Support




Contact
Powered by
Movable Type

Confessions of a Concern Troll?

I'm suspicious, as this is anonymous and tracks so perfectly with what I believe.

Then again, it tracks perfectly with what I believe.

We do know we have organized concern trolls popping up on blogs to say things like, "The Marist poll puts Obama ahead of McCain by seventeen million points... (Heavy sigh) I wonder if I should even vote."

Right.

At any rate, here's a confession, purportedly, from one of Axelrod's Axelturfers, from Hillbuzz.

Ok, I want to clear my conscious a little. Hopefully you could make a blog post to help some fellow clinton supporters out.

I work for a campaign and can’t wait for this week to be over.

I was doing it for a job. I was not a fan of any candidate but over time grew to love HRC.

The internal campaign idea is to twist, distort, humiliate and finally dispirit you.

We pay people and organize people to go to all the online sites and “play the part of a clinton or mccain supporter who just switched our support for obama”

We do this to stifle your motivation and to destroy your confidence.

We did this the whole primary and it worked.

Sprinkle in mass vote confusion and it becomes bewildering. Most people lose patience and just give up on their support of a candidate and decide to just block out tv, news, websites, etc.

This surprisingly has had a huge suppressing movement and vote turnout issues.

Next, we infiltrate all the blogs and all the youtube videos and overwhelm the voting, the comments, etc. All to continue this appearance of overwhelming world support.

People makes posts to the effect that the world has “gone mad”

Thats the intention. To make you feel stressed and crazy and feel like the world is ending.

We have also had quite a hand in skewing many many polls, some we couldn’t control as much as we would have liked. But many we have spoiled over. Just enough to make real clear politics look scarey to a mccain supporter. Its worked, alough the goal was to appear 13-15 points ahead.

see, the results have been working. People tend to support a winner, go with the flow, become “sheeple”

Thanks to jk and many others.

Posted by: Ace at 07:45 PM



Comments

1 Yeah, saw this yesterday, too.  The one thing that gets me is:

We have also had quite a hand in skewing many many polls,

How do they do that?  Can they explain? 

Posted by: Editor at October 29, 2008 07:49 PM (GTpOW)

2 I never believed such bullshit posted in the comments before and don't now.

Comrade Obama is going down to the utter disbelief of his minions.  Heads will explode and people will riot in the streets.  Works for me since the assholes always do it in their own neighborhoods.

Posted by: BillyBob at October 29, 2008 07:49 PM (v9vTw)

3

Hey I posted that first in comments days ago!  Oh well, I have another winner here.  This one is BETTER!

 

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18..
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59..

So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.

'Since you are all such good customers, he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.' Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes SO the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free.

But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $50 instead of $59 (15% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before.

And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. 'I only got a dollar out of the $20,' declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, 'but he got $9!'

'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got nine times more than I!'

'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $9 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!' 'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor.'

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction.

Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics, University of Georgia

For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

Posted by: JimD at October 29, 2008 07:51 PM (j/wD+)

4 Oh, and if someone can legitimately explain how they're able to skew polls, I'll be a true believer.

Posted by: Editor at October 29, 2008 07:52 PM (GTpOW)

5 If you see "I'm a lifelong Republican but...."

CAUTION: Astroturfer at work.

I have a theory that there are people working for the Obama campaign (either paid or volunteers) whose SOLE job is to scour major and minor blogs and news sites 24/7 and put up pro-Obama/anti-McCain posts. Cut and paste for the win.

Posted by: cbharmon at October 29, 2008 07:52 PM (+7CmB)

6 Meh, Best case scenario is it doesn't work and McCain wins in a landslide,

Worst case, Obama wins by a pinch and it turns out only 25% of the country agree with his policies and he becomes the new Jimmy Carter for running the country into the ground, and it waves in another 20 years of Palin driven Conservatism.

This has been my stance for the last several month since it has been fairly apparent between the fake online presence, the fake truth being put out by the media covering for Obama, and the fake speeches from the Obama Biden ticket that most Obama supporters, unless they have been paying attention really aren't sure of what they are going to end up.
They may even end up being drafted and see Pakistan through  the end of a rifle, and that's just the women.

Posted by: Ring at October 29, 2008 07:54 PM (FPnM5)

7

Wait for them to start whining about the Electoral College.  That is the signal that their internals are not nearly as good as the public polls.  I am surprised we haven't heard more of it already... maybe their message discipline is tight, or perhaps it is a vintage year for extra-powerful Kool-aid.

Posted by: sherlock at October 29, 2008 07:56 PM (ojW85)

8

Obama is a fraud, his supporters are frauds, the whole fucking thing is just a big bunch of bullshit.

I'm thinking of the movie The Candidate. Barry is nothing except what his political thug crew created.

And the soft-shelled lefties always thought it was the right and conservatism that "created" candidates.

It's been them, always has.

Posted by: Sen. Rev. Dr. E Buzz at October 29, 2008 07:59 PM (sf4Oe)

9 Only a few minutes before the Obamessiah's Crapmercial begins. I hear he's going to perform several biblcal type miracles before giving birth to live puppies and pulling 1 trillion dollars out of his ass to spread around the auditorium.

Posted by: Dave in PB at October 29, 2008 08:00 PM (CTSya)

10 I don't care if it's true, it has no effect. Peggy Noonan and the rest of the so-called Republicans who jumped ship have not been able to get me to rethink my vote. Why would some anonymous troll who claims to have never voted for a Democrat before be able to? Besides, the reason they have never voted for a Democrat before is because they have never voted before. They're probably not old enough to vote now.

If a hot chick in a bikini offered to get naked if I would vote for Obama, I still wouldn't. I'd lie to her and tell her I did of course. If she's stupid enough to sell sex that cheaply... well, let's just say I'm a bargain shopper.

In fact, in most cities you can get any liberal woman into bed if you pretend to be an Obama supporter. Talk about skewing polls. Or is that screwing poles?

