We’ve debated the strength of President Barack Obama here in Georgia on the frontpage. Polling is dubious and most of us have cast doubt on the notion that Georgia could be in play, including Ed; however, Gallup shows that Obama is polling better here than in traditional swing states:

A Gallup poll released Monday showed that President Obama’s job approval ratings are higher in Georgia than in other traditional swing states including Florida, New Mexico and Ohio.
[...]
Obama averaged 47 percent approval nationwide during this period. In Georgia, he was slightly above that, at 48 percent approval and 44 percent disapproval. That ties his approval ratings in the quadrennial swing state of Pennsylvania and is higher than his numbers in nine states that he won in 2008: Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, New Mexico, Ohio, Nevada, Colorado, Indiana and New Hampshire.

Georgia is the only state in the poll that Obama didn’t win in 2008 where his approval numbers are higher than his disapproval numbers.

Like I said a few months ago, I don’t believe Obama will beat a Republican in Georgia, but I do believe he’ll perform better than expected.

Today’s Courier Herald Column:

One of the oldest axioms of government is that “all politics is local.” Elections are generally won or lost on issues that directly affect voters where they live, work, and spend. The more recent trend, however, is to “nationalize” elections, moving politics at every level to a team sport. Voters are told they either want Hope and Change or must put their Country First. They either support radical socialism or TEA Party extremism.

Partisanship now trumps policy, and the politics in Washington D.C. sets the tone for most political races all the way down the chain to the local level. There was hardly a Georgia Republican candidate that could afford direct mail during the last election who didn’t link his Democratic opponent to Barack Obama. It’s always interesting watching a candidate for county tax commissioner discuss how he’s going to stop Obamacare, or to defend his pro-life views. Yet voters identify with these issues as litmus tests, and choose to judge the character of those seeking office based on core issues they understand. It is, after all, easier than actually learning what a tax commissioner or clerk of court actually does, or how the individuals running for these offices have capabilities to perform these functions.

A problem exists within this form of identity politics in that Washington is famous for great speeches, full of sound and fury, which signify nothing. An entire D.C. career can be made by being against anyone and everything without ever crafting a single piece of legislation. The legislative branch of government requires only strong opinions, without even a hint of skill required to implement policy as is required by the executive branch.

In Washington, we have now witnessed the culmination of hyper-partisanship combined with a lack of executive experience. The two parties are gridlocked on every major issue of the day, and it now appears whatever “compromise” will be worked out, it may be too little to avert a downgrade of U.S. debt. The unquestionable full faith and credit of the United States Government is about to be questioned.

Larry Sabato, the political guru from the University of Virginia, summed up the situation this weekend saying “For anybody who teaches the American system & believes in it, this has been an extremely discouraging week.” And, in all realities, it has.

But as Americans, we must also use discouragement not as an excuse for abandonment, but as a mantra for perseverance. We may continue to debate the amount of government we have, what its proper role is, and how we choose to pay for it, but above all else, for Americans and the rest of the world to believe in us, our government and our people, we must insist the government we have be a government that works.

There are few that will make a credible argument that Washington, as it exists today, performs as should be required. The system is big, complex, and greater than any one individual can tackle. But there are examples of how those who have great philosophical differences on governance can work together towards common goals. National politicians should spend a bit of time examining the relationship between Governor Nathan Deal and Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed.

Deal spent most of his Washington career out of the limelight, but voting a consistent party line after he joined the Republican party in 1994. The reputation of his office, however, was one of effective constituent service, demonstrating an understanding that locals needs must be addressed. Reed, likewise, reflects the views of his home in urban Atlanta, yet spent his time in the Georgia State Senate building effective relationships with and the trust of the Republicans who comprised the majority with which he served.

The two may have never desired to have spent so much time together, but necessity and opportunity created reality. The two have inherited and are solving problems with Atlanta schools, transportation, and water. They have systematically worked federal bureaucracies for funding of Atlanta’s streetcar and the Port of Savannah. The two walk in virtual lockstep, at least publicly, when issues of economic development are on the table. The myth of “two Georgias” does not exist in their mindset, and partisan differences are left at the door when there are problems to be solved.

