Seems some gay voters are wising up to the Democrats, realizing that they only pander to the gay community when election time rolls ’round.

[James] Wyatt, 35, a maintenance worker at the Center on Halsted, a community center serving Chicago’s GLBT community, said politicians only court gay voters at election time.

“Once they’re elected, they’re not fighting for things like civil unions or same-sex marriage or ending ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ because they’re hot-button issues,” said Wyatt, who usually supports Democrats. “We’re just used as a piggyback for them to get into office. It’s absurd.”

Whether or not that’s the case, Wyatt isn’t the only one who feels that way.

Wyatt “won’t cast a ballot at all because he no longer trusts anyone to fight for causes important to him.”

And he’s not alone; “volunteers who’ve been calling the 18,000 or so members of Equality Illinois to urge them to vote have been getting an earful. Many members say they won’t vote or will vote against incumbents, regardless of their party affiliation or stance on gay issues.”

Wonder if phone bankers from Equality Illinois’ Golden State counterpart have been getting a similar earful.  That might account for the increasingly hysterical e-mails I’ve been getting from that Democratic outfit.  Despite polls showing Democrats leading out here, gay voters may well be displaying a remarkable apathy about this fall’s election.

H/t Pam Spaulding (via Facebook).

Even on the liberal editorial pages of newspapers in the Golden State, pundits acknowledge that while they sometimes share Barbara Boxer’s politics, they’re turned off by the 28-year Washington veteran’s partisanship, faulting her ineffective leadership.  Yesterday, in endorsing Boxer’s opponent, Carly Fiorina, the editors of the Pasadena Star-News attributed the three-term Senator’s failures to her ideological zeal:

Incumbent Sen. Boxer has spent 18 years hammering away on a national liberal agenda for which she has accomplished little except for driving away colleagues. Even Democrats find her a one-note politician instead of a problem-solving public servant working for all 36 million California residents.

They contrasted Boxer to her fellow Democrat Dianne Feinstein, finding that Feinstein had more in common (temperamentally at least) with the Republican who wants to replace her partisan colleague.  Not just that, they found that

. . . Fiorina possesses an extraordinary record of accomplishment for California. Those accomplishments are entirely in the private sector. In our ongoing economic downturn to which joblessness is key, it’s precisely someone who understands private-sector job creation who we want representing us in Washington. As a Silicon Valley leader, the only woman CEO of a Fortune 20 corporation, Fiorina understands the way forward economically for our state.

That record of accomplishment contrasts with Boxer’s absence thereof. Pat Dando, president and CEO of the San Jose Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce, echoed the assessment of the Pasadena editors, chiding Boxer for being  ”more interested in partisan bickering and ideological wrangling.”  Fiorina, on the other hand,

. . . may not be in agreement with valley residents on all issues, she has clearly demonstrated that her priority, if elected to the U.S. Senate, would be to represent the people of this state and, most important, to focus on job creation and economic growth — issues of chief importance both here in Silicon Valley and across the nation. (more…)

In February 2009, the unhappy Barney Frank vowed “that he wouldn’t accept campaign donations from banks that received money under the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) or political action committees tied to such institutions.”  Well, well, well, seems this mean-spirited Congressman, just like his party’s leader, will go back on his word when he needs extra cash to win election.

Frank a 15-term Congressman, “has raked in more than $40,000 from bank execs and special interests connected to the staggering government loans, a [Boston] Herald review found“:

But Frank has hauled in thousands from top execs at Bank of America, Citizens Bank, Wainwright Bank, JP Morgan Chase and other institutions that received billions in TARP money.

Just yesterday, Frank made new campaign finance disclosures showing he received $17,000 from top executives of Bank of America — including $2,000 from CEO Brian Moynihan. B of A received $45 billion in bailout money. In all, Frank has hauled in at least $27,000 since 2009 from bank execs — and $13,000 from PACs — connected to banks that received TARP funding . . . .

(Via Washington Examiner.)  Guess they know they can count on this career politician to help them out.  Barney does seem to turn up when struggling banks are in need of federal cash.

And yet he — and his fellow Democrats — love badmouthing Republicans for being in the pocket of big banks (and big business).  Seems those big banks are putting a lot of cash into Barney’s pockets.  Wonder if more in the media will take note of his hypocrisy.

Instead of having to put up any more with this Democrat’s double standards, help out the man seeking to retire this big spender who has spent his life in government.

Nearly five years ago, I noticed that shortly before catching a cold, I had broken from my usual habit of eating an apple a day.  I wondered if that “old adage” was right.

Well, now we’ve got scientific proof to confirm my experience:

Studies have revealed that pectin, a special kind of fiber found in apples, may help boost levels of immune-supportive proteins. So crunching one a day could very well help keep the doctor away this cold season.

Gonna make sure to have an apple with my lunch today.

Maybe some on the left have a case of TPDS (Tea Party Derangement Syndrome).  They get worked into such a lather about the alleged radicalism of the Tea Parties, based on a few documented cases of nuttiness and nastiness among a broad-based, diffuse grassroots movement, yet are oblivious to their own narrow-mindedness.

Sonicfrog asks for such lefties to engage in a little introspection:

It’s funny; in a week where a liberal black man gets fired by white extremist neo-tolerant liberals for expressing and dealing with his inner fears about Muslims and terrorism, the same extremist neo-tolerant liberal types are wringing their hands analyzing the cognitive biases within the Tea Party movement, desperately trying to understand why it’s become so popular, and generally trying to figure out “what the hell is going on.”

Commenting on the Berkeley conference (trying “to make sense of the Tea Party movement“) which inspired Sonic’s post, Ann Althouse quips, “the very idea of a Center for the Comparative Study of Right-Wing Movements makes me want to run in the other direction.”

FROM THE COMMENTS:  The man who inspired this post answers the post’s title in the negative:

No, it’s not a new fad. They simply transfer the object of their animus from one target to the next. There was “Reagan The Enemy Of All Things Good And Virtuous” and then it was “George H W Bush The Enemy Blah Blah Blah” to GW to Rove to Cheney to McCain to Palin to the Tea Party to….

There was a brief moment when I really did think that Obama might upend American politics, helping forge a permanent Democratic majority.  I was largely impressed with the way he conducted his transition and thought that he would tack to the center and so marginalize a (then-)dispirited Republican base.

But, when he showed no sign of scaling back the “stimulus” cooked up in the back rooms of Democratic congressional offices, I began to sense that he might be more of a transitional than a transformational figure, foisting (far) left-of-center policies on a center-right nation. Considering that Democrats are, by and large, not campaigning on the legislative initiatives of the past two years, it seems they now realize how out-of-step his agenda is with the mood of the nation — yesterday, Glenn Reynolds linked a Rasmussen poll finding that “Only 25% Prefer a Government With More Services, Higher Taxes“.

No wonder Democratic attacks are becoming increasingly personal.  It’s the only tactic that might work in the current climate. Indeed, Ed Morrissey poins out, citing a Howard Kurtz piece in the Daily Beast, “those highly personal attacks are more the norm than the exception“.

Maybe it’s not just a campaign tactic, maybe as P.J. O’Rourke opines, “They hate our guts“:

They don’t just hate our Republican, conservative, libertarian, strict constructionist, family values guts. They hate everybody’s guts. And they hate everybody who has any. Democrats hate men, women, blacks, whites, Hispanics, gays, straights, the rich, the poor, and the middle class.

Democrats hate Democrats most of all. Witness the policies that Democrats have inflicted on their core constituencies, resulting in vile schools, lawless slums, economic stagnation, and social immobility. Democrats will do anything to make sure that Democratic voters stay helpless and hopeless enough to vote for Democrats.

So, that’s why they pushed an unpopular agenda.  They don’t love us so much as they love power.  Read the whole thing.

When I first met Mattie at agathering for LA bloggers to welcome R.S. McCain to Los Angeles this past summer, I wasn’t expecting her to be so outspoken on issues of concern to the gay community.  But, even among this group of conservatives, she didn’t mince her words, telling me she opposed Proposition 8 and supported repeal of Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell (DADT).

A few days later, she showed up at a meeting of Log Cabin.  And unlike some who have won the endorsement of that (ostensibly) Republican organization, when it comes to fiscal policy, Mattie leans toward liberty, believing “regulatory overkill” hinders the creation of jobs.  She faults some Members of Congress for hiking taxes to pay for “government spending sprees”, believing that “Every dollar taxed is a dollar diverted from businesses and households.”

And she favors repeal of Obamacare.

Not that, her campaign has produced one of the most creative ads of the campaign.

Her cleverness notwithstanding, Mattie’s got a tough race on her hand, fighting 8-term incumbent Jane Harman in a district Obama carried by almost 2-to-1. Yet, even in the Democratic year 2008 in this Democratic state of California, Harman’s underfunded opponent captured over 30% of the vote. Just think how well Mattie could do if she had a little extra cash on hand in what’s bound to be a Republican year, maybe even here in the Golden State.

Please lend this fine and principled woman a hand so she can compete in the campaign’s home stretch.

So pervasive are Democratic dirty tricks this fall that even the New York Times takes note:

Seeking any advantage in their effort to retain control of Congress, Democrats are working behind the scenes in a number of tight races to bolster long-shot third-party candidates who have platforms at odds with the Democratic agenda but hold the promise of siphoning Republican votes. . . .

In California, Republicans have received recorded phone calls from a professed but unidentified “registered Republican” who says she is voting for the American Independent Party’s candidate for a House seat, Bill Lussenheide, not for the incumbent Republican, Mary Bono Mack.

The caller says she is voting that way because “it’s time we show Washington what a true conservative looks like.”

The recording was openly paid for by the Democratic candidate for the seat, Mayor Steve Pougnet of Palm Springs.

A group backing Harry Reid has paid for a radio ad “advertisement promoting the Senate campaign of a “Tea Party of Nevada” candidate, Scott Ashjian“:

Nevada is one of several states, including Florida, where “Tea Party” political committees have appeared on ballot lines without the knowledge or support of leading Tea Party activists, who have generally chosen not to support third-party candidacies. In most of those cases, local bloggers, reporters and lawyers have traced connections to local Democrats, drawing lawsuits, complaints and, in a couple of cases, admissions of involvement.

Guess Democrats realize their ideas aren’t resonating this year and in order to win, need to play to those that do.

(H/t:  RealClearPolitics.)

“Which story,” David Freddoso asks, “do you suppose is more relevant — Aquabuddha, or this one?”

A Jefferson County prosecutor was tipped off by Louisville narcotics detectives twice in the past two years that he was under investigation for possible drug use or trafficking, according to police records obtained by The Courier-Journal.

When investigators learned of the leaks and interrogated the two detectives and the prosecutor last March, all three initially gave false or misleading statements about what happened, those records show. The statements of Matthew C. Conway, the prosecutor, were made under oath.

Conway just happens to be the brother of Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway, you know the guy trying to make much about the (alleged) college antics of Ron Paul, his rival in the contest for one of the Bluegrass State’s seats in the United State Senate.

Detectives tipped Matthew off that his house was about to be searched for “drug use or trafficking”, giving the prosecutor time to remove any “contraband.”  We don’t know who tipped Matthew off.  We know someone tipped him off.  And when your brother’s the state attorney general, you wonder if maybe . . .

Over at the Daily Caller, Alex Pappas is asking this very questions, suggesting that the candidate may have tipped his brother off.   For the record, “Jack Conway’s office said in an e-mail to the [Louiville Courier-Journal] Thursday that his only involvement was to advise his brother to obtain legal counsel.”

One other thing.  We know that Matthew lied about whether he had been tipped off.  When Louisville police realized there had been a leak, they launched an investigation, calling in the younger Conway.  He first denied being tipped off, then “went back and changed his story.”

The question remains open as to who tipped off Matthew.  And if it wasn’t anyone in the state attorney general’s office, it would certainly behoove that Senate candidate to get to the bottom of this in the next nine days.

Carly Fiorina’s latest campaign ad has begun to grow on me. When first I saw it, I didn’t think she hit hard enough, but the more I watch it, the more I like it.

Maybe it’s that when Carly addresses us directly, she makes some subtle jabs at her opponent, the 28-year Washington veteran. Barbara Boxer constantly bickers; she persistently plays politics; she doesn’t reach across the aisle; she never opposes her party.

Indeed, Barbara Boxer’s entire ambition to serve in the Senate is to promote her own left-wing agenda. And further own ambition. This one clip says it all:

Barbara Boxer can berate a general for following military protocol, yet she won’t address Californians. In none of her ads, does she, like her Republican rival, directly address us, the voters.

If Barbara Boxer can’t make her case to Californians, how can she make the case for California to her colleagues in Congress?

Support someone who can make the case for California.

“CHANGE: Cuba Announces New ‘Small Business Friendly’ Tax Code.”

In February, Ed Morrissey pointed out that in making the case for the Democrats’ health care overhaul, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told us that is wasn’t really a health-care reform bill, but actually a jobs bill: “In arguing for the current version of ObamaCare, whatever that is at the moment, Nancy Pelosi claims that it will create four million jobs — or nearly half of all the jobs lost over the last two years:”

Well, Mrs. Pelosi, to paraphrase an expression (do hope you don’t mind), now that we’ve passed the bill and found out what’s in it, well, we find that it actually discourages work:

Congressional Budget Office director Doug Elmendorf said Friday that ObamaCare includes work disincentives likely to shrink the amount of labor used in the economy. . . .

As Capital Hill has noted previously, work disincentives will be particularly strong for older workers because both health care premiums and the law’s subsidies grow much bigger with age.

Further, the new health law will give some older households without access to employer care a big incentive not to earn too much. That’s because earning more than 400% of the poverty level would make them ineligible for subsidies that may be well in excess of $10,000 for couples.

“Vice President Biden will campaign for controversial Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) next week in Florida.”

Of all the places to dispatch ol’ Joe . . .

Of all the incumbents the Administration is trying to protect. . .

This is the single most effective and chilling campaign ad I’ve seen in quite some time.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

There is really not much more I can say about the Juan Williams kerfuffle that has not been said on some blog, editorial page or newscast.  The management of NPR look like narrow-minded fools, exposed now in the public square for what conservatives have long held them to be:  partisans of the Democratic Party and its liberal agenda, elitists who reserve a special (intense) animus for FoxNews.

Hugh Hewitt is a socially conservative, evangelical Christian blogger; I’m a libertarian conservative, gay Jewish blogger.  Yet, both of us agree about the excellence of the campaign Carly Fiorina has run and the ability of this dynamic woman to represent California in the United States Senate.

This morning, Hugh wrote:

Fiorina has run a magnificent campaign in the Golden State and Barbara Boxer’s increasingly shrill and desperate campaign reflects that.  But 28 years of Boxer’s strident, angry and ever-ungracious arrogance –”Please don’t call me ma’am”– has contrasted so poorly with Fiorina’s disciplined, tough and principled appeals to California voters to send a senator to D.C. who can actually get something done for the state and the country to encourage economic growth and the return of California greatness.

But, he warns:

When Boxer gets desperate, she unleashes Bob Mulholland, one of the most malevolent forces in American politics.  As soon as the president leaves the state the campaign will go into Bob season.

Mulholland or one of his stooges will likely soon sling some some mud in attempt to derail Carly’s surge.  It doesn’t bother theses partisans that Boxer has failed to deliver for our state nor that she has no new ideas on how to get California out of its current mess.  We have the third highest unemployment rate in the nation, with 63,500 jobs lost in September 2010 the last month for which numbers are available.

It’s someone someone who’s spent the past three decades on the taxpayer’s dole lost her job.  Support the woman working hard to retire Barbara Boxer.  Join Hugh and me in supporting Carly Fiorina.

In one of his first acts as a member of Congress, Rep. Charles Djou (R-HI) voted to repeal Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell, saying:

On that particular issue, it comes from personal experience. I have served for nearly 10 years now in the United States Army Reserve. What concerned me about the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy is that it just simply doesn’t work. And I saw too many instances as an army reservist, soldiers would sign up for a re-enlistment bonus. Get this gigantic sum from the American taxpayer. And then as soon as the unit gets called up to mobilize to Iraq and Afghanistan, they suddenly claim they are gay, with no prior indication of that whatsoever. Get the discharge and keep the bonus. That’s wrong, that’s unfair and that’s why this policy should be changed.

Nice to have a Republican offer such a robust critique of  DADT.

And while many pundits and prognosticators thought his victory this past May in a three-way race (with him facing against two Democrats) was a fluke, the Hawai’i Republican is tied or ahead in most recent polls, with one survey showing him “ahead of [Democrat Colleen] Hanabusa, 45 percent to 41 percent among likely voters” in a district that gave Obama 70 percent of its votes.

Djou is a fiscal conservative, contending that the “federal government is spending too much money on programs that do too little for the American people.  Washington’s intervention in our economy has spiraled out of control.”

Given how close the polls are and the Democratic makeup of this fiscal conservative’s district, Djou may need a few extra bucks to beat his liberal Democratic opponent across the finish line.  We urge join to join us in supporting Charles Djou.

While I’ve been bullish on my gal Carly Fiorina since that confident and optimistic woman launched her bid for the United States Senate, I know she hasn’t had the easiest road to hoe.  Her opponent, 28-year Washington veteran Barbara Boxer has never been an effective advocate of the Golden State in the halls of Congress, but she has been effective at raking in campaign cash.  Meanwhile, 61% of Californians voted for Obama in 2008 — while the state hasn’t elected a Republican Senator in over two decades (not since Pete Wilson’s reelection in 1988).

Yet, Carly has run a vigorous campaign, impressing Californians with her energy and determination.  I’ve always believed that if she can make this race about her opponent while showing that she could better serve the state than the failed 3-term incumbent, she would win.  And I’m not alone.  She’s been surging in recent polls, closing the gap.  Jay Cost agrees, believing the career politician to be vulnerable:

Barbara Boxer in particular looks to be in bad shape, pulling in just 46 percent of the vote in the RealClearPolitics average.  The Fox News poll finds her job approval at a terrible 42 percent.

Finding that Fiorina has a “fighting Chance”, Daniel Halper cites perhaps the most important goal Dave Sackett of the Tarrance Group identifies in his Wednesday memo to the Carly campaign:

The goal is to “be able to bring focus back onto Boxer [so that the Fiorina] campaign will be able to convert the remaining Independents and undecided voters that it needs to capture a plurality on election day,” Sackett’s memo claims.

Keep the focus on Barbara Boxer, whose “most famous moments on Capitol Hill“, the editors of her home town paper write, “have not been ones of legislative accomplishment, but of delivering partisan shots.”

You too can help Carly keep the focus on this partisan Democrat whose lacluster approval languishes in the low forties by supporting her campaign.