Posted by: MagicalPat at October 29, 2008 08:01 PM (O49GA)

11 I suspect their poll skewing trends towards the online things that they can control, and are not scientific.

Of course, any way they can make turnout/Dem support look greater than it is will effect the weighting used by the major pollsters in determining likely voters.

Posted by: Sean at October 29, 2008 08:01 PM (vZzYJ)

12 That "confession" has been floating around various blogs and smells like a fake to me.  But Dan Rather and Mary Mapes went to air with less evidence so I say run with it.

Posted by: Randy R at October 29, 2008 08:01 PM (A9g/U)

13 Editor

You go out and register a huge amount of bogus voters. The pollsters look at an increase in democrats registering at the polls and adjust their polls to account for the new democrat excitement. Thus when NBC skews their sampling to include 50% Democrats and only 32% Republicans with 18% independents that is why. IBD is much more conservative in their breakdown in their sampling, which is why I tend to trust them more.

But the people at the Obama campaign are doing this for a reason. The human psyche does not want to show up to a fight when they believe they are going to get smacked down. Not a lot of people will vote out of duty if no hope of winning is involved.

Posted by: locus ceruleus at October 29, 2008 08:02 PM (e2mBS)

14 She does go on to say at the end:

Fortunately, my position has been a marketing position and I don’t feel I had any part of anything I would feel guilty for.

...so when she says "we did this or that" about the astroturfing, I think she means generally speaking, campaign operatives, not herself.

Posted by: Nice Deb at October 29, 2008 08:03 PM (Yccrl)

15 What the confessor doesn't understand is that most people just want to blow his/her head off.

Posted by: Bury Obama at October 29, 2008 08:05 PM (gJFp6)

16 When Ron Popeil and Billy Mays air an infomercial they're upfront about wanting your money.

And the shit they're peddling actually works.  At least my Showtime Rotisserie Oven does...

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at October 29, 2008 08:13 PM (Ulsfn)

17 Wait for them to start whining about the Electoral College.

It's already happening.

http://tinyurl.com/5nvvv4

http://tinyurl.com/586pju

http://tinyurl.com/5nydul

http://tinyurl.com/5wju25

http://tinyurl.com/5r5yqt

That's just within the last month or two. I know, one of these is just a WoW forum thread, but these were all on the first page of a quick and dirty websearch.

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at October 29, 2008 08:17 PM (Ds4I5)

18 I am a lifelong Republican and I don't buy this story at all. Astroturfing is a myth. I am disappointed and concerned about these kinds of posts. They're a distraction from real concerns of middle class Americans. For the first time in my life I am voting for a Democrat. The mean spirited, cynical McCain campaign has given me no choice. I cannot in good conscience endorse these kinds of tactics.

I never thought I'd say it, but I am voting for Obama.

Posted by: TomV at October 29, 2008 08:19 PM (/PwQS)

19 The breakdown, confession, and redemption at the end was a little too perfect to be plausible.  I'm calling "fake but accurate."

Posted by: Alex at October 29, 2008 08:21 PM (fgyj8)

20 As a concerned, lifelong Republican member of the middle class who is distracted by the real concerns of mean-spirited, cynical...aw the hell with it...

I'm still voting for McCain.

Posted by: Fresh Air at October 29, 2008 08:25 PM (SXkkC)

21

This type tells us a lot, I guess:

"Our goal is to continue to make you lose your moral"

Yeah, that's what they have been trying to do to us -  help us lose our morals.  lol

Posted by: Tom at October 29, 2008 08:28 PM (GKNOV)

22 "How do they do that?"

Probably lobbying for an unrealistic turnout model.

You know, THIS time the new voter tsunami will appear.  Really.  Honest.

Posted by: someone at October 29, 2008 08:37 PM (zHoxL)

23

Editor,

One other method is to register with Zogby and the others who do online polling using an alternative identity. Say you’re really a wacked out liberal nut case but you register with Zogby as a right-wing bible thumper. You play along for a few weeks in the campaign season then start shifting your vote from confirmed McCain to undecided – then Obambi.

They look at your past record and say, “hey, this guy is a for real republican who’s now shifted to the Chosen One.”  They also register multiple accounts and cell phones with some easily fooled polling outfit and skew everything to a predefined goal.

Indeed, it’s so damn easy anyone can play. However, the reason most people from the good side of the force don’t play the liberal game is we actually have lives and other shit to do.

Them – not so much.

Posted by: Murph at October 29, 2008 08:38 PM (Dw2sU)

24 Why does the Obama Camp think they are the ONLY ones Astroturfering? hmmmmmmmm


Posted by: ordi at October 29, 2008 08:40 PM (0LY3l)

25

JimD at October 29, 2008 07:51 PM (j/wD+)

 

Luv that tax policy lesson. It also makes me sad that so many have bought in to the donk tallking points. "Tax breaks for the rich, everyone else got nothing".

Anyone else think that maybe we need a minimum tax, say like a $100. or so? It really bothers me that there are people who don't pay income taxes but get the same say in the running of the federal government as those who pay the bills. I disagree with Bush removing the bottom 30-40% completely from income tax. And now under bambi we'll give these peeps money just for showing up and voting.  

Prolly have to write this law after the civil war.

Posted by: turtle at October 29, 2008 08:48 PM (PwMqB)

26 How did they recruit Allahpundit? /jking (I think)

Posted by: TheBigOldDog at October 29, 2008 08:53 PM (0oAW0)

27 "Oh, and if someone can legitimately explain how they're able to skew polls, I'll be a true believer."

They probably have a hard time skewing the some of the profession poles, but they have inside people at the MSM poles, but I repeat myself.
Even at the professional poles, don't they they hire temps for the election?   I wonder who was applying for those jobs.

Posted by: snookered at October 29, 2008 08:54 PM (h3PdB)

28

Anyone who gets a net benefit from the government shouldn't be allowed to vote.

