Yes, you read that right. Another day, another crazy outcome in the GOP primary season. Well, actually 3 crazy outcomes.

Here’s the lowdown from Politico:

Rick Santorum dealt an embarrassing setback to Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign Tuesday night, sweeping non-binding contests across three states and raising new questions about conservatives’ willingness to accept Romney as their nominee.
Santorum beat Romney handily in the Missouri primary and Minnesota caucuses, and well after midnight on the East Coast he was also declared the winner of Colorado’s caucuses. He defeated Romney by 30 percentage points in Missouri, 55 percent to 25 percent; in Minnesota, Santorum took 45 percent to Ron Paul’s 27 percent and Romney’s 17 percent.

The margin in Colorado was the closest of the three contests — Santorum led by 5 points with 100 percent of precincts in. But that defeat may have stung the most for Romney, who led polling in the Western state, where his Mormon faith was expected to be an asset.

So if these are non-binding…what’s happening to the delegates? Apparently the GOP thought this contest would be over because party leaders will decide in two of the states…which doesn’t really seem fair, does it?

Here’s more…

All three primaries and caucuses are largely symbolic and no delegates were awarded Tuesday night. Colorado and Minnesota Republicans will apportion their delegates in subsequent party meetings, while Missouri will hold an entirely new, nonbinding caucus process next month.

At this point, Rick Santorum has now won more primary contests than Mitt Romney. And the fact that he won 3 in one night is pretty amazing.

Also, Romney actually came in third in Minnesota. Ron Paul was second with 27%.

Has this race been blown wide open?

More as it develops…

The report was released in early July, but the MSM and blogosphere are just now beginning to pick up on what it says about our new law of the land.

Politico: Health reform’s bureaucratic spawn

CNN: Cafferty File

Ed Morrisey at Hot Air: ObamaCare: The Infinite Bureaucracy Act

Washington Examiner: Obamacare is just the beginning

Some Democrats have taken comfort in a recent tracking poll indicating that opposition to Obamacare has marginally decreased. I’d put that in the same category of self-delusion as “America is a center-left country”,”demographic realignment means a permanent Democratic majority“, and “a Republican cannot win Ted Kennedy’s seat”. This is legislation that only looks good if you blur your vision and avert your eyes. The promised deficit reduction has evaporated, the expected cost controls – don’t, and even before the most expensive benefits and costs kick-in, healthcare reform has already become an economic drag aggravating unemployment.

I expect the GOP will make sure everyone gets a good long rub-your-nose-in-it look between now and November. Every GOP candidate will be taking shots at Obamacare, and that is one slow fat rabbit to hunt. When you look at the chart and read the CRS report – the campaign ads write themselves. Since few Democratic Party candidate have any idea of what is in the hairball they voted for – well – lets see what happens when they have to keep explaining the details to the voters.

Missouri voters have taken a close look and made it clear what they think about the law. Claire McKaskill’s response to the vote illustrates the Democratic dilemma. She simultaneously acknowledges the depth and breadth of frustration with the law while trying to minimize the meaning of the vote. You can’t do both.

This administration is nothing if not sensitive to the political winds. To counteract the worsening negative perception, they’ve recruited Andy Griffith as spokesman:

Color me skeptical, but I don’t think an advertising campaign that emphasizes “framing” over content is going to have much of an impact. Particularly if the content is understood to be misleading, and the taxpayer funded ad is possibly illegal. But then, if you can’t trust the Sheriff of Mayberry – who can you trust?

^{x-posted from “Divided We Stand United We Fall”}

Proposition C passed by 70% last night and that has a lot of folks wondering if more states will follow suit to get initiatives like these on the ballot during times when vote turn out is extremely low.

The answer, of course, is yes. Similar initiatives will be on the ballot in Arizona and Oklahoma later this year. And I’d be shocked if they didn’t pass overwhelmingly too.

From NY Times:

“My constituents told me they felt like their voices had been ignored and they wanted Washington to hear them,” Jane Cunningham, a state senator and Republican who had pressed for a vote, said Tuesday night. “It looks to me like they just picked up a megaphone.”

