Obama's $1.5 Trillion Election Ploy

Check the editorial at IBD.

Obama's hoping to make the Republicans look obstructionist. And Professor Caroline Heldman's down with that. Indeed, she's even sold on the (voodoo) economics of it all, saying she's convinced the administration's jobs act will --- wait for it! --- actually create 1.9 million jobs.

Right.

SoCal Grocery Stores Reach Deal with United Food and Commercial Workers

At LAT, "Ralphs, Vons, Albertsons, union reach labor deal, avert strike."

Apparently, both sides realized a strike would be devastating, as this earlier LAT report indicated, "In the event of a walkout, the chains' competition would be the big winners":

Today, Ralphs, Vons and Albertsons have fewer stores in Southern California, and fewer employees. Albertsons has closed 67 locations since the 2003-04 strike and worker lockout. Ralphs has closed 48 stores, and Vons and Pavilions are down 47.

The competition is filling the gap. Unified Grocers, which represents at least 526 stores owned by independent chains, controls 12.1% of the grocery market in Southern California and Las Vegas, according to research by the Shelby Report, a grocery industry publication.

Trader Joe's, with 106 stores, has 5.4% of the market. Smart & Final, Tesco's Fresh & Easy and Whole Foods combined control another 5.4%, according to the report.

Although these companies all target different consumers, they have one thing in common: They are, for the most part, non-union shops. And like the airline and auto industries, the three big unionized retailers all have legacy health, pension and payroll costs that put them at an economic disadvantage.

Smaller chains can also tailor individual stores to the tastes of the neighborhood.

For independent grocer Jax Markets in Anaheim, that means packaging meat in smaller containers and wooing customers with personalized service. The four-store chain caters to predominantly Latino shoppers. A number of its customers don't have cars, so the grocer offers a free shuttle service for anyone who lives within a five-mile radius of a store and is willing to spend a minimum of $30 in their trip to the grocery store.

"When the gas prices were going up, I wondered, 'Is it really worth it?' But it is," said W. Bill MacAloney, chief executive of Jax Markets. "People are shopping around, and that gives us an opportunity. So we need to do what we can to help our customers."

Serving ethnic shoppers can go beyond carrying brands they like. A number of economic factors persuaded Vons to close one of its locations in a working-class Latino neighborhood of Long Beach. Superior Grocers snapped up the outlet in 2003, before the strike, and transformed it into a mid-size store with bargain-priced produce and fast-moving register lines.

On a recent Monday afternoon, a mostly Latino crowd jammed the produce section, plucking up bags of mangoes the size of softballs for 99 cents each. Customers reached for fresh tortillas made in the store, freshly baked French rolls and loaves of Mexican sweet bread. Flat-panel TVs played Spanish-language news clips. On the overhead speakers, daily specials rang out in English and Spanish.

Four miles to the southeast, in the upscale Belmont Shore neighborhood, Vons operates one of its smaller specialty stores, known as the Market by Vons. Sparkling clean and quiet as a library, the store features a bounty of wine and a limited produce selection. Mangoes there cost $1 more than at Superior Grocers and were half the size.

"I love this Vons, but I don't shop here all the time," said Patty Barnett, 38, an artist who lives in downtown Long Beach. "I shop where there are sales."

Day of Rage on Wall Street Fizzles

UPDATE: Zombie reports: "Day of FAIL: Nationwide anti-capitalist revolution flops."

*****

According to one source, only about 300 people showed up.

But see MyFoxNY, "'Day Of Rage' Protest On Wall Street."

And there's a big write-up at New York Times, "Wall Street Protest Begins, With Demonstrators Blocked," and Daily Mail, "'We won't put up with their greed any more': Demonstrators try to take over Wall Street in protest against corruption and budget cuts."

BONUS: At Michelle's, "“Day of Rage:” Alinskyites call for pointless mass sleepover on Wall Street."

Anti-American Graffiti: Marxist Scribblings Sighted in Suburban Orange County

Here's the writing on the restroom wall at Barnes and Nobles at the Irvine Spectrum, found this weekend. Recall last year Gallup found that a 61 percent majority of progressives had a positive image of socialism. And here's another example in real life. Remember Marx's exhortation: "Workers of the world unite." The Marxian system is built on the increasing immiseration of labor. The graffiti implies that no one can get rich without exploiting workers, that is, it's impossible to be entrepreneurial without exploitation, and hence the rejection of the foundation of the capitalist free-enterprise system. It's fundamentally anti-American, as is all progressivism, for as an ideology it rejects the exceptionalism that built the nation to world preponderance, instead invoking the state-socialist model of the stagnant European welfare states, if not the murderous totalitarianism of Stalin. Either way, the Democrat Party's 20th-century socialist model is dragging us down, which is exactly what progressives want.

RELATED: At New York Times, "Obama Tax Plan Would Ask More of Millionaires" (via Digby and Memorandum), and Washington Post, "Vast majority of tax breaks go to households."

Elisabeth Hasselbeck Rips Michael Moore on Osama Bin Laden's 'Execution'

Michael Moore's repeating the same talking points I heard him spewing almost a year ago. Only 100 al Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan? Sheesh. Medal of Honor recipient Dakota Meyer faced more than half that when he saved 36 lives in 2009. And this week's attack on the NATO compound was an astonishingly effective siege of the central command of the international protection force. Unreal. And here's Moore again saying we shouldn't have killed Bin Laden. He was just another crazy guy in the world, or something. Watch. Elisabeth Hasselbeck let's him have it:

F*** You, Douglas! — W. James Casper = COBAG = Repsac3!!

I'm just now getting to this, but W. James "Costanza" Casper = RACIST = Repsac3 had an entry for "civility week" earlier, at my blog post on "Tolerance of Islam":

Fuck you, Douglas...

You post about me, I'll almost certainly comment, like it or don't...

Cope.

(If you really wanted to be left alone, you wouldn't engage, would you?)

This is someone who has completely abandoned the slightest adherence to social norms and decency. So, for the record: I've never said no interaction. Idiot RACIST Repsac3 is BANNED from commenting at American Power. That is, NO ENGAGEMENT AT MY COMMENT THREADS, DUH!! Bird-brained W. James Casper, whose immorality is boundless, again reminds us of George Costanza. Click the image to watch. Unable to control his impulses, George eats a chocolate eclair out of the garbage pail. Jerry says to him, "Well, you my friend have crossed the line that divides man and bum. You are now a bum." And in our most recent despicable attack by RACIST Repsac3, our sick obsessive stalking asshat (and non-friend) has crossed the line that divides a restrained and respectable citizen from a profane and clinically deranged progresssive cobag: "You are now a complete cobag."

Congratulations!

Attack Watch

Or, at Michelle Malkin's, "Attaaaaack Waaaaaatch."

Plus: "Obama Campaign: AttackWatch Gains Over 100,000 Sign-Ups In Less Than 24 Hours."

Yeah, that oughta help. Not!

BONUS: "Attack Watch, new Obama campaign site to ‘fight smears,’ becomes laughing stock of the Internet."

Turning Conservative After September 11, 2001

I've mentioned it a few times in the past. It was actually the left's reaction to the Bush administration and the Iraq war that made me realize I was conservative. In fact, I realized it on the morning of March 19th, 2003, when I spoke at a campus panel on the war. I didn't feel at home. I was surrounded by bloodthirsty leftists, students and professors, who looked like they had vengeance in their eyes. I went home that night and had dinner with my family, and I remember President Bush coming on the air to announce that combat operations had begun in Iraq. My political beliefs have never been the same. I voted for Al Gore in 2000. I still thought the Democratic Party was the party of Truman and Kennedy. How naive I must have been. But my vision has become clearer every year since then.

The annual debate over the September 11th attacks always reminds me of my political transformation. By now it's safe to say that 9/11 and the Iraq war have merged in my consciousness, although it wasn't always so. It took me a couple of years to understand the partisan divide in America, that one side stands for old-time values, love of country, individualism and sacrifice. The other side stands for ideological intolerance, anti-Americanism, and appeasement toward the forces of evil in the world. It's a stark difference that took stark historical events to congeal for me personally.

I'm reminded of this by some of the comments at my post from yesterday, "Progressives Shame the Country on the 10th Anniversary of 9/11." I wrote at the conclusion there: "For many people like myself, that's why they became conservative." And my good friend Kenneth Davenport dropped by to comment, responding in particular to my conclusion:

I haven't thought about it in this way before, but I've certainly become more conservative in response to the painful nihilism that regularly comes from the left. I live in a different world than they do, and there really are no areas of common ground. That's the truth. They see America as a flawed nation which should apologize for itself at every turn and which deserved the attacks of 9/11. And I see America as the last best hope of earth, a place of unbounded fairness and generosity, forged in the belief that the individual -- and not government -- is sovereign. There is no reconciling these two different belief systems. So I don't try. Instead, I surround myself with good people who share my values and who give thanks every day that there are those who are willing to sacrifice everything for our survival as a nation.

That's so well-said, and reaffirming. And Ken's posted a photo-essay from yesterday as well, where he demonstrates his love of country and appreciation of sacrifice: "9/11 on the USS Midway."

Now remember that it was Paul Krugman who got me going yesterday, and it turns out Glenn Reynolds received a load of comments about that. See, "EVERYBODY’S ANGRY, to judge from my email, about Paul Krugman’s typo-burdened 9/11 screed":

Don’t be angry. Understand it for what it is, an admission of impotence from a sad and irrelevant little man. Things haven’t gone the way he wanted lately, his messiah has feet of clay — hell, forget the “feet” part, the clay goes at least waist-high — and it seems likely he’ll have even less reason to like the coming decade than the last, and he’ll certainly have even less influence than he’s had. Thus, he tries to piss all over the people he’s always hated and envied. No surprise there. But no importance, either. You’ll see more and worse from Krugman and his ilk as the left nationally undergoes the kind of crackup it’s already experiencing in Wisconsin. They thought Barack Obama was going to bring back the glory days of liberal hegemony in politics, but it turned out he was their Ghost Dance, their Bear Shirt, a mystically believed-in totem that lacked the power to reverse their onrushing decline, no matter what the shamans claimed.

I'm not angry, as much as continually shocked at the brazen progressive hatred. It forces me to look inward, to my values and beliefs, and to history and national purpose. But sticking with the theme here, recall the essay from Cinnamon Stillwell in 2005, "The Making of a 9/11 Republican":

I was raised in liberal Marin County, and my first name (which garners more comments than anything else) is a direct product of the hippie generation. Growing up, I bought into the prevailing liberal wisdom of my surroundings because I didn't know anything else. I wrote off all Republicans as ignorant, intolerant yahoos. It didn't matter that I knew none personally; it was simply de rigueur to look down on such people. The fact that I was being a bigot never occurred to me, because I was certain that I inhabited the moral high ground.

Having been indoctrinated in the postcolonialist, self-loathing school of multiculturalism, I thought America was the root of all evil in the world. Its democratic form of government and capitalist economic system was nothing more than a machine in which citizens were forced to be cogs. I put aside the nagging question of why so many people all over the world risk their lives to come to the United States. Freedom of speech, religious freedom, women's rights, gay rights (yes, even without same-sex marriage), social and economic mobility, relative racial harmony and democracy itself were all taken for granted in my narrow, insulated world view.

So, what happened to change all that? In a nutshell, 9/11. The terrorist attacks on this country were not only an act of war but also a crime against humanity. It seemed glaringly obvious to me at the time, and it still does today. But the reaction of my former comrades on the left bespoke a different perspective. The day after the attacks, I dragged myself into work, still in a state of shock, and the first thing I heard was one of my co-workers bellowing triumphantly, "Bush got his war!" There was little sympathy for the victims of this horrific attack, only an irrational hatred for their own country.

As I spent months grieving the losses, others around me wrapped themselves in the comfortable shell of cynicism and acted as if nothing had changed. I soon began to recognize in them an inability to view America or its people as victims, born of years of indoctrination in which we were always presented as the bad guys.

Never mind that every country in the world acts in its own self-interest, forms alliances with unsavory countries -- some of which change later -- and are forced to act militarily at times. America was singled out as the sole guilty party on the globe. I, on the other hand, for the first time in my life, had come to truly appreciate my country and all that it encompassed, as well as the bravery and sacrifices of those who fight to protect it.

Thoroughly disgusted by the behavior of those on the left, I began to look elsewhere for support. To my astonishment, I found that the only voices that seemed to me to be intellectually and morally honest were on the right. Suddenly, I was listening to conservative talk-show hosts on the radio and reading conservative columnists, and they were making sense. When I actually met conservatives, I discovered that they did not at all embody the stereotypes with which I'd been inculcated as a liberal.

PROTO CREDIT: "Faith, Freedom, and Memory: Report From Ground Zero, September 11, 2010."

9/11: Radical Islamists Burn U.S. Flag in London Protest (VIDEO)

From Telegraph UK:

And from London's Daily Mail, "100 protesters burn American flag outside U.S. embassy in London during minute's silence for 9/11."

RELATED: "Progressives Shame the Country on the 10th Anniversary of 9/11."

Progressives Shame the Country on the 10th Anniversary of 9/11

I long ago lost any respect I had for Paul Krugman. I read Krugman's scholarly work back in the mid-1990s. He was a reasonable voice for American economic competitiveness, and his work was at the leading edge of strategic trade theory. But upon becoming a New York Times columnist he found his calling as a celebrity mouthpiece for the most inane progressive ramblings in American politics. Beclowning himself in that role would be putting it mildly. He probably should have just taken the day off from blogging today, but he couldn't resist fouling himself, wrapping himself in progressive toxicity. Linkmaster Smith has the essay screencapped, and can't bring himself to even comment on the depravity: "I really can’t comment on this in any family-friendly way." Plus, more from Dana Pico: "And Paul Krugman truly does define The Conscience of a Liberal," and Lonely Conservative: "Paul Krugman is Deranged." And check Althouse, who slams Krugman for his cowardice at closing his post to comments.

There's a Memeorandum thread. And checking the progressive entries we see the left's shame piling up like a heap of dung.

Here's idiot progressive Blue Texan, at Firedoglake, "Krugman is Right: We Should Be Ashamed of What Happened after 9/11."

Is anyone proud, 10 years later, that we’re still losing lives in Afghanistan?

Of course, you dolt. People are proud of the sacrifice and valor that's helped to make this country safer. Shame on you.

And Susie Madrak at Suburban Guerrilla can't take a moment to even honor the dead:

I’m not watching any of this “commemorative” crap today (thank God for cable!) and I’m certainly not writing about it today.

Shame on you, Susie. The attacks of 9/11 killed indiscriminately, killing those of all creeds and colors. At least have the decency to honor the dead.

At read the comment thread at Washington Monthly, where for the rare wayward commenter, you've got steady serving of hate-filled progressive gruel:

Krugman sums up my feelings exactly.

They once again came to the surface for me while I watched GDumbya read a letter from President Lincoln during the ceremony in NYC this morning.

Although 9/11 was a tragic autrocity [sic], the real tragedy is that we allowed an incompetent, out-of-control administration lead us down a rat-hole in the Middle East and consequently lose our national soul, our treasure, countless lives, our reputation, our integrity and our influence in the world.

I often wonder how different our present circumstance would be if the Supreme Court had not appointed Bush as president in 2001.

(Recall Daniel Henninger nailed progressies on this, arguing that the left's desecration of goodness preceded 9/11, going back to the Florida recount and the GOP's victory in Bush v. Gore. See: "America's Broken Unity After 9/11.")

And then check Prairie Weather, "A growing consensus about post-9/11":

Maybe an important aspect of the great divide in America is the difference between those Americans who are able to feel shame and willing to make genuine apologies, and those who can't admit to shame and toss off self-justification as a cheap plastic substitute for remorse.

I'm confounded on the one hand and enraged on the other. What apologies are necessary here? I mean, seriously. Doesn't Prairie Weather sum up everything that conservatives have been combating here at home since the early days of the war on terror, such as the progressive war on Bush's domestic and foreign security policies? Since September 11th we've seen the left's long train of shame. Recall the radical left's rank political opportunism in opposing the Iraq war, demonically, of course, since the Democrat Party in Congress --- the party of defeat --- turned against our troops after authorizing their deployment, to excoriate the mission, and declare repeatedly that Iraq was lost and that we should turn tail in an ignominious cut-and-run. And we had years of Bush derangement syndrome, which then transmogrified into putrid Palin derangement syndrome, all combined into a program of partisan political destruction that's done nothing but weaken American security by successfully terminating programs such as wiretapping that were keeping Americans safe. A decade's shame of appeasement and partisan abomination is frothing to a head in the left's responses to the 10th anniversary of 9/11. For many people like myself, that's why they became conservative.

Negrophobia

I read but don't normally blog William Jacobson's Saturday Night Card Game. But last night's was something else: "Saturday Night Card Game (The “Negrophobia” card is played)." The "Negrophobia" card is played at Balloon Juice, "The Modern Negrophobists reaction to the President’s speech…" It's really disgusting, the cartoon and the ideas behind it in the contemporary context. But the commenters are running with it, for example:

The modern negrophobist would demand the would be rescuer bring him a large rock so he could sink more quickly.

