Give me a break! This guy (Barack Obama) is now trying to court the Jewish vote by attempting to relate his losing a Congressional race in Chicago to what the people of Israel endure everyday in horrible acts of terrorism. Take this passage:

When I ran against Bobby Rush [for Congress], the perception was that I was Hyde Park, I’m University of Chicago, I’ve got all these Jewish friends. When I started organizing, the two fellow organizers in Chicago were Jews, and I was attacked for associating with them. So I’ve been in the foxhole with my Jewish friends, so when I find on the national level my commitment being questioned, it’s curious. [Emphasis mine]

Really Barack? You enduring some politics by association hardships in your failed candidacy for Congress is comparable to innocent people in Israel being blown apart by savage terrorists? Your inexperience is showing…

On top of this, Barack was widely known in his early days in Chicago to have been associating with radicals on the Palestinian side of the argument and only came around to support Israel when he realized it would be politically advantageous for a future life in politics. (See this article about Barack’s ascent in Chi-Town’s machine politics).

Now, if that wasn’t ridiculous enough, Barack then trains his perceptive foreign policy analytical skills on the current situation in Israel with this earth-shattering, bold observation:

The lack of a resolution to this problem provides an excuse for anti-American militant jihadists to engage in inexcusable actions, and so we have a national-security interest in solving this, and I also believe that Israel has a security interest in solving this because I believe that the status quo is unsustainable. I am absolutely convinced of that[…] [Emphasis mine]

Are you joking?! Is that supposed to be some sort of bold proclamation condemning terrorism - that Israel probably can’t sustain itself if it continues to be bombarded by rocket attacks, suicide bomber, and radical jihadists of all stripes into perpetuity?

That Barack Obama is just now stumbling onto these facts should be very disturbing to anyone interested in national security and foreign policy, its domestic impact, and the impact on allied nations like Israel who is engaged in a fight for their very survival against these monstrous and cowardly terrorists.

They will not go silently into that good night! Hill-Dawg’s supporters are cotninuing to travel nationwide to volunteer for their leader as described in this article from the Washington Post.

“It’s become so personal, just one insult after another,” Smith said. “These sides are starting to feel some hate for each other. Everybody is angry, but I’m going to keep at this as long as I can. I never want to look myself in the mirror and say, ‘You quit. You didn’t do your part.’ “

Barack might have some trouble bringing women voters back into the fold after this nomination is all sewn up. With sentiments like these:

“I don’t even know these other women, but I feel like I do,” said Zenia Kuzma, from Shepherdstown. “We’ve been going through this same ordeal together.”

…there’s is definitely some allegiance-to-a-higher-cause-type motivation for many women voters with Hillary’s candidacy. And right on que:

“The more I’m involved, the angrier I get. Every call for her to get out of the race just incenses me. It makes me crazy. Who are you? Who in the world are you to tell this woman who’s done so much that it’s time for her to be quiet and sit down?”

As I have said before, this Dem nominating process is driving a wedge between certain demographic groups that Obama will need decisive margis with to win in November.

We shall see…

We need your help in naming the impact levels for 2008. We’d like to have 8 levels, but if you have a great theme that uses more or less we’d still love to hear it. Share your ideas and we’ll put the top 5 to a vote!  Post you ideas in the comments below, or join the conversation in the Storm Discussion Group.

Mary Katharine Ham has a very interesting post on the importance of staging and advance work in sending a message on television. She has posted two pictures of the Obama rally in NC held tonight - one the television shows and the other from a little more…uh, inclusive angle.

As Seen On TV:

As Seen In Real Life:

Now anyone in politics can tell you that every campaign in the world tries to master the angle the media depicts in photos and on television in addition t orchestrating countless other things to portray an bigger, more excited, all around better crowd than might actually be there. But Miss Ham (is it Miss or is she a Mrs.? I just don’t know) brings up an interesting point here about the lack of media scrutiny of such facts with the Obama campaign and an overzealousness to report them about Republicans like John McCain:

I realize it’s standard practice to rope off an area of a venue for crowd-wrangling and appearances, but this is a little drastic. McCain’s event at the Wait Chapel at Wake Forest today was nicely filled if not overflowing, but I imagine if he had held it at Groves Stadium and filled only the endzone seats, someone in the media might have said something about it. Obama doesn’t have such worries, I guess.

