N.S. Savannah

This is the NS Savannah. It was the only cargo ship ever built powered by a Nuclear Reactor (Currently Decommissioned). It was launched in 1959. Currently it is berthed in Southeast Baltimore. I remember taking a tour of the ship in the early 60’s. It is also a National Landmark. On our cruise earlier this month, we passed the ship on our way out of Baltimore Harbor. Read the website for more info on the ship.

http://www.nssavannah.net/

This website was created to help educate and inform the public about the history of the Nuclear Ship Savannah by exploring the ship’s design, construction, voyages, and the crew and passengers that sailed on her. It includes text and photographs from a variety of sources in an attempt to provide a single forum for information and news – past, present, and future – on the N/S SAVANNAH itself and the future of nuclear power in merchant ships. This site also supports and reports on the activities of the Maritime Administration (owner/licensee of the ship) and the N/S SAVANNAH Association, Inc., (a non-profit corporation dedicated to preserving the ship).

EDIT The Ship is featured in The APRIL 1962 Volume of the National Geographic Magazine

Old McDonald(s)

 

 

While I have a moment here I might as well comment on a phenomenon I’ve noticed recently; though I make no claim that it is a necessarily recent phenomenon, nor that it is a widespread one. Just one that a potential variation from my normal habits caused me to take note of.

I think in the last several months it’s happened about oh, three or four times, maybe five times.

While driving to the office relatively late, and after not having eaten breakfast, it occurred to me to take advantage of the “drive-thru” at a McDonalds which is a couple miles from my house and which I pass by on my way to the office.

Now, I know it’s not exactly a healthy choice, and that even under time pressures, there are better alternatives. But I chose it anyway. See, I had a B-vitamin pill slurry sloshing nauseatingly around my otherwise empty stomach, and exemptions were justified. At least that’s what I told myself.

That said, there turned out to be no real reason for guilt after all. My new pathway to sin more resembled that of the kid who tries to buy beer and fails, than the one who succeeds.

For I was never able to force myself to bear the wait necessary to obtain said forbidden fruit. Why not? Well, in each instance there were nine or more cars lined up waiting to order. That’s why. The last two times, disbelieving what I was experiencing, I actually counted them: 13 and 11 respectively.

Now what this is all about is not really how many cars there were, nor my cholesterol saving impatience, but the socially significant fact of who was in all those cars that blocked my way and prevented my from fall from dietary grace.

Other than the couple of guys in tradesman vans you might expect, those populating the queues of suppliants yearning for the Mikey D experience, were nearly all very late middle-aged, or just-elderly, women.

That’s who, figuratively speaking, elbowed me out of the food line. A bunch of grandmas.

What’s the world coming to when even Grandma can’t be trusted to do the right thing, while I do the wrong?

Now, if you want to split hairs, they are of course, technically speaking,  free to eat whatever they like.  And, if you insist on being a killjoy about it, I guess I don’t really even know for certain what it was that they were buying there at McDonalds, at 9:30 in the morning.

But it just kind of surprised me, and brought home more forcefully than ever, how the generations now living, even the older generations, are so thoroughly co-opted by, and apparently comfortable with, “the program”.

And … and … well,  who can we rely on to do the right thing,  if we can’t rely on America’s old ladies? I mean, shouldn’t they be pruning roses, or watering the raspberry patch, or interfering in vestry affairs, rather than spewing carbon monoxide into the atmosphere and shamelessly gorging themselves on Egg McMuffins?

Aren’t there even any sixties era types left who remain true to the “whole foods” movement, and who, as a result, do not conspicuously clog up the McDonalds’ drive-thru??

They must still exist somewhere! Just look at how many Democrats continue to be elected.

I guess it’s just that they, and their McDonalds, are found in another part of town …

6502

You might be interested in a link I took from Archeology Magazine on line.

Sometime between Pong and the computer you are now using, the revolution occurred.

Now you can take a look inside.

Editor Of Popular Internet Magazine Dead At 25

Samir Kahn, 25, was born in Saudi Arabia but grew up in New York. He later returned to the Middle East and began publishing the popular e-zine “Inspire” in an effort to educate English-speaking youth in world politics by speaking in their own vernacular.

