« Obama goes reconquista | Main | There's A Bear In The Woods... »

Reuters/Zogby: John McCain Opens Up a 5 Point Lead

I saw just this at Drudge. McCain has opened up a 5 point lead over Obama in the latest Reuters/Zogby poll:

In a sharp turnaround, Republican John McCain has opened a 5-point lead on Democrat Barack Obama in the U.S. presidential race and is seen as a stronger manager of the economy, according to a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday.

McCain leads Obama among likely U.S. voters by 46 percent to 41 percent, wiping out Obama's solid 7-point advantage in July and taking his first lead in the monthly Reuters/Zogby poll.

The reversal follows a month of attacks by McCain, who has questioned Obama's experience, criticized his opposition to most new offshore oil drilling and mocked his overseas trip.

All three of McCain's tactics are completely reasonable, with the first of McCain's criticisms being the most damaging. Obama is shockingly inexperienced to be the President of the United States and leader of the free world, and pointing this out is a necessity. Also, it's important to note that this poll was taken Thursday through Saturday, so it doesn't reflect Obama's dismal performance and McCain's brilliance in the Warren forum.

The Reuters/Zogby poll is consistent with the RealClearPolitics Electoral count, which puts McCain over Obama in Electoral College votes 274 to 264. Keep in mind that this includes the toss up states, but it's excellent news, nonetheless.

Rasmussen also has some very good news for McCain. His polls show Ohio is still moving McCain's way, and should he choose a VP from Ohio, which some are speculating he will since he's announcing his pick in Ohio, his lead in the state should be even more solidified. I can't stress enough how important Ohio is to McCain's chances of winning in November.

Ohio, the ultimate swing state in Election 2004, continues to lean in John McCain's direction, according to the latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of voters in the state.

McCain attracts 45% of the vote in Ohio while Obama earns 41%. That's little changed from a month ago when McCain led 46% to 40%.

When "leaners" are included in the totals, McCain leads Obama 48% to 43%.

Also, according to Rasumussen, McCain has the lead again in Florida:

John McCain has recaptured the lead over Barack Obama in Florida, besting his Democratic opponent 46% to 43% in the latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of voters in the state.

Counting "leaners," McCain attracts 48% of the voter while Obama earns 46%. That advantage for McCain is well within the poll's margin of sampling error.

This is all great news for McCain, who is really building some serious momentum, and with only 75 days left before the election, this is the time we need McCain to peak. We're getting down to the last few weeks, meaning more and more voters who have been focusing on getting their kids back to school will be paying much closer attention to both candidates and their message.

With Obama's inexperience, he will need to be especially impressive and will have to put a lot of details into his hopenchange message that he delivers with great vagueness. His performance on Saturday was a kick in the pants to Obama's camp that they have a lot of work to do to convince American voters their candidate is in the same league as McCain. Honestly, I'm not sure they can do it.

Cross-posted at Up North Mommy Talks Politics


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/31059.

Comments (47)

It's not good for the Big O... (Below threshold)

It's not good for the Big O that any convention or VP pick 'bounce' will merely get him back to even with the GOP pick and convention still to come. It's also really bad for him that Zogby finds a widespread erosion of support that has led to this shift of 12 points or so, so it's not like they can just flip one switch or state one position (ok, ok, "pander to one group") to get that 12% back.

Watch those superdelegates ... (Below threshold)
drjohn:

Watch those superdelegates at D convention.

Barry is tanking at just the right time for an insurrection.

Wait, wait, wait - you're t... (Below threshold)
JFO:

Wait, wait, wait - you're the folks who don't believe in polls!!

Oh and the poll was taken while Obama was on vacation and McSame was all over the news. Gee.

JFO,Yes, that's wh... (Below threshold)
Sheik Yur Bouty:

JFO,

Yes, that's what it takes for there to be any balance in the 'unbiased' media...Obama on vacation.

Where there's anything remotely approaching balance, Obama starts sinking like a rock.

Oh, and who doesn't believe in polls? They certainly exist for everyone to see. It's just that the methodology of most of these polls is so skewed to the Dem/left side of the equation that the results are usually worthless, except as Dem/left propaganda.

