Filibuster Nostalgia?

Think the Republicans don't like the filibuster now? Remember last year when Majority Leader Frist and other Republicans supported the idea of the "nucler option" but they were foiled by that McCain guy? Now that Republicans are in the minority, McCain looks like a genius to Republicans. The Democrats have only 51 seats, and will need 9 Republican senators to join them in cutting off debate to block a filibuster -- and that is only if no Democrats defect to supporting the filibuster. The Gang of 14 is now the Gang of 12, since Republican senators Mike Dewine and Lincoln Chaffee were defeated Tuesday. Of course, with the new situation, I'm sure the Republicans will easily find 2 more members to join the group if need be!

In other news, Dennis Hastert will no longer be among House leaders...

Donald is gone...

Why did Donald Rumsfeld wait until now to resign? Why not do so 6 months ago? Perhaps he and Bush want it to appear as if they are in control and his leaving was not due to criticism from Republicans and Democrats. But had he left earlier, it might have saved several seats in Congress.

Well, the voters have spoken in yesterday's midterm election. It looks like the Democrats will control the house by a 232-203 margin and will control the Senate by a 51-49 margin. There were some surprising upsets as well as some races where an upset appeared likely and the incumbent held on.

I calculated these numbers assuming that the candidate currently with the most votes will win. CNN still has not called 11 races yet. I think 7 of those are callable, but I will admit that these 4 are still very close....
Connecticut 2 - Courtney (D) leads incumbent Simmons (R) by about 170 votes.
North Carolina 8 - Hayes (R) leads his opponent by about 450 votes.
Wyoming 1 - Cubin (R) leads her opponent by about 900 votes.
Pennsylvania 8 - Murphy (D) leads incumbent Fitzpatrick (R) by about 1,500 votes.

At this time, it looks like the GOP will win OH-2 Schmidt (+2,300), WA-8 Reichert (+2,700), PA-6 Gerlach (+3,000), OH-15 Pryce (+11,300), and TX-23 where Congressman Bonilla faces a December runoff. He received 48% yesterday. I think Democrats will win GA-12 Barrow (+3,300) and the winner of LA-2's runoff in December. Scandal-plagued William Jefferson received the most votes yesterday, but it will be interesting to see if he can survive the runoff.

Other interesting news....in Michigan, voters approved restrictions on affirmative action, basically reversing the Supreme Court's 2003 ruling. And in Arizona...voters rejected a ban on gay marriage (the first state to do so), while making English the official language in its state. The funniest of all ballot initiatives? Arizona proposed giving a random voter $1 million for voting in future elections. That failed.


I hope to comment more later when I have time.

Democrats love the Lord!

Democrat Congressman & Senate hopeful Harold Ford speaks about religion. Watch the following clip where he implies that Democrats "love the Lord" while Republicans do not...



What role should religion play in politics? What role should politics play in religion? At the end of the clip, Mr. Ford says, "you're supposed to act it out" -- meaning that you should act on your faith and love for God. I think he is referring to the general perception of the public that Democratic leaning charities focus more on helping the homeless and ending poverty, while Republican leaning ones typically focus more on abortion. Republicans and Christian conservatives should, I think, be more observant of the need and compassionate toward the poor, especially those belonging to minority groups. Poverty is an issue, and if we as conservatives really care and love our neighbors, we should be trying to devise solutions to help rather than ignoring the problem. However, Mr. Ford crossed the line with his speech. There are many Republicans who have a genuine love for God, and most evangelical Christians have voted for the Republican candidate in the past few presidential elections. Mr. Ford was wrong to compare -- only God knows what is in our hearts. Despite my disagreement with Ford, I do realize that all of us, including myself, sometimes do stick our feet in our mouths.

To be fair, I should also mention the consistency of Mr. Corker's Iraq policy. Prior to the Republican primary, he said the US should "stay the course" in Iraq. Now in the general election, he is backing off that position -- even claiming he has never used that phrase. In my opinion, Corker did not intend to lie but probably forgot saying the phrase previously. I think his position on Iraq is not one of deep interest to him and he does not have a clear policy in his mind. Thus, I believe, it is easy for him, now that it is October, to forget what he said in July. Regardless, he did use the phrase which President Bush has now stopped using in reference to Iraq policy.

The Wilder Effect

The Wall Street Journal has an interesting article about minority candidates in close races. Some call it the 15% lie. Others call it the Wilder Effect. The idea is basically that when a pollster calls people on the phone to ask whom they will support in the election, some people will tell the pollster that they will support the minority candidate (even though they will really support the white candidate) just because they do not want the pollster to believe they are racist. For example, consider the Tennessee Senate race where democrat Harold Ford, an African American, is running against republican Bob Corker, who is white. If a democrat who is white receives a phone call from a pollster, he may feel the pollster is judging him as racist if he claims to be a democrat who is also supporting Corker. As a result, minority candidates typically underperform their poll numbers in the general election. In a famous race in November 1989, democrat Douglas Wilder, an African American then serving as Virginia lieutenant governor, ran for governor against Republican attorney general Marshall Coleman. Exit polls (face to face interviews after voters leave the voting area) during the day of the election showed Wilder ahead by 10%. In the end, Wilder won the race by only 0.38%. Why were the exit polls so wrong? Most assume it was the "Wilder Effect" at work -- which may be even stronger in face to face interviews (versus telephone surveys). This year, the "Wilder Effect" may be witnessed by democrat Harold Ford in the Tennessee's senate race, republican Michael Steele in the Maryland senate race, and Kenneth Blackwell in the Ohio governor's race.

Just to be clear - the "Wilder Effect" does not occur because voters are racist. It occurs simply because they do not want to appear as racists to the interviewer. I'm guessing this effect may not be a factor in uncompetitive races - such as Alan Keyes disastrous Illinois senate campaign in 2004.

Muslims not responsible for 9/11 attacks?

Over the past month, I've been very busy with doing homework and studying for midterms. But I have found time to attend a few events on campus - the College Republicans, the Diwali dinner put on by the Hindu Student Council, etc. Tonight I dropped in on a meeting after my class finished. A female student was reading poetry and sharing her opinions about her faith as a Muslim in a large room full of students, most of whom were also Muslim. During her speech, she mentioned, "I do not believe that Muslims were responsible for the 9/11/2001 attacks on the World Trade Center." Wait, what? My first reaction was to look around the room to measure the response and outrage at her comments. There was none. I was a little outraged. I consider it a well proven fact that the hijackers on the planes were Muslims. I stayed for a few more minutes to listen as she read a poem about her emotions and feelings about September 11th.

I needed to catch one of the last B trains so I left after her poem. To be fair, I have no idea how her speech concluded. Anyway, as I was riding home, I reflected on what she had said. I think many non-Muslim Americans might have been offended by the student's claim. However, I tried to put myself into her shoes. What if Christians had been blamed for the terrorist attacks? Or what about abortion clinic bombers who have all claimed to be Christian. What about the Holocaust? Hitler claimed to be a Christian. But many Christians today would claim that Hitler was not really a Christian - that he just claimed to be for political purposes and the version he practiced was really a Nazi-manipulation. And I'm sure that is how this girl at NYU feels. She takes great pride in her faith because, according to her, of its love and peace, and perhaps she feels that the 9/11 hijackers were not true Muslims in their faith and actions -- only using the affiliation for al quaeda's own purposes. I had never considered this possibility before. Perhaps this is the truth, or perhaps this girl is completely wrong. Regardless, I now have a deeper understanding of how American Muslims might feel about 9/11. This is one good reason to try to walk a mile in someone else's shoes before criticizing them. It helps you better understand where they are coming from. (The other reason is that if they are angry after you criticize them, at least they will be 1 mile away and barefoot!)

Race in Michigan

Remember Jennifer Gratz? After being denied admission to the University of Michigan law school due to her race (white), she appealed to the US Supreme Court to rule on race in admissions policy. Now she and Ward Connerly, an African-American businessman who helped pass bans on affirmative action in California and Washington, are fighting for a Michigan ballot initiative against affirmative action in Michigan.

Affirmative Action tends to divide Republicans and Democrats along party lines. While I am against the use of government forcing others to discriminate based on race, I think Republicans do need to be more sensitive to racism and the disadvantages that many minority Americans face in our nation. Greater attention (and money) should be invested into reducing the racial gap in the educational performance of young children. Those, including myself, who wish to end affirmative action, need to propose and actively support other means to end racism and make the playing field more equal for all Americans.

Check your Facts...

Don't believe everything you see in political ads. Both sides really twist the truth a lot. One site you can use to check for accuracy is Fact Check. While the site may have some bias, it does criticize both Republicans and Democrats for twisting facts. Here are some examples where one party accuses the other by twisting and/or making up facts.

Democrats accuse Republicans of voting to raid the Social Security Trust Fund

Republicans accuse Democrats of aiming to shrink benefit checks

Enron's Skilling gets 24 Years

CNN reported yesterday that Former Enron CEO Jeff Skilling is going to jail:

Jeffrey Skilling was sentenced to 24 years in prison Monday for his role in the fraud at Enron that brought down the nation's seventh-largest company and came to stand as a symbol for an era of corporate fraud in America...More than 4,000 Enron employees lost their jobs - and many their life savings - when the company declared bankruptcy in December 2001. Investors lost billions.

This is good for markets, as investors will have more confidence in the ability to prosecute wreckless managers. I wonder how this will effect the midterm election? Since Bush and the GOP previously got hammered on their ties to Enron, will voters interpret this as Bush's buddies are going to jail? (Actually, Bush was friends with Kenneth Lay, not Skilling.) On the other hand, will people give the Bush administration credit for cracking down on these corporate crooks and restoring confidence in investors? A third possibility - voters are clueless and won't consider this at all!

The Economy, stupid!

In Bill Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign against former President Bush, James Carville put a sign up with 3 points on it, the second of which read "the economy, stupid". Well, finally finally the Republicans are going to shift focus from Iraq to the economy. I don't know why they haven't talked this up so far. The stock market is at an all time high, inflation is in check, unemployment is below 5%, and the economy continues to expand at a good pace. Of course, maybe political strategists believe that it is easier to get someone to vote out of fear of terrorists than due to economic numbers.

Speaking of reminding voters of terrorists, watch this new Republican ad:


Some Democrats are saying the GOP is just exploiting Osama for political purposes. They have a counter ad:



The election must be close!

CNN loses respect

Some say CNN has a liberal bias. I'm not sure if that is always true, but I will give them credit for stupidity. CNN has a new "news story" on their web site about the '08 Presidential election:

"Asked if they preferred Hillary Rodham Clinton to McCain, respondents gave the Democratic New York senator and former first lady a 51 percent to 44 percent advantage over the Republican Senator from Arizona. Remove 'Rodham' and McCain had a 1 percentage point advantage, 48 percent to 47 percent. The results fall within the sample's margin of error, so there is a 'good chance, but not a statistical certainty' that Clinton's maiden name would help her in a matchup against McCain, said Keating Holland, CNN's polling director."

What a stupid poll. If there were consistent results that were outside the margin of error it would be useful. I would be willing to guess that most people know that Hillary Clinton and Hillary Rodham Clinton are the same person.

CNN loses respect by even running this "story." "If presidential elections were held today, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton would likely have a comfortable edge over Sen. John McCain." -- If you average the two polls she leads McCain 49% to 46.5%. That isn't a comfortable lead at all!

The entire story about the "rodham" is just stupid (other than the interesting poll numbers). She consistently uses "Rodham" and will if she runs in 2008. It's a moot point. Why not ask people if they would vote for George Bush if he changed his name to "Santa Claus"? I'm sure there would be some small difference in the numbers. But it would be ridiculous to write a story about it.

From Foley to Foley

My thoughts on the upcoming midterm election. The Repulicans will lose the House. The question is, by how many seats will they lose? Probably between 16 and 35. The Republican Revolution of 1994 began with the fall of Speaker of the House Foley and will end in 2006 with a different Foley ending the reign of the current Speaker.

The Senate? That's a tossup. Republicans effectively control it now 55-45. Democrats will pick up seats in two "blue" (Democratic-leaning) states -- Rhode Island (Chaffee will lose to Sheldon Whitehouse) & Pennsylvania (Santorum will lose to Bob Casey). They will also pick up seats in at least 2 "red" (Republican-leaning) states -- Montana (where Conrad Burns is struggling in overcoming with his ties to lobbyist Jack Abramoff and will likely lose to Jon Tester) and in Ohio (where Sherrod Brown will defeat Mike Dewine, the innocent victim of voter unhappiness with Republican scandals).

Assuming those four are a done deal, to take the Senate, Democrats will need to win 2 more races because the Vice President will break ties in a 50-50 Senate. They have good opportunities in Missouri (Talent-McCaskill) and Tennessee (Corker-Ford) to do just that. The Senate races in Virginia and Arizona are also close but lean GOP. I think the Republicans will hold the Senate but give Democrats a 40% chance of taking over the Senate.

Democrats should enjoy the next few weeks. Enjoy the victory on November 7th. Abramoff, Delay, Ney, Cunningham, Scooter, Foley, and Bush's Iraq policy have helped. Democrats have earned this victory - in the last few years they have been the least unethical party.

However, the good news for the GOP is that one year from now this election along with Abramoff, Delay, Ney, Cunningham, and Foley, will be history. Bush will be in his "last throes" as a lame duck, and the electoral college does aid the Republicans in electing Presidents. Coming off a victorious election, the Dean faction will be fired up to nominate a liberal like Feingold and conservatives will be more willing to compromise in order to win by selecting Guiliani or McCain (both of whom will be somewhat difficult to peg as Bush-Republicans).

The other positive news for conservatives - Casey & Whitehouse have very similar positions on abortion as do Santorum and Chaffee. Many of the House challengers are former Republicans or hold very conservative views. Obviously it is great for the Democrats to have power and set the agenda, but the next Congress will have more conservative Democrats in it (Ford if he wins in Tennessee, Maloney in Florida, Davis in NY, etc.)

If the GOP holds the Senate and saves Bush from a lot of vetoes, then the Republicans will not be in that bad of shape for '08.

Memphis Man on the Street

The Republican National Committee has started running a new ad in the neck and neck Corker-Ford race:



Corker has condemned the ad and asked them to stop running it. What do you think about it?

From an entertainment point of view, I think it is great. Perhaps I'm biased by my support for Corker. But does it cross the line of unfair attacks on Congressman Harold Ford? What is the ethical standard for running ads? Does this cross the line?

Previously, Corker did run an ad about Ford which, while not lying, did omit some key facts about Ford's record on national security. Both parties engage in this type of "truth telling" to educate undecided voters. There's definitely a problem, but how do we reform it?

Christian Politics

David Kuo, former second-in-command of President Bush's Office of Faith-Based Initiatives, has released a memoir about how his White House experiences left him disillusioned about the role religion can play in politics. Kuo, who I believe is sincere in his conservatism and his faith, wrote, "George W. Bush, the man, is a person of profound faith and deep compassion for those who suffer. But President George W. Bush is a politician and is ultimately no different from any other politician, content to use religion for electoral gain more than for good works. Millions of Evangelicals may share Bush's faith, but they would protect themselves—and their interests—better if they looked at him through the same coldly political lens with which he views them."

GOP delays Jesus' Plans

According to the Cleveland Plain Dealer, a Houston pastor is claiming that Republican foreign policy is delaying Jesus' Return:

Voters should oust congressional Republican leaders because U.S. foreign policy is delaying the second coming of Jesus Christ, according to a evangelical preacher trying to influence closely contested political races.

K.A. Paul railed against the war in Iraq on Sunday before a crowd of 1,000 at the New Spirit Revival Center in Cleveland Heights, his first stop on what he hopes is a 30-city campaign.

The Houston-based preacher said he believes that the Bush administration has delayed the second coming because U.S. foreign policy has blocked Christian missionaries from working in Iraq, Iran and Syria.

I thought Jesus' return was going to be like a thief in the night (I Thess 5:2), not based on US foreign policy. I wonder if this will have an affect on the turnout of evangelical Christians this fall. Paul has a large following but is not well-known in the USA. He did previously counsel Saddam Hussein, and met and prayed with Speaker Hastert following calls for Hastert to step down for mismanaging the Foley-page crisis.

Deja Vu?

Quick quiz: It's the 11th of the month. On a warm autumn day, people panic as a plane crashes into a tall building in New York City. What day is it? 9/11/2001? That would work, but so would TODAY! Yes, today NY Yankees pitcher Cory Lidle gave the whole city a big scare when he flew his small plane into a luxury apartment building, killing himself and another passenger. Fortunately, no one else died.

The scary thing is it was so "easy" for him to jump in an airplane in New Jersey and fly over Manhattan. What would prevent terrorists from doing the same thing? In a response, figher aircraft were put into the air above several major US cities. The quick response is good, but what are we doing to stop the first plane from hitting?

Chaos at Columbia

Last Tuesday, I received an email from the NYU College Repulicans that invited us to go to a speech at Columbia:

"3. Columbia has invited us to the event below. There will be a huge
protest so it would be nice to have a strong showing. E-mail me your name
by 9am tomorrow if you want to go.
Columbia students host The Minutemen and founder, Jim Gilchrist, for
their pre-election forum: “Defending America’s Borders”"

I didn't go, and it seems I missed a national event! If you haven't heard, protesters (supposedly from a socialist organization) crashed the speech and knocked over the guest speaker. You can read about the event at FoxNews.



I'm not sure what I think of the Minuteman Project. Honestly, I didn't read the email from the NYU CRs until after the event took place. So perhaps the chaos was good for them to get publicity. Still, shouldn't they be allowed to express their views? What happened to free speech? I never heard of the Minutemen until after this incident. Apparently, they self-patrol the Mexican border with guns. I'm not sure if I agree with that either though.

New York really is an interesting place to live!

Brooklyn Bridge to Midwood

Today I rode the subway up the Brooklyn Bridge and then walked back to my apartment in Midwood, stopping to take photos along the way. Unfortunately my battery ran out of power before I made it home. Below are a few of the photos I took.


This is the famous Brooklyn Bridge, with part of the the Manhattan skyline in the distance.



This is "Kennedy Fried Chicken" which uses red and white in its logo. There are many around the New York City area. Kentucky Fried Chicken claims it is an intellectual property rights violation.



After seeing this ice cream cooler, I was homesick for China!



Here is a building with interesting archictecure near the Dekalb Avenue stop.



The Brooklyn Academy of Music.



This street food vendor also reminded me of China, until I saw his prices!



Pizza by the slice! There are so many stores in the NYC area that sell pizza by the slice for anywhere between $1.75 and $3 per slice.




I also got a few photos of a group of protestors yelling for the US and Israel to leave all Arab lands immediately. The group was yelling many different slogans as they passed.



The protestors had their own protestor! Following behind them, a man held this sign very quietly as he marched in the rear of their group.

Appreciating Chinese Money

Chinese Renminbi (RMB) dropped below 7.90 against the dollar yesterday due to speculation that the government will soon expand the band within which the currency is allowed to fluctuate. The rate was fixed at 8.28 from 1994 until July 21, 2005. It has been slowly appreciating against the dollar ever since. Some economists predict it will appreciate up to 6.5. The US continues to put pressure on China. My Senator Chuck Schumer & South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham continue to back legislation "encourage" China to allow the currency to appreciate faster.

Who's Next?

In this Congress, Republican Representatives Cunningham, Delay, and Ney have all been caught up in scandals. The Vice President's assistant Scooter Libby has been indicted. And now Mark Adam Foley. Who's Next?

Florida Congressman Mark Foley abruptly resigned from Congress today after it was reported that he had sent inappropriate sexually graphic messages to Congressional pages under the age of 18.

The details are still a little bit fuzzy, but I have 3 thoughts on the matter:

1. The instant messages he sent were from account maf54 (mark adam foley, born in '54). Why would anyone send these messages from an account with his name on it?

2. There are conflicting reports as to how much the GOP leadership previously knew about this. If it is discovered that they were aware of the explicit messages and covered this up, it will be the final nail in their political coffins. This scandal is big news because it has the potential to destroy many political careers, not just Foley's.

3. The blog that "outed" Foley is very suspicious. It was set up in July in total obscurity with the stated goal of catching sexual predators. No one knew it existed and no websites linked to it. We are told that somehow several Congressional pages found it all at the same time and provided info on Foley. The website has never "caught" any other predators. Before the Foley story broke, the only information on the site is information copied from other web sites. What information? In August the site owner posted stories about Chandra Levy and other Congressional sex scandals. How conincidental is that? The owner refuses to identify her/himself. Who is behind this? I have no doubt in my mind that the owner of the blog knew about the Foley emails in July when the blog was created. If it is later discovered that some politician is behind this (one would assume a Democrat, but who knows) and held it back as a last minute political surprise before the upcoming midterm election, then it could backfire on them.

Politician Trivia

I've heard several politicians recently make firm statements about Iraq and whether or not the US should set a deadline to get out. I was curious whether or not these politicians are consistent in what they say. I just find it odd that almost all Republicans favor the war and almost all Democrats are opposed. Shouldn't there be more independent thinkers like Joe Lieberman or Chuck Hagel? So I searched around to see what I could find on the Internet.



Do you know who made these 10 Quotes?
(Answers at the bottom... Hint: 4 from Republicans; 6 from Democrats)


A) "If Hussein has chemical and biological agents, and I believe he does, he would have no incentive not to use them then, if he knew he was going to be killed anyway and deposed."

B) "I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long (U.S. troops) will be involved and when they will be withdrawn....Victory means exit strategy and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is."

C) "These arbitrary limits (setting a deadline for military withdrawl) are not going to be helpful."

D) "I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now....There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory...There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our overextended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today."

E) “We have to be able to convince the American people that this (military action) is in our interest. I don't think you need much of an imagination, though, to know what happens if all of this gets out of hand.…I think we can avoid that with a little preventative medicine. That's what this is all about. It's preventative, and I think it will work.”

F) He "views it (Congress setting a deadline for military withdrawl) as a legislative overreach on the powers of the presidency."

G) "What if someone had listened to Winston Churchill and stood up to Adolph Hitler earlier? How many people's lives might have been saved? And how many American lives might have been saved?...We have to take a stand now. If we don't do it now, we will have to do it later."

H) "In my judgment, it's a question of whether it's wise to set a deadline, and we might as well address that issue first and foremost....Now, if the sponsors of the language in this bill want to strike that deadline, we have a totally different situation. But the deadline is there, it is July of next year, unless Congress changes its mind. That creates between now and then, a very dangerous period of uncertainty and instability, which ...creates danger for our forces, that period of uncertainty is very dangerous because ... (they) are going to seek to arm themselves for the day in which we leave. "

I) (in regards to setting a deadline for military withdrawl) "signs of impatience can be misinterpreted as symptoms of weakness. We cannot afford that in a region where weakness attracts vultures."

J) "whether or not there was an exit strategy. I would take the use of force very seriously. I would be guarded in my approach. I don't think we can be all things to all people in the world. I think we've got to be very careful when we commit our troops. The vice president and I have a disagreement about the use of troops. He believes in nation-building. I would be very careful about using our troops as nation builders."


Obviously, these quotes were cherry-picked. The situation was different (all refer to Kosovo with the exception of Clinton's comment (a) about Iraq). But it is interesting to see what politicians said in the past.

A) President Bill Clinton (D-AR) (September 9, 2003)
B) President George W. Bush (R-TX) (April 9 & June 5, 1999)
C) Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) (Sept 15, 2000)
D) Rep. Tom Delay (R-TX) (April 1999)
E) Seanator Tom Daschle (D-SD) (1999)
F) Scott McClellan, for the Bush campaign (R-TX)(May 2000)
G) President Bill Clinton (D-AR) (March 22, 1999)
H) Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) (May 17, 2000)
I) Sec. of State Madeleine Albright (D)
J) President George W. Bush (R-TX) (October 3, 2000 debate)