Bay State Roundup

Jules Crittenden brings the hometown perspective to the battle in Massachusetts.

A Thought Experiment On Polling

Ed Morrisey notes that the latest ABC/WaPo poll appears to have a badly skewed – toward Democrats – sample.

The sampling comprises 33% Democrats, as opposed to only 20% Republicans. That thirteen-point spread is two points larger than their September polling, at 32%/21%. More tellingly, it’s significantly larger than their Election Day sample, which included 35% Democrats to 26% Republicans for a gap of nine points, about a third smaller than the gap in this poll. Of course, that’s when they were more concerned about accuracy over political points of view.

Remember when I wrote that poll watchers need to remember the recent Gallup poll on party affiliation? Gallup polled 5,000 adults and found that the gap between Democrats and Republicans had closed to the smallest margin since 2005, six points, and had been reduced more than half since the beginning of the year. For the WaPo/ABC poll, though, their sample gap has increased almost 50% during that time.

What is missing from the crosstab data (at least I did not see it) is how many responses were discarded to obtain the sample they report.

I think that makes a potentially huge difference in the polling. Think about this. If they had to discard 10 opinions to reach their sample number of 1,004 that tells one story.

If they had to discard 1,000 it tells a completely different story, indeed.

So, what are the raw contact numbers, as opposed to the final results posted by WaPo? What criteria did they use to make the discards? That information is actually vital to deciding what the poll is actually telling you – as opposed to the media interpretation of the results. Think about how that would make you read a poll for a moment. Skewing a sample to match the demographics of a population is quite regular in the world of statistics.

How you get there is also part (an unreported part) of the story.

(This is why I take polls with a grain of salt the size of Detroit, incidentally.)

The Dam Breaks

Aside from Jake Tapper, the MSM has largely ignored Van Jones, the self-described communist, self-indicted 9/11 “truther” and defender of Cop-killer Wesley Cook.

Until now (or soon-to-be-now). In a story datelined 9/5/09 (I wrote this post on 9/4/09), The Washington Post finally admits that Van Jones exists – and is a real problem for Obama’s White House:

White House officials offered tepid support Friday for Van Jones, the administration’s embattled energy efficiency guru, who has issued two public apologies this week, one for signing a petition that questioned whether Bush administration officials “may indeed have deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen, perhaps as a pretext for war.”

Earlier, Jones said he was “clearly inappropriate” in using a crude term to describe Republicans in a speech he gave before joining the administration.

The apologies did little to quell objections from Republicans, several of whom demanded Friday further action against Jones. Rep. Mike Pence (Ind.) called on the adviser to resign or be fired, saying in a statement, “His extremist views and coarse rhetoric have no place in this administration or the public debate.”

Senator Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.) urged Congress to investigate Jones’s “fitness” for the position, writing in an open letter, “Can the American people trust a senior White House official that is so cavalier in his association with such radical and repugnant sentiments?”

Incidentally, they credit Jim Hoft at Gateway Pundit for breaking the really damaging news on Jones. WaPo does not offer a link to Jim’s site. I have corrected that.

Congratulations, Jim, you busted the dam!

Now, how long until Obama kicks Jones to the curb – and runs the bus over him a few times? Pool is still open – and I still say before the end of today. (Really hoping I’m right on this.)

Not Everyone Went To Yasgur’s Farm

Bruce Kesler, writing at Maggie’s Farm:

I’ve nothing against the Woodstock get-together nor its good music. For those there who enjoyed the rain and mud, and those who addled their brains with drugs – most temporarily and some permanently, you’re welcome to it. What many object to is that Woodstock has been raised to an almost holy event to be honored as symbolic of our generation. Meanwhile, the far many more young people who wouldn’t have thought of attending, and the many more young people who weren’t there because they were serving in the armed forces, the hollow hallowedness attached by the media to Woodstock is seen as, as usual, blatantly one-sided and ignores the real sacrifices faced by others.

The VFW Magazine tells the tale of the 109 Americans killed in Vietnam during those four days in August 1969.

Time gushed with admiration for the tribal gathering, declaring: “It may well rank as one of the significant political and sociological events of the age.” It deplored the three deaths there-”one from an overdose of drugs [heroin], and hundreds of youths freaked out on bad trips caused by low-grade LSD.” Yet attendees exhibited a “mystical feeling for themselves as a special group,” according to the magazine’s glowing essay….

