Thursday, October 30, 2008

Any Fool Can Vote


I was watching some of Chris Matthews' show tonight, and he had for his "Big Number", the percentage of registered voters in Texas (from a statewide poll of 550 people) that truly believe Obama is Muslim. The number?.. 23%! That's right, 23% of registered voters polled in Texas say they truly believe it.

Obama likes to use the line that "Any fool can have a child, it's the courage to raise that child that makes you a father". Well, the same can be said for voters. Any fool can vote. It's the commitment to understand the issues and learn about the candidates that makes you a good citizen.

Neil -- looks like you may need to make a few calls to your neighbors.

Temporarily Blue Kansas?

Maybe Kansas can be blue for the next few days anyway:

From SurveyUSA:

In an election for President of the United States in Kansas today, Republican John McCain defeats Democrat Barack Obama 53% to 41%, according to this SurveyUSA pre-election poll conducted exclusively for KWCH-TV Wichita and KCTV-TV Kansas City. Compared to an identical poll released one month ago, the race is unchanged. Compared to an identical poll released two months ago, McCain is down 5 points; Obama is up 6 points.

15% of Kansas voters say they have already voted in early or absentee balloting; among those voters, Obama leads by 10 points. Among those who have not yet voted, but who SurveyUSA determines are most likely to vote before election day, McCain leads by 15 points. When the two groups are combined, McCain leads by 12.

Thursday Video Drip II

From the Kids at Ron Clark Academy in Atlanta.

Thursday Video Part I

I found a bunch of great videos last night that I want to post, so check back throughout the day for a steady stream of politic iv drip. This one comes via Slate:

In Case You're Undecided....

Found this candidate matchmaker on Fox News. If any of you are still undecided (yeh right)or if you just want to relieve some of the countdown stress, check it out. I'd be interested in hearing your results - I'm not surprised at mine, but it wasn't Obama.

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

get your carving tools ready!

did you know halloween is right around the corner?! it's definitely been the furthest thing from my mind (for obvious reasons), but here's the chance to combine the holiday with the cause!

www.yeswecarve.com

(More) Signs of Desperation

How do you know when you've reached a new low in mudslinging? What would be a good sign that you a squandering your last scraps of integrity and political legitimacy in pursuit of the presidency? When telemarketers refuse to read your trash.

Some three dozen workers at a telemarketing call center in Indiana walked off the job rather than read an incendiary McCain campaign script attacking Barack Obama, according to two workers at the center and one of their parents.

For all I know, this could turn out to be false. Either that or I'm not giving telemarketers enough credit these days.

Monday, October 27, 2008

All my fault....

I just received this from my professor after complaining about having to grade midterms on election night!



I didn't want to get you all on a spam list, but if you want you can personalize it and send it to others here to give them a little nudge. :)

Sunday, October 26, 2008

Who Did I Vote For

A friend sent me this email, and I thought it would be worth passing along.

I Didn't Vote For Obama

by kentuckyscott
Mon Oct 20, 2008 at 01:24:08 PM PDT

I'm a middle-class white guy living in Jacksonville, Florida. I've got a wife and two kids. Because the kids had no school today, I took a vacation day from work, and took the kids downtown to vote early. Fifty-nine minutes later, two smiling children and I proudly sported "I Voted" stickers.

But I didn't vote for Obama.

I voted for my ancestors, who believed in the promise of this country and came with nothing as immigrants.

I voted for my parents, who taught in the public schools for decades.

I voted for Steve, an acquaintance of mine from Kentucky. (Killed by an IED two years ago in Iraq).

I voted for Shawn, another who's been to Iraq twice, and Afghanistan once, and who'll be going back to Afghanistan again soon -- and who’s family earned eleven bucks a month too much to qualify for food stamps when the war started.

I voted for April, the only African-American girl in my high school -- it was years before it occurred to me how different her experience of our school must have been.

I voted for my college friends who are Christian, Jewish, Mormon, and yes -- Muslim.

I voted for my grandfathers, who worked hard in factories and died too young.

I voted for the plumber who worked on my house, because I want him
to get a REAL tax break.

I voted for four little angels from Birmingham.

I voted for a bunch of dead white men who, although personally flawed, were willing to pledge their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor, and used a time of great crisis to expand freedom rather than suspend it.

I voted for all those people and more, and I voted for all of you, too. But mostly, I voted selfishly.

I voted for two little kids, one who has ballet in an hour, and one who has baseball practice at the same time.

I voted for a world where they can be confident that their government will represent the best that is in this country, and that will in turn demand the best of them.

I voted for a government that will be respected in the world. I voted for an economy that will reward work above guile. I voted for everything I believe in.

Sure, I filled in the circle next to the name Obama, but it wasn't
him I was voting for -- it was every single one of us, and those I love
most of all.

In the Tradition of FDR

The following is excerpted from Franklin Roosevelt's fifth fireside chat, delivered in June of 1934. Sometimes history DOES repeat itself:


In addition to this our immediate task, we must still look to the larger future. I have pointed out to the Congress that we are seeking to find the way once more to well-known, long-established but to some degree forgotten ideals and values. We seek the security of the men, women and children of the Nation.

That security involves added means of providing better homes for the people of the Nation. That is the first principle of our future program.

The second is to plan the use of land and water resources of this country to the end that the means of livelihood of our citizens may be more adequate to meet their daily needs.

And, finally, the third principle is to use the agencies of government to assist in the establishment of means to provide sound and adequate protection against the vicissitudes of modern life -- in other words, social insurance.

Later in the year I hope to talk with you more fully about these plans. A few timid people, who fear progress, will try to give you new and strange names for what we are doing. Sometimes they will call it " Fascism", sometimes "Communism", sometimes "Regimentation", sometimes "Socialism". But, in so doing, they are trying to make very complex and theoretical something that is really very simple and very practical.

I believe in practical explanations and in practical policies. I believe that what we are doing today is a necessary fulfillment of what Americans have always been doing -- a fulfillment of old and tested American ideals.

Saturday, October 25, 2008

Noo-kew-lur

Hee hee.
Obama Pictures and McCain Pictures
see Sarah Palin pictures

Joe Six Pack Weighs In

I don't know how many of you remember the "Wassup" commercial from the 2000 Super Bowl. It became a pop culture icon, and a commercial that was memorable much like the old "Where's the Beef?" ads. Well, whether you found the original commercial entertaining or not, surely you will find the 2008 parody (by the same guys) to be right on the money. First the old, to refresh your memory, then the new...





True... True.

Title of the Week.

Here's my vote for blog post title of the week...

"The Lyin', the Witch, and the Wardrobe"

Electoral History

This is a fascinating look at the history of electoral votes. Be sure to take a look at the change between the 1928 and 1932 elections. I was also surprised at how badly McGovern performed against Nixon.

http://www.100bestwebsites.org/alt/evmaps/electoral-maps.htm

Friday, October 24, 2008

The Obama Effect

Forget about the Bradley Effect; here's a scoop on the Obama Effect:

By Dave Lindorff

I’m ready to call this election. It’s going to be a big win for Barack Obama.

I know this because of a story I heard from an employee of a major
polling organization. He tells of a poll worker who was interviewing
homeowners in a small town in central Pennsylvania, part of that “real”
American hailed by Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.
The man knocked on the door, and when the woman of the house answered,
told her he was a pollster and wanted to know how her household planned
to vote in November.

