iamned.com Blog

Ever get the impression that Obama tries to hard when he debates or gives speeches? He is too meticulous, articulate, and knowledgeable. He always tries to weigh both sides of an issue instead of simply answering the question with a yes or no. When Obama is asked a difficult question it apparent by the tone of his voice that he is perturbed and insulted. Then he spews a bunch of facts and figures, and tries to make some sort of sarcastic joke that falls flat. I suggest to Obama that during the Mississippi debate he phrase his answers into easily digestible sound bites and leave the joke telling to McCain. Although McCain’s jokes may be lame they always elicit laughter from the audience.

Hopefully during the debate Obama will be asked about being a Muslim because that is still a valid issue. In order for American citizens to make a truly informed decision on November 4th there need to be additional questions regarding Reverend Wright, flag lapel pins, lipstick on a pig, Michelle Obama finally being proud to be an American, terrorist fist jabs, shady real estate deals, and bitter Americans that cling to guns, their religion, and the constitution.

Nevertheless, no matter how much Obama talks about “change you can believe in” (whatever that means) it doesn’t change the fact that that Obama is still opposed to free trade/free market capitalism, increased defense spending, outsourcing, and tax cuts for the highest income earners. These aren’t American values. These aren’t the values that the hard working, working white Americans share; a demographic Obama needs to win. There is compelling evidence that Hillary would have made a superior democrat nominee because she does believe in free market capitalism, defeating our enemies through force versus negotiation, and she has the support of hard working Americans.

If there are two things liberals a good at it is complaining and losing. Liberals constantly bemoan the imaginary credit crunch/crisis, the fake recession, the non housing bubble, the rising oil, the rising gas prices, the rising consumer debt, and the war in Iraq ‘going on too long’, are just a handful of examples.

Liberal politicians are also adept at losing, a skill that will be put to test when Obama debates McCain on September 26th at the University of Mississippi. This will be the first debate between Obama and McCain, and therefore the stakes will be very high and the media coverage will be intense. The obstacles that Obama faces in this debate are the same that he encountered during the Rick Warren interview, which is that Obama gives rambling, scholarly answers that are heavily laden with liberal, anti-American, socialist rhetoric. Also working against Obama is the fact that McCain is a war hero and good American, while Obama and Michelle belittle small towns people who cling to guns, religion, and the constitution.

For the past six months McCain has been conveying his energy, economic, and foreign policy solutions though his townhall meetings. Obama, on the other hand, was busy calling people bitter while shopping for Arugula at Whole Foods. Numerous times McCain offered Obama the opportunity to debate him in one of these townhall meetings, but Obama refused. Why? Because Obama’s platforms are innefective, socialist, and anti-free market.

During the debate McCain will crush Obama on the issue of Energy. Obama has no solution to rising gas and rising oil while McCain supports offshore drilling and nuclear power. True, the oil may not be on line for ten years, or that the rigs are unsightly and detrimental to the environment, and the increase in supply may only shave a nickel off the price of gas, but that doesn’t matter. Atleast McCain is offering solutions, which is resuring to voters. Voters want defense/security (Invade Iran), more money (tax cuts for the rich), family values (teen pregnancy), and gas tax hollidays. They don’t care about such trivialities as the environment, rising deficits, or wire tapping.

There virtually no way Obama can come out ahead in this debate and the election. Perhaps if Obama changed his platform to support all forms of oil drilling such as opening up the Alaska Wildlife Refuge, advocating teenage pregnancy, giving tax breaks for oil companies, invading Iran, and raising the deficit to bail out financial institutions he could resonate better with working, hard-working Americans, white Americans. After all, as I wrote yesterday huge bailouts are good for wallstreet, middle America, the economy, and the free market. And Hillary DID win the popular vote. According to the polls it’s proving to be fortunate for McCain that Obama still doesn’t get it.

Obama is quoted in a speech in Manhattan “As most experts know, our economy is in a recession..” Hmm last time I checked the economy wasn’t in a recession because there hasn’t been yet a SINGLE quarter of negative GDP growth since 2001. A recession is formally defined as two or more negative quarters of GDP growth, yet there haven’t been any. This is just one of many of examples of the Marxist boo hoo hoo Obama spreading misinformation about the state of the economy to mislead voters.

Phil Gramm famously said we were in a mental recession, and while the boo hoo hoo democrats accused him as being ignorant and out of touch with “struggling Americans”, the comment had absolutely no negative affect on the McCain campaign in terms of polling, nor did McCain’s lapse regarding the number of homes . In fact, McCain’s poll numbers kept marching higher because Phil Gramm was indeed right, as I alluded to; we are a nation of crybabies (at least the pro-Obama liberals are).

