Astroturf-a-palooza (One Nation Working Together)

Astro·Turf \ˈas-trə-ˌtərf, -ˌtrō-\ : a political term of art for a faux movement funded by traditional powers to give a cause the appearance of independent grassroots support.

Smells like Soros...

An alphabet soup of union groups (e.g. AFL-CIO, SEIU, NEA, AFSCME, USW) in conjunction with the NAACP, Planned Parenthood, Code Pink and a host of radical, militant, race-baiting organizations will converge on Washington, D.C. on Saturday (10-2-10).

Big Government has provided excellent information on the Communist, Pro-Terrorist, Anti-Israel elements that are proud sponsors of the event. Together under the "One Nation" umbrella, hundreds of collectivist organizations representing hundreds of thousands of statist drones are expected show up for what might be the greatest display of astroturf of all time:

On October 2nd, the NAACP and national labor unions will give tens of thousands of people free bus rides, free lunches, free T-shirts and free Metro farecards as inducements to attend the One Nation Working Together rally being organized by a coalition of radical leftist organizations at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C.

The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has promised to give free bus rides from major metropolitan areas within twelve hours of D.C. The United Steelworkers are also busing in demonstrators from across the Northeast. Even the Screen Actors Guild is ‘getting on the bus.’

I'm not kidding... they're busing in ACTORS. It's faker than fake.

Here's a small sample of some of the nutty groups that will be represented at Astroturf-a-palooza:

• Ya-Ya Network: an organization focusing primarily on Counter-Military Recruitment.
• Solidarity: a "revolutionary socialist" feminist organization
• Ex-Offenders Association of PA
• Communist Party USA: "A militant, activist, working class party"
• Democratic Socialists of America: "The largest socialist organization in the United States, and principal US affiliate of the Socialist International."
• Physicians for a National Health Program: an organization advocating a national socialized health care program.
• GLSEN: Providing sexually explicit materials for young kids
• La Raza: Radical racist group

Why will they be marching? For a number of ill-conceived and incoherent reasons:

• "We march for a clean environment, so no child is ever forced to decide between drinking the water or breathing the air and staying healthy." [For good health, don't breathe!]
• Good jobs: One million new jobs now. [Of course...from thin air! Right away, sir!]
• "We march for green jobs..." [A billion green jobs...right away, sir!]
• "We are...frustrated that society seems willing to spend more locking up our bodies than educating our minds."
• "...enact policies that expand access to the polls for everyone, including former felons" [What could go wrong?]
• "Increase and index the minimum wage." [Because unemployment isn't high enough already?]
• "We march for a nation in which each person who wants to work can find a job that pays enough to support a family." [No entry-level jobs?]
• "We have the pride, power and determination to keep ourselves – and our country – moving up and out of the valley greed created."
• "Make every job a safe job." [No more soldiers, firefighters, roofers, power line installers, or police officers?]
• "Everyone who works in America should have the right to join with their co-workers to have a voice on the job." [Card check]
• "...no child should live in fear that her parents will be deported." [DREAM Act!]
• "...to move our nation beyond this moment when a handful of Senators can block urgently needed progress..." [No need to debate; end the filibuster]
• "And on 11-2-10, we will march again – into the voting booths."

I hope Andrew Breitbart gets an opportunity to stop by for a visit.

Cross-posted at Left Coast Rebel

Ten Buck Fridays: September 26 - October 1

Full length TBF post to follow. For now, this:

Poll closes 12:01 A.M. Eastern on 10/1

B

log

gers: Share this poll. Results will be cumulative!

*Note: Vote only once. Duplicate votes WILL BE DELETED. This is not a contest to determine who can click on a mouse the most.

Update: We've gotten as many as 600+ votes from a single IP address. This has been an increasingly common pattern as we have gotten closer to the elections. I will continue to delete votes that are not legitimate. I apologize for any inconvenience.

Update II: To answer questions regarding the poll results: As noted above, some IP addresses have been associated with hundreds of votes. These batches of hundreds of votes come in large bursts within a very short period of time. They all go to a single candidate. Occasionally more than one legitimate vote can come in from one IP address, but when this happens, the pattern is quite different.

I have tried to get this issue resolved through PollDaddy, but so far, they have not given me a satisfactory answer. At this point, all I can do to ensure the integrity of the vote is to delete the bad votes manually.

To ensure that your vote is counted, please vote before viewing the results, and to minimize confusion, please vote from home if possible. I apologize for the inconvenience.

More ObamaCare Deception From the Democrat-Run Dinosaur Media

Lefties have been shouting from the mountain tops: "By 2 to 1 margin, Americans want MORE health reform, not less!"

Really? Americans are clamouring for more ObamaCare? No. They. Aren't.

This one is even further from the truth: "Repeal? Many Wish Health Reform Went Further."

WRONG!

Who is responsible for these rumors? Blame CBS. And the Associated Press.

Wishful Democrat-friendly analysis of this new poll conduced by the AP is completely bogus ― the left-leaning media are comparing apples with potatoes. (And as S & L points out, the project was conduced with funding from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, a left-wing organization that views the private health insurance market as as a "barrier" to health care.)

Here are the most important numbers from the poll:

"In general, do you favor, oppose, or neither favor nor oppose the law changing the health care system that the U.S. Congress passed last March?"

• Favor: 30%
• Oppose: 40%
• Neither favor nor oppose: 30%

Perhaps even more importantly, strong opposition outweighed strong support 23% to 9%. Obama's handmaidens carefully buried these numbers.

What did CBS conclude? "A new AP poll finds that Americans who think the law should have done more outnumber those who think the government should stay out of health care by 2-to-1."

Cherry pickers!

It is true that the AP poll indicates that about 40% of Americans wish for better reform while 20% say the federal government should not be involved in health care at all (there's your 2:1 ratio). However, as we shall soon see, the same AP poll shows that 40% of Americans think ObamaCare has taken us in the wrong direction, and they certainly don't want to go even further down that road.

Let's dig a little deeper:

Of the respondents who said either said they supported the Democrats' new health care legislation (30%) or were neutral (30%), the following question was asked:

"Do you think that the health care law passed last March by Congress should have done more to change the health care system, or do you not think that?"

• It should have done more: 61%
• Do not think that: 36%

That's the question that yields the bulk of the responses that lead the AP to conclude that "about four in 10 adults think the new law did not go far enough."

Take note of the fact that "go far enough" were not the words used in the the poll. "Go further" and "do more" don't mean the same thing. But by pushing the "go further" meme, the AP and others (such as CBS and HuffPo) strongly and deceptively imply that this large minority of Americans who want "more" are explicitly asking for a more progressive bill with more goodies and a higher cost.

For example, shortly after making the assertion that "U.S. Wants More Health Reform, Not Less," CBS provided this quote in juxtaposition:

"'I was disappointed that it didn't provide universal coverage,' said Bronwyn Bleakley, 35, a biology professor from Easton, Mass."

It's very dishonest to imply that "do more" directly translates to universal coverage. Does everyone who wants effective legislation really want bigger reform ... or do they want better reform? Do they want a more liberal form of health care reform with universal coverage or do they want a smarter, more conservative form of health care reform with portability, tort reform, tax credits for individuals (not just for employers), and the freedom to cross state lines with health insurance purchases?

Another recent poll from the AP (released on September 16) shows that Americans do NOT think that bigger government is better government. Here's the question:

"If you had to choose, would you favor a smaller government providing fewer services, or a bigger government providing more services?"

"Smaller government with fewer services" was the clear winner with a 17 point lead (57/40).

Americans' desire for leaner government notwithstanding, CBS warns Republicans against repealing ObamaCare:

"Republicans are going to have to contend with the 75 percent who want substantial changes in the system,' said Stanford political science professor Jon Krosnick, who directed the university's participation.

"'Republican legislators' passion to repeal the legislation is understandable if they are paying attention to members of their own party,' Krosnick added. 'But if they want to be responsive to all Americans, there are more Democrats and independents than there are Republicans.'"

Absolutely wrong!

As the AP's own numbers show, if Republicans want to be responsive to the majority of Americans, they'll fight for less government, not more. A big majority of Americans are calling for a government that provides fewer services. And if lazy Journolistas would dig a little deeper, they'd find that while at least 40% of Americans do want changes to the health care system (presumably including conservative proposals), an equal number of Americans think ObamaCare has taken us in the wrong direction.

In the AP Poll, the respondents who said either said they opposed the bill (40%) or were neutral (30%) were asked the following:

"Which of the following best expresses your view of the health care law that Congress passed last March?"

The majority preferred one of two responses:

• I oppose most or all of the changes made by the law: 28%
• I oppose the law because I think the federal government should not be involved in health care at all: 28%

So according to this poll, about 40% of Americans (56% of the 70%) think ObamaCare is mostly (or completely) bad. Democrats are going to have to contend with that.

No poll funded by the left would be complete without an attempt to illicit "wrong" answers from the opposition. The AP says ObamaCare will cut the deficit, 81% of Americans disagree. Sorry, AP, you're wrong.

The AP also says that Americans are mistaken in saying ObamaCare will set up panels of bureaucrats to make decisions about people's care. Remember this chart? I rest my case.

Read it all: The Associated Press 2010 Health Care Reform Survey by Stanford University With The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Conducted By Knowledge Networks

Stanford University's participation in the project was made possible by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

Forget the Clown, Listen to Coates

While the Democrat-Dominated Dinosaur media faithfully directed attention to Steve's Silly Sideshow (staged by Congressional Democrats), real news was unfolding before the Civil Rights Commission. Power Line boils it down:

Christopher Coates testified this morning before the Civil Rights Commission regarding the department's disposition of the case against the New Black Panther Party [NBPP]. Coates disobeyed the instruction of his superiors in order to testify and claimed whistleblower protection for his testimony. PJM has posted Coates's testimony in full here. It has also posted J. Christopher Adam's related column here.

Coates's testimony is a bombshell. It exposes a couple of Obama administration scandals at once. One involves the Obama administration's attempt to cover up the rationale for burying the case against the NBPP. The other involves the Obama administration's support for the racially based administration of justice. Coates's testimony is suggestive of other scandals as well. You probably won't be hearing much about it on the broadcast news tonight or in the papers tomorrow, but we all should do everything we can to get the word out. [emphasis added]

And so we will.

Is this just another rich white Tea Party Republican whining about how hard it is to be a card-carrying racist good ol' boy during the Obama era? Hardly:

It’s not news that Christopher Coates, the former chief of the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division at the Justice Department, was relieved of his post on January 5 and “transferred” to South Carolina for an 18-month assignment with the U.S. attorney’s office.

Coates had been relentlessly criticized by liberals both inside and outside the division because of his involvement in two cases — one in Noxubee County, Mississippi (U.S. v. Ike Brown et al.), the other in Philadelphia (U.S. v. New Black Panther Party et al.) — that feature clear-cut voting-rights violations (namely, discrimination and intimidation) committed by black defendants.

Coates is a former ACLU attorney who has received many awards for his work in the area of civil rights over the past four decades. He has filed numerous voting-rights cases on behalf of minority voters. But he got in trouble because some of the ideologues who inhabit the civil-rights community don’t want to accept anyone who doesn’t share their view of Voting Rights Act (VRA) enforcement. One of their unbreakable rules is that the VRA shouldn’t be used to protect white voters from discrimination committed by racial or ethnic minorities. [emphasis added]

J. Christian Adams highlights the significance of Coates' testimony:

Coates simply destroyed the year-long spin from the Justice Department regarding the dismissal. Coates is the former Voting Section chief, and served as lead attorney on the Black Panther case.He has practiced voting rights law longer than any other lawyer at the Justice Department. His testimony today was the worst possible nightmare for the Obama political officials responsible for the dismissal. [emphasis added]

Fox News provides additional background:

Coates discussed in depth the DOJ's decision to dismiss intimidation charges against New Black Panther members who were videotaped outside a Philadelphia polling place in 2008 dressed in military-style uniforms -- one was brandishing a nightstick -- and allegedly hurling racial slurs.

The case has drifted in and out of the limelight over the past year as the commission has struggled to investigate it. Former Justice official J. Christian Adams fueled the controversy when he testified in July and accused his former employer of showing "hostility" toward cases that involved white victims and black defendants.

Nearly three months later, Coates backed up Adams' claims. In lengthy and detailed testimony, he said the department cultivates a "hostile atmosphere" against "race-neutral enforcement" of the Voting Rights Act.

Ace points out the self-destructive nature of the reckless incompetence of the Department of Justice:

They're Jeopardizing Their Own Prosecutions: Laws can be struck, and convictions overturned, for different reasons.

If a law violates the Equal Protection Clause by containing a racially discriminatory element in its very text, it gets knocked down as being "facially" discriminatory. Impermissibly discriminatory "on its face."

But a lot of laws get struck down not for containing some obvious on-its-face discriminatory element, but for being discriminatory "as applied." If a law purporting to neutrally require ID from all voters is usually only applied to Hispanic voters, or black voters, or even white voters, it can be knocked down, and all prosecutions secured under it overturned, as being discriminatory "as applied."

Instapundit explores the possibility that the same-day sideshow provided by Stephen Colbert was a deliberate distraction:

DISTRACTION: So, yesterday reader John Mark Williams suggested that the Colbert testimony was intended to distract from coverage of Christopher Coates’ testimony about the Justice Department’s racism scandals. If so, it’s worked. Front page of Daily Caller: Colbert. Drudge led with Colbert until the news of the Klein & Zucker firings came out. Limbaugh led off today talking about Colbert. NRO has covered Colbert at The Corner, but not Coates. Washington Examiner headline: Colbert. Looking around other sites, I see more about Colbert than Coates. Hot Air and Power Line did better.

On second thought...

If Colbert’s testimony was meant to distract what a price they paid!!! All the reviews of his testimony are negative and a lot of Democrats are going to wish they’d never heard of Colbert before this is over.

If ever there were an appropriate time to harness the deeper meaning of the metaphor "shooting oneself in the foot," this would be it.

Discussion: Memeorandum

Cross-posted at Left Coast Rebel

Related: Which Malik Shabazz Visited White House in July 2009, Mr. President?

More: Stephen Colbert, Dems' Trained Clown, Trotted Out to Distract From Obama DOJ Scandal... Mission accomplished.

Ten Buck Fridays Congratulates Jesse Kelly!

With a solid majority of the votes, Jesse Kelly wins this week's Ten Buck Fridays poll.

Jesse Kelly is a enthusiastic Reagan Republican who has earned the endorsement of Mark Levin. In my estimation, there's no more convincing evidence of one's conservative credentials than a seal of approval from "the Great One." But don't take Levin's word for it. Listen to Jesse Kelly speak for himself. You'll be thoroughly impressed, I guarantee it:

Jesse Kelly beat a liberal Republican in the primary, now he faces an incumbent Obama Democrat in the general election.

If you haven't started giving to conservative candidates on a weekly basis, now is the time to start, and Jesse Kelly is an exceptional candidate to start out with.

Donate here.

The election is almost here, folks...less than 40 days to go!

Bio

Jesse and his wife, Aubrey, live in Marana, a town just northwest of Tucson, Arizona. They are raising two sons, James and Luke. The family attends Alive Christian Church in Marana.

Jesse is a project manager of Don Kelly Construction, his family’s contracting business, where he oversees multi-million dollar infrastructure projects. As a project manager, Jesse has balanced budgets, made payroll and hired hundreds of people.

From 2000-2004, Jesse served in the United States Marine Corps. In 2003, he was deployed to Iraq, where he led a squad of infantry Marines in combat. Jesse was honorably discharged as a Sergeant. He was awarded a good conduct medal, and his unit was awarded the Presidential Unit Citation.

Jesse made the decision to run for Congress the day President Obama signed the wasteful, $787 billion stimulus package. He will fight for solutions that work in order to create jobs and get the economy moving again. Jesse’s military leadership and business experience are exactly what we need in a Representative to Congress.

Bloggers: Please help this great candidate with some nation-wide TBF publicity!

Candidate you may have Missed: California's 47th Congressional District Candidate, Van Tran

by the Left Coast Rebel

Although introduced by Matthew Newman to RightKlik readers, earlier this month, I felt the need to re-introduce Assemblyman Van Tran due to recent events in the campaign.

Van Tran (pictured left) faces six term Democratic Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez. Loretta Sanchez has come under fire recently for telling Spanish-only Univision that "The Vietnamese and the Republicans are trying to take away this seat from us." Seemingly Loretta Sanchez sought the cover of the Spanish-only network Univision, assuming that such a disgusting, vitriolic statement would go unnoticed outside of the Spanish-only station.

She couldn't have been any more wrong. A new introduction to Orange County Republican Van Tran is due, this from the Orange County Register:

Born in Saigon, South Vietnam, in 1964, Mr. Tran and his family were evacuated by U.S. forces shortly before the fall of South Vietnam in 1975. His childhood experience with oppressive regimes, he said, made him a conservative, and he is running for Congress to protect those values. "Having been a product of the Vietnam government, where the regime was dictatorial and oppressive, I understand the need for less government regulation," he said. "Encroachment of government on virtually every aspect of American life has inspired me to run for Congress."
Mr. Tran said the role of government is to empower the American people, to empower the family, to empower small businesses. The 47th is a very blue-collar district, so the biggest issues for voters are jobs and the economy. Mr. Tran said he would address those issues by reducing restrictions on small business and cutting taxes. "As a state assemblyman I have worked to make it easier for small businesses to hire, gotten rid of regulations and fee structures. ... That is what I would do at the federal level."

He opposes the original federal stimulus package – the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act – because he said it is full of pork and imposed more debt and other burdens on the economy than opportunity for job creators. Policies like the stimulus shift the debt to future generations and by supporting them we are "mortgaging the future of our country." He said, "We can't throw money at a recession to fix it."
Mr. Tran said the 47th District is a perfect example of the failings of government stimulus spending because jobs promised for the district have not materialized. Mr. Tran similarly opposes the government bailouts and the Obamacare health care reform program.

What's not to like? Think about it. What better appreciation can one have for freedom and free markets than to have experienced the precise opposite. If only more Americans had the same perspective and formed their political philosophy correspondingly.

Van Tran certainly could be a rising star in the Republican party and we wish him the best on November 2. Even though the recent racist gaffe made by Loretta Sanchez may breathe new life into the Van Tran campaign, he still needs your help. Visit his website here. Read Matthew Newmans excellent Van Tran writeup here. Check out more coverage of the race at Left Coast Rebel.

It's Still Cool to Live in America

I went to buy my wife a gun today. After a harrowing ten minute waiting period, we walked away with the model above. A big thank you to these guys and the Second Amendment!

"The Smith & Wesson Model 60, the world's first stainless steel revolver, was a success from its introduction in 1965. Praised by both law enforcement and sportsmen, the Model 60 was a stainless steel version of the Chiefs Special®; and began the era of stainless steel handgun production. The Model 60 is the perfect choice for those seeking a small frame, all-steel revolver with greater recoil control and proven performance."

We Can See November

If you can't see November from your house, you probably have your eyes closed. The red tsunami is coming, ready or not. For optimal results, get moving ASAP.

What's the best way to get involved? Here are some simple but powerful suggestions from someone who occasionally stumbles on some very good ideas:

• Pledge to Vote in November for constitutional conservatives.
• Recruit 10 people to vote for the first time in this election.
• Make 10 phone calls to recruit conservative voters.
• Knock on 10 doors and explain the need to vote for conservative job creators.
• Donate $10 to support the effort to elect conservatives (Hey, this sounds very familiar!)

Here's a cool video explaining the power of 10:

To win in November and beyond, we must not forget to utilize the persuasion of the carrot and the stick.

What's the most enticing carrot? Money! Don't leave it to the special interest groups to fund all the campaigns. If we don't vote with our dollars, we shouldn't be surprised when the politicians don't listen to us after the election. "Those who pay the piper call the tune" ― the political world is no exception to that truism.

As election day approaches, get a strategy and get organized! Need help with strategy? Read, watch and learn.

Who needs our help as we come to the final stretch? Don't miss these lists:

• The Top 50 Races YOU Can Help to Win
• Twenty Candidates Who Need Help
• 40Seats.com

Getting back to the stick, here are some of the people who need to be beaten (metaphorically speaking, of course)... Follow the links for information about why we need to beat them:

Z - T

Matthew Zeller, John Yarmuth, Ron Wyden, David Wu, Charlie Wilson, Tom White, Tim Walz, Trent Van Haaften, Manan Trivedi, Dina Titus, Harry Teague

S

Betty Sutton, John Spratt, Zack Space, Ike Skelton, Carol Shea-Porter, Joe Sestak, Kurt Schrader, Heath Schuler, Mark Schauer, John Salazar, Ravi Sangisetty, Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, Loretta Sanchez

P - R

Mike Ross, Ciro Rodriguez, Cedric Richmond, Harry Reid, Steve Raby, Stephen Pougnet, Earl Pomeroy, Chellie Pingree, Gary Peters, Tom Perriello, Ed Perlmutter

N - O

Bill Owens, Mike Oliviero, Glenn Nye

Me - Mu

Patty Murray, Scott Murphy, Patrick Murphy, Christopher Murphy, Lisa Murkowski, Stephene Ann Moore, Harry Mitchell, Walter Minnick, Pat Miles, Kendrick Meek

Ma - Mc

Jerry McNerney, Mike McMahon, Mike McIntyre, Gary McDowell, Carolyn McCarthy, Scott McAdams, Jim Matheson, Jim Marshall, Betsy Markey, Joe Manchin, Dan Maffei

L

Dave Loebsack, Bryan Lentz, Julie Lassa, Rick Larsen

K

Ann Kuster, Frank Kratovil, Suzanne Kosmas, Ron Klein, Larry Kissell, Ann Kirkpatrick, Ron Kind, Mary Jo Kilroy, Paul Kanjorski, Steve Kagen

H

Jon Hulburd, Rush Holt, Tim Holden, Paul Hodes, Jim Himes, Baron Hill, Roy Herron, Martin Heinrich, Denny Heck, Phil Hare, Colleen Hanabusa, Debbie Halvorson, John Hall

G - F

Alan Grayson, Kirsten Gillibrand, Gabrielle Giffords, Alexi Giannoulias, Joe Garcia, Bill Foster, Lee Fisher, Russ Feingold

E - D

Bob Etheridge, Lori Edwards, Chet Edwards, Steve Driehaus, Joe Donnelly, Robert Dold, Suzan Delbene, Lincoln Davis, Kathy Dahlkemper

C

Mark Critz, Charlie Crist, Chris Coons, Jack Conway, Gerry Connolly, Tarryl Clark, Travis Childers, Ben Chandler, David Cicilline, Brett Carter, John Carney, Chris Carney, Russ Carnahan, Robin Carnahan, Dennis Cardoza, John Callahan

B

Paula Brooks, Bobby Bright, Bruce Braley, Barbara Boxer, Allen Boyd, Rick Boucher, Leonard Boswell, Richard Blumenthal, Sanford Bishop, Jr., Ami Bera, Michael Bennet, Melissa Bean, John Barrow

A

Michael Arcuri, Jason Altmire, John Adler

Please share the information in this post!