"With Obama's inexperience,... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

"With Obama's inexperience, he will need to be especially impressive and will have to put a lot of details into his hopenchange message that he delivers with great vagueness."

What details? All he's even been is Mr. Vague. Just look at The Chosen One's previous track record. Unless the Dimocrats have changed the meaning of another word, zero still equals zero.

That's my point, GarandFan.... (Below threshold)

That's my point, GarandFan. He hasn't offered any details. Did you read the portion you quoted?

With Obama's inexperience, he will need to be especially impressive and will have to put a lot of details into his hopenchange message that he delivers with great vagueness
.
The "Obama vacation" line h... (Below threshold)

The "Obama vacation" line has been thoroughly discredited by the MRC, which showed that, even on vacation, Obama dominated the political news and the press continued to go after McCain while floating fluff about the chosen one.

Oh and the poll was t... (Below threshold)

Oh and the poll was taken while Obama was on vacation and McSame was all over the news. Gee.

That is too funny. What about those polls taken while Obama was doing his Walk on Water Tour and speechifying to the hundreds of thousands in Berlin?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

You can't buy press coverage like he got....unless you're a Democrat.

It's Zogby, so take it with... (Below threshold)
Big Mo:

It's Zogby, so take it with a grain of salt.

Still, the overall impression is that Obama is in serious trouble and McCain has finally hit a healthy, positive stride.

Has Obama peaked too early? Probably. He will have to do something very bold to re-fire his campaign, like, say, name Caroline Kennedy his veep.

Rasmussen's polling methods... (Below threshold)

Rasmussen's polling methods I always find superior to that of Zogby's. But the bottom line is that big oil will not easily give up their control of this government. They might well lose the Senate and House because it is too hard to control 535 smaller offices like that, but control of the White House with another puppet ruler is an effective counter to all of this. It wouldn't surprise in the least if big oil could manufacture a win for John McCain. America is also still racist at it's core so many Whites probably would not really give an African American a fair consideration as well. All of this favors McCain.

America's government is controlled by an oligarchy of big oil and others. Russia's government is controlled by an oligarchy of big oil and other big interests, Both societies are a mirror image of each other where the ruling class have too many inbuilt electoral advantages for true democracy to prevail in either society.

'control of the White House... (Below threshold)
bnorm:

'control of the White House with another puppet ruler ... America is also still racist at it's core'

Give it a rest, Paul.

Paul,Grapes real s... (Below threshold)
Howcome:

Paul,

Grapes real sour today?

Slightly OT, but I find peo... (Below threshold)

Slightly OT, but I find people who flog the "Big Oil" line to be very childish in their world view. Somehow there has to be somebody in charge, so they create an adult out there who controls everything. Whether it's the Jews, or the Bilderbergs, or aliens, or Big Oil, the responsibility for Paul Hooson (and other types like him) lie outside of themselves. They are helpless; they are victims; they are children.

Contrast this with the conservative point of view, which holds that we are the Captains of our fate. Millionaire or bum, you make your own life. That's why you don't find conservatives hanging out with Truthers and other conspiracy nuts.

I'm pleased at the polls because they skew so left that this must mean McCain is really far ahead. I'm not pleased because if Hillary snatches the nomination from Obama (as she must if the Democrats are to have a chance) then Denver is going to burn to the freakin' ground.

And I live in Denver. Ouch.

Obama is like a hurricane i... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Obama is like a hurricane in that both have lots of wind and seem unstoppable while in their element. Then they come to ground, and while they spin and blow hard initially, they soon weaken, fade and fizzle.

So what brought Obama to ground? Two silly ads that showed the ridiculousness of Obama's celebrity status. I'm sure the Obama camp never realized how vulnerable they were. Stripped of celebrity status, Obama has to run on the issues, his positions, his record, his experience, and his character. In those areas Obama is out of his league running against McCain. If this poll is any indication of Obama's fizzle factor, the first ballet at the democratic convention could be interesting. I wonder what Bill's been doing in those smoked filled rooms?

I wonder what Bill's bee... (Below threshold)
Clay:

I wonder what Bill's been doing in those smoked filled rooms?

Whatever it is, it involves a cigar.

