Ok boys and girls, as the "Primaries" thread keeps sinking into oblivion its time to start a new one on the finals...McCain v. Obama.
Lets try to keep this objective at times and partisan at others, but lets keep out the ad hominem attacks on fellow posters.
I would make the following observations:
1. The current polls showing them in a dead heat will change as Obama consolidates power and Hillary supporters start coming to their senses. He probably gets about a 9 point bounce IMHO and goes into the conventions about 10 points ahead.
2. McCain sees to be enjoying a huge electoral vote advantage and I don't see Obama winning unless he can poach a few states like Virginia and New Mexico and carry Pa, and either Ohio or Mich. I think Florida will go heavily for McCain. McCain's Veep choice will not help him, but could hurt him. Obama has little choice. Jim Webb or The Governor of Ohio.
3. Both men are desperately trying to define each other. McCain saying Obama is Carter and Obama saying McCain is Bush. So far neither candidate looks like he is going to be pushed around by the other, and the rapid responses may actually get us debating issues and not the nonsense we see on cable (the latest being a tease on Faux News that Obama's new hand bump gimmick is a secret jihadist code).
4. McCain's move to do the town hall meetings is the smartest move of the campaign so far by either candidate. It is the only forum in which he does well, and the only forum in which Obama doesn't. Obama cannot say no to this concept, and he is going to have to lighten up a bit and be faster on his feet than he has been in other one one one encounters. The danger IMHO for McCain is that if these go deep into the camaign there is a greater chance that he will commit a gaffe out of fatigue, or his temper. The danger for Obama is to figure out a way to explain how he is going to pay for do all these wonderful things he is romising us without looking like an old time tax and spend Democrat. The blessing to all of us is that it will be McCain and Obama asking each other questions and taking questions from real people instead of all these self important media types.
1. The current polls showing them in a dead heat will change as Obama consolidates power and Hillary supporters start coming to their senses.
Absolutely inevitable.
The die hard feminists that are screaming their heads off about the media being sexist and "rigging" the primary have to ask themselves just one question, After all we supposedly stood for in the 60s and 70s, can we really vote for a Pro-Life candidate? If they would, they're the biggest hypocrites I've ever encountered.
By the way, I'm making an observation. Democrat that I am, I am Catholic first and do NOT believe in abortion.
I believe that a woman's choice is a very personal one, and I don't believe that the government has the right to legislate it. While I don't believe in abortion as birth control, I don't want to see it made illegal again either. I think that every woman should have options if they find themselves in that situation, and I think that the government shouldn't limit those options.
That said, I don't want to turn this into a pro-choice/pro-life debate. This is about the candidates, and it should remain so.
I don't understand, given the low approval rating that President Bush currently has, the lack of support for the continuance of the war, the state of the economy, and so on, that McCain could possibly have any chance of winning. However, we may just be that stupid.
I support the African Americans and wanna see Obama win. It would be a history inducing moment. But he may get assassinated, like JFK, by the Lowriders or another group.
Here America - good luck to the winner. Get the boys out of Iraq and Afghanistan.
I hope that I am wrong, but too many closet racists and too many outright racists will probably keep Obama from getting elected.
Regarding the rabid Hillary supporters, I saw this woman on last night who claimed that the media were "misogynists" for their treatment of Clinton and "forcing" her out of the race. I wanted to scream at this woman. Focus on the real issue if you're going to throw that label out there: McCain called his WIFE the c-word! It does not get more misogynistic than that.
I hope that there are enough smart people in this country to realize that even though McCain is not as bad as Bush (how could he be?), McCain will inevitably carry out many of the same or similar agendas regarding foreign policy and our economy. I just don't see how most people, who have the ability to think beyond skin color, can say that we would better off with the state of the economy carrying forward as the status quo and that the Iraq War should continue down an endless path of another 4 years. But I have serious reservations as to whether enough people can vote beyond skin color.
And for those Clinton supporters who vote for McCain simply because they didn't get their candidate, I feel sorry for you. Obama won fair and square, so get over it. Is she capable - absolutely, but she did not get it done and used a poor campaign strategy since February. I don't really blame her so much as her advisors for a lack of vision and sense of inevitability. And now she has to live with the outcome. A spite vote for McCain is plain dumb.
If Obama loses to what amounts to the third coming of Bush, it can only be because of the racial aspect of it.
Why is that? Is there anything inherently superior about Obama's poilicies that anyone who chooses to vote against him is doing so because of race? What if people don't like his poilicies or don't trust him enough to carry out whatever he claims?
If Obama loses to what amounts to the third coming of Bush, it can only be because of the racial aspect of it.
Why is that? Is there anything inherently superior about Obama's poilicies that anyone who chooses to vote against him is doing so because of race? What if people don't like his poilicies or don't trust him enough to carry out whatever he claims?
Anything NOT resembling the Bush administration is inherently superior. How long would you like this war to go on?
Anything NOT resembling the Bush administration is inherently superior. How long would you like this war to go on?
I don't support the war and don't see why any candidate(mc cain here) would like to continue with it. But that is a topic with a large consensus. I feel that other aspects are much more polarized compared to war.
Regarding the rabid Hillary supporters, I saw this woman on last night who claimed that the media were "misogynists" for their treatment of Clinton and "forcing" her out of the race. I wanted to scream at this woman. Focus on the real issue if you're going to throw that label out there: McCain called his WIFE the c-word! It does not get more misogynistic than that.
AND McCain left his first wife after she had suffered an accident and was ugly... McCain didnt support his ex when she needed it.
Obama veep vetting team looks at retired military, By NEDRA PICKLER and MARY CLARE JALONICK, Associated Press
WASHINGTON - Barack Obama is considering former top military leaders among his possible running mates, according to a senator who met Tuesday with the Democratic presidential candidate's vice presidential vetting team.
North Dakota Sen. Kent Conrad told The Associated Press said the team asked him about potential candidates from three broad categories — current top elected officials, former top elected officials, and former top military leaders.
Conrad would not disclose which names they discussed, and the Obama campaign has been keeping the process a closely guarded secret.
"We talked about many names," Conrad said, including "some that are out of the box but I think would be very well received by the American people, including former top military leaders."
Obama has a three-person team managing the vetting process that includes one-time first daughter Caroline Kennedy, former Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder and the former CEO of mortgage lender Fannie Mae, Jim Johnson.
The vetters have been holding meetings with several Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill to get their input. Conrad met with Holder and Johnson.
"I sensed from this meeting that they are still very much building the list and at the same time evaluating possibilities," Conrad said. "It's very clear they have reached no conclusions, not even tentative conclusions."
Many former military leaders have been involved in the 2008 Democratic presidential campaign. Some of Obama's most prominent campaign advisers have been Gen. Tony McPeak, who was Air Force chief of staff during Operation Desert Storm; Maj. Gen. Scott Gration, who flew repeated combat missions and has worked with Obama on a range of military issues since before he began his presidential campaign; and Richard Danzig, who was secretary of the Navy under President Clinton.
He might also look at some of former rival Hillary Rodham Clinton's top military advisers in a gesture of unity, retired generals who include Hugh Shelton, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; or Wesley Clark, who led the war in Kosovo and ran in the presidential primary four years ago. Virginia Sen. Jim Webb, who served as Navy secretary under President Reagan, has also been frequently mentioned as a possible running mate.
Campaigning in St. Louis, Obama was asked about criticism from Republican rival John McCain of Johnson having received loans from Countrywide Financial Corp. with the help of the firm's chief executive, Angelo Mozilo. Countrywide is part of a federal investigation in the midst of the subprime mortgage crisis.
Holder has also come under Republican criticism for his role in helping fugitive financier Marc Rich get a pardon from President Clinton.
Obama said he was not hiring "a vetter to vet the vetters."
"Jim Johnson has a very discrete task, as does Eric Holder, and that is simply to gather up information about potential vice presidential candidates," Obama said. "They are performing that job well. It is a volunteer, unpaid position. ... They're not people who I have assigned to a particular job in a future administration."