It is easy to be discouraged about government in general these days at all levels, and Georgia’s is far from perfect. But for those discouraged at how broken our system is at the national level would do themselves a favor by looking at the bridge built over the partisan divide in Georgia. It’s nice to find a small glimmer of hope, for a change.

Today’s Courier Herald Column:

After over a year of effort, Georgia Senator Saxby Chambliss and Virginia Senator Mark Warner announced that their bi-partisan “Gang of 6” had reach a consensus on a deficit reduction plan. Agreement on a budget plan with significant deficit reduction has become key in both the House and Senate as a condition to raising the nation’s debt ceiling, set to be reached by August 2nd. The “gang” was joined by Conservative Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, who had earlier left the group, signaling that Senate Conservatives were also likely to support the effort.

The plan is a mix of spending cuts, elimination of some tax breaks, and some tax cuts. The Alternative Minimum Tax would be eliminated, but $1 Trillion in new revenues would be increased over the ten year period. Chambliss points out that on a net basis, the plan will still be scored by the Congressional Budget Office as a tax cut.

The plan broadly outlines savings from Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, and will most likely bring means testing – the idea that wealthier recipients pay more or receive less – to the seniors’ programs.
The plan received broad bi-partisan support in the Senate, where a gang of 60 is required for any bill to become law. President Obama also signaled support for the plan, signifying likely support from the Democratically controlled Senate as a whole.

The Republican controlled House, however, spent Monday passing their Cut, Cap, and Balance plan, which would cut over $100M from spending in next year’s budget, cap federal spending at 18% of GDP, and mandate a balanced budget in the future. The passage sets the stage for active negotiations with the Senate, though many House Republican scoff at the notion of a compromise that will include any revenue increases.

Attitudes and opinions on how to proceed run the gambit among conservatives attempting to navigate a political arena balancing the mandate from the 2010 election to reduce taxes and spending, but also meet the fiscal needs of the country forced by the debt ceiling limit being achieved before a budget they have already passed being appropriated. Some, like Georgia’s Paul Broun, have used the opportunity for personal grandstanding, refusing to vote for Cut, Cap, and Balance because the plan does not “pay down the debt immediately.” Broun’s continued demagoguery on the issue obfuscates the point that to pay down debt immediately, taxes would have to be raised, or the entire U.S. discretionary budget would have to be eliminated. Entitlements and interest on the debt currently account for all US tax revenues collected.

Others, such as freshman Rob Woodall, make the case for a more pragmatic approach. Interviewed on radio show host Martha Zoller’s program, Woodall emphasized that while Republicans control the House, Democrats control the Senate and Executive Branch. He also noted that if fiscal conservatives refuse to yield on any issues, “Liberals” only need to pick off less than 20 Republicans to pass whatever they want. The key, he urged, is to quickly determine the most conservative plan that can pass both houses, and then move forward with plans for items that continue to address the nation’s fiscal issues, such as comprehensive tax reform. Woodall has been able to schedule hearings on the FairTax, of which he is a sponsor.

Woodall’s approach is similar to that of Ronald Reagan, who not only did not fear compromise, but encouraged it. Compromise need not be giving up ideals for the sake of a deal, but getting as much of what you want as you can rather than getting nothing. House Republicans have made their stand with Cut, Cap, and Balance. They now need to fully engage the Senate in honest negotiation, and see how much can be integrated into the developing framework for this week’s grand compromise.

Public Policy Polling, a Democratic-leaning polling firm based out of North Carolina, has put out numbers showing that President Barack Obama’s re-election bid may have life in Georgia, as recent analysis suggests:

Obama looks like a pretty viable contender in the state next year regardless of who his Republican opponent is. 47% of voters approve of the job he’s doing to 48% that disapprove. Those numbers suggest Georgia is probably the state Obama lost in 2008 that he has the best chance of flipping for 2012 because in the two states that he came closer to winning last time around- Missouri and Montana- his approval numbers are far worse at 43/52 and 41/54 respectively.

The individual match-ups can be viewed below. Favorability numbers for all potential candidates in the poll are available in the crosstabs. Take it for what it’s worth. I do think Obama will do better in Georgia in 2012, but I don’t think he will win the state.