I can’t do this. I can’t sanitize this dirtbag. Dude was a Mohammedan terrorist, a major cog in Al Qaeda, and at war with the US, and the rest of the civilized world for that matter. “Inspire” e-zine was a Mohammedan terrorist propaganda program intent on getting more young Americans and other young westerners to commit acts of Mohammedan terrorism against the West. Dude is buzzard food, and rightly so. The first attack missed him but the second one got him. Some other Mohammedan terrorist also bought it in the drone attacks, and his name was…

Anwar al Awlaki.

The American born Al Qaeda leader in Yemen. The man with ties to Mohammedan terrorist and mass murderer Nidal Hasan. The man who plotted the underwear bomb, the cargo plane “computer printer” bombs, and many other Mohammedan terrorist attacks and attempts. He got fried, along with several of his body guards. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

From Ed Morrissey:

Awlaki has a long history of terrorism against the US. At first considered a moderate cleric — the Bush administration invited him to the Pentagon as part of their outreach program after 9/11 — he became a suspect in the 9/11 attacks after at least three of the hijackers were traced to his mosque. Awlaki fled the US and eventually masterminded the Christmas Day underwear plot in 2009 as well as a later plot to destroy cargo airplanes bound for the US, and at least inspired the Fort Hood massacre and other so-called “lone wolf” attacks.
…
Assuming that Awlaki is really dead, though, this could be a bigger operational deal than getting bin Laden. Awlaki’s group, AQAP, was by far the most active internationally among AQ affiliates, and his intimate knowledge of the US made him a dangerous foe. His death won’t be the end of AQ’s attempts to create home-grown jihadis and infiltrators, but it will make that task a lot more difficult.

But RS McCain notes some serious sanitizing going on in the mainstream media. (Is anyone surprised?) The New York Times called Awlaki a “preacher,” then waited until paragraph 24, when a large percentage of people would have quit reading, to note the guy was Mohammedan. Couldn’t call him a “Muslim cleric” to start out, now, could they? CBS called him an alleged, suspected, reportedly terrorist. Ya think?

Professor Jacobson reports on all the usual Leftist suspects crying in their lattes over the fact the Al Qaeda leader who was at war with the US was killed instead of taken to court. He was at war, and violating the Geneva Convention in the process. He knew the risks in going to war with the US — you get dead — and did it anyway.

Michelle Malkin has this to say to the Leftist whiners and victimologists:

Obama’s far left flank will be unhappy if the mission to kill Awlaki, an American citizen, was successful. They will again decry such drone strikes against American citizens as unprecedented and lawless.

On this, I will come to Obama’s defense.

Awlaki’s membership and leadership in al Qaeda is undisputed.

We are at war.

The Supreme Court set the precedent for Obama’s and our military’s actions in 1942.

I’ve referred before to the Quirin precedent.

She goes on at great length to shred the Leftist whiners. You should read it.

On the death of Samir Khan, Michelle had this to say:

Whoa.

Fresh reports that a second U.S. jihadi was killed in the drone attack that allegedly took out al Qaeda spiritual guru Anwar al-Awlaki.

His name will be very familiar to longtime blog readers.

It’s Samir Khan[.]
…
I repeat: God bless our military.

***

My friends at top counterjihad blog The Jawa Report have been on Khan for years and helped shut down several of his jihad-inciting blogs after tracking him across the Internet (he went by the name “Inshallahshaheed”).

In 2007, I noted Khan’s death threats against the founder of The Jawa Report, who goes by the nom de blog Rusty Shackelford[.]

And Michelle goes on to provide a very good history lesson on the now dead dirtbag “Inspire” editor, including his manifesto. You should read it.

Good riddance to bad rubbish. Two Mohammedan terrorist leaders dead, many more to go.

Hot Air Headlines brings an NBC report that insane nutcase “Ron Paul condemns Awlaki Assassination”. This is why you will never be President, Ron Paul.

UPDATE
Linked by The Other McCain
Linked by The Jawa Report

More Polling Numbers Democrats Won’t Like

I previously reported on the voting public’s positions on various issues and their stance opposing Democrat positions. A plurality (44 percent) are fiscal Conservatives while a small minority (11 percent) are fiscal Liberals. 2/3 want the border controlled before dealing with any other possible illegal immigrant solutions. The numbers regarding educating illegal immigrants gets more glaring, with 4 out of 5 saying they don’t want illegal immigrants to get in-state tuition rates. Over 7 in 10 Hispanic voters in “battleground” states approve of Voter ID. The majority of voters favor repealing ObamaCare, 20 points above those who don’t want it repealed. All of these issues have the Democrat party on the wrong side of the voting public.

