A Commentary By Joe Conason

Republished with permission of Rasmussen Reports
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_joe_conason/the_racists_return

Thursday, August 12, 2010

Among the most revealing aspects of life during the Obama presidency is the panoply of responses to a black family in the White House. What made so many of us proud of our country on Jan. 20, 2009, has increasingly provoked expressions of hatred from the far right. That is troubling, but not nearly as troubling as the behavior of conservatives who excuse, embolden or simply pretend to ignore the bigots surrounding them.

Last spring, after unruly tea party protesters on Capitol Hill were accused of spewing racial epithets at civil rights hero John Lewis, an African-American congressman from Georgia, conservatives rose up in furious denial. Where was the proof? How could anyone suggest that racial prejudice lurks behind the festering right-wing hatred of President Obama (and his family)? Anger over that episode still lingers in certain quarters, motivating the deceptively edited video attack on Shirley Sherrod and the NAACP by a website called Big Government, Inc.

Even if the alleged assault on Lewis and other black congressmen did occur, argued prominent commentators on the right, it somehow only proved that there is no racism in America worthy of concern. A writer for National Review (the conservative magazine that historically opposed civil rights legislation) confided that the whole subject made him yawn:

“That these things are even remotely newsworthy leads me to one conclusion: Racism in America is dead. We had slavery, then we had Jim Crow-and now we have the occasional public utterance of a bad word. Real racism has been reduced to de minimis levels, while charges of racism seem to increase.”

But this summer has seen several loud and ugly outbursts of very real racism — including threats of violence against the president of the United States — that go well beyond the utterance of any single word. As if suffering from a facial tic, leading figures on the right cannot seem to suppress their inner Klansman these days.

Is there any other way to explain Glenn Beck’s crazed rant comparing the Obama administration to an old movie about a society where apes and chimpanzees dominate humans? What did the Fox News host mean, exactly, when he shrieked: “It’s like the damned Planet of the Apes. Nothing makes sense!” Is there any other way to explain the grotesque new best-seller by radio host Laura Ingraham, “The Obama Diaries,” where, among other things, she depicts first lady Michelle Obama eating ribs at every meal? Why would she feel the need to describe the president as “uppity” by putting the word in the mouth of his mother-in-law? No wonder Stephen Colbert taunted Ms. Ingraham to her face for “hideous and hackneyed racial stereotyping.”

Of course, these are only two of the more egregious instances in recent weeks of social poisoning that dates back well over a year. Symptoms can be seen across the country now, even in amusement parks and church carnivals, where small children are exposed to this spiritual sickness.

At the Big Time fair held by Our Lady of Mount Carmel in Roseto, Pa., last week, a game called “Alien Attack” featured “an image of a suited black man holding a health care bill and wearing a belt buckle with a presidential seal,” at which players were encouraged to aim their popguns. Anybody who hit the cardboard figure in the head or the heart could win a prize. Irvin L. Good Jr., owner of Goodtime Amusements, who is responsible for this disgusting garbage, denied that the figure represents Mr. Obama. “We’re not interpreting it as Obama,” the inaptly named huckster told a local newspaper. “The name of the game is Alien Leader. If you’re offended, that’s fine, we duly note that.”

Meanwhile on the New Jersey shore, patrons of the Seaside Heights boardwalk could hurl baseballs at a black, jug-eared Obama figurine, winning a prize if they managed to smash it. As seen in a video posted on the Gawker website, this object closely resembles the grinning “lawn jockey” statuettes that used to festoon suburban lawns in a less decent era.

Most conservatives were late in taking responsibility for their movement’s immoral opposition to civil rights. It is time for them to step up and denounce the racism that is again disfiguring our country in their name.

Joe Conason writes for the New York Observer.
COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

Views expressed in this column are those of the author, not those of Rasmussen Reports.

The Views and Opinions Expressed by the author are his or her opinions only and do not necessarily reflect those of this Web-Site or its agents, affiliates, officers, directors, staff, or contractors. The author at the time of this article did not own any shares or receive any consideration financial or otherwise from any company or person mentioned or referred to in the article.