I know that's a fantasy, but that's the way it ought to be.

Posted by: Warden at October 29, 2008 08:57 PM (QoR4a)

29
When Ron Popeil and Billy Mays air an infomercial they're upfront about wanting your money.

And the shit they're peddling actually works.  At least my Showtime Rotisserie Oven does...

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at October 29, 2008 08:13 PM (Ulsfn)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My Showtime Rotisserie Oven makes really tasty chicken. And somebody actually caught a state record fish using a Ron Popeil's "pocket fisherman".

As for Obama's economic plan?

I'll go with whatever Ron Popeil says any day.

Posted by: Tinian at October 29, 2008 08:59 PM (Ohodx)

30 You can see how it works at Rasmussen. People now know it's better to look at the average of polls, but that single 15 point poll adds 1 to 1.5 points to the average all by itself.

Posted by: trw at October 29, 2008 09:01 PM (vg/h3)

31 I'm a lifelong Republican, and I'm voting for McCain.

Curveball!  YEAH, WHAT NOW BITCHES?

Posted by: apotheosis at October 29, 2008 09:07 PM (xWk3U)

32 When you read about 2 dozen political blogs and sites you immediately start to see a pattern in the comments.  You can tell it's the same few people posting over and over again, day after day.  When the first 50 comments are about how horrible the polls look for McSame or McLame or whatever the code word was for the day, you begin to suspect that these are people paid to post that shit. 


Posted by: Suzy at October 29, 2008 09:10 PM (61Hv+)

33 Oh, with all this talk of skewing poles, I thought this might be about longbows again, but it's still election stuff.  McCain wins in a squeaker.

Posted by: RicardoVerde at October 29, 2008 09:11 PM (PBTsv)

34 When you start talking about positively about McCain in public, people listen and sometimes nod in agreement.   You'll also get the freakin Obamatrons in a rage too. 

I think many McCain supporters have lunatic Obamabot family members and just keep their politicial views to themselves. 

Fewer stupid arguments that way. 

Posted by: Nyctalus Lasiopterus at October 29, 2008 09:15 PM (Xc+tm)

35 "People now know it's better to look at the average of polls"

No.  Before Jay Cost got paid off by RCP, he told the truth:  mixing good data with shit doesn't get you anything except more shit.

You have to figure out what's total baloney and what isn't.

Posted by: someone at October 29, 2008 09:16 PM (zHoxL)

36 If the Obama minions beleive the polls, they would not be registering homeless people, dead people, the Dallas Cowbows, Mickey Mouse or felons.  I give them credit, cause if you ain't cheatin' you ain't tryin'.

Posted by: Hammer at October 29, 2008 09:16 PM (XWJh5)

37 I need some c-c-c-c-c-c-c-COCK!!!!!!!!

Right here in my gaping maw. Stuff the balls in there, too! I love it!!!!

Posted by: smoke at October 29, 2008 09:21 PM (i5D30)

38 I've worked intimately (in a non-Barney Frank way) on 3 elections: one as a campaign manager for a state house guy, and two for the same member of Congress. There was never anything close to the kind of disgusting subterfuge spelled out by sarah p - not on the local/grassroots level, not at the candidate level, not at the party level. If anything, it was the total opposite. Frankly, I would have preferred a little more aggressiveness, but without spilling over into the Squadristi Zone.

The stuff I'm seeing in this presidential election from the Democrats is sick. What's far worse is that millions and millions of voters have turned a blind eye to it. And millions more are in the dark because of totally irresponsible news media and a (R) candidate who's run a lukewarm campaign.

Modern liberals crave power so much right now that it's horrifying. I hope and pray there are enough level-headed people this coming Tuesday who want to fight this Left Wing Fuck-Headed Beast properly out of DC.

Oh my, did he put "fuck-headed beast" in a real prayer?

Yeah.

Posted by: GOP operative at October 29, 2008 09:25 PM (z4EdS)

39 You guys, if you're going to parody astroturfers, you have to be sure to include "I'm a bible-believing Christian filled with the Holy Ghost. After we - you and me, my fellow Conservative Concerned Christians - are done voting for Obama on Jesus's behalf, we should get together and read the Bible or something."

Posted by: DoDoGuRu at October 29, 2008 09:27 PM (xBkZj)

40 I heard something about Bill Clinton having a skewed pole, but that may have just been a rumor.

Posted by: Dead Career Sketch at October 29, 2008 09:28 PM (JTN0y)

41 Porky!

Posted by: toby928 at October 29, 2008 09:28 PM (PD1tk)

42 IMO it's fake

Posted by: Mark at October 29, 2008 09:31 PM (EpUX6)

43 I am afraid of my liberal friends. I am not kidding. I NEVER say anything positive about McCain on Facebook or even polite conversation. I am simply not willing to deal with the anger from my FRIENDS. Yes, my friends.

I don't even want to know what strangers would be willing to post on my wall or status. Yikes!

Obama supporters are creepy when they get riled up. Even people who are otherwise great guys and gals - but bring up Obama and a trigger is pulled. It's frightening.

Posted by: TomV at October 29, 2008 09:32 PM (/PwQS)

44

Acccording to Lundz, the Dems are "better at the internet", so this sort of tactic is bound to be more effective in Dem primaries than in the general.

Posted by: Holdfast at October 29, 2008 09:35 PM (Gzb30)

45 TomV 14-year-old Republicans can't vote.

Posted by: Wilhelm Klink at October 29, 2008 09:37 PM (8D00g)

46 A good friend of mine went from a moderate/conservative Democrat to partisan zealot after he helped with a congressional election in Kentucky. He was really bitter over a whisper campaign that his candidate was gay. Which he was. But my buddy was really pissed off that this was used against him (my buddy was a New Yorker in Kentucky because of his wife).

He has been radicalized ever since. He gets worse every year. Very, very pissed off when it comes to Republicans.