But there’s more, as the late-night infomercials say. The next batch of polling numbers are again opposing Democrat party positions.

Most voters support the Death Penalty.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of American Adults shows that 60% favor the death penalty, while 28% oppose it. Another 12% are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

This is little changed from surveys dating back to November 2009, with support for capital punishment running from 61% to 63%.

Over 2/3 of men and a majority of women support the Death Penalty. Over 3/4 of Republicans and 6 in 10 independents support the Death Penalty. And the Democrat base is evenly divided on the issue. While a bare majority of blacks oppose the Death Penalty, a clear majority of Whites and non-black minorities support the Death Penalty. So as an issue, the Democrat party leadership is on the wrong side.

Most voters favor a Balanced Budget Amendment, something the Democrat party and many Ruling Class Republicans oppose.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Voters shows that 56% are in favor of a balanced budget amendment while 22% are opposed and another 22% are undecided.
…
Most Republicans (68%) and voters not affiliated with either party (54%) support a balanced budget amendment. So do a plurality of Democrats (46%).

The vast majority of voters support term limits for Congress, something the Ruling Class of both parties opposes.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 71% of Likely U.S. Voters favor establishing term limits for all members of Congress. Just 14% oppose setting such limits, and 15% are undecided about them.

The majority of voters are “just not that into” giving government subsidies for alternative energy.

Fifty-seven percent (57%) of Likely U.S. Voters think free market competition is more likely than government subsidies and regulation to help the United States develop alternative sources of energy. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 27% believe government subsidies and regulations are the better way to go. Sixteen percent (16%) are not sure.

But then 71% of voters say private sector companies and investors are better than government officials when it comes to determining the long-term benefits and potential of new technologies. Sixty-four percent (64%) think it’s likely that if a private company which cannot find investors gets funding from the government, that money will be wasted.

If private investors aren’t willing to put money into a company, only 17% of voters think the federal government should provide loan guarantees or loans to help keep such a company in business. Fifty-nine percent (59%) say the government should not provide money for an alternative energy company after private investors refuse to invest in it. Twenty-three percent (23%) are not sure.

More voters say being “pro-gun” is good and “union supported” is bad than say the reverse. 6 in 10 Americans believe if the Government raises taxes to reduce the deficit, it will only cause more Government spending (which means the public isn’t buying the Democrat party’s “the Republicans don’t want to raise taxes so they’re not serious about the debt” false dichotomy fallacy), while the majority believe if the Government agrees to cut spending, no spending will actually be cut (which means the public knows the Government’s history).

On practically every issue, the Democrat party stands in opposition to the will of the public. On practically every issue, the Democrat party stands in opposition to the will of independent voters. Is it any wonder a Democrat poll showed Democrats in a worse position in 60 Republican-held “battleground” districts now than in 2010, when Democrats were swept out of office? Is it any wonder Democrats are losing the independent vote?

The Fast And Furious “Smoking Gun”

Laura Curtis reports on Hot Air’s recent Fast And Furious article that the ATF sold guns directly to the narco-terrorists and deliberately refused to track them. I previously reported on Fast And Furious and the mainstream media’s reticence to report it for the epic scandal that it is. And I gave a “barely scratching the surface” listing of New Media coverage, showing the New Media has been covering the epic scandal for the epic scandal it is.

Mr Morrissey begins his Hot Air article:

The New York Post’s Michael Walsh wonders when the media outrage will arrive in the aftermath of the disastrous and deadly Operation Fast and Furious. The latest revelation shows that the ATF wasn’t really interested in stopping illegal gun sales or stopping the movement of guns across the border, Walsh writes, but something else entirely. And until the national media exposes the “lies” coming from the Department of Justice, Americans simply won’t get answers as to what purpose the ATF and DoJ really intended[.]

But Laura Curtis takes a different track.

Oh, sure, it’s a smoking gun showing that the Obama administration deliberately sold guns to narcoterrorists and deliberately failed to track them. That is a huge story. Watergate pales in comparison, if for no other reason than the body count, which currently stands at over 200 people.

It is also a smoking gun for the biased media, which is roundly refusing to cover the story.

