Ding Dong - Big Time?

Is Fidel Castro finally dead? Publius Pundit has a roundup that the man (or monster) that has kept Cuba in thrall for 47 years may finally be dead. He has been a brutal dictator and has kept his island nation back from real progress in the world for far too long. If he is gone at last, then it is not a bad thing for the people he has tormented and oppressed for too long.

On Saturday, his sycophant, Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez, flew into Havana (scroll down), possibly to bid a final farewell to his Cuban master. And Brazil’s President Lula da Silva made a slip of the tongue last weekend, saying ‘when Castro was alive…’ forgetting no one had announced that The Beast was dead. Meanwhile, Otto Reich reports that news agencies are getting visits from Castroite government functionaries regarding coming funeral arrangements, including seating, best camera angles, visas, how-tos ahead the coming spectacle…where guerrillas, tyrants, and Sandalista suckups will gather in one horrible place to mourn their hero.

I think there is little doubt that the Monster of Havana who has spent 47 years destroying Cuba, is at or near death. The Grim Reaper is after him, and the sickle is no longer on a little flag with a hammer; it’s real.

It’s over.

As that happens, brutal crackdowns are happening against Cuba’s innocent independent librarians. Like this one by Castro’s savage martial artist goons who specialize in assaulting members of Cuba’s fragile green shoots of civil society, people like these:

Go over and take a look at what Castro's machine is like. Take a hard look, you dilettantes who think his brutal dictatorship stood as a "beacon" against the country that allows you the freedom to ally yourself with a monster. Castro was a beacon alright. Guiding the way to a place in Hell. Fausta has more.

One hopes he enjoys his stay there.

One hopes.

UPDATE: Val Prieto at Babalu Blog:

I will honor my parents, both of whom at the age that I am now, were subjected to horrors unimaginable to me and whose determination to save their children from a life of hatred and indoctrination made them begin life anew in a new country with a new language and a new culture. They arrived here naked and toiled the rest of their lives to clothe me and my sister with freedom. I will go to their home that day, the home where I was raised here in exile, and I will shed more than a few tears. I know that they will perhaps never return to Cuba but I will promise them that I will one day see the home where I was born. I will one day lay flowers on the graves of lost loved ones in Cuba. I will one day see what caused them so much pain to leave.

"They arrived here naked and toiled the rest of their lives to clothe me and my sister with freedom." Do you - can you - understand that sentence you admirers of Fidel Castro? Do you understand what that means to people who fled the monster you admire and lionize? No, you dilettantes will mourn the monster. Better that you should mourn your humanity.

Snakes On A Cop!

Or snakes in a cop station! It seems a woman in Shamokin, Pennsylvania was reported to the police as being suicidal. The police responded and found the woman holding a knife to her own throat (I get a distinct mental image of Cleavon Little holding the gun to his own head in Blazing Saddles right now). But the knife just wasn't the right thing. apparently. She grabbed a couple of rattlesnakes she kept about the place and waved them at the officers. The snakes took a small bit of umbrage at this and bit her. Repeatedly.

She put down the knife but began waving the snakes at the officers, and was herself bitten on the arms and face. She put down the snakes and again grabbed the knife, but Mount Carmel police arrived with a stun weapon and used it to immobilize her, Brown said.

The woman was taken to Geisinger Medical Center in Danville for treatment of the snake bites, and officers brought aquariums back to the station containing two western diamondback rattlesnakes, a pygmy rattlesnake and two copperheads, each about 30 inches long, Brown said.

This is the funniest part of all this: The next morning, the police station's receptionist walked into the chief's office, to be greeted by the threatening sound of the rattlers doing what they do best - rattling. And she said: "I dropped my cell phone and almost my coffee." Almost. Her. Coffee. Thank God that's safe.

Played Like A Cheap Violin

The Associated Press is reporting that the kerfluffle over the so-called silencing of the Dixie Chicks and the ads for their new movie appear to be nothing more than a publicity stunt. So say the networks involved, NBC and CW.

CBS has agreed to air the ad, a spokeswoman for the Weinstein Co. said. ABC and Fox have not given an answer while the CW and NBC rejected it. The film distributors said NBC explained it was because the ad disparaged President Bush.

"We were very surprised, especially because this is a movie that deals with the whole issue," said Gary Faber, head of marketing at Weinstein. He suggested that the statements made in the ad are not unlike the opinions offered by commentators on political talk shows.

But Alan Wurtzel, head of standards and practices at NBC, said it is network policy not to accept ads on issues of public controversy — like abortion or the war.

