Nevada Campaigns Reach Political Boiling Point

Nevadans complained about their mailboxes overfilled daily, and front door knobs heavily laden with political campaign materials from all candidates running for various offices – U.S. Congress, state, office of attorney general, district and municipal judges, board of education, state comptrollers seats, and what-have-you.

In what is perceived as one of the most bitter fight for U.S. Senate in Nevada history, both Democratic and Republican campaigns have thrown their all-out support to their respective candidates not only in terms of financial donations and material contributions, but also in mud-slinging. Both campaigns threw in the worst name-calling and witch-hunting gimmickry never before seen in the Silver State.

Four-term incumbent and re-electionist Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, the only politician from Nevada who has reached the highest position in national office, is challenged by newcomer Sharron Angle, who was voted on by the Nevada Tea Party and beat the Republican establishment candidate Sue Lowden in the primary.

The name of the game is who will be able to do most for Nevadans in the coming years. Nevada has the highest home foreclosures in the nation, the highest unemployment at present, and currently reeling at the worst economy it has ever found itself in decades.

Incumbent Senator Reid touts his decades of illustrious service to the people of Nevada, his works and service records unmatched by any one or all of Nevad’s past politicians combined; challenger Sharron Angle has yet to show what she could do for the state in the face of the worst recession which started in 2007, untested and well known for her fighting the establishment and ultra-conservative politics.

On the other hand, the fight for Nevada’s Third Congressional District between incumbent Dina Titus (D-NV, D3) and challenger Dr. Joe Heck, is characterized by voracious accusations and counter-accusations ranging from major issues to petty mud-slinging which make voters memorize and familiarize themselves of numerous fact-finding websites of all kinds and political colors.

In the state gubernatorial race, the Rory Reid campaign has issued more information and political attacks clearly differentiating the Democratic candidate as “the only candidate with a solid plan for Nevada,” from his rival Republican Brian Sandoval, who has remained quiet and unmindful of the tirades against him.

Both candidates, in their previous debates, were not clear on how they would solve Nevada’s economic woes without raising taxes. As to Nevada’s education system, which is the lowest in the nation, they both have the same goal but differ in strategy and solution to the problem. While Rory Reid believes in improving education to strengthen Nevada’s economy, and has offered detailed plan and strategy to realize this goal, Sandoval, who is known for being a fiscal conservative, proposes (according to the Reid campaign) to cut $533 million from school budget. Sandoval refused to provide details of his plan to improve Nevada’s education system. He kept mum about his plans and solution to negate the worsening education system in Nevada. Efforts to reach Sandoval or his political aides, for comment remained futile.

One political pundit and community activist retorted that Sandoval’s silence meant that he was winning the race, so he need not go into rhetorics about what he would do if elected governor of the state.

While Rory Reid continues his attack on Sandoval’s silence and refusal to unveil his plans to address job creation, economic development, green energy, ethics reform, and education, the Democrat offered his six-point solutions to the current ills plaguing Nevada including “balancing the budget without imposing taxes, and without any cuts to education.”

The Rory Reid campaign further accuses Sandoval of planning “to force local government to raise taxes, by implementing property tax hikes at a time of record home foreclosures and families already under water in their mortgages.”

On Tuesday, October 26, eight days to the general elections, the two faced off in a statewide debate at 6 p.m. broadcast live on KSNV (Las Vegas), KRNV in Reno, and KENV in Elko.

(Zen S. Laluna)
balita.com

Tonight's the Night

President Obama addresses the nation tonight from the Oval Office to bring us all up to speed on the Gulf oil leak. Expect more of the same; the President telling us all he is in charge, while simultaneously deflecting the blame for the lack of results on BP. This is man who believes government can solve all of our problems, yet when faced with a real problem, he shoves it off on the private sector to come up with solutions. For a man who led gullible believers that he could lower the seas, you would think plugging a hole wouldn't be so difficult.

How Many Carbon Credits Will This Cost?

According to Michelle Malkin's website, Al Gore has just purchased (another) mansion. No telling what the environmental impact is. And this is the guy that is constantly telling the rest of us how we should live.