She goes on to recount the outrageously outraged and shockingly shocked mainstream media’s hyperventilating reporting of George W Bush’s completely legal activities that saved American (and other) lives. Day after day, legal action after legal action, all which saved lives, hyperventilatingly covered in the major newspapers and on the TV news outlets.

But the Obama regime’s corrupt, illegal activities that have cost over 200 innocent American and Mexican lives? Meh. American public, the mainstream media’s “not that into you.” Laura Curtis finishes her article:

If you ever wanted definitive proof that the press operates as an appendage of the Democratic party, I give you Fast and Furious. Q.E.D.

In slightly modified trucker lingo, “you got that stuff right.”

First Solyndra, Then LightSquared, Now This

Solyndra got a half a billion dollar taxpayer-financed loan despite all the agencies and auditors warning against it. The Obama Administration tried to bully an Air Force 4-star General into changing his testimony regarding LightSquared in an attempt to deceive Congress. Both Solyndra and LightSquared have strong ties to Democrat donors and fund-raisers.

Hot Air has news concerning more, recent, Department of Energy loans to economically unfeasible companies with strong ties to Democrats. And the numbers are ugly. And the corruption and crony capitalism and pay-to-play is so strikingly obvious.

Here’s a bit of a run-down from Hot Air:
SolarReserve gets a 737 million dollar loan guarantee for a Nevada solar project from the Department of Energy.
SolarReserve has ties to George Kaiser.
George Kaiser raised 53,000 for Obama in 2008.
Kaiser is majority owner of Solyndra.
Kaiser’s firm votes on SolarReserve’s board.
Ron Pelosi has ties to SolarReserve.
James McDermott is a SolarReserve boardmember.
James McDermott contributed over 61,000 dollars to Democrat campaigns since 2008, including over 30,000 to Barack Obama.
James McDermott has ties with Harry Reid.
Lee Bailey is a SolarReserve boardmember.
Lee Bailey has donated over 21,000 dollars to Democrat campaigns since 2008. Beneficiaries include Obama, Reid, Boxer, Hillary.

First Solar got over 2 billion dollars in loan guarantees.
First Solar’s stock has fallen roughly 60 percent since February.
Michael Ahearn was an investor in First Solar but apparently got out while the gettin’ was good last month.
Michael Ahearn has contributed in excess of 100,000 to Democrats over the last several years.

SunPower got over 1 billion dollars in loan guarantees.
SunPower’s stock has fallen over 50 percent since April.
SunPower paid a lobbyist who has very close ties to Harry Reid in excess of 290,000 since 2009 to lobby for it.
SunPower contributed over 15,000 dollars to Democrats last year, with Harry Reid getting 4,000.
SunPower is predicted to lose money over the next couple years because their costs are too high for the market.

All in all, this “green jobs” slush fund the Obama Department of Energy is throwing around is greatly benefiting people who support Democrats — at the cost of harming the nation’s bottom line. Oh, by the way, SolarReserve’s loan guarantees came after Solyndra and LightSquared broke. Talk about Obama doing an “in your face” to the American people.

Federal Prosecutor A Little Loose With The Facts?

RS McCain said US Attorney Carmen Ortiz’s statement was “curious.” You might say that. Her statement?

I want the public to understand that Mr. Ferdaus’ conduct, as alleged in the complaint, is not reflective of a particular culture, community or religion.

What are the allegations against Rezwan Ferdaus?

Plotting to strike the Pentagon and the Capitol with C-4 filled remote-control planes.
Attempting to supply Al Qaeda with materials to be used to attack US military.

Sounds like a particular culture and religion to me.

He turned mobile phones into IED switches and passed them on to undercover agents he thought were feeding the switches to Al Qaeda. And he was pleased when he was told, falsely, that the IEDs harmed US soldiers. He was warned his devices could cause death or injury to women and children but that didn’t bother him.

RS McCain also notes the CBS article title:

Mass. musician accused of D.C. terrorist plot

So, what words did CBS offer from this “Massachusetts Musician?”

[H]e repeatedly told the agents that he was driven to kill Americans which he called “enemies of Allah.”

Because all musicians from Massachusetts want to kill American enemies of Allah, right? No. He’s a Mohammedan terrorist, like the underwear bomber, the New York City bomber, Nidal Hasan, the 9-11 attackers, the previous WTC bomber, the Fort Dix plotters, etc, etc.

