|
Election Projection cannot screen all advertisements appearing here. Therefore, I do not necessarily endorse the products and/or services shown.
|
| Archives |
|---|
January, 2012
December, 2011
November, 2011
October, 2011
September, 2011
August, 2011
July, 2011
June, 2011
April, 2011
March, 2011
February, 2011
January, 2011
November, 2010
October, 2010
September, 2010
August, 2010
July, 2010
June, 2010
May, 2010
April, 2010
March, 2010
February, 2010
January, 2010
December, 2009
November, 2009
October, 2009
September, 2009
August, 2009
June, 2009
May, 2009
April, 2009
March, 2009
November, 2008
October, 2008
September, 2008
August, 2008
June, 2008
May, 2008
April, 2008
March, 2008
February, 2008
January, 2008
December, 2007
November, 2007
October, 2007
September, 2007
July, 2007
June, 2007
May, 2007
April, 2007
March, 2007
February, 2007
January, 2007
November, 2006
October, 2006
September, 2006
August, 2006
July, 2006
June, 2006
May, 2006
April, 2006
March, 2006
February, 2006
January, 2006
December, 2005
November, 2005
August, 2005
July, 2005
June, 2005
May, 2005
April, 2005
March, 2005
February, 2005
January, 2005
November, 2004
October, 2004
September, 2004
August, 2004
July, 2004
June, 2004
May, 2004
April, 2004
March, 2004
February, 2004
January, 2004
December, 2003
|
|
| - May, 2009 |
|---|
| Tuesday, May 26, 2009 |
|---|
| Sotomayor nominated for the Supreme Court |
|---|
President Obama has decided on a replacement for
outgoing Justice David Souter. She is Curcuit Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor, a Hispanic female. I am in no way expert in legal matters, so I cannot
provide an analysis of Ms. Sotomayor's qualifications. However, there are legal experts whom I respect. A number of them run the conservative
law blog, "The Volokh Conspiracy," and they are all over the announcement.
Orin Kerr published the following posts:
Both David Kopel and
Orin Kerr write about Sotomayor's positions re the Second
Amendment
And Ilya Somin contributes several posts as well. Among them:
That first post of Somin includes this snippet...
|
I am not yet sure what position to take on President Obama's selection of Sonia Sotomayor. My general sense is that she is very liberal, and thus likely to
take what I consider to be mistaken positions on many major constitutional law issues. I am also not favorably impressed with her notorious statement that
"a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."
Not only is it objectionable in and of itself, it also suggests that Sotomayor is a committed believer in the identity politics school of left-wing thought. Worse,
it implies that she believes that it is legitimate for judges to base decisions in part on their ethnic or racial origins.
|
Elections matter folks. No doubt Republicans are going to bemoan Sotomayor's liberal ideology, but you'll never hear me faulting President Obama for
nominating liberals to the Supreme Court or any other federal bench. After all, he would not be true to himself if he nominated moderates or
conservatives. America will reap what we have sown in electing Barack Obama. To many, that is a positive statement. To others - like The
Blogging Caesar - it's a statement that produces an anxious heavy sigh and whispers of "Oh boy, here we go..."
posted by Scott Elliott at 3:28pm 05/26/09 ::
link |
| Year of the Bible |
|---|
Congressman Paul Broun of Georgia is
calling on President Obama
to designate the year 2010 as "Year of the Bible." This is not an unprecedented development. Twenty-six years ago, President Reagan issued a proclamation at the 1983 National
Prayer Breakfast designating that year as "Year of the Bible."
|
In the United States, 1983 was designated as the national Year of the Bible by President Ronald Reagan by Proclamation 5018, made on February 3, 1983 at the
annual National Prayer Breakfast. President Reagan was authorized and requested to so designate 1983 by Public Law 97-280 (Senate Joint Resolution
165], 96Stat. 1211) passed by Congress and approved on October 4, 1982.
The law recited that the Bible "has made a unique contribution in shaping the United States as a distinctive and blessed nation and people" and that, quoting President Jackson, the Bible is
"the rock on which our Republic rests". It also acknowledged a "national need to study and apply the teachings of the Holy
Scriptures." "Can we resolve to reach, learn and try to heed the greatest message ever written, God's Word, and the Holy Bible?" Reagan asked.
"Inside its pages lie all the answers to all the problems that man has ever known."
|
Of course, simply acknowledging in an official way the importance that God's Word has had in the founding and development of our nation is repulsive to many
Americans these days. Nevertheless, it is hard to deny the role the Bible has played in our history.
