But for now, here’s what I’m predicting.

Senate: Toomey 53 percent, Sestak 47 percent
Governor: Corbett 54 percent, Onorato 46 percent

PA-1: Brady by a lot
PA-2: Fattah by a lot
PA-3: Kelly 52 percent, Dahlkemper 48 percent
PA-4: Altmire 55 percent, Rothfus 45 percent
PA-5: Thompson by a lot
PA-6: Gerlach 54 percent, Trivedi 46 percent
PA-7: Meehan 51 percent, Lentz 49 percent
PA-8: Murphy 51 percent, Fitzpatrick 49 percent
PA-9: Shuster by a lot
PA-10: Carney 53 percent, Marino 47 percent
PA-11: Barletta 51 percent, Kanjorski 49 percent
PA-12: Critz 54 percent, Burns 46 percent
PA-13: Schwartz by a lot
PA-14: Doyle by a lot
PA-15: Dent 52 percent, Callahan 48 percent
PA-16: Pitts by a lot
PA-17: Holden 54 percent, Argall 46 percent
PA-18: Murphy by a lot
PA-19: Platts by a lot

Now, here’s my take on the answer to the same question but for the Republican committees, in the form of percentages of the total spending available.

Senate race: 15 percent… Using resource to keep up the assault on Joe Sestak will win Pat Toomey this seat.

Gubernatorial race: 5 percent… This race is Tom Corbett’s for the taking, and all he needs is an additional push.

PA-7: 15 percent… A great chance for a GOP pickup if Pat Meehan is reinforced with additional cash.
PA-11: 15 percent… This is one of the country’s tightest contests, and any cash can help.
PA-3: 15 percent… Any chance for a GOP pickup here will require a serious commitment of money.
PA-8: 14 percent… Mike Fitzpatrick has made this a close race, but he still needs some help.
PA-6: 5 percent… It’s a safe seat as long as it’s given proper attention.
PA-15: 5 percent… A little extra cash can put Charlie Dent over the finish line.
PA-4: 5 percent… A decent opportunity for the GOP, but not worth the investment that other seats warrant.
PA-10: 5 percent… A close race on paper, but Chris Carney is a solid fundraiser.
PA-12: 1 percent… If national attention couldn’t win the race, more cash won’t matter this time.

You’ve got $5 million you can spend in Pennsylvania, and you can split up that cash in whatever way you see fit. What would you do?

Here’s my take, in the form of percentages of the total spending available.

Senate race: 30 percent… Joe Sestak will need the extra cash if he is going to catch Pat Toomey.

Gubernatorial race: 15 percent… Dan Onorato is a decent fundraiser, but more money couldn’t hurt.

PA-11: 16 percent… One of the closest races in the country requires a huge investment.
PA-7: 15 percent… Bryan Lentz’s chance at defending this open seat will require a boatload of cash.
PA-3: 15 percent… This seat is the Democrats’ to lose, and they’ll hold it with proper resources.
PA-15: 5 percent… John Callahan’s fundraising has been spectacular, and this could be a rare Democratic pickup.
PA-8: 5 percent… Despite common logic, this seat is proving to be a thorn in the Democrats’ side.
PA-4: 1 percent… Another seat that the Democrats hold if they spend their resources wisely.
PA-12: 1 percent… Even national attention couldn’t swing this race against the Democrats, so why worry now?
PA-10: 1 percent… Would require more money if Tom Marino knew how to raise his own.
PA-6: 1 percent… The Democrats just won’t give up on this seat, but they couldn’t get it even in a Democratic year.

So here it is, without looking at polls, my first round of projects for the 2010 general elections.

Senate: Pat Toomey over Joe Sestak

Governor: Tom Corbett over Dan Onorato

1st District: Bob Brady (unopposed)
2nd District: Chaka Fattah over Rick Hellberg
3rd District: Mike Kelly over Kathy Dahlkemper
4th District: Jason Altmire over Keith Rothfus
5th District: Glenn Thompson over Michael Pipe
6th District: Jim Gerlach over Manan Trivedi
7th District: Pat Meehan over Bryan Lentz
8th District: Patrick Murphy over Mike Fitzpatrick
9th District: Bill Shuster (unopposed)
10th District: Chris Carney over Tom Marino
11th District: Lou Barletta over Paul Kanjorski
12th District: Mark Critz over Tim Burns
13th District: Allyson Schwartz over Dee Adcock
14th District: Mike Doyle over Melissa Halusczak
15th District: Charlie Dent over John Callahan
16th District: Joe Pitts over Lois Herr
17th District: Tim Holden over Dave Argall
18th District: Tim Murphy over Dan Connolly
19th District: Todd Platts over Ryan Sanders

Still, it’s just plain wrong to try overcoming a large disadvantage by introducing a fraud candidate into the race.

Now, to be fair, this conduct certainly goes both ways. The case of Carl Romanelli in 2006 is a prime example of Republicans doing the same thing.

