Premium Content Site

Want your liberty news delivered without those pesky adds? Want more liberty news than what you can get on our site and blog? Want, like the best, premium content imaginable? Well, you are not going to get it without paying, silly! Announcing Politicallore.com’s bestest most awesomest service and idea ever… our “Premium Content Site.” Yes, that is the name we are going to go for… but if you have any ideas, send them our way!

In addition to our normal awesome content, we will provide you with more news directly from the source. This means more cartoons, more youtube videos, and more personal posts. A free land (that you pay for) where other liberty minded folk can run and play.

Just sign up… Introductory price of just… * drum-roll* $24.00 a year! Basically this service will help Politicallore.com not go under, while providing a better user experience for our core audience.

Look… We love you, now please love us too.

To sign up, simply click the “register” button. Enter your username/email, then check your email for your password. Simply login, then click the “subscribe” pay pal button. It is that simple!

The Mass senate race will soon come to a close. Martha Coakley and Scott Brown’s work is not over yet, as it will be a battle to the finish. Voter turnout, even in the weather, has been much greater than anyone could have predicted. While most predict a Scott Brown win, either candidate could win due to recounts, if the election is that close. The recount process, if it happens, will be brutal… with both sides screaming fraud. Politics, has been something that has been an ugly thing for awhile in this country, and it is just going to get worse.

We will be reporting results as soon as they start coming in. In an interesting note, Boston.com (The Boston Globe) already posted who the winner will be. Obviously, this was just a test, possibly an in-house prediction. The Globe has never been known for its… fair reporting, so take the image below with a grain of salt… then throw it over your shoulder.

This piece will be updated as soon as results from the Martha Coakley and Scott Brown senate race start coming in. The funniest thing is… the election would not even have been close if Massachusetts went with the rules (that they made) and did not assign an interim senator.

Edit: @8:00PM Polls now closed, results will start to trickle in slowly.

@8:36
Precincts Reporting: 179 of 2,168 (8%)

Scott Brown (R) – 103,633 (52.2%)
Martha Coakley (D) – 93,019 (46.9%)
Joe Kennedy (I) – 1,832 (0.9%)

For current updates go here!

We will be continuing our coverage of Scott Brown vs Martha Coakley late into the night. Today is the day of the special Massachusetts senate election. Polls have been sporadic at best, but they do show Scott Brown has the better chance of winning. It all, of course, depends on who shows up at the polls. All the media attention given to Brown vs Coakley, particularly the predictions that Brown will indeed win, will probably energize the liberal base enough to get out and vote. Personally, I am predicting Brown will come away with 54% of the vote. This is for all intents and purposes, a fair estimate.

Coakley has floundered as of late, and President Obama did nothing to help. In fact, he could have hurt the campaign. The real reason for her loss? She figured she was going to win by at least 20 points, so why even bother campaigning? A understandably frustrated Obama felt the need to head to Mass. and campaign for Coakley, something she could not do herself. Obama always knows how to excite the crowd and get people riled up… Like below, in this video. Scott Rasmussen was hesitant… but predicted a win for Brown.

If you listen to Ed Shultz from msnbc.com there will be no chance of the republican winning. What you are about to watch below, is startling, so be warned. Children cover your ears, and parents put on your headphones.

Freedom much?

Democrats are are bracing themselves for something they never thought possible until quite recently — a defeat in Tuesday’s special election in Massachusetts. A loss of the US Senate seat which the Democrats have held since JFK was elected in 1952, no matter the margin of defeat, would be a crushing one, and the outlook for a win by state AG Martha Coakley gets darker for the Dems with each passing day:

The latest polling in the race shows Republican Scott Brown with leads in the single digits, but some pollsters are predicting the swings in momentum suggest he’ll win Tuesday by double digits. That would be a stunning result for Democrats.

A survey from Democratic-leaning Public Policy Polling released late Sunday had Brown ahead of Democrat Martha Coakley 51-46, while a Suffolk University poll from late last week had Brown ahead 50-46.

Research 2000, which conducted polls for liberal websites both last week and over the weekend, showed the race a tie, but with Brown gaining eight points in a matter of days.

An ARG poll taken over the weekend and released Monday afternoon shows Brown leading by 7 points, 52-45. The survey’s margin of error is 4 percent.

The Democrats are already into the spin cycle. They aim to deflect criticism of President Obama following a Brown victory by putting all the blame on Coakley. While it is true that she has run a “rose garden” campaign and has committed many gaffes, make no mistake — this election is a referendum on ObamaCare. And a Coakley loss will be a severe blow to the president’s power and prestige. He put it on the line when he travelled to Massachusetts Sunday to campaign for Coakley, and in the process, made a huge unforced error of his own:

Obama told the crowd, “Anybody can own a truck.”

Of course, Obama’s latest attack on middle class Americans surprises no one.
Obama has a history of this.

Later Scott Brown responded to the president’s attack.
FOX News reported:

Brown took that opportunity to slam the president on government spending..

“Mr. President, unfortunately in this economy, not everybody can buy a truck,” Brown said in a statement. “My goal is to change that by cutting spending, lowering taxes and letting people keep more of their own money.”

Now that’s going to leave a mark.

- JP

Twelve months ago, if President Obama made a trip to campaign for a candidate it may have helped. The president has hurt his most loyal supporters most, which is why in the most liberal states like Massachusetts, there is a fear that republicans will start winning. Remember in 2008 when John McCain did not want President Bush on the campaign trail?

Granted Martha Coakley’s campaign is in utter disarray, and perhaps anything can help. Her campaign has taken a huge dive as of late, loosing a twenty-plus point lead. Scott Brown has come out of nowhere, because the election of Coackley would mean the continuation of the status-quo. The citizens of Massachusetts feel let down by the President, and current congress. They did not all of the sudden turn to Rush Limbaugh supporters, they lost hope in the current administration. By not voting in this special election, it will show the country their anger… which is exactly what they want.

As Josh Painter of Politicallore.com reported, Coakley’s campaign could not even spell Massachusetts correctly in a campaign ad, and is holding fundraisers in D.C. This is not the representation that Massachusetts residents currently want, and it is showing in the polls. Scott Brown would not have been able to poll 35% if the election was held earlier… instead of appointing somebody interim Senator. Scott Brown is currently up in the polls, and it looks like he will be walking away with a victory. Whether or not it will just be for one term or not, remains to be seen.

In what may be an early move toward a Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India natural gas pipeline, officials in Washington are putting pressure on the Pakistan central government to allow agricultural goods to pass through Pakistan on their journey from Afghanistan to India.

The official line out of Washington, via US Agriculture Sectary Tom Vilsack, is that the pipeline will create stability and wealth in Afghanistan by reopening its most important trade route.

However once the precedent is set the US will likely use this agreement to transition to the much more lucrative gas pipeline to India.

And so yet another true reason for the occupation of Afghanistan and the destabilization of Pakistan is explained by Washington’s desire to control the region’s resources.

The pipeline is projected to cost $7.6 billion and would likely be backed by credit extended to the stakeholders in the various countries by the Export-Import Bank of the Federal US government. In fiscal year 2008 Boeing Company, Bechtel Corporation and Chevron Phillips Chemical Co. made up 75% of the Export-Import Bank’s guaranteed Loans.

Last year the Export-Import bank extended $21 billion in credit, so if that were to hold steady in 2010, TAPI pipeline alone would eat up over one-third of their annual budget.
It is likely however, that the planners in Washington see this pipeline as one lucrative reward for grinding it out in Afghanistan for over eight years.

If the US puts up the money to build the pipeline, then they would likely have a majority stake in the profits brought in from the production of the TAPI pipeline, once it was completed around 2013.

There was a time in the late 90’s when all the necessary parties were on board to begin construction of the pipeline, including the Taliban. However, instability in the region scared off some of the key players and the deal fell apart.

It is likely that once construction were to begin on the pipeline the Obama administration would have to call on the US military to protect the construction process and then the survival of the pipeline until the region stabilized, and stabilization is not currently a short-term reality. Whether or not the American public will support deployment of troops to protect an investment of US big energy corporations is a question not yet answered.

This potential pipeline brings into sharp focus the value of both Afghanistan and Pakistan to both the US Federal Government and US big business. Both countries, simply because of the geographical placement, are immensely important in Washington’s global planning. They offer routes to bypass both China and Russia and open up markets with US controlled resources, supplied by US built infrastructure.

As rumors are circulating as to which politician may be able to lead the Tea Party movement into Washington D.C. many are talking but very few are working as hard as Kentucky US Senate candidate Rand Paul.

It has been an incredible two weeks for the Paul campaign. In a survey released by SurveyUSA Paul leads the GOP’s establishment candidate, Kentucky Secretary of State Trey Grayson by 3 points, 35% to 32%. And a new poll out from Rasmussen shows that Rand Paul leads both potential Democrat opponents. He leads Attorney General Jack Conway by 10 points, 45% to 35%. And he also leads Lieutenant Governor Daniel Mongiardo 49% to 35%.

Paul also received two high profile endorsements. The first endorsement came from financial expert Steve Forbes. Forbes has long been well known and respected in the fiscally conservative wing of the political world. The Paul campaign is also now publicly backed by the Gun Owners of America, an important endorsement in the state of Kentucky where a majority of the citizens take their 2nd amendment rights seriously. Both of these endorsements demonstrate Paul’s appeal to the base of the conservative wing of the GOP.

But the most impressive achievement yet for the Rand Paul US Senate campaign has been their cash raising ability. Paul has already raised $1.7 million, and the general election is still over 10 months away.

The way that Rand Paul is raising money is somewhat unique. He has a built in nationwide fundraising system from the residual network from his father Ron Paul’s 2008 Presidential campaign. Having that broad base of financial support has helped fund the extensive traveling and campaigning Paul is now undertaking within the confides of Kentucky state borders.

While his Republican primary opponent enjoys the support of the GOP establishment, namely Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, it does not seem to be translating into votes. It will be interesting to see how extensively the RNC and the GOP establishment is willing spend resources on a campaign that is already looking desperate for Grayson. And if Grayson fails, will McConnell ever back Rand Paul?

While names such as Sarah Palin and Gary Johnson are thrown around as the potential leaders of the Tea Party movement, it is Rand Paul that is on the ground raising real dollars that look as though they will soon translate into real votes.

Something that would have seemed impossible just a few months ago, Scott Brown may actually win the open senate seat in Massachusetts. Early polls showed republican candidate Scott Brown over ten points behind democratic candidate Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley. Rasmussen reports is now reporting that Scott Brown is within a few points of Coakley 47% to 49%, respectively. Normally, Rasmussen Reports are spot on, but because this is a special election, nobody can be certain of the outcome. Currently, we are predicting that Scott Brown will actually win the open “Kennedy” senate seat.

This is a special election, meaning voters are only coming out to vote for the senate race. Typically, these votes would skew democrat, but because of the vocal conservative movement across the country these voters are more likely to be against the status quo. Conservatives are fired up all over the country, and they will more than likely turn out to the polls to vote for Scott Brown.

Rasmussen Reports have 3% of likely voters voting for Joe Kennedy… While, I personally wish more would hear his message, not all battles can be won. Joe Kennedy will attract votes from two different factions. Libertarians or true conservatives may vote for Kennedy because he is the candidate that aligns closer to their views. Some democrats may vote for Kennedy because they may ignorantly think that he is related to the recently deceased Kennedy. Many are predicting that Joe Kennedy will not walk away with this many votes, I am predicting that the votes will counteract each other changing little in the form of results.

If conservatives make it out to the polls, Scott Brown will win Massachusetts. This will of course, send shock-waves across the country scaring the hell out of incumbents this 2010 election season.

Thinking back to the ominous firing of Barack Obama’s lead security advisor, Samantha Power, during his primary fight with Hillary Clinton the country was at that moment given a taste of what was to come.

Samantha Power gave a television interview in which she stated that US forces leaving Iraq in 16 months after Obama’s inauguration was a best case scenario. The problem was that Obama had been running around the entire country repeating that 16 month mantra as the backbone of his stump speech.

Now that Obama is 12 months into his presidency we see that having all US forces out of Iraq in the first 16 months of his presidency was a best case scenario.

Samantha Power knew then what most Americans did not want to admit to themselves: that the withdrawal from Iraq would be a game of delays, excuses and residual forces. Geopolitically the US cannot leave without leaving its position of world domination behind.

The security agreement that was agreed to by the US and Iraqi governments at the end of George W. Bush’s presidency sets the end of 2011 as the soft withdrawal date for all US troops from Iraq. There is also a withdrawal of 50,000 troops set to take place strategically two months before the Congressional midterm elections in August of this year.

The drawdown will leave 50,000 US troops remaining in the country. The US forces that remain have been officially renamed United States Forces-Iraq from Multinational Forces-Iraq, which had been there name since the initial invasion. It is clear that the US was going to be the last nation to remain and control their prize. Namely one of the largest oil reserves in the world.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stated in a recent interview with Charlie Rose that he foresees tens of thousands of American troops remaining after December 31st, 2011 as a residual force. Admiral Mike Mullen has added to the discussion that many troops may just be redeployed as non-combat troops with a mission of training Iraqi forces or some other job outside of combat missions. Pentagon planners say those currently counted as combat troops could be “re-missioned” and that their efforts could be redefined as training and support for the Iraqis

So the question becomes, why can’t the US leave Iraq? The answer is simple. If the US left Iraq, they would be leaving one of the largest oil reserves in the hands of a Shiite controlled country that would likely become friendly with Iran the moment the last US diplomat boarded a plane out of the country. There is also a substantial Shiite population in Saudi Arabia that reside predominately on the crescent of oil that runs from northeast Saudi Arabia up through Iraq to Southwestern Iran. With Iraq and Iran united by their Shiite ties they could encourage a secession or annexation by the Saudi Arabian Shiite population. If this were to happen suddenly the US is kicked out of the global oil game in a big way.