if the Senate is irredeemably lost, and if our bench in the House is wiped out. You may not know it, but conservative icons like John Shadegg (AZ-3) and Tom McClintock (CA-4) could lose.

Both AZ-03 and CA-04 are on our target list, with Bob Lord focused on taking out Shadegg, and Charlie Brown fighting McClintock.

There is a sudden realization on the right that they are on the precipice of losing not just their majorities, but some of their most cherished voices. We have been blessed with an opportunity to help that process along.

They're already expecting to lose. You want to see them truly crushed, you need to help (among so many others) Lord and Brown win their races.

Leave everything on the road.

Keep that in mind. Check out the Rightblogs' list of House challengers, donate to the RNC. And everyone vote. Straight ticket, unless you have a really good reason not to.

Posted by: Ace at 10:06 AM | Comments (127)
Post contains 427 words, total size 3 kb.

7 among registered voters.

Using the HopeyChangey turnout model, which only takes account of someone's self-reported determination to vote (something that is inherently unreliable, which is why it's never used), Obama is up by 8.

That 8 is too high but I'm sure a lot of these cultists will vote for the first time, much more than usual. So the lead is... who knows? 5? 6?

The Zogster has it just shy of 4.

Rasmussen has it at 5, 50-45, pretty much where's it's been for a week.

Thanks to Scott.

Posted by: Ace at 09:47 AM | Comments (97)
Post contains 103 words, total size 1 kb.

Score!

American troops acting on a tip killed the No. 2 leader of al-Qaida in Iraq — a Moroccan known for his ability to recruit and motivate foreign fighters — in a raid in the northern city of Mosul, the U.S. military said Wednesday.

The military statement described the man, known as Abu Qaswarah, as a charismatic leader who had trained in Afghanistan and managed to rally al-Qaida followers in Iraq despite U.S. and Iraqi security gains.

...U.S. troops killed Abu Qaswarah, also known as Abu Sara, on Oct. 5 after coming under fire during a raid on a building that served as an al-Qaida in Iraq "key command and control location for" in Mosul, the military said.

Abu Qaswarah — one of five insurgents killed — was later been positively identified, the military said, without elaborating.

The insurgent leader became the senior al-Qaida in Iraq emir of northern Iraq in June 2007 and had "historic ties to AQI founder Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and senior al-Qaida leaders in Afghanistan and Pakistan," the military said.

It called him "al-Qaida in Iraq's second-in-command" as the senior operational leader for al-Zarqawi's successor, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, also known as Abu Hamza al-Muhajir.

Driscoll said Abu Qaswarah directed the smuggling of foreign terrorists into northern Iraq and reportedly killed those who tried to return to their homelands rather than carry out suicide bombings and other attacks against Iraqis.

As always, Obama, Pelosi and Reid would like to remind you this only creates more terrorists and that the war is lost.

For some more good news from Iraq (You remember Iraq don't you? Well, you wouldn't if you just got your news from the MSM), check out this post on the graduation of some new Iraqi military pilots.

One of the kids nudged me when a DV started getting passionate in his address, and was interrupted by a standing ovation:

“He is saying that for the first time in our history, we are not doing things for one man, but we are doing it for all the people of Iraq. He is saying the US has showed us how, and we must not forget when we thank God every day, we must also ask him to bless the US.”

As you'll see from the post, their numbers are small but growing and so is their confidence in their own country.

Posted by: DrewM at 08:31 AM | Comments (62)
Post contains 434 words, total size 3 kb.

Last debate today. Will McCain dare utter the name that must not be spoken? Won't Obama just shrug it off as someone who lived on his street when he was six years old?

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 05:11 AM | Comments (89)
Post contains 41 words, total size 1 kb.

How long will CNN permit the infidel Griffin to spew heresies about the one?

I see Griffin on the consumer protection beat in the near future.

A baffled Wolf Blitzer cannot believe one of CNN's own reporters is declaring (accurately) that Obama paid $832,000 to CSI, an ACORN subsidiary front with the exact same board of directors, for get out the vote work. more...

Posted by: Ace at 10:14 PM | Comments (144)
Post contains 71 words, total size 1 kb.

Because, in the future, everyone will be Tom Snyder for 15 minutes.

Posted by: Ace at 09:39 PM | Comments (38)
Post contains 16 words, total size 1 kb.

It's such an awful notion I don't want to conceive of it as possible. Which means I probably should be slow to dismiss it.

[Russian sources claim she] was an enormous floating dirty bomb, intended to detonate after exiting the Suez Canal at the eastern end of the Mediterranean and in proximity to the coastal cities of Israel. The entire cargo of radioactive sand, obtained by Iran from China (the latter buys desperately needed oil from the former) and sealed in containers which, when the charges on the ship are set off after the crew took to the boats, will be blasted high into the air where prevailing winds will push the highly dangerous and radioactive cloud ashore.

Big problems with this theory:

1) There's no way that we just happen to get so lucky that pirates randomly seize this particular ship. [Objection to that objection: Maybe the pirates were in our employ. But I'm not really a believer in the competency of our intelligence services anymore -- how could they possibly have learned of this plot?]

2) There's no way the pirates wouldn't have already have allowed our intelligence agents on to the ship yet -- it's not only a get out of jail free card, it's a likely $10 million payday for each pirate, their biggest booty ever. [Objection to that objection: It's possible that this has already all been done, and the US and Israel are keeping quiet for the moment as they try to plot their response.]

