Birthday wishes to Arizona Sen. John McCain, who turns 75 today.

Remember all those Obama-loving liberal pundits who said in 2008 that McCain was too old to serve as president and he'd probably die in office, thus making Sarah Palin president?

Typical scare tactics for the far left. I bet some people did not vote for McCain because of his age. Instead we get stuck with a 50-year-old community organizer whose screwed up the country royally.

Remember all the media hype about Obama bringing out tons of voters to cast ballots in the historic election of 2008? It didn't happen.

The share of eligible voters who actually went to the polls in November 2008 declined from November 2004, according to new U.S. Census figures.

A total of 63.6 percent of eligible voters, or 131.1 million people, cast ballots in the contest between Barack Obama and John McCain last November. The voter turnout in 2004 for the George W. Bush-John F. Kerry showdown was 63.8 percent.

While the total number of votes cast was higher by 5 million, the turnout was down, especially among older white Americans, according to the Census Bureau.

This is a case where people voted with their feet and none of the above resulted in Barack Obama as president. How's that "hope and change" working out for you now?

"The 2008 presidential election saw a significant increase in voter turnout among young people, blacks and Hispanics," said Thom File, a voting analyst with the Census Bureau's Housing and Household Economic Statistics Division. "But as turnout among some other demographic groups either decreased or remained unchanged, the overall 2008 voter turnout rate was not statistically different from 2004."

Read more from the new report, Voting and Registration in the Election of 2008, at the link below:

Voter Turnout Increases by 5 Million in 2008 Presidential Election, U.S. Census Bureau Reports

"There are really only four things I have a strong aversion to: unloaded guns, dull knives, banjos, and Republicans in Name Only (RINOs)," says Ted Nugent, rock guitar idol, hunter and conservative commentator.

Writing at HumanEvents.com, Nugent says it's time for the Republican Party to purge itself of so-called moderates who have turned their backs on basic GOP principles of limited government, strong national defense and lower taxes.

From his column:

RINOs are Fedzilla punks who feign support for conservative principles only when it serves their political interest. RINOs are also known for their moderate positions such as supporting tax increases, federal "bailouts", "comprehensive immigration reform", advocating more counterproductive gun control that guarantee more innocent victims, opposing the death penalty, and growing and sustaining Fedzilla and all its toxic mongrels by going along with the liberals. RINOs have forgotten President Ronald Maximus Regan's admonition that government is the problem, not the solution.

Nugent says the 2008 presidential race is a clear repudiation of RINOs, including John McCain.

From his column:

John McCain has been a RINO on campaign finance, immigration, global warming and other issues and look what happened to him. He had reached across the aisle so many times to cut deals with the liberals that he had to pick Governor Palin, a true conservative, to try and lure disenfranchised and disgusted conservatives back into the fold. Didn't work. Senator McCain was the wrong candidate at the right time. RINOs lose elections;
conservatives win them.

Read the full column at HumanEvents.com

Stop the presses! The Washington Post has admitted it slanted its 2008 presidential race coverage to benefit Democrat Barack Obama.

That revelation comes from Deborah Howell, the ombudsman for the newspaper.

Writing in today's edition, Howell says, "The Post provided a lot of good campaign coverage, but readers have been consistently critical of the lack of probing issues coverage and what they saw as a tilt toward Democrat Barack Obama. My surveys, which ended on Election Day, show that they are right on both counts."

Too bad Ms. Howell didn't get around to writing about the newspaper's biased coverage until after the election.

From Howell's column:

The op-ed page ran far more laudatory opinion pieces on Obama, 32, than on Sen. John McCain, 13. There were far more negative pieces about McCain, 58, than there were about Obama, 32, and Obama got the editorial board's endorsement. The Post has several conservative columnists, but not all were gung-ho about McCain.

Stories and photos about Obama in the news pages outnumbered those devoted to McCain. Reporters, photographers and editors found the candidacy of Obama, the first African American major-party nominee, more newsworthy and historic. Journalists love the new; McCain, 25 years older than Obama, was already well known and had more scars from his longer career in politics.