Meanwhile, 8,429 miles around the other side of the world, 514,000 mostly young Americans were authentically serving the country that had raised them to place society over self. The casualties they sustained over those four days were genuine, yet none of the elite media outlets were praising their selflessness….

So when you hear talk of the glories of Woodstock-the so-called “defining event of a generation”-keep in mind those 109 GIs who served nobly yet are never lauded by the illustrious spokesmen for the “Sixties Generation.”

Yeah, I posted something funny about Woodstock earlier and took a shot at the iconic status the media has showered Woodstock with for lo these many years. What Bruce wrote here is part of the reason I feel the way I do about Woodstock – or more properly, about the mythic status that has been conferred upon it by the media and the left. (Redundant).

It helps put it in perspective when you remember that there were an awful lot of people who did not go to Woodstock. Bruce remembers. So do I.

Travel Day

Greetings, gentle readers. Today I have been on the road – or rather, in the air, then on the road – since O-dark thirty or so. I write this from the Keystone State where I am seeking to learn all the wit and wisdom of John Murtha. I’ll be at loose ends for the rest of the 86,399 seconds in the day.

Actually here attending a conference. Posting will be somewhat erratic, but will happen this week. I have been completely out of touch with any news today, so I have no idea if I will be back with other posts until I see whats out on the nets.

If you haven’t yet, go read the slogans on the contest thread.

Busted

Go over and look at the video The Daily Bayonet has posted. Catchy little tune and probably one of the best get-even tactics I have seen recently. You’ll have to see the video to make sense of the rest of this post, incidentally. From TDB’s post:

He was on Canada’s national news as the You Tube hits approached 500,000 and says that United have been calling him.

I bet they have.

Being a guitar player myself, I know one thing: Airlines have a long track record of busting guitars.  I happen to know a player who tours relentlessly and he has invested in very, very expensive travel cases for his guitars – and still will not bring any of his irreplaceable vintage guitars anywhere via any airline. Ever.

Frankly, if I were running marketing at this company, I would get one of my cases to Dave Carroll right now. Gratis. Just for letting the company use the artist’s name on their website (consider that a free business tip, folks.)

If I were United Airlines, I’d settle with this guy today.

If you ever have to ship a guitar – via airline or any other method, these are some packing tips from someone who has been in the business for a while.

UPDATE: National Public Radio covered this story on their All Things Considered afternoon program today. They report that United has asked to use Carroll’s video as a training tool for their employees. Pretty smart PR move, especially given their inept handling of the situation to date.

Gold Rush

Matt Welch – who I do not always agree with (to be fair, I rather doubt he would agree with me all the time, either) - points out the likely real reason for the utter fiscal mess in California right now:

During the last two decades, the Golden State has been transformed from what was once known as the nation’s most anti-labor outpost to a state essentially run by public-sector unions. Nearly three in five publicsector workers are unionized, compared to less than two in five public employees in other states. The Democratic Party, which is fully in hock to unions, has controlled the legislature and most statewide posts, with the notable exception of the governor’s mansion, for more than a decade. That means more government workers, higher salaries, and drastically higher pension costs.

According to Adam Summers-a policy analyst at the Reason Foundation, the nonprofit that publishes this magazine-the state’s annual pension fund contribution vaulted from $321 million in 2000-01 to $7.3 billion last year. According to public databases, more than 5,000 people are drawing pensions in excess of $100,000 from the state of California each year.

So pervasive is the union influence that big labor doesn’t even try to defend its deleterious effects on California’s finances. Just before the special election, a member of the Los Angeles Times editorial board asked Service Employees International Union chief Andy Stern to respond to charges that unions are the 21st-century equivalent of the railroads that were once all-powerful in California. Stern verbally shrugged: “I think democracy is an ugly thing at times.”

That ugliness has made the California budget, like those in most of the other 49 states, less efficient and more bloated. Government spending, unlike spending in the private economy, is a zero-sum game-especially on the state level, since governors can’t print money. Every dollar spent gilding a pension is a dollar not spent funding an orphanage. Naturally, the same elite outlets that were busy blaming voters after the election spent even more time detailing the horrors of the “annihilating cuts,” as the Los Angeles Times called them in a news article, that were coming down the pike. (In early June, the paper invited readers to be shocked that a high school with 3,200 students would have to make do with just three guidance counselors.) Bloated pension costs and the increasingly inefficient provision of state services received a fraction of the coverage.