One is that there will be people who do not vote for Obama because of his race, but I wonder how many of them would vote for any left of center democrat, hence his net loss may not be that great. Moreover if he can mobilize enough blacks to regoster to vote and get out there and actually vote, he can neutralize the racists. African Americans comprise a large minority in this country, but as a rule they do not turn up and vote. They way out number Jewish people, but the Jewish Vote is critical because they come out at some outrageous rate like 90%.
Two is this post partem depression the Clinton feminists are suffering (not to bemysoginistic) will wane. It is not unusual after a hard fought inter-party primary for the losers to have hurt feelings and claim they will stay home or vote for McCain. On so called women's issues like right to choose and the formation of the courts which rule on that and on sexual harassment claims, they will come home t the democratic party once they see where McCain stands(BTW I am against abortion, but I do not believe either the government or I have any right to get involved in a moral decision only a pregnant woman can make, thus I am pro choice. I am against the death penalty for one reason. I work in the legal system and I know how screwed up it is. I can almost guarantee if I were to go out and kill someone in cold blood and be convicted, I would end up with a life sentence because I have no prior record, I would have clients, lawyers, shrinks and judges lined up to testify about what a great guy I was, and how I must have just "snapped," etc etc. Some guy who is a "street person" would not get the same deal).
Three. Go to CNN, MSNBC, Time Magazine, Newsweek, and your favrite local daily. Gather all the information you can on what the conventional wisdom is. Once you have done that you can safely assume the conventional wisdom is wrong.
Four. Neither candidate is going to want to get really specific on what he will do once he is president. This is where we really need to press them hard. All we can count on the media doing is spculating about lapel pins, Obama's new fist bumping thing, McCain telling off the cuff jokes, and droning on endlessly about the horse race.
I am against abortion, but I do not believe either the government or I have any right to get involved in a moral decision only a pregnant woman can make, thus I am pro choice.
May I suggest to JG that he open a temporary Political Forum until the elections are over. It could start getting ugly in here.
Especially when DoubleJ debates the abortion issue by linking Pizzaboy and others with pictures of Adolf Hitler, or when appleonya once a blue moon copy and pastes the latest NEWSMAX talking points memo.
So if we open a tempory political thread, does that mean we can all get "temporarily" ugly?????? Down and dirty?
TIS
That's how it was on another board I was on in 2004. Pretty much there was a disclaimer in the political forum that anything goes there. Just keep it in that forum, and out of the other ones.
Aw c'mon... TIS ain't the angel that she suckered everyone into thinking she is.
She was once ready to kick Vercetti's ass.
She knocked over three old ladies on a breakfast buffet line because they were taking too long to decide what they wanted and she was stuck behind them.
She once ran my shopping cart off the road.
She made three sailors blush (by her bad language) when they tried to take her cab in Las Vegas.
She once punched out a bartender because the blue in her little girly drink wasn't blue enough.
She knocked over three old ladies on a breakfast buffet line because they were taking too long to decide what they wanted and she was stuck behind them.
I can relate to that.
Next time that happens TIS, I'll help ya knock people out of the way.
It was his way of getting out of a tough spot. Having been Clinton's VP, he would have had to endorse her. However, by waiting until she bowed out, he gets to endorse Obama. Rather chicken-like, but that's not unusual in a politician, is it??
It was his way of getting out of a tough spot. Having been Clinton's VP, he would have had to endorse her. However, by waiting until she bowed out, he gets to endorse Obama. Rather chicken-like, but that's not unusual in a politician, is it??
Yes. I always considered his silence during the primary as a ringing endorsement for Obama.
His silence in the primaries spoke volumes, true, although in 2004 he endorsed Howard Dean before Iowa, probably as payback to Joe Lieberman who sold him out in the Florida recount ....that stronz.
Obama could win vote, lose election, by Harry Siegel Wed Jun 18, 9:35 PM ET
Until 2000, it hadn’t happened in more than 100 years, but plugged-in observers from both parties see a distinct possibility of Barack Obama winning the popular vote but losing the Electoral College — and with it the presidency — to John McCain.
Here’s the scenario: Obama racks up huge margins among the increasingly affluent, highly educated and liberal coastal states, while a significant increase in turnout among black voters allows him to compete — but not to win — in the South. Meanwhile, McCain wins solidly Republican states such as Texas and Georgia by significantly smaller margins than Bush’s in 2004 and ekes out narrow victories in places such as North Carolina, which Bush won by 12 points but Rasmussen presently shows as a tossup, and Indiana, which Bush won by 21 points but McCain presently leads by just 11.
One possible result: Even as the national mood moves left, the 2004 map largely holds. Obama’s 32 new electoral votes from Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado and Virginia are offset by 21 new electoral votes for McCain in Michigan and New Hampshire — and despite a 2- or 3-point popular vote victory for Obama, America wakes up on Jan. 20 to a President McCain.
According to Tad Devine, who served as the chief political consultant for Al Gore in 2000 and as a senior adviser to John F. Kerry in 2004, “it certainly is a possibility. Not a likelihood, but it is a real possibility.”
Some observers, such as Joseph Mercurio, a political consultant and pollster who worked on Sen. Joe Biden’s Democratic primary bid, see this as unlikely given the dramatic increase in Democratic Party enrollment and President Bush’s near record-low approval rating. Also skeptical is Nate Silver, a political cult-favorite blogger whose statistical model — which factors in population change since electoral votes were last allocated in the 2000 census — shows McCain as more likely than Obama to lose the Electoral College while winning the popular vote.
But others, pointing to the competitiveness of the past two elections, predict that this will be another such tight race. If they’re proven correct, this would be the fourth in the past five elections, making for the most closely contested run of presidential contests since those spanning the popular vote-Electoral College splits of 1876 and 1888.
Hank Sheinkopf, president of Sheinkopf Communications and an adviser to Bill Clinton in 1996, warns that such a split “is anything but impossible.” While he gives Obama a slight edge in the general election “because he doesn’t have George Bush riding with him,” he predicts that “Obama’s going to get big votes for a Democrat in the Southern states but not enough to win any new electoral votes. So it’s a distinct possibility that he could lose the entire South, split the Midwest” and end up not as president but rather as the second coming of Al Gore. When asked the odds of this playing out, he offers “50-50.”
Devine points out that Bush’s strategy in 2004 “was predicated on massive base turnout” that pushed up margins in safe states. He doesn’t “expect the McCain campaign to be directed the same way — using issues like gay marriage on the ballot to get the base to the polls — so McCain won’t have the same forces at play to drive out the popular vote.”
Recalling the impact of Ralph Nader’s third-party run in 2000, Devine also wonders if Bob Barr’s Libertarian run might play out differently, costing McCain popular — but not electoral — votes, while producing another popular-electoral split.
Lloyd M. Green, who served as research counsel to George Bush in 1988, also rates Obama a slight favorite and predicts that, if the Democrat does win, he’ll do so with “even larger margins in New York and California than in the last several elections [in 2004, Kerry won the two states by a combined margin of a little more than 2.5 million votes], and yet with all that margin run-up in safe states, this will end up a tight general election.”
In a sentiment also expressed by Sheinkopf and Green, Devine sees little chance of this happening if Obama wins the popular vote by more than 4 points. “But if he gets it by 2 or 3 points, it is plausible," he said. "Absolutely.”
Green, who sees “about a 20 percent chance” of Obama winning the popular vote while losing the Electoral College, doesn’t expect anything resembling a blowout: “Given that the only clear and clean majorities [since 1992] were in 1996 and 2004, ... this election will have the ferocity of all recent elections.” It’s a tough trend to buck, he argued, noting that “Americans traditionally change their religious affiliations more often than their party affiliations.”
It was his way of getting out of a tough spot. Having been Clinton's VP, he would have had to endorse her. However, by waiting until she bowed out, he gets to endorse Obama. Rather chicken-like, but that's not unusual in a politician, is it??
No more than what John Edwards* did.
*=If Obama gets elected...Edwards as Attorney General?