The number of Obama stories since Nov. 11 was 946, compared with McCain's 786. Both had hard-fought primary campaigns, but Obama's battle with Hillary Rodham Clinton was longer, and the numbers reflect that.

McCain clinched the GOP nomination on March 4, three months before Obama won his. From June 4 to Election Day, the tally was Obama, 626 stories, and McCain, 584. Obama was on the front page 176 times, McCain, 144 times; 41 stories featured both.

I'm glad The Washington Post has admitted what any reasonable person would conclude: The American media has lost all objectivity and is an advocate for the Democratic Party and the far-left agenda. Almost every large American newspaper can make the same confession.

The interesting thing now is how will the mainstream media cover the Obama administration. Will the media help cover up Obama's mistakes? At what point will the American public get fed up with the fluff coverage of Obama?

Can a newspaper like The Washington Post provide the same kind of coverage of the White House that it did during Watergate?

Read "An Obama Tilt in Campaign Coverage," at the newspaper's Web site.

President-elect Barack Obama has women to thank for his election.

A new survey finds that nationally, 56 percent of women (who were 53 percent of voters) voted for Barack Obama compared with 49 percent of men (who were 47 percent of voters, according to the Institute for Women's Policy Research

Follow the link below for more:

Women's Vote Clinches Election Victory: 8 Million More Women Than Men Voted for Obama

An excellent editorial today in Investor's Business Daily that makes the argument that when it comes to a successful presidency, experience does matter.

From the IBD editorial:

Of all our presidents since World War II, the three who ranked highest among all American presidents in a 2005 survey of scholars by the Wall Street Journal were:

• Ronald Reagan: No. 6 of 43 presidents, inaugurated within weeks of his 70th birthday.

• Harry Truman: No. 7, inaugurated at age 60.

• Dwight Eisenhower: No. 8, inaugurated at 62.

The three youngest presidents since WWII were:

• John Kennedy: ranked No. 15, inaugurated at 43.

• Bill Clinton: No. 22, inaugurated at 46.

• Jimmy Carter: No. 34, inaugurated at 52.

Our next president will face a resurgent Russia run by Vladimir Putin and his KGB friends, Iran and its nuclear program, and al-Qaida and other terrorists who want an atomic weapon. Do we want to elect another young president, possibly a Carter or a Neville Chamberlain type, who will get fooled by our dangerous enemies who are masters of deceit?

American voters have a clear choice to make on Nov. 4: The most inexperienced candidate to ever seek the White House in Barack Obama or a tested and proven leader in John McCain.

Read the full editorial at the newspaper's Web site.

There are plenty of reasons to elect John McCain, but perhaps one of the most urgent is to prevent a liberal takeover of U.S government.

From The Wall Street Journal:

Perhaps the best case for the McCain candidacy -- apart from national security -- is that he would be a check on what is likely to be an emboldened and dangerous left-wing Congress. He would surely work with Democrats on some things -- for the better perhaps on immigration, for the worse on energy "cap and trade" regulation. However, unlike President Bush, Mr. McCain wouldn't wait four years to use his veto pen.

In this difficult year, Mr. McCain has had the harder sale to make. His admirable personal tenacity has been better than his variable political argument. We'll find out Tuesday if biography trumps hope.

Read the full editorial, "McCain's Honor," at the newspaper's Web site.

The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review has endorsed Sen. John McCain for president.

From its endorsement editorial:

We first endorsed Mr. McCain for president in February, long before we knew Sen. Obama would be the Democrat nominee. But our words then are even more apropos now.

John McCain is fiercely independent. And he makes no apologies for the principles he holds dear, even if they be at odds with the traditional party base. But he has never wavered in his core belief of what Republicanism (with a capital "R") and republicanism (with a lower-case "r") are all about:

Small government. Fiscal discipline. Low taxes. A strong defense. And a judiciary that does not legislate from the bench.