The federal government is now run by a president and Congress more responsive to union concerns than any in at least two decades. The same bloat currently bogging down statehouses and city halls is being duplicated in boomtown Washington, D.C. President Barack Obama even brought Andy Stern in to help warn Schwarzenegger that federal stimulus money would not be disbursed to California unless the governor rescinded some proposed state job cuts. Though that threat was later withdrawn, Schwarzenegger at press time was pushing for a measly work force reduction of 2 percent.

Welch makes a lot of points in this post that really are must reads. The political and media “elite” have been urinating on the voters who turned down the elite’s comic opera “solutions” to the budget disaster. Welch eviscerates them.

Welch also sees something in California: Hope. That would be a real hope that the voters are sick and tired of the “elite” and their “solutions” to the real problems our states and nation face.

There is some hope and change you can actually get behind.

Whip It, Whip It Good

When a good time turns around
You must whip it
You will never live it down
Unless you whip it
No one gets away
Until they whip it

Devo – Whip It

Gee, no hint of coordinated whipping from the left on this, is there. The JournoList strikes again with horrifying, hideous, nearly identical hysterical whipping of the meme that – gasp – Obama care might be in trouble.

What’s the latest assessment from those closely monitoring health care reform? Prognosis negative.

“Health reform is, I think it fair to say, in danger right now,” wrote Ezra Klein this morning at the Washington Post.

“Attention fellow liberals who want health care reform,” wrote Jonathan Cohn yesterday at the New Republic. “You are in danger of losing the fight for universal health insurance. And it’s not only – or even primarily – because of the public plan.”

“Anyone else think the net result of health reform is going to be that insurance companies have even more political power?,” twittered Atrios this afternoon.

What’s got the pro-reform contingent worried?

“It’s because of the money,” writes Cohn.

Yes, it actually is about the money. As in “It costs too much”. Not as in, “We want even more,” as the Klein meme is pushing. Klein is the proud papa of the coordinating emporium of the JournoList, let us not forget that.

I have been all over the Obama care scheme because of the brutal cost, the brutal loss of insurance by people who work for their coverage and the brutal taxation that will be required to pay for a plan that actually strips insurance coverage away from working stiffs who have played by the rules.  Not as an attempt to whip up hysteria and fear to get this abomination passed.

How’s That OCD, Andy?

In trying to make some sort of point, Andrew Sullivan wrote this mess of a sentence for a post titled, “The Rovian Islamist”:

Ahmadinejad’s bag of tricks is eerily like that of Karl Rove – the constant use of fear, the exploitation of religion, the demonization of liberals, the deployment of Potemkin symbolism like Sarah Palin:

Obsess much, Andy? What in heck does Sarah Palin have to do with the rest of your all-over-the-map post? Or the title of your post.

Give it a rest.

What A Tangled Web

When even the truth is just another lie. I caught this item over at Memeorandum this morning. It seems a blogger built a big following with a completely fabricated series of lies:

By Sunday night, when “April’s Mom” claimed to have given birth to her “miracle baby” — blogging that April Rose had survived a home birth only to die hours later — her Web site had nearly a million hits.

There was only one problem with the unfolding tragedy: None of it was true.

Not the pregnancy, and not the photos posted on the blog of the supposed mother and Baby April Rose, swaddled in white blankets. The baby was actually a lifelike doll, which immediately raised the suspicion of loyal blog-followers.

“I have that exact doll in my house,” said Elizabeth Russell, a dollmaker from Buffalo who had been following the blog. “As soon as I saw that picture, I knew it was a scam.”

By Monday, outraged followers on dozens of Christian parenting Web sites unmasked “April’s Mom” as a hoaxer, and hundreds more vented their anger.

“She needs to be exposed and held accountable,” Russell said.

Sensing people were close to establishing her identity, “April’s Mom” on Monday raced in vain to delete her Web site and Twitter and Facebook accounts.

But it was too late. The online community found out her true identity: Beccah Beushausen, 26, a social worker from Mokena.