Ok, maybe they will have a ... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Ok, maybe they will have a first ballet at the democratic convention, but I think the first ballot will be more interesting.

(raising hand)Um, ... (Below threshold)

(raising hand)

Um, JFO... I'm the one who says I don't believe in polls. Me. Jay Tea.

If other authors here choose to discuss them, that's their right. I don't demand that everyone here ascribe to my beliefs.

You are probably confusing the main page with that subdomain, where dissent or deviation from the head whackjob's agenda is not tolerated.

If Kim -- or any other Wizbang author -- wants to discuss polls, they're more than welcome to. I just probably won't participate in the discussion.

Unless, of course, some asshat like you says something that ties in to something I've said. Then I might jump in and correct the idiot.

Editor's prerogative. It's a grand thing.

J.

Bnorm, the immigration issu... (Below threshold)

Bnorm, the immigration issue doesn't involve a racial factor? Whites are 60% of America's population currently and still vote overwhelmingly for White candidates for office.

Obama has one more good shot to shake this up during the Democratic Convention next week or I bet he loses the election to McCain. And big oil fears Obama may tax their windfall profits, so oil prices will improve before the election, then surge on towards $5 to $7 a gallon after the election. Just watch and see.

Comrade Hooson constantly a... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

Comrade Hooson constantly and so aptly demonstrates the simple truth:

"Each person sees the world not as it truly is, but as they themselves are."

It wouldn't surpr... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
It wouldn't surprise in the least if big oil could manufacture a win for John McCain.

How would they do that Paul; raise gas prices to $4.00 a gallon? Oh, I see. Ok, it's a good thing democrats made themselves the target of big oil, big tobacco, big business, working people, and tax payers. Otherwise, we would get a government controlled by big fools, useful idiots, trial lawyers, professional racists, professional sexists, union bosses, and tax collectors.

It's just that the metho... (Below threshold)
Brian:

It's just that the methodology of most of these polls is so skewed to the Dem/left side of the equation that the results are usually worthless, except as Dem/left propaganda.

And how is the methodology of this poll different? Other than that its result is what you want it to be. Zogby is usually derided on here as a leftist shill, so it's humorous to see everyone rally around them now.

Mac Lorry, many voters stop... (Below threshold)

Mac Lorry, many voters stopped their anger over high gas prices for some reason when the prices dipped below $4 a gallon mark recently. But the huge Winter heating bills for their homes will mostly kick in after the election. Oil industry interests are spending a mere $80 million to influence the outcome of this election, which is a pretty good return for a $19 billion dollar tax break approved by Congress and signed by Bush. They're businessmen you know, and know to wisely invest their money where it will do the most benefit like buying politicians into office.

Here in Oregon, Republican Senator Gordon Smith has received over $300,000 in donations from big oil and nearly as much from the big drug companies and HMOs. And the same sort of story plays out state by state. This helped him to turn around polls where he narrowly trailed. Big oil money certainly helps to win elections. Independent 527s have no spending limits you know.

*sigh*re: polls<br... (Below threshold)

*sigh*

re: polls
to: leftists that don't understand the conservative reaction to this poll

the point is that when even the polls that should favor the democrat show that the democrat isn't doing very well, then he probably really isn't doing very well, indeed. conservative issues with zogby and company are not that they haven't a clue how to poll, but they generally poll such that they get a result they favor, or spin it in that way even when the fundamentals don't say what they say they say (if you follow). THEREFORE, when a result like this comes in from a source like this, it bodes ill for the Big O. From that the glee is derived - not simply from the headline results of the poll

'k?

Based on the latest headlin... (Below threshold)

Based on the latest headline for Obama - it looks like he or his handlers got the message from Zogby loud and clear:

Obama sounds populist themes in Virginia bus tour (AP)

AP - Democrat Barack Obama is sounding tough populist themes on the campaign trail, pledging to create union jobs to build energy-efficient cars and to end tax breaks for corporations that ship jobs overseas.