Buffett Defends Goldman

We all know that Warren Buffett is a Democrat, and a big supporter of Barack Obama. It never made much sense to me why a free-market capitalist would embrace the economic philosophy of the left, but it seems to be more common than generally thought. Now that Buffett is witnessing the assault on the private sector by the current administration, he may be having some buyer's remorse. Of course, Goldman Sachs is just one in a long line of companies the President has demonized, but now that it affects Buffett's bank account, he is sitting up and taking notice. Others have legitimate concerns about this President's agenda:

Obama Prepares the Path to Break Campaign Promise

• After pledging during the campaign that he would not raise taxes on families earning less than $200,000.00 per year, President Obama now says "everything is on the table", and that when it comes to keeping his promise, he says he "won't play that game." So this is what is has come to. Keeping your promise is "playing the game." Get ready, people. When a Democrat says everything is on the table, they mean everything in your wallet. In addition to raising income taxes, there is serious thought being given to a Value Added Tax. What is that, you say? A value added tax slaps a tax on every process involved during the manufacture of a product that increases the value of that item. For instance, when GM makes a car, they obviously paint it before it leaves the plant. This adds value to the product (who wants to buy an unpainted car?), and that portion of the process would be taxed. Who knows how many processes would be interpreted as adding value in something as complex as an automobile, but you're probably getting the picture by now. And this is just one product. This type of tax is already popular in Europe, and other parts of the world liberals think are better than us (which is pretty much everywhere). The most insidious thing about the VAT is that it is invisible. Unlike a sales tax, which is itemized on your receipt, or an income tax that you see deducted from your paycheck, it would take a lot of research to find out what portion of the price of a product were actually tax. For liberals, this can only be described as analogous to the types of dreams teen age boys have. Increase taxes without people being able to tell, with higher taxes on those industries and products you deem undesirable. Incredible.

American Thinker: 'Sedition' Is Constitutional

An interesting column by John Griffing.

News of the Weird: Loch Ness monster is real: former Scottish police chief - CSMonitor.com

This really offers no substantive proof, just interesting reading.

Amazing Dunk (by a Deer)

Nine Supreme Court justices? Why not stick with eight? / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com

A quickie history of the Supreme Court. it's a little known fact that the Constitution mentions nothing about the number of justices to be on the court.

Time to Stop the Rush for "Amnesty" Immigration Reform | The Heritage Foundation

In light of the furor over Arizona's attempt to take controls of it's borders, this article on The Heritage Foundation's site is particularly timely. Who would have ever thought that we would live in an age when whether or not enforcing our laws would be a controversial issue? Well, we have arrived at that point, folks, with the left describing illegals as "undocumented", and completely ignoring the fact that by their very presence on American soil, these people are breaking the law. This is not only a national security issue (although that is reason enough for enforcement). This is a question of whether our laws mean anything. The President, and other Democrats, are drastically misreading public sentiment on this issue. This goes back to my theory that liberals always over-reach when they get power. They see potential future voters here, and are willing to turn their backs on legal, law-abiding citizens in order to curry favor with those who are here illegally.

bin Laden "Shocked" by US response after 9/11

If anyone doubts the importance of the U.S. projecting strength, and a willingness to use it, they should read this article fro WTOP in Washington. Osama bin Laden was clearly shocked when the U.S. retaliated for the September 11 attacks. If we had displayed such a willingness to protect our interests beforehand, perhaps the greatest tragedy to strike this country would never have happened. Instead of learning from this, the Obama Administration seems more intent on letting our enemies know we mean them no harm, and want to be their "friends". Most of us know what this stance leads to.

Good Advice from Cnet!

Here's some handy info from Cnet for all of us whose music is hogging all our hard drive:

The Day After

If you're an Obama spin doctor this morning, you're earning your pay. It will be interesting to see the explanations Democrats come up with for losing a Senate seat in Massachusetts! Martha Coakley has been widely criticized for her lackluster campaign, but this is Massachusetts, for God's sake. The Dems considered this seat their birthright, it was "Kennedy's seat" after all. (When you cultivate an entitlement state, it's hard not to embrace that mentality.) Granted, Coakley was as tone-deaf as a politician comes, but with Union bosses twisting arms, and a long and storied tradition of dead people and house pets voting Democrat, she should have been able to mail it in. The Democrat primary is the election there. Unless, of course you're saddled with Barack Obama at the head of the party, presiding over policies too far left for even the most of blue of states. This, I believe, was not so much a referendum on where we are as country, but more where we are headed. More precisely, where the President wants to head us. Liberals almost always over-reach when they gain power, and Democrats (and the media) badly misread the results of 2008 as meaning this country wants to turn left. Hard left. Since then, the Dems have lost elections in New Jersey, Virginia and now, Massachusetts. Two of these (New Jersey and Massachusetts) are Democrat strongholds, and the third (Virginia) we were told, was turning that way. What do they all have in common? President Obama campaigned in all three.

Amazingly, the early word from most Democrats is that they are losing because government health care is not moving fast enough! They believe that they aren't implementing the rest of their agenda as quickly as Americans would like as well. With any luck at all, they will continue this self-delusion.