You mean in a state where the Democratic Governor's wife has endorsed Hillary, a record turnout was predicted, and Obamessiah is surging, the status quo representatives of the State's Democratic Leadership (the Secretary of State is a Dem too) have potentially disenfranchised the Big O's voters?

I question the timing!

In all seriousness, I think if I were Obama, I would make a statement about this before anyone else did. Something along the lines of "The pro-Hillary status quo can try to contain my margin, but they can't contain the significance of my victory."

Why?

Because let's say Obama wins by 9%. Does anyone really think has beens like Silky or Hillary are drawing hordes of new voters to the polls? Doubtful. So, the presumption is that if Democrats really are being turned away, the majority are his voters. Which means that his final victory, if only there had been enough ballots, would have been much, much larger.

So it insulates him if he underperforms. And if he still gets a win by 12-15% just imagine the butt-kicking it would have been!

He wins the expectations game either way, and gets to bash the "forces of status quo" again. Win-win baby.

And, at this point in time, with Hillary! going down faster than the Edmund Fitzgerald, and given all the "dirty tricks" people associate her family with, who wouldn't be inclined to believe that the Clinton's were pulling another one here, even if it isn't true at all? It suits her needs to lose by a close margin and not a blow-out. Where there's motive, and opportunity to corrupt, there is a Clinton nearby, after all.

So, before Hillary can start spinning that "her poor showing in NH was hurt by her voters not being able to vote", I'd take the initiative and head her off at the pass.

Do it, Obambi. Take a shot at her. Because, Lord knows, she'll use this to her advantage if you don't.

She might even meet with a group of aggreived Hillary supporters who "gosh darn it" just weren't able to vote. They might even have a group cry.

Posted by: Jack M. at 10:35 AM | Comments (34)
Post contains 370 words, total size 2 kb.

See Confederate Yankee's update. Obviously, if, as seems likely, most independents are voting Democratic, they're not available to push McCain on a not-entirely-willing Republican Party.

But Note... A poll says that McCain is also winning over Romney among New Hampshire Republicans. So he has a good chance to win a somewhat narrow victory, despite the independent love for Obama.

Posted by: Ace at 10:19 AM | Comments (39)
Post contains 89 words, total size 1 kb.

Nevemind.

But mystery abounds. In the WashTimes story, Jim Gilchrist of the Minutemen claimed Huckabee had "promised" just this.

Mr. Huckabee, who won last week's Republican Iowa caucuses, promised Minuteman Project founder James Gilchrist that he would force a test case to the Supreme Court to challenge birthright citizenship, and would push Congress to pass a 28th Amendment to the Constitution to remove any doubt.

Did the WashTimes get this wrong? Almost certainly not. So why did Gilchrist make this claim? Did Huckabee or did he not promise this?

Perhaps Hucakbee did promise it, much as husband promises his wife to finally clean the gutters; "Yeah, yeah, sure hon, I'll get to that." Maybe -- hold on to your hats for this speculation -- Huckabee tends to make pandering political promises rather lightly without appreciating the seriousness of doing so, or the implications of doing so. Perhaps he just doesn't remember making this promise, because, frankly, just like that husband and the gutters, he never really intended to fulfill the promise anyway.

Thanks to DrewM.

Posted by: Ace at 10:11 AM | Comments (21)
Post contains 193 words, total size 1 kb.

I seem to remember an awful lot of screeching by the liberal media when Republicans have dared to note that Al Qaeda takes note of the election returns, and often has a favorite in American elections.

There's a bit of consistency here as the AP seems somewhat peeved that Hillary would take such a swipe at The Obamessiah (Bringer of Hope), but I also note this rule is only invoked to protect Democrats. When Democrats suggest the world will be less safe if a Republican is elected because it will increase hatred all over the Muslim world, we never hear a peep about this "rule" that it's out-of-bounds to suggest that elections may have consequences beyond the borders of the US.

Hillary Clinton on Monday warned that Al-Qaeda watched US elections, urging Americans not to risk electing an inexperienced president, in her latest implicit swipe at rival Barack Obama.

In one of her most overt plays of the national security card yet, the senator from New York noted that days after Gordon Brown became British Prime Minister, militants planted bombs which failed to explode.

"I don't think it was by accident that Al-Qaeda decided to test the new prime minister," Clinton said here, referring to two devices which did not go off in London and a car which was crashed into Glasgow airport in June.

"They watch our elections as closely as we do ... they play our allies."

...

"You are hiring a president who will be here when the chips are down, and problems pile up, because that's when you really need somebody who knows exactly what has to be done, to make the tough decisions."

Hillary must be shell-shocked -- she's being treated poorly by the press, which clearly favors her rival. She's being treated, in fact, a bit like a Republican.

Welcome to the party, pal. Feel our pain.

Of course, she's not being treated with utter contempt. The press reserves that treatment for actual Republicans, as this comparison of Matt Lauer's interviews with Hillary and Romney demonstrates.