Barack Obama v. Herman Cain

• Obama: 44%
• Cain: 39%
• Undecided: 16%

Barack Obama v. Newt Gingrich

• Obama: 46%
• Gingrich: 45%
• Undecided: 9%

Barack Obama v. Mike Huckabee

• Obama: 45%
• Huckabee: 48%
• Undecided: 7%

Barack Obama v. Sarah Palin

• Obama: 48%
• Palin: 43%
• Undecided: 9%

Barack Obama v. Mitt Romney

• Obama: 43%
• Romney: 46%
• Undecided: 11%

During a townhall meeting for Rep. Paul Broun in Oglethorpe County, someone – presumably a constituent asked, “when is someone going to shoot Obama?” No doubt, that’s inappropriate and deranged question to ask, especially to a Congressman. According to Blake Aued, Broun responded by noting that the ballot box was where people upset with the president should voice their frustration:

The thing is, I know there’s a lot of frustration with this president. We’re going to have an election next year. Hopefully, we’ll elect somebody that’s going to be a conservative, limited-government president that will take a smaller, who will sign a bill to repeal and replace Obamacare.

Disagree with Barack Obama all you want. I don’t particularly care for most of his policies, but the ballot box is where I’ll make these disagreements known.

Hopefully, the guy that asked this question will be getting a visit from the Secret Service soon.

The following is a GOTV radio spot targeted at Obama voters.

Nathan Deal-Add_No Music-10.21.10

Discuss.

The following piece was forwarded to Peach Pundit on behalf of RNC Chairman Michael Steele. He seems to provide the case why Roy Barnes might want to make sure he doesn’t find that invitation he has to join Obama in Atlanta today:

President Obama Can’t Hide From The Facts As Rising Unemployment Welcomes Him To Atlanta

By RNC Chairman Michael Steele

President Obama is visiting Georgia just in time to address the new reports that show the Atlanta metro area’s unemployment numbers rising to 10.3 percent. Clearly the President’s big government policies aren’t working. Instead of putting Georgians back to work, his failed $862 billion stimulus, ObamaCare and proposed national energy tax have only led to more jobs lost, a national debt over $13 trillion, and a vast increase in the size and scope of the federal government.

It is time for the President to be honest with Georgians about his abysmal record since taking office. No more spin, no more lofty rhetoric, and no more passing the buck. Georgians want real answers. And as the “Campaigner In Chief” continues to criss-cross the country to raise money for the Democrat Party, his stop in Georgia seems like the perfect opportunity for him to talk about how his liberal, big-spending policies have been an utter failure for the Peach State.

In order to hold President Obama accountable, let’s review the facts:

∙ Since his $862 billion stimulus was passed, over 124,000 Georgia jobs were lost and unemployment has risen to an unacceptable 10 percent.

∙ With the passage of ObamaCare, Georgia small businesses will be crippled by the extra costs leading to losses in profits for many companies.

∙ President Obama’s cap and trade policy could lead to Georgia losing as many as 64,993 jobs and could cost families up to $930 a year due to high energy prices and the loss of industrial output.

Facts are stubborn things. President Obama needs to provide a full explanation as to why he continues to arrogantly chart a course that moves our country further and further to the left when there is clear evidence that his policies are doing more harm than good. Without clarification, Georgians can only assume that the President is content leaving them behind while he puts his own political agenda ahead of their well-being.

And by “ignore Democrats”, I mean the Commander and Chief. And, those who support him.

Jim Galloway brings us word this morning that while President Barack Obama will be in Atlanta for a couple of events on August 2nd, Roy Barnes will be in South Georgia and has “no plans to change the schedule”.

Barnes upset some of the more “progressive” elements of his party when he read poll numbers showing 2/3 of Georgians support an Arizona type immigration law, and decided he did too. Now he fears being photographed with the President of his own party. Barnes didn’t support Obama in 2008 either, choosing instead the man with the better hair.

While it may appear to be a “smart” strategy to move to the center while the Republicans are trying to drive off a cliff to right, a word of caution; Those on the left most likely won’t ever vote for one of the Republicans, but they may stay home.

