Friday, October 01, 2010

Rahm Emanuel Heads To Chicago – Progressives Flip As Rouse Named Staff Replacement

Progressives find more of the same, Rouse and Rahm, with Axelrod seated (Progressive hero)

Rahm Emanuelis due to leave the White House Today as Obama’s Chief of Staff, Pete Rouse has been named interim replacement. Emanuel will seek the office of Mayor of Chicago, a position left open with the current Mayor Daley’s retirement. Apparently, Emanuel’s style of management, which most observers would consider nothing short of brilliant, (considering he masterminded the Democrat resurgence in 2006, pandering to the press, while pushing what came to be known as “Blue Dog” (conservative) Democrats through to victory in normally Republican strongholds to take the majority back from Republicans in both chambers of the Congress.

Pete Rouse, a long-time mentor of President Obama, will be named interim Chief of Staff. Rouse, who served as Tom Daschle’s aid (Daschle, former Senate Majority Leader who lost his seat to Republican Jon Thune in in 2004) prior to moving onto Illinois to work for then Senator Obama. Rouse has a long history with the Democrats, when he began his political career in 1973 in the Congress as an aid, where he was known behind the scenes as the 101st Senator.

Meanwhile, over at the Daily Kos (Progressive hotbed blog), the rank and file are no happier with Rouse than they were with Rahm Emanuel. First, Emanuel has done nothing but irritate the Progressives intent on placing their personal brand of Socialism on the Democrat Party, going so far as to called Progressives about to take out attack ads on Democrats trying to save their jobs over Health Care Reform, “f-ing retarded”. Now, the problem with Rouse is that being excoriated by comments over at the Kos, complete with photos of Sergeant Shultz of the old Television Show, Hogan’s Heroes.

Some commenters are so concerned that they are hoping for the return of Emanuel should he not be successful in his run for Mayor of Chicago. However, as Rahm Emmanuel heads towards a position for which is most aptly suited, and it appears the mid-term elections, despite the best efforts of the Democrats and the blame game, will be less than stellar for the Democrats, there has to be someone at the White House to help and, at least appear to regroup.

To get the media take and profile on Pete Rouse, check out the piece on the Washington Post Blog, by Ezra Klein. who opines that there will be little change to the administration with the Rouse in the house.

Thursday, September 30, 2010

MA 2010 Election Update – Roll Call of Dems who Voted to Stay in Session to avoid Tax Increase in 2011 – Not One Mass. Rep. on the List!

The House voted to adjourn yesterday and put aside voting on legislation that would have prevented a tax increase come January, 2011. Those Democrats voting to stay in Session, along with all Republicans are shown below. Who’s missing? Every single Democrat Congressional Representative from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts – who voted with House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi (who cast the vote that put the House on mini-vacation) to come home and campaign. One more reason why anti-incumbent sentiment is running high in Massachusetts are stunts like this.

Putting one’s “career” over the interests of the tax payers is a problem; therefore, when the opportunity arises, in every district in the Commonwealth, the question should be poised:
“Why, Congressmen, (or woman) did you vote to come home and campaign, instead of saving me from paying more taxes? Followed by: “and why should you keep your job?”

Every single member of the House of Representatives (your congressional representative) and Senator knew that allowing the Bush Tax cuts to expire would mean your income would decrease, yet the people we hired decided their income was more important – they needed to get back to their districts to campaign. Was it each and every single Congressional Representative or Senator – hardly. In fact, the House of Representatives passed the motion to adjourn and not vote on the Bush Tax Cuts by one vote – the tie breaker - Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi.

That means that thirty nine Democrats joined all Congressional Republicans in voting to stay in session and vote on your income. Those Democrats who joined all Republicans and voted no are:

AL Bright
AZ Giffords
AZ Kirkpatrick
AZ Mitchell
CA McNerney
CO Markey
GA Marshall
ID Minnick
IL Bean
IL Foster
IN Donnelly
IN Ellsworth
LA MeLancon
MD Kratovil
ME Michaud
MI Peters
MI Schauer
MS Childers
MS Taylor
NC McIntyre
NC Shuler
NH Arcuri
NJ Adler
NM Heinrich
NV Titus
NY Bishop
NY McMahon
OH Driehaus
OH Kilroy
OH Space
PA Altmire
PA Carney
PA Murphy
PA Perriello
PA Sestak
SD Sandlin
TX Edwards
VA Connolly
VA Nye

If your Democrat Congressman or Congresswoman is not on the above list, they are responsible for increasing your income. Nothing more, nothing less.

