Yet Another Conservative Endorsement

In today's "The Economist" - an endorsement for Barack Obama "It's Time"

Now America has to choose between them. The Economist does not have a vote, but if it did, it would cast it for Mr Obama. We do so wholeheartedly: the Democratic candidate has clearly shown that he offers the better chance of restoring America’s self-confidence.

30 Minutes in History

Barack Obama's 30 minute long form advertisement aired Wednesday night. It will go down in history as a masterful success. Millions watched it - Hopefully undecided and moderate Republicans that will now vote Obama. I think we'll see a bounce in the polls announced this weekend.

The last time something like this was done was Ross Perot and his now infamous 'flip chart' presentation. There was a lesson to be learned from that; and Obama's team learned it.

Never mind the content, Obama's choice of the team to conceive, produce and film this project says something about himself. He makes the right choices, and surrounds himself with the finest, most professional experts available. The award winning filmmaker who put this together is a perfectionist, and it shows.

And what about the content?
Obama sends a message of Hope and Unification mixed with personal stories of people that exemplify what is 'right' about America. He adds his personal narration, and stories from his own life, connecting with the listener. He makes the argument that he knows and cares about the average American by example, not in words. He moves smoothly from big concepts to specific policies, and back again. In this presentation, what comes through loud and clear is that he "gets it". "It's not about me, it's about all of you" he says from the campaign trail. No place is that clearer than in this video:

Keeping Up

Ok, so I missed a day... so let's get to it! I've been busy following this, stirring the pot and commenting and emailing wherever I can.

In a previous post Beyond Repudiation, I discussed the smear campaign in Pennsylvania targeting the Jewish vote with an email linking a vote to Obama to the Holocaust. I filed an action request with the Anti-Defamation League and got a direct email response. I hope I was one of thousands that asked for action. In any case, their response was appreciated. The Press Release has helped raise some additional media attention. Sadly, it seems that CNN has not seen fit to PRINT a single word on this whole mess. NOTHING!! I sent the tip to them, suggested the story to them, then sent a message to AC360's Keeping Them Honest, blasting their producers for ignoring it. Since, I've heard Lou Dobbs mention it, and one other reference to liberal bloggers, but no call beyond my own for action on the part of the McCain campaign to repudiate it's signatory, who is still on his national staff. I guess it would be too much to expect of the McCain campaign anyway. At least there is this:

Dear Mr. Ben-Yehuda, We released a statement to the press and published it on our web site. You can see the statement by following this link. http://www.adl.org/PresRele/HolNa_52/5379_52.htm
If you have any other questions, please contact me at the number below.
Best
Kevin O’Grady
Kevin O'Grady, Ed.D.
Regional Director
Anti-Defamation League
Orange County/Long Beach Regional Office
kogrady@adl.org
714-979-4733 FAX: 714-979-4138
http://www.adl.org/

And then there is this story that went out on the AP: Ex-PA judge - Sorry

It's getting picked up by AP affiliates all over...
CNN - they had their chance. I think they've lost their edge.

Just Say No

Dozens Of Call Center Workers In Indiana Walk Off Job In Protest Rather Than Read McCain Script Attacking Obama.

"We were asked to read something saying [Obama and Democrats] were against protecting children from danger," this worker said. "I wouldn't do it. A lot of people left. They thought it was disgusting."

The campaign coincided with a robo-slime call running in other states. Robocalling is illegal in Indiana, which is why it was being read by call center workers.

The Top Ten Reasons Conservatives Should Vote For Obama

Andrew Sullivan blogs:

10. A body blow to racial identity politics. An end to the era of Jesse Jackson in black America.

9. Less debt. Yes, Obama will raise taxes on those earning over a quarter of a million. And he will spend on healthcare, Iraq, Afghanistan and the environment. But so will McCain. He plans more spending on health, the environment and won't touch defense of entitlements. And his refusal to touch taxes means an extra $4 trillion in debt over the massive increase presided over by Bush. And the CBO estimates that McCain's plans will add more to the debt over four years than Obama's. Fiscal conservatives have a clear choice.

8. A return to realism and prudence in foreign policy. Obama has consistently cited the foreign policy of George H. W. Bush as his inspiration. McCain's knee-jerk reaction to the Georgian conflict, his commitment to stay in Iraq indefinitely, and his brinksmanship over Iran's nuclear ambitions make him a far riskier choice for conservatives. The choice between Obama and McCain is like the choice between George H.W. Bush's first term and George W.'s.

7. An ability to understand the difference between listening to generals and delegating foreign policy to them.

6. Temperament. Obama has the coolest, calmest demeanor of any president since Eisenhower. Conservatism values that kind of constancy, especially compared with the hot-headed, irrational impulsiveness of McCain.

5. Faith. Obama's fusion of Christianity and reason, his non-fundamentalist faith, is a critical bridge between the new atheism and the new Christianism.

4. A truce in the culture war. Obama takes us past the debilitating boomer warfare that has raged since the 1960s. Nothing has distorted our politics so gravely; nothing has made a rational politics more elusive.

3. Two words: President Palin.

2. Conservative reform. Until conservatism can get a distance from the big-spending, privacy-busting, debt-ridden, crony-laden, fundamentalist, intolerant, incompetent and arrogant faux conservatism of the Bush-Cheney years, it will never regain a coherent message to actually govern this country again. The survival of conservatism requires a temporary eclipse of today's Republicanism. Losing would be the best thing to happen to conservatism since 1964. Back then, conservatives lost in a landslide for the right reasons. Now, Republicans are losing in a landslide for the wrong reasons.

1. The War Against Islamist terror. The strategy deployed by Bush and Cheney has failed. It has failed to destroy al Qaeda, except in a country, Iraq, where their presence was minimal before the US invasion. It has failed to bring any of the terrorists to justice, instead creating the excrescence of Gitmo, torture, secret sites, and the collapse of America's reputation abroad. It has empowered Iran, allowed al Qaeda to regroup in Pakistan, made the next vast generation of Muslims loathe America, and imperiled our alliances. We need smarter leadership of the war: balancing force with diplomacy, hard power with better p.r., deploying strategy rather than mere tactics, and self-confidence rather than a bunker mentality.

Those conservatives who remain convinced, as I do, that Islamist terror remains the greatest threat to the West cannot risk a perpetuation of the failed Manichean worldview of the past eight years, and cannot risk the possibility of McCain making rash decisions in the middle of a potentially catastrophic global conflict. If you are serious about the war on terror and believe it is a war we have to win, the only serious candidate is Barack Obama.

McCain Aides Comment on Palin

Dana Bash travels with the McCain campaign and reports on CNN some pretty damaging stuff.

Quoting sources within the campaign:

"She is a diva. She takes no advice from anyone," this McCain adviser said. "She does not have any relationships of trust with any of us, her family or anyone else.

"Also, she is playing for her own future and sees herself as the next leader of the party. Remember: Divas trust only unto themselves, as they see themselves as the beginning and end of all wisdom."

A Palin associate defended her, saying that she is "not good at process questions" and that her comments on Michigan and the robocalls were answers to process questions.

The Politico reported Saturday on Palin's frustration, specifically with McCain advisers Nicolle Wallace and Steve Schmidt. They helped decide to limit Palin's initial media contact to high-profile interviews with Charlie Gibson of ABC and Katie Couric of CBS, which all McCain sources admit were highly damaging.

In response, Wallace e-mailed CNN the same quote she gave the Politico: "If people want to throw me under the bus, my personal belief is that the most honorable thing to do is to lie there."

But two sources, one Palin associate and one McCain adviser, defended the decision to keep her media interaction limited after she was picked, both saying flatly that she was not ready and that the missteps could have been a lot worse. They insisted that she needed time to be briefed on national and international issues and on McCain's record.

"Her lack of fundamental understanding of some key issues was dramatic," said another McCain source with direct knowledge of the process to prepare Palin after she was picked. The source said it was probably the "hardest" to get her "up to speed than any candidate in history."

I'm thinking that Wallace and Schmidt wish they'd had another month to prepare her for those interviews. Her lack of "fundamental understanding" is still dramatic.

CNN contributor and Republican strategist Ed Rollins said Palin was "mishandled" during the earlier part of the campaign, and as a result, "she's become a target of a lot of ridicule."

But, he said, "She definitely is going to be the most popular Republican in this country when this thing is over."

I disagree with Rollins assessment that she was "mishandled". Wallace and Schmidt weren't given much to work with and did not have enough time to get the job done. I lay the blame on McCain's late decision, not on Wallace and Schmidt for this one.

To say she is the "most popular Republican" with polls showing Palin's unfavorables outweighing her favorables, is a pretty sad comment on the state of the Republican party.

McCain in 2000 - There's Nothing Wrong with the Wealthy Paying More

There is nothing better than showing how John McCain has flip-flopped on his primary tax issue that he's trying to hammer Obama with. In 2000, John McCain was preaching Obama's tax plan - wealthy pay a little more, tax cuts for the middle class. Now he's preaching the opposite. Where's the honor?

Here you go.. in his own words.