The referendum, known as Proposition C, was seen as a first look at efforts by conservatives to gather and rally their forces over the issue. In the end, though, the referendum seemed not to capture the general population’s attention. Instead, Republican primary voters (who had the most competitive races on Tuesday) appeared to play a crucial role in the vote’s fate.

By the way, guess what else passed by 70% in Missouri during the exact same primary election 6 years ago when Republican turnout was high.

Still, will this ultimately mean anything? My guess is no. Because federal law will trump this vote.

However, one can’t say for certain until the courts have their say.

More from NYT:

Practically speaking, it remains entirely uncertain what effect the vote will have. The insurance requirement of the federal health care law does not come into effect until 2014. By then, experts say, the courts are likely to weigh in on the provision requiring people to buy insurance.

“While we’re disappointed that Missourians didn’t vote against this, we think the courts will ultimately decide it,” said David M. Dillon, a spokesman for the Missouri Hospital Association.

More as it develops.

The following video is heartbreaking, especially since it happened in my state. Still, this is happening every day in every other state over completely victimless crimes.

Here’s a quick explanation if you can’t watch the video (via Radley Balko)…

SWAT team breaks into home, fires seven rounds at family’s pit bull and corgi (?!) as a seven-year-old looks on. They found a “small amount” of marijuana, enough for a misdemeanor charge. The parents were then charged with child endangerment. So smoking pot = “child endangerment.” Storming a home with guns, then firing bullets into the family pets as a child looks on = necessary police procedures to ensure everyone’s safety.

Just so we’re clear.

And now…yeah, wow…

And yet people can smoke and drink to their hearts content around their kids and nobody bats an eye.

Here’s E.D. Kain’s take on it…

How can we give our government the authority to trample on its own citizens like this over what is by every sane and rational argument – not to mention every piece of scientific data – an incredibly harmless substance used consensually without any real side-effects? It boggles the mind.

Here’s the original story, which happened back in February…

Whitworth was arrested, and his wife and 7-year-old son were present during the SWAT raid, Haden said. A second dog, which Whitworth’s attorney Jeff Hilbrenner described as a corgi, also was shot but was not killed.

“The family is concerned with what happened,” Hilbrenner said. “We don’t feel like what happened in the home was appropriate. The priority right now for us is the misdemeanor charges.”

Police discovered a grinder, a pipe and a small amount of marijuana, Haden said. Because the SWAT team acts on the most updated information available, the team wanted to enter the house before marijuana believed to be at the location could be distributed, she said.

Long story short…if the right wing, Constitution-loving crowd really wanted to fight tyranny…well…here ya go. This is it. Shock and awe in the face of some pot and some pets.

What’s telling about the conversations surrounding the “evils” of government run health care is how many people seem to reflexively applaud the notion of government staying out of the business of health care…and yet nobody who’s on Medicare wants to get rid of it.

Watch the following clip and tell me it’s not frustrating to watch…

And so it goes…

A truly dumb move by St. Louis airport employees is recorded and shared here by Fox News…

Is Missouri’s militia/Ron Paul tie still in full effect?

One note, the commentator in the middle who tries to tie this to Obama’s economic policies at the very end was a truly hacky move. He didn’t need to go there, but there it is nonetheless.

Otherwise, a very good clip.

(h/t: Below The Beltway)

This was definitely troubling, so it’s good to see that some real action was taken after the report was revealed.

From McClatchy:

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — The Missouri Highway Patrol this week retracted a controversial report on militia activity and will change how such reports are reviewed before being distributed to law enforcement agencies.

The Highway Patrol also will open an investigation into the origin of the report, which linked conservative groups with domestic terrorism and named former presidential candidates Ron Paul, Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin.

The Lt. Gov has also suggested that the Director of Public Safety be put on leave pending an investigation into how the report came about. I think that’s harsh, because there probably are some ties between 3rd party supporters and militia members, but the big thing here was the profiling based on bumper stickers. That was just a lazy move and the DoPS should have known better.