3) Why would Iran do this with a ship registered out of Iran, for Pete's sake? [Objection to the objection: None, really, that I can think of, unless Iran figured that it would be obvious who'd done it anyway and so they might as well announce it to the world.]

Although this all seems patently absurd, so did 9/11. While liberals will all laugh at the cowardly chicken little conservatives, the difference between us seems that we can imagine the possibility of the next 9/11, whereas they can barely even acknowledge the last one.

And here's the thing: We must have paid off the pirates to have ourselves a sneaky-peek at this ship by now.

Assuming we did that, why is there no statement from the US that the cargo is harmless whatsits or the like?

From the Drawn Cutlass.

Sleeper? While it seems hard to believe Iran would risk this before it had nukes, what if the idea was to put a sleeper ship out there, a maritime second-strike, going from port to port, just killing time, in case and until Israel struck Iran?

And only then attacking?

Posted by: Ace at 09:04 PM | Comments (110)
Post contains 376 words, total size 3 kb.

President Obama might get his chance to conduct the Great Overmountain Invasion of Pakistan after all.

A growing al Qaida-backed insurgency, combined with the Pakistani army's reluctance to launch an all-out crackdown, political infighting and energy and food shortages are plunging America's key ally in the war on terror deeper into turmoil and violence, says a soon-to-be completed U.S. intelligence assessment.

A U.S. official who participated in drafting the top secret National Intelligence Estimate said it portrays the situation in Pakistan as "very bad." Another official called the draft "very bleak," and said it describes Pakistan as being "on the edge."

The first official summarized the estimate's conclusions about the state of Pakistan as: "no money, no energy, no government."

...

About the only good news in the Pakistan NIE is that it's "relatively sanguine" about the prospects of a Pakistani nuclear weapon, materials or knowledge falling into the hands of terrorists, said one official.

However, the draft NIE paints a grim picture of the situation in the impoverished, nuclear-armed country of 160 million, according to the U.S. officials who spoke to McClatchy.

Thanks to Mr. X. Pretty sure not the Mr. X.

Posted by: Ace at 08:17 PM | Comments (42)
Post contains 205 words, total size 1 kb.

These rush decisions on emotionally charged topics are often a goldmine of snark and spite from judges directed against parties and other judges. Ohio Republican Party v. Brunner (PDF) does not disappoint, and while I try to steer clear of highlighting things which cast doubt on our system of justice, I figure that if it's in a judicial decision, it's fair game. Apologies to those readers who are just here waiting for accidental links to porn; this post is about a more subtle kind of stimulation. more...

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 08:05 PM | Comments (46)
Post contains 834 words, total size 5 kb.

Existential Threats Make Strange Bedfellows

Check out this essay from HillBuzz. And Buck Up, Wally.
Cons are driving me crazy with their endless wailing about Mainstream Media Bias and Mainstream Media Polls, simultaneously.

Don't you think for a minute that we aren't being played, and in a way that makes past years look like nothing. They haven't even bothered to hide their bias this time around, from ordinary coverage to debates. Do you really think the polls are going to be anything less than the same game in play?

We're not kidding about existential threats. Obama has been a net power-abuser even in his limited capabilities. Greater power will likely encourage him to act against normal citizens in massive strokes.

Free speech, voting rights, and therefore Liberty-with-a-capital-L is in the cross hairs in this election. I feel like such an alarmist ass for saying this type of thing. I feel like a Black Helicopter type.

But this is how I see things, realistically, from the lawsuits this man's campaign has filed, and the way he will not hesitate to use sympathetic law enforcement agencies as arms of his campaign.

And from the way he funnels money to corrupt organizations like ACORN which are dedicated to gumming up the voter registration process and faking votes, among other things.

Whatever your differences with the PUMAs, set them aside for the mutual fight against a truly existential threat to the American People's Freedom in the aggregate.

We can argue specific policy details later, when we're still free to do so.

You vote for this man once, you may never vote for anyone else again (check that post for info about the 22nd Amendment).

I would like to welcome the Hillary supporters aboard, umm well, not the conservative ship, but the Defeat Obama ship.

Again, we can bitch at each other later when we're still at liberty to shout our beliefs. And it's gonna feel so good when we do. Rowr.

Welcome, Ladies and Gentlemen of the allied-opposition. Please make yourselves at home. This is your couch too.

Just a warning about Ace's pad; the language is raw and the floor is sticky. The men are gentlemen but will customarily ask you to show your tits, just in case you're obliging in that regard. You don't have to.

Much.

UPDATE: From commenter How to Defeat Barack Obama.

I just scanned the link, but I'm afraid I don't see anything there or here in the way of a course of action.

So, let me suggest that instead of chasing rabbits, this site encourages people to go to BHO appearances and ask him tough questions on video. Then, upload his response to Youtube. He's not used to being challenged, so a good question would catch him off-guard and he might reveal himself to be an empty suit. Even if he does provide an answer, if the question is good enough he'd be forced to answer for some of his lies or the flaws in his policies.

So, this site should encourage its visitors to do that. And, it should get in touch with other sites and encourage them to get involved.

If not that, then let me suggest dealing with media bias by calling reporters on their lies in their comments sections, such as those at the WaPo and Swampland.

Excellent ideas. Does AOSHQ have people with the skills and balls to bring it?

Posted by: LauraW at 07:37 PM | Comments (123)
Post contains 574 words, total size 3 kb.