While the Weinstein Co. had shown NBC its ads, it had not inquired about buying commercial time, he said. Generally, when an ad is rejected, prospective advertisers return and work with the network on ways to make it acceptable — as was done with the Michael Moore film "Fahrenheit 9/11," he said.

But NBC heard nothing more from makers of "Shut Up & Sing" until portions of what NBC executives thought were confidential business correspondence showed up in a news release, he said.

"There was no attempt to come back and have a conversation," Wurtzel said. "There are times when some advertisers get more publicity for having their ad rejected."

The CW said a Weinstein representative discussed the ad with a low-level network official who questioned whether the network had the right programming to fit the ad.

"It was the beginning of a dialogue at a low level and it didn't get beyond that when they decided to go to the media about it," network spokesman Paul McGuire said.

The CW would accept the ad if commercial time was bought, he said. (Emphasis added)

Now the right leaning bloggers I have read about this either dismissed it out of hand as a publicity stunt or, as I did, made fun of the Chicks and their hyperventilation. Or both. But the left? A different story altogether.

TPM: "This really is pretty unbelievable: NBC won't run ads for the Dixie Chicks documentary because, in the words of the NBC's commercial clearance department, "they are disparaging to President Bush."

Networks usually at least go to the length of coming up with a phony 'we don't run ads with a political message' excuse. But I'm not sure I've ever seen one say something like this."

All Spin Zone: "Two interesting stories have emerged today regarding NBC and their political bias. If you need further evidence after Path to 9/11 that the big three networks are almost, in essence, state-controlled TV, look no further."

Crooks and Liars: "Back in 2003, I was busy practicing and playing music as much as I could, but when I heard that maniacs were issuing death threats against the Dixie Chicks because they spoke out against Bush—you might say it woke me up about where our country was headed. Not about Bush, but about wingnut behavior. I knew they were setting the tone that anyone who spoke out against their Dear Leader was in for a world of hurt. I take a very deep interest in the Dixie Chicks now because of their courage.

AmericaBlog: "Let's just all pack up and move to Canada because this isn't our country anymore. But then again, I have a better idea. Once Democrats win back the congress we have a long and hard look at media consolidation, and more importantly, media bias and whether the large networks have essentially been bought off by the Republicans. The Fairness Doctrine went away a long time ago, and as a result, whether through coercion or wooing, the networks have gone Republican.

The Agonist: "I imagine NBC just made sure a lot of people will go see it. NBC is owned by GE, by the way. By pretending not to be political, they just made sure that they will be seen as political. A lot of of companies have been doing this. Interesting bet they're making. They better hope they win it.

Hullabaloo: "Call me cynical, but I suspect that if the Republicans are out of office, they still won't have any problem getting their propaganda publicized like mad on all the major networds, no matter how vicious, how false, or how un-American.

What to do in the here and now? Well, I'd boycott NBC except for one thing. I can't remember the last time I watched anything on NBC. The closest was a few Olbermann web clips that didn't have any commercials, so I guess I've just been given one more very good reason to ignore NBC's programming."

Glenn Greenwald: "The networks are still a very powerful public opinion instrument, and allowing them to become political propaganda venues — where messages that "disparage" the Leader are prohibited while all sorts of pro-Leader messages are allowed — has the potential to be quite harmful. We seem to be well on our way to that result."

Every single one of you just got played. You got suckered by what you wanted to hear coming from somebody you thought was a hero (or from the corporation representing them). They took you in and used you to give them free publicity.

And you should be righteously pissed. Big time.

This Is One Of Those Things

That won't really make any difference in the end, but does show that Harold Ford is a little bit inexperienced about foreign affairs. It seems he gave a speech where he casually tossed off the names of countries interested in getting nuclear weapons. He threw Australia in there. Which comes as a surprise to Australia.  

His skilled oration on domestic politics may be flawless, but his grip on foreign policy is error-prone. Yesterday he stumbled into gaffes on the North Korean nuclear tests and then mentioned Australia in the same breath as rogue nations wanting to go nuclear.

"Here we are in a world today where more countries have access to nuclear weapons than ever before," Mr Ford said, adding that when he left college in 1992 he thought the nuclear age had come to an end "and America would find ways to eliminate the number of chances that a rogue group or a rogue nation would get their hands on nuclear material".

"Today nine countries have it - more than ever before - and 40 are seeking it, including Argentina, Australia and South Africa," he said.