Reported By Mike Zaman

Republished with permission of Rasmussen Reports
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_state_surveys/illinois/32_in_illinois_say_blagojevich_is_about_as_ethical_as_most_politicians

Saturday, July 31, 2010

One-in-three voters in Illinois (32%) believe impeached Governor Rod Blagojevich is about as ethical as most politicians.

A new Rasmussen Reports statewide telephone survey of Likely Voters shows that 59% believe the former governor is less ethical than his peers. Only two percent (2%) say Blagojevich is more ethical.

These results are similar to those found in December 2008, just after Blagojevich was arrested on charges including an attempt to sell the state’s U.S. Senate seat recently vacated by President Obama.
Last month, 57% in the state said the impeached governor should go to jail.

Only nine percent (9%) in Illinois share a favorable opinion of Blagojevich. Eighty-eight percent (88%) view Blagojevich unfavorably, including 70% who view who Very Unfavorably.

The survey of 750 Likely Voters in Illinois was conducted on July 26, 2010 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is 4 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

Those ratings are little changed from results found in June.
Jurors are still deliberating in the former governor’s trial for 24 counts of corruption.

There are very few partisan differences on the question of the former governor’s ethics. Roughly a third of Republicans, Democrats and unaffiliateds believe Blagojevich is about as ethical as his peers.
White voters are far more likely than black voters to believe Blagojevich is less ethical than his peers. Most blacks (53%) say his ethics are similar to other politicians.

Republican State Senator Bill Brady has now opened a seven-point lead over embattled Governor Pat Quinn in Illinois’ gubernatorial race.

The Illinois race for U.S. Senate between Democrat Alexi Giannoulias and Republican Mark Kirk remains very close.
___________________________________________________

Rasmussen Reports is an electronic media company specializing in the collection, publication and distribution of public opinion polling information. We poll on a variety of topics in the fields of politics, business and lifestyle, updating our site’s content on a news cycle throughout the day, everyday. Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, has been an independent pollster for more than a decade.

The Views and Opinions Expressed by the author are his or her opinions only and do not necessarily reflect those of this Web-Site or its agents, affiliates, officers, directors, staff, or contractors. The author at the time of this article did not own any shares or receive any consideration financial or otherwise from any company or person mentioned or referred to in the article.

A Commentary By Michael Barone

Republished with permission of Rasmussen Reports
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_michael_barone/house_democrats_head_for_a_thumping_at_the_polls

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Democratic spin doctors have set out how their side is going to hold onto a majority in the House. They’ll capture four at-risk Republican seats, hold half of the next 30 or so Democratic at-risk seats, and avoid significant losses on target seats lower on the list.

That’s one plausible scenario. The shift of opinion away from Democrats so evident in the polls could turn out to be illusory. The widely held assumption that Republicans will turn out in greater numbers than Democrats could prove wrong.

Democratic candidates do indeed have a money advantage in many close races, and their campaign committee has more cash than its Republican counterpart.

All that said, this Democratic spin sounds a lot like the Republican spin back in the 2006 cycle. If the numbers don’t change too much from 2004, Republicans said then, we can hold on. If the numbers don’t change too much from 2008, Democrats think now, they can hold on.

But the Republicans, as George W. Bush said, took “a thumping” in 2006. And most signs suggest Democrats will take a thumping this year, too.

To see why, take a look at the generic ballot question: Which party’s candidate will you vote for in elections to the House? The current realclearpolitics.com average shows Republicans ahead by 45 percent to 41 percent. Ten of this month’s 15 opinion polls asking the question had Republicans ahead; Democrats led in four (twice by 1 percent), and one poll showed a tie.

Keep in mind that the generic ballot question historically has tended to under-predict Republican performance in off-year elections. Gallup has been asking the question since 1950 and has shown Republicans leading only in two cycles, 1994 and 2002, and then by less than the 7 and 5 points by which they won the popular vote for the House in those years.