Hate Groups' Newest Target White Supremacists Report an Increase in Visits to Their Web Sites
Sen. Barack Obama's historic victory in the Democratic primaries, celebrated in America and across much of the world as a symbol of racial progress and cultural unity, has also sparked an increase in racist and white supremacist activity, mainly on the Internet, according to leaders of hate groups and the organizations that track them.
Neo-Nazi, skinhead and segregationist groups have reported gains in numbers of visitors to their Web sites and in membership since the senator from Illinois secured the Democratic nomination June 3. His success has aroused a community of racists, experts said, concerned by the possibility of the country's first black president.
"I haven't seen this much anger in a long, long time," said Billy Roper, a 36-year-old who runs a group called White Revolution in Russellville, Ark. "Nothing has awakened normally complacent white Americans more than the prospect of America having an overtly nonwhite president."
Such groups have historically inflated their influence for self-promotion and as an intimidation technique, and they refused to provide exact membership numbers or open their meetings to a reporter. Leaders acknowledged that their numbers remain very small -- "the flat-globe society still has more people than us," Roper said. But experts said their claims reveal more than hyperbole this time.
"The truth is, we're finding an explosion in these kinds of hateful sentiments on the Net, and it's a growing problem," said Deborah Lauter, civil rights director for the Anti-Defamation League, which monitors hate group activity. "There are probably thousands of Web sites that do this now. I couldn't even tell you how many are out there because it's growing so fast."
Neo-Nazi and white power groups acknowledge that they have little ability to derail Obama's candidacy, so instead some have decided to take advantage of its potential. White-power leaders who once feared Obama's campaign have come to regard it as a recruiting tool. The groups now portray his candidacy as a vehicle to disenfranchise whites and polarize America.
Obama has worked hard to minimize the issue of race in his presidential campaign. When asked about divisiveness and hate, he talks instead about ways in which unity between blacks and whites has inspired him. He chose to "reject and denounce" an endorsement from Nation of Islam minister Louis Farrakhan. Obama quit his church after his pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., spoke of racism and oppression in the "United States of white America."
Earlier this month, Obama's campaign launched a Web site to defuse the false rumors that hate-mongers spread on the Internet. The site lists a series of untruths about Obama -- that he is Muslim; that his books contain racist passages; that his wife, Michelle, used the word "whitey" -- and discredits them.
"The Obama campaign isn't going to let dishonest smears spread across the Internet unanswered," Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor said in a statement. "We have to be proactive and fight back."
But on a Web site run out of a house in West Palm Beach, Fla., the other side is also fighting.
Don Black spends 16 hours each day on his laptop computer reading hundreds of derogatory Obama comments posted on Stormfront.org, a Web site with the motto "white pride world wide." Black, a former Ku Klux Klan leader, launched the site in 1995 to create a central meeting place for the white power movement. In the wake of Obama's securing enough delegates for the nomination, Stormfront, he says, has begun to fulfill his vision.
A site that drew a few thousand visitors per day in 2002 has expanded into Black's full-time job, attracting more than 40,000 unique users each day who can post on 54 different message boards, he said. Black has enlisted 40 moderators and his 19-year-old son to help run Stormfront.
Posters on Stormfront complain that Obama represents the end of "white rule" and the beginning of "multiculturalism." They fear that he will promote affirmative action, support illegal immigration and help render whites, who make up two-thirds of the U.S. population, "the new minority."
"I get nonstop e-mails and private message from new people who are mad as hell about the possibility of Obama being elected," said Black, a white power activist since the 1970s. "White people, for a long time, have thought of our government as being for us, and Obama is the best possible evidence that we've lost that. This is scaring a lot of people who maybe never considered themselves racists, and it's bringing them over to our side."
Almost all white power leaders said they are benefiting from the rise in recruits. David Duke, a former Louisiana state representative and a longtime advocate of racial segregation, said hits to his Web site have doubled and that more organizations now request him as a guest speaker. Dan Hill, who runs an extremist group in northern Michigan, says his cohorts are more willing to "take serious action" and plan rallies to protest politicians and immigration. Roper says White Revolution receives about 10 new applicants each week, more than double the norm.
The past few months reflect a recent trend of hate group growth, watch organizations said. Fueled primarily by anti-immigration sentiment, white supremacy groups have increased by nearly half since 2000, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors hate groups. The KKK has diversified regionally and now has about 150 chapters spread through 34 states.
"Our side does better when the public is being pressured, when gas prices are high, when housing is bad, when a black man might be president," said Ron Doggett, who runs a white power group called EURO in Richmond. "People start looking for solutions and changes, and we offer radical changes to what's going on."
The new interest has led to a debate among white supremacists about how to harness it. So far, groups have executed a few small efforts to disrupt Obama's campaign. A bar in Georgia sells T-shirts depicting Obama's campaign slogan under the image of a monkey. A New York group distributed bumper stickers that read: "Wake up white people." Hill, who trains in militia and survival techniques with his group in northern Michigan, drove to an Obama rally and tried to "fire people up, maybe get a riot started or something."
The groups also despise Republican Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) for his moderate views on immigration and his willingness to stick with the Iraq war. Better for Obama to win, leaders said, because his presidency could fuel a recruitment drive big enough to launch events that the white power movement has spent decades anticipating.
"One person put it this way: Obama for president paves the way for David Duke as president," said Duke, who ran for president in 1988, received less than 1 percent of the vote and has since spent much of his time in Europe. "This is finally going to make whites begin to realize it's a necessity to stick up for their own heritage, and that's going to make them turn to people like me. We're the next logical step."
There is also another possibility, of course, one that makes white power leaders despise Obama even more.
"What you try not to think about is that maybe if Obama wins, it will create a very demoralizing effect," Doggett said. "Maybe people see him in office, and it's like: 'That's it. It's just too late. Look at what's happened now. We've endured all these defeats, and we've still got a multicultural society.' And then there's just no future for our viewpoint."
I think for these racists groups, the fact that Obama has done the unexpected and gotten this far with more than a good chance to become President, brings out their sheer racist hatred. It's pretty damn sad, yet true, that to think in today's world there are people so full of hate because of one's race. Of course it's hard to tell how much the media is fueling the flames too.
Btw, and on an UP note for me anyway....I read that Obama will be in Las Vegas on Tuesday. So will I. I checked the Las Vegas Sun Times who said it had "no further details" and Obama's campaign site and didn't get any info. If anyone hears of exactly where he'll be (and when), please post. I'd just love to be able to go see him. It could be anywhere in LV, but hopefully in the strip area and if so, I'm there.
If white supremacist groups become more vocal, Obama's popularity will rise. Mainstream America is more turned off by bigots than ever before. Their message will be met with contempt, and sympathy for Obama.
If white supremacist groups become more vocal, Obama's popularity will rise. Mainstream America is more turned off by bigots than ever before. Their message will be met with contempt, and sympathy for Obama.
I hope you're correct, Klydon. But I take it you haven't been to the South recently. Racism and bigotry is alive and well, believe me.
olivant cleared it up for me. I should have said that there were no penalties for failing to register. But if you vote, of course, you need to register.
THE Democratic Party has long been mocked as the Mommy Party for its soft, nurturing governing style and its paralyzing patience for listening to dissent from every quarter, no matter how small or irrelevant.
The Republican Party is the Daddy Party - always tough, determined and willing to do whatever dirty work is necessary to get the job done.
Democrats want Oprah Winfrey. Republicans want Jack Bauer.
But now that Barack Obama has taken over the Democratic Party, he's bending these "genderizations."
He's taking Mommy out of the Mommy Party. Now, it's the party that strides past a female reporter and calls her "sweetie" to dismiss her silly little question.
And if you're wondering who's in charge, don't.
Within days of winning the nomination, Obama moved party headquarters to his home town of Chicago and started pushing party heads around, telling them they can't raise money from PACs and Washington lobbyists.
Yet when it comes to raising his own money, he tossed overboard his campaign promises to participate in the public financing system so he can maintain his massive cash advantage over the Republicans.
And in the ultimate display of testosterone, Obama unsheathed a new campaign emblem that looked emarkably like the presidential seal. (He has since dropped it.)
All-inclusive to the point of absurdity? Not anymore.