The woman turned and yelled into the house, “Honey, how are we voting this year?”

From inside the house, a male voice yelled back, “I guess we’re voting for the nigger.”

The woman turned to the stunned pollster and, without a hint of embarrassment, said, “I guess we’re voting for Obama.”

Simply put, Obama has won the racist vote, a core Republican constituency since the late 1960s.

Indeed, it is likely that instead of the famed “Bradley Effect”
(named after the Mayor Tom Bradley of Los Angeles, who famously lost a
race for California governor which the polls said he would win
handily), according to which some white voters supposedly tell poll
takers they are voting for the black candidate in a race for fear of
appearing racist, while in fact they plan on voting for the white
candidate, the opposite is going to occur. That is, there are probably
many white racist voters like the one in this small Pennsylvania town,
whether in some northern suburb or village, or in Southern states like
Virginia, North Carolina or Georgia, who are fed up with the Bush
years, want a change, and are planning to vote for Obama, but would not
want their friends to know they were voting for a black man. Call it
the “Obama Effect.”

If I’m right that this anecdote is reflective of a broader
phenomenon, look for just the opposite of what we saw happen in the
2004 election, when the exit polls and the networks were calling the
election for John Kerry, and in fact key states like Ohio, supposedly
solidly in the Democratic column, went for Bush. (Sure there was voting
machine chicanery, but there were also problems with the exit polls.)
This year, if there are substantial numbers of white voters who vote
for Obama but sheepishly tell exit pollsters that they voted for
McCain, we may hear that races are close, or that states are going for
McCain that will ultimately, when the actual votes are counted, go for
Obama.

In a broader sense, even based upon the pre-election poll numbers
we are seeing, with Obama ahead in Virginia and North Carolina and
within the margin of error in Indiana, Georgia, North Dakota and
Montana, what seems to be happening in this election is the collapse of
the long-successful Republican strategy of using “social issues” and
fear-mongering, particularly fear of African-Americans and immigrants,
to convince white working class Americans to vote for a party whose
interests were and are clearly against their own. Republican campaign
ads and candidate speeches are larded with code words that seek to
appeal to those fears: “pals around with terrorists,” “don’t know who
he really is,” “anti-American preacher,” “wife not proud to be an
American,” “community activist,” “socialist,” “not really born in
America.” But they’re not working. Neither is the old Republican
nostrum of cutting taxes for the rich on the pretense that it will lead
to jobs for the poor. When McCain charges, as he has been doing
frantically of late, that Obama has been outed by “Joe” (sic) the
Plumber as a “socialist” and that he will be taxing the rich "to spread
the wealth around,” most people today are probably thinking, “Hey, that
idea of spreading some rich folks’ money around sounds pretty good to
me!”

That is to say, Obama’s populist rhetoric, whether it is sincere or
not, and particularly his promise to cut taxes for most Americans while
raising taxes on the wealthy and on the large corporations, and to make
college and health care affordable to all, is winning over a large
number of Americans, including many who for decades have been
responsive to Republican fear- and race-mongering and to Republican
"free-market" ideology.

There are many people on the left who argue that Obama and the
Democrats are a sham, and that they won’t really tackle taxing the rich
and corporations in any serious way, or offering real help to
struggling working class Americans. They may well be right. Certainly
the flood of campaign contributions from Fortune 1000 corporations
suggests that corporate America will have a big seat at the White House
table in an Obama administration, as they do already in the Democratic
Congress. At the same time though, the rhetoric of this campaign is
setting up a major expectation among millions of ordinary voters for
real progressive action on economic issues. This hope, given continued
organized political pressure after November 4, could lead to real
action.

I would argue that when the real “Joe’s” and “Jane’s” of America,
the ones who have been suckered in for years by cynical Republican
fear-mongering and race-baiting campaigns finally turn away and vote
for hope—even if that hope is being over-sold--it creates the chance
for a real movement for progressive change in the country.

At any rate, it certainly looks like my theory will be put to the test come Inauguration Day.

Have a Laugh

Courtesy of Steve:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinions/cartoonsandvideos/telnaes/telnaes_main.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Flies in the Ointment.

I was watching some reporting on Palin's speech today about her desire to fund programs for special needs children. I was already thinking, that's great, but I thought you were going to implement a spending freeze, when she started talking about how they'd fund it by cutting earmarks. I wish I had a tally of all the things they plan to fund with the money they save by making sure planetariums (planetaria?) are no longer able to spread rumors that the sun doesn't revolve around Earth, and Earth is more than 6,000 years old. And then she made an example of fruit flies. First I'll give you what she said, and then we'll talk about why it might be a problem for the credibility she was just trying to build.



She is apparently mocking an earmark that went toward studying olive fruit flies, which was championed by Rep. Mike Thompson of California. He contends that these fruit flies represent the single largest threat to the U.S. olive and olive oil industries. According to this information from UC Davis, his concerns are well founded. According to their site:

The rapid invasion of California by the olive fruit fly poses a severe economic threat for the state’s commercial olive growers. The olive fruit fly is considered the most devastating insect pest of olives in the Mediterranean region, where it has occurred for over 2000 years... In areas of the world where the olive fruit fly is well established, it has been responsible for losses of 100% of some table cultivars and up to 80% of oil value. For table olive growers, the presence of even a few infested fruit can lead to rejection of an entire crop.

So, to someone who spends two minutes on Google trying to understand the reason for the requested earmark (like I just did), spending less than a million dollars ($742,764) to try and avoid major injury to California's agricultural economy sounds like a potentially worthwhile expense. To Palin, however, it's a punchline for political gain. I wonder what Joe the Farmer would have to say about that.

The larger laugh line here (for me at least) is the other, more pertinent aspect of her remark. You see, it is probably unwise to mock fruit fly research in your speech that advocates programs for special needs children. It appears that fruit fly research, including a recent study at the University of North Carolina, is potentially instrumental in the fight against autism.

Now, if you'll remember, at the 3rd debate McCain said, about Palin and autism, "She understands that better than almost any American that I know." So surely she would know about the fruit fly study and would know better than to mock scientific research on the little bugs. Either that or McCain confused Down Syndrome for autism, and believes that Palin is the world's foremost expert on special needs children, the science of energy, and Russian diplomacy merely because she has had contact with all three subjects. Sadly, "my friends", it appears to be the latter. So when Palin says, "I kid you not", we can only wish she was.

Footnote:
Did anyone else notice that Electoral-Vote.com has Obama getting 375 electoral votes today? That could be 400 and I'd still be concerned.

Spooky Pranks

Just went to lunch with Grandma and Grandpa, and on the way we saw something pretty disturbing. Along Ward Parkway and down 55th Street, there are numerous Obama signs, the oversized variety - this alone is very encouraging of course, because these are million dollar homes. Unfortunately, ALL of the large signs have been spray-painted with "USSR," "Socialist," and the hammer and sickle emblem -symbol for Communism.
I wondered at first if the homeowners might have purchased the signs and then deliberately defaced them, but most of them were side-by-side with smaller untouched signs for other Democratic candidates. There are some real whackos out there!

Earmark for what??