Recently, another congressman, Randy Forbes of Virginia, along with 61 other legislators, drafted a resolution calling for Congress to designate the first week
of May as "America's Spiritual Heritage Week." The resolution calls out over 75 instances in which our statesmen and
politicians lend credence to the impact of Judeo-Christian values in the development of our nation's heritage. The bill's
language is worth a read, especially if you'd like to understand just our much America
owes to our collective Christian faith over the last 235 years.
posted by Scott Elliott at 1:34pm 05/26/09 ::
link |
|
| Thursday, May 21, 2009 |
|---|
| Rove a fan of Obama's foreign policy |
|---|
Well, sort of..
In an op-ed written in the Wall Street Journal by The Architect himself, Karl Rove
endorses several of President Obama's post-inaugural foreign policy decisions while pointing out that they differ greatly from Obama's pre-election campaign
promises.
|
For example, President Obama kept George W. Bush's military tribunals for terror detainees after calling them an "enormous failure" and a "legal black hole." His
campaign claimed last summer that "court systems . . . are capable of convicting terrorists." Upon entering office, he found out they aren't.
He insisted in an interview with NBC in 2007 that Congress mandate "consequences" for "a failure to meet various benchmarks and milestones" on aid to Iraq.
Earlier this month he fought off legislatively mandated benchmarks in the $97 billion funding bill for Iraq and Afghanistan.
Mr. Obama agreed on April 23 to American Civil Liberties Union demands to release investigative photos of detainee abuse. Now's he reversed himself.
Pentagon officials apparently convinced him that releasing the photos would increase the risk to U.S. troops and civilian personnel.
Throughout his presidential campaign, Mr. Obama excoriated Mr. Bush's counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq, insisting it could not succeed. Earlier this year, facing increasing violence in Afghanistan, Mr. Obama rejected warnings of a "quagmire" and ordered more troops to that country. He isn't calling it a "surge" but that's what it is. He is applying in Afghanistan the counterinsurgency strategy Mr. Bush used in Iraq.
As a candidate, Mr. Obama promised to end the Iraq war by withdrawing all troops by March 2009. As president, he set a slower pace of drawdown. He has also said he will leave as many as 50,000 Americans troops there.
These reversals are both praiseworthy and evidence that, when it comes to national security, being briefed on terror threats as president is a lot different than placating MoveOn.org and Code Pink activists as a candidate. The realities of governing trump the realities of campaigning.
|
That last sentence is a weighty one. Politicians are often derided for breaking campaign promises - and rightfully so. However,
being President of the United States must be a quite different proposition looking at it from the campaign trail than from behind the Oval Office desk. A fact
apparently confronting President Obama now as he faces these tough foreign policy decisions. While I don't support most of what Obama has done in office, I must offer kudos to him for adjusting his outlook on these matters to better suit "the realities of governing," even when it doesn't adhere to the MoveOn.org
template.
posted by Scott Elliott at 2:27pm 05/21/09 ::
link |
| Wednesday, May 20, 2009 |
|---|
| Betsy's on a roll |
|---|
Betsy Newmark, who runs the excellent blog, "Betsy's Page," is from my neck of the woods in Raleigh, North Carolina. Today she has published several great
posts. One post, Punishing those who play by the rules,
looks at the implications of recent credit card legislation on responsible credit card users. Another post,
Why government shouldn't run businesses, points to
an economic historian's perspective on the dangers of government entering the corporate boardroom. If you jump over to her
main page, you'll find much more worthy of your attention. Just keep scrollin'!
posted by Scott Elliott at 1:19pm 05/20/09 ::
link |
| Tuesday, May 19, 2009 |
|---|
| More antropogenic global warming rebuttal points |
|---|
AJStrata has a great post listing several important publications regarding the
growing body of evidence against man-made global warming. I highly recommend
you check out the post and read the resources he has linked to.
These resources explore many different aspects of climate change and its measurement and provide key insight into three particular areas where the
science of the "establishment scientific community" is lacking.
Before my liberal friends start cranking out those emails, let me say that I understand the folks generating the information I have linked to here are not without
bias of their own. Such is always the unavoidable case when it comes to ideologically-driven knowledge and interpretation of data. What is
remarkable to me is that, even in the face of new and expanded data refuting the man-made global warming claim, those same folks fail to see the potential
for bias in the "establishment scientific community" who often rely on faulty facts and suspect reasoning.
They somehow affirm the absolute objectivity of
a group of scientists - and even non-scientific academic types - whose research, respectability, and livelihoods depend on preserving an ever-flowing stream of funds from liberal government agencies. Under that influence, an objective opinion which might run contrary to the "accepted" liberal line would take great
character and integrity. Frankly, I don't give these global warming alarmists that much credit.
Update: Check out the global warming category AJStrata has compiled.
Lots of ammo there for combating the hysteria.
posted by Scott Elliott at 4:28pm 05/19/09 ::
link |
| Monday, May 18, 2009 |
|---|
| The Long War Journal |
|---|
Bill Roggio and I became cyber-friends during the 2004 election season. He started a blog that year which was headlined here at Election Projection.