Obama operatives last week rooted out a couple of Muslim women and ordered them to keep away from the bleachers behind the candidate unless they removed their head scarves.
Coddler of criminals? Not anymore.
Obama - rated the most liberal member of the US Senate- now sides with the most conservative members of the Supreme Court in supporting a state's right to execute someone who rapes a child.
The candidate of anti-gun sissies? Nope.
Obama may as well have strapped on his John Wayne chaps and holster yesterday to announce his support of the Supreme Court's decision that the Second Amendment guaranteeing gun rights actually means what it says.
Are the Democrats now the party of states' rights, gun rights and the death penalty?
This wild election just keeps getting wilder.
As Obama moves rightward and gets tougher, Republicans are desperately trying to portray him as some sort of arrogant flip-flopper.
But these audacious moves by him are not signs of weakness; they're signs of a man who will win at any cost.
Isn't that what they used to say about the Clintons?
Obama deserves a lot of credit for the way he's handled his campaign. This is a "first" of sorts with his remarkable ability to make so much campaign money from the internet. Who would have ever thought such a thing?
He also is replying immediately to any attack on him and his family. And, how smart that he starts a special internet site (stopthesmears.com) to put some of the lies about him to rest (many still think he is Muslim for one thing. They believe every e-mail or report they hear).
I never would have thought that being a Community Adviser, as he was, would have proven a real asset to Obama in planning out a practically perfect campaign. I am impressed with the guy without a doubt.
You talking about the "smear" site? Because, yes I am pretty certain. I heard it reported on CNN/MSN when it first opened, they announced that Obama started a site like this. I had no reason to think it wasn't legit. Why do you think it might not be?
TIS
You got me wondering, so I did some checking. It's so hard these days to tell with all the fake websites. What do you think?
ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. (WOFL FOX 35, Orlando) -- The Orlando Police Department found dozens of city owned vehicles vandalized Saturday.
The vandal or vandals appear to have political intentions; most of the vehicles were spray painted with anti Obama sayings, with ‘Obama’ misspelled several times. Some of their vehicles had their gas caps removed.
Officials said that gas caps were removed from several of the vehicles and they aren’t sure if gas was stolen or if something could have been added to the tanks that will damage the engines.
The person or persons left a business card with political ramblings and other phrases such as ‘How ‘Bout them Gators’ and ‘Legalize Marijuana/ Stop Building Prisons’.
Police are investigating but have no leads and no estimate on the damages.
When you're poor, it can be hard to pay the bills. When you're rich, it's hard to keep track of all the bills that need paying. It's a lesson Cindy McCain learned the hard way when NEWSWEEK raised questions about an overdue property-tax bill on a La Jolla, Calif., property owned by a trust that she oversees. Mrs. McCain is a beer heiress with an estimated $100 million fortune and, along with her husband, she owns at least seven properties, including condos in California and Arizona.
San Diego County officials, it turns out, have been sending out tax notices on the La Jolla property, an oceanfront condo, for four years without receiving a response. County records show the bills, which were mailed to a Phoenix address associated with Mrs. McCain's trust, were returned by the post office. According to a McCain campaign aide, who requested anonymity when discussing a private matter, an elderly aunt of Mrs. McCain's lives in the condo, and the bank that manages the trust has not been receiving tax bills on the property. Shortly after NEWSWEEK inquired about the matter, the McCain aide e-mailed a receipt dated Friday, June 27, confirming payment by the trust to San Diego County in the amount of $6,744.42. County officials say the trust still owes an additional $1,742 for this year, an amount that is overdue and will go into default July 1. Told of the outstanding $1,742, the aide said: "The trust has paid all bills shown owing as of today and will pay all other bills due."
Dan McAllister, treasurer- tax collector for San Diego County, said that about 3 percent of San Diego's approximately 1 million property owners default on their property taxes each year. The county assesses a 1.5 percent penalty for each month that goes by unpaid and puts houses up for sale after five years. "We do hear an awful lot of excuses for why people don't pay," McAllister said. "Under the law, the property owner is responsible for keeping the address current. We're only as good as the information we are given."
In what looks like the same site RR posted, only an update, it says one side of cars were slurring Obama and the other side supported Hillary. Either these vandals want us to think it's Hillary supporters or it really is disgruntled HRC supporters.
In any case, and as sad as it sounds, I do hope they supply adequate protection for Obama. I honestly feel most people are perfectly fine with a black man running for President, but it's the crazies that we all know still exist, that worries me.
In what looks like the same site RR posted, only an update, it says one side of cars were slurring Obama and the other side supported Hillary. Either these vandals want us to think it's Hillary supporters or it really is disgruntled HRC supporters.
In any case, and as sad as it sounds, I do hope they supply adequate protection for Obama. I honestly feel most people are perfectly fine with a black man running for President, but it's the crazies that we all know still exist, that worries me.
TIS
http://www.wftv.com/news/16738560/detail.html
What's sad is, my parents really are interested in who his running mate will be, because as my old man put it..."someone will try to shoot him."
Speculation about Virginia Sen. Jim Webb's prospects as a candidate for the Democratic vice presidential nomination got a boost last week with the passage of an important GI benefits bill — a signal achievement for a freshman lawmaker that won him praise from both parties.
The artfully crafted bill allowed Democrats to tangibly support U.S. troops while still opposing the war. The gesture toward troops straining to cope with near-constant deployments also drew no small amount of Republican support.
KATIE FALKENBERG/THE WASHINGTON TIMES Sen. Jim Webb, Virginia Democrat, is said to be on the shortlist of running-mate possibilities for his party's presidential nominee. It's a position the former Republican he says he doesn't want.
If President Bush signs the bill as expected, it will be one of the most significant pieces of legislation approved by Congress this year.
Just two years ago, the Democrat-turned-Republican-turned-Democrat was waging a long-shot bid for Senate against popular Republican incumbent Sen. George F. Allen — having switched parties in order to mount a campaign against the war in Iraq.
Today, the former Marine commander in Vietnam — where he earned the Navy Cross and the Silver Star, among many other medals — is increasingly seen on the shortlist of potential running mates for Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois. It's a posting he swears he doesn't want.
In an interview Friday with The Washington Times, Mr. Webb focused on his legislative priorities.
"I hope that the way we have worked across the aisle on this legislation will be useful as we work on other issues," Mr. Webb said. "I think it's a good feeling when you can work together and get something like this done."
Favorable reviews for the bill's passage abound for the 62-year-old best-selling novelist, who also added to his credentials with the recent publication of a political book, "A Time to Fight."
For the former Navy secretary under President Reagan to shepherd the measure through both chambers with no prior legislative experience makes the feat even more remarkable.
"It wouldn't happen without his tenacity and willingness to push this proposal all the way to the end," said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat. "It's very impressive."
Mr. Webb's bill provides educational benefits to Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans who served after 9/11, similar to those given to veterans returning from World War II. It provides full tuition, as well as money for fees, books and housing, at a public college in a veteran's state of residence.
The bill — which had nearly 60 co-sponsors in the Senate, 302 in the House and will cost an estimated $62 billion over 10 years — also allows additional payments of up to $1,200 for tutorial assistance. As many as 450,000 veterans are expected to take advantage of the benefits offered by the bill.
The Senate passed the bill 92-6 Thursday as part of a war funding bill. The House — following Democrats' concession that the benefits can be transferred to a recipient's spouse or children — approved it the week before with a 416-12 vote.
Mr. Webb initially had to spar with the White House, Pentagon and presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain on aspects of the measure.
Mr. McCain, of Arizona, a fellow Vietnam veteran, initially introduced his own GI package but has since come out in support of Mr. Webb's. The White House, citing the addition of the transferability option, said Thursday that President Bush would not veto it.
Sen. John W. Warner, Virginia Republican, who is retiring at the end of this term, said Mr. Webb's achievement with the GI bill will stand as a "hallmark."
"He came to the United States Senate, and he indicated his top priority was to get a revision of the existing framework of laws governing the GI bill because he felt very strongly, based on his long and heroic service to this country in uniform, that we owe this generation everything that previous generations had received by virtue of educational benefits," Mr. Warner said.
