Polls vs polls

Now that the GOP gubernatorial numbers have settled down a little bit, let’s compare the Polls (on June 1st – hat tip to Doc’s) versus the Public Strategy Associates poll (early May).   Bradley Byrne received 28% of the vote vs 24%; Robert Bentley received 25% vs 12%; Tim James received 25% vs 23%; Roy Moore received 19% vs 18%.  PSA observed that 21% of known GOP primary voters were undecided.  In May, PSA said:

“The next couple of weeks will be ‘make or break’ in the governor’s race…” said Brent Buchanan, a partner in Public Strategy Associates. “This is when the heat is on, and a lot can change in the next nineteen days,” he added.

Nice job on the poll.  Looks like the undecideds broke for Dr. Bentley and we’ll see soon enough if he or Tim James is in the runoff (pending the recount – Friday is the deadline). 

The vote difference between Bentley and James is 167 votes – well within the 0.5% error rate mentioned by Susan Fillipelli in comments at Doc’s (which seems to be a pretty good estimate).   My guess is that Bentley made the runoff with Byrne, but James certainly has good reason to request (and pay for) a recount.

Primary runoff turnout generally drops to 66% of the primary turnout, but that’s still roughly 330,000 voters who might show up (the most recent GOP primary runoff in Madison County turned out about 80%! – which could translate into almost 400,000 voters on July 13th).  It’s probably safe to assume that most of Byrne’s 137,000 voters show up and that most of Bentley’s (or James’) 124,000 voters show up: that leaves 69,000 to 139,000 votes ‘undecided’.   None of the candidates’ voters by themselves can take the primary runoff, exempli gratia, Byrne needs to get out all his vote plus add at least another 30,000 votes to win the runoff.

I voted for Byrne and will again, but James and Bentley rounded out my top three choices so I could vote for any of them come November.

My name is Rachel Corrie

Rachel Corrie.

That name will be in the news a lot over the next few days.  The Free Gaza Movement named a ship after Rachel Corrie, and it was intercepted today by the Israeli Navy:

“Israel is prepared to receive the ship and to offload its contents. After an inspection to ensure that no weapons and war materials are on board, we are prepared to deliver all of the goods to Gaza,” Gal said.

“Representative of the people on board and relevant NGOs are welcome to accompany the goods to the crossings,” he said.

Here’s more with some background on the Free Gaza Movement and last week’s encounter with ‘peace activists’:

Greta Berlin, a co-founder of the Free Gaza movement, said those on board the ship had no intention of ceding to Israel’s request… “Our mission is to break the blockade of Gaza,” she told The Jerusalem Post

Israeli claims that went it intercepted Monday’s flotilla of ships activists on one of them, the Marmara, ambushed the soldiers after they descended onto the board from helicopters. The military and Turkish TV have released videotape that backs up that claim. Returning activists admitted fighting with the Israeli commandos but insisted their actions were in self-defense because the ships were being boarded in international waters by a military force.

The Marmara, which was carrying hundreds of activists sponsored by an Islamic aid group from Turkey, the Foundation for Human Rights and Freedom and Humanitarian Relief. Israel outlawed the group, known by its Turkish acronym IHH, in 2008 because of alleged ties to Hamas.

The Rachel Corrie is owned by the Free Gaza Movement. It set sail from Ireland. It is flying a Cambodian flag and is funded by money raised by a former prime minister of Malaysia. Among the passengers are two well known Irish citizens, Nobel Peace Laureate Mairead Maguire and Denis Halliday, a former UN assistant secretary-general.

Let’s be clear on who and what Rachel Corrie was.  Corrie was a radical leftist member of the International Solidarity Movement and was killed in 2003 acting as a human shield for Palestinian terrorists.  Here is a picture of her (burning a makeshift American flag) that defines her legacy – teaching children how to hate.


Helen Thomas tells Jews to get the hell out of Palestine

Revered tolerant leftist Helen Thomas, the Dean of the White House Press Corps, attended the White House Jewish Heritage Celebration.  Thomas was asked for a comment on Israel and she said “Tell them to get the hell out of Palestine”

The interviewer then asked if  Thomas “had any better comments on Israel”.  Helen Thomas said “Remember, these people are occupied, and it’s their land.  It’s not German and it’s not Polish.”

The interviewer asked: “So where should they go?”  Helen Thomas said “They can go home.”

The interviewer asked: “Where’s home?”  Helen Thomas said: “Poland. Germany. And America. And everywhere else.”

As the late, great Tony Snow once said to Thomas: “Thank you for the Hezbollah view”.

Robin Hood

I saw the Ridley Scott movie ‘Robin Hood’ starring Russell Crowe and Cate Blanchett this evening (at the Monaco – nice theater).  I enjoyed the movie immensely – the scenery and the costumes and the period feel were fantastic – and Russell Crowe has been one of my favorite actors since ‘Master and Commander’.  I liked seeing Scott Grimes as Will Scarlet – he was Malarkey in Band of Brothers and I’m pleased to see those actors do well.  Lea Seydoux as King John’s wife is so French – with all the fantasy that entails.

The bad guys were deliciously bad, the good guys were magnificently good.  Problems: Cate Blanchett in chain mail hacking away at Frenchmen was unbelievable (she was great otherwise and she says she had fun doing those scenes); the Sherwood Forest ‘orphans’ didn’t fit into the storyline.  The movie is a wonderful retelling of the story of Robin Hood.


From the Cato Institute, “Robin Hood and the Tea Party Haters”:

…you really see liberals’ taxophilia coming out when you read the reviews of the new movie Robin Hood, starring Russell Crowe. If liberals don’t love taxes, they sure do hate tax protesters.

Yep.  If the movie reviewers don’t like the movie, it’s probably good.  It’s probably even better if the New York Times doesn’t like it (how those people can be so misinformed yet so smug in their ignorance baffles me):

…at the New York Times, A. O. Scott is sadly disappointed that “this Robin is no socialist bandit practicing freelance wealth redistribution, but rather a manly libertarian rebel striking out against high taxes and a big government scheme to trample the ancient liberties of property owners and provincial nobles. Don’t tread on him!” The movie, she laments, is “one big medieval tea party.”


I ran into The Huntsville Times editor Kevin Wendt – this is one of the nice things about Huntsville – in many ways it is a small town.  I complimented him on the changes he’s made at the Times – he says they’re making money (I asked and I’m pleased to hear it).  As much as I might poke at The Times, I appreciate the job they do.  I used to say that Huntsville needs a good paper and deserves a better one – looks like that’s happening.

I used to work in the food industry - so here is a bit of good gossip about Wendt – he tips well.  I love hearing that, especially since the lefties he got rid of were notoriously bad tippers.

Democrats practice gender apartheid

The Democratic Party practices institutional gender apartheid.

Democrats force voters to choose a MALE and FEMALE representative on the State Democratic Executive Committee: prohibiting men and women from running for the same office. 

For example, look at the Madison County Probate Judge Election Results where State Representative Laura Hall won the “STATE DEMOCRATIC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE (FEMALE), DISTRICT NO. 19″.    County Commissioner Bob Harrison won the “STATE DEMOCRATIC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE (MALE), DISTRICT NO. 19″. 

Rep. Laura and Commissioner Bob are presumably elected with male and female votes in the general elections, but the Democrats apparently believe that Laura can’t compete against Bob (or is it that Bob can’t compete with Laura?).

How can Democrats defend sex-segregation?  There are no bona-fide occupational requirements that would exclude women and men from competing IN POLITICS.  I’m sure they’ll say that sex-segregation doesn’t imply a lesser social status, but what other conclusions can be drawn?