Thursday, November 29, 2012

Washington Post Goes Full Bigot

Bob Owens has put up a post entitled “Washington Post Goes Full Bigot”.  To which I say . . .

Yeah, pretty much.

What other conclusion is there in light of this egregious excerpt of the Washington Post editorial in question:

Could it be, as members of the Congressional Black Caucus are charging, that the signatories of the letter are targeting Ms. Rice because she is an African American woman? The signatories deny that, and we can’t know their hearts. What we do know is that more than 80 of the signatories are white males, and nearly half are from states of the former Confederacy. You’d think that before launching their broadside, members of Congress would have taken care not to propagate any falsehoods of their own.

And, to be clear, this is an editorial by the Washington Post editorial board, not a column from one of their several crackpot columnists.

To get the full effect of the sheer outrageousness of this editorial, turn it around.  Imagine an editorial criticizing President Obama and Susan Rice for their Benghazi statements and throw in the following: “We can’t know their hearts.  What we do know is that they are BLACK, very very BLACK.”

Yes, it would be absurdly bigoted . . . just like the Washington Post editorial.

And the Washington Post should be called out for it.  And to look at the bigger picture, the Left should be called out for their increasing bigotry again and again.  But I will have to leave that subject for another time.

Tuesday, November 27, 2012

I like Jeb Bush, however . . .

There’s been talk the past few days that Jeb Bush is preparing to run for president in 2016.  I’ve always liked Jeb Bush . . . and I think him getting the Republican nomination for President would be a disaster.

To be clear, my prophetic opinion has nothing to do with his personal qualities.  I mean it when I say I like him.  But Jeb Bush is an establishment man and is, well, a Bush.  And the combination makes him unelectable.

The Republican Party has put forth two establishment men against Obama.  That hasn’t worked out too well.  And I know more than a few tea party/libertarian types stayed home and did not vote this year in spite of their antipathy toward Obama.  Too much of what should be the Republican base will not be able to stomach yet another establishment Republican candidate in 2016 and will not help him when the Democrat candidate will surely not be as noxious as Obama.  And establishment Republican candidates hardly excite anyone beyond sure Republican voters anyway.  The lackluster turn out for Romney, who to his credit was a good campaigner, proves that.

And another Bush?  Does anyone in their right mind think this country is ready for another Bush?  Not only is another Bush unelectable, that would be begging for a third Tea Party.  I know first hand that many tea party types detest W about as much as Obama. (For the record, I disagree with that sentiment.  I’m only reporting what I have observed.)  Most tea party people have been good team players in 2010 and 2012.  But put another Bush in front of them, and they will want him defeated along with the Democrat.  There will instantly be a strong third party then that will make Jeb Bush that much more unelectable and hand that election and perhaps more to the Democrats.

By the way, Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton?  Bush vs. Clinton again?  A third party would have a field day with that match-up.

So as much as I like and respect Jeb Bush, I sincerely hope he does not run for President. 

And that is a bit unfair, because I think he could be the best president since Reagan.  But life isn’t fair, especially political life.  Being the son of a Bush ain’t what it used to be.

Wednesday, November 21, 2012

After Synod: The Need for Provision for Traditionalists Illustrated

This is just a brief note to those who may doubt the need for robust provision for those who cannot accept the ministry of women bishops in any future Church of England women bishop’s legislation – surf around to twitter, comments here and there, and various message boards, and you will see just how needful said provision is.

Attitudes towards those who cannot accept the ministry of women bishops are appalling to put it mildly.  Here’s one example from a respected member of the Church of England (I’m not using even online names because calling out is not my purpose as much as calling out might be deserved.):

I'm the one preaching love and inclusion, they are the ones preaching bigotry and sexism. They should **** off to whichever bigoted misogynist shack will take them and leave the church to those of us who actually believe in love.

Yes, how very loving and inclusive indeed.  Then there is this from a CofE bishop not known as a liberal: “The Kingdom of God is bigger than the stupidity of 6 lay people.”

Oh.  So laity who don’t bow down and do the bishops’ bidding on women bishops are stupid . . . and oppose the Kingdom of God apparently.

