| Stack of Stuff Quick Hits Page |
|
October 16, 2008 |
|
 |
|
Story #1: Secret Service: Nobody Yelled "Kill Him" at Palin Rally
 RUSH: More examples of Democrat Party and media cheating and lying: "A couple of days ago, David Singleton of the Scranton Times-Tribune reported that somebody shouted 'kill him' about Barack Obama at a McCain-Palin rally in Scranton, Pennsylvania, while Republican congressional candidate Chris Hackett spoke. But today Andrew Cedar of the Wilkes-Barre Times Leader reports that not a single person interviewed by the Secret Service heard this outburst." We have Drive-By Media gotcha! We have gotten somebody in the Drive-Bys here.
"Secret Service Agent Bill Slavoski said he was in the audience, along with an undisclosed number of additional secret service agents and other law enforcement officers and not one heard the comment. 'I was baffled,' he said after reading the report in Wednesday's Times-Tribune of Scranton. He said the agency conducted an investigation Wednesday, after seeing the story, and could not find one person to corroborate the allegation other than the reporter," David Singleton of the Scranton Times-Tribune. Slavoski said that more than 20 nonsecurity agents were interviewed Wednesday from news media to ordinary citizens in attendance at the rally he said Singleton was the only one to say he heard somebody yell kill him. 'We've yet to find anybody to back up the story,' Slavoski said. 'We had people all over. We have yet to find anyone who said they heard it.'"
So now the Drive-Bys, this is not news, is lying, is making it up in order to push their agenda. So McCain supporters yelling "kill him" was a lie but Obama calmly saying, "Kill the babies" was truth. Obama is for infanticide. Obama is for killing babies who survive abortions. He lied about it through his teeth in the debate last night. McCain supporters yelling "kill him" is a lie. Obama calmly saying "kill the baby" is the truth, and the Drive-Bys ignore it and cover it up.
Story #2: Ohio Sec. of State Asks Supremes to Let Her Cheat
RUSH: Get this. "Ohio Secretary of State Forced to Reveal She's Been Hiding 200,000 Questionable Registrations". This is serious. " The controversial partisan Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner admitted today that she is holding 200,000 potentially fraudulent registrations. She has been concealing these registrations from the local election boards." Do you know what Bush's margin of victory in Ohio was in 2004? It was 118,457. Two hundred thousand hidden registrations! Hello, ACORN? Hello, Barack Obama? Hello, fraud and cheat? There are no coincidences. "Ms. Brunner has filed an appeal with the Sixth Circuit court" -- actually all the way to the Supreme Court -- "asking them to intervene in this dispute as to whether the state is required to do more to help counties verify voter eligibility."
Again now: the Democrat secretary of state in Ohio, Jennifer Brunner, admitted that she is holding 200,000 potentially fraudulent voter registrations and that she has been concealing these registrations from local election boards. The margin of Bush's victory in Ohio in 2004 was 118,457. Yesterday, Jennifer Brunner "asked the US Supreme Court to intervene in this dispute over whether she is required to do more to help counties verify voter eligibility, according to a spokesman from her office." The Sixth Circuit said you've got 'til Friday to verify all these. She now is asking the Supreme Court, "Isn't that too hard? Let us cheat here. Let us cheat in Ohio. It's only fair that we cheat." She didn't say this, exactly, but it's what she means.
Story #3: FBI Investigation of ACORN Should Take Ten Minutes
RUSH: Here's the late arriving news from Associated Press: "The FBI is investigating whether the community activist group ACORN helped foster voter registration fraud around the nation before the presidential election. A senior law enforcement official confirmed the investigation to The Associated Press on Thursday. A second senior law enforcement official says the FBI was looking at results of recent raids on ACORN offices in several states for any evidence of a coordinated national scam. Both officials spoke on condition of anonymity because Justice Department regulations forbid discussing ongoing investigations." Now, be prepared. I want you to be prepared for ten days from now the FBI to say, "We found nothing coordinated."
I'm not trying to be negative. I'm telling you that the liberals are all over the federal bureaucracy. They're in the state department; they're in the Pentagon; they're all over the place. They're in the justice department. So the FBI is investigating ACORN for voter fraud. This is an investigation that ought to take ten minutes. In Ohio alone they could prove it, and then go to Nevada, where you're registering the Dallas Cowboys and then go to Missouri where you're registering the Dallas Cowboys and then go to St. Louis where you're pulling all of kinds of shenanigans, 4,000 fraudulent registrations found in Philadelphia. This investigation could have been done yesterday in half a day. So we'll see what shakes out over this.
