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