Mr Ford was referring to the nine known nuclear weapon states: the US, the UK, Russia, China, France, India, Pakistan, Israel and now North Korea.

He said this made the US less safe because "more countries have nuclear weapons today which means the possibility of nuclear weapons falling into the wrong hands has increased dramatically".

On North Korea, he claimed Pyongyang had conducted two nuclear tests, the first of which he said occurred on July 4. This confuses the ballistic tests Pyongyang carried out on that date with the single nuclear test earlier this month.

The gaffes were lost on the audience and he was given a rousing standing ovation from Democrats and Republicans alike. Any chance of clarifying Mr Ford's remarks with the man himself was impossible as minders shielded any international media from asking questions, ushering Mr Ford away.

"You don't win us any votes," said his spokeswoman. And she might have added that it also means he is insulated from pesky questions probing his limitations on enunciating a foreign policy involving a trusted ally.

In point of fact, South Africa gave up its program. Australia has no interest in getting any of these weapons - at least for now. It has never expressed any interest and does not have a nuclear infrastructure at all. They only own one research reactor which is used for making medical isotopes.

Like I said, it won't nake any difference.

All Signs Point To A Hubble Repair Mission

There will not be anything official until Tuesday when a "gala" press conference has been scheduled, but it looks very, very good for a shuttle mission to repair the Hubble telescope.

The decision rests with NASA Administrator Michael Griffin, who hasn't yet made up his mind, NASA spokesman Dean Acosta said Friday in an e-mail.

However, the space agency sent out a press release about a gala announcement ceremony for Tuesday at the Goddard Space Center in suburban Washington, which helps oversee the 16-year-old space telescope.

The NASA press release said the ceremony includes a "news conference with the astronauts who would carry out the mission" — if the agency decides to go ahead with a shuttle flight to rehab the telescope.

And Griffin has previously said, "If we can do it safely, we want to do it."

Griffin worked on Hubble earlier in his career and recently described it as "one of the great scientific instruments of all time."

Another good sign for fans of the space telescope is that U.S. Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., one of Capitol Hill's most prominent supporters of saving it, will join Griffin at Goddard, her office said.

"I think they've decided yes, but they haven't done it officially," said University of Wisconsin-Madison astronomer Jay Gallagher, who is a member of a science team responsible for one of Hubble's cameras. "Everything we've been hearing in our community is yes, so I'm hopeful that this is going to happen."

The issue that NASA officials had to wrestle with was shuttle safety. If the spacecraft heading to the aging telescope has a problem, there is no place to go for safe haven, unlike NASA's 14 remaining shuttle missions to the international space station. Former NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe 2 1/2 years ago canceled a repair mission amid the fallout from the 2003 Columbia accident that killed seven astronauts.

This would appear to be very good news for fans of the Hubble. With the new safety protocols, NASA would have to have a second shuttle on the launch pad ready to go in case a rescue was needed.

Marooned Memphis Manatee Missing

It seems someone in Tennessee finally came to their senses. The marooned manatee that attracted so much media attention has disappeared from the Memphis area. 

A rescue team from Florida called off the search for the missing manatee early Thursday because of bad weather.

The animal was first spotted Saturday in the Wolf River Harbor, and the rescue was mounted because the water is too cold for it.

A wildlife biologist says the longer the manatee is in the cold water the more dangerous it'll be for it. The manatee will be taken back to the warmer waters off Florida by truck once its found.

To protect the manatee, which apparently swam up from the Gulf of Mexico, police have restricted onlookers to bluffs overlooking the shallow waterway between downtown Memphis and Mud Island, a three-mile-long island with a pleasure boat marina and residential neighborhood.

This explains the brisk trade we have experienced here in requests for our manatee brisket recipe.

Antidote For Dixie Chickitis

Getting a rash from the endless screeching coming from the Dixie Chicks? Exhausted by their endless whining about being silenced? Which they deliver on television, in a new movie and in endless cover stories in magazines? Ready to puke at the stupidity of people who cannot understand the difference between free speech and the consequences of their own actions in alienating the people who they expect to buy their product?

You, my friend, have a bad, bad case of Dixie Chickitis.

There is only one known cure for it. Listen to Poster Girl by Beccy Cole at least twice or until you stop hearing the power whine emanating from the left.

Beccy's website is here. (Many thanks to Blackfive for finding this gem).

