Rasmussen calls Senate a dead heat, TradeSports favors Dems to take House

posted at 1:39 pm on October 2, 2006 by Allahpundit

It was 45-44 for Corker in Tennessee as of a month ago. Today it’s 48-43 Ford.

Which means the Senate is now 49-49, with New Jersey and Missouri toss-ups.

On TradeSports, GOP retention of the House was trading at 58 on Friday. Last price as of this moment?

46.2.

It’s been awhile since I got drunk in the middle day. The last time was … yesterday, I think.

It’s hard to keep track, what with all the blackouts.

The good news? After all the racial nonsense, Allen’s still up by six in Virginia.

I guess that’s good news. Relatively speaking.

In other news, Andrew Sullivan now seems to believe that homosexuality and pedophilia are somehow related.

Dissent is patriotic — and optimistic! Election Projection still has the GOP retaining both houses, although surely the Foley effect has yet to be fully felt.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

(by the way, this rant is in general and not direct at AP or anyone… I just realized I say “you” a couple times, but I’m just speaking in general to a particular crowd)

In other news, Andrew Sullivan now seems to believe that homosexuality and pedophilia are somehow related.

Actually, Sullivan is really trying to blame the hostility of Republicans towards gays for Foley’s behavior. He’s claiming that being forced to stay in the closet drives them to this sort of behavior. A very different claim.

I would like to make that distinction because I DO believe they are related, in that they are both perversions and against human nature. Note that year by year, laws against gay acts are being removed from the books as society becomes more secular/”progressive”… Let’s hope the same isn’t true for pedophiles. I can just see it now, all the NAMBLA sickos “I’m born this way! I’m naturally attracted to children and you’re infringing on my civil rights!”

I know, I know “that’s different, we’re talking about two consenting adults with regular homosexuality!” So what? What evidence do you have that they didn’t choose their behavior/lifestyle any more than you pedophiles? Don’t get me wrong, I’m not justifying the behavior of pedophiles, I think they’re both wrong and I’m attempting to draw a comparison. What makes an “adult”? Ya know? Someone who’s 17 years and 364 days old isn’t any different than 18, it’s just a number that has been decided is “adult”. Some people develop and/or mature earlier…

What are you going to say when some sicko pedophile says “I am born this way and I like 15 year old boys!?” 100 years ago you’d have said “tough sh**” to any adult gays demanding the right to be bone smugglers. Now you can’t hide from it (especially here in VT). So how can you (folks who support “gay rights”, etc.) tell some gay pedophile that he’s not born that way or wanting to act on his own natural compulsions?

Again, I disapprove of both behaviors, believe they’re artificial and chosen… But my point is that you have no proof that one is natural and something they’re born with, so who are you to condemn the other? As for gays specifically, talk to me when they figure out how to produce offspring.

RightWinged on October 2, 2006 at 1:59 PM

So you think homosexuals choose to be homosexual. Interesting. When did you make the choice to be heterosexual?

Pedophilia is a form of arrested sexual development, sad family of disorders that produces transvestites. Before you jump to any conclusions, I believe pedophiles should be kept away from children at all costs, if that’s jailed for life, so be it. But it’s definitely a sickness. That’s why most (thinking) people were more outraged at the inaction of the Catholic hierarchy than at the actual perpetrators. The hierarchy’s only excuse was purely craven.

honora on October 2, 2006 at 2:22 PM

As for gays specifically, talk to me when they figure out how to produce offspring.

RightWinged,

They’re working around this little biological inconvenience. Lesbian couples can produce children via clinically donated sperm. Gay couples can acquire children via adoption.

In my state, there’s pressure being exerted to loosen the restrictions that prevent financially-qualified homesexual couples from being foster parents. I believe this is a stepping stone to breaking down barriers relating to adoption.

AP,

Thanks for the TradeSports link. After I enabled my Javascript, I observed a few minutes of the unmoderated live chat that was happening on that page. I don’t recommend that people go there from their work computers…

The live chat showed me this Foley incident is a windfall for the Dems. If it is true this has been going on for a while, though, I wonder why they didn’t wait until 1 week before the election before breaking the story?

Makes me wonder what other big news story is waiting out there….

Dave Shay on October 2, 2006 at 2:26 PM

So, I still haven’t come to an opinion if it matters which party holds power (I’m sure there is a right answer… at least I hope there is). The one motivation I have to keep the ‘Pubs in power is to watch DUers’ & Kosacks’ heads explode and then watch the splitting of the Democrat party.

Now that’s entertaiment.

Editor on October 2, 2006 at 2:32 PM

At the end of the day, most could not care less what adults do in the privacy of their bedrooms.