Beyond Repudiation

I'm not sure how I can express the level of anger and disgust that I feel reading the following story.

I'm sorry folks, but there needs to be legislation that makes this kind of defamation illegal, no matter what the circumstance. It is beyond simple repudiation. I certainly hope that the backlash from this becomes national news.

Matt Yglesias reports on his blog: Ja, Wir Können? and also reported in the New York Times

Pennsylvania GOP warns Keystone State Jews that Barack Obama is going to send us chosen folk into the ovens:

A new e-mail making the rounds among Jewish voters in Pennsylvania this week falsely alleged that Mr. Obama “taught members of Acorn to commit voter registration fraud,’’ and equated a vote for Senator Barack Obama with the “tragic mistake” of their Jewish ancestors, who “ignored the warning signs in the 1930’s and 1940’s.” […]

But where most of the attack e-mails against Mr. Obama have been mostly either anonymous or from people outside of mainstream politics, this one had an unusually official provenance: It was sponsored by the Pennsylvania Republican Party’s “Victory 2008” committee.

And it was signed by several prominent McCain supporters in the state: Mitchell L. Morgan, a top fund-raiser; Hon. Sandra Schwartz Newman, a member of Mr. McCain’s national task-force monitoring Election Day voting, and I. Michael Coslov, a steel industry executive.

Judge Newman, a former state supreme court justice now in private practice, helped author the letter.

After several calls for comment about the e-mail, leaders of the state party repudiated it on Friday. They said it had been released without their authorization and that they had fired the strategist who helped draft it, Bryan Rudnick.

He said the e-mail was sent to 75,000 voters in Pennsylvania and asked that other questions be e-mailed to him. Mr. Rudnick did not respond to that e-mail. But, contacted again on Friday night, Mr. Rudnick disputed the party’s version of events and said he had approval for the letter from officials at several levels.

Text of the email in part:

"Jewish Americans cannot afford to make the wrong decision on Tuesday, November 4th, 2008," the e-mail reads. "Many of our ancestors ignored the warning signs in the 1930s and 1940s and made a tragic mistake. Let's not make a similar one this year!"

A copy of the e-mail, provided by Democratic officials, says it was "Paid for by the Republican Federal Committee of PA - Victory 2008."

It warns "Fellow Jewish Voters" of the danger of a second Holocaust due to the threats to Israel from its neighbors and touts Republican presidential candidate John McCain's qualifications over those of Obama.

News from Alaska - OBAMA !!!

Two news items today from Alaska.
1st - A rally in Anchorage turns out hundreds of people in freezing cold weather to create a human OBAMA logo. Dressing in red, white and blue ponchos, an enthusiastic crowd of Obama supporters turned out in this grassroots effort. Pictures in the link. Remember that there are only 600,000 people in all of Alaska, so turning out this size crowd with a grassroots organization says something! Here's another link from Alaska Daily News

2nd - The Alaska Daily News, the largest newspaper in Alaska has endorsed-- BARACK OBAMA !!! Read the story by following the link. It's a great endorsement - well thought out. Here's a snippit:

Gov. Palin's nomination clearly alters the landscape for Alaskans as we survey this race for the presidency -- but it does not overwhelm all other judgment. The election, after all is said and done, is not about Sarah Palin, and our sober view is that her running mate, Sen. John McCain, is the wrong choice for president at this critical time for our nation

Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee, brings far more promise to the office. In a time of grave economic crisis, he displays thoughtful analysis, enlists wise counsel and operates with a cool, steady hand. The same cannot be said of Sen. McCain.

It seems Alaskans are more clear-headed than the right side of the Republican party. The lack of support in Alaska might mean the idea of Palin 2012 that's being floated by some of the national media may not be viable. Of course, to be viable, it would require that she resonate with people outside of the right wing of the Republican party. So far, that doesn't seem to be happening - and with her negatives larger than her positives at this point, it's not likely to change.

McCain Blasts Bush -- Shoots Self Again

John McCain lashed out at George Bush and the entire Republican party in an interview with Washington Times reporters Joseph Curl and Stephen Dinan. He's desperately trying to separate himself from the rest of the party and Bush's record, but the problem is that he's voted with Bush 90% of the time. When he criticizes them, he criticizes himself. It's inescapable.

"We just let things get completely out of hand," he said of his own party's rule in the past eight years.

"Spending, the conduct of the war in Iraq for years, growth in the size of government, larger than any time since the Great Society, laying a $10 trillion debt on future generations of America, owing $500 billion to China, obviously, failure to both enforce and modernize the [financial] regulatory agencies that were designed for the 1930s and certainly not for the 21st century, failure to address the issue of climate change seriously," Mr. McCain said in an interview with The Washington Times. "Those are just some of them," he said with a laugh

In addition to the long list of failures he attributed to Mr. Bush, Mr. McCain blamed the president for supporting the Medicare prescription-drug bill, saying, "They didn't pay for it."

I'm sure he's not making any friends with his congressional collegues over this, being that they have enough problems getting re-elected without getting blasted from their own party's candidate. We have Palin campaigning to energize the right side of the republican party, most of whom support Bush, and now McCain is doing the opposite.

It's tough to make headway when rowing in the opposite direction from your shipmate.

Taking Back the VP Bet

1st off - Let's not forget to say a prayer for Barry's grandma. She did a great job raising her grandson. I hope she makes it to see him inaugurated January 20th


Ok.. Now this is great..
While Barack Obama is in Hawaii visiting his gravely ill grandmother, Sarah and Todd Palin are taking a day off to greet a visitor in St. Louis. They are meeting a special prosecutor from the state of Alaska to give depositions in the ongoing investigation of abuse of power, ethics violations, and mis-use of government funds/property by Sarah Palin as governor.




Hope this helps raise a smile on another bad day on Wall St.

Palin Denies Accepting $150K In Designer Clothes

Excuse this drift into the minutia. When you iconize your campaign with images such as 'Joe the Plumber', this Icon becomes relevant.

If you thought that McCain's been living in a bubble when it comes to Sarah Palin it's nothing compared to the bubble surrounding Sarah Palin herself.

ORMOND BEACH, FLA. (AP) - Sarah Palin is blaming gender bias for the controversy over $150,000 worth of designer clothes, hairstyling and accessories the Republican Party provided for her, a newspaper reported Thursday.

Palin, who is John McCain's vice presidential running mate, said the clothes were not worth $150,000 and were bought for the Republican National Convention. (What, does she think we can't add up the numbers reported by the RNC?).

Most of the clothes have never left the campaign plane, she told the newspaper. (what a waste- more clothes then she can even wear)

"It's kind of painful to be criticized for something when all the facts are not out there and are not reported," Palin said.

"That whole thing is just, bad!" she said. "Oh, if people only knew how frugal we are."(Frugal? - emphasis added- Yes, tell us again how frugal $23,500 for the convention speech outfit is)

McCain was asked several questions on Thursday about the shopping spree _ and he answered each one more or less the same way: Palin needed clothes and they'll be donated to charity.

"She needed clothes at the time. They'll be donated at end of this campaign. They'll be donated to charity," McCain told reporters on his campaign bus between Florida rallies.

Asked for details on how they'll be donated, McCain said, "It works by her getting some clothes when she was made the nominee of the party and it will be donated back to charity."

Asked if he was surprised at the amount spent, McCain said, "It works that the clothes will be donated to charity. Nothing surprises me."

I guess this means that if McCain and Palin win the election, all those clothes are going to be donated, and she'll have to start all over again. Maybe McCain subconsciously admitted that they're not going to win?

I'm left wondering. Are those $5000 blazers and $1500 pumps are going to show up at a Salvation Army or Goodwill Industries store somewhere? Perhaps they'll have an auction, so that the party faithful can clamor over their spoils; donating the proceeds to the needy or homeless. Oh.. sorry.. that would turn Palin into a 'celebrity' - a 'dirty word' McCain used to attack Obama.

Well, maybe it's best we just leave the question unanswered too.
In any case, $150k at Neiman Marcus, Saks and Macy's is raising eyebrows, and questions.

Also on Thursday, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics, a private watchdog group in Washington, filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission against Palin, the Republican National Committee and several political operatives alleging that the purchase of clothing for Palin and her family violates Federal Election Campaign Act.

It raises another question for me. Who is paying for all those kids traveling around the country with Palin - and shouldn't they be in school? I don't recall McCain selecting the Palin FAMILY for the VP position. Is Palin paying their hotel and food costs (we know the clothes were paid for by the RNC)?

McCain's Latest Twist

Joe Biden opened a door at a Sunday fundraiser, stating:

"It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. ... We're going to have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy."

Now, not withstanding the fact that an international crisis has tested every recent new president within 6 months, John McCain jumped all over the comment as an opportunity to invoke the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 to incite fear and uncertainty about Obama's readiness to lead. He handled it like everything else he does that hasn't been carefully scripted in advance by his campaign team: He blew it. He said:

“We don’t want a president who invites testing from the world at a time when our economy is in crisis and Americans are already fighting in two wars,”

Then, McCain veered off script to expound:

“Sen. Biden referred to how Jack Kennedy was tested in the Cuban Missile Crisis. My friends, I had a little personal experience in that,” McCain said. “I was on board the USS Enterprise. I sat in the cockpit of a flight deck on the USS Enterprise off of Cuba. I had a target. My friends, do you know how close we came to nuclear war? America will not have a president who needs to be tested. I’ve been tested my friends.”

