The Nobama Network has this to say about the presidential election:

Breaking News: Obama buys himself the Presidency!

America, this is not your first mistake, but it is your worst! The question now is how long will we have to live with this anti-American cancer. God Help Us Now!

The cost? Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings for Barack Obama through October 15 record $639.2 million. FEC filings for John McCain through October 15 total $335.3 million.

It is just what you would expect from a real estate transaction. The seller (the American electorate) went with the highest bidder.

Don’t forget, Barack Obama will change everything with his Civilian National Security Force (may have gone by the name GESTAPO or Brown Shirts in the past)…

A Chilling Proposal by Barack Obama

Is he not aware that we already have the United States Army National Guard? So here is the change that you can expect now…

Here’s a preview:

Obama Youth Brigade March in Formation

And some scary echoes from the apparently forgotten past:

Comparison to Hitler Youth

Remember, Hitler was elected!

Related articles:

Blue Collar Muse — What in the World is Obama’s “Civilian National Security Force”?

The questions are legion and the implications of such an organization are staggering! What would it do? According to the title, it’s a civilian force so how would it go about discharging “national security” issues? What are the Constitutional implications for such a group? How is this to be paid for? Is this accounted for in some of Obama’s currently proposed tax increases or will we need more taxes to fund this enterprise? The statement was made in the context of youth service. Is this an organization for just the youth or are adults going to participate? How does one get away from the specter of other such “youth” organizations from Nazi Germany and the former Soviet Union when talking about it?

WorldNetDaily — Obama’s ‘civilian national security force’

If we’re going to create some kind of national police force as big, powerful and well-funded as our combined U.S. military forces, isn’t this rather a big deal?

I thought Democrats generally believed the U.S. spent too much on the military. How is it possible their candidate is seeking to create some kind of massive but secret national police force that will be even bigger than the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force put together?

Now, maybe he was misquoted by the Congressional Quarterly and the Chicago Tribune. I guess it’s possible. If so, you would think he would want to set the record straight. Maybe he misspoke. That has certainly happened before. Again, why wouldn’t the rest of my colleagues show some curiosity about such a major and, frankly, bone-chilling proposition?

Are we talking about creating a police state here?….

I have a feeling there would be more questions from the press if I myself had proposed the creation of something as preposterous as a “civilian national security force” … I’m quite sure I would be hung out to dry as some kind of Nazi thug. Meanwhile, Obama makes this wild suggestion and it is met with a collective yawn from the watchdogs.

InfoWars — Obama’s “Civilian National Security Force”

It appears candidate Obama, if elected, fully intends to recruit young citizens into something he calls a “national security force,” apparently a large paramilitary group “just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as the U.S. military. Obama made passing reference to this disturbing idea in a speech delivered in Chicago on July 2. As should be expected, the corporate media, with the exception on the Chicago Tribune, completely ignored the statement and its implications….

It is no secret Obama’s top advisor is Zbigniew Brzezinski, a close Rockefeller protégé, a founding member and former director of the Trilateral Commission, and a CFR member. Obama’s wife, Michelle, is a member of the Chicago branch of the CFR. Big donors to the Obama campaign basically constitute a who’s who of corporate and Wall Street banking interests, including JP Morgan Chase & Co., Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, and Citigroup. Disgraced former Obama advisor, James A. Johnson, former Fannie Mae CEO and consummate Washington insider, is a member of the American Friends of Bilderberg, the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations….

Obama — or rather his handlers, consisting of dedicated minions who work for the global elite, the international bankers, the corporate fascists — are serious, dead serious, about creating a “domestic security force.”

It has nothing to do with al-Qaeda, either, a phantom force Joseph Farah and his neocon buddies believe pose a serious threat to America. It has everything to do with subduing those of us who may resist an accelerated move toward fascist corporate globalization, one-world government, and the effort to turn the planet into a slave labor gulag where half the population exists on less than a dollar or two a day. It’s all about forcing us to accept the New Serfdom at gunpoint.

In the months and years ahead, with the engineered deconstruction of the economy, a “domestic security force” possibly the size of the U.S. military will be required to “to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals,” as Rockefeller functionary Brzezinski might describe it.

Something of this size and scope will be required, especially with the very real prospect of foods riots and civil unrest as America is reduced to a third world cesspool, an eventuality if the NWO [New World Order] has its way.