'populist' has, as we know, replaced 'progressive', which replaced 'liberal' in the press. Pro-union, anti-corporations (who will the unions work for?), wishful-thinking clean cars, closed borders (at least businesswise)...I guess the Big O's going after the biggest chunk he lost (support dropped 12% amongst liberals)

Mac Lorry, many vo... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
Mac Lorry, many voters stopped their anger over high gas prices for some reason when the prices dipped below $4 a gallon mark recently. But the huge Winter heating bills for their homes will mostly kick in after the election.

I got some bad news for you Paul, high energy prices are good for Republicans because of the Democrat's decades long stance against drilling and nuclear power. Some of the voter anger over high gas prices has dipped because the price has been going in the right direction. However, if Fay takes a bit more southerly path it will shut down many of the oil rigs in the gulf. Also, the hurricane peak doesn't happen until September.

T. Boone Pickens is doing a good job of educating the public that it's not just high oil prices that are the problem, but how much money is pulled out of our economy to pay for imported oil. When democrats make the old argument that drilling won't bring down the price the public now knows that's only one issue and the democrat looks out of touch.

Also, the NG I use for heating went up by over 60% already and people will be filling their heating oil and propane tanks BEFORE the election. Come November, Democrats are going to pay the price for standing in the way of domestic oil production and nuclear plants.

JTHow did you get ... (Below threshold)
JFO:

JT

How did you get your head through the door today? You assume, of course that I was referring to you. And we all know what happens when you assume something - you make an ass of yourself, speaking of asshats.

Just to make it clear to you, head size and all, I was referring to the the folks who frequently comment here. Those very people every time there was a negative poll (about every day for the last few years) about Bush just hollered and hollered like stuck pigs, well elephants anyway, and denied the validity of polls.

Let the air out of your head JT and you might return to earth. Oh, and you ought to pay attention to what the folks who comment here have to say about things like polls.

It's you who are confused JT - but then that's no surprise either for obvious reasons, i.e an inability to own what you really stand for.

JFO,Someone alread... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

JFO,

Someone already tried to explained it, but I guess you missed it. Believing polls are biased in favor of democrats is not the same as believing polls are randomly inaccurate. Thus, it's a consistent view to disbelieve polls showing Bush in a bad light while believing Obama is taking a shellacking based on this Reuters/Zogby poll. I hope this is not all over your head.

If you believe what you jus... (Below threshold)
JFO:

If you believe what you just wrote, which is astounding in its stupidity, then you obviously believe in the tooth fairy. Or, on second thought, maybe just paranoid.

If you believe wha... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
If you believe what you just wrote, which is astounding in its stupidity

Any fool can make such a claim, but are you up to backing it with logic? Most like it just went over your head.

You are the one making the ... (Below threshold)
JFO:

You are the one making the claim. You back it up. Apparently you say the polls about Bush are skewed by bias to democrats. Lets see the evidence.

Or should I just try to set up a meeting between you and your tooth fairy?

JFO,In po... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

JFO,

In post #3 you said "Wait, wait, wait - you're the folks who don't believe in polls!!"

Note that you are referring to some group's beliefs about polls.

In post #20 you said "I was referring to the the folks who frequently comment here. Those very people every time there was a negative poll (about every day for the last few years) about Bush just hollered and hollered like stuck pigs, well elephants anyway, and denied the validity of polls."

So now we get your full message. To be consistent, you expect those who denied the validity of negative polls about Bush to also deny the validity of the Reuters/Zogby poll, which is the subject of this post.

Your position contains two logical fallacies. First, it doesn't anticipate that someone can be consistent in their belief about polls while denying the validity of negative polls about Bush, yet accept the Reuters/Zogby poll showing McCain ahead of Obama. That condition occurs if a person believes polls are generally biased in favor of Democrats. That simple example renders you screed nothing more than the ranting of another lefty moonbat with no basis in logic or reason.

I'll give you a chance to figure out the second logical fallacy in your position. Hint, it has something to do with the pot calling the kettle black.

Apparently you say the polls about Bush are skewed by bias to democrats. Lets see the evidence

Well either your reading comprehension is lacking or you're trying to set up a straw man argument. I never said any polls were in fact biased, only that people believe they are. You'll note that you also use what folks "believe" about polls. I'm just being consistent.

Or should I just try to set up a meeting between you and your tooth fairy?