However, 3rd party supporters should take note at how quickly this was reversed once it was discovered. In other words, try not to fall into the trap of thinking this is part of a conspiracy. We’re still a nation of checks and balances, and this situation demonstrates that.

Still, I think somebody should keep an eye on the guy who put all those stickers on his car in the picture above. :-)

I’m just saying…

If you’re in Missouri, it might be better to take that old Ron Paul or Bob Barr bumper sticker off your car. A February 20 report to help Missouri law enforcement identify domestic terrorists has some alarming advice.

The report is put out by the Missouri Information Analysis Center, which is a “public safety partnership consisting of local, state and federal agencies.” It collects information on matters of homeland security and disseminates it throughout Missouri and neighboring states.

Supposedly, this is a report not meant for public distribution, but it is getting wide dissemination throughout the media. Although not one of my favorite sites because of exaggerated conspiracy theories, infowars.com has copies of the report.

In an attempt to identify where militia members may gather, the report identifies sources of political and anti-government rhetoric that it claims are suspect.

“Militia members most commonly associate with 3^rd party political groups. It is not uncommon for militia members to display Constitutional Party, Campaign for Liberty, or Libertarian material. These members are usually supporters of former Presidential Candidate: Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and Bob Barr.”

Ralph Nader must be jealous not to be included as a subversive.

However, if you think being liberal might get you off easy, there are still ways to catch the liberal terrorists in our midst.

“Militia members commonly display picture, cartoons, bumper stickers that contain anti-government rhetoric. Most of this material will depict the FRS, IRS, FBI, ATF, CIA, UN, Law Enforcement and “The New World Order” in a derogatory manner.”

It looks like as long as you don’t question the government, then you won’t be a suspect. That makes just about everyone a suspect.

Here, let’s give the Missouri authorities a chance to explain themselves as they did in this AP story:

Lt. John Hotz of the Missouri State Highway Patrol said the report comes from publicly available, trend data on militias. It was compiled by the Missouri Information Analysis Center, a “fusion center” in Jefferson City that combines resources from the federal Department of Homeland Security and other agencies. The center, which opened in 2005, was set up to collect local intelligence to better combat terrorism and other criminal activity, he said.

“All this is an educational thing,” Hotz said of the report. “Troopers have been shot by members of groups, so it’s our job to let law enforcement officers know what the trends are in the modern militia movement.”

Ron Paul bumper stickers. Anti-CIA rhetoric. That puts you on the path to be watched by Missouri law enforcement because you might be out to shoot them.

The report has some very weak arguments. It lists one of the motivators for the rise of militias the idiotic theory from Russian Professor Igor Panarin that the U.S. is going to split into six different nations as early as this year. According to this delusion, the Western U.S. may become part of China and the east coast will become part of the European Union. I must assume the authors of this report must have been looking for filler to include this lunacy. When Panarin presented this idea in Moscow recently, even the Russians snickered.

The report has just enough viable information about extremist Christian groups, white supremacist organizations, militant abortionists and anti-immigrant backers to give credence that it offers the “educational” value that officer Hotz said it is about. That is the problem. What is going to stop someone in law enforcement from believing all of it?

As much a threat the federal government can be to civil liberties, it increasingly looks like it’s the state cops that are going to have to be watched. Missouri is not the first state to head in this direction. Recently, a program in Maryland put peace-activist nuns, among others, on its terror watch list. However, all was not lost. In the name of national security, this specially trained unit spent hours investigating a potential chicken theft.

When anti-government rhetoric becomes something law enforcement wants to watch, then we all have cause to worry.

(from Foolocracy.com)

One week after I argued that my senator should be on MTP advocating for the stimulus package, well, there she is.

Coincidence?

Yes, probably.