I’ve heard this from a few of the Democrats who post here, and I won’t try to steal too much of their case. I know there are some who are vocal who are tired of Georgia’s Democratic political establishment distancing itself from the President. I just don’t know how many of them there are. (but I have to admit I hope its a lot.)

Comrade Mayor Otis Johnson down in Savannah is pleased to introduce yet another level of government intervention…now everything will be fixed!

A plan to provide comprehensive cradle to college support and services in Savannah’s chronically low-income areas will be presented at Mayor Otis Johnson’s Town Hall meeting at 7 p.m. Tuesday at the Savannah Civic Center.

The Savannah-Chatham Youth Futures Authority is heading the effort to qualify for one of 20 Promise Neighborhood planning grants pledged by President Barack Obama.

Emphasis mine. Details here. It’s all based on this proposal from POTUS:

Obama and Biden will create 20 Promise Neighborhoods in areas that have high levels of poverty and crime and low levels of student academic achievement in cities across the nation. The Promise Neighborhoods will be modeled after the Harlem Children’s Zone, which provides a full network of services, including early childhood education, youth violence prevention efforts and after-school activities, to an entire neighborhood from birth to college.

Now if Mayor Johnson could just tell us what kinds of food to eat. Wait, that’s making it’s way down the pike, too. Nothing to worry about now for the rest of our lives! Behold the awesome power of government: the state-legislated Chatham-Savannah Youth Futures Authority (where the Mayor used to be Executive Director)…what would we do without ‘em!

Earlier today, U.S. House Republicans gathered in Baltimore for their annual retreat that featured a question and answer session with H.R.H. Barack Obama. One of the questions was asked by U.S. Representative Tom Price (R-GA) concerning Democrat rhetoric on health care legislation for which both had a few heated moments of debate followed by Obama refusing to answer the question asked.

Apologies for the quality of the audio in the first few seconds, but you can hear the entire part of the Q and A involving Price (and Professor Obama’s lecture) HERE.

After today, Price can go ahead and plan on an IRS audit.

Georgia Attorney General Thurbert Baker, on his official website, touts his “responsibility to protect the public as well as to uphold the laws and the Constitution of Georgia.” As a candidate for Governor, it would also be safe to assume that he recognizes the important role the office he aspires to has with regard to state’s rights, as the chief executive of Georgia.

Why, then, is he silent about the unconstitutional aspects of ObamaCare?

Down in Florida, their Attorney General (and, coincidentally, a gubernatorial candidate, as well) Bill McCollum, has penned a detailed evaluation of several aspects of ObamaCare and their inherent unconstitutionality. In particular, McCollum said Tuesday that provisions to force Americans to buy health care or pay a fine are not legal and he will file a lawsuit if they become law.

Meanwhile, the sound of silence emanates from the Office of the Attorney General of Georgia.

In particular, McCollum makes several key points:

In a memo sent to the House and Senate leadership, the attorney general called the mandate requiring Americans to get health care a “living tax” that unconstitutionally penalizes people for being inactive.

“Never before has Congress compelled Americans, under threat of government fines or taxes, to purchase an unwanted product or service simply as a constitution of existing in the country (a ‘living tax’),” McCollum wrote to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, R-Nev., Minority Leader Mitch McCollum, R-Ky., House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Pa., and Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.

According to the attorney general, a citizen’s choice not to buy health insurance cannot rationally be construed as economic activity subject to the Commerce Clause.

“The Commerce Clause gives no authority for Congress to transform a citizen’s individual choice to be inactivein the marketplace into a compulsion to purchase apparently unwanted insurance or be penalized,” he wrote.

McCollum also said that taxes that are directly applied across the citizenry have to be “apportioned by the population of each state.”

McCollum wrote that as attorney general of Florida he is in a position to file suit.

“While affected citizens of every state may pursue judicial relief from the individual mandate provisions, states have standing to sue the federal government to protect their sovereign and quasi-sovereign interests,” he wrote.

Again, I urge one and all to review McCollum’s correspondence to Congress.