There is a profound lack of basic respect for the views and persons of those who cannot accept the ministry of women bishops.  Despite Justin Welby’s protestations otherwise, too many in the Church of England have proven they cannot be trusted to treat these traditionalists with grace and respect apart from the force of law.

Those who insist on robust provision and therefore voted against the women bishops legislation (And even a liberal or two voted “No” for those very reasons.  I salute those few.) were wise and right to do so. 

The reaction to the “No” voters proves just that.

MORE: And here is the passionate explanation of a “No” voter who is also a “convinced liberal” and supporter of women bishops.  Kudos to him for his courage.

Tuesday, November 20, 2012

CofE Feminists Get What They Deserve, the Defeat of Women Bishops Legislation

If you heard some disquietude (I would say shrill screaming, but I don’t think the English do that.) in the past hour or so, that may be because the proposed legislation on women bishops just failed to pass the Church of England Synod.  Less than 2/3s of the Laity voted for it.

The House of Bishops of the CofE will meet tomorrow morning to “consider the consequences of the vote.”

The irony of all this is women bishops legislation would have likely passed Synod this summer.  But, noooo.  A number of feminists were unhappy with the provisions in it for those who cannot accept the ministry of women bishops.  So they forced a postponement, which resulted in a weakening of those provisions, which in turn weakened support from the rest of the church.  Hence today’s result.

I can hardly improve on what I posted this summer:

Now the rational proponent of women bishops (and there are many) would see that [many cannot on the basis of scripture and tradition accept the ministry of women bishops] and therefore would propose to allow those of said convictions to have the alternative arrangements they are requesting and otherwise move on with women bishops.  But that is not good enough for the uberfeminists.  Having women bishops is not good enough unless the traditionalists are crushed or driven out or both.

What the heck do these feminists want?  The Principal of Pusey House being forced at the point of a sword to kiss the ring of a woman bishop?  More Anglo-Catholics forced to flee to Rome?  And there is little question some feminists secretly desire the latter.  And it is hard to see how their efforts are any less than attempted persecution of the Faithful.

If the feminists kill women bishops legislation because they refuse to allow orthodox opponents a little space, then they don’t deserve to have their women bishops . . . ever.  Further, their vindictiveness proves themselves unfit to called bishops or ministers of Christ . . . or Christians for that matter.

And most of them have indeed proven themselves, by both their teaching and conduct, more feminist than Christian.  For the sake of Christ’s Church, and for the sake of their own needful repentance, may their utter lack of Christian reasonableness and charity indeed bring about their own defeat again and again.

And, today, the feminists’ lack of reasonableness and grace did indeed bring about their own well-earned defeat.

Now if they really want women bishops along with peace and unity, they will repent and allow traditionalists the space they are requesting.

No, I am not holding my breath on that one.

Synod: The Naiveté of Justin Welby

I fear that, at the current Synod of the Church of England, we have already seen how Justin Welby will operate as the next Archbishop of Canterbury – to assume, with a smile, grace and good will among everyone and then to look the other way as heretics and apostates persecute the orthodox.

Yes, perhaps I am jumping the gun.  And I do sincerely hope I am mistaken.  But at Synod his reasoning behind supporting women bishops is naïve at best.  He seems to think it unnecessary to have robust legal protection of traditionalists because the rest of the Church of England will surely respect their consciences anyway:

"This approach that we have before us today is I believe, after much discussion with many people, as good as we can get. . . our will and intention are far more important than the rules.
"I am personally deeply committed, and believe that fellow bishops are also, to ensuring, as far as I am able, that what we promise today and later in the Code of Practice is carried out faithfully in Spirit as well as in letter."

CofE feminists have already demonstrated that they care not a whit for the consciences of those who cannot accept the ministry of women bishops.  If Justin Welby really thinks that feminist bishops can be trusted to respect and guard the consciences of traditionalists, his naiveté will surely enable persecution of the faithful sooner or later.

Again, I hope I am proven wrong.  We shall see.

Monday, November 19, 2012



That’s what Paul Krugman commends as a top income tax rate to make “the rich pay their fair share.”

I am not kidding.  Read his op-ed for yourself, if you can stomach it.

Democrats will not be happy until many Americans are turned into tax slaves. . . .   And Democrats probably will not be happy even then.

