That’s right… to anyone who supported these bank bailouts… be you Republicans, Democrats, the President… $1.6 billion will go toward compensating the bank execs who put us in the disaster that we are in, today.  Well, at least they are taking care of themselves!

Wow, what wonderful decisions our Congress and President have made this year.  Absurd.  Anyone who voted for ANY of these bailouts should be “recalled”.  What pitiful leadership our country has, right now.  It is disgraceful.  We are a joke in the eyes of the world for the stupidity that is driving this country into an economic sinkhole.

Apparently, the Dems are considering laying low on the auto bailout until a more favorable political environment is in place in January.  I am still in shock that this is being considered.  Why would a temporary influx of money “save” auto companies that have been grossly inefficient for so long?  This is just putting them on life support.  If they cannot survive in this environment, perhaps, they need a re-organization without unions.

Are you kidding me?

She beat out Elvis? Lennon?  How about McCartney? 

I completely disagree with this one.

Wow, last night, I watched Boogie Man:  The Lee Atwater Story.  If you get a chance to watch it, do.  Lee is definitely one of the most complex people in the history of politics.  Many think what he did for and to politics is bad.  But, the documentary is worth seeing.  Like him or hate him, this guy has done more than anyone to shape what politics has become in the last 25 years.

It did not dawn on me where Obama got it from until I heard my daughter singing in the car the other day…

Yesterday, I received an e-mail from an internet marketer, Rich Schefren.  In his e-mail, Rich attributed Obama’s win to the power of his social media marketing.  In the last week, I have heard a number of explanations of Obama’s victory.  The power of his social media organization was certainly impressive.  Rich Schefren pointed out that:

–Since the conventions, blog posts mentioning Obama outnumbered those referencing McCain by more than 3 to 1.

–Obama’s number of MySpace friends grew steadily over the past few months while McCain’s remained relatively flat. By election day, Obama had almost 4 times the number of friends McCain had

–While those MySpace figures are remarkable, the Twitter stats are even more eye-popping. Obama had nearly TWENTY FOUR times the amount of followers that McCain had.

…

And it doesn’t end there. I found similar numbers for FaceBook and YouTube usage as well, with Obama clearly outpacing McCain.

Obama’s tactic was a masterpiece–targeting the younger, more technically literate crowd (many who had never voted or even bothered to register) and hit them right where they live–on social networking landscape.

All of what Rich pointed out is very true.  Obama did an incredible job of mobilizing supporters online.  That is one great benefit for campaigns on the web.  The web gives you the opportunity to organize supporters cheaply.  And, that is critical for a campaign.  No longer do you have to pick up the phone and call 1,000 supporters.  Just Twitter it one time and have 1,000 people read that Tweet.  No longer do you have to spend thousands to find additional sources of funds.  Just blast out an e-mail and watch the money come in.

But, why was Obama able to accumulate all of these MySpace friends and McCain was not?  I have been telling people in the last few weeks that McCain NEVER could have mobilized that kind of online support for one reason.  It is all about the candidate.

In Primary Colors, one of my favorite movies, the Billy Bob Thorton character (who was supposed to be James Carville) kept discussing the importance of TB’s to a campaign, or “True Believers”.  Web support starts with a core of TBs.  That’s how the social media ball gets rolling.  After the early adopter TB’s come onboard, then, it becomes acceptable for others to get involved - because their friends are there.  In order to have those TB’s, you have to have a vision and a mission - something that the McCain campaign lacked.

No doubt, I voted for John McCain like millions of others.  But, why did we vote for him?  Was it the power of his vision or ideas?  I don’t think so.  Most of the Republicans I know were never excited about the McCain campaign.  They were terrified of Barack Obama.  But, in reality, what was the McCain campaign about?  What was the vision?  Give me 3 quick bullet points that the McCain campaign was about.  You can’t.  Because, his message was all over the place.  Actually, his message was “don’t vote for Obama”.  Plain and simple.

And, in order to succeed online, a campaign has to bring in TBs.  Building a web campaign presence is about attracting TBs.  A campaign must have a vision… a unifying, compelling vision that will attract youthful supporters who are tech savvy to get online and get involved - something that the McCain campaign lacked and, yet, something that Obama did so well.

This is utterly absurd.  Some are already working toward getting a National Obama Holiday.  Ridiculous.  This guy has done absolutely nothing for this country and they want to give him a Holiday?  Already?

Plans are being made to promote a national holiday for Barack Obama, who will become the nation’s 44th president when he takes the oath of office Jan. 20.

“Yes We Can” planning rallies will be at 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. every Tuesday at the downtown McDonald’s restaurant, 1100 Kansas Ave., until Jan. 13. The goals are to secure a national holiday in Obama’s honor, to organize celebrations around his inauguration and to celebrate the 200th birthday of President Abraham Lincoln, who was born on Feb. 12 1809.

Hey, maybe, you should wait until a week or so into his Presidency before you start this.

Well, at least they can admit it.  Deborah Howell, in the Washington Post actually admitted the biased Obama coverage.

The count was lopsided, with 1,295 horse-race stories and 594 issues stories. The Post was deficient in stories that reported more than the two candidates trading jabs; readers needed articles, going back to the primaries, comparing their positions with outside experts’ views. There were no broad stories on energy or science policy, and there were few on religion issues.

…

The op-ed page ran far more laudatory opinion pieces on Obama, 32, than on Sen. John McCain, 13. There were far more negative pieces (58) about McCain than there were about Obama (32), and Obama got the editorial board’s endorsement. The Post has several conservative columnists, but not all were gung-ho about McCain.

…

The number of Obama stories since Nov. 11 was 946, compared with McCain’s 786. Both had hard-fought primary campaigns, but Obama’s battle with Hillary Rodham Clinton was longer, and the numbers reflect that.

Check out the article.  It goes on and on with examples.  I do appreciate their honesty in admitting their lack of journalism ethics and professionalism in the covering campaigns.  Gotta’ admit.  It doesn’t surprise me.  Frankly, if they gave balanced coverage to both parties, THAT would surprise me.

I love how liberals so frequently cite Foxnews as the devil.  Yet, when studies are done, they always conclude that Fox is the closest to balanced coverage.   But, I guess it would appear that they are so skewed conservative because all other news outlets favor Democrats so heavily.

I congratulate Barack Obama on his historical campaign.  No doubt all of our prayers should be with him, as he is the trustee of the nation’s future for the next 4 years.

And, they didn’t even wait before the race was over to start their attack on the Fairness Doctrine.  This time… Chuck Schumer….

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Tuesday defended the so-called Fairness Doctrine in an interview on Fox News, saying, “I think we should all be fair and balanced, don’t you?”

Schumer’s comments echo other Democrats’ views on reviving the Fairness Doctrine, which would require radio stations to balance conservative hosts with liberal ones.

Asked if he is a supporter of telling radio stations what content they should have, Schumer used the fair and balanced line, claiming that critics of the Fairness Doctrine are being inconsistent.

“The very same people who don’t want the Fairness Doctrine want the FCC [Federal Communications Commission] to limit pornography on the air. I am for that… But you can’t say government hands off in one area to a commercial enterprise but you are allowed to intervene in another. That’s not consistent.”

In 2007, Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), a close ally of Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) told The Hill, “It’s time to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine. I have this old-fashioned attitude that when Americans hear both sides of the story, they’re in a better position to make a decision.”

Senate Rules Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) last year said, “I believe very strongly that the airwaves are public and people use these airwaves for profit. But there is a responsibility to see that both sides and not just one side of the big public questions of debate of the day are aired and are aired with some modicum of fairness.”

Awesome.  So, given that in this race studies have clearly shown that McCain’s press was overwhelmingly more negative than that shown to Obama, can we also be assured that a Liberal Democrat news media will also allow all if its coverage to be “fair” and balanced?  Hardly.  No, I am sure this is only one aspect of the war on conservatives we will see in a Democratic victory - with Dems drunk on power.