Story #4: NAGS: Love Your Body Because Nobody Else Does
RUSH: Yesterday was Love Your Body Day, the NAGs. The NAGs, the National Organization for Women, the NAGs, National Association for Gals. "For over a decade now the National Organization for Women Foundation's Love Your Body campaign has countered the unrealistic beauty standards, gender stereotypes and sometimes harmful images. 'We are constantly bombarded by media's ideals of what beauty should be,' says NOW Foundation President Kim Gandy. ... 'The vitriolic language used to describe Hillary Clinton, Michelle Obama, and Sarah Palin is a direct effect of the way media and advertising have created a world in which even the most powerful women are reduced to objectification,' said Gandy." Hey, you've been on the bandwagon to attack Palin. What have I always told you, though? Undeniable Truth of Life Number 24: Feminism was established so that unattractive women could have easier access to the mainstream. So what happens? The only women who mind sexual harassment -- I'm just kidding, Drive-Bys -- just kidding, just a little lighthearted interjected comment here. You ever notice a Hooters girl doesn't care? Ahem. (Ramming it down their throats day here on the EIB Network. )
Feminist Undeniable Truth of Life: feminism was established so as to allow unattractive women easier access, and here you go, the NAGs with their Love Your Body Day. They have a poster or sign here, says, "I love my thighs." It says, "I love my thighs." Love Your Body Day f you're a feminazi, if you're a NAG, Love Your Body Day, because nobody else does. That's what this is all about. They can't stand that there are still pretty women in the world, and they really can't stand that one of the prettiest is a vice presidential nominee, but they do mention Sarah here as having been shellacked and attacked for her looks and so forth, they say Sarah has been objectified. But this is also about the woman's movement that took away from us the role of women in life. It's all twisted. Did we need a Love Your Body Day before the feminazis geared up? Love Your Body Day because nobody else will.
Story #5: Hershey's Lowered Prices, 3rd Quarter Profits Doubled
RUSH: Hershey's third quarter profit doubled. They lowered prices. Some economy, huh?
Story #6: US Communist Party Excited by Prospect of Obama
RUSH: This is from the French News Agency: "A rare bird in the political world, the US Communist Party --" what do you mean, rare bird? US Communist Party, Democrat Party, Drive-By Media, what the hell's the difference these days? "The US Communist Party is feeling rather smug. At the party's New York headquarters on 23rd Street in Manhattan, regional party chairman Libero Della Piana, 36, laid out why he thinks Marxist-Leninism's time has finally come. 'We are very excited, we feel that we are at a turning point,' Della Piana, an imposing half-Italian, half-African American with a pony tail, told AFP. 'We can afford to be less on the defensive for the first time since Ronald Reagan, and we can say our word in rebuilding America on a new basis, rebuilding a better world, instead of one based on the greed of the few.' The US Communist Party was founded in 1919, their time has come." Now, why is that? Why all of a sudden would the US Communist Party be out there saying, "Our time has come?" Might some of it have to do with the Obama campaign, or with Obama himself, or, there is another possibility. Maybe these clowns at the US Communist Party are having a party because they think so many Americans have literally lost their minds in this campaign.
|
|
|
Story #7: Murtha Apologizes for Calling Pennsylvania Racist
 RUSH: "Rep. John Murtha said today in a prepared statement that he is sorry for making the comment that Western Pennsylvania is a racist area." This guy owes about 25 apologies over the last two years. "Yesterday Murtha told the Tribune-Review that 'Obama's got a problem with the race issue in Western Pennsylvania' and that [he] could expect his skin color to cost him up to 4 percentage points at the polls on Nov. 4. In his statement today, Murtha said: 'While we cannot deny that race is a factor in this election, I believe we've been able to look beyond race these past few months, and that voters today are concerned with the policy," blah, blah, blah. Now, his opponent, for those of you in Murtha's district, is named Bill Russell. This is Pennsylvania 12. Bill Russell. Remember the name: Bill Russell. He "said yesterday in a statement that Murtha was using the prestige and platform of public office to make wild, reckless statements about the people he represents."