Compared with Barack Obama's long and dangerous statist laundry list of the ever more expansive role government should play in our lives, John McCain sums it up quite succinctly, quite effectively and quite nicely, thank you.

Read the full editorial at the newspaper's Web site.

The Trentonian newspaper in Trenton, N.J., has endorsed Sen. John McCain for president.

The choice was an easy one, according to the newspaper's editorial board:

It's a contest between an experienced lawmaker of known and tested character, John McCain — a doer — and a neophyte lawmaker of unknown and untested character, Barack Obama — a talker.

Read the full editorial at the newspaper's Web site.

RNC Launches New Web Video: 'Slippery Slope'

A group of 357 leading American economists have issued a joint statement warning that Barack Obama's economic policies would be disastrous for the U.S. economy.

Here's is their statement, posted online, along with their names:

Barack Obama argues that his proposals to raise tax rates and halt international trade agreements would benefit the American economy. They would do nothing of the sort. Economic analysis and historical experience show that they would do the opposite. They would reduce economic growth and decrease the number of jobs in America. Moreover, with the credit crunch, the housing slump, and high energy prices weakening the U.S. economy, his proposals run a high risk of throwing the economy into a deep recession. It was exactly such misguided tax hikes and protectionism, enacted when the U.S. economy was weak in the early 1930s, that greatly increased the severity of the Great Depression.

We are very concerned with Barack Obama's opposition to trade agreements such as the pending one with Colombia, the new one with Central America, or the established one with Canada and Mexico. Exports from the United States to other countries create jobs for Americans. Imports make goods available to Americans at lower prices and are a particular benefit to families and individuals with low incomes. International trade is also a powerful source of strength in a weak economy. In the second quarter of this year, for example, increased international trade did far more to stimulate the U.S. economy than the federal government's "stimulus" package.

Ironically, rather than supporting international trade, Barack Obama is now proposing yet another so-called stimulus package, which would do very little to grow the economy. And his proposal to finance the package with higher taxes on oil would raise oil prices directly and by reducing exploration and production.

We are equally concerned with his proposals to increase tax rates on labor income and investment. His dividend and capital gains tax increases would reduce investment and cut into the savings of millions of Americans. His proposals to increase income and payroll tax rates would discourage the formation and expansion of small businesses and reduce employment and take-home pay, as would his mandates on firms to provide expensive health insurance.

After hearing such economic criticism of his proposals, Barack Obama has apparently suggested to some people that he might postpone his tax increases, perhaps to 2010. But it is a mistake to think that postponing such tax increases would prevent their harmful effect on the economy today. The prospect of such tax rate increases in 2010 is already a drag on the economy. Businesses considering whether to hire workers today and expand their operations have time horizons longer than a year or two, so the prospect of higher taxes starting in 2009 or 2010 reduces hiring and investment in 2008.

In sum, Barack Obama's economic proposals are wrong for the American economy. They defy both economic reason and economic experience.

For more, check out the Economists for McCain Web site.

Salena Zito of The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review has an interesting post at her blog about where popular radio talk show host Glenn Beck stands on the 2008 presidential race.

Beck has endorsed Sarah Palin (and by extension, John McCain).

Beck says he considered all the presidential candidates (including third-party) and found them all lacking:

I don't see any of them that actually believe in you, who actually is you, except Sarah Palin. So I'm going to pull the lever for John McCain and let the Lord sort it out. I want somebody that just, whose compass points north. Even though all these candidates think their compass points north, it doesn't. It's pointing east and some places it's pointing south. In Barack Obama it is pointing south. He says that it's pointing north, it's to you, but it's not. It's to the government, it's to Washington, it's to the special interests. John McCain I think points somewhere maybe northeast. It's in the right direction but it's not right. Sarah Palin points to you. I'm casting my vote for Sarah Palin.

Read the full post at Zito's blog.

The Associated Press has been compiling presidential endorsement editorials from across the country. Here's a sampling of editorials about John McCain:

The Dallas Morning News:

In better times, America could afford to consider entrusting the White House to an appealing newcomer like Mr. Obama and giving control of the presidency and Congress to the same party.

But in this time of great anxiety, the American people need a leader of experience guiding the ship of state. Mr. McCain offers the continuity, stability and sense of authority people want, as well as a decisive break from the Bush years.

The Democrat talks about change, but only the Republican has made change happen. Only one candidate has a solid record of standing up to his own party on principle and working hand in hand with legislators from the opposing party to get things done.

That candidate is John McCain, a progressive conservative we recommend.

The Palm Beach (Fla.) Post:

John McCain likes to say that he has been tested. In this campaign, he has been. And he has come up short. He has sounded like a bitter, jealous old man who considers himself entitled to the presidency. Washington can break optimism the way dry farmland can break plows, but Barack Obama still sounds like the candidate who talked about change when he began his campaign. He was right then. He's right now. That's why he's the right choice for America.

The Las Vegas Review-Journal:

Sen. McCain has a proven record of battling the drunken sailor culture so pervasive in our nation's capital. He has been an outspoken advocate for fiscal restraint, angering many of his colleagues by embarrassing them over their penchant for pork. Sen. McCain vows to veto any bill that includes earmarks and says he will freeze spending in many areas of the budget.

That would represent real change.

The San Antonio Express-News:

McCain brings a proven track record of fighting the bipartisan fiscal irresponsibility that prevails in Washington. ... McCain's understanding of the world and the nation's security needs is a crucial asset in these tumultuous times. ... The question comes down to this: Which candidate is best able to chart a new and secure course for a nation in perilous waters? John McCain is not a perfect candidate. In this tumultuous season, however, he is the best choice for commander in chief.

The Tampa (Fla.) Tribune:

Hard economic times, a disappointing Republican administration and the seductive promises of a master orator are pushing America toward a European-style social democracy. If you don't want that to happen, vote for Republican Sen. John McCain. ...

McCain brings a lifetime of useful experience, including his grueling captivity in Vietnam and long Senate service. He believes in federalism, a strong defense and disciplined self-interest.

McCain has been willing to cross party lines to work on tough problems. He co-authored a campaign finance law that failed to fulfill its objective, but he did muster the bipartisan support needed to try to control the buying and selling of public office. ...

(Barack) Obama's vision of hope shines like a rainbow, appealing but just out of reach. McCain's call to freedom and responsibility is less exciting, but you know it works. The Tribune encourages voters to vote what they believe, not what they wish were true. The nation needs a stable leader in these unpredictable times.

A peak into the future if Barack Obama is elected. Higher taxes and a cut in defense spending are in order. That means a return to the Jimmy Carter era. A weak economy and humiliation abroad from America's enemies.

Republican National Committee: They Said It! Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) on Increasing Taxes and Cutting Defense Spending

The Associated Press is compiling presidential endorsements by daily newspapers across the country. Here's a sampling of endorsements for John McCain:

The Chattanooga (Tenn.) Free Press:

"American voters have two very unlikely candidates for president of the United States this year. While the current polls indicate Sen. Barack Obama is ahead, a simple consideration of the candidates' relative qualifications should indicate we should elect Sen. John McCain president. Sen. McCain believes in keeping America strong, cutting taxes, limiting government and not surrendering to our enemies, and he has extensive experience in government that indicates far more stability and judgment than his opponent can offer. Sen. McCain's love of country and dedication to duty have been proved by his honorable military service for which he suffered torture by our enemies."

The Jackson (Tenn.) Sun:

"In an uncertain world, America needs a new president with certainty, fearlessness and proven leadership skills. That candidate is Sen. John McCain of Arizona. The nation faces some of the most trying times in its history. We are involved in two wars, the national and global economies are near meltdown, government spending is virtually out of control, the health care system is broken, Medicare and Social Security face bankruptcy, and partisan bickering has stymied progress in Congress. Who better to cross such a battlefield than a proven military veteran?

The New Hampshire Union-Leader:

"Barack Obama's call for 'change' has a certain appeal, to be sure. But this is no time to be rolling the dice on an untested leader whose rhetoric doesn't match his record when it comes to delivering actual change. John McCain has a long history of standing up to Washington's permanent political class, regardless of party, and pushing for institutional reforms to end business as usual. He is the right leader to restore trust in our government, confidence to our markets and prosperity to our country. On Nov. 4, do right by your country and vote for John McCain for President."

Lubbock Avalanche-Journal in Texas:

"Sen. John McCain has a better understanding than his opponent of issues facing our nation ranging from national security to the economy to energy to immigration and many more, and he has a better vision for establishing solutions and a better chance of implementing them effectively."

Amarillo (Texas) Globe-News:

"Barack Obama mirrors the tax-and-spend philosophies of liberal Democrats, which is not the type of change the nation needs. John McCain has built a more conservative track record during his service in both the House and the Senate, with just the right mix of moderation, to lead the country in a positive direction."

The Associated Press has been running a daily list of newspapers that have published endorsements for president. Here's a sampling of endorsements for John McCain.

The San Diego Union-Tribune:

"In our analysis, Republican candidate John McCain has a documented record of enlightened leadership in Washington, leadership that often has run counter to the status quo and challenged the folly of senior members of his own party. McCain never has been a conventional politician. He thinks for himself and acts on what he believes to be in the best interests of the nation, and not necessarily in the interests of his party or his own political fortunes. In an era of dismaying partisan paralysis in Washington, McCain has stood out as a bipartisan force, best illustrated by his collaboration with liberal Democratic lion Edward Kennedy on a comprehensive solution to America's immigration dilemma."

The Daily Press of Newport News, Va.:

"In today's instant messaging, celebrity-besotted culture, such opportunities for thoughtful and emotion-free reflection are rare. But when the hopeful message of change is subjected to the glare of factual light, Obama does not emerge as the best candidate to lead the world's most powerful nation during a time of threats both domestic and abroad, both economic and military. John McCain is the better choice, and that is why the editorial page of the Daily Press endorses him for the presidency."

The Winchester Star of Winchester, Va.:

"Selecting a president this go-round matters even more, particularly as it seems certain that one political party will retain or even enhance its control of Congress, perhaps to the point of gaining a coveted 60-vote super-majority in the Senate. Thus, we ask the voter: Is entrusting total domination of the political process to one party in the best interests of America? One must consider the extremism such a possibility would invite: Two of the Senate's most liberal members would assume the presidency and vice-presidency, and the equally liberal leaders of the two branches of a dysfunctional Congress would remain in the presidential succession. Thus, the need for balance, for a leavening presence, is apparent, almost achingly so. Given what confronts us globally and inside the halls of Congress, America needs strong, seasoned leadership. In what truly is an important election, the choice for president could not be any clearer John Sidney McCain III."

The Daily Courier of Grants Pass, Ore.:

"Experience and the courage to do what's right, no matter the political cost, are what elevate Sen. John McCain above Sen. Barack Obama in the race for the White House. Republican McCain has pushed campaign finance reform and other legislation, even when his party has opposed it. On the campaign trail, he risked his presidential hopes by supporting the then unpopular troop "surge" in Iraq. The surge has led to a dramatic drop in violence and U.S. casualties. The Daily Courier editorial board thinks America needs this mentally tough maverick as its leader as it faces numerous daunting tasks abroad and at home, from terrorists to a tumultuous economy. Democrat Obama is a highly intelligent, well-spoken person who has managed against all odds to break through the racial barrier. However, he simply has not shown in his 11 years in politics (four in the U.S. Senate and seven in the Illinois Senate) the toughness or abilities needed to meet these challenges."

Joe Wurzelbacher, the plumber from Toledo, Ohio, who confronted Barack Obama about taxes, could end up swinging the election to John McCain.

Wurzelbacher asked Obama to explain how the liberal Democrat's plan to raise taxes for Americans earning $250,000 or more would not hurt small business owners.

Obama had no explanation other than to say that "When you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

Translation? Obama plans to take money away from small business owners through higher taxes and "spread" it around to people who don't pay taxes.

