NYT Ohmsbudsman Finally Does His Job

Michelle Malkin is posting that Byron Calame, the NYT Ohmsbudsman, is finally admitting that it was wrong for the NYT to print the story that revealed national security secrets for surveillance of wire transfers of terrorists. He gives two reasons for his reversal:

1) It was legal
2) No sign of abuse of private data

Of course the mea culpa was not on the front page as it should be, but buried in the paper. One wonders what would make him change his mind after 4 months? Very likely the hit to both his credibility and the credibility of the NYT simply was not going away. Nor should it. The NYT has been a mouth organ for the Democrat Party for a long time. The recent irrational run of their irresponsible journalism by revealing one national security secret after another is rooted in their hatred of this administration. The Anchoress sums it up in her post on the issue - "I hated Bush so much I couldn't do my job". There seems to be a lot of that going around that is not limited to the NYT.

Barron's 2006 Predictions in Synch With Logic Lifeline

Almost 2 weeks ago I put out my predictions for this year's Congressional races. My predictions go against "conventional wisdom" and if correct will leave both houses with the GOP. My numbers are that the GOP will lose 7 seats in the House and 2 seats in the Senate. Barron's magazine has come out with a cover story also predicting retention of GOP control in both houses. Their numbers add 1 loss more to each house than mine - virtually in synch. Here is the significant section of Barron's:

JUBILANT DEMOCRATS SHOULD RECONSIDER their order for confetti and noisemakers. The Democrats, as widely reported, are expecting GOP-weary voters to flock to the polls in two weeks and hand them control of the House for the first time in 12 years -- and perhaps the Senate, as well. Even some Republicans privately confess that they are anticipating the election-day equivalent of Little Big Horn. Pardon our hubris, but we just don't see it.

Our analysis -- based on a race-by-race examination of campaign-finance data -- suggests that the GOP will hang on to both chambers, at least nominally. We expect the Republican majority in the House to fall by eight seats, to 224 of the chamber's 435. At the very worst, our analysis suggests, the party's loss could be as large as 14 seats, leaving a one-seat majority. But that is still a far cry from the 20-seat loss some are predicting. In the Senate, with 100 seats, we see the GOP winding up with 52, down three

The formula Barron's uses is based upon campaign financial data. Apparently, this barometer has been 89% accurate in the past. Critics claim that this year is different because the voters are more emotional this year than in the past. (I suppose not emotional enough to give more money than the GOP has, but emotional enough to vote). Speaking of voters, Chris Malott gains a hat tip with his post on a piece by Hugh Hewitt about voters. Hugh states:

My theory on this is that Republicans are serious adult citizens, Democrats and Independents are not. Republicans by and large take their citizenship seriously, inform themselves and vote accordingly. The rest of the population doesn’t even register to vote, or only vote when they are sufficiently ginned up, or when they are herded on busses to the polls. They base their opinions on chanted slogans or newspaper headlines, and take their responsibility to vote about as serious as all their other responsibilities as citizens.

Remember the last election drive to get out the young vote via MTV (vote or die)? Those votes did not materialize. It will be the same this year. This group that looks to the government for everything will be waiting for a government bus to drive them to the polls, so they will not show up. Hewitt also has another post shoing that the GOP base is engaged and ready to vote:

Despite the media hype, an examination of all the facts makes it clear: the Republican base is active and engaged. No matter how you measure it—whether by record-breaking fundraising, unprecedented volunteerism, or scientific polling—the numbers show that Republicans understand the importance of the choice we all face on November 7.

Every other day I see signs of the Dems looking over their shoulder fearing a loss of what should be a big victory. Most recently we began hearing that Nanci Pelosi might not necessarily be Speaker of the House. Ouch! While the GOP may not fully deserve re-election, many GOP know America does not deserve a Nanci Pelosi Speaker of the House. The Dems have given no plan to show they would do any better in the areas voters are angry with the GOP and their history shows they would do much worst.

Either way this year's election will be fun to watch. If the GOP does retain control, look for Dems to lose control.

China and Russia Not Pulling Their Weight

The recent development of China getting firm with North Korea and the subsequent change in rhetoric of Kim Jong Il shows something I have claimed for some time: China and Russia have been given a pass on their world responsibilities too long. While the world body takes great sport in blaming the United States for virtually all of man's problems, when it comes to the reality of the shortcomings of China and Russia they turn a blind eye. The actions of China and Russia may be malicious and they may be benign. China may be enjoying the fruits of dabbling in capitalism, but they have not relinquished the iron fist of communism. While the Soviet Union fell apart, Russia has not strayed far from their communist roots. Coincidentally or not, their choice of allies and friendships is always at odds with American interests. To give the benefit of the doubt, I suppose the great wealth and military might of the US makes it dificult for these two countries to keep their eye on the ball of who is real world threat.

For over a year now I have been saying that the resolution of the problems in North Korea and Iran needs to come from the world body who have thus far sat on the side lines in the war on terror. While it is doubtful the toothless United Nations can manage to gum these problems away, some Security Council members have great influence over these two countries; mainly Russia and China. This week China has taken the first steps in proving my theory is on the right track. While most have been pushing Bush toward the "Cowboy" unilaterism that they criticized him for; Bush has resisted the Clinton method of dealing with North Korea that only seems to work until the next administration comes along.

As a result of China's firm stance with North Korea, Kim Jong Il has now publicly expressed regret and claims he will not test a second nuke. While the details of what this means are still hazy - by no means does this mean the problem is gone, it does show the influence China has on North Korea if they choose to exercise it. While Iran would be more difficult for China to deal with - since Iran supplies China with oil, China and Russia have much more influence with Iran than they have used. If Russia and China get their eye back on the ball and realize that the greatest threat to the world is not the USA, but radical Islam jihadists, a united front from Security Council members may be able to keep it at bay until inevitable reform takes place.