McCain was tested by sitting in a cockpit on an aircraft carrier? President Kennedy sure didn't call him on the radio to ask his advice on how to resolve the situation. Maybe if he was close enough to see Cuba on the horizon, he can claim, Palin style, that he's an expert on Cuban affairs.

What does any of it have to do with being tested? However brave his military exploits, it was all about following orders, not making international policy decisions or negotiating solutions. Thank you John for reminding us all that your military service does not equate to crisis decision making or foreign policy readiness. Thanks also for reminding us just how old you are.

If anything, this confirms how erratic McCain's campaign is. It's pulled him off onto a new tangent. I have to wonder if Biden's comments were intended to do just that.

McCain and the Decline of the Republican Party

McCain spends his time at the rallies lately bashing Obama's tax cuts, carefully choosing to quote 'Joe the Plumber' when calling it 'socialism'. At the same time he proposes a 30% tax cut for corporations - from 35% to 25%. On the campaign trail, he tries to separate himself from GW Bush saying he wants to take America in a new direction, but doesn't say what that direction is. It's simply rhetoric, with nothing to back it up.

The reality is that his own plan for the economy is basically the same as the disaster that GW Bush has had for the last 8 years. Remove regulation and provide huge tax breaks for the large corporations and the generosity will 'trickle down' to the rest of us who work for a paycheck. The problem with that approach is that it assumes corporations are socially benevolent organizations. In practice, the last 8 years especially have shown that the CEOs, executives and shareholders will line their pockets with profits while continuing to cut operating expenses by shipping jobs overseas. He wants to do the same thing to health care, but we have already seen that absent regulation, health care corporations will deny services, and insurance companies will deny claims.

In the past, McCain came out against the Bush tax cuts, calling them 'irresponsible' while the country was at war. Now he wants to cut taxes on corporations even more, while continuing to wage war in Iraq and Afghanistan with a cost of over $10 BILLION a MONTH. Who is going to pay for this tax cut? All the rest of us. What has ruined our economy? People cannot continue to 'spend' money they don't have to support an economy while it is being sucked dry by military spending. The credit has been used up, the well is dry. We need to stop spending that money overseas on bullets, and instead spend it here at home on our veterans and on our infrastructure and in ways that produce positive economic results at home.

Obama's tax plan isn't 'socialism'. Taxes - all taxes- are always about 'redistributing the wealth' in one form or another. Our country has come to expect certain services from our government. To suggest that the lower and middle class have been paying too much of the cost, and that the wealthy can afford to pay a little more is what I call 'fairness', not 'socialist'.

The ideals of the Reagan era Republican Party are gone. They have been replaced with greed, power brokering, nation building, corruption and the worst kind of whisper campaigns that use fear mongering, racial prejudice and McCarthyism. Code words like 'terrorist', 'muslim', 'arab' and 'associates with' have no business in a political campaign. It's disgusting, narrow minded and reminds me of the tactics that GW Bush, Carl Rove, and Dick Cheney used to invoke the eras of McCarthy and Wallace in whipping up sentiment to support their hidden agenda of war with Iraq while suppressing their detractors.

This is a dangerous ploy that has to stop. It will divide our country and set us back 50 years. We must not allow candidates to use these tactics and simply deny the obvious truth. They must be held accountable for stoking the embers of extremism in this country. We can stop it with our voices in the press, and we MUST stop it with our votes at the polls.

Block the Vote

This article, written by ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR. & GREG PALAST appeared in Rolling Stone Magazine. Why isn't the mainstream media pounding this story hard? Contact your local media, Ireport or Keeping Them Honest for CNN, MSNBC, etc. and ask them why they are not covering this outrageous national Voter Fraud (by exclusion) campaign.

Here's a bit from the article:

These days, the old west rail hub of Las Vegas, New Mexico, is little more than a dusty economic dead zone amid a boneyard of bare mesas. In national elections, the town overwhelmingly votes Democratic: More than 80 percent of all residents are Hispanic, and one in four lives below the poverty line. On February 5th, the day of the Super Tuesday caucus, a school-bus driver named Paul Maez arrived at his local polling station to cast his ballot. To his surprise, Maez found that his name had vanished from the list of registered voters, thanks to a statewide effort to deter fraudulent voting. For Maez, the shock was especially acute: He is the supervisor of elections in Las Vegas.

Maez was not alone in being denied his right to vote. On Super Tuesday, one in nine Democrats who tried to cast ballots in New Mexico found their names missing from the registration lists. The numbers were even higher in precincts like Las Vegas, where nearly 20 percent of the county's voters were absent from the rolls.

Colin Powell Endorses Barack Obama

Meet the Press was the forum for this important endorsement by a key Republican.

It was not only an endorsement, but a major critical assessment of both campaigns and both candidates. Powell was particularly critical of McCain's campaign, and the RNC. He highlighted McCain's erratic handling of the economic crisis, his pick of Palin, and use of Ayers as several examples of problems he has with McCain. He called Obama a 'transformational candidate' and cited his steady hand, his substance and his style and ability to inspire in his decision to endorse Obama. He had a lot critical to say about the republican party and campaign with it's narrowing and negative focus. Here's a clip from the show to watch.

Marriage Squeaker in California

The fight for civil marriage equality in California is a dead heat in the latest poll.

We all need to get out the vote against Prop. 8. A LOT of money is being spent by out-of-state evangelical organizations get this 'marriage' constitutional amendment passed to overturn the California Supreme Court ruling.

Republican voter fraud

This in today's LA Times:
Voters say they were duped into registering as Republicans

YPM, a group hired by the GOP, allegedly deceived Californians who thought they were signing a petition. YPM denies any wrongdoing. Similar accusations have been leveled against the company elsewhere.

The Times randomly interviewed 46 of the hundreds of voters whose election records show they were recently re-registered as Republicans by YPM, and 37 of them -- more than 80% -- said that they were misled into making the change or that it was done without their knowledge.

The American Promise

Watch the video, get inspired. With all the negative BS on the news, it's easy to forget the positive message of hope and inspiration that this man brings.



If you have time to help, use up your cell minutes this month and make some calls.

FRAUD

People for the American Way have published this full page ad in the NYT about ACORN. The Republicans will be back to their old tricks again of voter suppression, and they are going to be working it hardest in those Red states that are polling purple/blue.

http://site.pfaw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ads_fraud

I disagree with one point in the ad. When people are 'warned' via anonymous flyers that if they have outstanding traffic tickets they may get arrested if they go to the polls, it could actually happen. In many states, police routinely set up roadblocks and check for registration and traffic scofflaws. All it takes is a little encouragement by local (or sometimes non-local) politicians to make sure that come election day, in certain districts, that 'routine' roadblocks just happen to be set up so that you pass through them to get to your local polling place.

This is exactly what people complained about in Florida in 2004. It is sure to happen again. I suggest that people take that 800 number that CNN published to report voter suppression/fraud activites on with them when they drive to their polling place.

Debate number 3 - Monitoring the Independents

The CNN Independent focus group twists the dials for Barack Obama again for debate number 3.
The snap polls taken after the debate

McCain started the debate with 'angry angry angry' and looked that way. The split screen told the tale, looking old, angry, and at times contemptuous. None of those win votes, especially with Independent or undecided voters. Dial responses were muted.

On the other hand, Obama was 'cool and collected', and although a bit tense at the open, seemed to get more comfortable and more focused as the debate wore on. It might have seemed 'boring' to some, but the 'even hand on the tiller' of steady leadership can look that way. Net result - similar muted responses.

In contrast, it makes McCain look even more erratic and disjointed when unsuccessfully trying one attack angle after another to get Obama off course. McCain just seemed to get more angry, more frustrated, and at the end, tired. It seemed the focus group ended the same way; positive responses dropped off while McCain was still dragging out his responses.

McCain sounded hollow when complaining about the Obama's negative ads. It's an unbelievable charge. He's not in a position to whine while he's running 100% negative ads and Palin is stoking the hate mongers on the fringe. No one will believe that Obama is spending the most on negative ads, because he's only about 30% negative compared to the 100% negative of McCain. Every time someone sees an positive issue ad by Obama, they are now going to think ' Gee, McCain was wrong about Obama spending so much on negative ads'. This is definitely going to blow back on McCain, especially if he continues to run negative. Needless to say, you don't win votes with this line.

Obama missed the talking point on Ayers that he was voted Chicago Citizen of the Year in 1987, but responded well about the relationship. He told the story, explained the board, who else was on it, and who funded it - Ronald Reagan's friends the Annenburgs. - McCain hurt himself with outbursts. The diallers show they really aren't that interested. McCain follows up saying that he's not that interested in an old former terrorist, but it's about Obama's being forthcoming about the information. The problem was he said that after Obama just got done with a detailed explanation.