Story #8: Man Ticketed for Dumping Dog Dung on McCain Fan
RUSH: St. Cloud, Minnesota: "A St. Cloud man was ticketed for unlawful dumping after admitting to putting dog feces in his neighbor's truck for political reasons." A man has been ticketed for dumping dog dung on a McCain fan. Now, of course, this isn't hateful. This is just playful! When the Democrats do this, they're just playful. Oh, what a good practical joke. Meanwhile, if you're just joining us, the Secret Service has done a thorough investigation in Scranton, Pennsylvania. They can't find anybody at Palin's rally who said "kill him." Only the Scranton newspaper reporter, David Singleton, said he heard it, but they've done an exhaustive interview, and they can't find anybody who heard it, other than the reporter who obviously made it up. Why would a reporter make it up? Why, remember Jayson Blair, all the other plagiarists and people that made it up in the Drive-By Media?
Story #9: Oil Price Drops, Gas and Jet Fuel Price Follows
RUSH: I don't know if you've noticed this, folks, but the barrel price for oil is now below $70 -- at least it was five minutes ago. Its high was $147, so it has dropped more than 50%, however you want to calculate it. But when the price was going up, Congress held investigations, the Big Oil chieftains were brought in, and then the speculators were targeted. And when the speculators were exonerated, the Big Oil chiefs were brought back in. Where are the investigations to find out why the hell this price drop is coming and happening right before an election?
Now, if this holds and if Obama is victorious on election night, I just want you to remember that starting the next day, the Drive-Bys will be filled with reports about how the economy is straightening out and people are feeling much more confident. The oil price is down. Gasoline price is plummeting. Birds are singing and chirping louder, the blue in the sky is bluer, the ocean is bluer, the grass is greener, the earth is warming not as much, all because Obama was elected. You watch. There's going to be such a turnaround in the way the economy is reported on.
Story #10: Fascinating Study on How Electorate Makes Decisions
RUSH: I mention this story, actually it's an article from the Wilson Quarterly, the Woodrow Wilson Center for scholars: "The Irrational Electorate." It's by Larry Bartels who directs the Center for the Study of Democratic Politics in Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. He is the author of Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age, published earlier this year by the Russell Sage Foundation and Princeton University Press. Now, when you print it out, it runs four or five pages. I'm not a scholar, and Mr. Bartels is, and, to me, the first part -- I had to read this a bunch of times. It reads like gobbledygook, and what it is is an analysis of a whole bunch of studies worldwide over many, many decades of the electorates, the electorates in democracies. And let me just give you some excerpts. One sentence in this piece -- and this is about how people determine who they are going to vote for. People are very short term in their focus. They tend to vote based on how the economy is going, rewarding or throwing the bums out regardless of party. But here's some interesting bits for you.
"A team of psychologists led by Alex Todorov established that candidates for governor, senator, or representative who are rated as 'competent' by people judging them solely on the basis of photographs are considerably more likely to win real-world elections than those who look less competent. Brief exposure to the photographs -- as little as one-tenth of a second -- is sufficient to produce a significant correlation with actual election outcomes. A follow-up study showed that the electoral advantage of competent-looking candidates is strongest among less informed voters and those most heavily exposed to political advertising." So, the follow-up study said the electoral advantage of competent looking candidates is strongest among less informed voters. One-tenth of a second, somebody looking at a picture, will form more of a lasting impression on how somebody's going to vote than what their issues are? I know that's how a lot of people get married. Well, it is. You know people make jokes about this, but a lot of people get married on the basis of one-tenth of a second, on how somebody looks. And if you're going to make a decision on who you going to marry on the basis of one-tenth of a second looking at them or a picture of them, well, it's a far less of a commitment to vote for somebody than to get married to them. But the less informed you are the more powerful the visual impression of somebody you think looks competent.
"A team from UCLA found that most of the effect of any given ad on voters' preferences evaporated within one week, and that 'only the most politically aware voters exhibited . . . long-term effects.'" In another study, "A major ad buy produced a seven-point increase in voter support for the featured candidate a day after the ads aired," but two days later the lead was gone. So we can assume that, again, most people are not politically aware round the clock, 24/7, and those who aren't can be moved by an ad for a day, and the ad's effect vanishes after one day. Another paragraph here: Issues matter less than they seem. People attribute their views to the candidate they like and adopt their candidate's views. This and one more explain Obama. "Voters consistently misperceived where candidates stood on the important issues of the day, seeing their favorite candidates' stands as closer to their own and opposing candidates' stands as more dissimilar than they actually were. They likewise exaggerated the extent of support for their favorite candidates among members of social groups they felt close to. ... Political scientist Gabriel Lenz found very little evidence that people actually changed their vote because of the Social Security debate. What happened, mostly, was that people who learned the candidates' views on privatization from the blizzard of ads and news coverage simply adopted the position of the candidate they already supported for other reasons. The resulting appearance of 'issue voting' was almost wholly illusory."