Indeed.

Karl Rove (CRNC alumnus) has shared some insight into the electoral map with Fox News, and I have decided to share it with you here as I prepare to fall asleep assuming that Barack Obama is going to get a bounce out of tonight’s Democratic primaries in Indiana and North Carolina.

The news is good and bad when we look at the maps Mr. Rove has constructed using polling data for general election match-ups with McCain v. Obama (shown below) and McCain v. Clinton. The good news is that the Dems seem to have nominated (presumptively, but they say never count the Clinton’s out ’til their out) the electorally weaker candidate:

The bad news is for College Republicans in those yellow states above - get ready for some serious GOTV work and a lotta attention this summer and fall…

But hey, it’s why we’re here right?!

Some interesting state results to note, both good and bad:

NY - We’re down only 4%!

NE - Up by 3%…

TX - 4%…

MI - Moving to our column!

OH - This is awesome. The GOP in OH has had some rough years for the brand name up there, but we are holding strong in 2008.

FL - If it stays this strong (performing better than state like Montana, South Dakota, and Nebraska for instance) it will be hard to call this a “swing state” in 2008. This speaks to the amazing reputation of former Gov. Bush and current Gov. Crist.

MO - See FL above. Traditionally a bellwether state, with an 8% victory, it will allow us to focus resources elsewhere.

IA - My home state is under-performing.

NM - Up by 2% in a close state from ‘00 and ‘04 with an important congressional and US Senate races.

Well, I could go on here, but those are some notables. Of course, this is all really for naught as it is way too early to be measuring in-state general election polls, but it paints an interesting starting picture. I should note too that states like MO and FL will probably remain incredibly important in the general election even if polls show them at decent margins now. I’m very, very confident we will win both states, but Barack’s say-anything-do-anything campaign will surely contest them with force and CRs will need to be prepared to add a little truth to the madness in states such as these.

If you notice something really striking that I have failed to mention, send it to csmith at crnc dot org and I’ll be happy to include them in a future post!

It seems as though Barack’s problem with rural and sometimes blue-collar voters isn’t going away. McClatchy has an interesting article up on the subject with some great lines from Dem voters who say they will never, ever vote for Obama in a general election:

 Lou Meyer, a housewife in Sellersburg, had similar thoughts. “He won’t wear a flag pin. Anyone who can’t stand up for their country, I won’t vote for,” she said. “If it’s Obama versus McCain, I’m between a rock and a hard place, but I’m not going to vote for Obama.”

…

Dennis Whetsell, a Brownsburg accountant, voiced other concerns: “Obama doesn’t have experience. McCain could work much better with Congress.”

…

“I’d like to get the troops home as quickly as we can,” said Whetsell, “but we also can’t allow the area to fall into the hands of Iran or Syria.” McCain, he said, understands all the nuances.

…

AND they like McCain!

“He’s honest. He’s not afraid to look you in the eye and tell you what he thinks,” said Cheryl Pauley, a Brownsburg housewife. “Obama is a yes man.”

Awesome news!

And some facts to back it all up:

The Pew poll showed that 23 percent of self-described conservative and moderate Democrats say they’d vote for McCain over Obama in November. If Clinton’s the nominee, that number drops to 14 percent.

Check out the primary coverage from IN on Election Journal. They have same great footage of grassroots primary action and more importantly coverage of primary voter fraud.

We are pulling together our orders for the Fall 2008 chapter boxes and would love to hear ideas from you guys about what would help you get the job done.  Email any suggestions to info@crnc.org with the subject line “Chapter Box” or  leave a comment below.

Barack Obama on negative campaigning at 12:33 PM ET Today:

“We have been consistent in this campaign in talking about the issues. Trying to have a different kind of politics. … In fact, I’ve been adamant to say we can’t run that kind of campaign. It’s contrary to our message. And I think it would actually erode support for me, in addition to not solving the problem the American people need solved.”  (CNN interview)

Barack Obama’s distorted, negative attack at 1:02 PM ET Today:

Repeated a distorted, negative attack on Senator McCain’s economic record that ABC News called an example of how to “twist the knife” and Chicago Tribune said was “only partially quoted”.