Just when it seemed The Two-State Solution is Dead, along came John Kerry Blaming the Jews for

the Jews for the

failure of peace talks and, thus, the growth of the Islamic State; Pamela Geller wrote the vile
demagoguery coming out of the Obama administration is the stuff of the KKK or al-Qaeda [its vicious,
anti-Semitic and supremacist] and Arlene Kushner wrote it was not only daft and outrageous [it was
dead wrong and dangerous]. {At a MENSA meeting yesterday, an expert who edits the web-page of the
Middle East Forum seemed to agree with me that the American priority must be to help the Kurds.}

A friend feels libs might be reached via music {Face of the New Democracy; Won't Get
Fooled Again; and California Uber Alles [interpreted]}; he also noted efforts to re-
examine Hannah Arendt's "Banality of Evil" [WSJ Review of Eichmann Before Jerusalem
and JRB Review of Eichmann Before Jerusalem].

Regarding the MIDTERMS, predictable predictions have been made by DNC chief, Rep. Wasserman-
Schultz ['Were going to hold the Senate,' for the president isnt on the ballotcontradicting BHO] and
the RNC head, Reince Priebus *GOP will absolutely win Senateciting reproducible data]; Ted Cruz feels
the GOP will 'likely' take Senate, leaving it wide open when pressed on his future. Articles by
disinterested analysts were consistently positive to the GOP [Latest Polling Tilts Redder, Senate
Fundraising Totals Are A Bad Sign For Democrats, and Democratic Hopes Dim in Kentucky].

Evidence of desperation has emerged, in particular, in a piece in The Hill [which is
supposedly bipartisan] which [1]praises Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) and other Dems for
opposing governmental spying *defeat would leave a void in the Senate and on the
powerful Intelligence Committee, civil liberties and anti-secrecy advocates fear+, but
[2]doesnt cite the fact that the force behind such concerns is BHO [not the GOP].

Brutal honesty is buried therein: The Denver Post which endorsed
Udall in 2008 said the senator is not perceived as a leader in
Washington and threw its support behind Gardner. While the
newspaper said it would be remiss not to credit Udall for his work
against spying activities, Gardner hasn't been oblivious to this issue,
either, it claimed, noting his support of a House bill to rein in the NSA.

Evidence of its imbalance permeates the article *Critics of the governments spy
agencies are worried that Colorados hotly contested Senate race could end the public
career of one of their best allies in Congress+ and it even uses one-sided lingo *Part of
the problem for Udall is that the focus of his efforts are just not a top issue for most
Americans+ while exclusively quoting libs [Part of the difficulty with an issue like
privacy is that the harms can feel very intangible and they dont necessarily have the
same obvious direct effect as pocketbook issues, said Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of
the Brennan Center for Justices liberty and national security program.].

The real-clear-politics.com update of the 2014 senate map continues to report that this 45-45 race
includes 10 toss-up states in which the most-recent polling universally continues to reflect GOP leads
[except for Georgia, where the Libertarian votes would presumably flip to the GOP in a run-off], and one
wonders how soon some of these races will be reclassified as Lean-GOP:

AK:
Sullivan 3+
AR:
Cotton 3+
CO:
Gardner 6+
GA: Nunn 1+
IA:
Ernst 4+
KS:
Roberts 2+
KY: McConnell 8+
LA:
Cassidy 9+
NH:
Brown 1+
NC:
Tillis 1+

This may explain why the NYT-SUNDAY published a Confidential memo from Obama pollster predicting
'crushing Dem losses' if blacks not engaged in election; it also may explain why Dems put prayers in
ground game and why Streisand is Pleading for $ ['We're Running Out of Time and Money']. Amazingly,
the customary weapons harbored by Dems arent working *Obama's standing with women hurts
Senate Dems and 'Clinton Democrats' [Both Bill and Hillary Clinton] are falling flat in South].

Other events reflect issues-trends that have been captured in prior Blast e-mails: the
SCOTUS will allow Texas to enforce its new voter ID law, Homelessness Exploded
Under Obama, and Cardinal Timothy Dolan said the Pope aims to be more accepting
and, thus, there will likely be changes in how the church views same-sex couples and
marriage [again justifying efforts to rev-up the Log Cabin Republicans in PA]. Finally,
again illustrating why gun control affects law-abiding people while doing little to
inconvenience law-breakers is the revelation that a stolen gun was used in the botched
robbery of PA lawmakers outside Capitol; to a counter-argument *There was absolutely
no gun control at play, for leaving a gun in a car was certainly not a secure way to store
a weapon+, the obvious dynamic was ignored *Illegal gun by perps vs. legal gun by
good-guysas usual+.