So if your candidate has one issue that you like, and you've seen one-tenth of a second of an audio or a picture of the guy, and you've determined you like him, and then he runs an ad that you really, really dig, you'll forget the ad in one day, but it will make your support for him go way, way up. You won't remember why you support him. The support will be even more profound and deep. Then the candidate comes out and voices something you totally disagree with. You'll reject that because you like the guy. "Ah, that doesn't matter. I don't care about that." He's right on whatever issue that is most important to the person. Everything else is irrelevant, plus the likability factor.
A couple of good voter behavior stories: Woodrow Wilson and shark attacks. "In the summer of 1916 a dramatic weeklong series of shark attacks along New Jersey beaches left four people dead. Tourists fled, leaving some resorts with 75 percent vacancy rates in the midst of their high season. Letters poured into congressional offices demanding federal action." Now, we're talking, again, 1916. "Letters poured into congressional offices demanding federal action; but what action would be effective in such circumstances? Voters probably didn't know, but neither did they care. When President Woodrow Wilson -- a former governor of New Jersey with strong local ties -- ran for reelection a few months later, he was punished at the polls," because he didn't do anything about sharks. "He lost as much as 10 percent of his expected vote in towns where shark attacks had occurred," 'cause he hadn't done anything about them.
"The 1936 election has become the most celebrated textbook case of ideological realignment in American history. However, a careful look at state-by-state voting patterns suggests that this resounding ratification of Roosevelt's policies was strongly concentrated in the states that happened to enjoy robust income growth in the months leading up to the vote. Indeed, the apparent impact of short-term economic conditions was so powerful that, if the recession of 1938 had occurred in 1936, Roosevelt probably would have been a one-term president. It's not only in the United States that the Depression-era tendency to 'throw the bums out' looks like something less than a rational policy judgment. In the United States, voters replaced Republicans with Democrats in 1932 and the economy improved. In Britain and Australia, voters replaced Labor governments with conservatives and the economy improved. In Sweden, voters replaced Conservatives with Liberals, then with Social Democrats, and the economy improved. In the Canadian agricultural province of Saskatchewan, voters replaced Conservatives with Socialists and the economy improved. In the adjacent agricultural province of Alberta, voters replaced a socialist party with a right-leaning party created from scratch by a charismatic radio preacher peddling a flighty share-the-wealth scheme, and the economy improved. In Weimar Germany, where economic distress was deeper and longer lasting, voters rejected all of the mainstream parties, the Nazis seized power, and the economy improved. In every case, the party that happened to be in power when the Depression eased went on to dominate politics for a decade or more thereafter. It seems far-fetched to imagine that all these contradictory shifts represented well-considered ideological conversions."
Ideology and issues had nothing to do with it. Whoever was in charge when the thing went south got punished. Whoever was in charge when it came back got rewarded. This is a longer piece from the Wilson Quarterly. It's a much longer piece than what I shared with you here by Larry Bartels, the Irrational Electorate. It's a scholarly work trying to explain why voters do what they do when they do it in democracies.
Story #11: Even ACORN Says Obama Lied About Them
RUSH: Folks, it's so bad out there, imagine this. Even ACORN is saying that Obama lied about them last night! It's in the San Francisco Chronicle today. "ACORN Comes Out Swinging." It's one of their blogs. "ACORN organizers this morning said that Senator Barack Obama, as a local elected official in Chicago, participated in two training sessions for 50 volunteer leaders." He lied through his teeth, but he was a rock. He was a mountain! He was elegant. He was cool. He was calm. He was unflappable. But he lied through his teeth, and even ACORN's out calling him a liar today. But nobody will care. It won't matter.
Story #12: Kofi Annan: Obama Election Will Be "Phenomenal"
RUSH: Maybe you'll be interested in this. "Kofi Annan," the corrupt former secretary-general of the United Nations, "said that a win for Obama would be phenomenal. When asked if the US and the world was ready for a black president, he said, 'I think it would be a phenomenal change for the US and for the world. It would introduce a new dynamics and a new relationship between the US and the world. Whoever wins this presidency will have to come out prepared to work in partnership with the rest of the world,'" meaning give up some of our sovereignty. Kofi Annan can't wait for that to happen with Barack Obama.
|
|
|
|
|
| *Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time. |
|
|