So the Republicans’ current lead in the generic ballot question suggests they may be on the brink of doing better than in any election since 1946, when they won a 245-188 margin in the House — larger than any they’ve held ever since.

Another metric is daunting for Democrats. Polls in House races almost always show incumbents ahead of challengers, because incumbent members of Congress are usually much better known than their opponents. An incumbent running below 50 percent is considered potentially in trouble; an incumbent running behind a challenger is considered in deep doo-doo.

In 1994, I wrote an article in U.S. News & World Report arguing that there was a serious chance that Republicans could capture the 40 seats that they needed then, as now, for a majority in the House. It was the first mainstream media piece suggesting that, and it appeared on the newsstands on July 11.

I cited as evidence five polls showing incumbent Democratic congressmen trailing Republican challengers. None of those Democrats had scandal problems; all five lost in November.
Today, a lot more Democratic incumbents seem to be trailing Republican challengers in polls. Jim Geraghty of National Review Online has compiled a list of 13 Democratic incumbents trailing in polls released over the last seven weeks.

They’re from all over the country: one each from Arizona, Arkansas, Illinois, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota; two from Virginia; three from Pennsylvania. Most if not all of these incumbents are personally attractive, hardworking and ethically unsullied.

Some of these poll numbers are mind-boggling. Tom Perriello, a 727-vote winner in Virginia 5 in 2008, has been running two weeks of humorous ads showing what a hard worker he is. A poll shows him trailing Republican state Sen. Robert Hurt 58 percent to 35 percent.
In industrial Ohio 13, which Barack Obama carried 57 to 42, a poll shows incumbent Betty Sutton trailing free-spending Republican Tom Ganley 44 percent to 31 percent.

As Geraghty notes, we haven’t seen polls released by many other Democrats on Republican target lists. Most are conducting polls; many have reason to release favorable results if they’re available.

This looks like a case where the absence of evidence is evidence of absence.

Two years ago, Barack Obama was elected president with a historic 53 percent of the vote — more than any other Democrat in history except Andrew Jackson, Franklin Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson.
These metrics — the generic ballot results and polls in individual districts — suggest that House Democrats are headed toward historic losses. Quite a swing in 18 months.

Michael Barone is senior political analyst for The Washington Examiner.
COPYRIGHT 2010 THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.

Rasmussen Reports is an electronic media company specializing in the collection, publication and distribution of public opinion polling information. Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, has been an independent pollster for more than a decade.

The Views and Opinions Expressed by the author are his or her opinions only and do not necessarily reflect those of this Web-Site or its agents, affiliates, officers, directors, staff, or contractors. The author at the time of this article did not own any shares or receive any consideration financial or otherwise from any company or person mentioned or referred to in the article.

Taxes Jumps In Importance, But Economy Still The Main Issue on Voters’ Minds

Republished with permission of Rasmussen Reports
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/importance_of_issues

Sunday, July 25, 2010

The number of U.S. Voters who view the issue of Taxes as Very Important has jumped 10 points from May to its highest level ever in Rasmussen Reports tracking. Still, Taxes rank fourth on a list of 10 issues regularly tracked by Rasmussen Reports.

The economy (85%), government ethics and corruption (72%), and health care (70%) are the top three issues.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 68% of voters view the issue of taxes as Very Important. Congressional Democrats are struggling with the best way to approach the issue as the Bush tax cuts expire on December 31. Some want to extend all the tax cuts rather than raise taxes during a difficult economic time. Others want to extend only the tax cuts for those who earn $250,000 or less. Polling Data available to Platinum Members shows that 45% would prefer a candidate who opposes all tax hikes over one who would raise taxes only on the rich. Forty percent (40%) take the opposite view.

Voters trust Republicans more than Democrats on nine out of the 10 key issues. On the issue of taxes, voters trust Republicans over Democrats, 52% to 36%. On the economy, Republicans are also trusted more, 48% to 39%. But voters are not sure which party to trust when it comes to government ethics and corruption.