She even tweeted about it today…as well as some thoughts on the stimulus yesterday…

McCaskill brings up a point that I’d like to address because there’s been so much ill will on this blog for the current bill that I’d appreciate at least a little acknowledgment that the legislation that will pass next week is a compromise between Dems and Repubs. It may not be the bill you want, and there may be some stuff in there that you don’t agree with, but Dems have stripped out the silly 1% that Republicans decided to key in on, so they’ve moved towards them, not away from them. To suggest anything else is simply not accurate.

Also, Republicans have set up a transparently dishonest premise that compromise means cutting the bill in half and making the vast majority of it tax cuts. Regardless of your politics, I hope we can agree that there’s no way they can reasonably expect that their Democratic colleagues would adopt those ideas. Not after they oversaw this once-in-a-lifetime economic collapse.

In other words, it’s very clear now that the vast majority of Repubs were going to vote against this thing from the very beginning. So when people talk about the bipartisanship train going off the rails, it’s not Obama who put dynamite on the tracks.

But to McCaskill’s point about Krugman…there’s no such thing as a perfect bill. So if you’re arguing that Senate Dems are simply slaves to Keynesian ideology and they’re using this crisis to prove it, then you’re not paying attention to what’s going on. Ideologues like Krugman would like a $1.2 trillion bill and has said as much. But politics is the art of the possible, and McCaskill rightly argues that without the current cuts, there wouldn’t be the votes to pass it.

So before liberals start to pile on the more moderate politicians, just remember who made it possible that we even were able to do something about this economic crisis in the first place.

On my Meet The Press post on Sunday I lamented that John Kerry was being put out there to argue the stimulus package. He’s just not up for it because he doesn’t seem the least bit passionate anymore. Plus, he’s from Massachusetts and nothing says tax-and-spend like a senator from the far east.

Instead, I argued that somebody like Claire McCaskill should be front and center to argue this thing. After all, hers is a state that barely went for McCain and, as such, she represents the views of the more independent minded among us.

Some of you told me I didn’t know what I was talking about.

Well, check out the Missouri senator tonight on Hardball…

So, am I wrong?

Listen, I watched her consistently during the campaign trail and she was by far one of the most energetic and effective surrogates for Obama. Here you have a female moderate senator from a swing state telling folks why they should take a shot on a junior Senator from one of the most liberal states in the union. And every single time she nailed it.

Obama would do well to continue to use her again and again in the coming days. She could help save this bill from itself.

With the announced retirement of Republican Senators Mel Martinez (FL), Kit Bond (MO) and George Voinovich (OH), 2010 could be a tough year for the GOP in these three swing states. But the outlook isn’t all bad.

In 2008, Republicans had a difficult time finding candidates who could compete for open seats. This time around, the party is better prepared. According to Politico, the names we should be paying attention to are former state House Speaker Marco Rubio in Florida, former U.S. House Minority Whip Roy Blunt in Missouri and former Rep. Rob Portman in Ohio. All three men have significant government experience, strong fund-raising bases and are generally well liked.

Adding to Republican prospects is the fact that, if either of these men fail to grab the nomination, each state has other potential candidates who could compete well on a state-wide level.

Democrats also have strong prospects in these three states and will undoubtedly do everything they can to capture the seats and move that much closer to a Senate super-majority. Of course, the problem for Democrats is swing states have a habit of swinging. If the state of the nation does not improve by 2010, voters may turn against the Democrats. If they do, Republicans look surprisingly well-positioned to retain their seats in Florida, Missouri and Ohio.

Well, my home state definitely took its sweet damn time announcing this, but now it’s finally official that we picked Mac, which means we’ve picked the loser for only the 2nd time in the past 100 years.

Here’s more…

The narrow McCain Missouri victory, by just 3,902 votes out of 2,888,000 cast, means that Missouri sided with the presidential loser for just the second time in the last century.

Missouri also “got it wrong” in 1956, when it delivered a narrow 3,984-vote win to Democrat Adlai Stevenson over Republican incumbent President Dwight D. Eisenhower.

The state had remained unclaimed this year as election officials awaited final results from four locales — the city and county of St. Louis, Jackson County near Kansas City and from rural Montgomery County. Those tallies arrived Wednesday at the Secretary of State’s office.