Bishop Lawrence’s Address to the Diocese of South Carolina

The Special Convention of the Diocese of South Carolina has met and confirmed that said Diocese is no longer a part of The Episcopal Church.

I continue to pray for the Diocese of South Carolina as the brazen attacks from The Episcopal Church will also continue. (And I apologize that I have not been posting on those attacks on South Carolina.  I just have not had the energy or stomach to dive into the subject. I guess I have Schori-fatigue.)

A highlight of the convention was Bishop Mark Lawrence’s address.  It is perceptive, pastoral, and gracious.  I commend it to you.

Thursday, November 15, 2012


I think I might need help.  Yesterday I watched an Obama press conference . . . and enjoyed it.

Now, I’m one who for almost eight years muted the volume whenever Bill Clinton came on.  I could not abide his smug lying.  And I’ve often muted Obama as well.  But I’ve sometimes made myself listen to The Dear Leader in part so I can be informed and make witty and intelligent comments for you my dear readers.  Hey, who loves you?

But yesterday, I actually enjoyed listening to Obama and his worshippers the press.

Am I sick and in need of professional help?  Perhaps my sickness is voyeurism.  For what I enjoyed most was this:

A reporter for the Chicago Tribune congratulated President Obama on winning reelection during a press conference Wednesday at the White House.

Obama called on Christi Parsons, the White House reporter for the Chicago Tribune.

"Thank you, Mr. President," Parsons said. "And congratulations, by the way."

Obama then noted Parsons was there "when I was running for state Senate."

"That's right, I was," Parsons replied, adding that she had “never seen you lose.”

Hey, you two.  Get. A. Room.

I wonder how many of the other reporters were jealous.

Yes. I am sick.

And here’s some NBC-Obama love action.

Wednesday, November 14, 2012

California: The Tipping Point to Come?

Since the election, there has been a lot of attention given to issues to be faced in a 2nd Obama term, particularly the “Fiscal Cliff.”

But I’ve seen no attention paid to an issue that could tear this country asunder – bailing out California.

The State of California is headed toward bankruptcy.  I expect that sometime in the next four years they will ask for a bail-out from the federal government.

If you think our nation’s divisions are bad now, wait until California asks for a fed bail-out, with Obama’s support no doubt.  

So taxpayers who have elected somewhat responsible state governments who balance their budgets are supposed to bail out a wealthy yet profligate state which has elected and re-elected and re-elected and re-elected irresponsible liberals and Leftists with their literally bankrupt policies? 

Taxpayers from red states will not take kindly to that.

Tuesday, November 13, 2012

Massive Election Fraud in Cleveland (UPDATE: And in Philly)

Yesterday, I brought up blatant election law violations and the possibility of election fraud in Philadelphia.  Today, however, there will be no question mark in the title.  There is no reasonable doubt that there was massive election fraud in Cleveland, Ohio.

There are over 100 Cuyahoga County precincts in which Obama got over 99% of the reported vote.  In many of these, Romney got 2, 1, or even 0 votes.  In fact in 16 precincts, Romney got 0 votes.  Most of these are not small precincts, either.  In one, the vote was reported as 597-0.

When I first read this story, I was skeptical.  I mean this isn’t the Soviet Union, right?  But then I checked the Cuyahoga County election returns on my own, and the results indeed are that bizarre.  Check them out for yourself if you like.  You will have to scroll down a bit to the presidential results.

To get odd results like that in one or two precincts would be suspicious, but in elections there is often a precinct or two with unexpected results.  To get results like that in precinct after precinct after precinct, however, is compelling evidence of election fraud, and that on a massive scale.

Again, no, I do not think such fraud affected the final result in this election.  But it is nevertheless an attack on the integrity of our democracy.  The full force of the law should come down on the perpetrators.

On Election Night, I expressed the wish that if Obama won, it would be decided that night.  Given the emerging election law violations and outright fraud in swing states, we should all be thankful that turned out to be the case.  I shudder to think of the state of the union if the election had turned out to be so narrow as to be brought into question by fraud like this.

Election fraud in this country must be stopped.


UPDATE: I think you can take that question mark off of my Philadelphia post now.  From here (with some high comedy mixed in):

It's one thing for a Democratic presidential candidate to dominate a Democratic city like Philadelphia, but check out this head-spinning figure: In 59 voting divisions in the city, Mitt Romney received not one vote. Zero. Zilch.