American Thinker — Obama’s Civilian National Security Force

Barack Obama’s recent words to promote his image as Community Organizer in Chief were … about turning America into one, giant, community organizer’s sandbox at enormous cost to taxpayers….

… In his campaign document entitled “The Blueprint for Change: Barack Obama’s Plan For America,” Obama’s “Service” section runs a close second to “Education” in complexity. But, with his Colorado Springs’ statement, it grabbed first place in its projected costs to taxpayers. Obama did the cost projection himself.

He plans to double the Peace Corps’ budget by 2011, and expand AmeriCorps, USA Freedom Corps, VISTA, YouthBuild Program, and the Senior Corps. Plus, he proposes to form a Classroom Corps, Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, Veterans Corps, Homeland Security Corps, Global Energy Corps, and a Green Jobs Corps. Here a corps – there a corps – everywhere a corps corps.

So it made sense in Colorado Springs when he said his call to community service “will be a central cause of my presidency.” He couldn’t be clearer in signaling his intentions, including a Social Investment Fund Network to link local non-profits with the federal government….

Senator Obama aims to tap into the already active volunteerism of millions of Americans and recruit them to become cogs in a gigantic government machine grinding out his social re-engineering agenda. It’s Orwellian-like, with a novice social activist’s mentality at the helm….

During an interview with National Public Radio when he first ran for the US Senate in 2004, Barack Obama said that he supported a ban on concealed carry of guns:

“Well I, I, I, I continue to, I continue to, uh, uh, support a ban on concealed carry laws.”

Listen to that audio clip.

---

During another speech, he let slip that the reason he would not confiscate privately owned guns was only because he could not get the support in Congress!

The WSJ Washington Wire describes a rally in Pennsylvania, you know, the place where the bitter folk cling to God and guns:

A woman in the crowd told Obama she had “heard a rumor” that he might be planning some sort of gun ban upon being elected president….

“If you’ve got a gun in your house, I’m not taking it,’’ Obama said. But the Illinois senator could still see skeptics in the crowd, particularly on the faces of several men at the back of the room.

So he tried again. “Even if I want to take them away, I don’t have the votes in Congress,’’ he said.

So now we know. He really wants to take our guns away, and it is just a matter of time until he gets the votes.

---

Well, my friends, it looks like we had better put in a good supply of powder and lead!!!!

You have heard about Miami having a homicide free month????

Well, maybe Missouri will have the same result if the media will publicize this result more often. Instead of demonizing firearms, let the bad guys know what they may have in store for them.

Got to love a happy ending, and yes, that means the end of the bad guy… Got what he deserved when he tried to rape his victim a second time.

In Washington D.C. this woman would have been raped twice, and probably killed. Check out this news item:

From a dear friend who has just started a new weblog, AmericanUnclassified, we have this:

My friend Ed Morrissey posted this map. I agree with Ed except Virginia. Give McCain Virginia and he wins 286-252, incredibly the same as Bush-Kerry in 2004. I think that New Hampshire is in play, too! McCain 292-248!

I started posting at My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. four years ago. My first post was predicting Pres. Bush’s reelection. I came pretty close to the final popular vote (51-48%) and EVs of 286-252.

Maybe I was lucky!

Dick Morris is saying that independents are moving to McCain:

“But the basic point, one week before Election Day, is that even if Obama clings to a four- or five-point lead over McCain in the polling, the election is not over.

The question is not so much how large his lead is over the Republican, but whether or not he is topping 50 percent.

As long as the polling leaves him below that mark, he is vulnerable and could well lose.”

To be honest, we face a very uncertain election.

I have never been so confused about any presidential election since 1976. At 7pm that night, I was certain that Carter would win. At 2am, we didn’t know because of Pres. Ford’s surge!

Are the polls trending McCain? Some are are some aren’t!

What else can I say? I’m totally confused over these polls.

On the popular vote, it will be a dead heat. It’s possible that Obama wins the popular vote because of very heavy black turnouts in the south. Also, don’t forget that Obama will win California, the most populous state.

However, the most under reported story of 2008 may be a huge Republican turnout. McCain and Palin are drawing huge crowds all over. Don’t be shocked if you see large suburban and rural turnouts!