Constitutionality cannot be trumped by politics or partisan ideology. There are serious questions of constitutionality related to aspects of pending health care legislation and now is the time for the chief law enforcement officer of Georgia to speak up about these issues. His silence is most telling about the kind of Governor he would be and, for us, most unfortunate.

Clay Land is a Federal Judge in the Middle District of Georgia, Columbus Division.

He is a Bush appointee and a solid guy. When I was a lawyer we has some interaction.

Today, he threw out Connie Rhodes’s lawsuit. That lawsuit is the one filed claiming Rhodes cannot be deployed to Iraq because Barack Obama is “not constitutionally eligible to act as Commander in Chief of the United States armed forces.”

According to Judge Land, “After conducting a hearing on Plaintiff’s motion, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s claims are frivolous. Accordingly, her application for a temporary restraining order (Doc. 3) is denied, and her Complaint is dismissed in its entirety. Furthermore, Plaintiff’s counsel is hereby notified that the filing of any future actions in this Court, which are similarly frivolous, shall subject counsel to sanctions.”

Also, Judge Land notes, “Plaintiff’s counsel is a self-proclaimed leader in what has
become known as ‘the birther movement.’”

I love that he called it the Birther movement and I love that he said he’d impose sanctions if the lawyer even attempts to bring this back up in his court.

Clay Land is a great American hero.

Brenda Lee, a writer for the Macon-based GA Informer and self-identified “Roman Catholic priestess,” was drug away from a press area near Air Force One while the president was in Los Angeles this morning, according to NBC.

Lee, who said she has White House press credentials, said she wanted to hand-deliver a letter to Obama asking him to “take a stand for traditional marriage.” After refusing to hand the letter to an Obama staffer, Lee was asked to leave, then told by security she could stay “as long as she did not yell or wave.”

Security apparently changed their minds, asking her to leave once again; when  she refused, security lifted her by the arms and legs and carried her away.

According to NBC, “Lee, who said this was the second presidential event she has covered, was later released.”

Note: If the Georgia Informer can get White House press credentials, then Peach Pundit should be getting invited to freaking state dinners. Where’s the justice in this world?

Update: Here’s a column by the “Catholic Priestess” in question “urging Christians to boycott Vatican events” because of the Catholic Church’s “tradition of murder.” Very interesting…

Over 11,000 veterans who received routine colonoscopies at three VA health centers are being warned to get blood tests for HIV, hepatitis, and other malignant viral infections in the wake of revelations that government-employed clinic staffers frequently neglected to sterilize the equipment between procedures.

1,800 patients at the Veterans Affairs health center in Augusta, as well as 3,260 in Miami and 6,400 in Murfreesboro (TN), may have been exposed to “potentially infectious fluids,” according to the VA. The fact that this is due to negligence on the part of the government-employed hospital staff is bad enough on its own, of course — but it gets worse, as some of those may have been infected with HIV or hepatitis as many as six years ago, and are just now being told to get tested.

Patients who underwent the procedure at the Murfreesboro facility as long ago as April 23, 2003 may be at risk, according to the VA, while Miami patients could have been contaminated as far back as May 2004. The Augusta exposures appear to have been limited to a period of “11 months last year.”

“What if you had to worry about giving your wife AIDS?” said Wayne Craig, a 52-year-old U.S. Navy veteran who lives in Elora and had a colonoscopy at the VA’s Alvin C. York Medical Center in Murfreesboro, near Nashville, about five years ago. “Why haven’t I been notified within five years?”

That’s a good question. Another good question is, with issues like this and like the infamous Building 18 at Walter Reed, why in the world are so many still conducting a full-court press for handing over responsibility and care for the rest of the American population to the same government bureaucrats who run places like these?

Fine, Andre. We’ll give President Obama every bit as much support as President Bush got from Democrats in Congress, “journalists” at MSNBC, and bloggers at DailyKos and FDL.

The fact is, you don’t have to support what an elected official is trying to do in order to support your country. If you don’t like legislation going through the Congress (say, yet another trillion dollar bailout, or a “stimulus” package that contains $787 in aimless pork spending and safeguards for AIG bonuses), do you cover your ears and your eyes and say “it doesn’t matter, because I support the Congress!”?