But the whisper campaign that set him off is nothing compared to what the Dems did to Sarah Palin in their smearing of her. But he is too far gone to realize that he is a part of the very thing that made him hate the GOP, but on a much, much worse level.

He doesn't even agree with Obama! He is low taxes/free-trade/pro-Isreali Democrat. But he is so partisan at this point that the only thing that matters is the label.

Very, very frustrating.

Posted by: TomV at October 29, 2008 09:38 PM (/PwQS)

47 Klink, I'm afraid you speak from ignorance. You need to stop worrying about being so cool.

Posted by: TomV at October 29, 2008 09:40 PM (/PwQS)

48 It carefully hits all the right buttons and confirms my every prejudice. Every last one.

Therefore, it's most likely fake.

Posted by: OregonMuse at October 29, 2008 09:45 PM (bMJ2V)

49 Ok  then - who paid the "Sarah".  Surly one of you guys can figure that out.  I'm totally serious.  You all, well mypetjawa.mu.nu guy, traced a you-tube post back the ad firm that made the fake palin vid.  So, figure out who she is and see who paid her.

Posted by: robin at October 29, 2008 09:53 PM (lUCxb)

50
At least I got Ace to read one of my posts.

Too bad he didn't read the other one.

Posted by: Tinian at October 29, 2008 09:57 PM (Ohodx)

51 We should all be doing the same, one for REAL and for FREE.  Start plastering your  pro McCain/Palin sentiments in online newspapers in swing state especially. Go. Now.

http://www.50states.com/news/virginia.htm
http://www.50states.com/news/penn.htm
http://www.50states.com/news/ohio.htm
http://www.50states.com/news/florida.htm
http://www.50states.com/news/colorado.htm
http://www.50states.com/news/newhamp.htm
http://www.50states.com/news

I find that respectful and truthful comments go a long way with the undecided. This is a typical exchange I will have:

"First, I hope you understand and respect why I would be asking these questions as a fiscally minded voter. From a very truthful standpoint, what I observe and see for facts are 1) Obama's far left voting history, 2) proven attempts to hide his history and extreme social agenda and 3) his promises to increase government spending rather than curtail it on a road to balancing the budget.  Obama promises a "net" spending difference and to "not make it worse than the republicans have already done" in his own words. How is this fixing anything?  Also, no matter how the end of the Iraq war comes about, what I heard Obama say with his own words is that he would use the money no longer needed for the war in Iraq, decrease military spending and increase taxes to cover his spending proposals to create a "net" spending difference. As a fiscally minded voter I'm just not seeing the joy here.  McCain is proposing to freeze spending and wants to reform the spending problems that the government including Bush has created. He has also demonstrated his centrist attitude and has unapologetically accepted his role as the thorn in the collective republican you-know-what.  Given what I know about Obama and from the facts available, McCain gets my centrist vote with confidence in -  rather than hope for - change. "





Posted by: robin at October 29, 2008 10:02 PM (lUCxb)

52 Is there any use to cry about all of this or should I go straight to the LA TIMES and picket them and their advertisers and make a huge scene, like a "die-in" such as the left does for fur coats and shit? We can hire some fancy photographer to make it seem like "art".

Posted by: Crimson Tide Guy at October 29, 2008 10:03 PM (o9sUK)

53 I reviewed this Hillbuzz confession with Mary Mapes and she agrees that while it is a total fake, it is, however, completely true.

Posted by: SlaveDog at October 29, 2008 10:08 PM (6Gy0q)

54 Oh, and if someone can legitimately explain how they're able to skew polls, I'll be a true believer.

Online polls, as in, "DU this poll!"

Posted by: george at October 29, 2008 10:11 PM (Tw7Fm)

55

OK this is obviously fake.  The astroturfing concept is plausible, though its a bit of a stretch, because I don't think that the Obama campaign takes the moral of conservative bloggers seriously.  Conservatives in general? yes.  Bloggers? Hell no.  I'm not saying we have no use, but we certainly are not acknowledged as a force that is numerically worth fighting.

The tone makes it seem extremely unlikely - people don't confess things in that tone.  I can't explain better than that, but hopefully some of you sense whhat I'm getting at.

But the thing that makes it so obviously fake is the "We are manipulating the polls" business.  A conspiracy to rig the polls is on the order of "Karl Rove tricked me into doing whatever stupid thing I just did" in terms of denial of reality.  That doesn't mean the polls are accurate, it just means that it is highly implausible that they aren't honest attempts to be accurate.

Posted by: MW at October 29, 2008 10:12 PM (YQsF5)

56 Y'know, I'm willing to believe it. There have got to be a lot of young idealists who have decided they have seen grown-up politics and don't like it, because they were signed up on the premise that Teleprompter Jesus was different. They're going to have a lot of confessing to do, especially if our side of the angels is victorious. I mean we used to have this problem working snitches in Iraq. If you got a source telling you what you were pretty sure what you knew was going on, you ran the risk of blowing that source off because you figured there was no way you could have guessed it right and had that much confirmed. We know what they're doing, so this confirms it.

Now the more they confess, the more they're going to have to go into hiding because the real Obama-zombies are going to be real rough on snitches.

Posted by: SGT Dan at October 29, 2008 10:13 PM (0Yr25)

57 Fake or not, we all know that similar actions are taking place. We are in an electronic warfare age that occurs on a national level as hot and contested as anything by Cybercommand et.al. It is an extension of the fight for the brainless and easily controlled. It is also a fight for the "air in the room" and I am certain it is a fight for campaign security (hacks, DOS, etc.)

Posted by: Rich Cox at October 29, 2008 10:14 PM (Sjyn7)

58 Anyone who gets a net benefit from the government shouldn't be allowed to vote.

I don't mind military personnel voting.  Or, government workers. 

Let's just confine the electorate to those with a positive net worth;  would eliminate a lot of the irresponsible riff-raff.