Facing a tough race against Bob Casey, Republicans allied with Rick Santorum fought to keep the liberal Green Party candidate’s name on the ballot, hoping he would steal votes from Casey. This case still lingers today, as Romanelli recently filed suit against state employees who apparently worked on challenging his petitions when they should have been conducting state business.

So, before the Republican Party goes after Dan Onorato for his support of John Krupa, remember that you are not only guilty of the same offense, but it didn’t work so well for you, either.

Rick already seems to have a good Iowa team lined up in Nick Ryan and a good polling firm out of Texas with connections to former Congressman Jim Nussle, a great campaign chairman for the Hawkeye State. He’s also got a great team lined up nationally with talent like Vince Galko and the might of BrabenderCox on his side. Rick also doesn’t strike me as the type that will have trouble fundraising.

The real issue of course is name recognition. He is a former somewhat powerful Republican Senator, but he is by no means going to stand out ideologically or in terms of profile in a field that may include Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, and possibly 10 other well-known conservatives. The good news is that Rick seems to be off to good start getting his name out there.

The real trials are to come, however, and it will certainly be an adventure watching Rick make a run at the White House.

This is coming from the same America that said that it could contain North Korea’s program, which is since up and running. This is the same America that said that is aimed to forge new relations with Russia, which is now fueling the nuclear plant under a somewhat suspicious promise that it will keep the Iranians from using the fuel for weapons. This is coming from the same America that published an intelligence estimate saying that the Iranian nuclear weapons Ppogram ended years ago, and argument that this assurance clearly negates. If we as a nation can protect the region from a nuclear Iran, it is a fair conclusion that Iran intends to make nuclear weapons. Sometimes, 1 plus 2 does actually equal 3.

The fact is the military option is still of the table. The only thing truly standing in Israel’s way is the ability to refuel, which is not difficult for them to solve. In the early 1990s, Operation Desert Shield started when Saudi Arabia was terrified of a non-nuclear (thanks to Israel, by the way) Iraq, so imagine how they’ll fold over the threat to a nuclear Iran, a country they already have long fought with. Part of American assurances also must include some support for military action at a later stage, partially due to the fact that no matter what Israel does, America will get blamed for it in the Muslim world anyway.

President Obama also feels as if this nation can live with a nuclear Iran. But a nuclear Iran is not just a nuclear Iran, its a nuclear-backed Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas. Now, regardless of whether President Obama cares about the destruction of the State of Israel, I’m pretty sure those nations are listed as State sponsors of terror and as terrorist groups respectively.

It is a tough situation, but the fact remains that an Nuclear Iran is in nobody’s interest, and at this point there is no doubting that Iran’s intentions are to build a nuclear arsenal. And unless they have nowhere they can sell oil, they are not going to stop anytime soon. Then the question becomes, is President Obama willing to drop his so-called “gains in confidence” in the Muslim world to protect American interests. But, even those questions are not relevant. Saudi Arabia and the small nations in the Persian Gulf around it are terrified of Iran’s Nuclear potential. So, there is no loss in confidence, even potentially a gain in confidence, by going through with military action.

So, I’m finding it very difficult to find another solution to the Iranian nuclear problem. Now may not be the time, but when it is the time, is America ready to support Israel?

One, the firing is the right move as there was really no other alternative. However, what McChrystal and his aides said will be judged soon enough based on the success of the current plan in Afghanistan. Can putting David Petreaus in charge really save a nation whose leader has openly said he’d rather negotiate with the Taliban and has a peace conference bombed?

Second, McChrystal’s downfall is worth examining. Is it surprising that a General who had mainly been involved in Special Forces and Pentagon work struggled to win a conflict such as this, one that required careful political navigation. Whether or not there is any truth to this argument is to be seen.

However, without a doubt, General McChrystal is nothing short of a patriot.

But, if you were in Israel’s place, trying to reinforce a life-and-death blockade for a small nation, what would you do?

Comments?

Let us start off with some facts. The Israeli blockade of Gaza is necessary to keep Iranian fighters and weapons out of Gaza and from killing innocent civilians with missiles. We throw fits awhen Iranian weapons are used against American soldiers, but Israel can’t feel the same way? And quite frankly, J Street, if Gilad Shalit was an American soldier, you’d be throwing a fit.

There were six boats. Five filled with Europeans went peacefully to Ashdod, and other than some large knives and concrete, used to build bunkers, all there stuff was delivered to Gaza. The exception was the boat filled with Turkish “activists,” whose leader acknowledged their intent was to provoke Israel and do damage to its image. They clearly, despite YouTube’s objections to you seeing the truth, hit Israeli soldiers and forced them to draw their secondary weapons. They did not enter the boat with guns blazing, which Americans do much more often than Israelis. Does the U.S. Military call buildings that are about to be attacked to warn civilians to vacate the premises?

Get the facts straight people, Israel is America’s ally, the only real democracy in the Middle East.