What, you have a fetish for the tooth fairy? Did you have a bad experience growing up or are you still anticipating another close encounter?

The national polls are not ... (Below threshold)
PeachPit:

The national polls are not a barometer for the Nov. 5 date. The national polls are for headlines...

The libs here are panicking... (Below threshold)
Michael:

The libs here are panicking. So funny.

There are times I'm not so ... (Below threshold)
BlueNight:

There are times I'm not so proud to be a New Mexican. This is one of those times.

Speaking of logic, here's y... (Below threshold)
JFO:

Speaking of logic, here's yours: "If there is a poll I agree with, it's valid. If there is a poll I don't agree with, it's not." For some reason that all is the logic of many of your fellow wingers.

That actually sounds like the logic of a toddler, i.e. my grandson. So I guess the tooth fairy reference is appropriate.

"If there is a poll I ag... (Below threshold)

"If there is a poll I agree with, it's valid. If there is a poll I don't agree with, it's not."

"That actually sounds like the logic of a toddler,..."

If, in fact, that's what Mac said at all. But he didn't, so your little argument (better known as the "abusive argumentum ad hominem") is fatally flawed. You can't have a solid deductive argument when the conclusion - "then you obviously believe in the tooth fairy" - is based on the premisis - "If there is a poll I agree with, it's valid. If there is a poll I don't agree with, it's not" - which is not fact.

I'd just chalk it up to a fundamental lack of reading comprehension and an inability to formulate a simple deductive argument. Which, interestingly, "sounds like the logic of a toddler,..."

Speaking of logic,... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
Speaking of logic, here's yours: "If there is a poll I agree with, it's valid. If there is a poll I don't agree with, it's not."

That's your logic not mine. Are you really so dense that you can't understand the example I gave? Here I'll put some numbers to it and if you passed 4th grade then you should be able to understand it.

I believe all political polls are biased in favor of Democrats by some percentage, say 20%. If a poll then shows Bush has an approval rating of 30% I add 20% to correct it. The corrected result is Bush has a 50% approval rating. Not bad for a second term President and better than Clinton in his second term. If I apply the same correction factor to the Reuters/Zogby poll I find McCain is leading Obama. I being entirely consistent.

This simple example proves I can be consistent in my beliefs about political polls while disbelieving negative polls about Bush and believing the Reuters/Zogby poll shows McCain is leading Obama.

This simple example also proves that your tirades on this thread are all astounding in their stupidity. When you see the tooth fairy again ask them to bring you some brains next time you lose a tooth.

Of course, if you want to keep making a bigger and bigger fool of yourself for all to see just keep coming back with your straw men and your nonsense tirades. Like Obama, you're out of your league, but too dumb to know it.

You "believe all polls are ... (Below threshold)
JFO:

You "believe all polls are biased in favor of democrats...." Again, where's the proof? This your assertion remember. You can go on and on about debating tactics all you want. You can go on and on about your superior intellectual powers. But to paraphrase the old commercial: "Where's the beef?" For the umpteenth time all you have to show are the facts - not what rolls around in your biased head.

My grandson "believes" he should get what he wants...my grandson "believes" in the tooth fairy.

You "believe all p... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
You "believe all polls are biased in favor of democrats...." Again, where's the proof?

Nice try but that's another straw man. I never said the polls were in fact biased, only that I believe they are. I don't have to prove my beliefs to nullify your argument, I only need to show that I'm consistent in them.

You can go on and on about debating tactics all you want.

I don't need to use debating tactics, I only need to recognize and reject the ones you're using to try and shift the argument and save face.

You can go on and on about your superior intellectual powers.

Well I did say "I hope this is not all over your head", which is a lot milder than your response characterizing my argument as "astounding in its stupidity". If you wanted to make a logical argument about your position that would have been the post to do it in. You've been nothing by an insulting smart ass since your first post on this topic. What do you expect then when your underlying argument is logically incorrect?

For the umpteenth time all you have to show are the facts -

As I have said, that's a straw man argument. I don't have to prove a belief is correct if I characterize it only as a belief. It's the same with opinions and we all have them or we wouldn't be posting here. Can you prove your opinions are factually correct?

