On Tuesday at 11:10 AM after receiving some information on votes to be counted I did some tabulations.  Then on Facebook I commented:

“I am looking at the numbers of absentee, early and questioned ballots in Alaska and crunching some numbers. It is hard to tell how many of these will affect the Miller/Murkowski race but to me it looks like Murkowski can at most gain 100 to 200 votes max on Miller.

Possibly very likely she will gain much less than 100.

Crossing my fingers.”

I sent the detailed numbers showing Murkowski gaining about 53 votes to a pollster friend of mine and her response to me was only to say, “Good analysis. Can’t disagree.”

After Miller had a lead of about 1,668 votes the alaska Public Radio Network reports with thousands of additional ballots counted the number had moved down just a hair to 1,630. That was apparently enough to make Murkowski realize that Palin had again whopped her family in Alaskan Politics.

As of Wednesday Murkowski is still apparently fuming. She did not endorse Miller in her concession speech and according to the Politico, “when questioned about a possible endorsement on Wednesday, Murkowski spokesman Steve Wackowski declined to comment.”

No real surprise there. From everything that I have heard from people that have dealt with Murkowski in the political arena the woman is an arrogant sort who does not take rejection all that well and who really thinks she is entitled to be Senator. Now that she isn’t she is going to have a lot of time on her hands to think about what she has done and the role she has helped play in leading America closer to the cliff.

Miller doesn’t need her endorsement though. From the prepolling I have been given from various sources, Miller is trouncing his Democratic opponent in head to head match ups.

Generally I ignore them.  But I have decided to take a different tact.  And as the number of requests is slowing down as primaries have been mostly settled, I thought I would take a different approach and take the opportunity to find out if these folks emailing me are worthy of my support.

So, as a test case, I am going to pick on John Pistone who is running for Congress in Connecticut’s 5th Congressional District.  I got an email from him or someone on his staff with a link to his website.  But I want specific questions answered.  So what I did was send back the following questionnaire.  Let’s see if he has the gumption to answer these questions!

I will let you know when or if I get anything back.

================================

Candidate Questionnaire:

1) Do you agree or disagree with the following statement.  “The federal government is too big and is currently doing too many things beyond the limited powers assigned to it in the Constriction.”   This question requires only a yes or no answer so please give only a yes or no answer.

2) If elected to Congress to represent the American people, please list 10 federal government programs/laws you would work to eliminate and in one sentence for each, explain why.

3) If elected to Congress to represent the American people, please list the top 3 policies/laws that you would work to enact and cite the Constitutional authority you would use for each to do so.

4) In one or two short sentences please state your position on Abortion.

5) Do you agree or disagree that the second amendment provides law abiding American citizens the right to keep and bear arms for their protection without federal, state or local interference.  After stating whether you agree or disagree you may explain, if you feel necessary, why in one sentence.

6) Do you agree or disagree that a homeowner has the right to use lethal force to defend their home from criminal intrusion.  After stating whether you agree or disagree you may explain, if you feel necessary, why in one sentence.

7) What is your position, in one or two short sentences, on the theory of man-made Global Warming?

If you had been in Congress in 2008, would you have voted for TARP?  An explanation of why or why not may be given in one or two sentences.  Did you make any public statements prior to its passage that can verify this position?  If so, please list sources.

9) If you had been in Congress in January 2009, would you have voted in favor to the Obama “stimulus” plan passed by the House of Representatives on January 28^th, 2009?  Why or why not in one or two short sentences and provide sources for any public statements you made prior to its inaction to prove this position.

10) Which of the following statements do you most agree with:

a) “Only government can break the vicious cycles that are crippling our economy”

b) “In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problems; government is the problem.”

11) When it comes to the current federal income tax, do you believe that the rates are too high, not high enough or just about right?

12) Which of the following federal taxation systems would you most prefer to see the United States use moving forward:

a)     the current progressive income tax

b)    a flat income tax

c)     a national sales tax

d)    import and export tariffs only

e)     no federal system of taxation

13) Do you believe that it is fiscally sound policy for government to spend more money than in collects in receipts each year?  If yes, explain why.  If no, explain what steps you would take to balance the budget.

14) Do you believe that the United States Government should actively work to retire the national debt.  Why or why not in one or two short sentences.

15) Which of the following most closely represents you view on terrorists that would wish to do America harm:

a)     There is no serious or significant terrorist threat.

b)    There is a threat from terrorists, but it is a threat that the United States created because of our foreign policies over the years and we are to blame.

c)     Terrorism is a result of poverty around the world and the United States should spend billions in foreign aid to make would-be terrorists like us.

d)    The threat of  terrorism is real and the United States must meet the threat head on with all means at our disposal EXCEPT for military force.

e)     The threat of  terrorism is real and the United States must meet the threat head on with all means at our disposal INCLUDING the use of military force.

f)     I can’t decide … it’s too difficult of an issue.

16) Should terrorists taken on the battlefield be given rights and privileges under the Geneva Convention?

17) If you were approached by a fellow Congressman and asked to support a bill you would not normally support if he or she added pork directly benefitting your district and your constituents, would you change your vote in favor of said legislation?

18) Which statement most closely represents your views on immigration:

a)     there should be no borders and people should be free to move from country to country claiming citizenship at their own will

b)    sovereign nations have every right to enact immigration laws that apply the same standards to all people that desire entrance and citizenship

c)     something other than a or b (in one sentence, explain)

20) Cite one quote from a founding father that you believe best sums up your political ideology.  Do not explain why, just provide the quote please.

21) Which current or past Supreme Court Justice(s) do you think should be emulated with future appoints by the current president?

22) Do you agree or disagree with the concept of Affirmative Action and government mandated or recommended racial and sex based quotas?  In one sentence explain why.

23) Do you agree or disagree with the concept of the federal government dictating who banks should and should not lend money to? In one sentence explain why.

24) Name a President of the United States you most admire and in one sentence tell why.

25) Do you agree or disagree with the policy of governments mandating a minimum or “living” wage?  In one sentence explain why.

26) Should companies that are going bankrupt be bailed out by the federal government in order to save jobs? In one sentence explain why.

27) When it comes to the “general Welfare” clause of the Constitution, what is your understanding of its nature and meaning?

28) When it comes to the “interstate commerce” clause of the Constitution, what is your understanding of its nature and meaning?

28) In one or two short sentences, what are your thoughts on the Constitutionality of the following government programs/departments:

a)     Social Security

b)    Welfare

c)     Food Stamps

d)    Medicare

e)     Medicaid

f)     Department of Education

g)    Environmental Protection Agency

29) Who do you believe is responsible for the terrorist attacks of September 11^th, 2001?

a)     The United States Government.  They planned it themselves and made it happen.

b)    The United States Government.  They knew the attack was coming and let it happen.

c)     Radical terrorists who want to kill non-Muslim infidels.

d)    Someone else (please explain)

30) Which of the following statements do you most agree with:

a)     all Muslims are terrorists

b)    not all Muslims are terrorists, but much of the world’s terrorism today is perpetrated by radical elements within Islam

c)     not all Muslims are terrorists and very little of the world’s terrorism today is perpetrated by radical elements within Islam

d)    there is no such thing as a Muslim terrorist

e)     the United States is the single greatest terrorist nation the planet today

32) List three pieces of federal legislations passed or proposed over the past four years that you agree with and would have voted for and in a single sentence for each explain why.

33) Agree or disagree, McCain-Feingold violates the first amendment.  In one sentence explain why.

34) Agree or disagree, the “Fairness Doctrine” or a new incarnation thereof, violates the first amendment.  In one sentence explain why.

35) Which of the following statements do you most agree with:

a)     the first amendment prohibits free and non-coerced religious displays in the public square because they might offend someone

b)    the first amendment protects free and non-coerced religious displays in the public square regardless of whether or not they offend someone

c)     oh God … uh I mean … oh non-descript higher power of your choice or non-choice if you so choose, please don’t make me answer this question!

36) If a State or Commonwealth decided that it wanted to secede from the Union because its citizens no longer believed that the United States was adequately protecting the inalienable rights of the people, would you oppose such a move or support it?  What principles or authority would you cite for your decision?

37) Name one event in American history that you believe exemplifies the spirit of America and in one or two sentences describe why.

38) If elected to Congress, could you be counted on to file Articles of Impeachment against any member of Congress, the federal Judiciary or even a sitting President who violated the Constitution and the public trust?

39) Regardless of your answer to the previous question, name one, if any, person in any federal position of public trust that you believe has committed impeachable offenses and document at least one such offense.

40) Would you:

a) vote against a piece of  legislation that contained a unconstitutional act even if such an act was the only unconstitutional act within the entire legislation or

b) sign on to legislation that contained a single unconstitutional act in order to get other things that the legislation contained accomplished?

41) Are you currently, or have you in the past, engaged in illegal activity?  Yes or no.  Go ahead and explain if you like.

42) Do you have any other comments to make as to why you believe that you are qualified to be elected to public office?  BRIEFLY explain and add them here.

So why is this the way I choose to describe Mr. Gross? Because Mr. Gross is a socialist unfit to live in America. He thinks that the government should nationalize the mortgage industry. Here are his exact comments:

“To suggest that there’s a large place for private financing in the future of housing finance is unrealistic,” Gross said today at a U.S. Treasury Department conference in Washington. “Government is part of our future. We need a government balance sheet. To suggest that the private market come back in is simply impractical. It won’t work.”

Yes, because the government has proven oh so capable of running so many things right Mr. Gross? The government we have is hemorrhaging red ink so fast that if it were you or I in our personal lives doing this we would be under a bridge huddled around a fire licking the bottom of a can of Spam for dinner.

Seriously, how can someone that thinks like this rise so far to the top? One would think that at some point in his career someone would have figured out that he has no real ability to think and kept him away from the control he currently has. Of course, often times people without brains do get promoted because they are getting paybacks from other people of similarly low intellects.

Mr. Gross, there is no authority for what you propose in the United States Constitution. What you propose is socialism. Socialism fails everywhere it either has been tried or is being tried. It will further fail everywhere where it will be tried in the future as well.

If anyone is invested in the bond fund this yo-yo controls I suggest running for the high grass and withdrawing your money immediately. If you don’t and with such idiotic statements as this apparently flowing from his mouth you may wake up one day to find him running down the middle of the street naked babbling about how he just invested everything into waffles; FRESH TASTY WAFFLES!

Alaska Libertarian Party leaders say they will not consider putting Sen. Lisa Murkowski under their party’s banner in this fall’s U.S. Senate race.

Murkowski trails challenger Joe Miller by roughly 1,700 votes before absentee and questioned ballots from the Republican primary election are counted. Her options if she loses are limited — one had been backing from the state Libertarian Party, which has a candidate, David Haase, set to appear on November general election ballots.

Haase would have had to withdraw for Murkowski to run as a replacement.

…

Kohlhaas said the party’s Executive Committee nonetheless voted unanimously to end speculation by closing the door on that option. The 5-0 vote was taken at an emergency meeting in Anchorage on Sunday.

The Libertarian Party cited Murkowski’s support for unconstitutional spending such as TARP for their decision.

I was worried that the Libertarian Party, which often struggles to woo voters despite most Americans agreeing with much of their platform, would actually make a hail marry pass here and sign up Murkowski to try and get a member of their party into the Senate just to try and show the world that they were not doomed to be yet another third party again this year with no real gains to show for their efforts.

Thankfully intelligence prevailed. That and the fact that quick polling showed Murkowski still trailing Miller in the general election probably had something to do with it too.

This is not a new comparison FYI. I have for years been comparing politicians to the world’s oldest profession with the way they throw money about to special interest groups to buy votes. That is, in essence, what whoring one’s self out is. But because Lisa is a woman (not a lady FYI) it is now apparently improper!

Dan headlines his article, “Calling Women Prostitutes Is the Hot New Political Trend.” I guess once again reminding people like this not to try this at home would be fruitless because what Joe Miller said is nothing but what has been said about politicians (both men and women) for years. It has nothing to do with Murkowski being a woman!

“What’s the difference between selling out your party’s values and the oldest profession?” – Joe Miller ?

I use a “?” following Joe Miller’s name for a reason that will be brought to light later.

That aside, the comment was referring, from what I can tell, to Murkowski possibly running on the Libertarian Party ticket which is a laugh riot considering that the Libertarian Party has almost nothing in common with Murkowski ideologically except when Murkowski is forced to act like a conservative to try and save her own political hide.

And of course Senator Murkowski is also offended at the truth too.

“Alaskan values have never included a complete disregard for the truth or a lack of common decency,” said Murkowski. “Mr. Miller owes all Alaskans, women and my family an apology.“

Oh, yeah, right! This coming from a woman who has shredded the Constitution whenever she thought it could further her political career? Hey Lisa, when are we going to get an apology from you for being such a blithering dunderhead? Probably never so you really aren’t in any position to be making demands if you ask me!

And now we see Joe Miller’s camp doing something that makes me wonder if he is good enough to be a United States Senator. He is apologizing. Apologizing? For what? Telling the truth?

The report goes further to state that the remark was not sent by Mr. Miller but by a staffer with access to the account and that that staffer has been “relieved of his tweeting duties.”

First of all, why would someone other than Joe Miller have access to Mr. Miller’s account? I don’t doubt that several people had access because maybe Mr. Miller had better things to do than tweet but you do not give people access to your own account on services like Facebook, Twitter and the like because everything that is said is automatically attributed to you. If it is your account you maintain complete control over what is put out through it. Just my opinion.

And second of all, like I previously stated why apologize for the truth? Murkowski is a whore, politically speaking of course. Perhaps otherwise too, but I have no evidence of that so won’t make that claim. She has whored herself out for political power, spent money to buy votes and done the same thing as so many other politicians have done and that the description is accurate. Especially considering that as best as I can tell there really does seem like a push from within her own camp and also the Alaska Libertarian Party to get her on the ticket.

Come on Joe! Grow a spine! Show some nuts! Don’t back away from the truth!

Now I would also be disappointed in Lisa Murkowski too IF I had any higher expectations of her than this sort of blatantly whimpering, limp wristed response to something that she knows exactly what is being said first of all. But I don’t so it is hard to be disappointed in someone you have such a low opinion of. It is like the woman standing on the street corner whoring our her body getting upset when someone actually dares to call her a whore!

Spare us all the false outrage Lisa. Hey, let me ask you a question though. If I told you to go screw yourself would you be offended? Because, I hope and pray that Joe Miller wins after all the ballots are counted and you are sent home to snivel about how Sarah Palin smacked your family around a second time.

There is a possibility that Murkowski could run on the Libertarian ticket in the November general election if she loses the Republican primary. The Alaska Libertarian Party is discussing the possibility and its Senate candidate, David Haase, has said he is open to talking to Murkowski about him stepping aside.

Really? Seriously? I was unaware that the Alaska Libertarian Party was really the Alaska Liberaltarian Party!

Murkowski is hardly a libertarian (which is basically a conservative no matter how “libertarians” want to parse it). Murkowski has stated that she thinks government run health care and insurance systems are good things; not a libertarian view point. Murkowski has stated that she thinks that Cap and Trade is a good idea; not a libertarian view point. Murkowski has was fully behind TARP and government bailouts; not a libertarian view point. Murkowski is pro-abortion (ie. murdering a child in the womb and denying said child his or her inalienable right to life) and, as much as some “libertarians” who refuse to use their brains hate to admit it, that is, again, not a very libertarian position.

The “Libertarian Party” is famous for its litmus tests where any slight deviation from true libertarian positions (even those poorly thought out) automatically disqualifies one from representing the party on the ballot. So the fact that they would be prepared to embrace Murkowski, a woman who has so repeatedly violated her duty to uphold the Constitution and act in accordance with the limited powers it grants is simply mind boggling.

The legislation has been law for months and guess what? Well, I’ll let this report from the Los Angeles Times tell the story:

California insurance regulators cleared the way Wednesday for Anthem Blue Cross to implement scaled-back rate hikes after a previous increase was canceled amid an uproar over its size.

Anthem said it intends to put the new rates — averaging 14% and as high as 20% — into effect Oct. 1 for nearly 800,000 individual California policyholders.

Regulators also allowed one of Anthem’s nonprofit competitors, Blue Shield of California, to move ahead with rate increases — averaging 19% and as high as 29% — for 250,000 individual policyholders.

They wanted to increase costs by up to 39% but that was declined by regulator; regulators who really have no business telling private companies what to charge in the first place. So we see what the liberals mean by controlling costs. 39% is too much for a year to year increase. But 20%? Well that isn’t too much.

Again, how about we try REAL solutions to the increasing premiums? Real solutions like allowing competition and prohibiting states from artificially limiting the companies that can give the residents living there what they want and using the commerce clause as it was actually intended? You know, instead of as liberals have bastardized it into meaning something other than it really does which is to give the federal government the power to regulate any business doing business across state lines?

November is coming. Will the voters be awake enough to realize that liberals, as they always do, have sold them a pile of crap wrapped up in a pretty bow and asked that it be eaten like chocolate?

Ok, first of all Al did you miss the part of MLK’s sermon regarding content of character and not the color of one’s skin? So trying to proclaim the day as “your’s” (ie black people’s) is counter to that message.

Second of all, if the day was so gosh darn important to you why didn’t YOU have the mall reserved in advance for a rally? Hmmmmm?

But the truth is, as usual, stranger than the fiction the left throws out to get you to panic and get their way.

For you see, just two people have signed up for the program!

Ok, so you might be thinking that there will be more, many more, to follow.  But do you really think that if there was such a crisis in health care that we needed Obamacare to fix it that after all this time just two people in a State like New Jersey would have been put on the roles?  The math is basically that as of right now each of these people have access to $70 million.

In nearly a month just 600 applications were downloaded according to the report.  This is still very shy of the crisis numbers we were told existed.  Remember, we were told that there were “millions” of Americans suffering and that would continue to suffer if Obamacare was not passed.

If all 600 of these applicants get approved the government tab per enrollee will become $235,000 each.  Looks like there will be a lot of unspent cash floating around.

Oh, and in case you were also one of those people that foolishly thought that Obamacare would give you “free” health care, think again.

Two policies are available, with premiums ranging from $212 to $768 monthly, depending on age.

Gee, I don’t know about you but that is a pretty hefty health care premium.  Most people I know who have private insurance have premiums on the lower end of that scale and the one I currently have is right in the middle.  So much for the glory of government run health care as the great cost control mechanism!

Warner Todd Huston

AFL-CIO Joins Communists, La Raza, ACLU, Other Unions in Voter Registration Drive http://bit.ly/bQ5Fon

J.j. Jackson We had an AFL-CIO crank come to our house a few months ago, knocking on doors and looking to talk to us … I told her to get off my lawn and never come back. She seemed stunned.

===================================

Warner Todd Huston

Democrat Trickery: Fake Mich. Tea Party Mastermind Resigns http://bit.ly/aw9aR5

J.j. Jackson Where any of these fake Tea Party candidates dead like so many of the Democratic Party’s voters are?

===================================

Jeff Blanco Nice…

Marine lays an asswooping on Congressman

www.youtube.com

http://RestoreTheRepublic.com/ | Things are heating up! Marine lays an asswooping on Congressman.

J.j. Jackson Oops! No more town hall meetings for this guy!

===================================

Bob McCarty Writes Sure, Democrats are all about transparency except when they know their answers will fly in the face of common sense and what most voters want. Such is the case in the video below which shows Adam Sharp [http://SharpElbows.Net/ ] trying to get U.S. Rep. Russ “Rubber Stamp” Carnahan (D) of Missouri’s 3rd Congressional …

Democrat Carnahan Runs From Ground Zero Mosque Question.

www.youtube.com

Russ Carnahan Runs From a Constituent With a Legitimate Question

J.j. Jackson By his silence you know his answer.

===================================

Jay Are

DeMint: Over 90% of Bills Passed Secretly With No Debate, No Vote

www.youtube.com

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) voiced concerns that the Senate passes over 90 percent of legislation without any debate, without amendment, and without a roll call vote (May 25, 2010).

J.j. Jackson ?… And no Constitutional authority too!

===================================

Jay Are

Hot Air » Boehner to Obama: Fire your economic team

hotair.com

“President Obama should ask for – and accept – the resignations of the remaining members of his economic team, starting with Secretary Geithner and Larry Summers, the head of the National Economic Council,”

J.j. Jackson Obama has an economic team? The way things are going I thought he was just having a bunch of monkeys sitting around pounding on typewriters and hoping they could turn out something in between the complete works of Shakespeare that they have been tasked to duplicate.