Posted by: george at October 29, 2008 10:17 PM (Tw7Fm)

59 Further on my comment at #57, The skewing polls... yeah... maybe non-scientific voluntary polls. We know the action alert e-mails they issue. Marching orders if you will. The way they flood call-in shows etc. But the statistical polls... no way. However, in that realm, there have been years of discussion or theory in a psychological/ personality difference that leans toward a more leftward tilt.

Posted by: Rich Cox at October 29, 2008 10:22 PM (Sjyn7)

60 Again, most of the poll problem is in the assumptions (turnout, electoral split, etc).

How did that happen?

Posted by: someone at October 29, 2008 10:25 PM (zHoxL)

61

TomV the  "you need to..stop ..... is kind of smarmy."

Just not buyin' the "lifelong Republican for Obsama" thing, but if it works for you run with it.

Posted by: Wilhelm Klink The Cool at October 29, 2008 10:29 PM (8D00g)

62 I'm sorry but how could concern trolls affect the polls?

Posted by: toetotoetotoe at October 29, 2008 10:30 PM (X8Omj)

63

Crap, George points out in post 54 a possible interpretation that I overlooked, that of online polls.  But really, I stand by my conclusion, since confessions do not sound like that - they just don't.  And although the online thing is plausible, its not so clear that's what it means.

Really, its ok to be upset at all the stuff Obama is known to be doing - you don't need to postulate conspiracy theories the way the Democrats do when KKKarl Rove uses his Jedi Mind tricks on them.

I actually do think the polls are probably accurate (on average), simply because it is natural, in a country where people tend to blame bad things on the party that holds the white house, for people to be abandoning the GOP at this time.  It is what you would expect to happen.

By the way people, as much as I agree that the democrats had their part to play in the economic crash,  I really get the sense, talking to people that I know who are smart, nonpartisan econo-wonks, that this whole mess is the result not of a stupid idea, or even a stupid philosophy, but rather a product of 30 years of many completely unsustainable economic policies that were perpetuated by big government regulators and free market types across the political spectrum, by a culture that has just been in complete denial about the fundamental unsoundness of its economy.  That doesn't mean no one's to blame, or anything as vague as "society" is to blame, but we probably can't pin this mess on democrats, or even government regulators, alone, or even primarily.

So even though the media is being unfair to us, I wouldn't go insane and think the whole world is backwards if we don't pull this off - even without the media against us this would really be an uphill struggle.

We should still vote, and put just as much effort into this stuff, because it IS still just as important, but we need to understand that the final result, if it doesn't go our way, is probably not the result of the election being stolen, unless the margin is really close, in which case we should nail them to the wall on fraud.

Actually, scratch that, nail them to the wall on any fraud anyway, just don't despair if it doesn't happen.

 

Posted by: MW at October 29, 2008 10:32 PM (YQsF5)

64 Speaking of Jay Cost/RCP:

I started reading RCP in 2004, when it was just Tom and John working on their own. They *gasp* actually would debunk bullshit polls and engage in some spirited partisanship.

But, when they teamed up with Time, they became like Parker and Noonan in that they were more interested in keeping their ad partners happy than exposing bogus polls in a non pompous, non DJ Drummond fashion. Now, they are even factoring in Kos-paid polls into their average!

As for Jay, I don't know what his deal is. I think it's a bit of the Noonan/Parker syndrome.

Gah, if only we had poll debunkers who weren't pompous clods who would write 60,000 word posts over at a site that gave a room to Lee Ward.

Posted by: eddiebear at October 29, 2008 10:33 PM (rItML)

65 Again, most of the poll problem is in the assumptions (turnout, electoral split, etc).

The biggest assumption is that people being scientifically polled tell the truth.  Saw mentioned on one of the blogs today that on the eve of  Michigan's vote to ban affirmative action the polls were running ten points against the initiative.  It won by sixteen points.

Posted by: george at October 29, 2008 10:33 PM (Tw7Fm)

66 Much of the media reporting of polls is the effort to depress GOPers and convince them they shouldn't even bother showing up while trying to influence the squishes to vote for The Zero. Hence the MSM poll tactics of oversampling or polling on weekends (of which, WSJ/NBC is the worst)

Why is it the MSM never discusses a poll when it's good news for a Republican, and yet will have above the fold or top of the broadcast coverage of one that is good for a Dem, regardless of methodology?

Posted by: eddiebear at October 29, 2008 10:35 PM (rItML)

67 I wonder if this O-bot's "confession" on a PUMA site is just a way to fuck with their heads and show them how AWESOME!!!!!11!!1! and smarter they are.

Posted by: eddiebear at October 29, 2008 10:36 PM (rItML)

68

even without the media against us this would really be an uphill struggle.

I have to disagree with you on this. Obama's past and current associations would be toxic to any conservative candidate. If the media were even a little bit fair in putting some legwork into vetting The One, then he wouldn't have even made it out of the primaries.

Posted by: Warden at October 29, 2008 10:50 PM (QoR4a)

69 Tom upon further review I think I missed your sarcasm. I hate when I do that. Sorry.

Posted by: Wilhelm Klink The UnCool at October 29, 2008 10:50 PM (8D00g)

70

I don't mind military personnel voting.  Or, government workers. 

Just to clarify, I was referring to transfer payments. 

Posted by: Warden at October 29, 2008 10:51 PM (QoR4a)

71 If the media were even a little bit fair in putting some legwork into vetting The One, then he wouldn't have even made it out of the primaries.

I'm more inclined to think that the media did (at least in the beginning) vet Obama and then had an "Oh, shit!" moment and sat on what they discovered or suspected, i.e., the LA Times burying the Kalidi tape.

Then again, maybe I'm giving them more credit....

Posted by: george at October 29, 2008 11:00 PM (Tw7Fm)

72

Color me skeptical, although I'm not saying it is absolutely not true. 