- not what rolls around in your biased head.

You've now made an assertion that my beliefs are biased. Care to prove that with facts?

My grandson "believes" he should get what he wants...my grandson "believes" in the tooth fairy.

You might do better if you let your grandson make the next post.

Mac Lorry's 10 rules for po... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Mac Lorry's 10 rules for posting:

Rule 1: Don't make insulting smart-ass comments in your posts. If you do, they standout above others and attract lightning. If your position is not well grounded in facts and logic, you'll get burned.

Rule 2: Accurately characterize the positions of others. It's logically invalid to misstate someone's position and then argue against the misstated position. If you do you risk being called out and made to look like a fool.

Rule 3: Carefully read what others have posted. If you don't you risk having your reading comprehension questioned.

Rule 4: If you make a blunder be quick to concede the point. You may want to soften the blow by making a joke about being up too early (late), spending too much time with children, etc.

Rule 5: If you're stating an opinion make sure you always characterize it as such. Otherwise, you're going to be asked to prove it.

Rule 6: Don't make absolute statements of fact unless you can offer proof, such as links. Make sure you don't use a link to someone's opinion to support your fact.

Rule 7: Use words like maybe, possibly, probably, and likely when you state something you think is factual, but you don't have the link(s) to prove it.

Rule 8: Links to Wikipedia can be funny or informative, but the are not poof. However, some of the external links given at the bottom of Wikipedia pages can be to authoritative sources. If so, use them rather than the link to Wikipedia.

Rule 9: Fully read any source you cite or link to before you post. If you don't you may find the source doesn't really support your argument in the way you think it does.

Rule 10: Try to remain emotionally detached from the argument. Cool logic and/or links to sources are the best comeback to insults. However, you can use insults along with facts and logic, just don't be the first to sink to insults.

In addition to bei... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
In addition to being hall monitor you are now the debate monitor.

Liar, Kevin would never give you the authority to designate someone as the debate monitor.

Rule 11: Read what you wrote before clicking Submit.

I didn't put that one in before because it seemed to be a no-brainer, but I guess you really have no brains.

Remember Rule 1 Mr Monitor.... (Below threshold)
JFO:

Remember Rule 1 Mr Monitor.

I'm using Rule 10 Mr Liar.<... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

I'm using Rule 10 Mr Liar.

You got no facts. All you h... (Below threshold)
JFO:

You got no facts. All you have is your "belief" which is nice to have but of no use when denying reality.

You keep changing the rules by the way - just an observation. They teach toddlers not to do that in kindergarten you know. Perhaps you should go back for a refresher.

"I don't believe polls that have conclusions I don't like because, well, I don't believe them. So there." That is logic according to the new Debate Monitor Mr Lorry. It also happens to be the same logic, also unchanged in the past few hours, of that wonderful toddler grandson of mine. And he likes to change the rules to suit his purposes too.

The only thing you have are... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

The only thing you have are straw man arguments, and you keep trying them even though they are logically invalid. I refer you to post #36. Maybe you'll be able to understand Oyster.

Jesus, give it a rest.... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

Jesus, give it a rest.

JFO--their point is valid if they can demonstrate, through a critique of the significance testing or sampling or other component of the survey methodology, how pollsters typically "skew" their data. They won't do that, of course, so no point in asking.

And let them have their stupid poll! I like to rub it in their faces when a Democrat or a policy position or whatever outclasses their guy/idea by a significant margin, so why can't they do the same? It's been a shitty week for Obama, so it's not surprising that McCain, who appeals strongly to that niche Conservative White Guy Who Loves War Porn demographic, has closed the gap.

Wait till polls are out next week after Obama has finished telling every American that John McCain doesn't know how many houses he owns, and that he pays more to his servants each year than 95% of American households earn.

It was resting just fine, b... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

It was resting just fine, but you couldn't leave it at that could you.

Wait till polls are out next week after McCain has finished telling every American that Obama got a convicted organized crime figure to help him obtain his house. Americans are just beginning to understand the extend of the corruption surrounding Obama. And why does Obama let his youngest half brother live in abject poverty? Can anyone take Obama's position on helping the poor seriously when he won't help close relatives?




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy