When did it become OK for adults to trick-or-treat?

Its not.

If you have or can get a tattoo, you have no business asking people for candy unless there is a cash register between you and the person you're asking.

WTF?!

Voting anti-GOP, not pro-Dem

I've long been of the belief that the country's Democratic-leaning pivot this election season can only be seen as a rejection of Republican leadership. I do not think the electorate has somehow found Progressive religion.

I've been telling anyone who cares to listen that the Dems had better not see this election as a mandate giving them "political capital".

The Dems need to walk away from this election seeing it as an opportunity to show the American people what we can do. We need to work not only to make their lives better, but to make Washington work, to avoid grandstanding and divisive politics and restore the better angels of our nature.

I see signs that the Obama campaign is thinking the same way. Take this piece in Chris Cillizza's blog, The Fix. Cillizza reports that the Obama campaign sees Florida as an important symbol that they cannot walk away from, even if they don't need the state for an electoral win. Cillizza reports:

In the last few weeks, Obama has sent his top two field generals -- "Sunny" Steve Hildebrand and Paul Tewes -- to direct ground operations in the state.

Surrogates for Obama are also flooding the state. Last night, following his 30-minute national informercial, the Illinois senator appeared alongside former President Bill Clinton at a midnight rally in Kissimmee. Then today came the news that former Vice President Al Gore and his wife, Tipper, will make stops in West Palm Beach and Ft. Lauderdale tomorrow to lead early vote rallies.

What does this mean? It means that the Obama campaign is not willing to write Florida and its diverse population off. It means that they feel they need to keep working to show they care about Florida and want to represent Florida. That is the beauty of the 50 state strategy: it backs up Obama's talk about our not being "a red state America or a blue state America, but a United States of America."

Right on.

Religious zealots for Prop. 8

Do you support Yes on 8? Are you one of these people?


You see, these are the people who support Proposition 8, rewriting the California constitution to discriminate against gay people. I have a family: me, the mother, one father, one boy, one girl. It will not effect my family one bit if every gay person in the world had a same-sex marriage.

What are these people afraid of? The apocalypse, apparently.

When did God create oil?

Ha! Never thought I'd say it, but MSNBC's Chris Matthews just asked an excellent question:

If you believe, as Sarah Palin does, that God created the earth several thousand years ago, then how is oil created?

According to scientists it takes millions of years for fossil fuels to be created from organic matter under tremendous geologic pressure. So if you don't believe that the earth is millions of years old, how do you think we get oil?

Seems to me this is a crucial question for the person John McCain says would be his chief adviser on energy policy.

(Way to go, Matthews!)

Should Lieberman lose his chairmanship?

I know what my husband's answer would be: "Let 'im hang!" There certainly are plenty of Democrats who would love to see Joe Lieberman's political career go up in flames for his support of John McCain. According to a report by The Hill today, Democrats are discussing a possible removal of Lieberman from the chairmanship of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, a position he's held since 2007.

However, I find myself concerned not with Lieberman specifically, but with the reasoning behind the choice and the precedent it sets.

Here's the thing: I am one of those oft-referenced Americans who really hates how partisan Washington has become. And I'm not sure that punishing Lieberman, a Democrat-cum-Independent, for supporting a Republican with whom he has a long-standing friendship, is right.

Don't get me wrong. There may be a LOT of very good reasons to remove Lieberman from the chairmanship. Committee positions are used strategically by the leading party to put up-and-coming politicians in positions to gain experience. That's how you become an experienced leader. Lieberman is not entitled to hold his chairmanship.

Additionally, Lieberman did not just support McCain. Throughout the campaign season, Lieberman actively attacked Barack Obama using distortions of Obama's record and repeating "questions" about Obama's history and relationships with no evidence that there was actually any wrong-doing on Obama's part (a particularly virulent campaign tactic that I think is beneath the dignity of any honorable leader). The Democrats have no reason reward such behavior by honoring Lieberman's claim to the committee chairmanship.

But then let's be clear about why Lieberman is losing his chairmanship: because he's not entitled to it and has done nothing outstanding to earn retention of it.

Let us not ever approve of a vindictive approach to politics that punishes politicians to making decisions of loyalty based on personal conviction. Even if the other team did it first. We've got to move on from that brand of leadership.

Sen. Ted Stevens guilty on all counts

Per Salon.com:

Reuters/Kevin Lamarque

Alaska Republican Senator Ted Stevens

The jury in the corruption trial of Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) came back Monday afternoon with a verdict that could well send Stevens' career down the tubes. Stevens was found guilty on all seven of the charges he faced, felonies relating to false statements he made on Senate financial disclosure forms on which he failed to report some $250,000 in gifts.

Stevens reportedly faces up to five years in prison on each of the counts, but the AP says he "will likely receive much less prison time, if any."

Though he's the longest-serving Republican in the Senate, Stevens may not be part of that body for much longer. He's facing a tough Democratic challenger, Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich, this year, and recent polling has generally shown Begich holding on to a slim lead. If Stevens is re-elected despite the conviction, it would be up to the Senate to decide whether or not to let him remain in his seat.

Capitalism + Subsidies = Hypocrisy

Watching George Will on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos on Sunday made me wistful for the 1980s brand of GOP conservatism that, you know, seemed PRINCIPLED. (Note: I'm the last person who would claim that the Democrats hold exclusive claim to principles, but the GOP seems to be trafficking in a particularly virulent strain of politics these days.)

No, I didn't agree with its values, but that brand of conservatism at least seemed to believe in something sincerely and with conviction.

Will made the point that I've heard him make consistently over the last several months, that if you think the US has engaged in capitalism over the last 20 years, you're a moron. (I'm paraphrasing, but not by much.)

The thing is, government subsidies are Socialism. Subsidies "spread the wealth". Subsidies to corporations are a fancy way of saying the Government is taking YOUR money and giving it to companies that cannot succeed on their own. Corporate welfare anyone?

Couldn't we take a fraction of the money that we use to subsidize industry in this country and use it to send every one of their employees to college, training them to work in a field that needs skilled workers?

If we want to have the argument about socialism, fine. But lets have it in honest terms and not engage in rhetoric.

An army deployed against its people

In his blog on Salon.com today, Glenn Greenwald discusses the recent announcement by the US Army that, for the first time ever, US soldiers would be deployed on our own soil to act as needed against civilian unrest.

One of the most concerning portions of the Army statement was the part emphasized here by me:

They may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack.

In Greenwald's blog today and in his Salon radio interview, he discusses this new domestic military role with the ACLU, who has lodged a Freedom of Information Act inquiry to find out why this new standing military force is needed on US soil.

My takeaway: the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have undeniably stretched our military to its limit, so much so that the National Guard has been deployed to serve overseas to the detriment of our domestic security, as enunciated by many state authorities who rely on the National Guard during times of disaster.

Do we need guard detail available throughout the nation? Yes. But I question why it should be a US military force, a force dedicated to combating foreign threats. Army units are NOT specialized in domestic security, and I, for one, want to know why the Department of Defence thinks they should now be in a position where they may be deployed against their fellow citizens.

(BTW - where are the "strict constitutionalists" on this one??)

Revitalization for the politic-weary

One day more, dear fellows. One day more.