McCain gained 31 votes in the final returns, while Obama actually lost 235 votes. Election officials found that a figure for the Illinois senator had been improperly entered and corrected the error in the new totals, said spokesman Ryan Hobart.

One thing’s for sure…when we’re wrong we’re not wrong by much. Less than 8,000 in the past 100 years? Wow.

And sure, Obama could contest the results, but there’s no point to that.

So that means the final electoral tally is…

Obama: 365
McCain: 173

And scene.

Listen MO,

I know you like being the swing state of all swing states, but seriously…it’s time to decide who you’re giving your electoral votes to.

Yes, I know you’ve chosen the loser in the election only once in the past 100 years, but nobody’s perfect and it looks like you picked McCain instead of Obama this time. But hey, it was only by about 5,000 votes and both candidates were pretty good this time (let’s agree to disagree on Palin) so I can imagine why you had such a difficult time figuring this one out.

Regardless, you’ve had more than week now and it shouldn’t be that hard to round up all the absentee and provisional ballots.

Show me a result soon. Please.

Your friend and resident,
Justin Hussein Gardner

PS – Also, could you do something about the roads?

I don’t know if there will be a recount in either state because the totals are so close, but as I predicted…Missouri didn’t pick the winner for only the second time in over 100 years.

On the other hand, Indiana delivered for Obama and I think it was clear from very early in the evening that if McCain was having trouble with Indiana, his dream was pretty much over.

This is how the AP saw it around 2 am Eastern this morning…

WASHINGTON (AP) — Another state that hasn’t voted for a Democrat for president in quite a while has done so this time.

By a narrow margin, Barack Obama is the winner in Indiana. The state’s polls were among the first to close, but the outcome wasn’t clear until long after Obama’s victory speech.

The last time Indiana voted for a Democrat for president was when Lyndon Johnson was elected in 1964.

The only question now: has it really turned blue? I have my doubts. I think deep, deep resentment for the Republicans will be replaced with maybe not-as-deep resentment for the Democrats.

We shall see…

(photo courtesy of jparonline)

I saw this story on CNN earlier and I’m happy to report that the lines are once again moving at the 5th Ward polling station.

Basically, people who were there early at 6:00 am didn’t get to vote until 8:30 because they had election officials had the wrong registration books. The line literally stretched down an entire residential block.

This from fellow 5th Warder Justin Parlette via Twitter who was there…

@jpgardner I had a 2 1/2 hour wait at the now infamous Immanuel Lutheran Church in Westport.

I, however, did not wait.

Once I saw that crazy line at around 7:30 am I walked home the few blocks to my house and waited until about 45 minutes ago to vote. The line was still out the door, but it wasn’t nearly as bad as it could have been.

Still, the turnout today is bigger than I’ve ever seen at any polling station in Kansas City, and other family members of mine sprinkled throughout KC are reporting similar lines even with no discernible problems.

Kansas City is coming out in force today, and no doubt it’ll heavily favor Obama.

More as it develops…

And actually, just to give you a preview of my election night prediction…this is pretty close to what I’m thinking.

First, the Obama leads…

Florida: Obama +2
Obama: 47%
McCain: 45%

Virginia: Obama +3
Obama: 47%
McCain: 44%

Pennsylvania: Obama +4
Obama: 47%
McCain: 43%

Nevada: Obama +4
Obama: 47%
McCain: 43%

Colorado Obama +5
Obama: 49%
McCain: 44%

And then, the McCain leads…

Missouri: McCain +1
McCain: 47%
Obama: 46%

Ohio: McCain +2
McCain: 47%
Obama: 45%

North Carolina: McCain +3
McCain: 49%
Obama: 46%

And that’s it. These are the last polls from NBC before the election.

The big news here is that Colorado is really starting to turn blue, and nearly every news organization has changed it to lean Obama.

Because while wins in Georgia and Missouri would be nice, Obama doesn’t need them. But he does need wins in Colorado, Virginia and Nevada if he doesn’t want to worry about Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania. Although I’d bet my car that he wins Pennsylvania.

The numbers…

Georgia: McCain +5
McCain: 52%
Obama: 47%

Missouri: McCain +2
McCain: 50%
Obama: 48%

Virginia: Obama +9
Obama: 53%
McCain: 44%

Colorado: Obama +8
Obama: 53%
McCain: 45%

Florida: Obama +4
Obama: 51%
McCain: 47%

As I’ve stated before, I don’t think Obama will take Florida or Ohio, but I actually think he has a shot at Georgia given its extremely high African American population and their massive early voting turnout.

And Missouri? Well, who knows, but if Obama is elected history shows us that Missouri will probably turn blue. If not, it’ll probably be in McCain’s column.

Here’s a little more from CNN about their electoral map…

The new numbers in Colorado, along with similar findings from other new polls in the state, are factors in CNN’s move of Colorado from a toss up state to lean Obama in our new Electoral College Map. CNN is also changing Indiana from lean McCain to toss up. A new CNN Poll of Polls in Indiana suggests McCain holds a two point lead over Obama in a state that hasn’t voted for a Democrat in a presidential election since 1964. The poll of polls is an average of the latest state surveys.

With the switch of Colorado’s nine electoral votes and Indiana’s 11, CNN now estimates that if the election were held today Obama would win states with 286 electoral votes and McCain states with 163, with 89 electoral votes still up for grabs. Two-hundred and seventy electoral votes are needed to clinch the presidency. Obama’s estimate of 286 electoral votes is a jump from 274 in our most recent electoral college map.

Here’s their map…

More battleground polls soon…

Okay, they’re not tied, but a 1 point lead for each might as well be tied.

Research 2000
Obama – 48%
McCain – 47%

Mason/Dixon
McCain – 46%
Obama – 45%

And so here we are. Missouri didn’t seem in play in September, but the swing state of all swing states is solidly in the toss up column now.

Still, Obama doesn’t need Missouri. With Colorado and Virginia stronger bets come election night, he’s already at 286. The Show Me state would be electoral gravy.

On the other hand, McCain can’t lose Missouri. Because if he does, the path to 270 is impossible. But given that he’s going to spend most of his time in Pennsylvania in the last week hoping to somehow turn around Obama’s double digit lead there, Missouri could very well go blue due to lack of attention.

There aren’t any details for the M/D poll, but here’s some from Research 2000′s…

Although statistically insignificant, Obama’s lead is his first in Missouri against McCain in any Research 2000 polls this year. The previous poll, in late September, showed McCain with a one-point edge. [...]

Ali says Obama’s strength with voters on economic issues is undoubtedly helping his cause. More than half of those polled in Missouri (52 percent) said they trusted his judgment more on the economy, compared with 43 percent for McCain.

Obama also got significantly higher marks on health care and the environment. He edged out McCain on gas prices, energy and taxes.

McCain was deemed far more trustworthy in tackling terrorism, international affairs, the war in Iraq and Supreme Court appointments.

More as it develops…

That’s pretty impressive.

The Obama campaign says they’ve been told by the St. Louis Police Department that about 100,000 people gathered to hear Obama’s rally in St. Louis earlier Saturday.

No wonder he’s doing better in the Show Me State.

By the way, if you’re from Kansas City, he’ll be at the Liberty Memorial in a couple of hours.

Not much change from last week to this week, so the story is essentially that Obama’s numbers are holding steady in these key battleground states with 21 days left.

Florida
Obama 51, McCain 46
Week ago: Obama 52, McCain 45)

Missouri
Obama 50, McCain 47
Last week: Obama 50, McCain 47

North Carolina
Obama 48, McCain 48
Last week: Obama 49, McCain 48

Ohio
Obama 49, McCain 47
Last week: McCain 48, Obama 47

Virginia
Obama 50, McCain 47
Last week: Obama 50, McCain 48

By the way, 1000 likely voters were polled in each state, and the MOE is +/- 3.