AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

The Zogby Interactive survey of 2,530 likely voters nationwide was conducted Aug. 18-20, 2009, and carries a margin of error of +/- 2.0 percentage points.

Foxfyre wrote:

... the "Freshman" Republican class of 1994 ... had the vision, the message, and the guts to back up their campaign pledges ...What we need now is the vision and ability to sell it ... Maybe there's somebody out there who will fit that bill. Not asking much do you think?

You are truly not asking much! You are not asking enough. You should be more specific about what you are asking

First things first: what should the message be this time?

I say the message should be impeach & remove Obama. Both you and my wife disagree! Ok! How about this message?

Rescind all Obamacollectivist bills:
Subsidies;
Stimuluses;
Universal Health Cares;
Cap and trades;
Domestic oil drilling bans;
tax increases.

From his website:

Quote:

The Zogby Interactive survey of 2,530 likely voters nationwide was conducted Aug. 18-20, 2009, and carries a margin of error of +/- 2.0 percentage points.

I was in error about the 'likely voters' as apparently Zogby did focus on likely voters. And an on line survey is not the same thing I meant by 'internet' surveys which anybody and everybody can be included. I get Zogby surveys to complete every few days and these are little better than straw polls except that the demographics of them are tracked a lot more closely. An on line survey is no less 'scientific' than a telephone poll when conducted scientifically and Zogby would not jeopardize his reputation by posting a 2% margin of error if he couldn't back it up.

So a Zogby poll that put Obama's numbers at roughly 50-50 would be a significant outlier. Outliers are nothing new, however, when it comes to Zogby polls. They are, in fact, the rule and not the exception.

Let me qualify this a bit: Zogby International conducts two types of polls. One type are conventional telephone polls. Zogby's telephone polls, while prone to somewhat wild fluctuations and subject to their share of erratic results (such as predicting a 13-point win for Barack Obama in the California primary; Obama lost by 9 points), are actually not terrible, and did fairly well on November 4th.

Zogby, however, also conducts Internet-based polls. These polls are conducted among users who volunteer to participate in them, first by signing up at the Zogby website (you can do so yourself here) and then by responding to an e-mail solicitation. These Internet polls, to the extent they rely on voluntary participation, violate the most basic precept of survey research, which is that of the random sample. And as you might infer, they obtain absolutely terrible results.

---

All told, between 48 contests that he's surveyed over the past two election cycles, Zogby's Internet polls have been off by an average of 7.6 points. This is an extreme outlier with respect to absolutely anyone else in the polling community.

These Internet polls, simply put, are not scientific and should not be published by any legitimate news organization, at least not without an asterisk the size of an Alex Rodriguez steroidal syringe. But I'll bet you that Matt Drudge already has the siren cued up by now.

Cyclop, I am no fan of Zogby. He has consistently been wrong in his polling though you have had no complaints until he came up with one you didn't like. All I am saying is that he would not post a margin of error that he can't back up.

The man makes his living doing polling. He won't screw that up by intentionally manipulating the numbers or doing sloppy research.

DNC Admits Barack Obama WAS Collecting Information on People Via [email protected]
Posted by Erick Erickson
Thursday, August 20th at 1:25PM EDT

Greg Sargent, doing his part as a mouthpiece for the online left, is trying his best to deflect concerns over [email protected], but in the process reveals that Democrats are now admitting the White House collected data on individuals from [email protected].

Here’s the deal " and you’ll have to pardon wading through the stupid that is Greg Sargent regurgitating DNC talking points:

John Cornyn has a contact form on his Senate website.

You can contact Cornyn by filling in your name, address, etc. and sending an email note.

Greg Sargent breathlessly reports that

Now the DNC is striking back by pointing out that similar email collection is done on the Web sites of Senators and members of Congress, including … John Cornyn.

Over on Cornyn’s Senate Web site, for instance, you find that people who want to contact the Senator are asked to submit personal info, such as their names, addresses and emails, which are all required.