There's another word for Obama's scheme. It's called welfare.

That brief exchange between Wurzelbacher and Obama crystallized the basic choice in this year's presidential election.

Obama is pushing big government, higher taxes, protectionism, forced unionization and socialized medicine.

McCain says he will freeze government spending, eliminate pork and cut taxes for all Americans.

McCain made reference to Joe the plumber numerous times in Wednesday's presidential debate, saying he doesn't want to raise taxes on Joe or any other working American.

From The Associated Press:

Wurzelbacher watched Wednesday night's debate and said he still thinks Senator Obama's plan would keep him from buying the small business that employs him. About Senator McCain: "He's got it right as far as I go." Even so, Mr. Wurzelbacher declined to say who was getting his vote. He said he was surprised that he was called "Joe the Plumber" repeatedly during the debate. "It's pretty surreal, man, my name being mentioned in a presidential campaign."

If McCain pulls out this election, he may have to offer Wurzelbacher a job as White House plumber.

Do you like your job? Would you like to keep your job?

As we head into what many experts predict will be a painful and prolonged recession, many people are worried about their jobs.

If you'd like to increase your chances of bringing home a paycheck, then you should vote for John McCain for president.

That what 80 percent of chief executive officers surveyed by Chief Executive magazine say. That's right. Eight out of 10 support McCain's economic plans.

The CEOs believe McCain would do a better job of handling the economy and preserving jobs. The business executives perceive Barack Obama as anti-growth.

Obama's tax policies would sink the fragile economy deeper into recession and cut jobs, the CEOs believe.

From Chief Executive magazine:

It is clear jobcreating Business leaders chose McCain over Obama largely because his policies are seen as pro-growth, whereas Obama's policies are viewed as redistributive and anti-growth.

For some months during this Presidential election year, Chief Executive has conducted specialized polling of CEOs' attitudes on issues affecting national policy and the economy. In CE's most recent poll in September, 751 respondents, more than double the usual number of business leaders, made their voices heard on their Presidential choice. By a four-to-one margin CEOs support Senator John McCain over his rival, Senator Barack Obama. More to the point, a thundering 74 percent majority say they fear the consequences of an Obama presidency, compared to only 19 percent who fear a McCain presidency.

During this period CE also asked the people who create jobs what it will take to get our engine of job creation going strong. We first asked CEOs what policies and approaches would work best for business, energy policy and job creation. Subsequently, we asked CEOs which Presidential candidate's policies were best aligned with these prescriptions for growth.

Read the full story and review more polling results at the magazine's Web site.

You can't say this comes as a surprise. The National Rifle Association has endorsed Republican John McCain for president.

NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre, who also serves as chairman of the NRA's political action committee, is planning to announce the group's endorsement at stops in key battleground states, including Pennsylvania, Missouri, Colorado and Nevada.

McCain "cast more than 60 votes in the Senate in support of the Second Amendment," LaPierre said.

Contrast that with Barack Obama, who supports gun control measures and has said the Second Amendment is subject to interpretation. Obama criticized the Supreme Court ruling earlier this year that said the Second Amendment guarantees the right of citizens, not militias, to bear arms.

Along with the endorsement, the NRA's Political Victory Fund is planning newspaper ads and television spots to remind gun owners that McCain will protect their rights while Obama would restrict gun ownership if he's elected president.

Although McCain has not always supported legislation pushed the NRA, the fact that his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, is a member of the NRA, helped the group decide who to endorse in the 2008 race.

"She's a hunter, she's a Second Amendment supporter and she's a tremendous asset to the ticket," LaPierre told The Associated Press.

Palin received an A-plus rating from the group when she ran for governor in 2006.

LaPierre also noted that the NRA doesn't always endorse presidential candidates.

The group backed President George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004 but did not support Bob Dole in the 1996 race against Bill Clinton or George H.W. Bush in the 1992 race against Michael Dukakis.

For more information, visit the National Rifle Association's Political Victory Fund Web site at http://www.nrapvf.org/