Tax Hike! Reduction In Income Coming to Your Paycheck in January - Courtesy of Nancy Pelosi – Roll Call of Dem Voting No

Every single person working in the United States, regardless of income level, will be bringing home less in their paychecks this January as Federal Taxes increase this January. Both the House and the Senate, by voice vote, passed a motion to take a break in order to return to their home districts and states to campaign for re-election – it is what was not taken up for a vote in either chamber of the Congress that will impact every single taxpayer – the Bush Tax Cuts. Cutting through the rhetoric for a moment, the Bush Tax cuts known primarily as a rallying cry for the Democrats to insure that the “wealthy” fork over more of their income, actually was an across the board tax cut – meaning people making minimum wage received an increase in their income when the Bush Tax Cuts were implemented. Therefore, letting these tax cuts expire, is a reverse tax increase.

How much will your income be reduced depends upon several factors; married couples with children will feel the impact more than someone who is single with no children, however all income will be reduced by at least 5%. To find out how much your taxes will increase, The Tax Foundation has a calculator at that will give you a clear picture of the immediate impact through payroll deductions. Also included in the Bush Tax Cuts were a reduction in the marriage penalty and a increase in the child tax credit – those will no longer be available. It may seem like a pittance, at first, that $5, $10, or $50 missing from a weekly check, but consider that in this economy, it means struggling just a bit harder to make ends meet. Also, those who look forward to a nice refund from the I.R.S. at tax time, may find no refund at all, once those standard child and marriage deductions are no longer available. In fact, some middle class families may find themselves writing checks to the Federal Government.

Someone has to foot the bill, and that someone is you – regardless of how much you earn. Every single member of the House of Representatives (your congressional representative) and Senator knew that allowing the Bush Tax cuts to expire would mean your income would decrease, yet the people we hired decided their income was more important – they needed to get back to their districts to campaign. Was it each and every single Congressional Representative or Senator – hardly. In fact, the House of Representatives passed the motion to adjourn and not vote on the Bush Tax Cuts by one vote – the tie breaker - Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi.

That means that thirty nine Democrats joined all Congressional Republicans in voting to stay in session and vote on your income. Those Democrats who joined all Republicans and voted no are:

AL- Bright
AZ- Giffords
AZ- Kirkpatrick
AZ- Mitchell
CA- McNerney
CO- Markey
GA- Marshall
ID- Minnick
IL- Bean
IL- Foster
IN- Donnelly
IN- Ellsworth
LA- MeLancon
MD- Kratovil
ME- Michaud
MI- Peters
MI- Schauer
MS- Childers
MS- Taylor
NC- McIntyre
NC- Shuler
NH- Arcuri
NJ- Adler
NM- Heinrich
NV- Titus
NY- Bishop
NY- McMahon
OH- Driehaus
OH- Kilroy
OH- Space
PA- Altmire
PA- Carney
PA- Murphy
PA- Perriello
PA- Sestak
SD- Sandlin
TX- Edwards
VA- Connolly
VA- Nye

If your Democrat Congressman or Congresswoman is not on the above list, they are responsible for increasing your income.
The plan, to save one’s political future and hide, may have miscalculated the fact that voters would eventually find out that they were directly responsible for one of the largest tax hikes and job killers in U.S. History. On jobs and a government check, it does not take a rocket scientist to understand that Corporations and Small Businesses who are left standing and are necessary to insure that those who collect government checks, whether through entitlement programs or payroll are directly related. Corporations have been fleeing the United States (or states and Commonwealths within the United States) for years to dodge increasing tax hikes, the Bush Tax Cuts ensured that these employers would stick around and hire people. When it became evident that many of the programs that passed under the Obama administration would involve a round of new taxes and regulations to these corporations, they were concerned enough to stop hiring. Google hiring freeze for the heck of it, and one will reference after reference in news articles nationwide of continued hiring freezes. When taxes go up for corporations, they have less money to spend on employees, which includes hiring new employees as well as paying out benefits to current employees. Those in the northeast, where manufacturing was a staple prior to the Civil War, watched factories and corporations flee to the “sun belt” (Southern U.S.) during tax hikes under the Carter administration – what’s left may soon be leaving for climates where there are fewer taxes and, no kidding, no labor unions with ridiculous pensions and hourly wages (see Auto Workers).

Therefore, there will be fewer jobs, and fewer corporations, meaning a significant drop in revenue to the Federal Government (and State Governments who rely on your job and the corporation that hired you) which will mean the Administration will have to try and borrow more money to cover those entitlement programs, from welfare to extended unemployment benefits. What happens when the government simply runs out of enough tax payers and cannot borrow another red cent to meet these obligations? The aforementioned scenario sounds a bit far-fetched; however, when one considers what has taken place over time, the potential exists. Surely, Nancy Pelosi and those Democrats who voted to head home to campaign were smart enough to know that the above scenario is possible.

One has to examine the motives of those who vote against deeply entrenched, long-term Congressional Representatives and Senators with a new focus after yesterday’s vote. Those that put their power and position over the livelihood of the lowest of their constituents, are not preferable to the unknown Republican, Tea Party, Green Party or Independent running against an incumbent who has, in many cases, been in office for decades.
Side Note: Nancy Pelosi, who is up for reelection herself, is facing one John Dennis, those living in the San Francisco 8th district may want to consider an alternative to Ms. Pelosi.

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Obama Mid-Term Strategy – Blame Your Own Party and Go Back to the Campus Campaign Mode – But -Will The Youth Vote?

Obama in his "comfort zone" rally at University of WI - image Fox

It’s Campaign Mode for the DNC and the Head of the Party, Barack Obama, while Democrats worry over dismal poll results in the final weeks prior to the Mid-Terms. The strategy appears, on the surface, to be two-pronged – first the blame game. After blaming former President George Bush, the Democrats go-to “villain”, wore thin with independents, the President has now taken to blaming members of his own party. In a recent Rolling Stone interview(AP news source), the president called Democrats out for being “inexcusable” and “irresponsible” should they not get out and vote for Democrat ticket (or at all) this November.

Not taking any chances, the President headed to Madison, WI for a stop at the University of Wisconsin. The crowd estimates were high, for a change – attendance has been estimated at approximately 26,000 (both inside and outside the campus event). However, the question remains, will one or twenty large university events, translate into a renewed energy at the polls? It remains to be seen if those students taking part in a political rally complete with music and a break from class, will get to the polls in numbers large enough to make a difference to embattled Democrats trying to hold onto a majority in both the Congress and the Senate.

Interviews conducted by the local daily, The State Journal, indicate otherwise. Asking students if the rally would translate into votes, garnered the following response from one student:

“Even Lawless admitted she would likely not vote. “It’s too much work with the absentee ballot,” she said.”

Although the same student stood in line for hours in order to see the President, it was the opportunity to be at a big event, one which included a sitting President. Therefore, it is difficult to assess how many of the 26,000 in attendance at a University will actually vote. The rally at Madison was broadcast to other Universities: Over at NYU a crowd of 40, “members of the NYU College Democrats and Organizing for America...watched” Obama. Forty gathered at NYU, including members of the President’s campaign organization seems hardly sufficient to save the day for the Democrats.

The “rock star” persona of Barack Obama may have drawn crowds that appeared to be “Woodstock revisited” in 2008, (including left-over 1960’s radicals), however, that was then, two years have passed and there other things on the minds of America’s youth, such as student loan debt and employment. Although it looks good on paper, and the evening news, the rally at Madison is hardly indicative of the national outlook and one considers the anti-incumbency mood of the general electorate – it’s palpable and it transcends political party lines. Additionally, although Obama’s ability to bring out the youth vote was huge in the past, 2010 attendance may not be as genuine as it appears. For example a recent even held at a campus in Ohio required that staffers insure seats were filled for the event by “recruiting” on-campussee: Recent campus visit in Ohio here)

Therefore, it will depend on who has the best “marketing” when it comes to the mid-term elections, and at the moment it appears that the voting public could care less – the focus being on ousting the incumbent and/or apathy. One has to imagine that, regardless of whether on is a Democrat, Republican, Tea Party, Libertarian, or Green Party, the constant drumbeat of the two-party partisan “warfare” has worn thin and the general populace is just “tired” of the rhetoric and the slogans. Therefore, what will determine the outcome of the mid-terms is not about political party per se, it is a referendum on what affects the individual – employment, inflation, fear and apathy. Youth is ever hopeful, but hope does not necessarily translate into votes. Anger and fear, however, are motivators that will move mountains. It will, even with a “youth vote” and perceived enthusiasm broadcast to living rooms across the nation, it will be those who are feeling the impact personally, (regardless of age) that determine the shape of the Congress and Senate for the next two years – as well as Obama’s future prospects for 2012.