The “media in the tank” for Obama has been pushing the narrative that Dems can’t wait to vote. OK. I’m sure that Dems are excited. However, don’t underestimate our ability to turn out either!

And we will!

Trust me. We will turnout!

This could be the year when polling for the presidential election is meaningless. That is because the mathematical models for weighting the various responses to pollster questions do not account for the PUMA factor. That is the millions of Hillary Clinton supporteers who are voting for John McCain because they are outraged at the way the Democratic primary was illegally hijacked (Party Unity My Ass).

One of the best analyses of this uncounted influence comes from political insider Paul Marston, who writes The Marston Chronicles. He has done extensive analysis on the campaign as a whole, including two excellent articles on the PUMA factor:

• Excerpt from THE P.U.M.A. FACTOR
  

  The results of the polls for President are all over the map. If the polls are supposed to be correct to a 95% degree of certainly give or take 2 or 3 percent, how can the polls be that much different for the same candidates when taken at the same time? The simple answer is that they should not be that far apart….

  What is … likely is that the sample simply does not accurately represent the voters in the area being polled as a whole due to some new factor…. Whatever this factor is, it is something that the tried and true weighting algorithms are not handling properly….

  Looking at where the McCain folks are competing when they would seem to have no chance, they all have one thing in common. They were carried by Hillary Clinton and in some cases even after it was obvious that Obama had it locked up. McCain was bound to pick up some of Hillary’s supporters anyway after the way Hillary was treated by the Obama campaign. These are the so-called PUMA (Party Unity My Ass) folks. Clearly the McCain folks think that there is a P.U.M.A. Factor in play….

  The key point here is that these people are actually Democrats who plan on voting for McCain. Because such people are being called racists for this by people like John Murtha of Pennsylvania, they are not telling the pollsters that they are planning to vote for McCain. Most of the pollsters are weighting their samples based on the usual voting splits between Democrats and Republicans. If the P.U.M.A. Factor is upsetting this voting pattern, the pollsters are giving too much weight to the Democrats in their samples….

• Excerpt from HOW BIG IS THE P.U.M.A. FACTOR?
  

  If you know the answer to this question, you know who our next President will be. While it is possible for McCain to win even if this factor is negligible, he would need to get virtually all of the undecided’s to break his way. That is theoretically possible but it is mostly wishful thinking on the part of McCain-Palin supporters. For every undecided voter either candidate picks up, it takes a vote out of the undecided column and adds one to that candidate’s total. However, the spread between the two candidates only goes up by one vote. That is not the case with a P.U.M.A. voter, which is by definition, a registered Democrat voting for McCain-Palin. This takes a vote away from Obama-Biden and adds one to McCain-Palin, decreasing the spread by two votes.

  There is always a certain amount of voters who do not vote for their own party’s candidate in any election. This desertion rate is pretty well known and is factored into the weighting algorithms used by pollsters. What is unusual about this election is that the way Hillary was treated by the Democratic National Committee and by the Obama campaign thoroughly annoyed a lot of Democrats…. [It is] difficult for the pollsters to properly allow for this factor. Given the spread between the various polls, it is obvious that some of the polls are making no allowance for the P.U.M.A. Factor at all.

  Visit The Marston Chronicles and read all of the careful numerical analysis that follows, done by an expert. There is a very optimistic note at the end of this article, which we will leave as a pleasant surprise for our readers who pay Paul Marston a visit!

Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez can’t wait to have the results of the presidential elections in the United States. He is already saying that he is willing to talk with Barack Obama if the Democratic candidate wins Tuesday’s election (Chavez says Obama win could spur talks with US). 

No wonder freedom-loving Latin Americans see an Obama victory as a Chavez victory that will destroy any hopes for freedom, democracy and progress in Latin America and will empower the Marxists, violent guerrillas and Islamic terrorists who are working with Chavez. 

While stealing millions from his compatriots, Chavez has been investing heavily in every possible strategy to destroy the United States and its allies, mainly Colombia. To damage Colombia, Chavez has funded monumental propaganda campaigns against Colombian President Alvaro Uribe. 