That cartoon warms my heart. I especially like the way the artist depicted the bigot as some sort of weasel/human hybrid.

I don't even know what to say. These people are simply not my countrymen. The sentiment is analogous to the kind of anti-Semitism found in caricatured drawings of long-nosed money-grubbing Jews. In other words, it's eliminationist.

I haven't finished listening to it, but Dennis Prager, in a clip at Blazing Cat Fur, indicates that progressive ideology is so removed from the basic values of this country as to be functionally anti-American. See: "Dennis Prager's Top 10 Ways Liberalism Makes America Worse." Balloon Juice demonstrates the point 1000s of times over.

Democrats Openly Alarmed About Obama's Reelection Prospects

Well, they should be.

At NYT, "Democrats Fret Aloud Over Obama’s Re-election." (Via Memeorandum.)

Democrats are expressing growing alarm about President Obama’s re-election prospects and, in interviews, are openly acknowledging anxiety about the White House’s ability to strengthen the president’s standing over the next 14 months.

Elected officials and party leaders at all levels said their worries have intensified as the economy has displayed new signs of weakness. They said the likelihood of a highly competitive 2012 race is increasing as the Republican field, once dismissed by many Democrats as too inexperienced and conservative to pose a serious threat, has started narrowing to two leading candidates, Mitt Romney and Rick Perry, who have executive experience and messages built around job creation.

And in a campaign cycle in which Democrats had entertained hopes of reversing losses from last year’s midterm elections, some in the party fear that Mr. Obama’s troubles could reverberate down the ballot into Congressional, state and local races.

More at that top link, but clearly, the Dems are going to be crushed.

And like Bill Whittle said, it's not going to matter who the GOP nominee is. Obambi's toast.

We Didn't Overreact to 9/11

At the video, an interesting clip featuring Ann Coulter and Matt Welch.

And see Charles Krauthammer, at Washington Post, "The 9/11 ‘overreaction’? Nonsense":

9/11 was our Pearl Harbor. This time, however, the enemy had no home address. No Tokyo. Which is why today’s war could not be wrapped up in a mere four years. It was unconventional war by an unconventional enemy embedded within a worldwide religious community. Yet in a decade, we largely disarmed and defeated it, and developed the means to continue to pursue its remnants at rapidly decreasing cost. That is a historic achievement.

Our current difficulties and gloom are almost entirely economic in origin, the bitter fruit of misguided fiscal, regulatory and monetary policies that had nothing to do with 9/11. America’s current demoralization is not a result of the war on terror. On the contrary. The denigration of the war on terror is the result of our current demoralization, of retroactively reading today’s malaise into the real — and successful — history of our 9/11 response.

I love Krauthammer. Read it all.

America's Broken Unity After 9/11

ICYMI, be sure to read Daniel Henninger's, "Whatever Happened to 9/11?", from a couple of days ago. Henninger recalls where he was on the morning of the attacks, and what it was like for him. Then he begins discussing the American response to the terror, for example, with the USA Patriot Act. There's more like that, and then he writes:

Virtually every aspect of the Bush antiterror policies became a target for litigation from the ACLU, opposition in Congress and press exposures: the wiretaps, Guantanamo, the Swift program to track terrorist finances, military courts, the Bush Doctrine of pre-preemptive strikes, terrorist interrogations. Opposition to the Iraq war rose, too, but the effort to thwart the provisions of the Patriot Act was a separate front.

Policy disagreements are inevitable. But how does one account for the intense personal animosity directed toward George Bush and those who worked for him in the government? They were hated, reviled, mocked. Recall, for instance, the effort to disbar former Justice Department officials John Yoo and Jay Bybee for writing the legal opinions on aggressive interrogations. Opposition wasn't enough. The destruction of reputation became a policy goal.

This Sunday's 10th anniversary commemorations will evoke some semblance of the unity then in the face of an enemy attack on U.S. soil. But make no mistake: It's gone.

What happened?

Well, continue reading. But as noted above, political opposition wasn't enough for the left. The utter destruction of opponents is required, for according to progressive/socialist ideology, conservatives and Republicans are greater enemies to America than the terrorists. And the left's bloodlust demands for revenge and recrimination continue right into the 10th anniversary. I watched Rachel Maddow on MSNBC while working on this post. Her broadcast, "Day of Destruction, Decade of War," was one long repudiation of America's response to the terrorist attacks, from the decade-long war footing and military mobilization, to the interrogation techniques that helped generate actionable intelligence to track down and kill Osama Bin Laden. Plus, I'm reading David Cole, at New York Review, "After September 11: What We Still Don’t Know." Cole is a far-left activist professor of law at Georgetown University. He's repeatedly argued that the bigger threat to American security is the U.S. government and not the terrorists determined to decapitate it. At Cole's New York Review piece, he revives calls for war crimes prosecutions against Bush administration officials, taking President Obama to task for purportedly not standing up for constitutional values:

As President Obama entered office, he sought to make a clean break with his predecessor. But at the same time, he has insisted that we look forward, not back. His administration has refused to conduct the criminal investigation that the Convention Against Torture requires wherever there are credible allegations that a person within our jurisdiction has committed torture. His Justice Department vetoed the recommendation of its own Office of Professional Responsibility that lawyers John Yoo and Jay Bybee be referred to their bar associations for disciplinary action in view of their having failed to provide candid legal advice in drafting the “torture memos.” The administration has sought to derail efforts in Spain to investigate US responsibility for torture of Spanish citizens held at Guantánamo. And President Obama continues to oppose even a high-level commission to investigate and report on the nation’s departure from the rule of law and descent into torture, abduction, and disappearances.

Obama appears to believe that such an investigation would be divisive, and might undermine his efforts to portray himself as above partisan wrangling. But division is a fact of life in Washington these days. And being above the fray is not an unmitigated good; some things are worth fighting for. A legal and moral accounting of the wrongs we have done should be high on the list.

Cole goes on like that, and it's interesting that he picks out John Yoo for special condemnation, twice in fact, basically renewing the call that Yoo should have been disbarred for his work in the Bush administration, and by extension, tried as a war criminal.

Behold the mind of the progressive left on the eve of the 10th anniversary of the attacks. For radical progressives, it's America that's the problem, not the fanatical killers who continue to wage war against us.

The Global Left's Anti-Israel Forum

See Anne Bayefsky, at Weekly Standard, "Durban III: An Anti-Israel Forum Takes Shape" (via Memeorandum).

Gender Equality Elusive at Top?

That was the headline at yesterday's Los Angeles Times business page, although I've added the question mark.

See: "Women on Wall Street: Small group at the top gets smaller."

"While the ouster of a number of top Wall Street women cannot necessarily be tied directly to the glass ceiling or sexism per se, the numbers aren't good," said Deborah Ancona, a professor of organization studies at the MIT's Sloan School of Management. "Women fill a minority of top leadership positions in corporate America."

But RTWT.

Actually, I don't think we'll ever have exact equality in that department, and I don't know if it was God's plan to do so, in any case. As James Taranto has written:

Men and women are intrinsically unequal in ways that are ultimately beyond the power of government to remediate. That is because nature is unfair. Sexual reproduction is far more demanding, both physically and temporally, for women than for men. Men simply do not face the sort of children-or-career conundrums that vex women in an era of workplace equality.

That said, see Patricia Sellers, at Fortune, "Carol Bartz exclusive: Yahoo "f---ed me over..." (At Memeorandum.)

'It's Civility Week!'

Mandy Nagy is cracking me up!

See, "New Tone: Twitter Users Want Republicans Dead."

Yeah, that is a lot of "new tone" this week, and it's only Wednesday!

Stay classy, progs!

Tea Party Zombies Must Die

Verum Serum has the story: "New Tone Video Game: Kill Fox News “Zombies”…Who Paid for This?" Seriously. The "Koch Whore Lobbyist Zombie"? These people are beyond the pale. But check that link to watch the clip.

At Linkmaster Smith, at The Other McCain, "Raaaaacist Tea Parties: The Frankenstein Vampire Werewolf Zombie Argument."

BONUS: From Daniel Foster, at National Review, "Tea Party Zombies Must Die":

Hey kids, hear about the latest rage? It’s “Tea Party Zombies Must Die” an exciting new first-person shooter “Advergame.” Here’s how it’s described:

DON’T GET TEA-BAGGED! The Tea Party zombies are walking the streets of America. Grab your weapons and bash their rotten brains to bits! Destroy zombie Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Glenn Beck, the Koch Brothers, and many more!

Don’t believe the hype? I took the game for a whirl and managed to snag some choice screenshots...

Via Memeorandum.

Polls Find 3 of 4 Americans Saying Country's On Wrong Track

People keep talking about how dissatisfaction hasn't been this high since 2008 and the Wall Street bailout. But I'm thinking back to 1991, when President George H.W. Bush went from almost 90 percent approval on the Persian Gulf War to being defeated by Bill Clinton in 1992. At the Los Angeles Times a whopping 60 percent disapprove of President Obama's handling of the economy. There is no doubt that economic issues will be the number one priority for voters next year, so in California, a reliably blue state, those are horrible numbers for the Democrats. See: "Poll illustrates California voters' anger." Especially noteworthy about the Times' poll is that partisans on both sides are digging in their heels against compromise, with 57 percent of Democrats and 50 percent of Republicans backing a stand-firm position for their party's priorities. That's the anger factor right there. There's speculation that the summer's budget battle in Washington --- which Democrats lost --- has helped create a hardening of positions. This seems to go against suggestions that we should all just get along and work for the common good.

And today's Wall Street Journal poll is a keeper. See, "Voter Discontent Deepens Ahead of Obama Jobs Plan." (At Google as well.) Seventy-three percent say the country's headed in the wrong direction. But picking up on my discussion from yesterday on the Electoral College, this bit on Ohio is devastating for the White House:

Voters appear to be looking for a new direction. By 44% to 40%, Americans now say they are more likely to vote Republican next year than for Mr. Obama's re-election. In June, the president held the edge, 45% to 40%. The president is losing support from key groups including political independents, women and Hispanics.

In the Mahoning Valley of Northeast Ohio, a Democratic stronghold that Mr. Obama must win handily next year, the president can find all the hurdles that will impede his path: 10% unemployment, collapsing incomes, private-sector payrolls that have begun creeping back from the depths of early 2010 but which remain roughly 19,000 jobs down from a decade ago for the metropolitan area here.

The lukewarm support Mr. Obama finds here not only endangers his hopes in Ohio, one of the country's key swing states, but shows the erosion in enthusiasm for the president even among voters he should be able to reach and who he will need badly next year.

Bill Hiznay—a registered Democrat who voted for John McCain in 2008 and says he's currently undecided—says the president inherited the terrible U.S. economy, "But we're still going to blame Obama for our misfortunes." Mr. Hiznay, a 58-year-old pipe-mill worker, added: "He's in trouble, no question about it."

Among blue-collar workers nationally, the president's disapproval rating reached 56% last month. Some 49% of union members and union households disapprove of the job Mr. Obama is doing, vs. 45% who approve.

Blue collar America is turning against this administration. Not even three years after Barack Obama was elected as a man who could virtually walk on water, he's being repudiated viciously among voters from left to right. This helps explain why Democrats and union leaders are so combative. It's all slipping away. The mask of "hope and change" is falling off. The electorate's rose colored glasses are off too. I'm getting really excited for next year, no matter who wins the GOP nomination.

DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz on Fox & Friends: Won't Comment on Teamsters Leader's Violent Rhetoric

Nice Deb has the big roundup: "Video: Debbie Wasserman Schultz Also Not Interested In Condemning Violent Anti-Teaparty Rhetoric":

Not only is she out of her league as DNC Chair, she's really nasty woman.

See also at Althouse, "'We got to keep an eye on the battle that we face: The war on workers'."

I realize "let's take these sons of bitches out" can be interpreted to mean let's vote these terrible people out of office. But "take them out" is not an idiomatic expression that corresponds to "vote them out." Take them out? Maybe that's not the phrase he intended to use, but if it was unintended, it was still a gaffe. A revealing gaffe. Unless you're speaking in a positive way — referring to taking someone out on a date, for example — "take them out" is a violent command. With "sons of bitches" right there, it's unmistakably violent. Now, you can say it's only metaphorical, and all Hoffa really wants is to oust these people from office.

But it was only last January that Obama and many other Democrats were saying that violent metaphors, including a simple target on a map, were dangerous incitements for the unstable irrational folk out there.

Also, "Jimmy Hoffa's "Let’s take these sons of bitches out" speech — take 2."