But the “truth” is just another lie:

In response to a June 12 article in the Chicago Tribune and a related Associated Press story about “April’s Mom”, http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-baby-hoax-12jun12,0,5601624.story, the National Association of Social Workers has confirmed that the troubled young woman who created a huge online following with a fictitious account of her pregnancy IS NOT A SOCIAL WORKER. According to sources at the NASW Illinois Chapter, Beccah Beushausen is not licensed in the State of Illinois as a social worker and is not a member of the National Association of Social Workers.

The social workers are, understandably, quite angry at having this person counted among their ranks. They are demanding a correction from the Chicago Tribune.

People have been defrauded by this woman – and it is not over yet. At some point, some behaviors cross over into pathology. It appears that point was reached and passed some time ago by this woman.

Perfectly Okay…..

.. To “Hate F…” a woman you disagree with – according to a feminist?

I stayed off this story yesterday, but Playboy published, then withdrew, an article about 10 conservative women they’d love to  – well – rape – for grins and giggles. Today a so-called feminist said that was really, really bad – except for Michelle Malkin – which would be her just asking for it, according to said feminist.

I also want to note that at least one woman on the list is so venom-spewing, she unfortunately invites venom to be shot back at her: Michelle Malkin. Her posts and her “routine” are so venomous and predictable, in fact, I stopped paying attention to her years ago.

Others on the list, however, are not venom-spewing at all. One woman mentioned on the atlasshrugs2000 blog is a regular guest on my PBS show. Amanda Carpenter, on the show at least, eschews personal judgment of people with whom she disagrees politically. So her inclusion on the Playboy list is much more offensive to me than is the inclusion of Ms. Malkin, although their political views may not differ greatly.

We’ll just point out that Erbe doesn’t even begin to catch the irony of her complete failure to eschew personal judgment of people with whom she disagrees politically. We will, however, point out that Erbe and US News & World Report owe some apologies here.

Not “Sorry if anyone was offended” ones, either.

Why Govern When You Can Bully?

Amity Shlaes points out that Obama supporters on the web are somewhat less interested in governance than in sheer shrieking in support of their Chosen One:

So Michele Bachmann’s version of history is “from another planet.” Bobby Jindal, the Republican governor of Louisiana, is “chronically stupid.” And Eric Cantor of Virginia, the second-ranking Republican in the House, is “busy lying constantly.”

That at least is according to posts on three left-leaning blogs.

Writers who are not pro-Barack Obama are suffering character assassination as well. George Will of the Washington Post, the nation’s senior conservative columnist, has been so assaulted by bloggers that his editor, Fred Hiatt, recently wrote, “I would think folks would be eager to engage in the debate, given how sure they are of their case, rather than trying to shut him down.”

The disconcerting thing isn’t that the bloggers or their guests did this slamming. We’re used to such vitriol in campaign time. What is surprising is that the attacks are continuing after an election.

In the past, politicians and policy thinkers tended to be magnanimous in victory. They and their friends focused, post- victory, on policy and strategy — not on trashing individuals.

What Shlaes does not mention is that most, if not all, of the left-leaning bloggers in question are being coordinated in their attacks by the White House itself.  

It’s easier if you don’t actually have to think or write for yourself, isn’t it? It’s easy to simply regurgitate the stuff you are fed by your political masters. It’s easy to smear and lie and attack at all costs when ordered to.

It’s easy to lie under the table and fight for scraps from your masters.

Just don’t look at yourself in the mirror. It’s easier that way.

Defending Hysteria – And Shutting Down Debate

A twofer. (That will not endear me to the left).

Matthew Yglesias defends the absolute necessity of  having the full might and power of the Federal government tell people to wash their hands. No, really, he does.

Second, the way you stop a flu virus from spreading widely is that you’ve got to raise the level of public concern. There are several billion people living on the planet earth. If each of them becomes a bit more vigilant about washing their hands, a bit more vigilant about staying home from school or work from feeling ill, a bit more hesitant to travel to infection hotspots, a bit more careful about where they sneeze, etc., that all can ad up to a big reduction in the transmission rate.

My mother taught me to wash my hands, I don’t really need the President or the WHO to substitute for her.

But Yglesias is more interested in the defense of fear-mongering, panic-inducing hysterical pronouncements by elected – and appointed – officials as an apparent “greater good”.

Meanwhile, those government officials are rapidly trying to back off from their hysterical pronouncements.

But then, I rather doubt Matt’s “thoughts” on the matter are actually his own, anyway. rather than a regurgitation of something delivered to a baby bird.