Mr. Webb said speculation about a spot on Mr. Obama's ticket is "totally apart" from his GI Bill.
"[The bill] is just something that needs to be done," Mr. Webb said.
Some who say Mr. Webb could appeal to blue-collar workers alienated by Mr. Obama and help the nominee carry Virginia, which has not voted for a Democratic presidential candidate since 1964.
Those opposed to his selection say the senator is too brash and averse to the campaign trail to be a successful sidekick. In a June 9 piece posted on www.slate.com, Timothy Noah called Mr. Webb "a bit of a blowhard" with a "volcanic temperament."
"Nominating Webb isn't worth the risk that he'll alienate important constituencies, embarrass Obama, or break with him outright, as John Nance Garner did with Franklin Roosevelt," Mr. Noah wrote. "He's trouble, and Obama's already had too much of that."
Obama spokesman Michael Rodriguez said the Illinois Democrat "greatly respects the extraordinary service and sacrifices that Senator Webb has made for our country as a Marine, Navy secretary, and U.S. senator."
"Early on, Senator Webb recognized the need to improve college opportunities for our returning service members, and he assembled a bipartisan coalition of senators to introduce and pass a 21st-century GI Bill," Mr. Rodriguez said. "Senator Obama is honored to serve with such a tireless advocate for our service members and veterans."
Approval of the GI Bill also represents the culmination of a campaign promise made by Mr. Webb during his Senate bid.
Mr. Webb's son, Jimmy Webb, is a Marine who has been deployed to Iraq multiple times, and the senator has noted that both he and Mr. McCain received their post-Vietnam educations thanks to the current GI Bill.
Aided by several of Mr. Allen's missteps, Mr. Webb earned a razor-thin victory in the November 2006 Senate election despite critics who cited excerpts from his writings to contend the former Navy secretary did not respect women.
His victory secured the transfer of power in Congress — one reason Democrats chose him to rebut the president's State of the Union address the following January.
"Most people who come from [outside of Congress] chafe at the pace and the process that the Founding Fathers set up," said Brad Fitch, chief executive officer of Knowlegis — a company that provides power rankings for congressional members at the Web site www.congress.org. "Here's a guy who not only didn't chafe at it, he thrived at it."
Meanwhile, Wesley Clark is also pimping himself for running mate status with this op-ed piece...
Bush's Third Term
by Wesley Clark
This year, we're facing the most important election in a generation. As Americans, we must ask ourselves which candidate will bring about the change our country so desperately needs. In my opinion, Barack Obama is the only candidate with the judgment to move our country forward.
The disastrous consequences of George W. Bush's poor judgment over these last 7 1/2 years are all too apparent. Now, John McCain is offering 4 more years of Bush -- while Barack Obama offers the change in direction our country so desperately needs.
Barack had the judgment to oppose the war in Iraq before it began, and he is ready to bring our troops home and end the occupation of Iraq in a responsible way. John McCain has said that American troops should be willing to stay in Iraq for 100 years.
Barack will engage in the diplomacy that is necessary to bring stability to the Middle East. Just like George Bush, John McCain repeatedly resorts to saber-rattling and threats about invading Iran while revealing a startling ignorance of the basic issues that define the politics of the region. Barack knows we have to invest in renewable energy to end America's dependence on foreign oil and fight global warming. And like George Bush, John McCain is in the pocket of big oil.
It's about judgment -- and I think the answer is clear.
While I respect John McCain's service, I know exactly what he stands for -- Bush's third term. And in national security terms, John McCain is largely untested and untried. He's never been responsible for policy formulation. John McCain is calculating that he will use the national security debate to his advantage. He's wrong.
Like Bush, McCain has always been for the use of force, force, and more force. In my experience, the only time to use force is as a last resort. When John McCain talks about throwing Russia out of the G8 and makes irresponsible comments about bombing Iran, he reveals his own disrespect for the office of the presidency.
And while he's all too willing to continue putting our troops in harm's way, John McCain initially refused to support providing benefits like the new GI Bill to our veterans because he believes that providing good education opportunities to our troops will hurt retention. That's ridiculous.
We need new leadership in the White House -- not George Bush's third term.
Last week I sat down with Barack Obama. I know he's the right person to lead our country forward. Now we need to come together and support his campaign for change.
As I see the sacrifices our troops and their families make every day; as I see Americans buckling under the weight of record high gas prices; and as I see families struggling with sky rocketing health care costs, I know this:
We simply can't afford another 4 years of the McCain-Bush-Cheney agenda.
There is a lot of speculation on Obama's running mate, and I know Webb is very popular among the bloggers. I am only recently learning more about him. I also know some are suggestion Kathleen Sebulus (?) I forgot what state she is from. Claire McCaskill is another name that comes up. Personally, I don't think Obama will pick a woman (unless it's HRC and I doubt that).
I always thought Biden would be a good choice, but I know just a little more about him than the others. He has foreign experience and is older, which may be a plus to counter the two areas people seem to think Obama is inexperienced in.
But yea, I do find myself paying attention just a little more than usual as to whom the VP might be. Even in McCain's case, and considering his age, it's a good thing to consider. At least, speaking for myself, I find myself more interested than usual in who the VP nominees will be. Normally, I don't really pay that much attention to VP.
Former Indiana governor in a state that usually goes Republican...
I think that is who he will pick. If he picks any woman other than Hillary then her supporters are going to be upset. If he picks someone older like Sam Nunn he emphasizes his youth and inexperience to his disadvantage. Webb is a good choice, but a bit of a loose cannon given to making outrageous comments.
Bayh supported Clinton, he could deliver Indiana and possibly tip Ohio , and assuming Obama carries Illinois, then the Reps are in deep trouble.
In any case, and as sad as it sounds, I do hope they supply adequate protection for Obama. I honestly feel most people are perfectly fine with a black man running for President, but it's the crazies that we all know still exist, that worries me.
Does anybody else feel if Obama wins be assinated?
In any case, and as sad as it sounds, I do hope they supply adequate protection for Obama. I honestly feel most people are perfectly fine with a black man running for President, but it's the crazies that we all know still exist, that worries me.
Does anybody else feel if Obama wins be assinated?
He and his family have had secret service protection longer than any other candidates, and apparently there are many threats that have been made.
If Obama is assassinated, African Americans wouldn't do anything about avenging it other then moaning and griping.
Is'nt Obama Muslim? I heard he practices it. Would you as an American allow a Muslim to be your President?
Obama is Christian. There have been many rumors and distortions concerning his faith.
As to your second question, personally I would not disqualify a candidate from consideration because he/she was Muslim (though that person would not likely be elected). Nor would I dismiss someone, who was agnostic or atheist. I'd draw the line at a Satan worshiper because I don't want any goats burning on the White House lawn.
Can't find the link, but here are some interesting poll results from Canada, where The Strategic Counsel asked 1000 Canadians which Canadian/ American leader they preferred. The results:
1. Barack Obama: 26 per cent 2. Stephen Harper: 21 per cent 3. Hillary Clinton: 16 per cent 4. Jack Layton: 9 per cent 5. Gilles Duceppe: 6 per cent 6. Stephane Dion: 5 per cent 7. John McCain: 3 per cent
Other Useless Polling Data
-82% of Canadians now think Iraq was stupid, compared to 51% who wanted us to go there in 2003, 54% of Americans think it was stupid too and 59% applaud Canada's decision not to enter -45% of Americans think Canada's health care system is better (42% preferred America's) and 91% of Canadians also felt that way -51% of Canadians would call themselves liberal or very liberal, just 37% of Americans say the same -57% of Americans say they are either conservative or very conservative, 41% of Canadians say the same -Just 23% of Canadians attend religious services weekly, 46% of Americans do -68% of Canada now supports gay marriage, up 13% since 2005, whereas 44% of Americans support it (that's pretty good considering)
Surprising many Republican insiders, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is at the top of the vice presidential prospect list for John McCain. But lack of personal chemistry could derail the pick.