Paris Is Burning

The 1966 movie Is Paris Burning? is about the withdrawal of German forces from the city and the ultimate disobeyal of Adolph Hitler's direct orders to burn the city if the Germans could not hold it. It has taken 62 years, but Hitler's orders are finally being followed, but by Islamist driven mobs this time. The French government has ordered an additional 4,000 riot police into the Paris suburbs to try to stem the rioting. There are more reports of armed "youths" burning buses.

The move came on the one-year anniversary of the death of two teenagers which sent a wave of urban riots surging through France, sparking the country's most serious social crisis in 30 years.

"Four thousand police have been made available and will reinforce local personnel in order to ensure the security of citizens in sensitive districts," a national police headquarters spokesman said.

They will be used "in accordance with events on the ground", the spokesman said, adding that their presence will be "discreet but reactive and effective."

Police also said two masked men attacked a bus outside the train station at Blanc-Mesnil, in the violence-prone Seine Saint Denis region, forcing the driver and passengers to get out then setting the vehicle on fire, in the fifth such incident in 48 hours.

Police said the men were armed but did not specify the weapons used. They had spread petrol in the vehicle then set it alight.

The bus company said the driver and the 15 or so passengers aboard were not harmed.

After starting the fire, the men disengaged the vehicle's brake and allowed it to roll down a hill where it crashed into a barrier on a bend in the road, near to homes, according to witnesses.

Authorities are on high alert for a new flare-up of violence after youth gangs, some carrying handguns, torched — and in one case hijacked — three buses near Paris on Wednesday.

In Clichy-sous-Bois, the poor northeast Paris suburb where the riots erupted on October 27, 2005, around 1,000 people, most of them youngsters, filed quietly Friday morning past the spot where the two boys died.

France has a major problem right now. It does not appear to be getting any better at the moment even though the government has flooded Paris with Police. How long until martial law is declared?

Venezuela Continues To Block

They are accusing Guatemala of backing out of talks to resolve the UN Security Council voting deadlock, but from the rhetoric it certainly sounds more like the only compromise Chavez will accept is the substitution of his pet regime in Bolivia. That one will not fly. Everyone knows that Bolivia is going to do Venezuela's bidding if they get the seat.

Venezuela's Foreign Minister Nicolas Maduro said if talks resume his government will again propose Bolivia as a compromise nation "because it is an emerging country with a new leadership representing very well South America."

Latin American diplomats had hoped that high-level talks on Thursday between Maduro and Guatemalan Foreign Minister Gert Rosenthal could break the impasse after 41 ballots failed to produce a winner, but both countries refused to withdraw.

Guatemala has led Venezuela in all but one of the votes, where they tied, but it has been clear since the early ballots that neither can muster the needed two-thirds support in the 192-nation U.N. General Assembly.

The United States backs Guatemala, and leftist Venezuela is led by the fiercely anti-American President Hugo Chavez.

Maduro said that between Monday and Tuesday several countries were contacted as possible alternatives as agreed by the two countries. Some said no and some agreed to be considered as a possible compromise, he said.

But at Thursday's meeting "they said they were canceling all the talks and they did not recognize the agreements made on Monday and Tuesday," he told two reporters after meeting Arab nations to campaign for additional votes.

"The Foreign Ministry of Guatemala is changing its mind because they are following the signal sent by the U.S. administration," Maduro said.

Richard Grenell, spokesman for the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, rejected Maduro's claim.

"Venezuela's strategy has always been to make this about the United States. This issue is about who would serve best on the Security Council. Clearly, it is our opinion that Guatemala is the best candidate," he said.

At the end of Thursday's meeting, Guatemala's Rosenthal said Guatemala was not willing to step down.

"We still believe we have the possibility of getting enough votes to prevail," he said. "Our position is different from theirs — they don't have any chances."

It sounds as if Guatemala will not "compromise" by giving Chavez his way. Chavez again demonstrates his incompetence as a diplomat.

Two World Views

There have been several discussions lately comparing different frames of reference on this election. There have been comparisons between "Blog Time" and "Mainstream Media Time" that asks which frame of reference will hold through the election and what the implications will be for the old and the new media. There has been speculation as to whether there will be a wave as the mainstream media speculates (and is frankly pimping for) or whether it will be a non-wave and what the implications will be for the old media if a wave doesn't happen. Today, John McIntyre at the Real Clear Politics blog compares two world views of polls and what is happening in this election.

1) Republicans are in big trouble. The generic ballot shows a huge lead for Democrats (over 15%) with fewer than 10 days until the election. Republicans in contested races are either trailing or polling in the mid-40's, and given the national mood toward the GOP as seen in the generic ballot, it is reasonable to assume that these races will break for the Democrats. With the close races tipping the Democrats way they are poised for substantial pickups in the House of 25 seats or more and perhaps the six seats needed for a majority in the Senate.

2)The generic ballot is problematic and is over sampling Democrats, pushing the raw numbers higher for the Dems than they should be. Trying to use the generic ballot to predict who will then win x, y and z house races is a jump that can't be made soundly. In 2004 the voter turnout was 60% of eligible voters. In 2002 and 1998 in the two previous midterms it was 40%. What if a significant number of that 15%-20% who aren't going to show up at the polls this year come from soft voters in the middle? These are the exact group of voters that are helping drive the big polling numbers for Democrats. What if they don't show up in these contested races at the same proportion they are representing in many of these polls? Following this line of thinking, it is possible the bulk of the races that the polls now say are close will actually go to the GOP because the pollsters aren't sampling a representative field of who will actually vote in the contested races.

McIntyre points out that the data (at least in Senate races) appears to be supporting the second viewpoint, which is where Karl Rove appears to believe the election will go. But it is not a certainty, nor is it evident that it will break that way in all cases.

Unsuccessful Experiment

Well, we have the first reported failure of the animal uprising's genetic experiment program. One of their four-legged attack chicken experiments has turned out badly. The chicken kicked the bucket. With all four legs, apparently.

WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AFP) - Forzie, the four-legged chicken hatched in New Zealand last month, has died, and it appears it was an extra anus rather than the extra legs which led to its death.

"He developed two bottoms and I think he got glugged up," said owner Marlene Dickey.

Dickey said she was surprised by Forzie's death, as he was slowly gaining feathers.

"He was a bit of a laugh," she said.

Looking ungainly on its extra legs, the bird was an exception to the rule that chickens with defects are not normally born alive.

You wouldn't be laughing if it had turned out to be successful. We still need to be vigilant. The next generation may be already under development. Here's Forzie's mug shot, by the way.

Punish Me, Too

I'm with Laurie Byrd on this one. If boatloads of free publicity, scads of magazine covers, endless rivers of ink and immediate access to radio, television and reporters is punishment, the Dixie Chicks sure seem to be getting a heck of a lot of good out of it. To claim these people are being silenced in any way, shape or form is so laughable that it makes the people claiming it look foolish. Did they pay a price for shooting their mouths off? Maybe, but it was by alienating fans. Did anyone try to shut them up? Hell no.

NBC responded to a clearance report submitted by the Weinstein Company's media agency saying that the network "cannot accept these spots as they are disparaging to President Bush."

The CW Television Network responded that it does "not have appropriate programming in which to schedule this spot."

Famed litigator David Boies stated, "It is disappointing and troubling that NBC and The CW would refuse to accept an otherwise appropriate ad merely because it is critical of President Bush."

Harvey Weinstein, co-chairman of The Weinstein Company stated, "It's a sad commentary about the level of fear in our society that a movie about a group of courageous entertainers who were blacklisted for exercising their right of free speech is now itself being blacklisted by corporate America. The idea that anyone should be penalized for criticizing the president is sad and profoundly un-American."

The Weinstein Company is exploring taking legal action.

Obviously the Dixie Chicks have been silenced and censored, I mean, has anyone reading this heard anything about the comment Natalie Maines made in London? Does anyone reading this know that the Dixie Chicks don't like President Bush or the war? Since they have been so effectively silenced for three years now there is no way anyone could possibly know any of this and since these mean networks are censoring their ads the world will never know.

I would love to be silenced and censored as the Dixie Chicks have. How many magazine covers and primetime interviews did they get when their latest CD was released? Certainly more than they got when their previous CDs were released, back when they were a "hick country group". NBC and the CW are making decisions based on what they think their viewers want to see and whether or not they have programming where they can place the ads. Whether or not that decision is a correct one, it is ridiculous to say the Dixie Chicks have been penalized….

Quick! I want to be silenced! Get me the cover of Time right away! I could use a few million bucks.

UPDATE: Greg Tinti has a video of one of the ads NBC refused. It blames a "conspiracy" against the Dixie Chicks. No, really, it does. These people are seriously disturbed. My eleven year old is more mature.

UPDATE: A Blog For All sees a conspiracy all right. Just not the one the Dixie Chicks and the studio are pushing. This one involves free publicity and getting the videos aired out for free. It is working, too. I think this is probably spot on.