These are the kind of numbers that send Republicans into paroxysms of voter-fraud angst, but such results may not be so startling after all. [Yeah.  Right. – ed.]

"We have always had these dense urban corridors that are extremely Democratic," said Jonathan Rodden, a political science professor at Stanford University. "It's kind of an urban fact, and you are looking at the extreme end of it in Philadelphia."

Most big cities are politically homogeneous, with 75 percent to 80 percent of voters identifying as Democrats.

Cities are not only bursting with Democrats: They are easier to organize than rural areas where people live far apart from one another, said Sasha Issenberg, author of The Victory Lab: The Secret Science of Winning Campaigns.

"One reason Democrats can maximize votes in Philadelphia is that it's very easy to knock on every door," Issenberg said. [. . . and kill any and all possible Romney voters?]

Still, was there not one contrarian voter in those 59 divisions, where unofficial vote tallies have President Obama outscoring Romney by a combined 19,605 to 0?

The unanimous support for Obama in these Philadelphia neighborhoods - clustered in almost exclusively black sections of West and North Philadelphia - fertilizes fears of fraud, despite little hard evidence. [19,605 to zilch isn’t “hard evidence”?]

Upon hearing the numbers, Steve Miskin, a spokesman for Republicans in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, brought up his party's voter-identification initiative - which was held off for this election - and said, "We believe we need to continue ensuring the integrity of the ballot."

The absence of a voter-ID law, however, would not stop anyone from voting for a Republican candidate.

Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia who has studied African American precincts, said he had occasionally seen 100 percent of the vote go for the Democratic candidate. Chicago and Atlanta each had precincts that registered no votes for Republican Sen. John McCain in 2008.

"I'd be surprised if there weren't a handful of precincts that didn't cast a vote for Romney," he said. But the number of zero precincts in Philadelphia deserves examination, Sabato added.

"Not a single vote for Romney or even an error? That's worth looking into," he said.

Gosh, you think?

Hat tip to The Blaze, which has more on the *interesting* returns in both Cleveland and Philly.

Monday, November 12, 2012

Election Fraud in Philadelphia? (UPDATED)

First, I should say I am not one of those who think Obama was re-elected by vote fraud.  His margin was large enough that I do not think vote fraud that massive is feasible in this country . . . yet.

But any vote fraud is reason for concern.  Historically, it has been the difference in several close elections.  And I shudder to think how divided this nation would be if a presidential election were very close with suspicious election/counting activity to boot.  I would make 2000 look like a picnic.

What happened Election Day in Philadelphia is more than a little suspicious.  Appointed GOP Poll Watchers were kicked out of many wards (restored later by court order).  Here is audio of one episode.

Not caring what the law says is an odd attitude for an election judge to have.  And the results in these wards also happen to be odd, 9955 Obama to 55 Romney in one ward.

Now, do I know election fraud occurred in these Philly wards?  No.  But at the very least, election law was willfully and systematically violated when GOP Poll Watchers were expelled.  And actual vote fraud or no, the conduct of the election and the results are an indictment of the political culture of Philadelphia.

UPDATE: The youtube code kept messing with me.  So I just changed it to a link.  Sorry.
Also note that I am now just about certain of election fraud in Philly and in Cleveland as well.

Friday, November 09, 2012

About the New Archbishop of Canterbury

I suppose I should edify and/or amuse my readers and have something witty or profound to say about the new Archbishop of Canterbury.  But I just don’t.  For Justin Welby has done nothing to either encourage or alarm me.  So my attitude is more or less wait and see.

Now maybe that is because I have not been paying much attention.  Or maybe it is because the Crown Commission was so deadlocked that an inoffensive pick was inevitable.

Nonetheless, I most certainly do pray God’s blessings and guidance upon him.  Given the current state of the Church of England and of the Anglican Communion, he’s going to need them.

Thursday, November 08, 2012

A Time for Ministry

Robert Munday has posted a calm and cogent missive on what we can expect in a 2nd Obama term.  I particularly appreciate his addendum:

Our only hope in all this is a revival or spiritual awakening among faithful Christians that gives the Church new unity, boldness, and power in accomplishing its mission, and that turns the hearts of the people of this country to repentance.  It is incumbent on Christians to pray and work as never before.

It will not surprise that I am very pessimistic about the coming years, perhaps more so than Dr. Munday.  We are in *interesting* times.  And it will get more interesting.

And it is precisely in such times that the ministry and witness of the church is that much more needed and people are more needy and receptive to it.  So we indeed need to prepare, pray, and work . . . hard.  People need us.  They just don’t know it . . . yet.

Wednesday, November 07, 2012

Why This Loss is Different

I finally have a moment or two to put down some thoughts about last night.

I’ve noticed some of like mind say that this is not a disaster.  There’s been bad elections before, and our system of checks and balances will do its job and preserve our republic just fine.  I do wish they are proved correct, but I beg to differ.

Last night is different because of the voters and because of the President they re-elected.

I’ll dispense with the latter first and quickly.  I’ve long and frequently noted that Obama has a totalitarian streak.  He has already shown a propensity for running over the Constitution and its checks and balances.  Obama is dangerous in large part because of his disregard for Constitutional checks and balances.  And now that he no longer has the accountability of an election, his disregard will become more evident and consequential.

But what saddens me more about this election is what it says about what Americans have become.  With all the information available, it does not take a great deal of effort to know the kind of President that Obama is.  And yet they re-elected him.  (I say “they” because I sure as heck did not re-elect him.) 

This is different than 2008.  Thanks to a feckless news media, you had to dig a little to find out about Obama.  But now he had a record and a horrific one.  It’s different than 1992 and 1996, too.  Clinton hid much of his liberal-left agenda in 1992, and had already run to the center (and wisely so) by 1996 after the spanking he got in 1994.

This time, voters had no such excuses.  Obama’s first term record is clear for all to see.  And he certainly has not run from it to the center.  And yet, they re-elected him anyway. 

To be blunt, the electorate acted more like Venezuelans than Americans.  Yes, that is harsh. (And don’t give me “RACIST!” crap.  I’m referring to culture, not skin tone.) But rest assured I say that with more sadness than anger.

Greg Griffith spells out some of what this election says about what American voters have become:

How could anyone who had drunk in even a sip of the disgusting actions of our president even entertain the notion of re-electing him?

My answer didn’t come immediately, but it came soon enough. The answer is this:

- There are millions of voters who can’t tell you that Benghazi is in Libya, can’t tell you that our ambassador was murdered there, can’t even point to Libya on a map.

- There are millions of voters who, while perhaps being able to tell you that our ambassador was killed in some sort of attack, are wholly ignorant of the administration’s fecklessness and perhaps traitorous culpability in all of it.

- But the most important answer is this: There are millions of voters who can be sat down, and have it explained to them exactly what happened, and fully comprehend the disgusting failures of leadership and morality of the Obama administration… they can look at the photos of the men who died fighting in Benghazi and have at least some understanding of their honor and courage and sacrifice, and look at the photos of Barack Obama partying with Beyonce and Jay-Z beside a champagne tower… and they prefer the champagne tower. They prefer the depravity of Barack and Beyonce and Jay-Z to the honor and courage and sacrifice of the men who died in Benghazi.

And combined, those millions of voters outnumber the ones who cannot conceive of preferring depravity over honor.

We could run the same exercise using other questions of morality - photos of partial-birth abortions, for example, or the indignity of the poverty and insecurity that results from socialism - and we would get the same results.

Sad, but true.  And regardless of what Obama may or may not do in his 2nd term, what the American electorate has become does not bode well for our nation’s future.

As I concluded last night, it was a dark night.  And it’s about to get darker.

Tuesday, November 06, 2012


I am tanned, ready and rested.  So as promised, I shall now liveblog this Election Night.  And I will be tweeting, of course.  It should be quite a spectacle . . . the Election, not me.

Oh, hell, who am I fooling?  I will surely rant, pontificate, and commit manifold and diverse sins.

So anyway, let’s go.

I will keep Fox on my TV.  Largely due to Candy Crowley’s conduct as moderator, I will boycott CNN.  And I am DVRing MSNBC in hopes of committing the sin of schadenfreude later.

For those who haven’t seen it, here is my semi-infallible election prediction which I made two weeks ago.  I stand by it.

For those who wish to be geeky about their election watching, here are 50 counties to watch tonight.  And the Campaign Spot and Battleground Ohio over at the National Review are keeping a close eye on election details.

For those less geeky, do not let the first vote totals panic you from those swing states which have early voting.  Particularly in Ohio, the Democrats are much stronger in the early vote than on Election Day voting.  And the first totals released will be the early vote.

I will keep a close eye on comments, so feel free to ask questions or add your two cents.

O. K. that’s a start.  I’ll be back.

5:54pm CT

Oh, I should mention that I will not blog everything I tweet and visa versa.

But I will repeat my tweet and say I don’t put a lot of weight on exit polls.  I remember President Kerry.

The first results I’m seeing from Indiana have Mourdock (R) ahead of Donnelly for Senate, but badly lagging Romney.  That might be a nail-biter.  Sorry I don’t have exact numbers.


I do not intend to drunkblog tonight.  But I will report that Full Sail’s Wreck the Halls Hoppy Holiday ale is quite nice and only 6.5%, which is reasonable as Winter ales go.  Oregon knows how to brew beer.

Now if Oregon would start voting right, too.


You know what I find more disturbing than that Obama mural at a voting place?  That it’s at a school. 

Propagandizing school kids like that for a Dear Leader is worthy of North Korea, not America.

Sorry I’m not posting more, but I’m not yet seeing numbers that give me a good handle on this election.


Bill Nelson is beating Connie Mack bad in Florida.  That should get closer with the Panhandle coming in, but it doesn’t look good.

Romney and Obama are very close in Florida.  Since the Republican Panhandle closes and reports later than the rest of the state and since the early vote tends to be heavily Democrat, this is good for Romney.

Virginia numbers so far are strong for Romney (57%-42%).  George Allen (R) is lagging Romney, but leading Kaine (52%-48%).  I do not know which precincts are in and which aren’t.  I do know Virginia has paused reporting due to voters waiting in long lines.  The lines are bi-partisan, in Obama, Romney, and swing areas.


The Indiana state election results site is pitiful, but I read here that Mourdock is now down by 3 with 45% of the vote in.

Really, the numbers for Allen in Virginia are the only somewhat encouraging Senate numbers I’ve seen tonight so far.  And his winning is still no sure thing.

Just now, Fox calls Michigan for Obama.  Ugg.  That going that quickly is not encouraging.

Fox calls Pennsylvania for Obama already.  Sickening and NOT a good sign.  I had a lot of hope for that state.

No, I am not happy now.  Maybe I should drunkblog, but I don’t think that would make me happy either.

So Romney HAS to take either Wisconsin or Ohio.


Fox calls Wisconsin for Obama.  So now it comes down to Ohio.

This is disturbing.

And, yes, my semi-infallible prediction looks quite mistaken.


Great. Fox calls the WI Senate race for Tammy Baldwin.  She is a freaking Leftist.

Thanks Wisconsin . . . for nothing.


I’m having trouble finding useful information on Ohio.  I see Obama 52.0% - Romney 46.5% with 26% in. But the gap keeps narrowing as more of the vote comes in.


So here’s what it looks like to me now.  Either 1. Obama wins, or 2. Romney wins, BUT we don’t know for more than a week. 

Why?  Ohio has over 100,000 provisional votes to be counted.  And counting them will no doubt be controversial.  And I don’t see Romney winning Ohio by enough tonight to make those provisional votes moot.

This country needs neither outcome.

9:12 pm

Ohio is now Obama 51% - Romney 48% with 51% reporting.  Romney is about 99,000 votes behind.  It keeps narrowing even as I post this, but I do not have a good handle on his chances to make that up.

Fox just called the Missouri race for McCaskill.  Thanks, stupid (Akin).

By the way, I pretty sure Romney has to take Iowa, too.


A--hole, namely Alan Grayson, is back in Congress.  Oh joy! 

I really don’t understand some voters.  I really don’t.

Ohio: 55% of the vote is in.  Romney is down by 90,000 now, and it has narrowed further as I type this, but I honestly cannot keep up.  (Hold on.  58% in.  Romney down by 80,000.)

Rove just said the Cincinnati suburbs are not in.  That’s good for Romney.



Two outliers.  Obama is still ahead in Florida.  Of course, if he pulls that out, it’s over.

On the Romney side, he is ahead is Wisconsin.  I’m wondering if that state was called too early for Obama.  But only 33% of Dane County, aka the Peoples Republic of Madison, is in.  Still, something to watch.

Ohio: 62% in.  Romney down by 81,000 now.


I am slightly beside myself.  Obama proved himself an incompetent, negligent tyrant.  He is driving this nation toward bankruptcy.  He doesn’t even protect our ambassadors with sensible security, etc. etc.  And yet he is at least close to being re-elected.  Is this what the American people have become? 

Ohio: 64% in.  Romney is down by 90,000 now.

Amidst the gloom, I missed that George Allen has lost and conceded in Virginia.

More gloom – Roger Beckett looks at two Ohio counties that are completely in.  And Romney is barely outperforming McCain in both, with the emphasis on “barely”.


FINALLY, a Republican pick up in the Senate.  Fox calls Nebraska for Deb Fischer.


Well, lookie here.  With 68% of the vote in, Romney has pulled within 60,000 in Ohio.  BUT as I type this Fox calls Ohio for Obama.

I think that’s it.


I’m remarkably at the point of acceptance already.  Don’t get me wrong.  I think the electorate just voted to send this county to Hell.  And I expect it to go there for a time at the very least.  But my hope is not in America, and that much less so after tonight.

I’ll stay on here a while.  Too early projections have been made before.  But too many unlikely returns have to come in for Romney to win.  I will mention that he has now pulled within 50,000 with 71% reporting in Ohio.

No. I do not intend to watch Obama’s victory speech.

I will say that if Obama is to win, it is healthier that it is decided tonight.  We do not need a repeat of 2000.


On Fox, Carl Rove is saying calling Ohio for Romney is premature.  I agree.  I still think Romney will lose.  But I completely disagree with the rush to call the election.

And now with 73% reporting, Romney is down by less than 30,000 in Ohio.

Heard on Fox just now: “That’s awkward.” Dang right, it is.  Stop acting like CNN.


Fox is really busy covering their rears on the Ohio call.  Yes, Ohio will probably go for Obama, but this is ridiculous.

I expected to watch clowns on MSNBC tonight.  Instead, I’m seeing them on Fox.


Wisconsin update: Obama 52% Romney 47% with 53% of the vote in.  But 80% of Communist Dane County is already in.  So not many more votes from there, thank God.

Now that is a still lot for Romney to make up.  We’ll see.

Ohio update: Romney down by only 17,000 with 74% of the vote in.  Wow.



AHEM.  Romney just took a 2000 vote lead in Ohio. 77% of the vote in.


On Fox, I hear roughly half of Cleveland is not yet in.  That’s an old Democrat trick, to hold out voting boxes then massage them if needed.  Us Texans of long standing know about that.

However, Romney is now 20,000 ahead in Ohio.  78% of the vote in.

Rove continues to give Fox a hard time.


Just to reiterate, it looks unlikely Romney will pull this out.  And I do think that if Obama is to win, it’s better for the country that it be decided by sunrise.

However, I do find it amusing that YET AGAIN the news media is playing the fool by rushing to virtually call the election.  I don’t want this country to suffer, but the news media suffering? . . . YES, PLEASE!

Having said that, Obama just retook the lead in Ohio, by 23,000 with 80% in.


I think it needs to be said that Mitt Romney ran an excellent campaign, certainly beyond my expectations.  In the unhappiness to come, some will surely try to pin blame on him for tonight.  He deserves none of it.  And I salute him.

Housekeeping:  I am having some technical trouble updating this.  So if I stop blogging without a “good night” . . . 


Hmmm, 84% of loathsome Cleveland is in, and Romney is closing the gap in Ohio again.  Down 11,000 with 82% in.


I now notice Obama is up about 50,000 in Virginia with 89% in.  I did not expect that.  And that may make Ohio moot.

Well, I have to make some personal decisions tomorrow morning because of what has transpired tonight.  So I better try to get some sleep.

I wish I had appropriate words with which to end the evening with you, my forbearing readers.  But I really do not.

This is a dark night.  And it’s about to get darker.