McCain is not believable about 'repudiating' all negative personal attacks. How can he say that when his running mate is busy making negative personal attacks? The dial shows people are not particularly impressed.

McCain has some problems with his arguments lately. When asked about Sarah Palin, he can no longer say 'reformer' without people thinking 'troopergate - abuse of power'. Flat Independent response from women until he touched on 'special needs kids'.. Men seemed to like that 'feisty' part of the 'reformer' word.

As the subjects turned to energy, Obama blew McCain out of the water. Especially when he talked about making high efficiency cars here in the US, not overseas, and working on new energy sources creating jobs in the US. McCain's drill-drill-drill just didn't resonate. The focus group is from Ohio. Job news is hurting this part of the country. McCain ties jobs to energy, but doesn't say how. Bringing up nuclear powered navy ships seems SO detached, McCain's just not relating to the focus group.

Moving on to Health Care, Obama got the twist to full + both with men and women. McCain's $5000 plan got Neg marks with women.. period! Men also dropped down to only slightly +.
McCain's mocking 'zero' response to Obama's statement about fines to small businesses didn't come off. It made him look like he didn't know Obama's plan. Obama continued with a strong response, detailing McCain's plan and it's faults. McCain is clearly out of it on this one. He didn't explain or counter Obama's arguments - he went back to Joe Plumber.. what? He goes off track then veers back. McCain then goes on to explain that his plan would give people $5000, but then would be taxed .. but the kicker is then he says the average health plan costs $5800.. hmm that seems like a $800 loss, and you then have to go out and find coverage for yourself... Good Luck... needless to say he got flat lined by the diallers on that. His arguments were not coherent at all. Obama's explanation of the McCain plan was far more understandable than McCain's attempt at explaining his own position. Probably convinced more than a few that they're better off without McCain's plan.

On the Supreme court issue - McCain came out and said he's for overturning Roe v. Wade. Called himself a Federalist - (stole that one from Palin!) He then got incoherent again.. no litmus test, but someone who's record supports Roe v. Wade would not be qualified .. huh? Talking out of both sides of his mouth. Obama refers back to supporting the Right to Privacy.. gets a strong uptick. Obama gives a strong empathy position - not 'Pro-Abortion'; support providing alternative solutions. Empathy was apparent; give women the choice, but encourage alternatives and prevent pregnancies to begin with. Very Centrist- and probably acceptable to some who lean pro-life, but are not hard line. Common ground approach mentioning sacred sexuality hits TOP marks, men and women! This line provides a way for people to support Obama from both sides of this issue and is reflected in the focus group response.

Obama hits again with Education. Teacher pay is very good point with the dialer twisters, but college hits the mark 100% + especially with women, but also with men. He does it again when he talks about better parenting -- 100% both men and women. Clear win on this one.
McCain harps on Vouchers.. his only answer. Troops returning to work as teachers without credentials gets a strong neg twist from women. Don't blame them... it's a STUPID idea. What qualifies a veteran to be able to teach without appropriate training? Makes NO sense. The visual of that ex-marine standing in front of a bunch of elementary school kids is pretty stark.
Obama comes out and blasts McCain's lack of help for college education, and uses his campaign's flippant response of not being able to accommodate a 'special interest'

Closing speeches were a mis-match. McCain starts, and gets only small responses. He doesn't have much to say. If anything, this should have been his shining moment. He should have been prepared to espouse all his strong points, but doesn't. He basically just asked for people to trust him. That's pretty tough with the sentiment running so negative these days, and some of his erratic answers. No big positives in response. Obama reviews his policy positions and relates them to the people. He gets a fairly strong positive response on the dials, and closes asking for peoples votes. (Don't forget to ask for their votes!!).

McCain set himself up as the angry attack underdog, but that set up a very negative tone. Response was muted. This is a very dangerous mode to go during a debate. If you are successful with the attacks, throwing your opponent off or getting them to change their game plan, and do it in a way that doesn't set a negative tone on your own message, you can win big. It's the kind of tactic that McCain needs because he needs to make a global shift in the campaign. Unfortunately for McCain, his tactic didn't work. He came across with a negative tone, did not throw Obama off his game plan, and didn't deliver a message of his own.

He ended up attacking Obama, but doing it on Obama's turf. That gives Obama control of the response and the debate. In order to work, he needed to attack Obama from his own turf. From his own strengths, he could have attacked without setting a negative tone on his own message.
The problem is that his own strengths aren't very strong. They don't bear critical analysis. They are also in areas that are not as important as they once were to the voters.

UPDATE - CNN snap poll data shows:
By 23 points, those polled said Obama was the stronger leader during the debate. By 48 points, they said Obama was more likeable. Independents went 57% to 31% for Obama as winning the debate. [Those are blow-away numbers. Clearly McCain's attack underdog persona hurt him]
CNN's Electoral College map now is at 277 Obama - more shifts, and some strong red states are now only 'lean McCain'. Interesting to see it change.

I expect a bounce for Obama in the battleground states out of this. I'm also waiting for the press to bring forward the William Timmons lobbyist issue, which mainstream news organizations haven't delivered on yet. Perhaps they were all waiting for the debates to be over. Obama doesn't need to raise this issue, but the press should still let people know about Timmons. He's an example of the worst of Washington insider politics.

McCain Transition Chief Lobbied for Saddam

There is a lot more to this breaking story if you follow the link to the full report.
So much for being a 'reformer' and bringing 'outside-of-washington' type changes. McCain hiring a lobbyist to head his transition team is bad enough, but this guy isn't just any lobbiest. He was in the middle of the Iraq 'food for oil' corruption disaster. I'm surprised he didn't end up in jail like his cohorts.


Murry Wass reports:

William Timmons, the Washington lobbyist who John McCain has named to head his presidential transition team, aided an influence effort on behalf of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein to ease international sanctions against his regime.

The two lobbyists who Timmons worked closely with over a five year period on the lobbying campaign later either pleaded guilty to or were convicted of federal criminal charges that they had acted as unregistered agents of Saddam Hussein's government.

During the same period beginning in 1992, Timmons worked closely with the two lobbyists, Samir Vincent and Tongsun Park, on a previously unreported prospective deal with the Iraqis in which they hoped to be awarded a contract to purchase and resell Iraqi oil. Timmons, Vincent, and Park stood to share at least $45 million if the business deal went through.

Vincent, an Iraqi-born American citizen with whom Timmons worked most closely, pleaded guilty to federal criminal charges in January 2005 that he had acted as an unregistered agent of Saddam Hussein's regime. Tongsun Park, the second lobbyist who Timmons worked closely with, was convicted by a federal jury in July 2006 on charges that he too violated the Foreign Agent Registration Act.

Timmons testified that he first introduced Vincent to Tongsun Park and encouraged him to hire Park to work on the deal.

At the time Timmons introduced the two men, Park's notorious background was well known:

In the 1970s, Park had admitted to making hundreds of thousands in payments and illegal campaign contributions to U.S. congressmen on behalf of the South Korean government. Park was indicted on 36 counts by a federal grand jury, but fled to South Korea before he could face trial. All of the charges were later dismissed in exchange for Park providing information about which public officials received funds from the South Korean government.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, not long after Timmons suggested that Vincent hire Park to assist their influence, lobbying, and back-channel diplomatic efforts on behalf of Saddam Hussein's government, much of that effort became increasingly bizarre, corrupt, and - on occasion - illegal.

Palin's True Nature

Latest Q-Polls

These surveys of likely voters in Colorado, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan were conducted by Quinnipiac University in partnership with washingtonpost.com and The Wall Street Journal.

The polls reflect data collected Oct 8-12 (post debate)
Full survey results are available here

Key Findings Among Likely Voters
Presidential Preference
If the election for President were being held today, and the candidates were Barack Obama the Democrat and John McCain the Republican, for whom would you vote?
Colorado
McCain (R) 43%
Obama (D) 52%
Michigan
McCain (R) 38%
Obama (D) 54%
Minnesota
McCain (R) 40%
Obama (D) 51%
Wisconsin
McCain (R) 37%
Obama (D) 54%

What happened to Troopergate?

I'm surprised by the lack of coverage on the Sarah Palin Abuse of Power story.
Friday, when the report was released, CNN seemed to be confused by the findings. Obviously, they didn't read it, but relied on the spin of their 'political contributors' (instead of a legal analyst) to tell the story... and it seems they didn't read it either. Since that embarrassing evening, CNN has been strangely quiet; making no almost no mention of it. It seems they'd already blocked their time with the 'Race on Race' story, and weren't going to cover breaking news after flubbing the story out the starting gate.

Rachel Maddow on MSNBC got it right that night.. she read findings directly from the report on the air. Unfortunately, others didn't seem to pick it up. The other news sources were tying this whole thing into one neat package the way the McCain campaign was spinning it; focusing on the 2nd finding's one sentence saying firing Monegan was within her discretion even if the Trooper Wooten issue played a part in the decision.

It seems the Republican spin machine has managed to cloud the issue sufficiently that the weekend news shows didn't even make MENTION of it. WHAT'S GOING ON ???