Of course you don’t, for the same reason those of us who disagree entirely with President Obama’s liberal ideological dogma (as evidenced by his singleminded determination to spend this country into deeper debt than previously imagined by man, his  his attempts to bring down health care costs by jacking up the cost of everybody’s health care, his removal of any and all restrictions on abortion and infanticide that he possibily can, and his preliminary surrender to terrorists in “Pock-eee-stohn”) and his tired liberal “solutions” that apparently just haven’t been tried by the right people yet, want to see him fail utterly in his attempt to implement them in the first place.

I want what’s best for our country, and want it to succeed. Opposing policies which would damage our country in the short and long term is part and parcel of that. Ergo, I oppose President Obama, and hope he fails to implement even a single shred more of his agenda.

Either way you look at it, I’m just doing my patriotic duty as an American — whether that be “patriotism” by the definition recounted in the above paragraph, or “patriotism” as defined to us by the left over the last eight years: namely, a state of belief and being of which “dissent” is the “highest form.” Take your pick — either way, it works for me.

Tomorrow, we will witness one of the great events in human history. Yes, an African-American will be inaugurated president for the first time since America’s founding — and I’ll get to that momentarily — but that’s not what I’m referring to here.

What I’m talking about here is far more underrated, and far more consistently historic. You see, tomorrow we will witness that rarest of political occurrences: the peaceful, non-dynastic transfer of power over the mightiest country in the world, yet again, from the outgoing leader of the past eight years to the incoming leader of at least the next four.

The fact that America’s transitions from president to president are so regular, so peaceful, and so orderly has led us to take for granted this occurrence which, in the context of human history, is an incredibly rare and spectacular event.

This is far more rare, and far more amazing, an occurrence than we ever give it credit for. The ancient pioneers of democracy whose tradition we are carrying (and building) on were not able to continue such a tradition.

The legendary democracy of classical Athens, for example, took over a century to establish, then underwent fits and starts during its century and a half of existence, ceding preeminence to tyranny after Solon’s early 6th century tenure, to an an oligarchy during the late-5th century Peloponnesian war, and ending in Macedonian monarchy after the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC.

Rome’s fragmented republican system lasted longer (around 400 years if the traditional founding date of 509 BC is accepted), but it endured more upheaval and violence than the halting Athenian system, finally ending in the 3/4-century long inferno of repeated proscriptions, tyrannicide, and seemingly endless civil war.

Barack Hussein Obama’s accession to the presidency is not being met by military mobilization, riots, or widespread conspiratorial assassination attempts. In fact, it’s not even being met with the protests, the threats of violence, and the widespread claims of “he’s not my President!” which were directed at the last recipient of presidential power eight (and again four) years ago, when we came the closest we have in living memory to breaking our historic cycle of peaceful, non-antagonistic transitions.

Tomorrow’s inauguration of the 44th President of the United States (and the first African-American president) will demonstrate two things above all else:

1. That America, its citizens, and its leaders still respect the rites of democratic succession to such a degree that, for the 42nd time, we have had our electoral say and as a result power is changing hands peacefully, with (despite the far Left’s paranoid claims of the last eight years) no armies being marched on The Mall and no last-ditch attempts being made by the outgoing leader to hold onto power or to keep the presidency within his dynastic line; and
2. That the idea of racism as an institution imposing a glass (or steel) ceiling on the level to which African-Americans can rise is as dead as Nathan Bedford Forrest himself.

Building on #2 above, allow me now to change gears to address the race issue.

The inauguration of Barack Hussein Obama as the 44th President of the United States of America shows once and for all that the identity politics and categorical identification and treatment of Americans according to race, religion, and gender — which has for so long been a key tool in the Left’s political toolkit — is both outdated and irrelevant.

With the swearing-in of a racial minority to the highest office in the world, attempts to supposedly make up for past transgressions by implementing race-based quota systems, rather than actually allowing minorities to succeed on their own merits without the cloud of racial favoritism and “white guilt”-induced pity hanging over their heads, should be recognized as the irrelevant mechanisms of outcome equality that they are, and should be left by the wayside with “separate but equal” and other similarly outdated doctrines.