On to the next one: An Obama fan is suddenly noticing that the Obama baby birds prefer to shut down discussion rather than actually have to think for themselves and engage.

No more. At least not in my circles. If you want to stop a conversation in its tracks, just question something President Barack Obama has said or done. It’s not open to debate — and I don’t think that’s healthy, for the country or the president.

It’s especially unsettling for a free speech girl like me. The First Amendment is important — but lately, it feels like my right of self-expression is being squashed.

One example: Obama’s comment to Jay Leno on “The Tonight Show,” comparing his bowling abilities to someone in the Special Olympics.

Can you imagine the uproar had Bush said that? He’d be banished from bowling alleys for eternity. His bowling average and IQ would have immediately been compared in Twitter messages demanding his resignation.

But instead, media and water cooler conversations the next day were about bowling scores and how tough the game can be. Anyone bringing up the insensitivity of the president’s remark heard, “Come on, give the guy a chance. So he said one thing wrong. Anyone could have said something like that.” End of discussion.

Anyone remember poor Dan Quayle, the vice president who misspelled “potato” at a school spelling bee in 1992? No second chance for a Republican. Five months after the resulting media field day, Quayle and the first President Bush were voted out of office.

Yes, it is unsettling. Any debate is being shut down by a programmed, highly coordinated, White House-driven series of mandatory talking points.

Like the greater goodness of fear-mongering, panic-inducing hysterical pronouncements.

But there is some hope. Folks like Laura Varon Brown are beginning to notice the the baby birds, the automatons.

Or is that Otomatons?

Ch-Ch-Ch-Changes

Nick Gillespie and Matt Welch at Reason have a link-filled post that looks at the stale, old discredited ideas that are passing for change in Omerica. I will not even try to excerpt any of this one, the link-fest is what makes it fun.

From my point of view, just about everything Obama is spouting is recycled. Gillespie and Welch think a real day of reckoning is fast approaching, where a lot of people will suddenly realize they’ve been had. I only hope it is soon enough to limit the damage.

Protests In Thailand

According to the Telegraph, “Protesters ‘rule streets of Bangkok’ as army fails to act .”

As night fell, the army had been mobilised and hospitals placed on standby for casualties, but no offensive against the demonstrators had yet begun.

For the last two weeks, protests demanding the resignation of Abhisit Vejjajiva, the British-born and Oxford-educated prime minsiter, have swept the capital.

The first clashes on Sunday took place at the interior ministry while Mr Abhisit was inside the building, formally declaring the state of emergency. Angry protesters – who wear red to show their anti-government credentials – attacked a Mercedes limousine with stones, bricks, paving slabs and flower pots, wrongly believing that Mr Abhisit was inside. Trapped, the armoured vehicle could only take this punishment, which abated when the crowd discovered that the prime minister was not in the passenger seat.

Seems like evidence of a popular uprising, no?

That would be NO.

It seems that the protesters are actually paid thugs, according to my old friend Agam. 

The current governing coalition was formed early this year, not because of the yellow shirted “People’s Alliance for Democracy” airport occupation (although they certainly claimed credit), but due to the final verdict of a longstanding legal prosecution on illegal campaign activities by Thaksin’s proxy party. Thaksin’s puppets resigned, and minor parties as well as a good part of the puppet party supported the Democrats to form the new government, with Khun Abhisit as prime minister.

There is nothing undemocratic about any of that. The red protesters who carry signs accusing Abhisit of being a “dictator”, a “supporter of terrorists” and a “killer” just simply don’t have a clue about democratic systems (or the meaning of words). They were paid to come to Bangkok, and now Pattaya, to carry out this disruption (I’ve been informed by someone who would know, that they each got 1000 baht per day – about $30 US). You have only one guess as to where that money came from.

If your answer involves a certain formerly richest Thai-Chinese tycoon in the country with the initials TS, you win tonight’s star prize. The entire Norwich City Council! [But, I've already got one!]

Moreover, Agam has a video posted at the bottom of that post which shows the reactions of bystanders to an attempt by the red-shirted goon squads to close a street and stop traffic. It’s rather amusing to watch. It is rather obvious that the thugs are very much not wanted by the average citizens of Bangkok.

Or, as they shout: MAI OW! and AWK BAI!

I’ll send you over to Agam’s place to see the video and read his description of what is really going on over in Thailand right now.