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

2010 Update – Richard Neal (D-MA) Announces Re-election Bid – Opens 2nd Campaign Office - Internal Polls May be Reason for Renewed Efforts by Neal.

Richard Neal (D-MA) the Congressional Representative form the Bay State’s Hampden 2nd District is taking nothing for granted in this year’s mid-term election. Neal, who has held the Hampden Second district seat since 1989, is seeking another term going forward. Neal hopes to be appointed to the Chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, of course, that is if the Democrats maintain the majority.
The Campaign Launch was held at a Chicopee restaurant where in the Western part of the district : where Neal spoke for 10 minutes. (Springfield Republican) Neal wanted the voters in the Western Part of the District to know he was taking this election seriously. Apparently, he feels that anti-incumbency is “rhetoric” which can lead to the election of individuals, like Scott Brown, “who must be able to deliver what they promise.” Apparently, the Congressman is not aware of the Junior Senators high approval ratings amongst his constituents. (Which is a tad higher than Sen. John Kerry’s see Washington Examiner). So much for “rhetoric” and “results”.

Meanwhile, over in the Eastern Part of the District, Neal opened a campaign office in Milford, MA and the opening was greeted by Wesley supporters who held a rally across the street. When told that there were 70 Wesley supporters outside in the pouring rain, rallying for their candidate, the incumbent Congressman quipped:

"If my supporters did that I'd be upset. I'd be furious," he said last night. "There are some elementary courtesies we extend."

Apparently, that darn anti-incumbent rhetoric, (or the normal political process that one is supposed to experience during a campaign) is getting under Neal’s skin. The campaign office, which is located a stone’s throw from Neal’s Challenger, Tom Wesley’s home, prompted Mr. Wesley to walk over to the office when it first opened to say hello and introduce himself – Mr. Neal was not present at the time (not being the grand opening) so a few staffers were given a pleasant greeting and welcome to the Eastern part of the district by Mr. Wesley. (Think Officer and a Gentleman).

Speaking of staff – (an anonymous source working within the campaign) it is understood that internal polls may not be what the Congressman would hope, apparently calls to the district (paid polling) find that a large majority of voters find the Congressman who hates the type of “rhetoric” that leads to politicians’ such as Scott Brown, might just prefer a Tom Wesley. (Which, conversely, Wesley must have internals and that may be the reason his supporters (and staff) are so exuberant.)

Neal is in real trouble in the Hampden 2nd. It will be up to the incumbent to assure the voters, without the usual “save social security” rhetoric which is on a mailer every two years, why he deserves to be reelected. There are key areas that voters now do not feel are a priority and one of those is seniority in the Congress or Senate, nor are positions of power in either body. What they are interested in is how the Representative voted on the Health Care Reform Act (Neal-Yes), as well as how well the Representative plays with the other “side”. (Neal votes reliably with the Democrats – see roll call votes Library of Congress). The main reason that Scott Brown was swept into office by voters who crossed party lines, was because he represents all the voters – and that is reflected in how he approaches legislation – crossing the aisle when he feels that it best represents his constituents. Tom Wesley appears to be as reasonable as Brown – thus the angst over in Neal’s camp, and the avoidance of mentioning candidate Tom Wesley by Neal (see the Mass Live article on launch of re-election camping).

The Hampden 2nd District is definitely in play, adding to the angst spreading across Massachusetts districts, (See Globe article where incumbents threaten to quite if the republican’s achieve the majority.)
It remains to be seen if Congressman Neal’s renewed committeemen to campaigning for the District will be too little, too late.

Tom Wesley for Congress:

Richard Neal for Congress (since 1989!) Richard

Monday, September 27, 2010

With Ever Dropping Approval Ratings, President Obama Looks to Rally Support – at Universities – Students Recruited to Fill Seats

Bill Clinton on the Stump for the President - drawing crowds of 3,000 to defend Incumbants image huffington post

From Real Clear Politics :the Presidents approval rating, once again, hit a new low. Real Clear Politics, is not a poll per se, rather a combination of all polls taken in a given period. Therefore, there are high and low approval ratings (depending upon the pollster) averaged to come up with an “overall” approval. The combined “score” is now at a 44.5% approval.