America as a whole crossed the threshold into a largely “colorblind” society years ago. Unfortunately, as is their wont, politicians and government (particularly on the left side of the aisle) have lagged far behind their countrymen in this area, and have continued insisting on identifying, categorizing, and regulating Americans by their race and gender, rather than by their common humanity.

This will not immediately cease to be the case with tomorrow’s inauguration — but it should, and, with the accession of an African-American to the presidency for the first time in U.S. history, there is no longer any excuse for it not to.

Check out this picture from a Boston Globe article on today’s runoff election:

The caption below the photo says, “Jim Martin, the Democrat vying for the US Senate seat in Georgia, posed with rappers (from left) T.I., Young Jeezy, and Ludacris during a campaign rally in Atlanta.”

Here’s a question I have: who in their right mind thought, in a state-wide runoff, it would be a good idea to have Martin appear at public venues with these Kings of Misogyny?

The article is actually pretty good in its opening paragraphs, saying:

Jim Martin, the Democrat trying for the second time in a month to unseat Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss, was standing in one of Barack Obama’s old campaign offices the other day, circled by a staff paid for with Obama’s dollars, facing a large banner bearing Obama’s image.

The postcard-sized handbills stacked around the room were old door-knockers printed to promote the Obama-Martin ticket, crudely cut in half for their new purpose. “For President,” some of them still read, in Obama’s familiar Gotham typeface.

“I have a little bit more help than I did before,” Martin said with a little smile. The longtime state legislator and former human resources commissioner, who waged a lackluster campaign for lieutenant governor two years ago, carried the unsettled air of someone who had been pushed by an unexpected inheritance into flashier digs than he ever expected to call his own.

Further, the question that is asked directly after that exerpt — “Is there a sustainable Obama coalition, and is the Obama machine durable? Has Obama created anything greater than himself?” — is one which has a clear and obvious answer, but an answer which Democrats will probably spend anywhere from the next two to eight years avoiding.

The fact is, Obama has always been about moving himself forward, regardless who is advanced or pushed back into oblivion by his tireless self-promotion and self-aggrandizement.

Remember, this is the man who during the general election campaign performed whiplash-inducing 180°s on Iraq, on abortion, on the DC gun ban, on FISA and telecom immunity, on welfare reform, on the death penalty for child rapists, on debating John McCain “anywhere, any time,” on the financing of his campaign, and on too many other issues to recount here (not to mention on Jim Johnson, on Jeremiah Wright, on Wes Clark, on Austan Goolsbee, on Samantha Power, on Tony Rezko, and on Scarlett Johansson, as well as on too many other people to recount).

The constant delusions of grandeur — and constant need, whatever his current level of accomplishment, to make himself feel even more important through false claims of importance and ridiculous iconography (imitation White House Rose Garden, anybody? How about fake Presidential seal? And — even Obama supporters can honestly admit the level of absurdity on this one — holder of the Office of the President-Elect? Perhaps I missed the day that became an actual office, complete with its simultaneous campaign-related requests for money and use of the official-business-only .gov domain) — that Obama insists on enjoying are further signs that this truly is a person who cares only about himself and his own advancement, and who will shed all friends, supporters, and coattail-hangers-on, both in the personal and electoral worlds, for the opportunity to get ahead by just a little bit more.

Barack Obama is carrying those 10 million email addresses and 3 million cell phone numbers into the White House with him to serve his own ends, not to retain a tool for the purpose of making that grassroots army available to other Democrat candidates and issue-advocacy organizations.

He may, at points in the future of his choosing, assign his devoted followers to assist others — like Jim Martin here in Georgia — but the bottom line is, Obama has created an army of activists who are very clearly loyal to him, and to nothing and no one else.

And that’s just the way he wants it.

Good Will Hinton interviews U.S. Congressman Hank Johnson (GA-4th) in a broad ranging conversation covering the current energy crisis, real estate foreclosures, the War on Terror, and Barack Obama.

Part 1 – Energy Crisis
Part 2 – Real Estate & Foreclosures
Part 3 – War on Terrorism
Part 4 – Byrne/JAG & Arbitration Fairness Act
Part 5 – Barack Obama & Election season