In other words, “John Cornyn does it too.”

But, as Cornyn points out, and the DNC admits, with Cornyn’s website it is an individual offering their own information to contact the Senator. With Barack Obama, it is people offering other people’s information.

The distinction is huge.

But the DNC argues this is a meaningless distinction. Following Cornyn’s logic about the White House, the DNC says, shouldn’t those who write in to Cornyn’s Web site to criticize the Senator ask what his office will do with their personal info?

Of course that is desperation on the Democrats’ part. Trying to deflect attention from the White House invading people’s privacy, the Democratic National Committee is making real news by admitting [email protected] was used to collect data on people being turned in by third parties.
http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/08/20/dnc-admits-barack-obama-was-collecting-information-on-people-via-flagwhitehousegov/

The message should not be to impeach Obama. If they include that in the platform, they won't get 25% of the vote. The American people honestly don't care who is at the helm so long as they are assured that their government will not make their lives more complicated or difficult and that their government will leave them alone to enjoy the fruit of their labor and live their lives as they choose so long as they don't violate the rights of others.

Is anybody comfortable with President Obama's idea of going forward with a National Civilian Security Force?

...I must circulate in a unique small community distributed over the USA. ...

Because of this, many ultra-wealthy individuals who have chosen to become stateless now cruise outside coastal waters in their mega-yachts in the belief that if they stay on the move, tax authorities will not be able to catch up with them. One analyst who did not want to be named, has estimated the number of stateless tax evaders amounted to a few thousand.

Under US tax laws, the worldwide income of any US citizen or resident is subject to tax. The US is the only country in the world that requires its citizens to stump up, no matter where they live.

Foxfyre wrote:

The message should not be to impeach Obama. If they include that in the platform, they won't get 25% of the vote. The American people honestly don't care who is at the helm so long as they are assured that their government will not make their lives more complicated or difficult and that their government will leave them alone to enjoy the fruit of their labor and live their lives as they choose so long as they don't violate the rights of others.

I must circulate in a unique small community distributed over the USA. In my community, well over 60% want Obama impeached and removed.

However, specific proposals and actions for correcting Obama's abuses of our Constitution and for preventing additional abuses, may suffice. What specific proposals and actions, Foxfyre, do you favor?

REVIEW & OUTLOOK
AUGUST 18, 2009
Obama Underwrites Offshore Drilling

Too bad it's not in U.S. waters

You read that headline correctly. Unfortunately, the Obama Administration is financing oil exploration off Brazil.

The U.S. is going to lend billions of dollars to Brazil's state-owned oil company, Petrobras, to finance exploration of the huge offshore discovery in Brazil's Tupi oil field in the Santos Basin near Rio de Janeiro. Brazil's planning minister confirmed that White House National Security Adviser James Jones met this month with Brazilian officials to talk about the loan.

The U.S. Export-Import Bank tells us it has issued a "preliminary commitment" letter to Petrobras in the amount of $2 billion and has discussed with Brazil the possibility of increasing that amount. Ex-Im Bank says it has not decided whether the money will come in the form of a direct loan or loan guarantees. Either way, this corporate foreign aid may strike some readers as odd, given that the U.S. Treasury seems desperate for cash and Petrobras is one of the largest corporations in the Americas.
MORE. . .
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203863204574346610120524166.html

Facts About the Proposed Ex-Im Bank Loans for Petrobras' Brazilian Offshore Oil Exploration and Development
Background on Ex-Im Bank:

* The Export-Import Bank of the United States’ (Ex-Im Bank) mission is to help create and sustain jobs for American workers. The Bank does this at no cost to the American taxpayer; in the past sixteen years the Bank has netted the American people $4.9 billion and the jobs those exports have supported.
* More than 80% of Bank authorizations during the last fiscal year directly benefited small businesses.

Charges and facts:

Charge: The U.S. government is giving away more than $2 billion in taxpayer dollars to Brazil’s largest oil and gas company to drill for oil in Brazil.

Fact: The Bank has approved a preliminary commitment to lend up to $2 billion to Petrobras for the purchase of American-made goods and services. The funds will go to American exporters as payment for their sales to the company. Of note, the Bank is self-sustaining and no taxpayer dollars are involved.

Charge: The loans to Petrobras represent a giveaway of U.S. tax dollars.

Fact: The Bank’s activities do not cost the American taxpayer a dime. In fact, since 1992 the American people netted more than $4.9 billion and the jobs those exports created.

Charge: America is exporting jobs to Brazil as a result of the loans.

Fact: Only American made goods and services qualify for Ex-Im Bank loans or guarantees. This is the government doing what it's supposed to do - helping to create U.S. jobs, making sure that Americans get a fair shot at selling goods and services, and helping American workers compete on a level playing field against foreign competition.

Charge: The loan to Petrobras represents a reversal of the Obama Administration’s policies on off-shore drilling.

Fact: The Bank’s bipartisan Board unanimously approved the preliminary commitment to Petrobras on April 14, 2009, before any Obama appointees joined the Bank. In fact, at the time the Bank’s Board consisted of three Republicans and two Democrats, all of whom were appointed by George W. Bush.

LETTERSAUGUST 21, 2009
Brazil Loan Helps U.S. Manufacturers


Your editorial "Obama Underwrites Offshore Drilling" (Aug. 18) more correctly should have read, "Obama Underwrites U.S. Jobs." That's because the mandate of the Export-Import Bank of the U.S. (Ex-Im Bank) is to help create and sustain U.S. jobs by financing U.S. exports. Our offer to provide financing to Brazil's state-owned oil company Petrobras does exactly that.

That's what is behind our decision to offer at least $2 billion in loans or loan guarantees to help finance purchases of U.S. goods and services by Petrobras. This increases the likelihood that American"not foreign"
workers will be employed to satisfy part of the company's planned $175 billion investment during the next five years.

Ex-Im Bank does not make U.S. policy. In fact, our charter prohibits us from turning down financing for either nonfinancial or noncommercial reasons, except in rare circumstances including failure to meet our environmental standards.

We make no grants. The vast majority of our financing consists of guarantees of loans made by commercial lenders, not Ex-Im Bank direct loans. The foreign buyers that use Ex-Im Bank products pay us in full. Over the past 16 years the fees that we collect have netted American taxpayers more than $4.9 billion plus the jobs those exports have created. Thanks to the fees we charge, the bank is self-sustaining and does not receive any appropriated funds from Congress.

At a time when jobs, and exports, are more important than ever in helping our economy recover, Ex-Im Bank is achieving its mission to keep Americans working, and we're doing it without burdening the U.S. taxpayer.

Fred P. Hochberg

Chairman and President

Export-Import

Bank of the U.S

Washington

Opinion: Obama commits to off-shore drilling
By Larry Clifton.

After consistently opposing drilling for oil and gas, Barack Obama ultimately decided to literally buy into off-shore drilling and has committed billions of U.S. taxpayer’s dollars to the cause.

While this may seem like a good thing considering the immense and rising percentage of crude the U.S. is forced to float across the oceans in foreign-flagged ships from the Middle East through pirate-infested regions, there is a problem.

Turns out Obama is going to lend billions of taxpayer’s deficit dollars to Brazil's state-owned oil company, Petrobras, to finance exploration of the huge offshore discovery in Brazil's Tupi oil field in the Santos Basin near Rio de Janeiro.

Sweet deal, you say? Not really. Should one estimate the tens of millions spent by Soros on behalf of Obama and the Democratic Party, Soros is only asking the Democrats for what is due him. The problem is that Obama and the Democrats are using your money to pay Soros, and if you happen not to support off-shore drilling for crude or (God forbid) you are Republican or a conservative, you still have to pay Mr. Soros, courtesy of Barack Obama.

George Soros indirectly underwrote much of Obama’s campaign, not to mention spending tens of millions to help get Democratic Party candidates elected since 2000. Unfortunately, since Obama is using taxpayer dollars to fund the Brazilian off-shore drilling project " we all must financially support the Democratic Party. What a country!

Billionaire investor George Soros bought an $811 million stake in Petroleo Brasileiro SA in the second quarter, making the Brazilian state-controlled oil company his investment fund's largest holding. Now, had George W. Bush concocted this off-shore drilling arrangement with, say, anyone, The Pelosi-led House would be screaming for an investigation after she had convicted him of sins against the planet and our nation during several press conferences. Now you know that’s right.

According to an article in the Bloomberg Press dated August 15, as of June 30, the stake in Petrobras, as the Rio de Janeiro-based oil producer is known, made up 22 percent of the $3.68 billion of stocks and American depositary receipts held by Soros Fund Management LLC, according to a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Petrobras has since slumped 28 percent.

In a Wall Street Journal editorial article dated August 18, the editor laments, “If President Obama has embraced offshore drilling in Brazil, why not in the old U.S.A.? The land of the sorta free and the home of the heavily indebted has enormous offshore oil deposits, and last year ahead of the November elections, with gasoline at $4 a gallon, Congress let a ban on offshore drilling expire . . .”

Seven months into his term, Barack Obama’s administration seems to be running out of gas when it comes to driving home credible records on his pledge to reduce deficit spending and his promise of ethical governance.
Perhaps this Soros payback (with billions of taxpayer dollars being gifted to Soros to drill for off-shore oil) is just another clunker compared to his world-record first-year deficit of more than $1.5 trillion. Even so, taxpayers need to understand that they are now financing the Democratic Party and Obama with their children’s money.
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/277955

... perhaps Freeduck and DTOM's sources are accurate, ...

Foxfyre wrote:

... perhaps Freeduck and DTOM's sources are accurate, ...

no perhaps to it. it came from the wsj, just as yours did.

your piece from a Wikipedia type blahg is perhaps the one you should be skeptical of..

George Soros Cut Petrobras Stake in Second Quarter
By Saijel Kishan and Andres R. Martinez

Aug. 14 (Bloomberg) -- Billionaire George Soros cut his stake in his biggest holding, Petroleo Brasileiro SA, in the second quarter while buying more shares of other energy producers.

His New York-based hedge-fund firm, Soros Fund Management LLC, sold 22 million U.S.-listed common shares of Petrobras, as the Brazilian oil company is known, according to a filing today with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Soros bought 5.8 million of the company’s U.S.-traded preferred shares.

Soros is taking advantage of the spread between the two types of U.S.-listed Petrobras shares, said Luis Maizel, president of LM Capital Group LLC, which manages about $4 billion. The common shares were 21 percent more expensive than preferred today, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

“He knows he held a voting right in the common shares that would never translate to actual power,” Maizel said in an interview from San Francisco. “He’s just playing the spread.”

Petrobras preferred shares have also a 10 percent additional dividend, said William Landers, a senior portfolio manager for Latin America at Blackrock Inc.

“Given that there will most likely never be a change in control in the company, I see no reason to pay a higher price for the common shares.” Brazil’s government controls Petrobras and has a majority stake of voting shares.

Hess Stake

Soros boosted his stake in oil company Hess Corp. to 5.1 million shares as of June 30 from 3.7 million at the end of the first quarter, according to the filing. Hess was Soros’s second- largest holding. He also added to stakes in Houston-based Plains Exploration & Production Co. and bought shares in Calgary-based Suncor Energy Inc. and InterOil Corp. in Sydney.

Soros’s company oversees about $24 billion. His Quantum Endowment Fund returned 9.3 percent in the second quarter. Hedge funds gained an average of 9.1 percent during the period, according to data compiled by Hedge Fund Research Inc. in Chicago. The filing doesn’t reflect the Soros’s holdings in cash or other securities.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601014&sid=aOJMyM_rVnv8