What I don't get is the idea that a voter would be dumb enough to let some freak posting on a web site influence how they vote, or would not vote because of the appearance that their candidate will likely not win. 

I also don't get the concept of the "undecided voter" this late in the game.

Posted by: TheReSaDEe at October 29, 2008 11:07 PM (MO2LE)

73 It's fake but accurate.

Posted by: SarahW at October 29, 2008 11:15 PM (7sl9X)

74 It's a buck-up job.

Posted by: SarahW at October 29, 2008 11:16 PM (7sl9X)

75 Fake or not, after the election it is inevitable that many will "confess".  I don't put that words in quotes to mean that the word doesn't have its normal meaning; I put it in quotes to mean that what we now think of as suspect confessions will become more common once the voting is done.

There are a lot of people hiding a lot of things and doing things that aren't truly in the best traditions of honest democracy.  A lot of them.  A certain per centage of them will want to unload that burden once the it's all over but the shouting.

Posted by: ArrMatey at October 29, 2008 11:29 PM (35LYA)

76

If you're so stupid that a "concern troll" changes your mind........

Never mind, you are the ones who posted this stuff.

 

Posted by: smoke at October 30, 2008 12:03 AM (i5D30)

77 As a christian conservative republican, I'm deeply concerned about what my party has to offer me. I mean, think about it.  At what price would you sell your vote for the coming election?  If you were offered financial reparations, a discounted mortgage or even a free home, would you sell your vote?  Is prosperity for "sale," and what price would you pay?  

This is why I'm selling my vote to a Marxist Redistributionist.  He'll set things right. He'll give me all of the free shit that I toiled an entire lifetime to achieve. Vote Obama, -- because you're a Fucking Whore like me.

Posted by: Fritz at October 30, 2008 12:15 AM (UU4Hu)

78 <i>Anyone who gets a net benefit from the government shouldn't be allowed to vote. I know that's a fantasy, but that's the way it ought to be.</i>

John Stuart Mill, who was something of  socialist, actually argued along these lines in the 19th century.

Posted by: Catbert077 at October 30, 2008 12:44 AM (/hhTC)

79

I have a theory that there are people working for the Obama campaign (either paid or volunteers) whose SOLE job is to scour major and minor blogs and news sites 24/7 and put up pro-Obama/anti-McCain posts.

Yes, I've even caught them on British and Australian blogs.

Posted by: andycanuck at October 30, 2008 12:51 AM (GGy7k)

80 Thank you, my fellow morons, for enlightening me on Jay Cost. I wondered what the hell happened to him. He did great work. Didn't take the little assclown long to sell out , did it. Hope you're getting all the free shit from the magical mystical marxist that you toiled a lifetime to achieve, Jay.

Posted by: nonsequiturd at October 30, 2008 01:01 AM (o3yZA)

81 If you have the money, bet against Obama on intrade.  the odds make it a very good bet.

You can bet your life that Axelrod has devoted tons of money to skewing this once reliable indicator. 

I'm heartened to see that Axelrod actually aimed at RCP... that used to be my main indicator, and it's been bad news for a while.  Now I know why.  They are targeting people like me... hoping we don't waste a week volunteering for Mccain.  My wife is complaining about me being gone for the campaign, and I admit, if I really thought Mccain had no chance, I wouldn't be going.  So how many thousands of volunteers are not going precisely because of these undemocratic efforts?

These are extremely dishonest tactics, and they seem to be illegal if they do not have a 'paid for by' disclaimer.  Will anyone ever drag Axelrod in front of a committee and ask him, under oath, if any of this has happened?  I want a special counsel dedicated to investigating the illegal financing and operation of Obama's campaign, and of course the destruction of normal people who asked Obama 'tough' questions.  Let Obama pardon the crooks if he wins.

I think the election is extremely close.  Folks are mad at Bush, but scared of Obama.  No one really has a reason to hate Mccain aside from his moderate tendancy. 

If Catbert and Mill had their way, this nation would be so much better off, and billion dollar campaigns simply wouldn't occur, but they do occur.  Please do something to help Mccain's election.  Anything you can do.

Posted by: Shill at October 30, 2008 01:05 AM (8jYMc)

82

I have to disagree with you on this. Obama's past and current associations would be toxic to any conservative candidate. If the media were even a little bit fair in putting some legwork into vetting The One, then he wouldn't have even made it out of the primaries.

Well, even if we had Clinton to run against instead of Obama, I'm not sure that would be too much easier.  A lot of the dirt that was dug up on her would have been brushed off as old news, even by an unbiased media, just because it would be boring. 

Keep in mind, I am assuming that all of these what-ifs are under the condition that the economy still imploded.  I really think that it's extremely hard to fight against that, even with some more balance from the press.

Really, though, its kind of hard to say what would happen if the media were fair - if the media were fair, would the natural, "punish the guy in the white house" impulse still be there?  I don't think that fundamental trait is related to media bias, I think it's a function of people wanting a personification for their scapegoat, and the easiest branch of government to personify is the executive.

In any case, my pessimism is not a license for people to not vote.  I'm not a concern troll.  Of course, if I were, I would be claiming that I'm not, so can you trust me?

Seriously, though, even if you knew 100% sure that we were going to lose, it would be important to make the margin as small as possible, in terms of how much we lost in congress, and in terms of how much we lost the presidency  (the latter would be important to reduce the strength of Obama's apparent mandate).  Really, if you think we have no hope of winning, then we are facing a much more dire situation and your help in controlling the damage is more sorely needed.

Posted by: MW at October 30, 2008 02:37 AM (YQsF5)

83 As a life-long Republican, I'm going to be pissed at myself and the world when I vote for McPalin, because I will have been forced to reward the GOP's big-government drift. We may never have a "best choice" like Reagan again--it'll always be one of these damn "lesser of 2 suckinesses" situations. Seriously, if McCain wins (which is still way better than a leftist super-majority), the chimps running the GOP will think that America has spoken, and they want Big-Ass Government up in their grill, yo!

Posted by: Poop at October 30, 2008 02:42 AM (3rhcN)

84 MW, you're totally right.  We need to be represented.  Even if we were only going to get 5% of the vote in a socialist counrty... it's out civic duty to get the fuck out there and speak our mind.

Also, while I think Hillary would have been tough, I don't think she would have fought in this astroturfy way, and I don't think she'd have had as much help from voter fraudists... sure, I'm sure she'd have done plenty to piss me off this election, but she is simply a lot more centrist than Obama, and the crazies see her as a DLC DINO.

She would have made a safer president than Obama... she is friends with normal people... we know much more about her, and she doesn't pal around with Ayers and Dhorn and Wright and Khalidi, and every other psycho out there.  She would have been strong on defense, and soft on domestic issues.  It's not that clear to me that she'd be much different from Mccain.  I'd still vote Mccain over her (especially for Palin), but I don't see why Hillary supporters wouldn't prefer Mccain over Obama (as many seem to).

Obama is downright scary.  His supporters are criminals who do not mind damaging the democratic system with ACORN, or free speech with illegal searches.  Hillary would have been at least a bit restrained.  I'd take a sure Hillary victory over a possible Obama victory any day.

Posted by: Shill at October 30, 2008 02:44 AM (8jYMc)

85 poop, while this is how I feel too... Reagan was not evidently so great until after he was elected.  His primary virtue was always the way he communicated positivity about the American experiment.

Mccain is a centrist at heart... and he doesn't have the warmth of Reagan, but I have faith that he knows enough that he would attempt to do much of what Reagan did and Bush 43 did not.  Even Clinton knew that facing the people confidently is critical.  Mccain is a very good president for the GWOT, like Reagan was for the cold war. 

Will the GOP really keep up their spending bullshit?  They may very well have no way of showing us... being in the minority as they are.  Man I wish Newt had more control over his personal life.  I'd give a lot to have him running the show.

Posted by: Shill at October 30, 2008 02:50 AM (8jYMc)

86 Yeah, Newt really torpedoed more than himself with his personal decisions.

Posted by: Poop at October 30, 2008 03:00 AM (3rhcN)

87 Hey, if you want to determine if it's true, just offer a reward.  A truly non-committed, apologetic person would gladly produce proof for a few bucks, right?  Get paid and absolve your guilty conscience in one fell swoop.

Posted by: douglas at October 30, 2008 03:23 AM (20QoQ)

88

Oh, and if someone can legitimately explain how they're able to skew polls, I'll be a true believer.

It's easy to skew a poll.  All they have to do when polled is say that they are Republicans voting for Obama.  When the pollster is done collecting data, they look at the sample for how many are D/R/I.  They then adjust the data for what they believe the numbers to be.  For instance, if they believe that the actual population is 42 D/33 R/25 I and the survey sample is 45 D/30 R/25 I, they will discount the D answers and boost the R scores so that it more closely represents ahwt they believe the population to be. Therefore, an R answer claiming to be for the One will count more than a D answer the same way.

Posted by: Steve L. at October 30, 2008 08:10 AM (o0YD+)

89

As a (CHOOSE ONE: "pro-life Christian conservative"/ "former senior editor of The Weekly Standard"/ "life member of the National Rifle Association") who is deeply concerned about (CHOOSE ONE: "fighting the gay agenda"/ "preventing terrorism"/ "illegal immigration") and (CHOOSE ONE: "ending the abortion Holocaust"/ "restoring integrity to higher education"/ "race-mixing"), I have been proudly voting Republican since 1964.

Now, however, I find myself deeply troubled by John McCain's (CHOOSE ONE: "choice of Sara Palin"/ "resort to negative campaign tactics"/ "fathering an illegitimate mulatto child").

America needs a strong leader who can (CHOOSE ONE: "balance the budget"/"help middle-class families"/ "run the neocon Jewish warmongers out of the State Department"), and it is clear to me that Barack Obama is that leader.

Sincerely,

YOUR SIGNATURE HERE

Posted by: Lifelong Committed Conservative at October 30, 2008 03:18 PM (vKwFx)

90 Posted by: Bury Obama at October 29, 2008 08:05 PM (gJFp6)

Do you realize you could go to jail for stuff like this?

I think this woman's post is pure fabrication. Does not jibe with the people's experiences that actually work for that campaign.

There are trolls on every site. Mostly they have no life and believe in conspiracy.

Posted by: Voice of Reason at October 31, 2008 08:14 PM (o+5vP)

Posted by: himily at December 18, 2008 09:54 PM (CecZA)

Posted by: baidu at July 21, 2009 04:49 AM (pXYcm)

93 货架 货架 托盘 托盘 货架

Posted by: google排名 at August 12, 2009 03:44 AM (KUnwh)

Posted by: fdsfds at October 27, 2009 07:24 PM (8kvkz)

Posted by: airforceoneshop at November 03, 2009 08:20 PM (LHCCE)

96 Come to our website for shopping with high quality and best service! There have new products,MBT M. Walk
and MBT Lami,Welcome everybody to buy it.