UPDATE: James Joyner reports that NBC denies they were asked to run the ads. In other words, this is looking more and more like apublicity stunt. Riehl World View: Who cares? Say Anything: Give me a break - staged. Just go take the cure for Dixie Chickitis.

Gutter Trawling

More about negative campaign ads from AFP. Oddly, it's actually more balanced than the article in today's Washington Post that I linked earlier. It points out both Republicans and Democrat negative ads pretty evenly. It also mentions the long term effect of these tactics - they are not good.

Characters are twisted and records trashed as Republicans and Democrats tar each other as misogynous and seedy terrorist-appeasing hucksters, who leech off the public purse and lie as naturally as drawing breath.

A campaign commercial in Tennessee featured a sexy blonde beckoning African-American Democrat Harold Ford, sparking claims that Republicans backing Ford's white rival Bob Corker are mining stereotypes about inter-racial dating to play on latent Southern racism.

Like most negative ads, the spot sought out the merest grain of truth: Ford reportedly once was among 3,000 guests at a Superbowl party sponsored by Playboy magazine.

But anyone in the staunchly conservative state watching the scantily-clad woman pout "Call me, Harold" might be left with the impression Ford regularly snuggled with Playboy bunnies.

In Virginia, Republicans seeking to overcome racism accusations clouding Senator George Allen claimed his opponent Jim Webb was guilty of past discrimination against women military recruits.

Other ads have New York congressional candidate Michael Arcuri accused of dialing a telephone sex line from his hotel room and billing taxpayers — an allegation since disproved.

In Idaho, Democrat opponents of Republican Bill Sali pounced on a quote from a party colleague branding him an "absolute idiot."

Negative advertisements are used by both parties simply because they work, experts say.

"People may express their distaste for them, but they do remember them," said Professor Tom Baldino of Wilkes University.

"If they are not over the top, negative ads can force the target to go on the defensive."

But some analysts believe gutter-scraping negative ads further poison the public view of politics.

As it is, an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll this month found only 16 percent of registered voters approved of Congress's performance.

"Negative campaign ads reinforce and amplify the prevailing view of US politics as something decent people should avoid at all costs," said Professor Rich Hanley of Quinnipiac University.

Read that last sentence again. This is exactly why some of the best people in the country would never run for office. Why would you volunteer to jump into a meat grinder? Weird that AFP is actually more even-handed than the WaPo, though. That's not something the WaPo should be proud of. New motto: The Washington Post, more unbalanced than the French.

Snow Jobs

Jim Lynch over at bRight and Early has a mixed-up story that is really quite humorous.

More Cheerleading

The Associated Press is jumping up and down chanting, "1994, 1994" over and over and over. This must be part of some sort of magic incantation they pray will work for their chosen candidates in the elections. Their positively breathless analysis: The Republicans Are Doomed! Really. Honest.

Less than two weeks before the Nov. 7 election, the latest Associated Press-AOL News poll found that likely voters overwhelmingly prefer Democrats over Republicans. They are angry at President Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress, and say Iraq and the economy are their top issues.

At the same time, fickle middle-class voters are embracing the Democratic Party and fleeing the GOP — just as they abandoned Democrats a dozen years ago and ushered in an era of Republican control.

"I don't think the Republican Party represents what I stand for. The guys I golf with, we're in the middle class, we're getting hurt," says Joseph Altland, 73, a retired teacher in York, Pa. He is a registered Republican but says he is considering becoming an independent.

The AP-AOL News telephone poll of 2,000 adults, 970 of whom are likely voters, was conducted by Ipsos from Oct. 20-25.

Aside from the fact that national polls are worthless in predicting local races, you can take whatever you want from this poll. It might be a good idea to read what My Election Analysis has to say about polls this year:

No, I don’t discount this argument at all, actually. In fact, one of the great unknowns of this cycle is the disconnect between the generic ballot and the race-by-race polling. Right now, the GOP is doing well in a surprising number of districts to be 22 points down in the generic balloting. There are four possible explanations for this:

(1) A large number of voters dislike Republicans, but still like their individual congressmen.

(2) Democratic voters in blue districts are incredibly energized, but Republicans are holding their own in their districts.

(3) Democratic voters have moved GOP voters in heavily GOP areas into their column, but not made progress in purple districts.

(4) The generic polling heavily oversamples Democrats.

(5) The district polls are just wrong, as it is impossible to sample heavily gerrymandered districts, or to draw conclusions off polls of 400 people.

He makes no claim to know exactly how much each of these factors is bearing on the polls today. But it helps clarify the issues that are out there this year.