Posted by: Ace at 10:06 AM | Comments (14)
Post contains 364 words, total size 2 kb.

Mark Levin notes the obviously cynical nature of this 11th hour ploy.

Heading into South Carolina, where illegal immigration appears to be the biggest issue among Republicans, Huckabee is going to support a constitutional amendment prohibiting birthright citizenship? Did I not hear him in several debates, including on Sunday, admonishing those of us who've long opposed birthright citizenship, about God's children coming out of the shadows? Is this not the same man who only a few months ago supported McCain-Kennedy?

It seems very strange to me that Huckabee is still "discovering" his deeply-felt policy instincts so late in the process.

Posted by: Ace at 09:46 AM | Comments (41)
Post contains 126 words, total size 1 kb.

I hope it's a parody. Funny, though I think the people doing it wind up losing the plot as to the object of the parody. (You'll see what I mean.)

Moderate content/taste warning. The premise is "Talk to your kids about obscure sexual acts... or somebody else will."

Thanks to RobG.

Posted by: Ace at 09:19 AM | Comments (18)
Post contains 57 words, total size 1 kb.

This is why domestic courts have no business interfering in international military matters.

A lot of these so called “human rights” groups aren’t so much anti-Western as they are just plain pro-terrorist.

Posted by: DrewM. at 07:12 AM | Comments (29)
Post contains 56 words, total size 1 kb.

Stunning. On the scene research, as opposed to the survey format which requires people to "remember" what the hell happened the other night (which oddly enough came to the same conclusions).

Significant observation: "themed parties encourage college women to drink more heavily than men, new research suggests".

Shut up.

via Geoff, sans charts and graphs I'm afraid. He is a scientist though.

Posted by: Dave In Texas at 06:22 AM | Comments (16)
Post contains 78 words, total size 1 kb.

Dick Morris said Hillary would begin playing the race card subtly, making not overtly racist pitches but racism-by-proxy pitches. It's not that Hillary wouldn't accept a black president, you understand, but that all those benighted rednecks won't.

He was right. Except for the "subtly" part.

As they barnstorm through New Hampshire, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and her husband are often introduced by supporters who once backed another candidate but converted to her cause.

Today, in Dover, Francine Torge, a former John Edwards supporter, said this while introducing Mrs. Clinton: “Some people compare one of the other candidates to John F. Kennedy. But he was assassinated. And Lyndon Baines Johnson was the one who actually” passed the civil rights legislation.

The comment, an apparent reference to Senator Barack Obama, is particularly striking given documented fears among blacks that Mr. Obama will be assassinated if elected.

Phil Singer, a Clinton spokesman said: “We were not aware that this person was going to make those comments and disapprove of them completely. They were totally inappropriate.”

Mrs. ClintonÂ’s expression did not change noticeably when Ms. Torge made the comment.

Only a few hours later, she brought up the civil rights legislation herself in remarks to a Fox News correspondent.

I guess Clinton was making the distinction between the "dreamer" RFK and the "doer" LBJ (with Obama and Hillary filing those roles now) and her supporter was seeking to follow that script, but wow. I think even I'm offended.

We all knew it would be ugly and messy and cost thousands of lives when she went down. Just don't get caught in the whirlpool.

Posted by: Ace at 12:12 AM | Comments (47)
Post contains 303 words, total size 2 kb.

Just as the UK is finalising plans to eliminate incandescent lightbulbs by 2011, new reports indicate that compact fluorescents may pose health risks for consumers. So far, a few different health problems have been identified for people with special sensitivities including migranes and skin problems, and for unsafe disposal leading to mercury poisoning. Most recently, the President of the British Association of Dermatologists announced:

'Photosensitive eruptions range from disabling eczema-like reactions, to light sensitivities that can lead to skin cancer. It is essential that such patients are able to protect themselves from specific wavelengths of light emitted by fluorescent bulbs, especially as they are often trapped indoors because they can't venture out in natural sunlight.'

Of course, anyone who has read Glenn Reynolds' years-long experimentation with compact fluorescents knows that it might take some trial and error to find a bulb with an intensity and spectrum that doesn't bother you. I have some and they work great and don't seem to set off any migraines (with which I am occasionally afflicted), although one of them has burned out already. I'm going to assume that one was defective.

What's so interesting in the case of bulb-pushers is that the same people who told us that long tube fluorescents in office buildings and public schools were hurting us have decided that compact fluorescents are okay for use in the home. I admit, it's a new technology, but that seems to be a reason for more observation, not bulb bans.

This post on the subject from Hippyshopper (yes, that's a real consumer website) is not reassuring:

But how seriously should we take these scare stories? I'm with the the Energy Saving Trust on this one, who argue that we should not let the concerns overshadow the fact that these bulbs are far better for the environment, and that the technology is improving all the time.

Ah, their priorities are now clear to me.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 11:41 PM | Comments (34)
Post contains 338 words, total size 2 kb.