“Romney as favorite” is the hot buzz in Republican circles, and top party advisers said the case is compelling.
Campaign insiders say McCain plans to name his running mate very shortly after Barack Obama does, as part of what one campaign planner called a “bounce-mitigation strategy.”
The Democratic convention is in late August, a week ahead of the Republican convention. That means McCain can size up the opposing ticket before locking in his own.
The McCain campaign declined to comment, saying McCain has made it clear they are not to discuss the matter.
One of the chief reasons the Massachusetts governor is looking so attractive is his ability to raise huge amounts of money quickly through his former business partners and from fellow members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, the Mormons.
McCain sources tell Politico that they believe Romney could raise $50 million in 60 days. One close Romney adviser said it could even be $60 million.
Romney’s other advantages, according to people involved in McCain’s screening process:
— Squeaky-clean and fully vetted by the national media.
— Has presidential looks and bearing and immediately would be a strong campaigner who could be trusted to stay on message.
— Family’s Michigan roots would help in a swing state that went Democratic in 2004.
But there’s one big problem: Despite the buddy-picture choreography of a McCain-Romney campaign swing, McCain remains less than enamored with Romney.
And it’s not just the candidate. Some of McCain’s closest confidants evince little enthusiasm for Romney, feelings that are owed in part to lingering bad blood from the GOP primary, a genuine skepticism that such a conventional pick could bolster the ticket in a grim year for the GOP and concerns about whether his Mormon faith could imperil McCain in Southern states that Obama hopes to put into play.
McCain sources also say he’ll pick his vice presidential candidate based more on ability to govern than ability to help in the election.
So two other names are in the top tier:
— Rob Portman, a former congressman from Ohio, member of House leadership, U.S. Trade Ambassador and White House budget director.
— Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), who would delight conservatives and is at the top of the list of the party’s prospects for the presidential race in 2012 or 2016. He was described to Politico by a McCain confidant as a possible “compromise” if the senator can’t stomach picking Romney.
Then there’s a second tier of candidates who are less likely, but possible: former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge, who dropped out of the top tier because of recent revelations about his lobbying; Florida Gov. Charlie Crist; Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty; and Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.), who is one of McCain’s most energetic and successful fundraisers.
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal is frequently included in veep news stories but was not mentioned by McCain insiders. Their view is that his youth would accentuate, not mitigate, the age issue.
Especially if McCain is far behind later this summer, he could do something truly unorthodox like pick his strong supporter Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.), who was the Democrats’ vice presidential candidate back in 2000.
Party leaders don’t expect that. But McCain remains, after all, a maverick.
-45% of Americans think Canada's health care system is better (42% preferred America's) and 91% of Canadians also felt that way
I was speaking with an orthopedic surgeon before a deposition last week. This doctor has spoken nationally on panels and at symposiums about healthcare. He said he has no problem with a national healthcare system as long as he does not have to deal with a multitude of forms and paperwork.
He also spoke about Canada's system, which, he says, leaves many patients on waiting lists for surgeries and procedures that should be performed as soon as possible. As a result, many Canadiens with money come to the US to have their gall bladders removed.
As a result, many Canadiens with money come to the US to have their gall bladders removed.
For some reason, this struck me as rather funny. "Honey, let's go to New York, take in a show, and stop at the hospital on the way home and leave them my gall bladder."
As a result, many Canadiens with money come to the US to have their gall bladders removed.
For some reason, this struck me as rather funny. "Honey, let's go to New York, take in a show, and stop at the hospital on the way home and leave them my gall bladder."
It does look funny. I should have added, "whether they want to or not."
After years of attacking Democrats with relative impunity for their supposed moral failings, Evangelical leader James Dobson surely didn't expect to suffer much of a backlash when he trained his sights on Barack Obama. Over the years, the party had practically cowered in fear and gone into radio silence when the head of Focus on the Family targeted one of its standard-bearers. So in a campaign that has already proved to be anything but predictable, the counterattack on Dobson this week epitomized the new, fraught political climate that Christian Right leaders like himself face.
Earlier this week, Dobson used his popular Christian radio program to denounce a 2006 speech the Illinois Senator gave about the place of religion in public life. He took personal offense at the fact that Obama had referred to him by name in the same breath as Al Sharpton, using the two to illustrate the range of differences that exist within Christianity. But he also expressed outrage at Obama's assertion that individuals can be moral without being religious. "He oughta read the Bible," said Dobson. Obama, he charged, was "deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview."
But less than 24 hours after Dobson's radio broadcast, www.jamesdobsondoesntspeakforme.com was up and running on the Web. The site displays both Dobson's charges against Obama and Obama's own quotes from the 2006 speech. It also features a statement condemning Dobson that reads in part: "James Dobson doesn't speak for me when he uses religion as a wedge to divide; he doesn't speak for me when he speaks as the final arbiter on the meaning of the Bible."
The website was the handiwork of a coalition of Christian leaders headed by Kirbyjon Caldwell, the Texas pastor and Bush family friend who led the benediction at George W. Bush's first Inauguration. The group came up with the idea for the site a while ago, and figured it was just a matter of time before the good Dr. Dobson would give them an opportunity to unveil it. And they're not the only ones pushing back against the Christian Right leader's broadsides. The Matthew 25 Network is a political action committee formed in early June by Mara Vanderslice, a Democratic strategist who oversaw religious outreach on the 2004 Kerry campaign and remembers well the perils of remaining silent in the face of attacks on that candidate's Catholic faith. Within hours of Dobson's program, the PAC had raised $4,000 for radio ads that will run next week in the Colorado Springs market, Dobson's home turf. Vanderslice and her co-producers at the Eleison Group, a new Democratic consulting firm founded by Hillary Clinton's former religion adviser, Burns Strider, plan to expand to other stations that carry Dobson's Focus program.
It's hard out there for a Christian Right leader. Last December came and went with barely a peep about a grinchy liberal "War on Christmas." The Republican nominee, John McCain, has refused to make the pilgrimage to Colorado Springs, telling the Focus on the Family leader to come to him instead. But the biggest problem is that Democrats — and Barack Obama in particular — are determined to make a play for a bloc of voters over whom Dobson and his colleagues have traditionally maintained exclusive control. And those voters seem willing to listen.
Obama's willingness to talk about his faith, including his decision to become a Christian as an adult, has resonated even with religious conservatives who disagree with him politically. Richard Cizik of the National Association of Evangelicals was part of a gathering of Christian leaders Obama convened earlier this month, and he says, "There was no way I could leave that room not knowing this was a fellow brother in Christ." The Democratic candidate has also been an outspoken critic of what could be termed "certainty" theology — the idea that real Christians have no doubts about their rightness.
This language, combined with the Obama campaign's aggressive efforts to reach out to religious voters, has made it hard for the Christian Right to paint Obama as a secular bogeyman. His opponents have numerous lines of attack — is he a secret Muslim? A black nationalist Christian? A wishy-washy liberal Protestant? — but all seem to accept the basic premise that Obama is religious, which is key in a country where 70% of voters say they want their President to be a person of faith, according to Pew Research polls.
Obama's theological beliefs are clearly more liberal than those on the Christian right. But it's the beliefs of the latter that are fast becoming a minority. A new Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life survey of 35,000 Americans reports that 70% agree with the statement "Many religions can lead to eternal life," including 57% of Evangelicals. No less a figure than George W. Bush responded "no" when asked in 1999 if he believed heaven is open only to Christians. Those evolving, more relatively open-minded attitudes are one reason Dobson's organization has steadily lost members and revenue over the past five years.
Dobson and his colleagues have also been stymied by a new generation of Evangelical leaders who stubbornly refuse to join the political fray. When Saddleback pastor Rick Warren welcomes Obama to his church with open arms or Mike Huckabee declares that Obama's religion and his former pastor should be irrelevant issues in the campaign, they undercut the criticisms made by their elders in the Christian Right. In 2004, there was near-universal agreement by religious conservatives that their "non-negotiable" issues were limited to abortion, stem-cell research and gay marriage. But Warren and others now insist that the environment and poverty and health care reform are legitimate concerns as well, and the people in the pews increasingly agree with them.
So it's no surprise that the old lions of the Christian Right are suddenly sputtering. "This is raising my blood pressure," admitted the normally calm, Mr. Rogers-sounding Dobson at the end of his radio show on Tuesday. Just a few weeks earlier, the conservative columnist and former Moral Majority vice president Cal Thomas wrote an essay calling Obama a "false prophet." Placing Obama's "Christianity" in quotes, Thomas charged that the candidate's statements about religion — including his belief that non-Christians can get to heaven — prove that he does not understand what it means to be a Christian.
But if the grassroots reaction is any indication, the attacks on Obama have been largely self-defeating. After Thomas' column ran, dozens of regional papers that carry it were flooded with letters to the editor — and they were hardly in liberal bastions. In places like Augusta, Georgia, and Lubbock, Texas, people wrote in to criticize Thomas' attack on Obama. "To suggest that anyone is not a Christian because they do not adhere to Cal Thomas' narrow interpretation of what a Christian should believe," wrote one Texan, "is extremely intolerant, ignorant, and downright insulting." Barack Obama couldn't have said it any better himself, and this election year he may not have to.
In 2004, Republicans demanded fuller disclosure about the considerable fortune of Teresa Heinz Kerry, wife of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry.
Now, the GOP is reaping what it sowed.
Having established a recent precedent for increased scrutiny of spousal finances, the party now finds its own presumptive nominee, John McCain, under an unwanted spotlight over the fortune of his wife, Cindy.
Already, Democrats have blasted Cindy McCain’s less-than-full financial disclosure, asserting that it calls into question John McCain’s commitment to transparency and suggests that he may be “hiding” information about how his efforts in Congress benefited his family.
Worse though, the burgeoning focus on Cindy McCain’s finances could attract attention to an aspect of the Arizona senator’s family life that is unlikely to be advantageous to him on the campaign trail: the affluent lifestyle and free-spending habits of the McCain clan.
Cindy McCain and the McCain children are the beneficiaries of a beer distributing fortune amassed by her parents and estimated to be worth $100 million or more. Though the McCains maintain separate finances, Cindy McCain’s family fortune has boosted her husband’s political career at critical junctures, helping to fund his inaugural 1982 run for Congress and helping to subsidize his current presidential campaign when it all but went broke last year.
In recent years, a Politico analysis found, the McCain family appears to have tapped its fortune liberally.
While Cindy McCain, her dependent children and the trusts and companies they control made as much as $29 million — and likely substantially more — from her family’s business interests from 2004 through last year, data from the Internal Revenue Service, the U.S. Senate, the U.S. Office of Government Ethics and the Center for Responsive Politics also reveals that they spent $11 million purchasing five condominiums for the family, hired additional household help and racked up progressively larger credit card bills almost every year.
Their credit card bills peaked between January 2007 and May 2008, during which time Cindy McCain charged as much as $500,000 in a single month on one American Express card and $250,000 on another, while one of their two dependent children had an AmEx card with a monthly balance as large as $50,000.
A campaign aide who did not want to be identified discussing the McCains’ personal finances stressed that the credit card balances are “not ongoing debt.”
The aide pointed out that the disclosure forms on which the credit card liabilities were listed ask respondents to indicate ranges for the largest balances owed during the reporting period.
“It has been the McCains’ practice and procedure, as previously indicated, to pay off the balance of credit cards on a monthly basis, so they do not carry credit card debt,” the aide said in a statement.
The aide did not answer questions about what Cindy McCain or her children purchased with the cards and declined to make either she or her husband available for an interview about their finances or spending habits.
Cindy McCain released only the first two pages of her 2006 tax return. She received an extension until Oct. 15 to file her 2007 returns, and the aide said “she will make the decision whether to release her 2007 return at the appropriate time.”
During the 2004 presidential campaign, Teresa Heinz Kerry, whose fortune was estimated to be worth more than $750 million, eventually released comparably limited information about her finances after repeated demands from Republicans who asserted the public’s right to know because they said her finances were intertwined with those of her husband’s presidential campaign. The Kerry campaign had benefited from a $6.4 million personal loan John Kerry secured using, as collateral, equity in a Boston townhouse the couple jointly owned.
Likewise, John McCain’s presidential campaign benefited from Cindy McCain’s fortune, using a legal loophole to travel the country in a jet owned by her company for cut-rate fares.
That revelation, combined with recent reports about Cindy McCain’s hefty credit card tabs and nearly $7,000 in unpaid property taxes on a condo owned by a trust she oversees have drawn even closer scrutiny to the McCain family finances.
While John McCain’s campaign spending is a matter of public record, his family’s personal spending is not, and for the most part there’s only anecdotal information available.
For instance, in the June issue of Vogue magazine, Cindy McCain said she favors suits made by the German designer Escada, which typically retail for around $3,000 a pop. If she becomes first lady, she told Vogue she may switch to an American designer, possibly Carolina Herrera, whose suits are comparably pricey.
But one area in which Cindy McCain’s spending — and its impact on her husband’s lifestyle — can be chronicled is real estate.
Property records show that trusts and corporations controlled by her and her children spent nearly $11 million between the summer of 2004 and February 2008 on three condominiums in Phoenix and a pair outside San Diego.
One of the Phoenix condos, a 6,600-square-foot unit for which Cindy McCain’s trust paid $4.7 million in October 2006, became Cindy McCain’s primary residence after the trust sold the couple’s Phoenix house, which she had purchased from her father for $3.2 million in December 2006.
Less than one year later, a corporation controlled by Cindy McCain bought another condo on a lower floor in the same building for $830,000.
And, in between, the corporation plunked down $700,000 for a 1,900-square foot, three-bedroom loft condo for her then-22-year-old daughter Meghan McCain, who was moving back to Phoenix after graduating from New York’s Columbia University.
Cindy McCain, through another family corporation, spent about $4.7 million in 2004 and 2008 on two condos in an exclusive building in Coronado, Calif., an affluent San Diego suburb noted for its high percentage of military retirees.
In her recent Vogue interview, conducted from the newer Coronado condo, McCain explained that her husband, a Navy veteran, initially wasn’t keen on the idea of a pied-à-terre in Coronado.
"When I bought the first one, my husband, who is not a beach person, said, 'Oh, this is such a waste of money; the kids will never go,'” she told Vogue. “Then it got to the point where they used it so much I couldn't get in the place. So I bought another one.”
Through her trusts and other corporate entities, Cindy McCain also owns another three properties: a scenic ranch outside Sedona, Ariz., where John McCain has entertained staff, prospective running mates and political reporters; a three-bedroom Arlington, Va., condo that’s been John McCain’s Washington-area residence since 1993 and the La Jolla, Calif., condo on which the back taxes were due.
The McCains increased their budget for household employees from $184,000 in 2006 to $273,000 in 2007, according to John McCain’s tax returns.
The additional cash supports an “increase in the number of employees,” said the McCain aide, who did not say whether the growing staff stemmed from the addition of new properties to the family’s real estate portfolio.
Other than the primary Phoenix residence, the aide said the new condos were “purchased for investment and are available for personal use by the McCain family.”
The recent growth in the family’s credit card bills could stem from furnishing, decorating and moving into the new condos, said Christopher Cordaro, a wealth manager at RegentAtlantic Capital in New Jersey.
After reviewing the McCains’ taxes and disclosures for Politico, he declared their finances in ship-shape and their spending understandable when “put in perspective that the McCains are very wealthy.”
“You certainly wouldn’t see the average person ringing up that large of a monthly balance,” he said. “But if you’re worth $100 million, the amount they’re spending is not inordinate. I’m sure that at their level, they’re putting lots of stuff on their credit card.”
Judging by their finances and spending, Cordaro asserted the McCains likely qualified for top-tier charge accounts loaded with benefits.
In addition to the American Express cards — which carry no monthly interest charges — Cindy and John McCain jointly hold a credit card through Chase with a steep 25.99 percent interest rate. It had a top balance as large as $15,000 last year.