The Boston Globe article linked above didn’t say anything about Carmen Ortiz’s political affiliations, so I did some digging and was shocked — shocked, I tell you — with what I found. (Do you believe me? Heh.)

The more difficult task, she and others say, is to sustain the attention on her office with the work she vowed to do when US Senator John Kerry and the late Senator Edward M. Kennedy nominated her for the post.
…
She has instituted a diversity hiring committee. And she works to serve as a role model for women and minorities.
…
Ortiz welcomes the scrutiny and even the criticism, saying it’s one of the reasons she has sought to stay in the public’s eye.

It’s what she promised Kerry and Kennedy, as she recounts a heartfelt conversation with the late senator in which she told him she would “make him proud.’’ She keeps a photo of Kennedy’s old Washington, D.C., office near her desk, among mementos of her accomplishments.

“He was enormously impressed by her, her life story,’’ said Eric Mogilnicki, Kennedy’s former chief of staff, who met with Ortiz recently. “She’s no stranger to the ups and downs of life, so I’m very confident she’ll be able to handle whatever the future holds for her.”

I do believe that wouldn’t make her a Conservative or a Moderate, but I’m just guessing here. And I wonder why the Boston Globe wouldn’t see fit to note who nominated her for her job. If a Republican nominated her, I’m sure that would have been noted.

Fast And Furious: A Scandal Of Epic Proportion

The breadth and depth of the Obama Administration’s involvement in the wholly corrupt Operation Fast And Furious is of epic proportion. I would venture to say there has been no time in the history of the US that a scandal of this size has ever before been perpetrated, in terms of the number and level of the people involved, in terms of the cover-up involved, and in terms of lives lost.

ATF bought guns, then sold them to illegal buyers. An ATF agent in charge ordered this done, then ordered the illegal buyers not be surveilled, then when the field agent who had disobeyed that corrupt order and surveilled them anyway reported the guns were being moved and requested the ATF take down the illegal buyers and those moving the guns, his supervisor flat-out refused, allowing the guns to just disappear. Then the supervisor got promoted.

An FBI informant was involved in illegally transporting the guns across the border. The FBI also covered up the fact one of the Fast And Furious guns, tied to the FBI, was used in a murder.

The Department of Justice has obstructed the Congressional investigation, ordering its people to not cooperate, deceiving the Congressional investigation, and refusing to release documents related to Fast And Furious.

The White House received emails regarding Fast And Furious as it was in operation.

Over 200 murders are tied to Fast And Furious guns, including civilians, Law Enforcement officials, Government officials, and including people on both sides of the border.

While the New Media has been covering this epic scandal as the epic scandal it is, Mainstream Media has in essence not given much weight to the scandal at all. And some Democrats, at one point, were trying to use the wholly corrupt Operation Fast And Furious in an attempt to take away gun rights.

I have created a chronological list of New Media reports on Fast And Furious that I’ll place below the fold. The list is far from exhaustive, barely scratching the surface. Nor does the list start at the beginning, but it is a decent place to work on some research. Do some research, if you haven’t already, and let your anger at the full-blown corruption grow. Then inform those around you and vote the bums out.

Critical Sarah Palin News

Critical Sarah Palin news! Highly important news about Sarah Palin! The paper of record, the New York Times has an announcement of major proportion concerning Sarah Palin!

Since I value the New York Times just a little less than my most recent bowel movement, I picked up this critical, earth-shattering news from Hot Air. What is the earth-shattering news that is so huge that the New York Times would write about it? What is so amazingly spectacular about Sarah Palin that it requires a New York Times piece?

#TopShot

For those who don’t know, Top Shot has entered its new season.

Jake, a competitor on this new season of Top Shot, is the living, breathing example of a worthless dirtball. His only redeeming quality is that he’s a good marksman. Everything else about him is dirtball to the extreme. He has no consideration for his teammates. He has no consideration for anyone else. He has no intention of listening to anyone else. The experts who are brought in to coach the various weapons have a very dim view of him. In short, he is the most worthless, lousy excuse for a human being that Top Shot has ever had on its program.

But he’s the perfect example of Barack Obama. Never listening to contrary positions. Always thinking his fecal matter don’t stink. Always producing more fecal matter than everyone around him combined. And of the people watching a weapons-heavy program (it is, afterall, a “who can shoot the best” program) less than 20 percent of the people are in his corner. Because he’s an absolutely worthless dirtbag poor excuse for a human being.