With that in mind, knowing that the 2010 midterms are at stake and shortly thereafter, he must begin to campaign for the Oval office in 2012, he is taking to the road - in an “attempt to recapture Democrat Enthusiasm”. (New York Times). His first stop is the University of Wisconsin and the Times is heralding this particular rally as having the draw Obama was used to seeing at rally’s in 2008. The word “Thousands” and used in context with the size of the crowds.

Easier said than done, a recent rally held in Ohio was so poorly attended that Obama rally organizers were desperately trying to recruit students to fill the seats. Perhaps the Obama has a better following in Wisconsin, or buses standing by to insure the seats are filled with thousands, which said, perception is half the battle.

Losing the Battle:

Even the most popular Democrat President in recent history, one Bill Clinton, who is on the stump in “blue New England” for the most endangered species: Incumbent Democrats, managed to draw a “crowd” estimated at approximately 3,000 - the event: A rally for Barney Frank (D-MA) held in Taunton in the 4th District of Massachusetts. According to New England Cable News, Bill Clinton was able to draw 3,000 attendees to a Barney Frank Rally.
The rally was “advertised” well in advance by the local press as well as the Republican Challenger, Sean Bielat, who held a counter-rally. The AP jumped in as well: ”Barney Frank Denies Clinton Visit indicates weakness”. That said Bill Clinton in Massachusetts is akin to a visit by the Pope himself. In the past, the former President was greeted by large enthusiastic crowds (with the exception of his stump for Martha Coakley in January of this year, therefore to draw 3,000 at a rally for Barney Frank is hardly a success.

The aforementioned begs the question: With the man (President Clinton) sent out to rally the troops who feel Obama is poison draw crowds of merely 3,000, will Obama’s huge crowds materialize on their own?

Note: Barney Frank is seen as the architect of the mortgage meltdown (Freddie and Fannie); however, he is also most often aligned in the minds of the electorate with Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, the later, being a bigger problem in some voter’s minds. With that in mind, can the ever popular Bill Clinton succeed when “guilt by association” is in play in all districts in New England? Also, if this is taking place in New England, known as “reliably Democrat” across the board, then how much more in states that swing decidedly down the middle?

The 2012 Democrat Candidate for President standing next to Obama? - image our vote

Bill Clinton must, at this point, understand that, although doing his best for the Democrat Party, there is little hope of recovery under the current administration. With that in mind, he must know that the public would have preferred another Democrat be president instead of the current occupant of the White House – one Hillary Clinton. A recent poll puts the former first lady in the number one slot of candidates who would come through a 2012 primary – by 62%. Not for nothing, Bill Clinton is a consummate poll watcher.

Sunday, September 26, 2010

John Kerry (D-MA) – Believes Voters are Clueless – MA (D) Congressional Incumbents Threaten to Quite if GOP wins House.

The Globe's Support for Coakley went to the bitter end: this election eve "test" goes to denial image: Michelle Malkin

The Senior Senator from Massachusetts who will be up for reelection in 2014, has once again, stuck a large foot in his mouth. Apparently, Senator Kerry, known to be somewhat on the clueless side himself, uttered this gem at the Boston Medical Center where he was "on tour":

“We have an electorate that doesn’t always pay that much attention to what’s going on so people are influenced by a simple slogan rather than the facts or the truth or what’s happening,”
(Boston Herald)

Kerry then went on to blame the, you guess it, Republicans.

The last single slogan the “people” fell for was the rehashed “Yes We Can”, first used by Deval Patrick, to put his special brand of incompetence to work in the Bay State: then exported nationally by Barack Obama, in order to do the same damage on a larger scale to the nation. That has to be where he got the impression that the general public was easily fooled. That said, an old adage applies: “Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me”. Barack Obama’s approval ratings indicate “we won’t’ get fooled again” (Borrowing from The Who).

The simple fact of which Mr. Kerry is apparently unaware, historically the electorate is engaged more than any time since the foundation of this nation (see Tea Party, rise of internet news sites, the Gallup Poll Trust in Institutions which places traditional news media outlets right above dead last Congress) and unfortunately for John Forbes Kerry, they are informed.