I was listening to Science Friday today, and heard an interesting conversation about the earmark that McCain keeps attacking Obama on. The request was for a new projector for the planetarium in Chicago. The entire interview was terrific, but I copied just the headline about it. Go to npr.org -talk of the nation - science friday for the whole thing.

In the recent presidential debates, Senator John McCain referred to "$3 million for an overhead projector" as an example of wasteful spending. The 'overhead projector,' however, was not the typical piece of classroom-style AV equipment one might imagine, but rather a state-of-the-art projector for planetarium presentations. The projector, which did not receive federal funding, would have been an update to the Adler Planetarium's 40-year old Zeiss Mark VI projector, used in the planetarium's Sky Theater. The planetarium is still attempting to raise money for the projector replacement project. We'll talk with the head of the Adler Planetarium about what the projector is and why the planetarium requested money for it. Teachers, find more information about using Science Friday as a classroom resource in the Kids' Connection.

Thursday, October 23, 2008

As if we needed more evidence that she's clueless...

When I said she was making an ass of herself, I didn't mean it like this. We can only assume she didn't look twice at the theme of what she has wrapped around her neck.










Desperation

Have you all seen this mailer that the RNC is sending out?? Disgusting.

I'm the One You're Talking About

This is rather long, I know, but it summarizes how I feel personally. I think you might enjoy it. Happy 100!!!!

I'm The One You're Talking About
Edited on Thu Oct-23-08 03:24 AM
by NanceGreggs

With all the vitriol I’ve been hearing from the right-wingers of late, I can’t help but recognize myself as the target of their obsessive hatred. So I thought I’d take this opportunity to out myself, just so they know who it is they’re spending so much time talking about.

Yes, I’m that American-hating broad who believes in life, liberty and equality for all Americans, not just those of a “socially acceptable” color, religion, address, pay scale or political affiliation.

I’m that baby-killer who thinks that every child should be a wanted child, and that the ultimate decision to give birth is the domain of the woman whose body is involved. I also believe that people who really care about saving babies might want to think about the ones who are already born – especially the ones born in places our government is currently blowing off the map, or might plan to in future.

I’m that godless whore who believes that if the government wants a say in how I conduct myself in my own bedroom, they’d better be prepared to lay down a lot of cold, hard cash – because if I’m going to screw according to someone else’s specifications, it’s only right that I be paid handsomely for satisfying the john.

I’m that infamous anti-Christian who actually believes that I am my Brother’s Keeper – and that includes supporting social safety-nets that provide food for the hungry, shelter for the homeless, care for the sick – you know, all that yadda-yadda stuff that Christ used to preach about back when people who called themselves Christians had a passing familiarity with his teachings. I also believe that just because Christ was tortured to death doesn’t mean he was promoting the idea as something we are free to do with his approval.

I’m that unscrupulous libertine, apparently devoid of any morals whatsoever, who has deluded myself into thinking that if the gay couple down the street get married, they’re not going to destroy every heterosexual marriage in the neighborhood – and by the way, I’ve yet to hear a coherent argument as to how that would happen if they did.

I’m that unpatriotic bitch who thinks that sporting a flag pin in your lapel doesn’t mean shit if you’re wearing it while supporting pay-cuts for the troops, or budget cuts to veterans’ care – or, for that matter, calling anyone and everyone who disagrees with you “unpatriotic” because you really have nothing of substance to say, but just love the sound of your own meaningless rhetoric blasted over the airwaves.

I’m that blatant sexist who thinks that if someone like Sarah Palin has nothing more to offer than a pair of tits while seeking the office of the vice presidency, she’d damned well better have something more in her training bra than a wad of Kleenex – like actual knowledge of the responsibilities of the job, for starters.

I’m that socialist commie who thinks people should reap the financial rewards of their own hard work while the CEOs of the corporations they toil for share the resulting profits, rather than pocket them all while throwing crumbs to those whose labor created those profits in the first place. Yup, that’s me - another anti-capitalist, spouting my big mouth off when oil companies earning record profits get tax subsidies, as though they don’t deserve them.

I'm that big city chick, who couldn't possibly share the same values of the kid from the suburbs, or the mid-western farmer, or the small-town librarian - or anyone who, unlike me, was raised in the right pocket of Americana - wherever that may be.

I’m that no-good Bush-basher who had the gall to notice that an idiot who couldn’t string two words together without getting both of them wrong would inevitably lead this country into an unwinnable war (or two), financial ruin, complete moral failure, and global disgrace.

And while I’m at it, I may as well come completely clean – because, let’s face it, you’ve got me dead-to-rights: I’m also a tree-huggin’ environmentalist who believes in such outrageous ideas as upholding the Constitution, equal treatment under the law, and civil rights – and the hypocrisy of you people who call ME un-American makes me want to retch.

So now that you know who I am, please feel free to rant about me all you want. I’m proud of who I am, what I believe in, and what I stand for – a feeling you’ll never know.

But don’t be embarrassed by not recognizing me in a crowd – you see, there are tens of millions like me, and you know what they say: All those damned anti-Americans look alike. And we’re all about to vote alike – which means voting your asses out of office.

See ya around, chumps. And the next time you think about calling me or anyone like me anti-American, you might want to look back at what this election has been all about - and who the REAL Americans truly are.

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Continuity of Message

Okay, one more. I just had to add this because it seemed like a little factoid that you all would enjoy. The third part of this short segment is just plain cool. By the way, this is post number 99! Next person to post puts us over the century mark. Not half bad, considering the first post was on September 26. Way to go, people.

In case you missed it...

I know I said I was going to follow up on some of what I said yesterday, but I decided today needed to be about comic relief. I was going to start with Sarah Palin's third or fourth failed attempt to understand what the VP does, but that rocketed right past funny and slammed head-on into scary territory.

So, here's something a little more light-hearted. John Stewart is really ticked off about the "real America" language that has been coming from Palin and some of their campaign surrogates. Check out the videos from yesterday on their site, which are really good. I've attached just a couple...






And one last bit of humor, again, in case you missed it. And I thought McCain said he isn't George Bush...

a letter from blue states to red states

i, for one, will definitely consider "new california" an option if things don't work out on the 4th.

Dear Red States,

We've decided we're leaving. We intend to form our own country, and we're taking the other Blue States with us. In case you aren't aware, that includes California, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, and all the Northeast. We believe this split will be beneficial to the nation, and especially to the people of the new country of New California.

To sum up briefly: You get Texas, Oklahoma, and all the slave states. We get stem cell research and the best beaches. We get the Statue of Liberty. You get Dollywood. We get Intel and Microsoft. You get WorldCom. We get Harvard. You get Ole' Miss. We get 85 percent of America's venture capital and entrepreneurs. You get Alabama. We get two-thirds of the tax revenue, you get to make the red states pay their fair share.

Since our aggregate divorce rate is 22 percent lower than the Christian Coalition's, we get a bunch of happy families. You get a bunch of single moms. Please be aware that Nuevo California will be pro-choice and anti-war, and we're going to want all our citizens back from Iraq at once. If you need people to fight, ask your evangelicals. They have kids they're apparently willing to send to their deaths for no purpose, and they don't care if you don't show pictures of their children's caskets coming home. We do wish you success in Iraq, and hope that the WMDs turn up, but we're not willing to spend our resources in Bush's Quagmire.