Did I mention he was black? Likely that’s the reason for a large percentage of people voting for him. Guaranteed that has nothing to do with the vast majority of the viewers who are disgusted by him.

Let’s just call it the Chicago way

Thanks to Karl, I saw this column from Daniel Howes of The Detroit News. Ford was running an ad:

featuring “real people” explaining their decision to buy the Blue Oval, a guy named “Chris” says he “wasn’t going to buy another car that was bailed out by our government,” according the text of the ad, launched in early September.

“I was going to buy from a manufacturer that’s standing on their own: win, lose, or draw. That’s what America is about is taking the chance to succeed and understanding when you fail that you gotta’ pick yourself up and go back to work.”

Sounds reasonable to me, and it reflects my feelings personally. When I bought a new truck in April of 2010, there was no way on God’s earth that I’d have bought a Chevrolet or GMC or Dodge pickup, precisely because they took the bailout; I was going to buy a Ford, period, and never even looked, nor intended to look, at a Government General Motors or Chrysler product.If they had given one to me for free, I’d have sold it, and taken the money and bought a Ford.

Mr Howes continued:

That’s what some of America is about, evidently. Because Ford pulled the ad after individuals inside the White House questioned whether the copy was publicly denigrating the controversial bailout policy CEO Alan Mulally repeatedly supported in the dark days of late 2008, in early ’09 and again when the ad flap arose. And more.

With President Barack Obama tuning his re-election campaign amid dismal economic conditions and simmering antipathy toward his stimulus spending and associated bailouts, the Ford ad carried the makings of a political liability when Team Obama can least afford yet another one. Can’t have that.

The ad, pulled in response to White House questions (and, presumably, carping from rival GM), threatened to rekindle the negative (if accurate) association just when the president wants credit for their positive results (GM and Chrysler are moving forward, making money and selling vehicles) and to distance himself from any public downside of his decision.

And now we have confirmation of Mr Howes’ story, that Ford was pressured by the Obama Administration.

Ford Motor Company faces continuing hardships from its decision to not accept the bailout. According to Mr Howes, Ford’s greater debt load leaves its competitors with better credit ratings, and Ford is not protected by a no strike clause from the United Auto Workers, the way GM and Chrysler are until 2015. On top of those competitive disadvantages, now we have the Obama Administration telling Ford it can’t run an ad which urges people to buy Ford products because Ford didn’t accept the bailout. And since the Obama Administration is penis-in-condom hand-in-glove with the UAW, given that the UAW now owns a significant share of GM, due solely to the bailout, the Administration has the hammer: either Ford agrees to drop the ad, or the UAW can force a strike.

I have a better idea: let’s just dump the thug who is our current President for someone a bit more honorable.
____________________________
Cross-posted on Common Sense Political Thought.

Democrat Outlook Worse Than 2010

Democrats are pinning their hopes on making a comeback after their disastrous 2010 election results, and they have selected 60 Republican-held “battleground” districts to try to make that change. Well, they can HOPE for CHANGE in the results all they want. According to a Democrat pollster, things look even worse now than they did in 2010. From National Journal comes the news.

One of the Democratic party’s leading pollsters released a survey of 60 Republican-held battleground districts today painting an ominous picture for Congressional Democrats in 2012. The poll shows Democratic House candidates faring worse than they did in the 2010 midterms, being dragged down by an unpopular president who would lose to both Texas Gov. Rick Perry and Mitt Romney.

Pollster Stan Greenberg released the poll with some sugary spin for Democrats, downplaying the results by arguing that the president’s jobs plan will improve the party’s fortunes.

How’s that working out for you? Yeah, that “jobs” plan is going over like a lead balloon as Senate Democrats are loudly declaring “No, you don’t”. And those lead balloons tend not to bounce all that well.

But the numbers – at least right now — are troubling for Democrats, and echoed some of the takeaways from the GOP special election upset in New York City last week. Instead of an overall anti-incumbent sentiment impacting members of both parties, voters are taking more of their anger out on Democrats. When voters were asked whether they’re supporting the Republican incumbent or a Democratic candidate, 50 percent preferred the Republican and just 41 percent backed the Democrat.

Voters in these districts said they were more supportive of Republicans than they were during the 2010 midterms, when 48 percent said they backed the Republican candidate and 42 percent said they backed the Democrat. (Republicans won 55 percent of the overall vote in these 60 battleground districts, while Democrats took 43 percent.) In 2010, Republicans netted 63 House seats – their best showing since 1948.

So, according to a Democrat pollster, the voters are two percent more likely to vote for a Republican and one percent less likely to vote for a Democrat now than in 2010, the year of the TEA Party-lead Republican tsunami. No, the Democrats will have to forget about trying to win back seats and start to figure out how to save what Democrat seats they have, because 2012 is lining up to be another year of across-the-board Republican gains, led by the TEA Party/Conservative grass-roots wave.

Here’s a blast from the past. January 25, 2010, ABC News.

Rep. Marion Berry, D-Ark., fears that these midterm elections are going to go the way of the 1994 midterms, when Democrats lost control of the House after a failed health care reform effort.

But, Berry told the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, the White House does not share his concerns.

“They just don’t seem to give it any credibility at all,” Berry said. “They just kept telling us how good it was going to be. The president himself, when that was brought up in one group, said, ‘Well, the big difference here and in ’94 was you’ve got me.’ We’re going to see how much difference that makes now.”

(What’s with the pink highlighting, ABC?) Yes, that was the difference, alright. The 2010 elections were an even greater landslide than the 1994 elections. And it continues to be the difference. After the 1994 elections, President Clinton commandeered multiple Republican agenda items as his own. After the 2010 elections, President Obama threw a hissy fit and doubled down on his ad hominem and straw-man attacks while maintaining the Leftist agenda. So, the difference between 1996 and 2012 is you Democrats have Obama.

The news coming out of Virginia is definitely bad for Democrats, as Ed Morrissey points out.

In 2008, Barack Obama sailed to victory over John McCain in Virginia by six points in the normally Republican state, promising “hope and change.” According to a new poll from Roanoke College in Virginia, Obama certainly brought change. The incumbent President trails both Mitt Romney and Rick Perry, and can only muster 33% support against a generic Republican — twenty points below his popular-vote percentage in 2008[.]
…
The really bad news? Roanoke polled adults, not registered or likely voters. Democrats tend to do much better in polls that don’t screen for registration, which means that a more predictive sample would undoubtedly have produced even less pleasant results for Obama.

Chances are very strong that Virginia is lost to Obama, as Virginians will vote the ABO (anyone but Obama) line in 2012. As Ed Morrissey said, expect Democrats to only put in enough money in Virginia to attempt to protect down-ticket incumbent Democrats.

New York City this year put a Republican in a seat held by Democrats since the 1920s as the Republican candidate tied the Democrat candidate directly to Obama. Nevada’s 2nd Congressional District, a “battleground” district Democrats hoped to capture, saw the Republican demolish the Democrat by 20 points as, once again, the Republican tied the Democrat directly to Obama.

Smitty notes that The New Republic’s William Galston is upset that Democrats are losing the independent vote.

As Democrats are looking at 2012 being a much worse outcome than 1996, there is another correlation, and that is between 2012 and 1980. There are many similarities: a bad economy that is not improving, a lot of ugliness going on in the Middle East that the President isn’t fit to handle, a very unpopular President, a Conservative grass-roots distaste for the Establishment Republicans, the Establishment Republicans fighting hard against a Conservative Republican candidate. But there are differences as well. In 1980, Republicans still had the shadow of Watergate hanging over them. In 2012, Democrats have more than just a shadow of Fast and Furious, Solyndra, LightSquared. It has even gotten to the point that many incumbent Democrats do not want to be photographed with Obama, because they cannot afford to be tied to Obama if they want to win reelection.

No, Democrats, the difference between Clinton and Obama is Obama never learned and is still rhetorically mauling the public. And the public doesn’t like being mauled.

Lighthouse at Portland

Yorkshire

I have added Yorkshire as an author on TBD so he can produce his landscape photography here to pretty-fy the place. As soon as he decrypts the emails I thought were already decrypted, I’m hoping to be viewing some outstanding panorama here. Yorkie, as I like to call him, has recently retired, but believe you me, when it comes to brain-dead Liberals, he’s busier than a Yorkshire in a butt-kicking contest.

I have also presented an offer to another photographer to have an identical position here. I hope to hear an affirmative answer from her in the near future as her photography is quite excellent.