Chavez’s propaganda has worked. Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi not only refused to approve the vital Colombia free-trade agreement, but prevented anyone else voting on it. After President Bush submitted the pact to a vote under fast-track rules, Pelosi changed the rules. By a 224 to 195 House vote, the voting timeline rule on trade pacts was changed from 90 days to whenever. Pelosi now can hold up Colombia’s treaty however long she wants. See Latin American Media Paints Pelosi As a Chavez Lackey:

Democrats Freeze the Colombian FTA with the “Chavez Rule” was the headline at Noticias 24 following Pelosi’s historic move to block free trade with Colombia.

Everything indicates that Obama will also support Chavez. During the last Presidential debate, responding to McCain’s support for Bush’s free trade proposal with Colombia, Obama repeated Chavez’s propaganda against Colombia.

Obama’s refusal to side with Colombia would be a sign to U.S. friends that they will be delivered to their enemies for the “crime” of having trusted Washington. 

Fueled by Obama’s remarks during the last debate, demonstrations against Uribe mushroomed all over Colombia. Those demonstrations, most likely funded and organized by Chavez’s cronies, seek to weaken Uribe’s position and prepare Colombia to be taken over by Chavez’s allies (Marxists, drug cartels and terrorists).  

Cuban writer Alberto Montaner wrote: “The only real ally that the United States has in the region is Colombia. However, if the Democrats win – as everything seems to indicate will happen – it’s very possible that the U.S. military support to Colombia will be reduced significantly and the U.S. Congress will refuse to sign the free trade agreement with Colombia. Why would anyone want the fickle and unreliable friendship of Washington?” (U.S.: El peligroso mundo que le espera al proximo presidente – por Carlos Alberto Montaner) 

By increasing Chavez’s influence and power, and promoting Colombia’s demise as a free country, a U.S. government controlled by the left will multiply the danger of terrorism against the United States. Chavez, who calls Iranian dictator Mahmoud Ahmadinejad his “brother,” is working with Islamic terrorists against the U.S. and has even pledged that his country would support Iran if it was invaded as a result of its nuclear standoff with the United Nations Security Council. (Chavez To Back Iran If U.S. Invades 

Chavez is also working with the Russians to harm the U.S. He has bought arms from Russia, and says that Russian planes can sink ‘gringo ships.’ (Chavez: Russian Planes Can Sink ‘Gringo Ships’)  We pray the United States may be delivered from Obama, who will harm the United States and its friends, and help U.S. enemies, such as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hugo Chavez.

Obama went to Chicago on his own (or was sent there).

What happened in Chicago and the emergence of Obama the politician has been detailed, first at Rezko Watch and the replaced after Rezko’s conviction by The Real Barack Obama.

I urge all Americans to go there and read it all. There will be no doubt left in your mind of what happened and what will happen if Obama is elected.

Obama’s associates were not accidental. The only question in my mind is whether Obama was using them or whether THEY WERE USING HIM!

Rezko Watch on Blogspot

The Real Barack Obama on WordPress

According to the steady drumbeat from the in-the-tank-for-Obama mainstream media, Barack Obama is way ahead of John McCain in all the polls — state polls, national “eligible to vote” electorate, surveys of those “most likely to vote,” etc. So what do polls really mean, in general, and what do they mean given the particular dynamics of this election, with a black man and a woman in the running?

1. Hang-ups, refusals — When a poll is based on a telephone survey, 80% of the annoyed recipients of these calls, having been interrupted from their dinner starving and tired after a hard day’s work, hang up. (I am one of those who always slam the telephone down.)

If you look at a Gaussian distribution of human personalities, from liberal to conservative in behavior — and I’m talking personality, not political affiliation — the 80% starting from the conservative end of the spectrum are the ones who hang up on surveys. The 20% most liberal are the ones who talk to strangers (including pollsters) over the phone, who discuss their sex life with friends, who wear revealing clothes, who talk about personal finances and how much their possessions cost, who tell everyone how they feel about things, etc. As folk get more conservative, or we might say circumspect, they “hold their cards closer to the chest.” For iconic examples of tell-all personalities, consider the avowedly liberal Hollywood “celebrities.”

There is a political correlation, not one to one, but significant. Those who have conservative mind-their-own-business personalities are much more likely to be conservative politically. So the 80% of voters who do not participate in telephone polls are much more likely to be political conservatives or Republicans, causing the polls to be skewed in favor of liberal candidates.

This same reluctance of more private people extends to in-person exit polls, and was responsible for the now-famous inaccuracies of the Bush-Kerry exit polling:

Interviewing for the 2004 exit polls was the most inaccurate of any in the past five presidential elections as procedural problems compounded by the refusal of large numbers of Republican voters to be surveyed led to inflated estimates of support for John F. Kerry….

[Conservatives are passionate, and will respond to website-based polls, if their personal information is not required to have their vote counted, so those unrestricted counts will show better for conservative candidates than most poll formats. Require name, address, and phone number and you are back to the liberal slant. Conservatives are just more private folk!]

2. Bradley effect — The Bradley effect is well-defined by Wikipedia:

The Bradley effect, less commonly called the Wilder effect, is a proposed explanation for observed discrepancies between voter opinion polls and election outcomes in some US government elections where a white candidate and a non-white candidate run against each other. The effect refers to a supposed tendency on the part of some voters to tell pollsters that they are undecided or likely to vote for a black candidate, and yet, on election day, vote for his or her white opponent. It was named for Tom Bradley, an African-American who lost the 1982 California governor’s race despite being ahead in voter polls going into the elections.

The Bradley effect theorizes that the inaccurate polls were skewed by the phenomenon of social desirability bias. Specifically, some white voters give inaccurate polling responses for fear that, by stating their true preference, they will open themselves to criticism of racial motivation. The reluctance to give accurate polling answers has sometimes extended to post-election exit polls as well….

No point in calling it the Wilder effect. Douglas Wilder never played the race card. He ran on his distinguished record, was supported by many Republicans while running as a Democrat, won his election, and became a well-liked governor of Virgina, whom many hoped would be the first black man to become US president. He should have run for president, he would have won the US presidency, and race would never have been an issue. Most people would have thought of him as yet one more Virginia governor, like Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Harrison, Tyler, Taylor, and Wilson, and not as a black man.

By contrast, Barack Obama has played the race card obnoxiously, with contradictory logic — insisting whites should vote for him despite the fact that he is black, while counting on most blacks to vote for him because he is black. Worse, his campaign has made a strategy of calling those who oppose him “racists.” So, yes, if there really is a “Bradley effect,” we can expect it to be a factor in 2008 presidential race polls.

3. Special interest groups — There are several principle-driven voting blocs in play that the media is absolutely stone-walling.

• Democrats who love democracy — Unique to this election are the PUMAs, horrified by the way the legal election process was thwarted in the Democratic primaries by outright intimidation and cheating. Many former Hillary supporters will not vote for Obama. Large numbers will vote the McCain/Palin ticket and many more will vote for Nader or just not vote. Their feelings count, and the mainstream media (MSM) is absolutely and shamefully ignoring them.
• Right-to-life voters — Not just right-to-life voters, but most voters who have human compassion, are horrified by Obama’s tacit support of the Illinois practice of infanticide — leaving live birth babies who were intended to be aborted in the hospital soiled laundry room to die. Even those who support a woman’s freedom to choose whether to continue a pregnancy think this goes too far.
• Gun rights advocates — Barack Obama is the most anti-gun-rights candidate ever to run for the presidency. Most politically aware gun-owners are aware of the danger he poses to their Second Amendment rights, and will weigh that against their other issue concerns. For the large segment of that population who believe that the right to keep-and-bear-arms is what secures all the other rights, it will be a black and white decision — Nobama.
• Special needs families — Advocates for the disabled estimate that 11% of our children, or 4 million, have special needs. That’s 8 million parents. And Sarah Palin speaks directly to that population, and from the heart. It’s not just another campaign issue with her — it’s her life. That issue has never been in play before in a presidential election, but it is now, and in favor of the McCain/Palin ticket. But, again, it is one of those things that the MSM just doesn’t take into account.
• Native Americans — All Native Americans born in the United States are eligible to vote. And that population is expected to vote overwhelmingly for John McCain, just on the issues. Add to that the fact that Sarah Palin’s husband is one of their own… Again, no MSM coverage of this voting bloc.

The MSM talking heads believed their own propaganda during the last presidential campaign, right up to the end. We can all remember Dan Rather’s face twisted with surprise, disbelief and agony as he reported the results. He looked like he was about to cry. No reason to get cocky here, but no reason to get discouraged either!