If Ebola was to be the October Surprise, it was made-to-order to help the GOP, for it dramatizes the
dire consequences when BHO prioritizes ideology over reality; for example, a lib [NYTS JONATHAN
MARTIN] concluded that the EBOLA RESPONSE constitutes ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF OBAMA NOT
RUNNING COMPETENT GOVT. The man is incorrigible; just after the NYT reported that a 'Seething'
Obama Has Been Let Down by CDC, Obama Golfed For 4 Hours, 40 Minutes On Saturday, and Then Held
Nighttime Ebola MeetingWhich New Ebola Czar Skipped [as he had the one on Friday]. As Dallas judge
Clay Jenkins announced the Duncan family quarantine will be lifted by days end, Nurses union head
confessed nurses overwhelmingly said we werent ready for Ebola.

The issue has become politicized when one notes what is said by the GOP. Cruz said the
'Biggest mistake' in the response to the Ebola public health crisis was letting flights
continue, because the administration was focused on politics; CRUZ also said DOCTORS
OPPOSING TRAVEL BAN 'WORKING FOR OBAMA.' COULTER said KLAIN was PART OF
DEM EFFORT TO EXCLUDE MILITARY BALLOTS IN 2000 ELECTION.
Rep. Tim Murphy said Ebola misinformation could lead to panic and Sen. Roy Blunt said
Ebola fears are based on a long list of government failures, having proven incapable of
dealing with other crises.

NIH official [Dr. Anthony Fauci] called Ron Klain an "excellent manager,"
continued to oppose a travel-ban because of the ability of officials to
track people easily, track people, and claimed budget-cuts were not to
blame for lack Ebola vaccine (disagreeing with NIH head [Dr. Francis
Collins].

The issue has become politicized when one notes what is said by the Dems. DNC head
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz accused Rand Paul of politicizing Ebola, claiming Paul, who's
a doctor, "should know better." {Even Alan Grayson Called for Ebola Travel Ban in July,
although Obama 'Inexplicably' Ignored Request.}

Bill ONeill provides this commentary [consolidated]:

The purpose of a military is to kill people and destroy things. The use of the military is to
invade a country, to occupy a country. Killing people is anti-humanitarian. A military is
therefore anti-humanitarian, which is the purpose of the military. President Obama
failed to follow the Constitutional use of the American Military.

President Kennedy organized The Peace Corps, the purpose of which is to help people,
not kill them like the military does. President Obama ordered the Peace Corps to
evacuate from Liberia in July. The two infected Americans [Kent Brantly and Nancy
Writebol] were put in intensive care in Monrovias isolation center, prior to being
evacuated to Emory University Hospital; they were treated with an experimental drug,
Zmapp, and cured.

Is there probably no reason to panic about Ebola, except when the credibility of the
information in the news is problematic. The media is used for propaganda by all
governments, so the information is always biased and therefore not always trustworthy.
Thats why people are pretty much on their own when it comes to finding out what's
going on. Thats also why the Drudge Report became immensely popular [because of its
questioning nature] and why the Internet and Social Media are great tools for freedom
[which explains why they are opposed so much by government].

Blogging on Politics-PA became heated and personal, as was revealed by an attack on my input [and, of
course, by my rejoinder]:

Robbie says:
October 18, 2014 at 1:59 pm

Sklaroff,
Stick to medicine, because you clearly know nothing about politics.
You support no winners. You backed Guzzardi for Governor against Corbett, and
Guzzardi didnt even make the ballot. On that, you thought he would make the ballot.
Wrong. It shows Guzzardi is a terrible lawyer who doesnt know how to follow simple
directions in law. It shows you know nothing about the law or politics, even though it
doesnt stop you from pretending you know everything.
You claim to be a doctor, but would you compare one patients records with another
patients records when diagnosing or trying to assess a change in medical condition? Of
course not (if you did, no medical liability insurance carrier would insure you). That is
what you are doing with polls. You cant compare Magellan Strategies poll with a
Quinnipiac poll, or a Franklin and Marshall poll, or even a YouGov/CBS/NY Times poll.
Different polling organizations have different methodologies, conduct the surveys
differently, ask different questions, and present in a different order.
By the way, Magellan Strategies has only conservative organizations (including Keystone
Report) for clients, including Americans for Prosperity (the Koch brothers 501(c)(4)).
That is hardly an unbiased poll. That is cheerleading, not objective analysis. What makes
anybody think their polls have value? Nobody thinks that except those who want to
believe the results.
You like to talk about trends, so lets look at them. The margin in the YouGov/CBS/NY
Times polls has not changed at all since its survey began in June/July. Whether or not
you believe the numbers (and no pollster, Republican, Democrat or Independent, uses
that methodology or thinks it is viable except them), there has been a margin change of
exactly 0% in 3-4 months. That trend is what we call stagnation.
The Magellan polls have moved only within the margin of error. We who are
professionals and have conducted polls before will tell you that is not a trend. That is
just movement within the margin of error. Even the most pro-Corbett poll (Magellan)
and the poll using an outlier methodology (YouGov/CBS/NY Times) show no trend
except a big loss for Corbett. Every other poll has the lead at a large double digit margin.
Nobody thinks it is winnable for Corbett (except Corbett dreaming he can keep his job).
If anybody who mattered did think that, the conservative groups and those who matter
would be pouring huge resources into the race (that happened in 2012, and the
Democrats still had a clean sweep of all 5 statewide elections they have stayed out this
year).
Please tell us one example of a candidate who has come back to win an election in a big
state or city when he was trailing in every poll by a margin this large with barely 2 weeks
left (by the way, Obama and Rendell are still more popular than Corbett in every poll).
Also, despite what the Corbett sycophants like Charlie Gerow like to say, Corbett never
trailed in any public poll for Governor 2010, Attorney General 2008, or Attorney General
2004 (his only 3 other campaigns) he was the favorite in every race, start to finish.
Sklaroff, I hope for the sake of your patients that you are much better as a doctor than
you are as a lawyer or political pundit. I dont try to practice medicine just because I
have read articles on health an medicine and spoken with many doctors. Accept your
limits and stop acting like you know a lot about the law and politics just because you
read Politics PA, a few other blogs and believe things must to be the way you believe.
On November 4, you will be wrong again when Corbett loses by double digits.
*
@ Robbie:
WOW. All I did was to leave the Internet to attend a lecture on the Middle East @ a
MENSA meeting and then go out to dinner/movie *"The Judge"+and this entry
materializes.
First of all, my prediction was merely that the race would narrow, and it has.
Second, my concerns regarding Corbetts re-electability [expressed herein during the
past two years, based primarily on Sandusky] prompted me to nudge for Cawley to
displace him [as I said to him, and to others, repeatedly].
Third, in conjunction with that viewpoint, I told everyone my view [starting in
December, including to Guzzardi] that his potential candidacy could potentially spark
discussion *@ the PA Society meeting+ along the lines Id articulated.
Fourth, when that failed to materialize, I helped him get onto the ballot and, despite
attacks by DD, I correctly vetted his signatures.
Fifth, I concurred with Commonwealth Court but suspect the Supremes may have
harbored problematic motivations when overturning, inasmuch as 1]The signatures
were validated [100+ in at least 2/4 challenged counties, although all 4 were ultimately
OK]; and 2]Guzzardi had filed his fisc-report with the DoS and it immediately was
available to the world [via the Internet], so the law was outmoded (behaviorally
superseded) because its intent had been satisfied (and he was not told to file anything
anywhere else when his filing was accepted by the DoS).
Therefore, thus-far, I have provided sufficient clarification to undermine your historical
revisionism.
*
These analytic-points are c/w those Ive articulated:
Magellan said that over the course of the three polls it has conducted
for the Keystone Report, Mr. Corbetts showing has improved
somewhat as he has begun to consolidate his GOP base. In July, he had
the support of 64 percent of GOP voters. In the latest findings, he had
73 percent among Republicans. The statement also said that the
proportion of voters with a negative view of first-time candidate Wolf
had also crept up.
The pollster said the biggest difference between its finding and those
of most other recent public surveys is that the weighting of its results
assumes a lower relative turnout among Democrats compared with
Republicans, an assumption that Magellan said better reflects the
pattern of recent non-presidential voting years in Pennsylvania.
Ive also argued that Corbett should tie Wolf to BHO *as is occurring nationally], an
effort that could yield enhanced GOP-turnout.
Of COURSE Im rooting for Corbett, if for no other reason than AG-Kane flubbed her
Sandusky-attack and hes $-responsible; Ive been a GOP-Committeeman [for two
decades-plus!] and feel BHO has methodically been destroying America.
If you choose, you may wish to react to this prognostication [plus the flipping-Senate],
based primarily upon multiple-readings and chats with political-leaders.
*
Ill close by addressing your ad-hominem attack ["would you compare one patients
records with another patients records when diagnosing or trying to assess a change in
medical condition? Of course not (if you did, no medical liability insurance carrier would
insure you)."]
You are incorrect, for the whole concept of basing clinical decision-making on the data
culled into articles published in the professional literature ["evidence-based medicine"]
underlies the optimal approach to patient-care.
*
Finally, you raised the issue of whether political comebacks can transpire, and I would
point to last years gubernatorial race in Virginia, which was thisclose @ the end, with
many pundits feeling Cuccinelli would have won had the election be held a week later.
I know youd probably react with a cudda/shudda level of scorn [particularly when it is
recalled that his national-$ had been cut+, but this illustrates why it aint over til its
over!
I am not wont to talk the talk without walking the talk and, thus, I have manifest my
angst about BHO [and his Dem-apologists+ rather than merely lamenting whats aired on
cable-news.
Would you care to defend whats happening on the national/international stage, c/o
this Alinskyite?
*
Inasmuch as DD has consciously demurred rather than attempting to defend his
assertions [having subsequently blogged without returning to this prior page], perhaps
you might wish to try to shore-up his credibility [in this instance, defending AG-Holder].
The previously-detailed attack by a friend against the Tea Party Patriots was amplified and rebutted:
- "
For example, if the movement believed in a flat tax as an option, why not actively
advocate for that rather than a repeal of the federal government's ability to tax? It's all
grandstanding and neither helpful nor plausible. If you believe in the "rule of law," why
stand up only for the 2
nd
Amendment but not an amendment that deals with the right to
tax? And where does it say that the states should actively regulate the insurance
industry and what those regulations should be? You are superimposing your own
views. This platform lacks specificity and, frankly, that makes it extreme and frightening.
Rather than providing real solutions, all it asserts is the intent to spend less money.
*I replied+ Repealing the graduated income tax would necessitate
imposition of a substitute, such as a flat or a fair tax. Also, because
the Constitution allows for an amendment process, one can
simultaneously advocate for compliance with existing law and for
amendment thereof.
Here is another example of discriminatory policies promulgated by the insurance
industry when it is not tightly regulated. I know someone who has had to carry a private
disability policy since the '90s which costs more than 225/month because that industry
g / -benefits have been used. Thus, there
must be a requirement to accept people with such pre-existing conditions.
*I replied+ Other resources illustrate how the TEA Party Movement has
articulated a set of proposals that could supplant ObamaCare]; also,
would you now have the federal government assume control over the
Disability Insurance industry?
A friend reacted to the following assertion: Just as libs paint a picture of the outcome
of the programs it supports which may be overly optimistic, the TEA party fails to really
discuss what a world without an income tax looks like. The money to fix problems (e.g.,
highway repairs) must come from somewhere. If it's not federal income taxes, it will be
state or sales taxes. Be honest. Spending cuts will take a very long time to implement.
Money must come in from somewhere. Reforming the tax code would at least let things
happen gradually. Pushing for a repeal without a viable alternative will not.
Income taxes to the Federal Government are not the only source of
money for government.
Government spends too much to do too much to us and for us.
Eliminating the Income tax by repealing the Amendment which itself
violates the per-capitation restriction in the Constitution is an attempt
to control government over-spending.
There are numerous ideas to pay to build and repair roads, schools,
government buildings, forts, magazines and dockyards without an
income tax.
The snide comment to be honest is childish. Tell her to Grow up.
Spending cuts can be immediate. The rapacious PA Public Pension
Payments can be cancelled by rescinding the fraudulent contract. (Fraud
invalidates a contract.) Alternately, negotiate a new contract. Forcing
taxpayers to pay too much money to government workers is a freedom
violation on its face. Government contracts are too often about the use
of force; the avoidance of choice and are only slightly different forms of
holdup and theft by force, i.e., armed robbery.
A viable alternative to overspending is an immediate stop to the
excessive spending.
Liberals are some of the most stubborn and intolerant of people, who
for many inexplicable reasons adore Marx, Lenin and John Dewey
without realizing Communism is a dog whistle for thugs and dictators
like Stalin, Mao and Fidel.