The diminishing relevance of Pat Buchanan

One to watch: McCain/Palin on NBC Nightly News

OK - gotta tune into NBC Nightly News tonight.  

We just got a preview from Brian Williams and Chuck Todd about the interview with McCain and Palin together, which airs tonight.  Apparently the body language and mood of the candidates and the staffers was overwhelmingly negative. Todd just couldn't emphasize enough how bad it was. He was saying they just seemed incredibly uncomfortable together, suggesting that they may be starting to blame each other for the nose-diving campaign.  

Also, apparently Palin reversed herself in the interview, telling Williams she WOULD now release her medical records, which Todd says visibly jarred her staff.  

As a side note, Todd has been saying for some time that McCain and Palin may be nearing their "Bullworth moment". 

Axelrod: a look at the image-maker

If you're wondering how it happeded, look no further.  The New Republic's Jason Zengerle has penned this fantastic behind-the-curtain piece on the Obama campaign's chief strategist, David Axelrod, revealing Axelrod's history of political stagecraft and his evolving relationship with the would-be candidate for President of the United States.

Interesting tidbits abound, like Axelrod's lack of forsight and vision when it came to Obama's potential, Obama's persistence in pursuing Axelrod for a lead position on his political team, and Axelrod's role in persuading Obama to aim for the Presidency in 2008.

Most revealing of all may be the amount of strategy that was put into making a black man acceptible to white voters.  It seems that in this campaign Barack Obama's blackness has often almost been beside the point in this contest, especially when compared to predecessors like Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton.  But, as Zengerle highlights, that air of post-racial, post-partisan politics was indeed well-crafted.  Of Axelrod's work on the 1989 mayoral race of black state senator Michael White:

Axelrod believed the other crucial vehicle for winning his candidate the votes of Cleveland's white residents was what he's called "third-party authentication"--in other words, endorsements from respected individuals or institutions that whites put a lot of stock in. "David felt there almost had to be a permission structure set up for certain white voters to consider a black candidate," explains Ken Snyder, a Democratic consultant and Axelrod protégé . 

Axelrod, it seems, has developed the winning formula for black candidates to grab freely from the white electoral pool:

The self-described "keeper of the message" for Obama's presidential bid has taken the lessons he learned from his mayoral and gubernatorial campaigns and made them cohere into something that approaches a unified theory of how to elect a black candidate--emphasizing biography, using third-party authentication, attacking with an unconventional sideways approach, letting voters connect to the candidate by speaking to them directly in ads, and telling voters that supporting the black candidate puts them on the right side of history.

There are many, many revealing and fascinating bits in the piece.  If you want to know how we got to this moment, read it.

What we really think of attack ads

Just a thought, but when the media and political operatives say that we, the people of America, hate political attacks, and that the Obama and McCain campaigns are engaging in attacks, does that mean that all attacks are equally bad?  

Bear with me here.

If a candidate attacks his oponent's policies, plans, and records, that's one thing.

But if a candidate attacks the opponent's character and patriotism, isn't that something else entirely?

I'm just thinking that, just because we all hate political attacks, it doesn't mean that all attacks are created equal.

A return to Palin's "pastor problem"

I know we've largely put Sarah Palin's "pastor problem" behind us, with the media consensus seeming to be that Kenyan Bishop Thomas Muthee, who blessed Palin and called for her protection from "witchcraft", should be seen in a cultural context and that he isn't literally hunting witches.  As summed up by the Washington Post :

Can we forget the crazy preachers and try to get the candidates to focus on the serious problems?

Haha.  Silly "phony issues".  Oh, but wait.  What if Kenyans are actually inciting the murder of "witches" by burning?  While witchcraft is illegal in Kenya, apparently the reaction to accusations of witchcraft is getting horrendous.  Per NPR today:

In May, 11 people died in a "witch" burning in southwestern Kenya, but questions linger over whether neighbors in that particular region of Kenya believed the people killed were witches.  ...Local authorities say that in May, a security guard turned over a suspicious notebook he found at a school. The notebook reportedly listed the names of local witches and the minutes of their meetings. But before turning over the book to the authorities, residents of the area apparently copied down the names. Over a two-day period, a mob cut down 11 mostly retired and elderly people and burned their homes to cinders.

While there is no evidence that Muthee's pursuit of witches in his home community has lead directly to bodily harm or death, it did lead to the persecution of a local woman who is also a pastor.  

Furthermore, persecution and murder justified by accusations of witchcraft is a real problem in Muthee's home nation and his active role in scapegoating individuals by identifying them as "witches" bears further scrutiny.  Palin should know that she is closely aligned with someone who contributes to a very real culture of persecution, violence and murder.

Behold, the Undecideds!

This was just so good I had to reprint it:

Behold, the Undecideds. Have you heard of this bizarre, nefarious group? The millions of faceless, slow-blinking, mentally unattached Americans who are, right this minute, with mere days to go before the most historic election in our lifetime and when faced with what seems to be the most glaringly obvious divisions of attitude and perspective you could possibly imagine, still "on the fence" about Obama or McCain, love or hate, country or disco, Paris or Fresno, oil or water, Porsche or Pinto?

Check out Mark Morford's column in its entirety here.

Ha!  It just doesn't stop:

Or maybe not. Maybe I have it exactly backwards. Maybe the Undecideds are the mostevolved among us, more aware and conscious than the rest of us desperate plebes who are far too eager to plant our flags in the treacherous soil of definitive thought. Possible?

OK.  Good laugh.  I feel better.

McCain the Socialist/Communist

So who said the following: Barack Obama or John McCain?  

I believe that when you really look at the tax code today, the very wealthy, because they can afford tax lawyers and all kinds of loopholes, really don't pay nearly as much as you think they do when you just look at the percentages. And I think middle-income Americans, working Americans, when the account and payroll taxes, sales taxes, mortgage pay -- all of the taxes that working Americans pay, I think they -- you would think that they also deserve significant relief, in my view...

If you said John McCain you would be CORRECT.  That's the John McCain of 2000 - remember him? - answering a citizen's question on Hardball.

I know.  I know.  Isn't that that pesky "spreading the wealth" that McCain and Palin are up in arms over?  Well, sure!  But this is an election year, and apparently that means McCain's job is to demonize others for things he actually believes in.  

Think that's taken out of context?  To hear McCain say specifically that this is NOT socialism, read the full transcript here.

Find us now on Salon.com

I'm pleased to announce that you can read From the Exurbs blog postings by Chattering Lass on Open Salon at Salon.com.

A sign of economic movement in home sales

According to this report from NPR this morning, home sales in southern California were up dramatically in September.  Southern California has had one of the highest forclosure rates in the nation, so what we're seeing here is bargain shoppers getting into the market at what could now be the nadir of the mortgage meltdown.

What does this mean?  These figures are from a period before the credit freeze that spurred Congressional action and a rollercoaster DOW, so we'll have to see how buyers fared in October when there was apparently no credit to be had.  Still, with 2 weeks left in the month, credit markets are thawing and it will be interesting to see if lenders think these So. Cal. purchases are a safe enough bet.

If we're lucky, the credit freeze will have been a blip, and people who have had some money but didn't jump 2 years ago will finally be able to take the home-ownership plunge.  That will begin working the bad mortgages through the system and get home values back on an upswing.  

There is still the question of what all this means to those who were forclosed upon, some who lied in order to get financing on homes they couldn't afford in the first place, but others who were handed or encouraged to take more than they could afford.

But for the grace of God...  The other day my husband and I were recalling our first tentative peerings into the world of home ownership, contacting a mortgage broker to find out if there was anything out there we could afford.  See, this is the thing: blame the buyer all you want for getting into a bad mortgage, but most of us do not understand the ins and outs of mortgage rates, terms, and conditions.  We rely on advice from the people who are experts: bankers and mortgage brokers.  Our broker told us we could afford up to 1/2 our monthly income on a mortgage - and would be approved for it.  With no down payment.

Fortunately husband and I are skittish creatures, prone to suspicion and fear.  We said thanks but no thanks to that huge offer and took something a little more modest.  (We're liberals to the core - always thinking "conserve".)  However, many people trusted their lenders and took the plunge.  Whose fault is it that they're now drowning?

GOP: crumbling from the center

To recap, let us note all of the Republicans who are now defecting from the John McCain/Rick Davis/Sarah Palin GOP:

Colin Powell - retired US Army General and fmr. Secretary of State

Ken Adelman - conservative Republican and original neo-con

Mickey Edwards - Fmr. Oklahoma Congressman and founding member of the Heritage Foundation

Christopher Buckley - National Review contributer, author, son of the late Wm. F. Buckley

Peggy Noonan - Fmr. Reagan speechwriter, author, and conservative columnist

George Will - conservative columnist

David Brooks - conservative columnist

Michael Smerconish - conservative talk-show host and author

I have to say, one thing I love about Peggy Noonan is that she speaks EXACTLY as she writes.  Its just archaic and wonderful.

Granted, McCain and Davis would write all of this off as the treachery of the irrelevant Georgetown cocktail circuit, but that may be even more evidence of how these people are narrowing the party.

Thoughts on the Powell endorsement

No doubt - NO doubt - you've heard plenty by now about Colin Powell's endorsement of Barack Obama, but let me point out one thing about that endorsement that you may not have heard about if you didn't see it live.

Mr. Powell made a very lovely point that I think its important for all of us to consider.  It was about the whisper campaign that Barack Obama is "really a Muslim" or a "secret Muslim" or just outright "Muslim" as an email I received stated.  Powell said this:

I'm also troubled by, not what Senator McCain says, but what members of the party say. And it is permitted to be said such things as, "Well, you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim." Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he's a Christian.  He's always been a Christian.  But the really right answer is, what if he is?  Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer's no, that's not America.  Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president?  [my emphasis]

Just give that some thought and remember what is good about America.  You can watch Powell's endorsement in its entirety here.

GOP voter registration fraud. Yes, GOP voter registration fraud

Well, if you thought ACORN had cornered the market on voter registration fraud, get some bi-partisan religion.  

In a great story followed by the LA Times, Mark Jacoby, owner of a firm that the California Republican Party hired this year to register thousand of voters, was arrested over the weekend on suspicion of voter registration fraud.  Turns out Mr. Jacoby falsely registered himself at a California address that is not his own in order to meet California's legal requirement to register others to vote.

THIS AFTER dozens of California voters came forward to report that his firm, YPM, had duped them into registering Republican by asking them to sign a petition for "tougher penalties against child molesters".  According to the Times, "YPM has been accused of using bait-and-switch tactics across the country.  Election officials and lawmakers have launched investigations into the activities of YPM workers in Florida and Massachusettes.  In Arizona, the firm was recently a defendant in a civil rights lawsuit."

In California, if these voters didn't discover the change, they would be disqualified from voting in their party's next primary.

So, I know they're both bad, but indulge me: which is worse?  Filling out a bunch of obviously false registration cards (Tony Romo, Mickey Mouse, Jimmy John, etc.) or duping an actual person into changing their party affiliation?

PS - Unlike ACORN, YPM does pay by the card, not by the hour.

(Tip of the hat to Rob for this one.)

Resurrecting McCarthy

Well, this one stopped me in my tracks.

There I was putting away laundry in the bedroom and before I know it I've been drawn to the television because this crazy woman just said WHAT???

Minnesota Rep. Michelle Bachmann went above and beyond in her demonization of the liberal left/leftist/anti-American element of the US Congress and of liberal/Democrat Americans.  The words were really interchangeable for Rep. Bachmann.  Check it out for yourself, below.  

As Salon's Alex Koppelman put it, this probably just an example of what happens when enflamatory talking points are put into the hands of blithering idiots.  (OK, I might be embellishing on Koppelman's wording a bit.) He may be right, but McCain campaign is playing with fire, and McCain KNOWS it.  You know he does.  

And that's why there's a bit of a cognitive dissonance when you see all the hilarity of the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner.  Everyone yucking it up as though what is being spewed out into American society right now is just harmless tomfoolery.  It is not.  It is virulent and dangerous and irresponsible.  When I look at John McCain these days, all I feel is rising concern.

UPDATE: Since this post was originally published, Bachmann's Democratic opponent, Elwyn Tinklenberg, has raised some $700,000 in campaign contributions.  How ya like them apples, Bachmann!

Powell to appear on Meet the Press

Fmr. Secretary of State Colin Powell is scheudled to appear on Meet the Press this Sunday morning, and its rumored he may finally choose to endorse for President... Barack Obama.

If the rumors are true, it would be an enormous coup for Obama, who has been criticized by the McCain campaign as naive in his foreign policy cred.  It would also be a persuasive arguement to independents and moderate Republicans who were gung ho for a Powell candidacy 9 years ago and who have taken a second or third look at Obama.

It might also give a little tail wind to a campaign that appears to be worrying about keeping their momentum up with 2.5 weeks to go and a strong lead in the current polls.

P.S. - Look for Bill Kristol to demand an apology if this happens, as he predicted it a couple of months ago and was strongly repudiated by Powell's people.

California is anti-America?

Well, at least the GOP is finally being direct about it.  In their mind, anyone who isn't pro-McCain/Palin is apparently anti-America.  From WashPo:

Palin also made a point of mentioning that she loved to visit the "pro-America" areas of the country, of which North Carolina is one. No word on which states she views as unpatriotic.

An obvious candidate might be California -- a state Palin has campaigned in -- because, as she told the audience, she and McCain have encountered problems enlisting famous performers in their cause.

Can McCain and Obama be funny?

If you saw last night's Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner, you know the answer is an emphatic "Yes". 

If my post below of Purple and Brown was a mental palette-cleanser late in the election season, this was a good political reset button, reminding us that John McCain and Barack Obama are still human.  McCain actually had the best lines, like his explanation of the nicknames he and his friend Barack have for each other, and Obama came right back with his October surprise: that his middle name is actually Steve.  This bit from Obama is great in text - the delivery wasn't as good:

But, look, I don't want to be coy about this. We're a couple weeks from an important election. Americans have a big choice to make, and if anybody feels like they don't know me by now, let me try to give you some answers. Who is Barack Obama? Contrary to the rumors you have heard, I was not born in a manger. I was actually born on Krypton and sent here by my father Jorel to save the planet Earth ...

If you want to check it out the speeches at length, here you go:

Post endorses Obama

Even the Washington Post's endorsement seemed arbitrarily "fair and balanced", but where it was right it was right:

Not even his fiercest critics would blame President Bush for all of these problems, and we are far from being his fiercest critic. But for the past eight years, his administration, while pursuing some worthy policies (accountability in education, homeland security, the promotion of freedom abroad), has also championed some stunningly wrongheaded ones (fiscal recklessness, torture, utter disregard for the planet's ecological health) and has acted too often with incompetence, arrogance or both. A McCain presidency would not equal four more years, but outside of his inner circle, Mr. McCain would draw on many of the same policymakers who have brought us to our current state. We believe they have richly earned, and might even benefit from, some years in the political wilderness.

...But Mr. Obama's temperament is unlike anything we've seen on the national stage in many years. He is deliberate but not indecisive; eloquent but a master of substance and detail; preternaturally confident but eager to hear opposing points of view. He has inspired millions of voters of diverse ages and races, no small thing in our often divided and cynical country. We think he is the right man for a perilous moment.

Spreading the wealth

The disdain was dripping as John McCain pooh-poohed Barack Obama's suggestion in last night's debate that we need to spread the wealth.  "Hey," McCain says, "Joe the Plumber should be left alone to create more wealth so he can create more jobs."

OK.  Is that what happens?  

Here's what I think happens.  I think that Joe the Plumber and his huge plumbing company isn't what we're talking about here, since Joe would have to make $250k after business deductions.  I think we're actually talking about owners and boards of large businesses who DON'T create new jobs with their wealth.  They use it to pay exorbinant salaries and bonuses to executives who lay off thousands of employees.  They spend it on spas retreats and golden parachutes and partridge hunting. 

Because, you see, the wealth is what goes to the CEOs for cutting jobs and cutting costs in order to raise stock prices.

Just so we're clear.

Typical post-debate commentary

Post-show analysis: The Last Debate

All in all, John McCain did much better in this debate than he has in any other. He made some strong points that seemed backed by strong conviction. However, I really think he hurt himself in moments of sarcasm, impatience, and incredulity.

What was with some of those eye expressions?? Were wild crazy eyes supposed to poke holes in Obama's arguments?

This was definitely Obama's weakest performance, but he more than held his own, so in the end he was more successful in doing what he needed to do. McCain may gain a little ground, but probably not very much.

And, by the way, Obama answered the questions about Bill Ayers and ACORN tonight. Unless the McCain campaign, the GOP, or the media can show us any evidence that Obama was not telling the truth, this subject should be closed.

UPDATE: Bill Kristol on FOX News tonight shrugging his shoulders and simply saying that Obama looked Presidential and had a better arguement as to why he should be President: if that doesn't sound like a death-knell, I don't know what does. Oh, and Juan Williams appeared to agree. Daaaamn.

"He might be a terrorist, but at least he's not a Republican!"

OK, so take a look at the post below. I just took it directly from Ben Smith's blog on Politico because you should read it in its entirety. What does this say about the current mood of the country? Read and I'll meet you back on the other side...

Voting for Obama anyway

I just got an astounding e-mail from a Republican consultant I know well. He's a guy who's always thought Obama had a "glass jaw," and was always among those agitating for hitting Obama harder.

Recently, he conducted a focus group in an upper-Midwestern state, showing them the kind of ad he thought would work: A no-holds-barred attack, cut for an independent group, which hasn't aired.

I'm just going to reprint his amazed e-mail about the focus group:

Reagan Dems and Independents. Call them blue-collar plus. Slightly more Target than Walmart.

Yes, the spot worked. Yes, they believed the charges against Obama. Yes, they actually think he's too liberal, consorts with bad people and WON'T BE A GOOD PRESIDENT...but they STILL don't give a f***. They said right out, "He won't do anything better than McCain" but they're STILL voting for Obama.

The two most unreal moments of my professional life of watching focus groups:

54 year-old white male, voted Kerry '04, Bush '00, Dole '96, hunter, NASCAR fan...hard for Obama said: "I'm gonna hate him the minute I vote for him. He's gonna be a bad president. But I won't ever vote for another god-damn Republican. I want the government to take over all of Wall Street and bankers and the car companies and Wal-Mart run this county like we used to when Reagan was President."

The next was a woman, late 50s, Democrat but strongly pro-life. Loved B. and H. Clinton, loved Bush in 2000. "Well, I don't know much about this terrorist group Barack used to be in with that Weather guy but I'm sick of paying for health insurance at work and that's why I'm supporting Barack."

I felt like I was taking crazy pills. I sat on the other side of the glass and realized...this really is the Apocalypse. The Seventh Seal is broken and its time for eight years of pure, delicious crazy...

So has the country finally become so bankrupt that those persistent GOP talking points have finally shaken loose? "We hate socialism, and big government, and tax-and-spend liberalism," they seem to say, "but we don't give a rats ass anymore because everything is going to hell and someone needs to step in and FIX it."

Here's where the problem lies: "TRUST US" said the Republicans. TRUST deregulation. TRUST Wall Street. TRUST trickle-down. TRUST the free market. TRUST the moral majority.

They did, and here we are. Now they need someone to fix it. It may be "Big Government" stepping in, but at least Obama is offering to do it. The list of people who've shown zero strength of leadership are staggering: Bush, Paulson, Bernanke, McCain, industry executives. Frankly, Sarah Palin is the only person whose shown initiative in an executive role, and SHE raised taxes on oil companies during a state budget SURPLUS. Explain to me what she knows about dealing with dire financial straights!

Sadly, this situation represents a major opportunity for Dems to put some significant rebuilding efforts in place. And, if history teaches us anything, just as with FDR and Bill Clinton, once the nation is rebuilt the electorate will return control to the Repubs who will just go and squander it all over again.

That's what Prop. 8 is about

There you go. That's what Prop. 8 is about:



See more videos at the HOMOtracker's YouTube page.

Have you donated yet to NO ON PROP.8?

Yes, we are 29th in infant mortality!

Wow. Unreal. Aren't we so proud of our free-market healthcare system??

The U.S. now ranks 29th among industrial countries for infant mortalities.

That's right: we're now tied with Slovakia and Poland. Shameful. No other word to describe it.

You know, if you can't admit that our national stature is crumbling, you're in total denial. And if you'd rather get a tax break than do something meaningful about it, you aren't patriotic.

I'm so sick of our spoiled, self-centered, me-first attitude that calls any type of group effort "Socialism". Anyone who is still complaining about socialism needs to get a life, some self-sacrifice and some national pride.

Cleese on Palin

Just in case you're a drama geek or equivalent who thinks that Python are God, you can't beat John Cleese's reaction to the question posed (replete with parrot references):



And, in case you missed it:

Ode to Sean Hannity
by John Cleese

Aping urbanity
Oozing with vanity
Plump as a manatee
Faking humanity
Journalistic calamity
Intellectual inanity
Fox Noise insanity
You’re a profanity
Hannity

The gentleman ages nicely.

The problem with the "voter fraud" story

OK - my husband is right. I said it.

We need to talk about this "voter fraud" story that the media is spewing and not doing any actual reporting on.

1) The problem with people "raising questions" - McCain campaign, Obama campaign, media, or others - is that it raises a QUESTION. We then need to work to find the ANSWER.

2) What do false voter registrations mean? Do they mean that ACORN is trying to allow fake people to vote for Barack Obama? Does it mean that ACORN employees are trying to make a paycheck without doing the work of registering voters? Or does it mean that GOP operatives are trying to cast doubt on Obama's election, should he win?

Let's explore the reality.

1) ACORN pays by the hour. Not by the card. Still, there are instances of employees who did not want to take the time just phoning it in and falsifying cards.

2) Once cards are falsified, ACORN is REQUIRED to turn them in. It makes sense, right? No organization should be able to get registration cards filled out and then decide unilaterally that those should be thrown away. That's when you get into issues of partisanship.

3) Even if "false voters" are registered, first time voters must produce identification on election day. Therefore, if you register as Tony Romo or Taco Bell, you'd better have an ID or a piece of mail to back that up. Otherwise you CANNOT CAST A BALLOT.

4) Relatedly, there is a difference between voter registration fraud and VOTER FRAUD. Lets step out of the realm of the 2008 Presidential election and look at this article from 2007 about voter fraud. Apparently its more likely that a person would be struck by lightening than commit voter fraud - literally.

5) Fraudulent voter registration is reprehensible and ACORN should act accordingly. ACORN has meted out 3 degrees of punishment to employees depending on the degree of fault: 1. discipline, 2. dismissal, 3. prosecution. Note: they have turned employees over for prosecution when they've committed egregious fraud.

The fact of the matter is that ACORN is responsible for paying some irresponsible people to register voters. Whether that is by design or by accident, you'll have to decide for yourself based on the evidence (not the stump speeches of the candidates or the talking points of their surrogates on the cable news channels, please). And it is true that ACORN needs to do a MUCH better job of self-policing and PR. In both instances they are lacking.

However, lets not pretend that suddenly ACORN is overwhelming an unsuspecting elections infrastructure. We've been told for at least a year that liberal leaning groups were going to put a tremendous amount of money and effort into register people who had heretofore been uninterested in the election process. We saw that in the primaries: millions of people nationwide. To say now that you can't deal with that is lamentable, but it isn't ACORN's fault. It is the fault of our imperfect elections system, which we somehow can't muster the interest to deal with seriously until 3 weeks before a Presidential election.

How about we make this a national issue beginning on November 18th, 2008. Let's start talking about uniform elections and voter registration laws. Let's start talking about a national voting holiday. But to freak out now is to simply serve the campaigns.

DOW 36,000

Let's look back 9 years, to 1999, when James K. Glassman wrote his remarkable book DOW 36,000, suggesting that the stock market was significantly undervalued and would triple its value over 3 to 5 years.

By the way: in June 2008, Glassman became Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs in the Bush administration.

And these are the guys who want to privatize social security. Nice, huh?

California voter guides

Now that I have kids and a wood-burning stove for heat, I rely more than ever on voter guides to give me a quick sense of what the ballot measures are really about. Often they can help you figure out precisely which part of the measure you want to research more. (Although that measure from the last election on Indian Gaming rights was obtuse no matter how much time you spent on it!)

So, in the spirit of sharing, here are a couple of links to voter guides I'd characterize as "progressive":

The Courage Campaign
SF Gate endorsements

Penn and Blake for the youth vote

Obama is getting a clever boost for the youth vote from CW stars and MoveOn.org. Like the Great Schlepp before it, Partnership for a McCain-Free White House is showing that the candidate is also hip by association. Check it out:

McCain + ACORN

What is the McCain campaign has been saying about lying about your associations? This is true Washington politics, my friends: demonizing whoever is convenient.

This from Politico:

Acorn pushes back, hugs McCain

The beleaguered Democratic-leaning community group Acorn sends over this photograph: John McCain, in March of 2006, sitting beside Florida Rep. Kendrick Meek at an event Acorn co-sponsored in Florida.

The immigration event, which other photos show was packed with red-shirted Acorn member, was co-sponsored by the local Catholic Archdiocese, the SEIU, and other groups.

McCain, still spiting much of his party on immigration at the time, was the headliner.

Bertha Lewis, Acorn's chief organizer, said in a statement that came with the photo, “It has deeply saddened us to see Senator McCain abandon his historic support for ACORN and our efforts to support the goals of low-income Americans."

”We are sure that the extremists he is trying to get into a froth will be even more excited to learn that John McCain stood shoulder to shoulder with ACORN, at an ACORN co-sponsored event, to promote immigration reform," she said.

NY Times' Krugman wins Nobel Prize

Economist (and favorite economy geek of this blog) Paul Krugman has won the Nobel Prize in Economics. Although Krugman is well know for his Times column, and beloved at least by me for his Bush-critical perspective, his Nobel Prize was awarded for his academic work.

It is, however, notable that the Nobel committee recognized Krugman's status as an "opinion maker" in awarding the prize. By the way, the Nobel is now worth about $1.4 mil. Couldn't've happenned to a better economist.

Disheartened, demoralized

So much to write about, yet I'm finding it really hard to write.

I guess I have to think back to the beginning. In 2004 I was introduced to Barack Obama, was inspired by his message of common American values, goals, and potential. I thought, boy, if ever we could be so lucky to be able to vote for that guy as President!

So here we are within a month of the election and Barack Obama is surging in all the polls and it looks like I may get something I could only have dreamed of 4 years ago.

But at such a cost.

Yes, the economy is falling apart - probably the worst I have or will see in my lifetime. Yet I have faith in the ability of our nation to be resillient in our innovation, and business savvy, and national will.

It is this ugliness that I find so disspiriting, that in a time when all purport to need change, we see a segment of the American population harkening back to its basest self. Xenophobia. Racial mistrust. Outrage at the other. One week ago, Sarah Palin was, to me, a dissapointing example of my sex. Now she has demonstrated her gleeful willingness to whip up the most virulent strains of racism and fear in order to gain political power. She is Rove incarnate.

And, I'll say it: I was the last one in my family to hold to the belief that John McCain was, fundamentally, a principled man. Yes, I said, he'd made a deal with the devil, aligning himself more with the Bush-Cheney base in order to win the nomination, but it was only because this was his last shot. This wasn't really him.

I'm so dispirited and, yes, hurt by what I'm seeing. I had such feelings of hope for my country. That is why Barack Obama spoke to me. It was the reason I disagreed with but respected John McCain for so many years. It was the notion that we were finally ready to move beyond demonization and return to the best of ourselves that we had been at one time.

I know: its probably a dream that this country was ever that - that we ever had overwhelming feelings of unity. But did we at least have a sense of basic respect? Basic decency? A fundamental obligation to respect the process and the people who submit to that process, sacrificing their privacy, their time with family, their freedom to err or be imperfect, in order to stand up and lead?

I did have that kind of respect for John McCain once, and now I just feel sad, disheartened, demoralized.

In a time when our country is falling apart, when any notion of a responsible, conservative, free-market society have come crashing down, all I can think is that I will remember this as the time when, instead of coming together as a rational society with political differences, it was the time when many in our nation decided that hatred of the other was the solution they liked best.

I am trying to convince myself that somehow, despite all I am seeing, this is not who we are.

Exhale, and rejoice

Yes, it really is almost over.

Politico reports today that the Bush administration has signed an executive order to begin transitioning national security issues to both potential Presidential teams.

Can a sista get an amen?

If you support THAT ONE for President...

...you can get your gear here:

http://www.thatone08.com/

Post-show analysis: The Town Hall Debate

Obama did what he needed to do: looked confident and capable and presidential. John McCain looked like he was attacking the leader. All in all, McCain improved from the last debate performance. It is clear that a town hall debate is his forum. The handshake with the petty officer was nice. But there were no game changers here, and at times it seemed as though McCain was nipping at Obama's heels.

On to debate #3. Poor Bob Schieffer: are there any economy questions left unasked?

SIDE NOTE: Uncle. I, like apparently all other bloggers, am getting addicted to the CNN emote-o-meter. Watching the women is like watching my favorite roller coaster EVER. x)

SIDE SIDE NOTE: Apparently Manhattans go with ALL debates. Who knew?!

Pre-show analysis: The Town Hall Debate

Is there much that needs to be said here?

McCain will try to reinforce this idea of the mysterious, untrustworthy Obama, not by directly bringing up Bill Ayers, but by declaring Obama's positions to be dishonest. And he'll make eye contact this time. He needs to change narrative of the election but dispel this notion that he is avoiding the subject of the economy. He needs to be reassuring.

Obama will continue to talk about the economy and try to talk kitchen-table-ese. He did a good job in the last debate of talking about these shifty economic issues, but he needs to bring back to a personal perspective instead of broad generalities. For Obama, its do no harm. He continues to rise in the polls and doesn't want to change the trajectory. (Also, the demeanor that was once derided by the press as "professorial" is now being called "steady" and "comforting". We'll see more "steady".)

Don't expect any surprises.

"Gender Auditors" in the Battle for Gay Marriage

California voters, after having polled largely against Prop. 8 for the last month or so, appear to be swinging in the other direction, according to a poll from CBS affiliate KPIX.

Time for the opposition to get creative! Check out this great ad from the Courage Campaign"

'Omaba Nation' author a bee in Kenya's bonnet

Following this gem of a story today:

As previously noted in this blog, Obama Nation author and former Swiftboater Jerome Corsi had traveled to Kenya in order to, according to WorldNetDaily, research and expose nefarious ties between Barack Obama, Kenyan PM Raila Odinga, and Muslim forces. However, based on press releases going out to the Kenyan media, Corsi seems to have been there to promote his book.

Ah, but freedom of speech is a valuable and oft under-appreciated American right. As of this morning, the Times of London reported that Kenyan officials were detaining Corsi for lack of work permit in promoting his book.

By this afternoon, NPR is reporting that Corsi has been deported. What do you want to bet that Corsi and the right will be blaming Obama for that by week's end?

Brushing up on the economy

I'm busy today, but I thought you shouldn't miss this opportunity to get some easy to digest info on the economy. So here I go, just reprinting a post from Salon's War Room blog:

The Fed and commercial paper funds

I’m not an economist and have no background in finance. I therefore may be having just as much, if not more trouble, than you comprehending all the finance-related angles of the proposed bailout.

For example, if news that the Federal Reserve is about to take control of the Commercial Paper Fund Facility makes you scratch your head wondering, “what the hell are commercial paper funds?”, you certainly should read our own Andrew Leonard who explains how this part of the financial world works.

But in addition there’s also a great, unofficial Finance-for-Dummies radio program with which, I suspect, many Salon readers are already all too familiar: "This American Life." (Confession: I’m addicted to the show.)

This week’s episode, “Another Frightening Show About the Economy,” explains why the collapse of the mortgage-backed securities market has since been exacerbated by the collapse of the commercial paper fund market.

Actually, if you are not entirely certain why the mortgage-backed securities market crisis collapsed in the first place -- and no, it’s not just that people took out home loans they couldn’t afford to pay, though that’s certainly a big part of it -- before listening to the latest TAL episode you may want to check out the equally fascinating, “Global Pool of Money” episode.

― Thomas Schaller

The missed Palin opportunity

Former McCain strategiest Mike Murphy touched on a real truth today in Time's Swampland blog. According to Murphy, Sarah Palin ought to "start connecting to her cherished hockey moms on the one issue they are actually worried about; a quickly slowing economy..."

When Barack Obama says that McCain doesn't get it, this is a prime example. Sarah Palin is McCain's star quarterback in the fight for working-class Americans. In a time of high disaffection and cynicism, more people in suburban/exurban/rural America believe that Sarah Palin "gets" them and their issues, pocketbook among them, no matter what their feeling about her as a potential Commander-in-Chief. So why is McCain sending her out pitbulling about Bill Ayers?

If McCain wants to make some gains on economic issues he needs to start showing that his campaign understands those issues. Sarah Palin is uniquely qualified to make that connection with voters. I'm about half way through this fantastic article by George Packer at the New Yorker, explaining equisitely what is actually going on out there in the country with those blue-collar white voters who can't get behind Obama, Democrat and Republican alike. Read it.

It seems that the McCain campaign has given up on substance and will charge ahead on character and ideology issues. That won't do the job for them this year - no way, no how.

The takeaway: the falling DOW

OK. For god's sake.

If you thought that the "Bailout/Rescue/Recovery Bill" was going to prevent the STOCK MARKET from falling, you need to school yourself a little bit about what this "economic disaster" we're going through is about.

The recent bill was meant to get credit moving which keeps business from HALTING. It does not "fix" the economic problems we have.

Of course you can't count on the press to report that. According to Andrea Mitchell in front of me, we're all out here saying "HEY! I thought I spent $770 billion to FIX this s%&t" and we don't understand what's going on!

Um, I don't think we're that idiotic. Are we?

Chalk this up to the same electorate that complains that it doesn't know what Barack Obama stands for. Um, are you kidding me? There is NO EXCUSE for lack of understanding in this day and age. Folks, internet. Internet, folks. Get together and figure something out, would ya?

What is fair game in assessing character?

If it is OK to question Barack Obama's association with Bill Ayers, is it OK to question John McCain's association with Charles Keating?

If its OK for McCain to use his years as a POW speak to his character, is it also OK for his military record prior to that POW time to speak for his character?

If I don't think McCain's military record suggesting carelessness has any real meaning in his current endeavors, should I also not consider his time as a POW to have any bearing on his qualifications to be President?

I'm just sayin'.

The gloves come flying off

Well, it was to be expected, but MAN did they exceed expectations!

Since polls late last week showed Barack Obama pulling away is many key swing states, reports abound in the papers and on the Sunday morning shows that the McCain campaign was going to unleash its character attacks on Obama, going to Obama's associations with Bill Ayers and Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Sarah Palin previewed that strategy in a stump speech in Omaha on Saturday, saying Obama "pals around with terrorists".

Then POW! In my inbox on Sunday night: an email from the Obama campaign playing the - you got it! - Keating 5 card. Oh yeah, they went there. The campaign is devoting an entire website to educating you on McCain's role in the Keating 5 scandal, repleat with synopsis, downloads, and "documentary".

So can we finally shake the Democrats-as-Kerry-wallflowers persona now? Here are some of my favorite headlines for today:

I'll see your Ayers, raise you a Keating

McCain, Obama go for jugular

While I think we can all agree that negative campaigning is not what we're interested in, two thoughts:

1. At least we only have 4 weeks left in the election. They could have started this garbage in earnest weeks ago.
2. Hopefully the Obama campaign's response will net out as an equal and oposite reaction to the McCain campaign efforts. If they both come out slinging mud, the story may just die as "Look at all the mud these guys are throwing!" instead of becoming a false storyline for the media to lap up.

Here's hoping.

UPDATE: Sadly, it looks like the continued plunge of worldwide markets and the DOW sinking below 10,000 will be the story. Is it telling that this is what needs to happen for us to focus on real issues in politics?

We must never forget that art is not a form of propaganda; it is a form of truth.

- JFK

See a side-by-side comparison of the arts positions of each of the Presidential candidates. (Thanks be to Allison.)

Who owns small town values?

So I sprained my ankle and am online catching up on all the Daily Show and Colbert Report I've missed in the last week, and I catch this clip I hadn't seen before of the miniseries that apparently was the Couric/Palin interview.

And I hear Sarah Palin saying something to the effect of "I'm not one of those kids whose parents gave them a passport and a plane ticket to Europe after graduation. I had to work two jobs until I had kids and walk uphill both ways..." blah, blah, blah.

And I flash back to her debate performance, talking about being from a small town and how special that makes her so she's not going to answer your questions the way you Media-Types or Washington-Types or Elitist-Liberal-Types want her to.

And that's when my HEAD explodes I say: THAT'S ENOUGH. You don't OWN small town values.

You see, I'm from a small town. Nearest neighbor was a half a quarter mile away. How do you like them apples? And I started my first real job when I was 13 - having cleaned houses and babysat before that - and worked my way through college with one or two jobs, depending on how lucky I was. And I couldn't afford to go to Europe until after I was married.

And I married my sweetheart who I've been with since I was 19. And I never had an abortion. And we have two beautiful children who were conceived WITHIN wedlock. And you know what?

I'm a liberal.

I'm agnostic.

I'm pro-choice.

And I don't care about your Christian values.

Because, you see, to me it doesn't matter a lick if you're a Christian. That really doesn't say anything about what kind of person you are as you walk through this world. And being from a small town and having "small town", "Joe-six-pack" values? That don't mean shit. Pardonnez mon français.

You see, my grandfather was an immigrant. He came from small town Plymouth, England. He was the child of a single mother who worked her butt off to make that existence work for her kids. My grandfather didn't have a college education. He didn't complete a high school education. But you know what his hobby was through his life? Damn sure it wasn't snow machinin'.

My grandfather read. Volumes and volumes. Everything you were supposed to read if you were a worldly, knowledgeable individual. He read Keats and Aristotle and Shakespeare and Huxley and Emerson and Verne and Freud and Dumas. He had books on Van Gough and Monet and Picasso and ancient architecture and mythology.

You see, being from a small town, being unworldly, isn't something to aspire to. It is the circumstance in which you are born. Certainly the small town offers its own set of values, but they are certainly not the ends to which you aspire.

The small town folks we DO admire, people who made this world a better place such as President Lincoln, aspired to something bigger than themselves, which required an intellectual curiosity to look beyond the sphere to which they were born.

So, you see, I'm from a small town and I live back in that same small town, but I've never stopped trying to become a bigger person in awareness and understanding.

(Did I just quote John Cougar Mellancamp?)

Thoughts on the VEEP debate

A draw. I thought Sarah Palin outperformed incredibly low expectations. I don't think she shined to the extent that she changes any undecided minds. But Joe Biden did a wonderful job of thoughtfully engaging and being substantive without offending. All in all, I thought it was an enjoyable debate: not especially challenging, but not especially phoney.

This is not a game changer, but you can bet that the punditry will have less to mock about Sarah Palin. For that, she made me respect her again as a woman .

FYI, the Manhattan was the right drink to accompany this debate: fun and a little substantive. What will be the drink for election night? Comments?

The electoral field begins its tightening

So it begins: Politico's Jonathan Martin reports that the McCain campaign is pulling out of Michigan. Based on recent polls, that means in 2008 the election will likely hinge on... wait for it....

Florida and Ohio.

Joy.

Silverman for Obama

Warning: link to indelicate language follows.
(You're totally going to watch now, right?)

Sarah Silverman's plan for winning a swing state: "The Great Schlepp". Classic Silverman.

More swing state polling

Remember those swing states we looked at yesterday? Let's look at some new swing state polling this one from CNN/Time:

Florida: Obama +4
Minnesota: Obama +11
Missouri: Obama +1
Nevada: Obama +4
Virginia: Obama +9

OK - the polls have consistently shown that Obama has the momentum. If you're following the horse race, I think you can ignore polling for about a week. By next Thursday or Friday, people will have had time to digest both the VP debate and, more importantly, the second Presidential debate, which is scheduled for Tuesday. As I've argued before, people are going to vote the top of the ticket this year. Sarah Palin would have to prove herself to be an utterly disasterous possibility for the Presidency in the eyes of her GOP following in order to have any additional downward drag on McCain.

Also, look for any stories coming out of Kenya for the October surprise that could change the narrative in the way McCain needs.

Patriotism, taxes, and the conventional wisdom

This recent exchange between Joe Biden and ABC News' Kate Snow has been pointed to by the media as an example of a Biden gaffe. Can ANYONE explain to me why this is a gaffe?

Snow: "Anyone making over $250,000..."

Biden: "Is going to pay more. You got it. Its time to be patriotic, Kate. Time to jump in. Time to be part of the deal. Time to help get America out of the rut. And the way to do that is - they're still going to pay less taxes than they paid under Reagan."

I'm with Biden! All the way, man. Why is it that we CANNOT seem to accept sacrifice? Isn't this what got us into our financial crisis? An expectation of entitlement? We deserve to have a bigger house, a better vacation, cheaper goods, and not pay ANY more in taxes during an incredibly expensive war. This notion seems to be a political standard: Americans do not need to give more. Do actual Americans really feel this way?

Do YOU feel that way? And, by the way, are you sure you AREN'T giving more?

Biden is talking about wealthier Americans (do you make over $250,000 year? I actually don't have a single friend who does.) getting fewer tax write-offs, thereby increasing the nation's income. Are you going to tell me that families with McMansions and Escalades can't afford to chip in to the cause? The America I grew up admiring expected its wealthy members to step up during tough times. That's who we were supposed to be.

We can't help the largely middle-class Americans who are in trouble with mortgages and debt. After all, they made uninformed, impulsive decisions, making bad investments, ignoring what the long term consequences would be so that they could get the best deals for right now. We have a moral obligation to let them face the consequences. Now, where did I put that Bailout Bill?

Glittering generalities: ooo, SHINY

One tactic to watch for in tonight's veep debate: folksy tales and "glittering generalities". In yesterday's Christian Science Monitor, Alaska state rep and former gubernatorial candidate Andrew Halcro writes about what we can expect to see from Sarah Palin:

Palin is a master of the nonanswer. She can turn a 60-second response to a query about her specific solutions to healthcare challenges into a folksy story about how she's met people on the campaign trail who face healthcare challenges. All without uttering a word about her public-policy solutions to healthcare challenges.

In one debate, a moderator asked the candidates to name a bill the legislature had recently passed that we didn't like. I named one. Democratic candidate Tony Knowles named one. But Sarah Palin instead used her allotted time to criticize the incumbent governor, Frank Murkowski. Asked to name a bill we did like, the same pattern emerged: Palin didn't name a bill.

And when she does answer the actual question asked, she has a canny ability to connect with the audience on a personal level. For example, asked to name a major issue that had been ignored during the campaign, I discussed the health of local communities, Mr. Knowles talked about affordable healthcare, and Palin talked about ... the need to protect hunting and fishing rights.

So what does that mean for Biden? With shorter question-and-answer times and limited interaction between the two, he should simply ignore Palin in a respectful manner on the stage and answer the questions as though he were alone. Any attempt to flex his public-policy knowledge and show Palin is not ready for prime time will inevitably cast him in the role of the bully.

On the other side of the stage, if Palin is to be successful, she needs to do what she does best: fill the room with her presence and stick to the scripted sound bites.

Become ONE with your candidate

In the Washington Post today, conservative columnist Kathleen Parker wrote about the response she's received since writing her famous "Sarah Palin should bow out" column on Sunday. Apparently the response was vicious and personal:

Allow me to introduce myself. I am a traitor and an idiot. Also, my mother should have aborted me and left me in a dumpster, but since she didn't, I should "off" myself. ...
The emotional pitch of many comments suggests an overinvestment in Palin as "one of us."
Palin's fans say they like her specifically because she's an outsider, not part of the Washington club. When she flubs during interviews, they identify with that, too. "You see the lack of polish, we applaud it," one reader wrote.

This harkens to something that irked me during the Democratic primaries, this personal attachment to the candidates. As a woman who was never particularly jazzed about candidate Clinton, I could never get the rabid devotion displayed by many of her supporters. Furthermore I did and DO find it offensive that so many women think that Hillary was our last hope. What an incredible slap in the face to all of the other brilliant women whose greatest aspiration is public service! (I'm winking at you, Jess!)

Dahlia Lithwick and the smart ladies over at the XX Factor have discussed this phenomenon of over-identification with our candidates. Its one thing to want to be like those we admire. Its a whole different neurosis to want them to be like us. Maybe we could all use a crash course in Hiring Practice 101. Qualifications for this position do not include affability and beer-drinking skills.

Final thoughts from Parker:

The picture is this: Anyone who dares express an opinion that runs counter to the party line will be silenced. That doesn't sound American to me, but Stalin would approve. ...

Our day of reckoning may indeed be upon us. Between war and economic collapse, we have enormous challenges. It will take the best of everyone to solve them. That process begins minimally with a commitment to engage in civil discourse and a cease-fire in the war against unwelcome ideas.

Brava.

Liberal Baby Eaters

This one is so good I just had to copy the post. From Jonathan Stein of Mother Jones' MOJO blog (thanks, Allison!)

Hugh Hewitt and the Department of Caricatures

Folks on the interwebs are making fun of the questions right wing blogger and talk show host Hugh Hewitt recently put to Sarah Palin. They are the softest of softballs — they make Sean Hannity look like Edward R. Murrow. You can check them out here.

I want to highlight this one in particular:

"You're pro-life, and how much of the virulent opposition to you on the left do you attribute to your pro-life position, and maybe even to the birth of, your decision, your and Todd's decision to have Trig?"

That's right. Hugh Hewitt think the left opposes Sarah Palin because she decided to give birth to a child with Down Syndrome. Not because she knows nothing about foreign affairs while we're engaged in two wars. Not because she has nothing coherent to say about the government bailout of Wall Street as we face a dire economic crisis. Not because of her retrograde views on science and books. Not because she undermines every feminist accomplishment Hillary Clinton fought for earlier this election season.

The left opposes Sarah Palin because she gave birth to a baby with Down Syndrome. Just think about the misconceptions about the left that need to be in place for someone to make that claim. The left either hates infants with disabilities, or it hates women who refuse to abort unborn children with disabilities. Or it wants to jack up some kind of karmic abortion counter as high as possible and is disappointed when it misses an opportunity.

Has Hugh Hewitt ever met a Democrat?

"The most anticipated Vice Presidential debate in a long time"

That seems to be the headline today. "In a long time"? OK, maybe I'm unschooled in our nation's electoral history, but I think we can say with some certainty that this is the most anticipated Vice Presidential debate in EXACTLY 24 years.

The Debates: the Basics

While Syd and I were watching the first ("foreign policy") debate, he asked me when the next debates were and what there "themes" were. Amazingly, I've not seen that info provided once in the media. So, you're welcome!

Oct. 2 - Palin / Biden VP debate
Host: PBS's Gwen Ifill**

Oct. 7 - Town Hall debate
Host: Tom Brokaw
NOTE: The Commission on Presidential Debates is taking your submissions for questions for this debate until FRIDAY!

Oct. 15 - Domestic Policy debate
Host: Bob Schieffer

All debates start at 9pm EST / 6pm PST and are available on all major networks.

**UPDATE: The hosting of the veep debate may be in question. Turns out Gwen Ifill has a book coming out around the time of the inauguration entitled "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama". From the Amazon.com description, this doesn't sound like an in-the-tank-for-Obama tome, but rather an analysis of modern race politics. Still, it has the appearance of impropriety, and it was bad vetting on the McCain camps part for them only to realize this now. Ifill could indeed be out.

Obama Pulls Ahead in Swing States

If you're still looking at the Gallup Daily Tracking polls to see how your candidate is doing in the Presidential horse race, you need to stop. Now. The electoral college elects the president, and Obama won't get more electoral votes from California the more popular he is here. That said...

The Quinnipiac poll of the three big swing states - Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania -released today shows Obama pulling ahead in all of them. Barring any repeat shenannigans in Ohio or Florida, this bodes very well for Obama.

Consider: 1) the economy will not be getting better in the next 30 days, and conventional wisdom and polling agree that Obama benefits when the economy is our number one worry, and 2) Obama has put the one debate that was supposedly his weak spot behind him. Things will likely only get better for Obama in the upcoming debates.

Now, I don't think Florida is remotely settled. The Jewish American population there seems to be uneasy (at best) with Barack Obama. And there's no way I'll put it past Florida officials to screw up the election in their state. But its a hugely important state and worth watching closely.

Furthermore, let's put this to rest: even if Joe Biden calls Sarah Palin a tartlette in tomorrow night's debate, its not going to sway the electorate one way the other. People will vote the top of the ticket this year.

Just for the record, here are the swing states you need to watch and their respective electoral votes:

Florida - 27
Pennsylvania - 21
Ohio - 20
Michigan - 17
North Carolina - 15
Virginia - 13
Indiana - 11
Missouri - 11
Minnesota - 10
Colorado - 9
Nevada - 5
New Mexico - 5
New Hampshire - 4
Montana - 3