Posted by: mbt shoes at November 08, 2009 02:45 PM (QhfLM)

Posted by: ugg boots at November 12, 2009 09:35 AM (IeIJx)

Posted by: replica watches at November 17, 2009 05:29 AM (xpuiO)

Posted by: replica watches at November 17, 2009 08:08 AM (xpuiO)

Posted by: replica watches at November 18, 2009 02:15 AM (C/zDM)

Posted by: replica watches at November 18, 2009 07:23 AM (C/zDM)

Posted by: mbtshoesbuy at November 23, 2009 01:25 PM (bNNim)

103 The proper function of man is to live, but not to exist.ugg classic cardyConquer fear of death and you are put into possession of your life. ugg classic tallThere is a time to speak and a time to be silent. ugg knightsbridgefree shippingmbt cheap
mbt sale
mbt uk
mbt shoes cheap
MBT M.Walk

Posted by: reviewups at November 27, 2009 12:06 PM (xUZwC)

Posted by: replica watches at December 04, 2009 11:48 AM (bsW/x)

Posted by: Lacoste shoes at December 13, 2009 02:48 PM (/3s/N)

Posted by: wholesale jewelry at December 18, 2009 09:53 PM (1dySH)

Posted by: replica watches at December 19, 2009 07:54 AM (wd3Wb)

Posted by: wholesale jewelry at December 27, 2009 10:37 PM (1dySH)

109 Un total de once comunidades autnomas estn este jueves en alerta naranja Christmas gift ugg tall boots (riesgo importante) por nevadas y bajan las temperaturas en toda Espa09a, segn la Agencia Estatal de Meteorologa (AEMET). En concreto, se Christmas gift ugg napoule sandal trata de Aragn, Cantabria, Castilla-La Mancha, Catalu09a, Christmas gift timberland classic boots Madrid, Navarra, Comunidad Valenciana, Galicia, Pas Vasco, Asturias y Murcia. La cota de nieve bajar a menos de 200 metros en el CantbricoLa Pennsula Ibrica est bajo dos borrascas y un anticicln que crearn un pasillo que permitir el paso de una corriente de aire muy fro, como la que est provocando un temporal de fro glaciar en Europa, aunque es esperan que el fro que suframos no sea tan intenso como en otros pases. An as, se espera que las bajas temperaturas se mantengan hasta el domingo. La cota de nieve baja en el Cantbrico a menos de 200 metros

Posted by: El temporal de fr¨ªo y nieve pone en alerta a once comunidades aut¨®nomas ugg boots|ugg uk|timberlan at January 10, 2010 07:46 AM (tWrEP)

110

Swiss replica watches Now while replica watches you can buy a good digital replica watches and pocket watch you might need to see what features are present on your new purchase. This is important as you should know and understand the quickest way to set any of the watch brands. You will also need to familiarize yourself with how to know when you will need to change the batteries on your digital watch.The key to finding your perfect watch is mainly replica watches keeping your options open. There are flea markets where you should be able to find replica watch stalls. You can see if you will come across any great antique watch brands in auction houses. These places will sometimes have fantastic looking antique pocket watches that will grace the hand of any owner.These facts may seem to be quite daunting but if you have ever owned a watch of any kind then you will replica watches know that you just how replica watches easy wristwatch these devices can make your life. The many different styles and features that you can find on an average watch will make choosing the right watch brands an exciting experience.

Posted by: replica watches at January 29, 2010 10:41 PM (ihruD)

111 Certainly watches are Replica Watches used to help people record rolex Watches time, but rolex watches nowadays its functions have enlarged. Replica watches are now tag heuer Watches not only objects that tag heuer watches can tell you what time it is, they are also a status symbol. You should not feel strange when you find someone wearing a watch on his wrist, but use the cell phone to tell time. In that situation, the watch is just showing its luxurious function cartier watches. It is normal and cartier watches perhaps also happens to you. .If asked that among the watches of various brands, which one can suit your taste? There is no doubt that most people will choose Rolex. Whichever social class you are in, it is naturally Rolex was known breitling Watches and cherished breitling watches for a long time. However, the elements do not usually enter the market alone, always come with the price tag up to the hand. For this reason, many people, especially men, their dreams of luxury Rolex watches are buried in omega Watches his heart omega watches. What should I do? Rolex watches are simply stunning worn by the rich and famous, right? No, this world is not the world's richest men, is the world of each. All are equal before the search of luxury and be men's watches respected. Within men's watches, the law, when consumers are in the market, women's watches they should women's watches receive the same treatment. This is the real reason why replica Rolex watches are ladies watches ladies watches more welcome than Rolex. Because in this world are not difficult to understand that the rich are much less than people with low income, you agree with me? You are forced to nod and say with certainty that is the reality. These low-income people do not have enough money to save every month. They can not afford such luxury Rolex watches

Posted by: replica watches at February 05, 2010 08:15 AM (TUJDt)

112 Factors Replica Watches About The Rolex replica watches Oyster The Oyster is so closely get in touch with Rolex, and it is inevitably that some people think these are the only Replica watches Rolex manufacture. Others suppose that there is a single Oyster watch. But as a matter of fact, the name Oyster does not actually meant for a rolex Watches particular watch you can buy rolex watches or even to a series but to a type of case that available in some of the Rolex ranges. History The Oyster case was first released in 1926. The objective was to protect the workings of the watch from dust and moisture. Early watches were far from waterproof. The Oyster tag heuer Watchescase was an tag heuer watches innovative design to eliminate these problems. It had a new double locking crown that screwed into place. It has been compared to the hatch on a submarine. Like a submarine, the Oyster case was waterproof. In 1927 Mercedes Gleitze swam the English breitling Watches Channel breitling watches . Before she set off she was presented with a Rolex Oyster. When she arrived, the watch was still working perfectly. The resulting publicity gave the new case a massive boost. Why is it called Oyster? Legend has it that Hans cartier Watches Wilsdorf cartier watches, who invented the Oyster, chose the name because the new case reminded him of the difficulty he had experienced prising open oysters at dinner. Since then the Oyster has further, particularly advanced. Many Oyster watches today are omega Watches perpetual-self-winding, in other omega watches words, it does not require to expose the mechanism to the outside world in order to wind it. The Osyter Perpetual is one of the toughest, most durable, most reliable watches (under truly adverse conditions). It is probably the best mechanical watch money can buy.

Posted by: replica watches at February 08, 2010 07:31 AM (TUJDt)






Processing 0.05, elapsed 0.0522 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0077 seconds, 121 records returned.
Page size 124 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat