I have had the pleasure of talking with Doug Jarman many times over the last few months.  Judge Jarman was appointed by Supreme Court Justice Lloyd Karmeier to the 4th Circuit Court when Judge John Coady retired.  I can tell you that Judge Jarman is a good man with a good head on his shoulders and if elected, will continue to do an outstanding job. 

However, Judge Jarman cannot be elected without your support.  Jarman's circuit is 9 counties wide including Effingham, Christian, Clay, Clinton, Fayette, Jasper, Marion, Montgomery, and Shelby counties.  We need as many people to vote for the Judge as possible!

Judge Doug Jarman comes recommended from the Illinois State Bar Association and has received high marks from his peers.  Jarman's opponent, Michelle Coady, is somewhat related to the retired Judge John Coady, received a "not recommended" by her peers and received less than stellar marks.  Here's how Jarman and Coady stand up against each other head to head (from the Illinois State Bar Association):


As you can see, there is a HUGE difference between Judge Jarman's ability, qualifications and confidence of his peers than his opponent.  Vote for Jarman on November 2nd.  It's not everyday we get to place a good judge on the bench!!!
 

        

As the title says, stupid doesn't fix stupid.  In other words, two wrongs don't make a right. 

First, to build a mosque at Ground Zero is stupid.  Period.  It's insulting, and it's inflammatory.  To build such a structure serves no purpose other than to rub salt in a still open wound.  Yes, freedom of religion is a right, and nobody is questioning whether the mosque in New York can build, it's just where.  The whole idea is in bad taste.  That's one wrong.  And I'm not even

Then you have a second wrong.  Terry Jones, pastor in Gainesville, Florida, is planning a Burn a Koran Day on Sept. 11th of this year.  Here is another blatantly stupid idea.  Jones' idea is also insulting and inflammatory.  Just because you can do something, doesn't always mean you should - like the mosque at Ground Zero.  Likewise, burning books, even religious books of a different faith is just plain stupid.  Exactly what is the difference between Pastor Jones burning books he and his "flock" hate and Hitler burning books that were threats to the Reich in Germany 1939?  Answer?  Absolutely nothing.  One zealot emulating another zealot.  

Have we gotten to the point in this country where nobody is willing to use common sense?  Instead, we have people wrapping themselves in the Constitution and claiming they are protected.  Burning books and claiming freedom of speech is no different than building a mosque near terrorist attack site and claiming freedom of religion. 

General Petraeus also weighed in on the book burning and said it would endanger our troops in Afghanistan.  I agree wholeheartedly.  In fact, I beg anyone to say my son will be any safer in Afghanistan after Jones' bonfire than before.  Doesn't this whole debacle get to the point of stupid?  Stupid feels good when you do it, right here and right now.  Stupid always seems like the best idea at the time.  Trust me, YouTube would have been a bust if it weren't for stupid and people videotaping it.  However, it's the consequences of stupid that hurt and emergency rooms have plenty of examples of the consequences of stupid.

You can't fix stupid, but it sure seems that stupid can get to build a mosque at Ground Zero or burn some Korans.  Is there something in the water?  On my laptop, I have a still from the movie Dr. Strangelove.  Those of you who know me or get emails from me know that I absolutely love that movie and I include a quote from the movie in my signature line: "Gentleman, you can't fight in here!  This is the War Room!".  The still on my laptop is of General Jack D. Ripper consoling a visibly shaken Captain Lionel Mandrake after he gets done explaining the reason he launched a nuclear attack:

General Jack D. Ripper:  Mandrake, do you recall what Clemenceau once said about war?

Captain Mandrake: No, I don't think I do, sir, no.

General Jack D. Ripper:  He said war was too important to be left to the generals. When he said that, 50 years ago, he might have been right. But today, war is too important to be left to politicians. They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought. I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination,Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.

This is a post-Cold War world, so insert Islamic in place of Communist in the above movie quote and tell me how that is different from what Pastor Jones said:

 "We feel it's maybe the right time for America to stand up. How long are we going to bow down? How long are we going to be controlled by the terrorists, by radical Islam?"

Ridiculousness from the Ground Zero mosque and ridiculousness from Jones.  I hate zealots no matter what side of the political or religious spectrum they fall on.  Period.  Below is that picture I was talking about.  Mandrake is on the left and Ripper is on the right.

 

        

The Chicago Tribune/WGN-TV conducted a few polls recently.  First, they did a polling statewide of registered voters regarding the Kirk/Giannoulias race finding that it is a statistical tie at 34-34 with 22% undecided.  There is some troubling with this polling in my opinion.  First, the Trib/WGN neglected to release their crosstabs, methodology, or polling service used.  Second, a paragraph from the Kirk/Giannoulias article makes me question the "statewide polling":

Nearly four in 10 collar-county voters still had no opinion on whether to view Kirk favorably or unfavorably, despite near universal name recognition. A similar share of conservative voters, 36 percent, have no opinion on whether they like the GOP candidate, and one in five are undecided in the Senate contest. That could leave an opening for the Libertarian candidate to pick up support.  

One, while it's good that the polling is tracking geographical differences between the voters, it makes me question whether or not the poll conducted was truly statewide.  Did the polling of the 600 registered voters question 200 Chicago, 200 collar-county, and 200 "downstate" voters?  "Nearly 4 in 10" suggests there was enough polled in the collar counties to make an assumption about the electorate and their voting preferences.  Two, the number of undecided voters are assumed to be so disaffected by Kirk that they will vote 3rd party.  You have to love the Trib's speculative journalism here because they don't make the same assumption in print that disaffected Giannoulias voters will vote Green Party.  

The Brady/Quinn poll has its problems as well.  According to the polling of 600 registered voters, Brady's lead is at 5% over Quinn 37-32 with 19% undecided.  Maybe it's editorial oversight, but there is no mention of this poll being a statewide poll.  Furthermore, there is no indication of geographical, i.e. mentioning a breakdown of collar county voters as in the Kirk/Giannoulias poll raising my suspicions.  In addition, the Trib neglects to include the crosstabs, methodology, and polling service used for the Brady/Quinn poll. 

Be careful when you read polls because even though it is not an exact science, there are those polling agencies like Rasmussen and Public Policy Polling (PPP) that are very experienced, very careful and very specific on many of the things that the Trib/WGN left out.  The reason these places include their crosstabs, methodology and polling service used is because if you don't, you run the risk of having your data called out and questioned and it gives people a chance to examine the legitimacy of the polling.  Just ask the now discredited (because they were inventing data) R2000/DailyKos poll how that works out.  There will be a new round of polling soon from both of these pollsters in which at least one of them, Rasmussen, will start including "leaners" in the lead tallies after Labor Day.  "Leaners" are those polled who will not pick a candidate out right but indicate they are leaning towards one candidate or another.  Even with "leaners" factored in, Brady's lead was still 8 points in the last Rasmussen polling.
  

        

        

Lisa Murkowski has conceded in Alaska to the Tea Party favorite Joe Miller.  It's nice to see that race didn't get any more brutal than it did follow the election results.  However, the results of the Alaska primary (other the other primaries) has yet to be accurately reported by the media. 

According to the Associated Press:

Joe Miller, backed by Sarah Palin and the Tea Party Express, became the latest newcomer to the national political stage to take down an incumbent in 2010 amid deep dissatisfaction with the Washington establishment.

Fox News, using the AP's story as a backdrop, summed up Miller's victory this way:

Murkowski had hoped to avoid the fate that has befallen other incumbents nationwide as they were swept out of office in 2010 amid an anti-incumbent fervor.

Incumbency might drive some of what has taken place, but those Republicans that have seen their bids for re-election or their bids to be the candidate in the General election were partly responsible for where we are now.  Bob Bennett in Utah was a notorious ear-marker and ran around claiming to be a conservative.  Murkowski's record in the Senate was tarnished in its own right.

At some point, the media will have to start realizing that any kind of spending binges an incumbent was part of will come back and haunt them.  McCain slipped by in Arizona because McCain ran to the right and his opponent Hayworth was a notorious ear-marker when he was in the House. 

An excellent analysis has been done by Erick Erickson over at Redstate.  He accurately points out that the establishment GOP will have plenty of conservatives to contend with post-November 2nd as Sen. Jim DeMint's star continues to rise.
 

        

President Obama's national address had some good points - our military is the best in the world and they have done a stupendous job in the War on Terror - and some low points - blame Bush for economic woes without ever having mentioned Bush's name.  One thing has me scratching my head: why would Obama talk about the economy and GI Bills in a speech about the combat operations ending in Iraq?

Once again, part of our answer lies in the history books. 

To make a long story short, in 1932 about 43,000 veterans of WWI marched on Washington demanding payment on their service bonds early because many of the veterans marching had been unemployed for quite some time.  The "Bonus Army" march ended horribly as our federal government used troops to remove the encamped veterans. 

I'm not saying that anything like a Bonus Army will take place, but the circumstances surrounding the Bonus Army could find its way into reality.  The United States unemployment rate is at about 10% now.  Imagine the rate when thousands of our soldiers come home and leave the Armed Forces.  Wouldn't it stand to reason that the unemployment rate would go up as more people enter the fold as job seekers?  Couple that possibility with the economy suffering a "double dip" and unemployment going up just before the November elections or long term - going into the 2012 Presidential election.  This is why Obama talked about the economy in his speech.  He was saying he needs to find a way to jump start the economy quick before unemployment sees a dramatic increase due to anemic growth.  The GI Bill Obama was discussing would also send unemployed soldiers to school, buying his administration time to try to fix the economy before they graduate and before the 2012 election.  

There is always a method to Obama's madness and his method (madness) is to do what is best for Obama.  Sure, he comes off seeming altruistic towards our troops, but Obama never seems to do anything without getting something in return. 

Furthermore, having the troops stateside also poses a problem for Obama other than rising unemployment - they will be able to vote.  Traditionally, Democrats have tried to suppress the military vote because Democrats know that our military tends to vote Republican - when they get a chance to vote that is.  Remember the Democrats trying to suppress the military vote during Bush v. Gore?  Several states have been denied waivers to disenfranchise military voters including two states that are "toss-ups" or even "pick-ups" for Republicans come November - Wisconsin and Colorado.   Others have already been granted said waivers.  As a result, if Obama can suppress enough overseas military votes to help offset the stateside vote, it might be a nil balance.

I guess we'll have to see how the next year or so plays out to see if my hypothesis pans out, but never, never, never underestimate Obama and the Democrats.  They know they will need every last vote in order to maintain their grip on power or to stop an absolute apocalyptic scenario November 2nd. 
 
 

        

Seats are still available!  The St. Louis Tea Party has added Dick Morris, Rep. Tom Price, and Rep. Steve King as speakers!  Let's pack the Arch grounds like they have packed DC for the Beck rally!
 

More details about the St. Louis event at the St. Louis Tea Party website!

        

It is being reported that Adm. Mike Mullen, Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is stating that our national debt is a threat to national security.  Mullen alludes that the $600 billion in interest paid to the debt will hurt defense spending, therefore hurting our ability to defend ourselves.  While Mullen's statement has merit, he fails to notice how our national debt is hurting our national security by hindering our diplomatic efforts.

According to ustreas.gov, our national debt holdings by certain nations is the real threat to our national security.  China/Hong Kong have almost $1 trillion in our treasury notes.  What makes anyone think that if North Korea got super serious about rattling their sabers that the US would not be hamstrung by China?  Same thing for Iran where Russia and China have been more than open about their dealings with this rogue nation.

Go further down the list, and you'll find "oil exporting counties" own $223 billion of our debt.  As a result, I supposed the US will have to tread lightly when dealing with countries like Venezuela.  Who is included in the list of "oil exporting countries"?  Not many of our friends..

Oil exporters include Ecuador, Venezuela, Indonesia, Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar,
     Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Algeria, Gabon, Libya, and Nigeria.

Adm. Mullen's assessment of our national security being threatened by our national debt is correct in a sense, but for more reasons than he fails to mention.

        

With just a few primaries left to go over the next 3 weeks, and no real major upsets in the wings, the media has begun their ritual Democrat defensive articles including articles trying to show how weak the GOP are going into November.  Polls be damned apparently.   Let's examine a few...

First, we have the blog post from the Chicago Sun Times titled "Palin support the kiss of death?"  The author points out 4 races in which the Palin backed candidate lost, but fails to mention that far more candidates she has backed have won.  Journalistic prerogative I guess.  I guess we'll ignore Ken Buck, Nikki Haley, Allen West, Rand Paul, Carly Fiorina, and many others that have won or are leading.  Plus, there's that whole Joe Miller is leading thing in Alaska...but who's counting victories, right?  The media is only concerned with Palin's loses.

Then, we have the Associated Press article titled "Republican Party civil war rages in US".  This article details how conservatives have won and some party insiders have lost their bids to newcomers.  The article also takes time to take a few swipes at the Tea Party as a "fledgling coalition" who is tearing the GOP apart.  The article even tries to cast a shadow on the Florida Senate race saying that the Tea Parties will hurt Marco Rubio.  Interesting considering the newest poll shows Rubio up 10 over Crist - 40-30 and Rubio over Meeks 40-21.  Sure sounds like those conservatives are really hurting Rubio.  Nice try by the AP though.

Finally, we have the non-partisan wizards at Time Magazine writing an article about how great the recovery act has been.  I can't figure out if this article was written by Time or Joe Biden.  The entire thing is a fluff piece about how much the stimulus has helped.  I think I may have just threw up in my mouth typing that.  Apparently, the writing staff at Time suffers from the same delusional economic thought processes as the White House. 

The media is trying to paint a picture of the GOP and Tea Parties as baby-eating, rich businessmen trying to take the United States back to the days prior to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.  Amazing.  The left is using scare tactics in an attempt to energize a less than enthusiastic Democrat electorate.  Tall order since the economic indicators are far more scarier than the left conjured up acid trip hallucinations of a country ran by the GOP.  November 2nd is going to be fun to say the least.  The House is lost for the Democrats and the Senate is very much in play. 
 

        

I know Congress is out of session right now, but Washington is very quiet.  Not a peep.  No one trying to put a feather in their cap.  But why the silence?!  There is an industry that just recalled a half a billion eggs for salmonella contamination!  The problem is a hazard to the nation's health!  Where are the Congressional hearings so members of Congress can berate the CEO of the egg producers?!  Where's the calls for a national egg producing program and fingers pointing at how privatization has failed the egg industry?!  Silence.

I'm being facetious of course.  Congressional hearings are nothing more than an opportunity for members of Congress to get some soundbites (like Nancy Pelosi wanting to investigate the mosque opponents) and prop themselves up as actually "helping" and ensuring that whatever happened will never happen again.  But the question remains, why is Congress quiet about the egg salmonella situation?

The answer in my opinion is that the egg producers are not in competition with federally owned egg companies.  Take a trip down memory lane, and you'll see that when Toyota had their little accelerator problem, Congress reacted like Chicken Little.

But Toyota was purposely covering up the accelerator problem and therefore deserved the criticism it received from Congress, remember?.  Sure, Toyota might have known about a possible problem, but when the government tried to reproduce the problem, we find this:

From the L.A. Times: Toyota data recorders reveal no new causes of sudden acceleration
From CNN Money:  Toyota probe: drivers may have botched the braking
From New York Daily News:  In Toyota crashes investigated most drivers did not hit brakes, preliminary government t report shows
From the Wall Street Journal:  US study indicates driver error in most Toyota crashes

Despite the findings, Toyota got the BP shakedown for $16.4 million and received a damaged reputation on top of that.  All because Congress saw an opportunity to take a Government Motors competitor down a notch and make some good TV.

Then we have the whole BP incident.  It's no secret that the Obama administration wanted to prove a point about off-shore drilling and fossil fuel usage.  The hole is plugged now and with a $20 billion payout fund extracted from BP, the government can show it's favoritism again.  Now it seems the government is changing the rules regarding payouts from the fund.  If you live closer to the Gulf of Mexico and Louisiana, you get a better chance at getting some money.  Restaurants and other businesses that have taken a hit from the spill further inland will have a much harder time collecting money.  I hope someone will keep track of how much money gets paid out to different Congressional districts.  Sorry if I'm so distrusting of my government, but their track record to this point warrants it.

Another reason why there will be no egg salmonella hearings by Congress is because it is not politically expedient and nobody likes to see a Midwesterner get berated in front of Congress.  It just doesn't make for good TV.  As a result, there are no calls for the egg producer CEOs to resign or "commit suicide".  No calls for stricter government regulation.  In the end, like the canceled Obamacare v. CEOs Waxman hearings, you won't hear a clucking thing about a Congressional investigation regarding the egg salmonella recall....and thank God for that.