Here's the specifics - and this is completely clear to anyone who reads the actual report:

There were 2 major findings:
1st - That Governor Palin was guilty of Abuse of Power, and violating the public trust (a violation of state law; ie. criminal) by pressuring, and allowing her Husband to use the office of the Governor to pressure various members of the Alaska State Troopers, and various state officials and personnel agencies to fire Trooper Mike Wooten, her sister's ex-husband.

2nd - That the firing of Walt Monegan was legal, in spite of the fact that his refusal to fire Trooper Wooten likely contributed to the decision.

Now, the McCain campaign and Gov. Palin keep pointing to the 2nd finding - and claim that this exonerates Palin of any wrongdoing. They intentionally combine this with the Abuse of Power finding, to confuse the issues. They are clearly spelled out in the report as separate issues.

The 1st finding is a violation of Alaska State law, and is an impeachable offense. Abuse of Power is a very serious charge. No matter how much the McCain spin team ignore and refuse to address this issue, it is a fact.

Palin's lawyers know it's serious. They issued a 3 page document contesting the findings, claiming that the ethics statute requires financial gain. The report already addresses that point, specifically refuting the 'financial' aspect as a requirement of the law.

The funny thing is looking through the deposition transcripts, it was so heavy handed that it's almost comical. There was NO consideration for what might happen if it were to come to public light; even though the Palin's and others acting on their behalf were warned of the possible legal issues with their continuing to press about a closed case.

Finally there is an article on Time Online now that covers thing pretty well.

I'm waiting to see if the Alaska legislature decides to take further action. Don't be surprised if they wait until after November 4th. If McCain/Palin win, it becomes moot, as she will no longer be Governor. If not, Alaska will be able to clean up the embarrassing mess without the glare and scrutiny the national spotlight.

McCain's Housing proposal - really Frank-Dodd?

I never thought I'd be quoting a NR article, much less agreeing with it. Either McCain is actually proposing the Frank-Dodd bill that is already law and trying to take credit for it while exaggerating on the numbers of homeowners that will benefit, or he's gone completely beyond it with a complete lender bailout with no hope of the taxpayers recovering any of the money spent. Either way, 'his' idea is NOT new. If the latter, it is simply Frank-Dodd with all the restraint and lender responsibility aspects removed. This is exactly what the public at large and house Republicans are so strongly against and what McCain supposedly suspended his campaign to help resolve. He's either out-of-touch with the legislation, or this is a huge flip-flop of $300B proportions.

The editors of the National Review weigh in against McCain's latest proposal in an article titled Frank-Dodd 2008!

Here is what is wrong with McCain’s new housing proposal: It can’t improve on current law without rewarding an unacceptable amount of bad behavior.

Under the Frank-Dodd housing bill that was signed into law last summer, borrowers qualify for a federally subsidized workout only if they meet the following criteria:

1) The borrower must live in his house — no investment properties.
2) The borrower must show that he has been spending at least a third of his income on mortgage payments since March of this year.
3) He must also show that he can afford to make lower payments if his lender agrees to a write-down.

This is obviously a narrow slice of borrowers — around 400,000, according to most estimates. It excludes people who borrowed to buy investment properties in order to flip them for a profit. It excludes people who are hopelessly in over their heads and simply cannot afford the homes they’re in. And it excludes people who could afford to pay their mortgages if they wanted to but have instead decided to mail the keys to the bank rather than continue making payments on a house that is worth less today than when they bought it.

McCain’s campaign says his plan would help “millions” of borrowers stay in their homes without authorizing any new spending. But he has not said how he plans to accomplish this without lowering the standards set forth in the Frank-Dodd bill. And if he does lower the standards — by, for example, letting people who can afford their current payments get a write-down just because their property value has fallen — then he would be offering taxpayer assistance to “ruthless borrowers,” which is an industry term for borrowers who default on their obligations not because they can’t pay but because they’ve decided it’s not in their interest to pay.

McCain’s plan would also be a gift to lenders who abandoned any sense of prudence during the boom years. Under the Frank-Dodd bill, lenders must agree to “take a haircut” — slang for writing down the value of a mortgage — in order to qualify for federal insurance on a distressed mortgage. The lender bears an initial loss but is protected if the borrower eventually defaults. McCain would transfer that initial loss to the taxpayers. Under his plan, the government would buy mortgage loans at face value and then reduce the principal and interest on these loans to accommodate distressed borrowers. Taxpayers would take so many haircuts we would all look like Britney Spears after a three-day bender.

Defenders of McCain’s plan argue that the lenders are already getting a bailout through the Treasury Department’s purchase of mortgage-backed assets from banks and other financial firms. They argue that McCain’s plan actually saves taxpayers money by preventing foreclosures and preserving the value of the assets the Treasury Department is about to buy.

There is a big difference between Treasury’s plan to buy mortgage-backed assets through a reverse auction and McCain’s plan to buy the mortgages themselves at face value. It gets complicated, but here’s the bottom line: There must be a limit to the level of reckless behavior we are prepared to reward in a given bailout, especially if we are only improving on previous bailouts in a marginal way.

The Frank-Dodd housing bill has only been in effect since Oct. 1. It gives lenders who own mortgages ample incentive to work out deals with distressed borrowers and avoid costly foreclosures. It also provides liability protection for loan originators who sold their mortgages to Wall Street. These lenders are authorized to work out deals on behalf of investors in mortgage-backed securities (of which the U.S. government is soon to be the biggest). Most important, Frank-Dodd sets reasonable limits on what kinds of borrowers will be eligible for taxpayer assistance.

We never thought we would defend the Frank-Dodd legislation, which we bitterly opposed last summer. But it looks downright prudent compared to what McCain has proposed. McCain’s plan is a full bailout for lenders, and it cannot do much more than the Frank-Dodd bill without letting “ruthless borrowers” and other reckless types off the hook. It is time to acknowledge that the government has gone as far as it can without creating a level of moral hazard that is unacceptable. Give Frank-Dodd — and the Paulson plan — time to work.

No Press Conference for Palin before the election

In what is clear disdain for the press and the concepts of accountability and transparency, the McCain campaign announced there would be no press conference with Sarah Palin before the election. Similar to the hard line they used during Palin's interviews at the UN, the press should boycot the McCain campaign until they agree to set press conferences with Palin on a regular interval. Their campaign needs coverage, and we need to hear the candidates answer questions and follow-ups.
Here's Andrew Sullivan's reaction:

It seems to me that in the absence of a real press conference, the networks and cable news networks should simply cease broadcasting her speeches live and demand of every Republican guest that they explain this descent into anti-democratic territory. Bush and Cheney despise the press and despise the constitutional balances that restrict their dictatorial impulses. They don't recognize the rule of law as an impediment to the exercise of their power and they don't acknowledge any democratic input, apart from a single "accountability moment" every four years. And now they want to prevent the public's ability through the press to ask the toughest questions and toughest follow-ups even during that one "accountability moment".

This is how Putin behaves. It is anti-American. It has never been tried in modern times before. It is a chilling attack on an open society and the accountability of its leaders to the people they serve. The press has a duty to stand up against it - and to care more about the process than its own precious reputation in the mouths of Hannity, Steyn, Palin and the rest of them.

McCain's Hero Petraeus: "I Do Think You Have To Talk To Enemies"

Did I say there was a lot of news today?
Greg Sargent reports on TPM Thursday:

So General Petraeus agrees with Barack Obama -- and not John McCain -- on the question of whether we should meet with hostile enemies?

In a case of comically awful timing, Petraeus yesterday gave a talk at the Heritage Foundation in which he more or less echoed Barack Obama's views on negotiating with hostile foreign leaders -- views that McCain has repeatedly subjected to criticism and ridicule.

Asked by a questioner specifically about the disagreement on this topic that McCain and Obama had at Tuesday night's debate, Petraeus demurred a bit, but said: "I do think you have to talk to enemies."

What Petraeus said isn't a perfect endorsement of Obama's views -- he didn't specifically discuss Iran, and the question of "no preconditions" didn't come up -- but it's pretty darn close.

That's because it's as clear as day that the context specifically was the debate between Obama and McCain on this topic on Tuesday night. During that exchange, the candidates clashed on whether to meet with the leaders of Iran, and the questioner at Heritage posed the subject about talking to enemies specifically in that light.

Listen for yourself - it's a short video - and completely clear on the subject. It mirrors Obama's approach exactly, one that McCain ridicules as 'dangerous'. McCain's argument blown by his biggest hero the day after the debate. How sad. McCain has nothing to campaign with anymore.

McCain in a Bear Market

George F. Will, our conservative stalwart comes out with another blast against the McCain campaign in his latest article. He opens with

Time was, the Baltimore Orioles' manager was Earl Weaver, a short, irascible, Napoleonic figure who, when cranky, as he frequently was, would shout at an umpire, "Are you going to get any better or is this it?" With, mercifully, only one debate to go, that is the question about John McCain's campaign.

In the closing days of his 10-year quest for the presidency, McCain finds it galling that Barack Obama is winning the first serious campaign he has ever run against a Republican. Before Tuesday night's uneventful event, gall was fueling what might be the McCain-Palin campaign's closing argument. It is less that Obama has bad ideas than that Obama is a bad person.