His expert and eloquent analysis of all things military quickly caught folks' attention. Now, 5 years and several tours of duty as an embedded journalist later,
he is at the forefront of War on Terror journalism. His current endeavor, a blog called The Long War Journal publishes frequent and important on-the-ground reports from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, and Somalia, as well as information on the movements and
tactics of Al-Qaeda. If you are interested in getting broader and deeper reporting on the War on Terror than you can find in the mainstream media,
The Long War Journal should be one of your first daily reads.
posted by Scott Elliott at 1:16pm 05/18/09 ::
link |
| Saturday, May 16, 2009 |
|---|
| California "rip-offs" |
|---|
I had to laugh at an email I got from the American Independent Party. (Who knows how I got on their mailing list??) No, I'm not laughing at them for
the substance of their note - in fact, it seems sound to me. There's just something humorous in the direct and simple language of their "recommendations" to
California voters.
|
Dear California Voter,
Here are the American Independent Party of California's recommendations for the May 19th Special Election.
Prop 1A. Extend the Tax Increases. NO. This measure extends the recent tax increases for up to two additional years to the already overtaxed people of California.
Prop 1B. Increases Public School Spending $9.3 Billion. NO. This measure promotes irresponsible budget management, obligating future payments to public
schools in exchange for not making certain mandated budget expenditures over the next two years.
Prop 1C. Lottery Rip-Off. NO. This measure moves lottery money that was designated for schools to the general fund to pay for $5 billion in new borrowing. It
then locks the general fund into making additional payments to public schools--another example of budget mismanagement.
Prop 1D. California Children and Families Rip-Off. NO. The current compartmentalization of funds is no way to run a government, but this measure will give
lawmakers addicted to overspending access to more funds.
Prop 1E. Mental Health Funding Rip-Off. NO. Like 1D, this measure appears to deal with a problem of compartmentalization of funds, but ends up giving
overspending legislators more funds to squander.
Prop 1F. No Raise without a Balanced Budget. NO. This measure would give lawmakers an incentive to balance the budget by raising taxes. And legislators do
not need another incentive to raise taxes, especially one that appeals to their own self-interest.
For more information about the American Independent Party, please visit the state party website at www.aipca.org or America's
Independent Party at www.selfgovernment.us.
|
posted by Scott Elliott at 1:22am 05/16/09 ::
link |
| Growing pro-life sentiments |
|---|
A couple weeks ago a Pew Research poll
found that the number of Americans expressing a "pro-choice" position on the issue of abortion has decreased significantly in just the last year while those
in the "pro-life" camp have increased moderately.
|
The proportion saying that abortion should be legal in all or most cases has declined to 46% from 54% last August. The decline in support for legal
abortion has come entirely in the share saying abortion should be legal in most cases (from 37% to 28%); 18% say abortion should be legal in all cases, which is virtually unchanged from last August (17%). Currently, 44% say abortion should be illegal in most (28%) or all cases (16%), up slightly since last August (41%).
|
Now, Gallup has released another poll indicating the same trend.
|
Just last year, 50% of adults said they were "pro-choice," much higher than the 42% who define themselves that way today. And the gains for life are everywhere--in its application to public policy, political parties, and religion. When asked to what extent abortion should be legal, Gallup found that roughly the same amount of people say it should be illegal in all circumstances (23%) as legal (22%), a big change from the years before when more Americans were in favor of unrestricted abortion.
|
Gallup's numbers confirm what the Pew poll found. Americans are indeed less inclined to offer an approving nod at the killing our unborn children - and the
change is stark both in the size of the shift and in its pace. Whether this is simply reactive to President Obama's extreme pro-choice agenda or a sustainable
change of heart remains to be seen. Either way, two separate polls have now shown that pro-choice Americans are no longer a majority.
posted by Scott Elliott at 12:56am 05/16/09 ::
link |
| Friday, May 15, 2009 |
|---|
| Court-mandated health care for young cancer patient |
|---|
Parents of Daniel Hauser, a 13-year-old boy suffering from Hodgkin's lymphoma, will be forced to seek
conventional chemotherapy treatment for his cancer or risk losing custody of their son.
The family belongs to the Nemenhah Band, a religious sect which sometimes prefers "alternative medicine" to treat their members' ills. While I would
disagree with them both on their religious beliefs and their decision to forego chemo for Daniel, I am alarmed by the ramifications of such a judicial decision.
First, since a lot of families are financially unable to afford this kind of treatment, adhering to this ruling opens the door even wider for nationalized health
care. After all, if the court orders treatment and the family can't pay for it, that leaves the government to foot the bill. Voi-la! Universal health care.