Republican candidates have consistently led Democrats on the Generic Congressional Ballot for the past year.

Just below government ethics and corruption is the issue of health care, with 70% of voters placing this issue at the top of the list. Prior to the health care debate, the number of voters who viewed this issue as very important remained in the high 50s - low 60s. Once the debate started to heat up in the summer of 2009, health care has been Very Important for at least 66% of voters. That jumped to 72% following passage of the law in March.

Sixty-one percent (61%) of voters nationwide now expect the cost of health care to go up under the new health care reform law, the highest level of pessimism measured since the law was passed in March. Most want the law repealed.

Sixty-four percent (64%) of voters view Social Security as Very Important. This finding has remained relatively steady since late December 2009.

Just below Social Security is education, viewed as Very Important by 62% of voters. This finding has shown little fluctuation since early April of last year.

Fifty-seven percent (57%) feel that national security and the war on terror should top the list as the most important issue, a finding that has remained fairly consistent for years now.

The issue of immigration, which jumped to fifth place in early May following the Arizona immigration law debate, now falls back to eighth on the list. Fifty-four percent (54%) regard this issue as Very Important, down 11 points from the previous survey.

The war in Afghanistan and the war in Iraq are essentially tied, with roughly 40% viewing each of these issues as Very Important. The number of voters who regard the war in Iraq as the most important issue has steadily declined since August 2008. Meanwhile, this is the first time the war in Afghanistan has been included in this question.

****************************************************
Rasmussen Reports is an electronic media company specializing in the collection, publication and distribution of public opinion polling information. We poll on a variety of topics in the fields of politics, business and lifestyle, updating our site’s content on a news cycle throughout the day, everyday. Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, has been an independent pollster for more than a decade.

The Views and Opinions Expressed by the author are his or her opinions only and do not necessarily reflect those of this Web-Site or its agents, affiliates, officers, directors, staff, or contractors. The author at the time of this article did not own any shares or receive any consideration financial or otherwise from any company or person mentioned or referred to in the article.

By Mike Zaman

While shades of Jack Abramoff still cover the windows of congress what they fail to illustrate is just how far lobbyists can go. What remain still unaddressed are the ramifications of the money Wall Street pumps into the coffers of our legislators. A congressman or woman can enter Washington Politics with mediocre means and leave a multi millionaire.

But, power, money, and politics always have the potential to mix into a toxic brew, and for those looking to gain the legislative edge; the rules leave enough loopholes to do so within the bounds of the law, a law designed specifically for that purpose.

Lobbying is a broad based concept, so broad, and ambiguous that lobbyists actually have the edge, including the ability to have their own attorneys draft legislation that becomes law.

And the rewards for our politically privileged are ominous, for example:

The American Bankers Association invested $1.8 million lobbying the federal government in the first quarter to prevent several key issues of sweeping legislation to overhaul financial institutions from being passed by the House and Senate.

The banking industry’s biggest trade group lobbied Congress and federal agencies on the financial overhaul legislation as well as accounting rules, new requirements for credit card issuers, small business lending, bankruptcy legislation, insurance, retirement savings and taxes. In addition to the House and Senate, the bankers’ group also had lobbying contacts with the Treasury Department, the Federal Reserve, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the White House, according to a disclosure form filed April 20 with the Senate’s public records office.

Among the group’s members are Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co. and U.S. Bancorp. The association represents major financial institutions as well as regional, community and small banks.

Paying someone for their vote even though it is considered lobbying is just another way to say Bribery even if no money is exchanged at the moment, but only a promise for future support.

Lobbyists are like insects, they multiply and there is no clear method to exterminate them.

The Views and Opinions Expressed by the author are his or her opinions only and do not necessarily reflect those of Crown Equity Holdings or its agents, affiliates, officers, directors, staff, or contractors. The author at the time of this article did not own any shares or receive any consideration financial or otherwise from any company mentioned or referred to in the article. Please read our disclaimer