Recently Obama’s campaign blasted McCain in a TV ad regarding his inability to remember how many homes he owns while using the ad as a backdrop to impart his empathy for the so called ’struggling home homeowners’; (Who ever these folks may be. I have yet to meet any. ). So why didn’t so called ‘housegate’ gain more traction? Why hadn’t his ads had any damping affect on the polls? The reason is because there was never a housing bubble or housing crunch to begin with. For the most part housing prices have been rising steadily for the past two decades, and while there have been isolated booms and busts on average the trend is up. Aspen, Palo Alto, and Manhattan are three examples of regions where home prices have been steady appreciating. Foreclosures only make up a tiny fraction of total mortgages. So while Obama habitually about a ‘crisis’ the opposite is the case.

The McCain Britney/Paris ad was a brilliant success because it was factual and did resonate with Americans regarding Obama’s and Michelle’s aloofness and celebrity status. This sentiment was compounded by Obama’s grandiose Reichstag speech, in which he appeared to display an undying affection towards the Germans as opposed to the bitter Americans. Too bad it’s the bitter Americans, not the Germans, who can vote.

In yet another setback for the Obama campaign, recent polls by Rasmussen show that McCain and Obama are even, erasing a four to eight point lead that Obama has held for the past month.

This should serve as a major wakeup call to the Obama campaign that there is a definite possibility Obama will lose the election, as I have written numerous times before.

But what about rising oil, gas, and food prices? What about the war in Iraq ‘going on too long’? What about the mental recession and the non-credit crunch? What about jobs being outsourced and rising tuition? What about polls that show that over eighty percent of Americans are dissatisfied with the direction of the country? You would think that with all these problems Obama would have a substantial lead over McCain, so why is he faltering?

The answer lies in economic theory, and Obama’s lack of solutions. While pro-Obama liberals complain constantly about rising gas and food prices, most Americans are gladly willing to pay inflated prices for food and gas because those goods are considered to be inelastic. What this means is that as the price rises the demand falls only very slightly. This is why Americans haven’t adjusted their driving and eating habits in spite of a rising prices in food and gas, and why $150 oil or $6 gallon gas isn’t nearly as big of a deal as the liberal media makes it out to be.

Also, Obama still comes across as an aloof elitist who doesn’t offer any solutions to anything. While McCain has outlined several energy solutions through his town hall meetings such as nuclear power, offshore drilling, and gas tax holidays Obama has yet to convey any specific plans to relieve high energy prices. In addition, Obama is still faces an insurmountable challenge appealing to hard working, middle class, white voters.

Meanwhile, there is evidence that the Iraq surge is working and Obama realizes that perhaps McCain was right all along not to pull out or demand a timetable. This further weakens his case against McCain because he can’t keep reusing the same talking point that the Iraq surge is a ‘failure’ and a ‘mistake’. And there are still valid concerns over Obama possibly being a Muslim, as well his his patriotism.

Obama is too liberal to win the presidency. I suggest to him that he concede the election early so that the nation won’t be as divided across party lines. McCain has much more experience and appeal to middle class and lower class voters. Oabma only appeals to SF liberals and he thinks small towns people are bitter and cling to guns and religion.

Recently the McCain campaign has gotten into some flack regarding the brutally honest statements by his economic adviser, Phil Gramm, which is that America is in a mental recession.

Phil Gramm is spot on. We are indeed in a fake recession. There hasn’t been a single negative quarter of GDP growth since 2001 and many sectors such as energy and materials continue to thrive. Stocks such as POT PCX CLF AAPL GOOG AAPL MA V RIMM, which I have recommended on my blog for awhile, have held up very well. Yes we are now officially in a bear market, but no recession.

If were were really in a recession why did Hancock and Wallie gross tens of millions of dollars over the weekend? If the consumer were really tapped out as the boo hoo hoo pro Obama liberals claim those movies wouldn’t have done nearly as well because Americans would have stayed at home. Why is Apple projected to sell 40 MILLION iphones? Why is Facebook, Google and Myspace seeing record traffic and revenues? So much for a recession.

Americans have tons of purchasing power, credit, and huge liquidity. There is no credit crunch or crisis, except a leftist media generated one. If Americans had no access to credit why would Visa and Mastercard stock be near record highs?

The truth of the matter is, Phil Gramm, a senior economist knows there is no recession, which confers what I have been saying for the past year. The only recession is an imaginary, pro Obama generated one. Period. Boo hoo hoo gas prices keep going up. Boo hoo hoo oil is a $146. Boo hoo hoo war in iraq is going on to long, boo hoo hoo I can’t afford groceries, education, and health care. Boo hoo hoo McCain is going to win in 08′ and Obama will lose. Boo hoo hoo jobs are being ’shipped overseas’. Pleeeeaase help me Obama I’m a crybaby liberal.

Oil WILL go to $200. Gas will go to $6 gallon. Facebook is worth $30 billion. We are still in the smartist era of hypercapitalism, web 2.0, consumerism, materialism, globalism, paymentism, and spendism. Phones will be wiretapped under FISA and you will like it. McCain will win. No pull out in Iraq and no time tables.

In the meantime instead of being a loser BUY these stocks and ETFs for the ‘new era’:

MOS POT IPI MA
V PCX EWZ KOL CLF
AAPL GOOG BIDU
RIMM FSLR BTU
CLR ANR OIL/USO

Recent polls have shown that up to two thirds of Americans support offshore drilling. It doesn’t matter to voters if it will take years for the oil to come on line or that the quantity of oil is small. At least McCain is offering a solution to rising oil and gas, and that is what voters what. Voters do support a gas tax holiday contrary to what the Obama lefties claim. Voters don’t care about the environment; environmentalism has never resonated with middle class, hard-working voters.

The McCain campaign has already unveiled a series of energy policies in the past two weeks under what is being called “The Lexington Project” to achieve energy independence by 2025.

The plan includes proposals ranging from lifting the ban on domestic offshore drilling exploration to creating a $300 million prize for the creation of a zero-emissions car battery.

Ads regarding his energy plan will air nationally on cable, and in Colorado, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

What energy plans have Obama proposed? None. While Obama is busy calling people bitter and shopping for Arugula at Whole Foods, McCain is conversing directly with the American people through his town hall meetings offering solutions for the problems Americans face.

Intrade is currently giving Obama a 64 percent chance of wining the 2008 presidential election, while McCain’s odds are just 25 percent.

Why are Obama’s numbers Intrade numbers so high? A recent newsweek poll shows Obama with a 15 point lead. However, polls conducted just a week ago gave Obama a meagerfive point lead. The fifeteen point difference in the newsweek polls seems to be a statistical outliers, possibly due to poor sampling. It seems extremely implausible that without any breaking scandals that Obama would abruptly gain an additional ten points over McCain.

I have have written numerous times that Obama will lose, and the intrade numbers will eventually reflect this inevitability. Within a a few months I the intrade spread will narrow to just four points with Obama’s odds at 52 and McCain’s at 48. This convergence to equilibrium will be triggered by increasing concerns Obama’s inexperience, his baby momma (Michele Obama), and his lack of appeal to hard working, white Americans.

One advantageous move by McCain is his recent support for drilling for oil offshore, which will will ease rising oil and gas prices. Obama, being a radical environmentalist liberal and a Marxist, opposes offshore drilling. What Obama fails to realize is that the vast majority of Ameircans could care less where the oil comes from as long as gas prices go down. McCain at least has a viable solution, while Obama is still belittling the ‘bitter’ people and giving out terrorist fist jabs. I can guarantee that McCain’s offshore drilling proposal WILL boost his poll and intrade numbers in the coming week.

(Warning: This blog entry is over 500 words. I you prefer to read off a cereal box hit your back button)

Although six months remain till the 2008 campaign draws to a close, political scientists are already prognosticating a strong victory for Obama, using historical election and economic data to back their claims. What they don’t seem realize is that realize is that we’re in a new era, and neo-liberals such as Obama don’t win elections.

But what about the imaginary recession, housing ‘bubble’, the credit crunch, the widening wealth gap, rising oil, rising gas, rising food, George W. Bush’s poor approval ratings, and the so called ‘unpopular’ war in Iraq? Don’t these negatives for the incumbent bode well for an Obama victory win in 2008? Political historians think they do. Allan Lichtman, a history professor at American University has created a system dubbed ‘13 Keys to the Whitehouse’, which supposedly has ‘predicted’ the winner of every presidential dating back to 1860.

“The keys are based on the thesis that elections turn on the performance of the party in control of the White House, in this case the Republicans. And they don’t depend on the particularities of the campaign,”

According to Lichtman’s analysis not once has the party in control been able to retain the White House if six out of the thirteen keys turn against the incumbent. Right now, seven are against McCain’s party, with two others leaning against it. Those keys measure incumbency, the state of the economy, social unrest, foreign developments such as war, the charisma of the candidates, inter-party contests, scandals and third-party challenges.

So doesn’t that pretty much ensure an Obama victory? Surely a system created by an esteemed professor that has proven infallible since 1860 can’t fail? Actually, it can fail because political prediction ’systems’ are for the most part biased by the observer, which invalidates any scientific objectivity. The problem with Lichtman’s key analysis is that it uses past data to try to extrapolate future results, and as many stock market traders can attest to hindsight is 20/20. Anyone can create a system and then ‘massage’ the variables to get the desired results. There is obviously no scientific, objective way of measuring ‘foreign developments’ or ‘charisma’ of a candidate since those variables are subjective and impossible to quantify.

Regardless of how many ‘keys’ are against McCain, the republican machine is still a force to be reckoned with. The success of the republican party lies in appealing to American’s fears and greed. While Obama talks vaguely about ‘hope’ and ‘change’, McCain has an entirely different tactic of using terrorism to instill fear in Americans while labeling Obama as inexperienced; a strategy that worked for Bush in 2004 and will work again in 2008. In addition, republicans play the family values card and the tax cut card, which has proven to be an unassailable strategy for sealing republican victories since Nixon’s ‘moral majority’.

Most Americans could care less about ‘hope’ and ‘change’; they want more money (tax cuts), security (pro guns, war on terror, war on Iraq and Iran), and preservation of traditional values (anti-gay marriage, anti-abortion). Neo-liberal values of environmentalism, ‘equality of opportunity’ and fighting ‘corporate corruption’ has never resonated with most Americans in the past and won’t in this election. This is why Obama is destined to lose in 2008 because he is a Marxist, welfare liberal. Instead of eliminating our enemies he wants to converse with them, instead of promoting wealth creation and capitalism he wants to impose more taxes and regulations on corporations and the rich.

The polls also show a potential uphill battle for Obama. Recent hypothetical general election polls show Obama and McCain to be nearly neck and neck. Obama ‘lead’ is within the margin of error, and hardly portends to a ‘landslide’ victory as many pundits are predicting. It is also interesting to note that although Bush’s approval ratings are at historical lows and only one third of Americans support the Iraq war, nearly half of Americans will vote for McCain. Why? Because in spite of the flaws of the administration many Americans would still rather have a war-mongering republican over a Marxist like Obama, which isn’t surprising if the ‘red scare’ of the 50’s is any reminder.

So what will happen next? By early August the tides will begin to turn against Obama. There will probably be another Reverend Wright type scandal or another bittergate and McCain will continue attacking Obama on his inexperience regarding terrorism and Iraq. Meanwhile, Obama’s Intrade prediction market numbers will fall from the present 62 percent chance of a 2008 victory to 50 percent. And come November 4th it will become painfully clear that Obama was just the ‘Osama’ the republicans needed for another victory.

Fox, which is fair and balanced, reported that Obama’s fist jab could be a terrorist signal which is a very valid point. In addition, Michelle Obama is Obama’s baby momma.

McCain will win the election because Obama is too liberal. No one cares about the war going on too long, the fake recession, the immaginary credit crunch, or rising oil, tution, outsourcing, food, and gas prices except radical, pro-Obama liberals.

The war will go on, food prices will go up, gas will go to $5 a gallon, oil will go to $200, jobs will be outsourced, consumer debt will keep rising, the dollar will keep falling, web 2.0 is not a bubble, and Facebook is worth $30 billion. The stock market will react favorably to all of this.

Silicon Valley real estate will keep rising. NO housing bubble there. NO recession. In a hypercapitalist, spendist, consumerist, smartist, globalist ‘new era’ which we are living in, marxist democrats like Obama Laden can’t win elections. This isn’t the 60’s or 30’s.

here is a boo hoo hoo-er that casts criticism on social networking:

http://mashable.com/2008/06/12/social-media-delusions-of-grandeur/

I’m certain Steven Hodson is a pro-Obama democrat who is jealous that his crappy website isn’t worth $30 billion like facebook or that his utopian, socialist democratic ideals aren’t being fullfilled.

He writes:

If social media was making any changes why are the homeless of the Katrina disaster still waiting on the government to fulfill their promises. How about the the Myanmar disaster now that everyone’s attention has turned elsewhere. Where is the social pressure from those bragging about changing the world with social media over the people who are still dying in Darfur. Why is it that social media isn’t holding our own government to the fire over our own homelessness and children falling through the cracks because their isn’t enough money for the services needed to save them.

——————–

Boo hoo hoo spoken like a true Marxist. The truth of the matter is, no one except pro-Obama liberals cares about homelessness, ‘children falling through the cracks’ (whatever that means), Katrina, Darfur, or Myanmar. What people care about is making money, gadgets such as the Iphone, spending money (spendism, consumerism), celebrities, and social networking. Most sane, level minded Americans would agree that George Bush’s repsonse to Katrina was more than adequate; it’s the radical liberals that continue to make a stink about it.