He goes on, calling Sarah Palin McCain's "Sancho Panza" and describes the McCain/Palin attempts to distract voters by focusing on Barack Obama associations as "like being savaged by a dead sheep"

It's clear that George Will has written off John McCain's campaign.
He's not the only one - the other end of the Republican Party (the populist, Rush Limbaugh side) is angry with him too. What remains is only whether he will take down the rest of the republican party with him.

Where do I start? Troopergate Marchs Forward

On this day when the stock market dropped another 675 points, there is so much in the news, it's hard to know where to start. I'm just going to hit some points in no particular order.

The Alaska Supreme Court declines to stop the 'Troopergate' investigation. Hopefully all those big Texas Republican lawyers can now get out of town and far away from the report that's scheduled to be released tomorrow. In a last ditch effort to suppress, there is pressure being put on the republicans on the legislature's committee to vote against releasing the results. If any of them have felt Palin's wrath, or seen others who have, hopefully they'll be smart and do everything they can to end her career while she's out of town. Since it's pretty clear that she's not going to to Washington, when she gets back to town, retribution will be a bitch otherwise (no lipstick required). Certainly, there are plenty of additional issues - mis-use of state funds, use of private email for government use with intent to subvert recordkeeping requirements, etc.

In predictable Palin-Republican style, she and the McCain campaign released her own 'investigation' and proclaimed herself 'Innocent' although it looks like Todd has admitted making calls and now the clain is that Sarah didn't know anything about it. That's gonna be hard to sell, since it's documented that Todd was working in her office all the time, at least when she was there.

Rednecks for Obama

From Yahoo! News:

Tony Viessman, 74, and Les Spencer, 60, got politically active last year when it occurred to them there must be other lower income, rural, beer-drinking, gun-loving, NASCAR race enthusiasts fed up with business as usual in Washington.

Viessman had a red, white and blue "Rednecks for Obama" banner made, and began causing a stir in Missouri, which has emerged as a key battleground in the run-up to the November 4 presidential election.

"I didn't expect it would get as much steam and attention as it's gotten," Spencer told AFP on the campus of Washington University in Saint Louis, the state's biggest city and site of last week's vice-presidential debate.

"We believe in him. He's the best person for the job," Viessman, a former state trooper from Rolla, said of Obama, who met the pair briefly on that July day in Union, Missouri.

Rednecks4obama.com claims more than 800,000 online visits. In Denver, Colorado, Viessman and Spencer drew crowds at the Democratic convention, and at Washington University last Thursday they were two of the most popular senior citizens on campus.

Quote of the Day -

John McCain gives his opinion on Negative Attack Ads

"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."
John McCain,[The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, 2/21/2000]


Video of this quote is being used in a DNC ad released a few days ago.

Global Economic Crisis Overshadows Debate

Americans woke up this morning thinking about last night's debate, but the news headlines are all about the global crisis in the stock markets. Yesterday, the Dow dropped 500 points as an introduction to the debate. The Nikki is down 9.38% overnight in a post debate curtain-call. All the other Asian markets are down as well. The British now have their version of a bank bailout plan worth $87 Billion that will partially nationalize British banks. The Fed cut their rate 1/2 point this morning in a coordinated effort with international central banks to stop the losses - trillions of dollars in the past few days alone.

Congress voted, passing legislation, but that isn't the same as implementing it. You can't unwind years of mis-management in a couple of weeks. The world markets voted today with a no confidence vote on the US economy. This ripple effect isn't unexpected, just feared.

What we have to do November 4th is clear. We need to elect the brightest, best educated candidate we can in Barack Obama and make real changes to our financial market regulatory practices to restore investor confidence. The recovery from this crisis will be rooted in fundamentals. Americans are not going to be able to 'shop' their way out of this. That card has already been played, and now we are all having to pay for it.

Debate take 2 - What's New, and What's Not

If anything should be the headliner coming from this debate it's this new statement from McCain. Unfortunately for McCain it's a negative headline.

In regard to Social Security, McCain said “we are not going to be able to provide present day workers with the same benefits as present day retirees get today.” That means that he intends on CUTTING Social Security benefits for the middle ‘working’ class.

McCain tried to claim something new when he talked about the treasury buying out ‘bad’ mortgages. THAT ISN’T NEW - it’s authorized by the bailout package voted on last week. McCain never read the 3 page proposal from Paulson; now it seems he hasn’t read the legislation he just voted for. What is new is the way he suggests that the treasury implement this; direct with homeowners like a giant mortgage company. He would effectively nationalize the mortgage industry. That's an approach most Republicans would scream over. He clearly got off his talking points and campaign positions on this one, so I expect the spin from the campaign to be revising this tomorrow.

McCain suggested the former CEO of Ebay, Meg Whitman for heading up the Federal Reserve. What she knows about money policy or economics comes from business; not on the banking side which is what the Fed deals with. She is a quite capable CEO, but without a banking background I'm not convinced.

McCain seemed on edge and uncomfortable for most of the debate. Particularly while throwing his barbs at Obama he seemed very contrived. I have to say that his "That One" snipe was well beyond just disrespecting Obama; to me is smacked of a racial cast. Remember, that's SENATOR OBAMA you are referring to. He only looked at Obama briefly, never mentioned 'middle class'. There was a strange attitude coming from McCain all night affecting the entire tone of the debate. Perhaps it was because Obama got off to a great start, scoring points early. To me, McCain came across as a mix of desperate, condescending and petty. Not likable at all, and certainly not Presidential.

Clearly Obama made a strategic choice to not contest, nor argue these types of attacks, although clearly he could have, especially since they've all been contested and responded to in the press, in ads and on the campaign trail. Most of McCain's attacks have been proven to be either untrue or misleading by independent organizations. Obama didn't play into McCain's sleaze, taking and maintaining control of the debate by choosing his attacks on McCain on his own terms. When Obama did strike, it clearly set McCain back on his heels; particularly when he reminded McCain about his 'Bomb Bomb Iran', Bagdad's next, and obliterate North Korea statements. You could visibly see the reaction on McCain's face.

There wasn't much new on Health Care or Foreign Policy. The Health care issue question 'is Health Care a Privilege, Responsibility, or a Right?' put an interesting twist in the discussion. McCain feels it's a responsibility; Obama a Right. Clearly that fits with the Obama plan's goal to cover Everyone. McCain's plan leaves it up to individual families to set their priority in the context of food, housing, and other necessities, without setting a goal of providing health care for anyone. They spent the usual time on McCain's $5000 tax credit, or dividend, or whatever he wants to call it today. At least McCain didn't try to call it 'budget-neutral' like his running mate. I call it the largest windfall for insurance companies in history. Obama missed the opportunity again to call McCain's tax on employer paid health care benefits a new tax on the middle class. Every time McCain talks about Obama taxing the middle class, Obama should be striking back with what would be a huge new payroll tax that would hit the lower and middle class workers hardest of all. Those with the best health care plans through their employers or union would get hit the hardest on McCain's plan.

The ‘other’ news is the McCains left moments after the debate ended. The Obamas hung around for more than 20 minutes, shaking hands, signing autographs, posing for pictures, talking and greeting everyone personally. Big win for Obama on that; it was noted on the news coverage as well. It was a contrast from the 1st debate, when McCain tried to act victorious at the end. Clearly, McCain must have known that he didn't do what he needed to do, that he didn't win the debate or do anything to turn the tide of the election. There was no celebration. On a modicum of hand shaking, a few akward moments with Cindy clearly being uncomfortable, and a couple of waves - McCain was gone. So are his chances November 4th.

McCain Has Erratic Aviator Record Full of Mishaps

Three crashes early in his career led Navy officials to question or fault his judgment.

An article published in the LA Times outlines three separate crashes that were caused by pilot error and "clowning around". Furthermore, McCain in some cases lied about the circumstances in his autobiography

John McCain was training in his AD-6 Skyraider on an overcast Texas morning in 1960 when he slammed into Corpus Christi Bay and sheared the skin off his plane's wings.

McCain recounted the accident decades later in his autobiography. "The engine quit while I was practicing landings," he wrote. But an investigation board at the Naval Aviation Safety Center found no evidence of engine failure. The 23-year-old junior lieutenant wasn't paying attention and erred in using "a power setting too low to maintain level flight in a turn," investigators concluded.

The crash was one of three early in McCain's aviation career in which his flying skills and judgment were faulted or questioned by Navy officials.

In his most serious lapse, McCain was "clowning" around in a Skyraider over southern Spain about December 1961 and flew into electrical wires, causing a blackout, according to McCain's own account as well as those of naval officers and enlistees aboard the carrier Intrepid. In his 1999 autobiography, "Faith of My Fathers," McCain briefly recounts the incident, calling it the result of "daredevil clowning" and "flying too low."

Over the Eastern Shore of Virginia, McCain descended below 7,000 feet on a landing approach in a T-2 trainer jet, according to accident records. He said he heard an explosion in his engine and lost power. He said he tried unsuccessfully to restart the engine. He spotted a local drag strip and considered trying to glide to a landing there but finally had to eject at 1,000 feet.

In his autobiography, McCain said he had flown on a Saturday to Philadelphia to watch the annual Army-Navy football game with his parents. The accident report does not mention Philadelphia but rather indicates that McCain departed from a now-closed Navy field in New York City on Sunday afternoon and was headed to Norfolk, Va.

In a report dated Jan. 18, 1966, the Naval Aviation Safety Center said it could not determine the cause of the accident or corroborate McCain's account of an explosion in the engine. A close examination of the engine found "no discrepancies which would have caused or contributed to engine failure or malfunction."

The report found that McCain, then assigned to squadron VT-7 in Meridian, Miss., had made several errors: He failed to switch the plane's power system to battery backup, which "seriously jeopardized his survival chances." His idea of landing on the drag strip was "viewed with concern and is indicative of questionable emergency procedure." The report added, "It may be indeed fortunate that the pilot was not in a position to attempt such a landing."

Edward M. Morrison, a mechanic for VT-7 who is now retired and living in Washington state, said that the plane McCain checked out that day had just been refurbished and that he knew of no engine problems.

In today's military, a lapse in judgment that causes a crash can end a pilot's career. Though standards were looser and crashes more frequent in the 1960s, McCain's record stands out.

"Three mishaps are unusual," said Michael L. Barr, a former Air Force pilot with 137 combat missions in Vietnam and an internationally known aviation safety expert who teaches in USC's Aviation Safety and Security Program. "After the third accident, you would say: Is there a trend here in terms of his flying skills and his judgment?"

Naval aviation experts say the three accidents before McCain's deployment to Vietnam probably triggered a review to determine whether he should be allowed to continue flying. The results of the review would have been confidential.

McCain was on his 23rd bombing mission over North Vietnam when a surface-to-air missile struck his A-4 attack jet. He was flying 3,000 feet above Hanoi.

A then-secret report issued in 1967 by McCain's squadron said the aviators had learned to stay at an altitude of 4,000 to 10,000 feet in heavy surface-to-air missile environments and look for approaching missiles.

In his autobiography, McCain said 22 missiles were fired at his squadron that day. "I knew I should roll out and fly evasive maneuvers, 'jinking,' in fliers' parlance, when I heard the tone," he wrote. But, he said, he continued on and released his bombs. Then a missile blew off his right wing.

"Nobody broke off on a bombing run," said Tullo, later a commercial pilot and now an accident investigation instructor at USC. "It was a matter of manhood."

Great... Just who I want with his finger on the nuclear button.

More Polling - Gallup quote and Yahoo EC map

The economy is tanking, and my portfolio is sinking, but I'm being buoyed by the Polls.

This economic mess is going to be handed to our next President to fix, so it's more important then ever, now that the $700 Billion has been approved, that we make sure the right man gets elected to do the job. Who would you rather have; A man who barely made it through the Naval College, graduating fifth from the bottom, known to all to be the 'maverick' because he was in more trouble than he was anything else, not getting kicked out because his daddy was an Admiral, or a man who broke barriers at Harvard and was elected to be President of the Harvard Law Review?

Here's the Yahoo! News Political Dashboard - EC map. This one is based on the RealClearPolitics organization. Look at this map and reason for John McCain's desperation is obvious. The data is a little different than CNNs, but they aren't bashful about the projected 341 EC votes for Obama either. Also, included is the InTrade market prediction. Interesting stuff, and lots of data behind it. You can click on a state and see the polling numbers graphed to see trends, etc.

Gallup:

This 10-day stretch of a significant Obama lead is the longest since [Obama] became the presumptive nominee back in early June, and the longest for either candidate at any point in the campaign.

Hope that helps take your mind off your 401k balance.

On another note, Republicans are hinting voter registration fraud in Indiana. We should remind them of voter fraud in Ohio and Florida (insufficient polling places/machines, 'roadblocks' and intimidation of black voters) during the '04 election. They are just tired of getting their butts kicked by the best grassroots campaign organization ever assembled.

A heartwarming example is what's going on in North Carolina. This state has gone Republican since 1976. McCain is being forced to defend this state, one that most of the politicos thought was safely in the fold. Why? Because of massive voter registrations drives that are 6 to 1 Democratic.

As written in the Washington Post yesterday:

The ratio is more lopsided in North Carolina, where Democrats have added 208,000 voters this year. The 34,000 voters the Republicans have added lags well behind the 148,000 new independents. Four years ago, when Bush won the state with 56 percent of the vote, the picture was different -- Democrats added 192,000 voters during all of 2004, but Republicans nearly matched them with 179,000 new voters of their own.

A disproportionate share of the new voters in North Carolina are minorities. At the start of the year, white voters in the state outnumbered blacks by nearly 4 to 1, and Hispanic voters by 10 to 1. Yet the 146,000 black and Hispanic voters added to the rolls represented nearly three-quarters of the growth among white voters.

Gary Pearce, a Democratic political consultant in North Carolina, said the gap in new registrations is a big reason he thinks Democrats have a chance of carrying the state for the first time since 1976. "It's huge. You talk about a surge -- we think we're going to see it here," Pearce said.

Latest CNN polls show Obama widening lead

The latest poll results are in from Time/CNN. CNN shows an 8 point lead nationally for Obama. The CNN 'Poll of Polls' shows his lead as 6 points.

Their election calculator map shows 250 Obama, 189 McCain however their poll tracker shows an even better story. The latest polls show Obama with leads in Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Florida. In fact, the only states left that are within a 'margin of error' are Nevada, Colorado, Missouri, Indiana, Virginia and North Carolina
Total EC votes up for grabs - 64. Obama at 311 and McCain is at 163.
Two states that were 'leaning McCain' , Indiana and North Carolina, are now 'toss up' states.
Moved to Obama from toss up now are Wisconsin, Ohio, New Hampshire and Florida.

Smile ! Stay Positive ! Keep Working !!!!!!

Keating Economics - Responding to the Smear Campaign with FACTS

The Obama campaign is not going to let the mudslinging and 'swiftboating' go by without launching a salvo of it's own. Remember this - Obama is responding with FACTS to McCain's LIES and mis-representations.

Launched today is the Keating Economics website. This is a comprehensive review of John McCain's involvement with the S&L bailout of the late 80's and early 90's. There is research and reference material along with a 13 minute video documentary. It's clear that he hasn't learned his lesson. McCain's campaign manager Rick Davis is/was a lobbyist for Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac. Taking a LOA while holding a ownership position in the lobbying firm is a joke. He did the same thing to head McCain's 2000 campaign only to return to his lobbyist ways immediately afterwards. Read about McCain's current ties, and Rick Davis on my previous post "The $2 Million Man" .

It's clear to me that McCain is desperate to turn the tide of the campaign. Obama is expanding his lead, especially among independents and women voters. McCain has nothing left to campaign on other than 'character' issues (code word for Race, Patriotism and Smear tactics). Sending his fuzzy bunny Sarah Palin out to sling the mud is probably a good idea. If the Obama campaign tries to combat her winks and folksy sarcasm, she can cry 'foul' and 'unfair' and 'sexist'. Besides, she can't say anything worthwhile anyway and we've heard all her talking points already.

Obama, on the other hand is playing hardball against McCain. His associations with the financial industry and clear track record of calling for Deregulation are FACTS. I just saw a bit of video from a public press conference in March of this year where he called for "deregulation and removing impediments to capitalization' in response to the housing market weakness. Now THAT is a FACT.

Hey Sarah Palin - another Musical Missive

So I start posting musical missives, and now they are arriving in my mailbox. Here's one I couldn't help but laugh through:

The Musical Tributes Continue - this one for Swing Voters

Takin' it Back with Barack Jack! (for Swing Voters!!!)

This one with much musical taste, makes the case
(Thanks Julie for passing these along - they made my day!)

Brain to Nowhere

While I'm digesting the aftermath of the VP debate, (wink, gotcha, wink, nudge) a friend sends me this link. Being a musician, I just had to post this musical commentary. Commentary on the debate, and the latest tactic of sending the fuzzy bunny out to be the Republican attack dog (can anyone really take her seriously when she tries to smear Obama's character with 'palling around with terrorists'?) can wait. What we all could use right now is a little dose of laughter.

Bill Clinton Campaigns for Obama

Bill Clinton opened his campaign tour for Obama in Florida on Wednesday, with a wonderful 22 minute speech. I think his positive campaigning - and avoidance of the negative attacks will be a strong positive for independent and undecided voters. He is SO inspiring to listen to. Some have felt that he's been slow to come aboard, but the reality is that he only first met Obama in mid-September. He is not playing the obvious partisan card which goes to his credibility when he does speak out in support of Obama. He's also been heavily engaged in his annual Clinton Global Initiative meeting that occurred in New York last week; so being non-partisan is his mode of operation these days for this reason as well. Let there be no question - he is totally behind Obama in this race.