Air America Bankruptcy Proof of Liberal Bias Media

Air America has filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection so they can survive a little longer. In order to survive, Air America must somehow do what they failed to do in the first place: fill an existing void in the market. In the market in order to succeed at selling anything you must make sure you have a product that is lacking. For instance, it might not be a good idea to start a business selling sand in a desert. Selling water in a desert, however, is certain financial success.

Contrast both the launching and results of conservative talk radio. When Rush Limbaugh took to the air, there was nothing like him ideologically. Limbaugh was met with huge resistance from the establishment. When Air America launched, it was heralded by the establishment and given many free plugs across the media. Yet Limbaugh and the avalanch of conservative talk show hosts have greatly succeeded, and Air America is filing Chapter 11 despite millions of dollars of cash infusions.

What is the difference? The difference is that when Rush came on the scene, there was a huge void in what he had to offer. All things conservative were suppressed, censored, ridiculed or simply ignored by other major media. When Rush began, people heard day after day what they simply could not hear anywhere else. When Air America started, there was an initial hoorah that they had created an answer for the massively successful conservative talk radio. When that passed, large numbers of listeners never materialized. Why? There are plenty of liberals out there. Air America fails to draw large audiences, because they offer nothing new. The media is already glutted with the liberal ideology. Liberals can get their fill from CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS, CNN, MSNBC, almost all of the newspapers across the country, and from much of the garbage that comes out of Hollywood. Liberal talk radio is like selling sand in the desert.

So in summary, both the success of talk radio and the failure of liberal talk radio are proof of the massive liberal bias that exists in the media. They are as different as their ideologies; and as different as the photo shown of the two Koreas. South Korea has plenty of power at night and North Korea must turn its lights out at 9 pm to conserve electricity. Night and Day.

The Ex-Foley-ation of the GOP

Pardon my lateness coming to the story during my hiatus. When the Foley story broke, I was disgusted but not extremely interested in the story. I thought "Ok, the Dems scored a point or two. All's fair in love and war." As the story unfolds at each new development I have become increasingly more interested. After all one of my favorite topics is when something backfires on the Democrats. It may be, however, that Democrat repercussions will occur in the future. The nature of such sensationalism is that people get caught up in the short term, then later as they think about things they realize there is much more to the story than the Dems and their media water carriers focused on. As people think about this they will realize:

- The timing of this story is very interesting. Both the media and the Dems are spinning the story in the light of protecting the youthful pages from being exploited. However, it is obvious that both had this information for months and felt that an October Surprise was more important than protecting other pages. The timing mixed with revelations that events were not quite as initially described once again shows how very little we can trust the media. One important note about the Dems. They can never wait until the opportune time to drop their "bomb" AND when they do they always overplay their hand. While this bomb was timed for the election, it was at least 2 weeks too early. In 2 more weeks when people think of Foley, they will think of an irritating mosquito but not quite remember why.

- There is a drastic inconsistency in how scandals (sexual or otherwise) are handled depending on whether the offender is a Republican or Democrat. We have quite a number of examples to pick from. We have Ted Kennedy who is virtually revered by the Dems in a lionized fashion. The death at Chappequidic was not enough to dislodge him from politics (though it did deprive him of the presidency). Being one of the bread slices of a "waitress sandwich" brings no shame to Ted, and does not prevent the other slice (Chris Dodd) from having presidential aspirations. Rep. Studds repeated re-election should cause a red face to every Democrat across the country. Barney Frank and the gay prostitution run in his house transformed him from virtually unknown to a highly revered member of the party. Finally, we have Bill Clinton transcending IM dirty talk with a page, to phone sex and sexual activity with an intern. While the GOP sleazebag resigns on the spot, the Dem digs his heels in and is surrounded by Democratic leadership in the rose garden for moral support (misnomer). Dems hang on for dear life during their scandals and with a lot of image resucitation help from the media they weather it. Foley's immediate response was to resign. While this in no way applies any virtue to Foley, it should apply great shame to the Dems who have not resigned when they have disgraced their office.

- The sad fact that this is all the Dems have. How many times have we heard recently that this Foley scandal will be what pushes the Dems over the top. Isn't it sad that a list of real solutions to problems is not what is promoted to push them over the top? The Dems have banked on the following from the voters:
1) That they have the mentality of the Vietnam generation rather than the Greatest Generation
2) That they will resent the Bush administration taking every step possible to protect the American people from terror
3) That they will want to throw the bums out over a 4.6 unemployment rate
4) That having been angry at high gas prices, they will become angry at falling gas prices
5) That they will get angry with the GOP over a weak immigration stance while not getting angry over the Dems weaker stance
6) That one bad GOP that resigned and was denounced by the rest of the GOP somehow makes the other GOP look bad, while decades of supporting perverts like Studds, Kennedy and Clinton make the Dems look good

In short it basically boils down to the Dems banking on their voters overlooking all of their scandals, perversions, and foolishness but that those who normally vote for the GOP to stay home. They have not positioned their win on MORE Dem votes, but LESS GOP votes. There is not one category where the GOP deserves to booted out of office (and there are several) where
the Dems have shown they deserve to be elected into office. The Dem strategy reminds me of the proverb "Even the Fool when he opens not his mouth, is considered wise". The fun part if they do pull it off is that after the election they will open their mouth and reveal their bankruptcy of solutions.

My current view is that GOP will lose 7 seats in the house and 2 in the Senate. I hope to have a weekly prediction on these numbers until the election. I hope to also list my predictions to some key races. That is always fun.

---

Finally, on a personal note I have determined to plan for only one weekly post for now. If time permits I may add more but I have other priorities that continue to demand my attention. Look for the weekly post around the weekends.