However the transparency exhibited by homosexuals as it pertains to their political activism is alarming. It is apparent that they are the predominant “Single Issue” constituency in the Country. Their militancy regarding their sexual proclivities seems to override all other issues entirely. Even to include the hypocrisy of throwing fellow travelers like Foley under the bus solely because he is aligned with the wrong party.

One could conclude that the shame and self loathing that evidently is part of the homosexual lifestyle is so pervasive that it overwhelms rational thought. In their effort to “mainstream” their deviance, they rail at any and all who they feel might be intolerant. Unfortunately for the Country this manifests itself in many forms that are Anti-American and helpful to the enemy in our war on Terror.

Examples include the MSM becoming a fifth column for the Terrorists. The Liberal 9/11 deniers. The NY Times releasing classified information time and again. The Democrat leadership echoing Al Qaeda mantras against the Bush Administration, etc. etc.

Slick Willie on the other hand is worshipped among this cult. His standing among gays is certainly helped by the fact that he married a Lesbian and appointed a record number to his Cabinet.

there it is on October 2, 2006 at 2:36 PM

Sullivan is also buying into the Kos-inspired “Goldwater Democrats” nonsense.

Maybe someone should remind him of a great Goldwater quote: “To disagree, one doesn’t have to be disagreeable.”

Slublog on October 2, 2006 at 3:17 PM

What the closet does to people–the hypocrisies it fosters, the pathologies it breeds–is brutal.

Andrew Sullivan

Then, what is Mr. Sullivan’s excuse? He’s certainly no longer in the closet.

The votes will be counted on the night of Nov. 7, and the morning after.

This Foley story has just begun to unfold. These ‘sheep’ will be counted in the next 1-2 weeks, and it’s going to be ‘beautiful’, but nor for whom they think.

Entelechy on October 2, 2006 at 3:26 PM

Glenn Reynolds has a post up noting Ford’s having been a regular on “Southern Roots Radio,” a local hard-right talk radio show. Reynolds links this to Ford’s being up 5% in polls.
Reynolds writes, “this willingness to engage people rather than coming across as condescending has paid big dividends.” He says this applies to Phil Bredesen as well.

I don’t know much about Bredesen but I’ve caught a lot of Harold Ford on the cable news channels.

I think Reynolds’ perception of Ford is accurate but wrong.
Accurate in that Ford’s outreach has been successful.
Reynolds calls Ford smart for doing this. Also accurate.

But Reynolds is as wrong about Ford as he was when he misperceived Clinton.

There’s a strain of phony aggressive earnestness to Ford.
Same as Clinton. Same as Carter.
A good number of good people always buy into aggressive earnestness.
For some of us our BS detectors sound off.
It’s visceral. So sorry, facts are slim.

People pleasing is not a character asset.

We all know what it was about Clinton’s family that warped him into a people pleaser.
I remember Billy Carter. And I don’t think a guy like that can come from a healthy family dynamic. Anyway Carter’s certainly a people pleaser.
This past week I read something about Ford’s family which might well create a people pleaser.

I know my facts are thin. But I trust my gut.
If you don’t like any of of that then feel free to ignore me.

If Harold Ford Jr ever runs for national office the only way he’ll get my vote is if his opponent is very, very weak and flawed.

Stephen M on October 2, 2006 at 3:46 PM

honora, everything you said screams of “because I say so”, but you offer no evidence to support anything you said. I would respond further, but I already did because your reply was predictable… reread my original comment as a reply to you.

RightWinged on October 2, 2006 at 4:08 PM

Rasmussen gets the results he wants to get until about a week before an election.

Republicans are somewhat energized to vote. Are liberal democrats?

DannoJyd on October 2, 2006 at 4:27 PM

Actually RW, your statements also scream “because I say So”.
Their have been psychological studies on pedophilia, and the DSM IV ( the psychologist book on mental disorders)catagorizes it as a mental illness.

I have a bit harsher view on pedophiles. Out back with a shotgun is the only cure, and the only consideration they should have.

Now to define a minor… thats harder. Used to be a 14 year old girl could marry a 40 year old man in this country. In some states you can get married at 16. Course this implies consent. When their is no consent it is rape, and I can refer you to my shot gun solution.

Homosexuality is part choice, and part inclination. Look at the type of woman you find attractive. And then look at the type of lady you find ugly. If society said that you could only be with women that looked like Pelosi or Hilary would you follow the dictates of society, or seek out the lady you find attractive?
With homosexuals it is the same thing. They find certain members of their sex appealing, more so then the oppasite sex. Why do they? Beats me. But it has nothing to do with their belief, or lack there of, in a God. It is the same reason why I find oriental women and red heads irrisistable. I do not know why I do, I just do.

To the final question:

What are you going to say when some sicko pedophile says “I am born this way and I like 15 year old boys!?”

I will say that what consenting adults do to each other is their own problem, not mine. But when a non consenting child is brought into it, let me get my shot gun.

Wyrd on October 2, 2006 at 4:28 PM

I predicted that the democrats would say it’s Bush’s fault for his policy against gay marriage. I just didn’t think it would be Sullivan to say it. I wish I knew how to link to my original post…ugh.

SouthernGent on October 2, 2006 at 4:37 PM

Addendum- Their is a movement to remove paedophilia from the DSM iv.
I forgot to add that above.

Wyrd on October 2, 2006 at 4:40 PM

SouthernGent, why not copy and paste your origional post, then link that to where you posted it?

DannoJyd on October 2, 2006 at 4:42 PM

Wyrd I’m crashing at the moment but couldn’t not respond to that… first of all, you went back to the “consenting adult” thing in the end there, which again means you’ve missed my point.

as for this:

Homosexuality is part choice, and part inclination. Look at the type of woman you find attractive. And then look at the type of lady you find ugly. If society said that you could only be with women that looked like Pelosi or Hilary would you follow the dictates of society, or seek out the lady you find attractive?
With homosexuals it is the same thing. They find certain members of their sex appealing, more so then the oppasite sex. Why do they? Beats me. But it has nothing to do with their belief, or lack there of, in a God.

This is another “because you said so”… Part inclination? Says who? The society that has become slowly more and more accepting of it? You talk about getting out your shot gun. The same would have been said a few generations ago about gays before society “progressed” (not the word I would use though). The point again is that pedophiles and gays are choosing their unnatural behavior, and the fact that you brought God in to the debate to argue against me shows how simply you look at this matter.

I’m suspecting you aren’t a liberal, but invoking God to argue against someone who opposes homosexuality on obvious natural grounds is pathetic. I didn’t say “God says” or “the Bible says”, but you (or usually a liberal) bringing God in to the discussion is an attempt to invalidate criticism of gays. Like I said, I’ve gotta crash for a while and I barely even know what I’m typing right now (especially because this fricken mosquito keeps flying around and distracting me)… so… can someone else please handle this?

RightWinged on October 2, 2006 at 5:07 PM

Homosexuality is a dead end in terms of propagating the species, and marriage is the institution/sacrament best suited for the raising of children/offspring.

Enough said.

DannoJyd on October 2, 2006 at 6:13 PM

Keeel da Mosquito!

I probaly should not have used the god word. truth to be told though, this nation is built on Judeo Christian ethics, and those are what your origional post seemed to touch upon. It was appearant you were not using ancient Greco roman values, if You had I would have invoked Zeus or Apollo.
RW, this is more of an argument in semantics. My position s that A person is attractive to who they are attracted to, be that a hetero sexual or homo sexual attraction. Your position is that some one wakes up and decides that they are more attracted to another person. I placed forth some examples about attraction. All you have done is state unequivacly that ones sexuality is a choice, and have no evidence to back it up. You have not even slapped some anacdotal evidence down, as I have done. Your position is that homosexuality is unnatural. But that is your opinion. Ever see two bulls getting it on? I have. How about a couple of she dogs in heat? The Female Jackel has a pseudo penise that she uses on other females. Evidence of Homosexuality is all through the natural world. So is canabilism. What makes it wrong is a moral code. So far only Humans have been smart enough to develop such a code (well, maybe dolphins, but I digress)
You are 100% wrong about how “simply” I look at the issue of pedophiles. Suffice to say I have had first hand experiance in this matter, and have had 33 years to dwell on it ( I am 38 now). According to many psychologists (mostly those who want pedophiliasm removed from the DSM iv)about 20% of the population is arroused by pedophilliac behavior. Just look at how well the “school girl” smut magazines sell. The difference is that most well adjusted people will not act on those urges.
When an adult does, then society needs to come down hard on that person. If for nothing else then for the sake of the child. What a pedophile does is simply wrong. It is damaging to the child both physically and mentally. The scars can take years to heal, if they ever do.
So whats the difference between homosexuality and pedophiles? One is between consenting adults, and the other is a predator harming a child. If you can not see that then their is nothing more to be said.

Wyrd on October 2, 2006 at 6:16 PM

Again, the answer to almost your entire post Wyrd is – define “child” and define “adult”. American law is just a settled uniform law so that there isn’t confusion. But everyone is different. Couldn’t someone argue that once they’re able to have children that makes them an “adult”? Again, I’m not advocating ANY of this behavior, but couldn’t a pedophile argue that? Especially sense you’re saying that 20% are arroused by pedophilliac bahavior. That’s more than gays! Are you saying that pedophiles are more mainstream (a larger percentage) of the population then? It seems like it, then how can YOU condemn the behavior. Again, just a few generations ago homosexuality was condemned the same way.

Your position is that homosexuality is unnatural. But that is your opinion. Ever see two bulls getting it on? I have. How about a couple of she dogs in heat? The Female Jackel has a pseudo penise that she uses on other females. Evidence of Homosexuality is all through the natural world.

I was waiting for this response…. Animals don’t have the same type of conscience or brain, etc. that we do. They get in heat, etc. and just hump things. I knew a female chihuahua once, that was fixed, and used to hump the hell out of a stuffed penguine ALL THE TIME. It was obsessed. All the owners had to do was bring that chihuahua out and “Bean” was raping that thing. So by your logic then, it would be natural if I told you I’m only attracted to stuffed animals.

You comments imply you’re a Darwinist, in which case I have to wonder how “natural selection” will handle homos?

As or God, again I never mentioned God, I’m appealing to peoples’ common sense. I may believe in the Christian God, but that has nothing to do with this. Because you can’t comprehend opposition to homosexuality without linking it to religion isn’t my hang up, it’s yours (and that of the left).

And please drop the “hot chick, ugly chick” argument. That’s just silly. Because some people are better looking (in different people’s eyes), doesn’t mean that a dude is born being attracted to dudes, with whom he has no NATURAL way to produce offspring. Have either of us proven whether gays are 100% born or chosen? No, but I’ve watched the movement go through acceptance to advocacy in American society and don’t like what I see, especially when there is no evidence that this is natural behavior, despite attempts to find a “gay gene”, etc. Why is it they can isolate everything like the color of hair and eyes, and anything you want now, but they still can’t find the elusive “gay gene”?

Again, produce a child through gay sex or find a gay gene and then we can talk.

RightWinged on October 2, 2006 at 10:12 PM

really not much we can talk about. Your only responses are to dismise anything I say.
I am not saying that pedophiles are mainstream, that is what I have read based on the DSM iv, which was in responce to a comment you made about them not being mentaly ill. Until pedophilias,m is removed from the DSM iv, it will be considered a mental illness. In all honesty my opinion has nothing to do with this discussion. That is not what you are discussing.

You bring up “natural” and the fact that humans have a larger brain as being a reason why a lifestyle other then yours is unnatural. But that is specious at best. Humans define their own morality. That will be different for each person. Yes, 30 years ago a gay man was shunned by our society. I assume you are also against inter race marriages also? That was shunned as much as 20 years ago.
What is our solution? Should people that decide they are gay be locked up? As for common sense (As Heinlen once said, “common sense? Their aint no such thing!” ) Thats impossible to define. If two people want to drink beer together, have sex, make a boat what ever in the privacy of their own home then that is their own business. Not mine. Unless they are building something that will kill or maim people of course.

Darwinist…Be carefull about the “implied” argument. I went their and said “God” and you have tried to beat me over the head about that twice now (probaly three times, since I used the word again’)

How about debating the points and not trying to pin down my world view? Trust me, I am far more complicated then you May think. Most people usually are.

Attracted to stuffed animals? Those people are called “Furries” They often dress up as stuffed animals and get their freak on.

Basicly their are two camps here. You believe gays are unatural. I am interested in your solution to that problem. My viewpoint is that what 2 or more adults (as defined by the law) do in private is none of my business as long as it does not interfere with me or cause harm to others.
I would like to see you explain why I am wrong, with examples and evidence. So far the only answer I have gleaned from your writting is that t is unnatural, because offspring can not be produced. When people of the same gender have sex it is not for procreation, it is for recreation. Most sex is recreational by the way. I have extrapolated this by the glut of condoms, sex toys, books etc on the market. If it were only for procreation then the woman could just lie their, the guy could do his business, and then they would go to their respective beds.

Wyrd on October 3, 2006 at 7:32 AM

honora, everything you said screams of “because I say so”, but you offer no evidence to support anything you said. I would respond further, but I already did because your reply was predictable… reread my original comment as a reply to you.

RightWinged on October 2, 2006 at 4:08 PM

I repeat my question: when did you choose to be heterosexual? Second, both the AMA (see medem.com library) and the American Psychiatric Association manual of disorders provide ample evidence of my statements.

honora on October 3, 2006 at 11:31 AM