It was nice to hear positive campaigning on the issues after all the negative spin of which there will be plenty in these next 30 days. I hope they will be sending him to Ohio next

McCain steals the VP Debate Thunder - Pulls out of Michigan

The McCain camp announced this afternoon that it was pulling out of Michigan - conceding that state to Obama. Well, the polls were pretty clear, but making that announcement puts the McCain campaign in dire straights. They recently announced that they had raised a record amount of money, so clearly they could campaign there if they wanted to.

Looking at the electoral college map on CNN, they have moved Obama to 250 EC votes, with McCain at 189. With Obama only 20 points away, McCain would literally have to win almost ALL of the remaining battleground states to win this election. That map still does not reflect significant Obama gains in Ohio, Florida, Wisconsin, and Virginia since last weeks debate.

This certainly doesn't look good for McCain. I'd be watching for some pretty major mud-slinging in McCain ads soon. His biggest problems are that he really doesn't have anything new to offer, and independants tend to really dislike negative campaigning.

VP Debate - Talking Points vs Content

Sarah Palin managed to survive the VP debate, mostly because the bar has been set so low for her to begin with. Babbling was kept to a minimum, unlike her interviews with Katie Couric. I supposed several days of non-stop prep will help issues like that. It also helps that she didn't respond to questions asked, and didn't have anyone drill down in depth on any subject.

It was obvious that the plan was to answer questions when they fit into talking points that she had prepared for her stump speech, and when they didn't, answer with talking points from her stump speech anyway. She even admitted such when it was remarked early on that she didn't respond at all to the question asked. That was an obvious tactic for those who are not prepared. It was also obvious to some that she was referring to notes very frequently on her answers, frequently glancing down, sometimes appearing to be reading.

In some questions, the moderator did a very poor job, suggesting answers as part of her questions. She also did not press for answers to the questions asked, when Palin kept changing the topic and wasn't responsive. The only real break from McCain and Bush was on the subject of rights and recognition of same-sex couples. I'm sure there will be 'clarifications' on that response by first thing this morning.

The other major gaff was her statement in regard to the job of the VP. She states that she would like to expand the roll of the VP - in the legislative branch. Does she mean that she'd like to re-write the Constitution and 'run' the senate? That is NOT how the Senate runs, nor how the Constitution lays this job out.

Who is McClellan? The top general in Afghanistan is McKiernan. Since she was reading - what happened? Fact Check Please !! She didn't address any of the issues, or supply any answers to what McCain/Palin would actually DO. No Beef!

On the other hand, Biden was specific, answered the questions thoughtfully, and stayed away from any hint of sexism, or condescension. He hit some home runs connecting with women (at least from the CNN real-time focus group results) even more than with men. He came across as eminently qualified and a master of foreign policy. I particularly liked his response to Palin's sarcastic comment about looking at the past when he said 'prologue', when she tried to characterize it as irrelevant and unimportant. I also felt that his choke when talking about his family was real, a 'human' connection, but Palin ignored it, and she came off cold as a result.

Poll stats show Biden won this debate easily, and gained positive impression numbers for himself. Although Palin managed not to trip over ankle high bar; she also did not help McCain or her party win over any significant numbers of undecided voters. It seems that initial poll results show that undecideds are still moving steadily to Obama, and those leaning McCain are going more to neutral. Time will tell over the next few days whether her 'favorable numbers' go up. I expect they will, if only until the next segment that CBS releases of her Couric interview, or if she has to actually have a press conference where she has to answer questions.

Correction to Sarah Palin's latest- Supreme Court..

Well, I have checked references to "Federalist" and found reference to "New Federalism" - as defined by (and this is in some dispute) FDR and Richard Nixon, but certainly Ronald Reagan, who used the exact term 'New Federalism'. The concept gives more autonomy to regions and states, with direct payment of federal funds in the form of block grants to states to use as they see fit, ie. no federal control. Reagan ended the practice in the mid 80's, seeing that it seeing that it simply encouraged states to spend more money. Certainly Palin seems to subscribe to the practice as governor of Alaska, with direct undefined cash payments to municipalities and individuals.
So, I will give her that she uses this term in the "New Federalism" sense, not in the historical sense.
I still stand by the rest of the article in all aspects.

Shana Tovah - and a message from Barack Obama

In celebrating the New Year, Here's a message for all of those that might
doubt Barack Obama's support of the Jewish Community straight from the Jewish community of Chicago - where he's known best. I post this, because amazingly, there are still people who believe in the baseless internet rumors about being Muslim or not supporting Israel. Being willing to use diplomacy does not equal weakness!!!

Biden does a Great job. Palin's latest - Supreme Court, Church and State.

I could have titled this "Palin blows another 2 segments with Katie Couric".

I'd like to say first what a great job Joe Biden did answering these questions. For a Catholic, stating his position on Roe v. Wade could be considered big news. Of course, the advantage of having all that experience is he's already weighed in on the matter multiple times.

He did a masterful job of responding in depth to the questions, the nature of our country and how this ruling related. He also continued to describe his support of the core principle behind the Roe decision of the 'right to privacy'. Bravo too for picking as a disagreement his "Violence against Women Act" which he tried to get through the Supreme Court. He certainly had plenty of choices. As to his answer on separation of Church and State, what a creative way of describing why this governing principle is so important to maintain. Very thoughtful and enlightening.

Well, on to the obvious, and latest Palin disaster:
Discussing why she opposes the Supreme Court Roe v. Wade decision, her primary answer was "it should be a states' issue". What? Her next sentence - and I'll quote it here says:

I'm, in that sense, a federalist, where I believe that states should have more say in the laws of their lands and individual areas.

What? A Federalist?
OK.. I am SO confused... So read the link on the word above and read all about it for yourself just to be sure you know all that it implies! This is the TRUE disaster of this interview... regardless of your agreement on her position on Roe or anything else.

First off, to oppose Roe based on states rights isn't a credible argument. Then in the very next sentence to say you are a Federalist, is saying exactly the opposite. Federalists believe in a strong central government, and care little about states rights. She's clearly got this exactly backwards.. a 'states rights' proponent claiming to be 'Federalist' - come ON !!

Well, Ms. fuzzball Katie Couric doesn't challenge her on this, but moves on to the next part of the question, and asks her about if she believes in a 'Right to Privacy' being inherent in the Constitution. I suppose if she had answered the Roe question on ideological terms, this would be an important follow-up. Surprisingly, she answers that she DOES support the 'Right to Privacy' which is the cornerstone of the Roe decision (which Ms. Couric dutifully reminds her, and us), and then goes on to expound again how she feels it should be a 'states' issue, not federal! It sure doesn't sound very 'Federalist' to me!! I think Ms. Couric was in shock by this point.

I'm wondering what McCain and the rest of the Republican Party have to say about their 'Federalist - States Rights' candidate much less the right side of the Party - those who support constitutional amendments to ban Gay marriage and outlaw abortion. Watching the Conservatives scramble will be fun these next few days. They have been running away from this candidate as fast as they can.

Keeping up the pace, Ms. Couric moves on again, and asks what other decisions that Gov. Palin disagrees with the Court about. She couldn't come up with a single thing... not ONE! Even the Court's decision to overturn the Exxon-Valdez multi-billion dollar jury award, and reduce it to $500 million - something she spoke out against at the time!

Of course, not to let us down on the Separation of Church and State issue, Palin trys to quote Thomas Jefferson - but says 'never underestimate the wisdom of the people' - which I can't find as a Jefferson quote anywhere - (and so far no one else I know of either, paraphrased or otherwise). What's worse, is that she does this after claiming to be a "Federalist", which party Jefferson defeated in 1800. She said "government did not mandate a religion on people". In the strict one phrase response to the 'wall between Church and State' that answer is accurate, in an elementary school approach to American History. Separation of Church and State goes far beyond that. It means, especially in regards to Jeffersonian politics, that the Church should not be a part of Government and politics. It was a principle argument in the election of 1800, so is quite appropriate to bring into the conversation. Palin fails, however to say anything else, so fills the time with meaningless babble about 'wisdom of the people' whatever that means.

I have two Jefferson quotes to share - that have been part of my email signature block for a long time now. In an open attempt to provide an accurate quote for Gov. Palin to use next time, I'm including them here:

"The presumption of dictating to an independent nation the form of its government is so arrogant, so atrocious, that indignation as well as moral sentiment enlists all our partialities and prayers in favor of one and our equal execrations against the other. I do not know, indeed, whether all nations do not owe to one another a bold and open declaration of their sympathies with the one party and their detestation of the conduct of the other. But farther than this we are not bound to go; and, indeed, for the sake of the world, we ought not to increase the jealousies or draw on ourselves the power of [a] formidable confederacy." --Thomas Jefferson to James Monroe, 1823. ME 15:435

"Nor is the occasion to be slighted... of declaring our protest against the atrocious violations of the rights of nations by the interference of any one in the internal affairs of another." --Thomas Jefferson to James Monroe, 1823. ME 15:478

Here are the videos - from CBS News - It's ABOUT TIME YOU PUBLISHED THESE!!!!!!!
1st - Supreme Court - Roe v. Wade



And the 2nd one - Church and State




Happy New Year folks -