With the Blue States in hand, we will have firm control of 80 percent of the country's fresh water, more than 90 percent of the pineapple and lettuce, 92 percent of the nation's fresh fruit, 95 percent of America's quality wines (you can serve French wines at state dinners) 90 percent of all cheese, 90 percent of the high tech industry, most of the U.S. low-sulfur coal, all living redwoods, sequoias and condors, all the Ivy and Seven Sister schools plus Stanford, Cal Tech and MIT. With the Red States, on the other hand, you will have to cope with 88 percent of all obese Americans (and their projected health care costs), 92 percent of all U.S. mosquitoes, nearly 100 percent of the tornadoes, 90 percent of the hurricanes, 99 percent of all Southern Baptists, virtually 100 percent of all televangelists, Rush Limbaugh, Bob Jones University , Clemson, and the University of Georgia. We get Hollywood and Yosemite, thank you.

Additionally, 38 percent of those in the Red states believe Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale, 62 percent believe life is sacred unless we're discussing the death penalty or gun laws, 44 percent say that evolution is only a theory, 53 percent that Saddam was involved in 9/11 and 61 percent of you crazy bastards believe you are people with higher morals then we lefties.

Finally, we're taking the good pot, too. You can have that dirt weed they grow in Mexico

Peace out,
Blue States

David Sedaris on Undecided Voters

David Sedaris on undecided voters, via Andrew Sullivan:

To put them in perspective, I think of being on an airplane. The flight attendant comes down the aisle with her food cart and, eventually, parks it beside my seat. "Can I interest you in the chicken?" she asks. "Or would you prefer the platter of shit with bits of broken glass in it?"

Obama In Kansas City

Monday, October 20, 2008

Tolerance and the Republican Brand

Apparently religious tolerance and an understanding of the United States Constitution are officially rebuked by Republican doctrine. In the following video, a representative of the McCain campaign does the right thing by confronting one of the chuckling bigots that have become emblematic of McCain rallies, but the way the campaign handles the story is, well, another story...



In the article on the Huffington Post, they show the subsequent CNN clip that really defies reason. When they were about to interview the man who did the right thing in the name of the McCain campaign, he was told that his message had not been cleared and that he should not give the interview.

Am I insane, or did they just shred a winning lottery ticket? Here you have a representative of the campaign providing a shining and non-scripted example of what McCain has been trying to claim -- that when then see this kind of crap, they immediately refute it. Instead, we're left wondering why they would stuff a sock in the guy's mouth before he could tell his story!

I can only hope that the coming days provide the explanation, and that it is simply that they of course want us to know about this event, but that they are trying to make sure their surrogates are truly speaking on behalf of the campaign before they go on the air. I wouldn't fault them for trying to make sure they don't have any more idiots like Bachmann and her McCarthy-like inquisition going on the air. I will fault them, however, if we don't hear something from their campaign about this in the next couple of days.

If we don't, then the only conclusion for me to draw is that they were worried it wouldn't poll well with "the base" if it got out that McCain's supporters exhibited tolerance toward Muslim Americans at one of his rallies. It is a tangible suggestion that religious tolerance is officially omitted when it comes to the Republican brand. I'm not suggesting there aren't plenty of Republicans that feel the campaign representative did the right thing. Surely there are. I'm suggesting that those who control the Republican message are doing a great disservice to their party, and their country, if they suppress this positive example of tolerance.

Just as the idiot promoting hate at the rally is emblematic of McCain's events, this poorly-handled, botched, and lost opportunity is symbolic of his entire campaign. It's a campaign characterized by conflicting messages, lost opportunities to do the right thing rather than pander to the extreme right-wing, and an endless string of backpedaling to explain what they "meant to say". They'd rather be confidently wrong than corrected and right. This post is getting too long, so I'll have more on that later. (teaser)

Voter fraud, new registrations, etc

The closer it gets to election day, the more nervous I get that there is going to be a major melt-down with regards to all the new voter registrations that Obama's campaign has worked so hard for. Did you all read the article that went with that awesome speech by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. that Elizabeth sent out a few weeks ago?? He talked about scams with the voter registrations, and cross checking them against all other governement records. I heard that the Supreme Court ruled against the Ohio Republican Party in a simliar case on Friday, but will that apply to all states? What other scams are going on that we DON'T know about? Here's a case of fraud here in California that I just read about -- the CA Republican Party hired a firm to tell voters they were signing a petition for tougher penalties on child molesters, when in actuality they were registering as Republicans!

What can Democrats do in the next two weeks to try to ensure that there isn't a big surprise on Election Day?? The last thing we need right now is to become more disenfranchised, less confident in our government, and more certain that our vote truly doesn't count because the whole thing is rigged anyway.


Maybe I'm just nervous because things are looking so good for Obama now.... I have to worry about something, right?! :)

Saturday, October 18, 2008

100,000 People in St. Louis!

Dictator Rising

This is too funny!!! Radio talk show host voices concern over the flags behind Obama during an Ohio speech. Pays to know your state flags, buddy.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200810160022?f=h_latest

Frontline Delivers

Frontline produces an unbiased piece on presidential candidates before each major election. I remember their balanced coverage of Kerry and Bush four years ago. Last week they presented their side-by-side comparison of McCain and Obama. It's great! Rather long (2 hours), but I'm watching it in segments. It's worth a look:

Friday, October 17, 2008

Cash on Palin or maybe cash-in Palin

This is a great article by Roseanne Cash (Johnny's daughter). It's hilarious!

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20081027/cash

On Glass Ceilings and Glass Slippers

Sarah Palin is a detriment to the efforts of feminists in many ways, but one way seems to literally take center stage in her speeches. A couple of days ago, at a rally in Maine, she said:

“It’s so great to be here in the state that has elected Sen. Margaret Chase Smith, has elected Sen. Olympia Snowe and Sen. Susan Collins,” she said. “Maine, you all know something about those cracks in the glass ceiling, but the women of America aren’t finished yet. Maine, with your help this November we are going to shatter once and for all that final glass ceiling.”

Either she has unintentionally revealed her low confidence in the health of John McCain, or the shattering of the "final glass ceiling", according to Palin, is for a woman to achieve the office of Vice President of the United States. In her mind, that doesn't leave any potential remaining aspirations. Mission accomplished.

She has said it many times, and each time I expect Joe Lieberman to ease up behind her and whisper in her ear, after which she'd turn to the microphone and say, "Second highest... I meant to say the second highest glass ceiling." But Joe never appears, and her message never changes. If she keeps it up, it may be Hillary who winds up tapping her on the shoulder with something to say, and not Joe Lieberman. Seriously, Sarah, have you been putting cracks in a glass ceiling, or crack in a glass pipe?

What Hillary Clinton already achieved in the primary is more significant than what Palin is seeking. When Hillary got votes, they were votes for her, and to be POTUS, no less. Those votes represent a very positive trend in the collective consciousness of the country.

For Palin to achieve the vice presidency, it would be largely because people voted for John McCain. By what stretch of the imagination could that be called a crowning achievement for women?

It would be somewhat different if McCain had picked a more qualified woman, and that woman was widely seen as someone who was partially to be credited for his success. Instead, the prevailing attitude is that Palin is an increasing liability to his campaign's chances. If it's a step for women, I fear it's a step in the wrong direction. How he managed to pick a woman who gets low favorability ratings among other women, I'll never know.

Do we, in this election, have an option to shatter that "final glass ceiling" as Palin suggests? Not hardly. Is that a possibility in the near future? Thanks to Hillary we know it is. This time, however, Palin needs to worry less about the glass ceiling, and more about the glass slippers she's wearing. It's almost midnight, Cinderella, and people are quickly figuring out that you don't belong at the ball. Yes, even in Kansas, one of the "pro-America areas of this great nation." Take it from me, Joe the Planner.

Crazy McCain Rally Lady

Here's the video! I like the Thursday SNL better than the Saturday one :)

SNL this week

Yet again, there is a rumor that Palin (the real one!) will be making an appearance on SNL this weekend. This time, instead of denying it, the show just says they "are not confirming anything". Stay tuned!!

Did you guys watch the Weekend Update Thursday last night? I'm loving it. Who else thinks the guy who plays Barack Obama is SPOT ON?!? I love how he imitates his speaking patterns... he he :) The one who played McCain did nothing to capture his anger in the last debate though -- slightly disappointing. I did love the crazy lady from the McCain rally though! "....Obama consorts with terriers..... he's a Jer.... he's a Muslin..."

Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Where McCain Gets His Material

This video has been circulating as a parallel to McCain's campaign, and it couldn't be more tragically accurate.


Margaret and Helen

this is just a link to another blog, but it's an entertaining one for sure. ladies and gentlemen, i give you 82-year-old helen philpot. she is a riot.

"John McCain has been part of the Republican party in Washington for 26 years. It doesn’t matter what he has been saying the last few months, eventually he’s going to eat the party pie again. He’s old. I’m old. That’s what we do. We don’t suddenly switch to salad."

http://margaretandhelen.wordpress.com/

Challenging Palin's Moxie


I really liked this morning's commentary from CNN's Roland Martin. I was getting frustrated about Palin's recent and effortless lies that the investigation finding she violated ethics laws had apparently cleared her of any unethical or illegal behavior. Rather than write a long blog post, I'll just say "what he said" to the Martin opinion.

"My goodness, Tina Fey has actually done more interviews about playing Sarah Palin than Sarah Palin has done about being Sarah Palin!"

Monday, October 13, 2008

McCain Rally Invocation: If Obama Wins, God Loses.

There just aren't words.

New McCain Strategy: "What he said".

I was listening to McCain's speech from Virginia Beach today, and I heard something that sounded somehow familiar. He said, "I’m going to make government live on a budget just like you do."

So I went to my notes from the last debate and sure enough, there was my answer.
Obama: "We're going to have to prioritize, just like a family has to prioritize."

I guess that's one way for McCain to find an effective message. First you find the more effective candidate, and then you steal his message.

McCain finished his speech with a modified closer from his speech at the RNC, "Stand up, stand up, stand up and fight. America is worth fighting for. Nothing is inevitable here. We never give up. We never quit. We never hide from history. We make history."

That sounds strangely similar to two other phrases I've heard from the Dems. At least since the DNC speech, Biden has been telling the story of how his dad always said, "Champ, when you get knocked down, get up... get up." He ends most of his speeches by repeatedly and emphatically telling America to "get up".

If you put McCain's and Biden's closing remarks back-to-back, you get a Bob Marley song. "Get up, stand up..."

And then there's McCain's line that "we never hide from history. We make history." Hmmm... is that anything like Obama's oft-used line that "our destiny is not written for us, but by us."

To be fair, on that last one I cannot honestly say who said what first without spending a lot of time searching, and they're both kind of trite "destiny grabbers". Suffice it to say that there is not a lot of daylight between the catch phrases the two campaigns are using these days, and McCain had better find a way to stand out or he's in trouble. That is, unless you believe another quote from his speech to day... "My friends, we've got them just where we want them."

Update: Who IS John McCain

This is just an update on an earlier post about McCain's own domestic terrorist pal, but I thought it was worth its own entry.

Carl Bernstein himself writes today about the political connections between Watergate mastermind G. Gordon Liddy and John McCain. He goes into further detail concerning some of the quotes we mentioned in our earlier post about Liddy. Some of the things Liddy has said, done, and served prison time for are absolutely shocking, yet McCain still said, "Congratulations on your continued success and adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great."

I really hope this gets traction if McCain continues to play the Ayers card...

Guilt by Juxtaposition.


McCain was right to correct the woman who called Obama an "Arab" last week, but it seems like his campaign is only repentant when the top of the ticket is directly confronted with an atrocious statement. For them the problem, it seems, was that they were becoming too obvious.

To the McCain campaign, it's all fine and good for Palin to give speeches unburdened by any adherence to the truth, as her political career is expendable in the pursuit of a McCain win. How else can you explain her assertion that Obama has "unconditional support for unlimited abortion". I'm increasingly convinced that she was chosen to dominate the news, hopefully gather support from women, and be given the assignment of saying things that would irreparably damage the reputation of a politician with a more legitimate future on the national stage. She's like Mikey from the old LIFE cereal commercials. You know, the kid who would eat anything so they fed him things they wouldn't try themselves? In this case it's more like, "I don't know, that statement could really come back to haunt someone. Give it to Sarah... she'll say anything".

So, while McCain is out trying to swim his way out of the quicksand that his rhetoric has created, Sarah is still out there serving as the other side of a two-faced message. In Ohio on Sunday, she continued McCain's message of "we know how to do stuff" by talking about "bad guys":

“Help me, Ohio, to help put John McCain in the White House,” she said. “He understands. He understands you. We understand how important it is that this team be elected. For one thing, we know who the bad guys are, OK?”

That statement elicited scattered shouts of “Obama!” throughout the crowd.

“We know that in the war, it’s terrorists, terrorists who hate America and her allies and would seek to destroy us, and the bad guys are those who would support and sympathize with the terrorists,” she said. “They do not like America because of what we stand for. Liberty. Freedom. Equal rights. Those who sympathize and support those terrorists who would seek to destroy all that it is that we value, those are the bad guys, OK?”

Notice she's saying it's not the terrorists themselves who are the "bad guys", but instead those who are associated with them. The crowd was already shouting Obama's name as she said it.

Veiled in language basic enough to make the listener feel like a 2nd-grader being read a story, the subtle purpose of the message falls more under the "evil genius" level of strategy. See, the last couple of weeks the McCain campaign and its minions, er, surrogates, have wasted no opportunity to place the name Obama in the same sentence as the word "terrorist".

Herein lies the new guilt by association. Call it guilt by juxtaposition. Over and over again we were told that it is legitimate to question why Obama is associated with a terrorist. To be fair, it is legitimate to question such things, but their intent was not to get to the bottom of Obama's association with Ayers. They created a mob, and McCain took two steps back while Palin took advantage of their successful efforts to create the impression that Obama=terrorist associate, and simply stopped saying "Obama". Now it's terrorist associates who are the bad guys and not the terrorists themselves. Having successfully outlined for an angry crowd who the "bad guys" are, later in the speech she added the following:

“All across America, I know that there’s a lot of anger right now,” she said. “There’s anger about the insider dealing of lobbyists and anger at the greed of Wall Street, and anger about the arrogance of the Washington elite. And with serious reforms to change Washington, John McCain is going to turn your anger into action.”

I know, I know. She's talking about the economy and government reform here. At least to the depth of her ability. Still, I cringed at the last five words of that statement. Given what we've seen from these crowds, and how they are directing their anger, should she suggest (in any context) that it's a good idea to "turn your anger into action"?


Sunday, October 12, 2008

Virginia GOP Chair: Compare Obama to Osama

Here's a nice little nugget from Time Magazine about Virginia's GOP chairman Jeffrey M. Frederick:

"With so much at stake, and time running short, Frederick did not feel he had the luxury of subtlety. He climbed atop a folding chair to give 30 campaign volunteers who were about to go canvassing door to door their talking points — for instance, the connection between Barack Obama and Osama bin Laden: "Both have friends that bombed the Pentagon," he said. "That is scary." It is also not exactly true — though that distorted reference to Obama's controversial association with William Ayers, a former 60s radical, was enough to get the volunteers stoked. "And he won't salute the flag," one woman added, repeating another myth about Obama. She was quickly topped by a man who called out, "We don't even know where Senator Obama was really born." Actually, we do; it's Hawaii."

Who IS John McCain???


Since the current political situation is not quite thrilling enough, we decided to rent All the President's Men tonight... that of course led to a couple of hours on Wikipedia. We were particularly interested in what happened to the various players once they got out of prison.

One interesting tidbit concerns G. Gordon Liddy, who was one of the chief operatives of the Watergate scandal and smear campaign against the Democrats. It turns out that Liddy is still alive and is a somewhat successful talk radio show host... and an occasional panel guest on none other than Fox News.

Most interesting was a quote from his "old friend" John McCain while appearing on Liddy's radio show late last year:
"I'm proud of you, I'm proud of your family... It's always a pleasure for me to come on your program, Gordon, and congratulations on your continued success and adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great."

Let's just review the principles and philosophies that G. Gordon Liddy adhered to:
1. Masterminded Watergate break-in of DNC headquarters.
2. Sentenced to 20 years in prison for conspiracy, illegal wiretapping, and burglary (served five).
3. Admitted to putting together plans for a potential assasination of investigative journalist Jack Anderson.
4. Said this after Waco in 1994: "Now if the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests. ... Kill the sons of bitches."

If this isn't domestic terrorism, I don't know what is.

~Greg & Sarah

Friday, October 10, 2008

Report: Palin abused her power.


It's good to see she has another skill, in case she loses her day job. We all new something was fishy.

From Dad:

What's the difference between Sarah Palin and Dick Cheney?...

Lipstick.

The report is in!

"Gov. Palin knowingly permitted a situation to continue where impermissible pressure was placed on several subordinates in order to advance a personal agenda," the report states.

Kids these days... they know everything.

During the last debate I jotted down in my notebook a question. "Why did McCain just assume that the young black man had never heard of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac?" I left it out of my debate summary because I dismissed it as being overly sensitive and guessed I was just searching for something scandalous. Well, I guess the young man who asked the question actually took some exception to the comment. Turns out he has a bachelor's degree in political science, a master's degree in legal studies, a few years of law school, and is working on a master's in public administration.

For the record, my guess is that McCain's assumption was based upon his perception of the man's young age more than anything.

By the way... any predictions on what Obama will do with his 30 minutes of prime time on the Wednesday before the election?

The Crass Menagerie


Excuse my language, but here is a small list of things that pissed me off today...

1. Cindy McCain's assertion that John didn't suffer mentally from his Vietnam experience (PTSD), because he was well-trained, and that other soldiers who had problems would have been fine if they'd just had good training. Now it is the rest of us who have a "cold chill" running through our body. That's weapons-grade ignorance, right there. I truly hope someone takes an opportunity to educate her in a very public manner, and I pray for her son's safety and swift return so she doesn't have to learn about PTSD the hard way like so many others.

2. Sarah Palin's accusation that Obama isn't telling the American people the "total truth" about his relationship with Bill Ayers. For her to assure us that he is witholding information means that she surely has evidence of something Obama isn't disclosing, right? Otherwise, it's little more than politically-enabled slander. I am dying for someone to ask her what, precisely, she thinks he's hiding. If she said anything more specific than "gosh, iddaknow, but you can bet it's pretty darn bad" I'd be floored.

3. The descent into madness that is the McCain mob. Yes, it's starting to look and sound more like that kind of mob. Someone managed to catch some documentary-style footage of the people heading into a couple of recent events, and the results are absolutely chilling. I'm not exaggerating. To borrow a phrase I heard today, perhaps McCain would rather lose a country than lose an election. They are feeding this frenzy, and they need to put a stop to it before it becomes something even more frightening and dangerous. You just have to see it to believe it...







Thursday, October 9, 2008

Obama 52%, McCain 41%

Wow, look at the margin that Obama has over McCain in today's Gallup poll!! 11 points! That's awesome. What other polls are good to look at? (I used to be a pollster at Gallup, so I need to get over my bias and look at some others...:)

EDIT: I just found this page on Real Clear Politics that lists a whole bunch of polls and the spreads.

Wednesday, October 8, 2008

Hannity Out-"Foxed", and Analysis Thereof.



You may have seen a clip of Hannity vs. Gibbs already, but this replay and analysis is worth a look.

The video lasts just under seven minutes, and I enjoyed every second. It's always fun to watch the fish pull the fisherman into the water. Hannity not only gets beaten at his own game by Obama's Communications Director, but he also get's a "vicious taunting" from the French castle guard himself, John Cleese of Monty Python fame. No, he didn't say his "mother was a hamster" or that his "father smelt of elderberries".

Obama sure seems to be surrounding himself with the right people these days. We may be watching a clip of our next press secretary. That's to say nothing of the revelation at the end about Palin's only remaining interviews, which I feel the need to fact check. I've verified her additional interviews will take place, with this pathetic excuse for, well, an excuse, but not whether they will be the only ones before the election. Anyway, ENJOY!..

Tuesday, October 7, 2008

I'm voting for "that one".



Even though I took a lot of notes tonight (a nasty habit I've developed), I don't want to spend a lot of time on a full play-by-play analysis. Increasingly, the importance of who told the most lies or took the most liberties with the truth is diminishing. Like a Bush administration scandal, there are so many that you are somehow forced to just focus on the big ones. Still, I can't promise this will be short once I get to typing. So, here are some general impressions:

Before the debate, Chris Matthews (who is a real tire-swinger for Obama), said he expected Obama to be like an elegant, skinny matador, dodging the attacks of McCain, who would be more like a stomping, snorting, charging bull. It was an interesting simile that summed up my expectations, even if it was laughably over-the-top.

Instead of being a bull, it seemed like McCain was trying to use some sad attempts at humor to soften his image or off-set his attacks. When asked who he would appoint as Treasury Secretary he said "not you" to Tom Brokaw. When talking about health care he joked about how he might need hair transplants. He told Brokaw that he would be better about keeping his answers short by saying, "wave like that and I'll look atcha." There were other moments, but these stick out.

All the while he seemed a little, well... creepy. The jokes were met by uncomfortable silences, and he spent a lot of time talking in a gruff whisper a-la Jack Bauer. He referred to both Ronald Reagan and Teddy Roosevelt as his singular hero. In a quote worthy of Yogi Berra, he answered the zen-like question about "what he doesn't know" with, "I don't know what the unexpected will be." Read that last one again if you have to. It's a little hard to wrap your head around it.

McCain's two worst mistakes were probably these: First, that he flung the door wide open for Obama to question his judgment on Iraq by providing a laundry list of examples for how his good judgment led him to the right decisions in Bosnia, Lebanon, etcetera, and stopped right before he got to the current war with Iraq. He might as well have ended with "but", and gestured to Obama to finish with how he was wrong on Iraq. For such a veteran, that was a rookie mistake. His second big mistake was throwing out the idea of nationalizing bad mortgages. First he calls for a spending freeze, and then he calls for a $300 billion program to deal with these mortgages. The response in the post-debate shows, especially from the right-wing (whoops!), was really negative on that one.

Obama, I thought, did a good job refuting McCain's criticism of failing to "talk softly" by tossing the "bomb Iran" and "next stop, Baghdad" comments back at him. He also did a much better job of answering the early question the young man had about the bailout in an understandable way. I also noted that he worked to assuage some of the "drill baby drill" crowd by saying that he wasn't against it. I thought he might have lost some points when he pointed out that we may not have the resources to deal with Darfur, even though it may be true. It felt like an uncomfortable airing of our vulnerability. He also went back to some of the pre-answer stuttering and "uhhhhs" that he successfully avoided in the first debate.

The big moment that everyone is focusing on came when McCain called Obama "that one". That and McCain avoiding Obama's handshake by using his wife as a proxy were both gift-wrapped moments for the spinsters.

In the end, I was happy with the results. Obama did what he needed to do, without shooting himself in the foot (or more accurately, putting his foot in his mouth). McCain simply failed to achieve that game-changing moment he so desperately needs. That said, I felt like the format of this debate was pretty bad. There simply was not enough time for rebuttals and, well, debating! It was the same with the V.P. debate... 90% stump speech. Every time it started to get into a good back-and-forth, Brokaw was crying "foul". I was begging for the chance to watch them duke it out and actually address one another, and I was glad when Obama effectively said, "now wait just a minute, that requires a response". I guess I shouldn't complain too much. As long as Obama continues to increase his lead in the polls I should be praying that these debates are completely forgettable.

Watch out, folks. In the absence of a clear win in this debate by McCain, we can expect some monumental mudslinging in the days to come. It may be all they have left.

That's All You Had to Say

''I didn't decide to run for president to start a national crusade for the political reforms I believed in or to run a campaign as if it were some grand act of patriotism. In truth, I wanted to become president because it had become my ambition to be president. I was 62 years old when I made the decision, and I thought it was my one shot at the prize.'' -John McCain

I wonder if it's really still worth it to him.

Palin at an event in Florida said:

“Our health-care plan will give millions of middle class Americans access to better health-care coverage without costing you a dime,” she said, saying middle class families would receive a $5,000 tax credit to buy coverage.

“Barack Obama is calling that a tax,” she said. “Now, there’s no tax; that’s changing health care for the better. He doesn’t understand that. I don’t know how he captures it and spins it to being a tax on Americans. No, it’s a credit.”


I was able to extract one true phrase out of that speech. "I"..."don't"..."know". To borrow a phrase from her trough of folk-speak, darn right you don't! Will someone please explain to the cheeping crickets in her brain how her running mate plans to pay for his program -- namely by eliminating the exclusion of employer-provided health care plans from taxable income. Maybe she thinks there's a difference between eliminating an exclusion from taxes and imposing a new tax. It's a complex concept, I know.

"College" Sports


Electoral-Vote.com has shifted 20 points from McCain and given them to Obama since yesterday, giving Cool Barry a 349-174 advantage. They're showing Virginia as "Weak Dem" (before it was "Barely Dem"), but perhaps more notable is their listing of Missouri as "Barely Dem" (before it was "Barely GOP"). Florida also moved from "Barely Dem" to "Weak Dem". Not only that, but Obama now leads by 9 points in the Gallup poll, 51%-42%. That's the biggest gap yet. I know these are just polls, but they are the best indicators we have at this time.

Looks like McCain should take his own advice from the 2000 campaign, when he said, "Uh, I, I just have to rely on the good judgment of the voters not to buy into these negative attack ads. Sooner or later, people are going to figure out if all you run is negative attack ads you don't have much of a vision for the future or you're not ready to articulate it."

He used to rely on the good judgment of the voters. It's pretty obvious what he's relying on now.

Monday, October 6, 2008

Keating Economics

The Obama campaign just released this documentary about McCain's involvement in the Lincoln Savings & Loan scandal in the 80's, and how it relates to the current financial crisis. This is the first I've heard of this, so I don't know how accurate it is... Hopefully it will show up on FactCheck so we can see for sure. If this IS accurate, how in the hell can the McCain campaign even respond?!? I thought he was just clueless about the economy, but it's much worse than that -- according to this info, he is downright crooked. Yikes.


What if?

Sarah was asking last night what would happen if one of the candidates dies after the election, but before taking the oath. Here's an explanation, which basically says we're not really sure.....

http://www.slate.com/id/2201173/

Sunday, October 5, 2008

For your listening pleasure

Where's the separation here? Help me understand.


From a New York Times article about differing political positions among Catholics, which I found really interesting, comes a problematic little piece of information:

In Scranton, Pa., every Catholic attending Mass this weekend will hear a special homily about the election next month: Bishop Joseph Martino has ordered every priest in the diocese to read a letter warning that voting for a supporter of abortion rights amounts to endorsing “homicide.”

Someone please explain to me how this isn't a violation of their 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt status. I respect the opinions of those who have personal, faith-based reasons for voting one way or another, but this to me seems like a clear breach of the tax law.

Hope it's true

Found this story tonight on democraticunderground. At first read, it sounds like something that could be one of those schmaltzy chain emails, but so far, it checks out. Nothing on snopes or urban legends. I'll keep checking and edit as need be, but I thought you might enjoy it, even if it might be temporary!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7324205

Computers Might Pass Palin Test

Here's the answer to the Sarah Palin problem. "They" can just program her with artificial intelligence since she doesn't have much of the real stuff. Wait a minute! Maybe they already did that, but they still have to iron out the bugs.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/oct/05/artificialintelligenceai

Palin's Alternate Universe

Interesting op ed:

"In such a serious moment in American history, it’s hard to believe that someone with Sarah Palin’s limited skills could possibly be playing a leadership role."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/opinion/04herbert.html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

Saturday, October 4, 2008

Not this time.

Brace yourselves, everybody. The McCain campaign is going to be lashing out like a cornered animal, and it's going to be both sad and despicable. Palin's pathetic remarks about Obama today, I fear, will be nothing compared to what's coming over the next few weeks. We can only hope that all they have to go on is the same mud the Clinton campaign was throwing. We all know how well that worked.

Surely the Obama campaign has plenty of ammunition of their own, even though they will probably try to stay above it all. Still, I get the feeling we're all about to learn a little more about the Alaskan Independence Party.

Friday, October 3, 2008

Fox Noise gives Palin a "re-do"

She's annoyed?! I can hardly find words to describe this. Fox gives Palin a re-do on her Couric interview. Her first answer is especially worthless, and is more or less just a list of the different branches of government (benefits of a multiple-college education). My favorite part, and I don't think anyone has pointed this out yet, is that while she's talking about it being irresponsible for Obama to talk about killing civilians in Pakistan (about half-way through), the crawl at the bottom of the screen is describing a U.S. drone strike in Pakistan that killed "mostly" suspected militants. Priceless.

Palin Comparison (forgive the pun)

This is why Biden kept begging her to distinguish the McCain campaign from George Bush. I'm sure all this sounded too familiar to him as well. This is fun, folks... enjoy.

PDF detailing, comparing budget proposals

This PDF file from a bipartisan non-profit organization compares Obama's and McCain's respective budget proposals.

At least one interesting bit of data from it: McCain would offer a tax credit for citizens purchasing health care ($2500 for individuals / $5000 for families) but he would repeal the current tax exemption on health benefits provided by employer health plans. (See page 11.) So health benefits that are tax-exempt now would be taxed as part of personal income.

Two observations / questions:

1. It seems to me that this would have the effect over time of encouraging inviduals to move away from employer health plans and toward individual health plans. Since employer-provided health plans pool people together and thus reduce costs to the individual, the individual-purchased plan sounds like a worse deal (unless it comes with other means of pooling people together for cost-savings).

EDIT: A partial answer further down the page:
"Senator McCain has said he would work with states to create institutions that would expand insurance access to high-risk or traditionally uninsurable individuals. Under this plan, state governments and nonprofit institutions would pool individuals who want coverage and contract with insurers for them, while offering limits on premiums."

2. I don't know the details of how these benefits would be taxed, but on the surface it appears that the more benefits you receive, the higher your taxable "income" would be. So, the more sick you get, the more you pay in taxes. (I could be missing something here.)

http://www.usbudgetwatch.org/files/crfb/usbw082908promises.pdf

Flowchart



Charles Krauthammer

Dare I say a reasonable analysis by Charles Krauthammer???

"In the primary campaign, Obama was cool as in hip. Now Obama is cool as in collected. He has the discipline to let slow and steady carry him to victory. He has not at all distinguished himself in this economic crisis -- nor, one might add, in any other during his national career -- but detachment has served him well. He understands that this election, like the election of 1980, demands only one thing of the challenger: Make yourself acceptable. Once Ronald Reagan convinced America that he was not menacing, he won in a landslide. If Obama convinces the electorate he is not too exotic or green or unprepared, he wins as well.

--------------

Obama understood that the magic was wearing off and the audacity of hope wearing thin. Hence the self-denial perfectly personified in his acceptance speech in Denver. He could have had 80,000 people in rapture. Instead, he made himself prosaic, even pedestrian, going right to the general election audience to project himself as one of them.

--------------

Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. famously said of Franklin Roosevelt that he had a "second-class intellect, but a first-class temperament." Obama has shown that he is a man of limited experience, questionable convictions, deeply troubling associations (Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, Tony Rezko) and an alarming lack of self- definition -- do you really know who he is and what he believes? Nonetheless, he's got both a first-class intellect and a first-class temperament. That will likely be enough to make him president."

FactCheck.org page on the VP debate

Looks like FactCheck.org has a page up on the VP debate last night:

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/factchecking_biden-palin_debate.html

EDIT: marked as hyperlink

If the World Could Vote

None of this will come as any surprise, and it's not particularly scientific, but it's still interesting to browse the list of countries and the results.

http://us.iftheworldcouldvote.com/results

Was It Just Me?

Or did she actually say "nucular" eight times? And for all her attempts to keep the past in the past, she actually used a Bushism, saying that terrorists "hate our freedoms." And I can't believe she had the mountain oysters to say that they hate our women's rights. She may not have had any "moose in the headlights moments," but it's true that the questions were 99 percent meatballs.

Hopefully this is still funny after election day.

Some good news.

A poll on Fox News' site with over 126,000 respondents asking "who won the debate?" has Biden winning 61% to 39%. I repeat - a FOX NEWS poll.

The CNN poll, with 216,000 respondents, has Biden winning 70% to 26%, with 4% saying "neither".

Bosniak

Actually, it's a real term... Bosniak is an ethnic Muslim in Bosnia. Here is the breakdown straight from the CIA Fact Book:

Bosniak 48%, Serb 37.1%, Croat 14.3%, other 0.6% (2000)
note: Bosniak has replaced Muslim as an ethnic term in part to avoid confusion with the religious term Muslim - an adherent of Islam

Thursday, October 2, 2008

I'm looking for a word.....

Steve and I are trying to come up with a word that describes Palin's unique attitude, especially as showcased in the debate. I'm not quite satisfied with snotty, bratty, snarky, snobby......you know, one word that reflects her seventh-grade-cooler-than-everyone-popular-mean-girl demeanor.
Dust off your thesaurus and see what you can do.

Could not have said it better myself

On CNN, David Gergen said: Palin did what she needed to do, but "Joe Biden gave the best debate performance of his life.'

Earpiece???


From democrats.com

Based on her interviews with Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric, it's obvious Sarah Palin's head is filled with lots of rightwing attitude but virtually no facts. For parts of her Couric interview, Palin needed McCain sitting by her side to throw her lifelines.

Obviously McCain won't be next to her tonight. To make up for it, will Sarah Palin rely on an earpiece - just as George Bush did in the 2004 debates (first uncovered by Dave Lindorff in Mother Jones) and for 3 years afterwards? And if she does, how will we know?

Over at HuffPo, Keith Thomson did some great research and uncovered some surprising facts.

  • The CIA has equipped its agents with earpieces since the 1970's. (Guess who ran the CIA in the 70's? Yup, George H. W. Bush.)
  • State-of-the-art earpieces (visit http://customearpiece.com) can send radio signals over 4,000 channels, which makes it hard to detect.
  • The Commission on Presidential Debates employs a Frequency Coordinator who uses a spectrum analyzer to detect radio signals. ("Sarah, what's the frequency" might not be a joke.)
  • Infrared signals cannot be detected by a spectrum analyzer, and they can deliver sound right to the target's ear as long as there is line of sight (or mirrors).
  • Infrared signals can be detected with a broadband microwave probe (visit researchelectronics.com) but the Commission on Presidential Debates won't say if it has one.

So how will we know if Palin is wired? We won't see anything in her back or in her ear. But if we watch her eyes, she may give it away - just as Bush does - by looking oddly inward as she tries to listen to the answers, mumbling to buy time, then reciting information that is clearly not in her head.

I encourage all Youtube fans to record the debate and try to upload such answers. If we're lucky, we might just score political gold!

Update 1: I love how Thomson describes infrared devices:

Infrared signals can be transmitted wirelessly and require that a candidate wear no special device -- not even a receiver in the ear. The infrared signal transforms into sound that only the recipient can hear -- undetectable even by someone standing right next to him.

This technology is being used in the war on terror to transmit messages to individual terrorists, so it seems they are hearing from Allah himself -- hence it's nickname: "The Voice of God."

No wonder George Bush believes God speaks to him! I'd sure hate to be the one to tell him it was just Karl Rove.