Senator Kerry has to drag himself out of the 1970’s and into the digital age, where news and quotes are accessible to the “general public” in a heartbeat, by internet, cable television, radio and email. Back when Senator Kerry was just thinking about a career as a U.S. Senator, information to the public was controlled by the Big 3 networks (CBS, ABC,NBC), and Walter Cronkite basically told the public his version of events. Now, the masses have access to multiple versions, including video, audio and 8 X 10 color glossies as events happen – what’s a Beltway Democrat to do?

101 things one can do with simple Duct Tape.

#1: Insure that the Senior Senator from Massachusetts is not capable of insulting his constituents.

At times, it is embarrassing to admit one is from Massachusetts – unfortunately, that embarrassment stems from words, and deeds (while in office) of our elected officials. John Kerry heads the list, but there are others, Congressional Representatives, that are equally out of tune.

Take, for example, a Boston Globe article dated September 26th. This article warns the electorate that if the Republican’s take control of the House, then the Massachusetts Congressional Delegation (all Democrats) may quit! Many of these Congressional Representatives are, according to the Boston Globe’s standards, extremely important:

“Representative John Olver, Democrat of Amherst, is part of an elite club of members known in the House as “cardinals,’’ because he holds a subcommittee chairmanship on the Appropriations Committee.”

“Representative Richard Neal, Democrat of Springfield, has been angling to become the next chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, one of the most powerful positions in Washington.”

And this “gem” from the 3rd Districts own Jim McGovern:

I’ll have to up my medication,’’ quipped Representative James McGovern, Democrat of Worcester, who is second in seniority on the Rules Committee. “Obviously it’s better to be in charge than not. I don’t even want to speculate what it would be like to lose the House.

(Above source Boston Globe)

Therefore, should the Republicans be victorious and take control of the House, the Democrats from Massachusetts would either loose their lofty positions and or quit outright. The thoughts of say Barney Frank and Richie Neal losing Chairs of Committees that have anything at all to do with our nations finances is not necessarily a “bad idea” to a portion of the Massachustts electorate. Although the Globe is certain that all of the House Seats will remain firmly in the hands of the Democrats currently viewed as unmovable (by the Globe – and Washington based media/pundits), reality may once again rear its ugly head.

Running without national or even state Republican support is nothing new to those Republican’s who dare to try and unseat the powerful, or, for that matter those who are trying to rest a seat that was thought to belong to a certain Democrat family. Massachusetts Republicans running against deeply entrenched Democrats have to rely on those “clueless” voters that Senator Kerry speaks highly of, and the Globe dismisses out of hand.

Two races, in particular, involving one of the aforementioned (the other menioned in the Globe articles also rediculous) considering quitting if they can’t have the top jobs, are more competitive than the Globe, national media, or local district media believe: The 4th District, where Barney Frank is being challenged by one Sean Bielat, and the Hampden 2nd, where Richard Neal is being challenged by one Tom Wesley.

What has to happen in these two races is for the “interest level” to rise to a certain point (unknown) before they are given notice and funds. Ever fiscally conservative, the GOP will not throw “good money after bad”, especially in Massachusetts. Therefore, Republican’s running in Massachusetts, like Sean Beilat and Tom Wesley, must garner support both on a retail/grassroots level, and on a national scale (donations) in order to gain any traction.

There are ten Congressional incumbents, nine of which are facing opposition in the Bay State, and one fact that is not being considered, is that Scott Brown was the beneficiary of an early surge in anti-incumbency that began in Massachusetts - Nothing more, and nothing less. Is this to say that all races are competitive, no – however, there are more than a few which are – and the Globe, (with like minded media) will do their utmost to stick their heads in the sand in order to hold up their preferred candidates until the last minute. (See Boston Globe special election Coakley wins over Brown Internet “test” image)

Although no crystal ball is employed, one can with certainly state that the 2010 mid-term and the 2012 general election will be met by a better informed constituency and many of the incumbents nationwide, (even in Massachusetts), will be writing memoirs of their “careers” in the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Senate.

Amazon Picks

Massachusetts Conservative Feminist - Degrees of Moderation and Sanity Headline Animator

FEEDJIT Live Traffic Map

Contact Me:

Your Name
Your Email Address