Running late again, sports fans. I’ve been quizzing Brooke on lipids vs fatty acids vs trigycerides this morning. Gahhh! Make it stop!
So, anyway, I have a small compilation of news but I haven’t had much time to read them all the way through. Take a look and tell me what you think.
1.) Myiq has already touched on this. The New York Times has a big headline that reads:
Jeez, the White House must really hate the guy(s). Who do they hate more? The beloved ex-president who is busting his ass campaigning for Democratic candidates or the Democratic senate candidate who supported the Big Dawg’s wife for president? Damn, does this make sense? Why would the White House cripple two important candidates 5 days before the election? And why does the rest of Congress put up with it?
2) Obama is a piss poor socialist. According to Politico (always take with a grain of salt), under Obama Corporate profits have climbed magnificently. Note to the socialists: this guy is giving you a bad name.
3.) Ted Strickland is toughing it out in Ohio. Seems like a pragmatic guy. The Big Dawg campaigned for him. But it looks like Obama has the most to lose if Strickland loses:
Even as party leaders in Washington leave some vulnerable Democrats to fend for themselves in the final days of the campaign and scramble to shore up incumbents who might be more viable, one candidate is being given particular assistance: Gov. Ted Strickland of Ohio, who is in a difficult battle for re-election.
The reason is not simply that he still has a chance of winning. For Mr. Obama, the fate of Mr. Strickland could be very much tied to his own, since a Republican in the Ohio governor’s seat could make his re-election to the presidency in 2012 that much more complicated.
Ohio is one of nine states where Mr. Obama expanded the Democratic map in the last presidential election, and his advisers believe the electoral votes here are likely to be among the most critical to assure his return to the White House. Republicans do not disagree and have used that argument in the final stages of the midterm election campaign as a motivating factor.
Wow, that’s a tough one. Vote for the guy Bill Clinton endorses or vote for the Republican to exact revenge on the president you were pressured to vote for instead of the candidate you actually voted for in the primary of 2008. I’d be asking myself, can I survive four years of a Republican governor? Well, we in NJ are suffering through it. It’s not pleasant and for sure the guy’s no long term thinker…
Ehhh, go with Strickland. Obama’s not savvy enough to save his own ass in 2012. And anything can happen. He might even be challenged by a better presidential candidate from his own party. (Hint to party: you only have *one* viable alternative)
4.) Charles Krauthammer is not really in David Brooks league as the Saruman of the right. He doesn’t know how to finesse his words as finely as Brooks in such a way to make you think you have absolutely no hope of prevailing against the masters of the universe so why don’t you just bow down or slit your throat now, you helpless underlings? Still, Chuck gives it the old college try and attempts to wrangle the obvious- that voters are pissed as hell at Democrats for a variety of reasons- into some kind of reason to celebrate the Reagan revolution? Ehhh, I don’t get it. Nevertheless, Chuck is taking the anger part seriously in a way the Democratic party is not:
The beauty of this year’s campaign, and the coming one in 2012, is that they actually have a point. Despite the noise, the nonsense, the distractions, the amusements – who will not miss New York’s seven-person gubernatorial circus act? – this is a deeply serious campaign about a profoundly serious political question.
Obama, to his credit, did not get elected to do midnight basketball or school uniforms. No Bill Clinton he. Obama thinks large. He wants to be a consequential president on the order of Ronald Reagan. His forthright attempt to undo the Reagan revolution with a burst of expansive liberal governance is the theme animating this entire election.
Democratic apologists would prefer to pretend otherwise – that it’s all about the economy and the electorate’s anger over its parlous condition. Nice try. The most recent CBS/New York Times poll shows that only one in 12 Americans blames the economy on Obama, and seven in 10 think the downturn is temporary. And yet, the Democratic Party is falling apart. Democrats are four points behind among women, a constituency Democrats had owned for decades; a staggering 20 points behind among independents (a 28-point swing since 2008); and 20 points behind among college graduates, giving lie to the ubiquitous liberal conceit that the Republican surge is the revenge of lumpen know-nothings.
Yeah, he’s not in Brooks’ league. It must be maddening.
5.) Anglachel has a trio of new posts. I haven’t had time to dig in but don’t let that stop you.
Hypergraphia: It’s not a bug- it’s a feature!
And now for something completely different. Have you ever had a secret desire to fold a protein but didn’t know where to start? What would your friends think? Does that mean you have to start wearing pocket protectors and a calculator on your belt?
Well, worry no more, secret protein folders. You can get in on the game with no experience necessary. In fact, you might even have an advantage if you know absolutely nothing about science and if you’re a female who works well with others in cooperative teams (there’s a study that says so. I’ll add the link later). The game is called Foldit: Solve puzzles for science. Check it out. I expect The Confluence to have the winning team. Let’s kick some tertiary structure ass!!!
Filed under: General | Tagged: Anglachel, Bill Clinton, Charles Krauthammer, Charlie Crist, Florida, Foldit, Kendrick Meeks, Mark Rubio, marketing, Ohio, plebes, Reagan Revolution, ted strickland | 162 Comments »