Second, if the government can dictate how parents care for their children's physical health to an increasingly intrusive degree, how far can we be from the
government deciding that how we "indoctrinate" (i.e. teach) our kids should be subject to their control? If refusing chemotherapy on religious grounds can be considered "medical neglect," when will teaching our children basic Christian doctrines such as the depravity of man and the eternal condemnation of lost souls be
deemed "psychological abuse?" Seeing legislation being passed now where "hate speech" can be criminal, I don't find it terribly hard to envision a day in this
country when they'll come for our children.
posted by Scott Elliott at 3:02pm 05/15/09 ::
link |
| Early look at the 2010 Senate races |
|---|
Soon, I will be looking in depth at senators who look vulnerable in 2010. To whet your appetite, here's a list of the top ten most vulnerable senators
as I see them 536 days from the next election. This list is in alphebetical order and does not represent a ranking of vulnerability.
- Colorado (D-Bennet)
- Connecticut (D-Dodd)
- Delaware (D-Open)
- Florida (R-Open)
- Kentucky (R-Bunning)
- Missouri (R-Open)
- Nevada (D-Reid)
- New Hampshire (R-Open)
- North Carolina (R-Burr)
- Ohio (R-Open)
posted by Scott Elliott at 12:58pm 05/15/09 ::
link |
| Thursday, May 14, 2009 |
|---|
| Blockbuster movie material? |
|---|
I have a lot of confidence in the Special Forces of the United States. I'd rather have them on my side than any other military force.
Even so, this report is not very comforting.
While I'm glad the Joint Special Operations Command has a plan laid out for wresting control away from the Taliban should they seize power over Pakistan's nuclear
arsenal, the fact that such an event is plausible enough to prepare for in detail is frightening.
This situation does provide a great storyline for a blockbuster, however. I can just imagine how exciting and suspenseful a movie about this whole
scenario could be. The Taliban orchestrates a coup. . They initiate plans to fire a strategic nuclear missile at India. In the meantime, our elite
anti-terrorism units are infiltrating the mountains of Pakistan from neighboring Afghanistan. Just as the countdown is about to commence, our troops swoop
in and save the day! That would be a blockbuster, indeed....
We can only hope a similar happy ending comes to pass if this nightmare scenario confronts us in real life.
posted by Scott Elliott at 3:11pm 05/14/09 ::
link |
| Your taxes at work |
|---|
Here are two more items in the "Look-at-what-the-government-spends-our-money-on" department. First, China's prostitutes should be comforted to know
that the good ol' US of A is paying $2.6 million for a study to help them
drink less. Second,
Argentinians can rest easier now that we're laying out $400,000 to conduct a study of
homosexual activity in Argentinian bars.
Oh, brother!
posted by Scott Elliott at 2:11pm 05/14/09 ::
link |
| Invisible, important changes |
|---|
Even though there has been little in the way of posts recently here at Election Projection, I have been very
busy on the website behind the scenes. For starters, I've revamped the way my posts are displayed, switching many of the files to php. Part of
that process has been reformatting all previous posts to fit the new method. Almost 5 1/2 years of blogging add up to over 1100 posts! As you
can imagine, converting them all will be a mammouth task. I'm currently about 40% done.
Another project I've been spending some time the last couple days is a program to automate publishing my blogposts. (I am a computer engineer
by profession, afterall!) It is mostly complete. In fact, I am using it to write this post. It will help make publishing stuff easier, and thus it
should result in more posts!
These changes are not the only ones I'm planning over the next few months. Look for many cool features to come online over the summer.
I figure the election off-season is a good time to broaden the website's appeal. I'll keep everyone posted as the new stuff is completed.
posted by Scott Elliott at 12:03am 05/14/09 ::
link |
| Monday, May 4, 2009 |
|---|
| New feature: Political Quick Hits |
|---|
In an effort to produce more fresh content on Election Projection, I'm initiating a "Quick Hits" section in the right sidebar of the
Main Page. This new feature will enable me to post links to articles and blog posts that interest me without having to spend a lot of time reacting to
them. Come back often for new links to the day's hot political stories, real-time conservative alerts, and content from around the blogosphere that you might not find elsewhere.
And don't worry, I'll still be publishing my own thoughts and analysis when the urge strikes!
posted by Scott Elliott at 11:00pm 05/04/09 ::
link |
|
|
| Election Projection Resources |
|---|
EP's RSS Feed |
RSS
|
| 2010 Projection Results |
|
| 2008 Projection Results |
|
| 2006 Projection Results |
|
| 2004 Projection Results |
|
| Search this site |
provided by Google
|
| Contact Me |
e-mail Scott at:
thebloggingcaesar
-at- yahoo.com
|
|
|