John McCain has his own credit card, his aide said, but its balance for years has not exceeded the $10,000 threshold that triggers the reporting requirement for listing liabilities on Senate or executive branch personal financial disclosure statements.
The last year John McCain reported holding a credit card with such a balance was 2004, when he had an American Express Platinum card with a top balance of $15,000. Cindy McCain also had a Platinum AmEx that year, with a top balance of $100,000, as well as a Business Platinum account with a top balance of $50,000, and charge cards from Saks Fifth Avenue, MasterCard and Visa with top monthly balances between $15,000 and $50,000 and interest rates between 10.49 and 24.49 percent.
And in 2004, one of their dependent children had an AmEx Business Platinum card with a top monthly balance of $50,000. The McCain aide wouldn’t identify which child got the card, but their oldest, Meghan, turned 20 that year.
WASHINGTON (AP) - People would rather barbecue burgers with Barack Obama than with John McCain.
While many are still deciding who should be president, by 52 percent to 45 percent they would prefer having Obama than McCain to their summer cookout, according to an Associated Press-Yahoo News poll released Wednesday.
Men are about evenly divided between the two while women prefer Obama by 11 percentage points. Whites prefer McCain, minorities Obama. And Obama is a more popular guest with younger voters while McCain does best with the oldest.
Having Obama to a barbecue would be like a relaxed family gathering, while inviting McCain "would be more like a retirement party than something fun," said Wesley Welbourne, 38, a systems engineer from Washington, D.C.
Party label means a lot, with three-quarters of Democrats picking the Democrat Obama and the same number of Republicans picking McCain, a Republican. Independents are about evenly split.
"John and I would probably have a lot to talk about," said Republican Michael Mullen, 53, of Merrimac, Mass., like McCain a Navy veteran.
One in six people saying they'd vote for McCain prefer Obama as their barbecue guest; just one in 20 Obama backers would invite McCain.
The AP-Yahoo News survey of 1,759 adults was conducted online by Knowledge Networks from June 13-23 and had an overall margin of sampling error of plus or minus 2.3 percentage points. The margin of sampling error for subgroups was larger
ha ha I hadn't seen this poll. I'd rather BBQ with Obama too, but please, let's not vote by BBQ. Last time people voted for the guy they wanted to have a beer with and look what happened? Sad thing is, some people vote based on these things.
I'll be happy to get a President who can put a sentence together and has the smarts to start to clean up the mess that the village idiot created.
ha ha I hadn't seen this poll. I'd rather BBQ with Obama too, but please, let's not vote by BBQ. Last time people voted for the guy they wanted to have a beer with and look what happened? Sad thing is, some people vote based on these things.
I'll be happy to get a President who can put a sentence together and has the smarts to start to clean up the mess that the village idiot created.
TIS
Or at least someone who at least seems competent.
BTW TIS, you heard about that racist Japanese TV ad that got pulled?
ha ha I hadn't seen this poll. I'd rather BBQ with Obama too, but please, let's not vote by BBQ. Last time people voted for the guy they wanted to have a beer with and look what happened? Sad thing is, some people vote based on these things.
I'll be happy to get a President who can put a sentence together and has the smarts to start to clean up the mess that the village idiot created.
TIS
Or at least someone who at least seems competent.
BTW TIS, you heard about that racist Japanese TV ad that got pulled?
RR
Yes, I saw it tonight on cable news. I am really really surprised. I wonder if it's different in the Japanese culture or what?? They had interpreted brief interviews with Japanese people who didn't seem understand why it might be offensive. So I don't know. But yea, if that was a McCain ad, he'd be totally on the sh*t list.
Btw, did you hear about Obama supposedly refusing to "fist bump" with some little kid? It was totally misreported. They had a picture/video. Today they played it and the kid asked Obama to autograph his hand with a marker and Obama said something to the effect of "you're mom will wonder how your hand got so black" and he wouldn't do it. The media was way off. One station (I'll guess FOX news) reported that Obama refused perhaps because he didn't want the nation to think it was some kind of terrorist sign.
ha ha I hadn't seen this poll. I'd rather BBQ with Obama too, but please, let's not vote by BBQ. Last time people voted for the guy they wanted to have a beer with and look what happened? Sad thing is, some people vote based on these things.
I'll be happy to get a President who can put a sentence together and has the smarts to start to clean up the mess that the village idiot created.
TIS
That's an interesting poll. While I plan to vote for Obama, I think I'd have more fun at a barbecue with McCain, who would have a lot more interesting stories. Obama might be a wonderful president, but he might be a little too stiff and less relaxed at a bbq.
My daughter graduated from high school last Sunday. The valedictorian gave his speech, and in it he said that while he admired his classmates that won all sorts of awards and scholarships, he wanted to remind the C students that, just like George W. Bush, they too could be President of the USA one day.
Who would I rather barbecue with?? Definitely Obama. On the other hand, the McCains are wealthier, so they might bring over some money and try to buy some votes.
WASHINGTON (AP) — If the presidential election goes to the dogs, John McCain is looking like best in show.
From George Washington's foxhound "Drunkard" to George W. Bush's terriers "Barney" and "Miss Beazley," pets are a longtime presidential tradition for which the presumed Republican nominee seems well prepared, with more than a dozen.
The apparent Democratic nominee Barack Obama, on the other hand, doesn't have a pet at home.
The pet-owning public seems to have noticed the difference.
An AP-Yahoo! News poll found that pet owners favor McCain over Obama 42 percent to 37 percent, with dog owners particularly in McCain's corner.
"I think a person who owns a pet is a more compassionate person — caring, giving, trustworthy. I like pet owners," said Janet Taylor of Plymouth, Mass.
Taylor, who described herself as a retired stay-at-home wife, owns two cats, Lady Jane Taylor and Mr. Tommy Katz.
Richard Powell, 79, of Spokane, Wash., whose dog passed away last fall, said if a person owns a pet that "tells you that they're responsible at least for something, for the care of something."
He said pet ownership wouldn't make a difference in his vote, but if a president owns a pet, then "I'm glad to know they like animals."
Christina Duffney, a spokeswoman for the American Kennel Club, said "you usually connect with things that you're familiar with, so that could be a part of" why pet owners lean toward McCain.
Well, if voters identify with a guy who owns pets, it's easy to see why they'd like the Arizona senator.
He has a veritable menagerie, including Sam the English springer spaniel, Coco the mutt, turtles Cuff and Link, Oreo the black and white cat, a ferret, three parakeets and a bunch of saltwater fish.
On the other hand, the poll found that among people who don't have pets, Obama leads McCain 48 percent to 34 percent.
But that still leaves McCain looking strong, since the majority of homes have a pet.
The American Pet Product Manufacturers Association estimates that 63 percent of American homes include a pet, including 88 million cats and 75 million dogs.
Both of those groups lean toward McCain: 43 percent to 34 percent for dog owners and 41 percent to 38 percent for cat owners.
While he doesn't currently have a pet, Obama has reportedly promised his daughters a dog once the campaign is over.
In a spirit of helpfulness, the American Kennel Club is collecting opinions as to what kind of dog Obama should get.
There are more than 150 breeds available, but not every one is suitable for every family because of exercise needs, allergies, personalities and other reasons.
So the AKC has narrowed the choices down to five breeds and is asking the public to vote at www.presidentialpup.com with voting to continue until mid-August.
Their suggestions: Bichon Frise, Chinese crested, poodle, soft coated Wheaten Terrier or miniature Schnauzer.
According to the Presidential Pets Museum there are no records of family pets in the administrations of James K. Polk, Millard Fillmore, Franklin Pierce and Chester Arthur. Fillmore, however, was a founding member of the Buffalo, N.Y., chapter of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.
President Andrew Johnson reportedly left flour out at night for a family of mice living in the White House, though it's not clear if that counts as having a pet.
Here's a look at the poll results:
— All pet owners: McCain, 42 percent; Obama 37 percent; Nader, 3 percent; other, 3 percent; undecided, 14 percent. Margin of error, plus or minus 2.9 points.
— Do not own a pet: Obama, 48 percent; McCain, 34 percent; Nader, 3 percent; other, 3 percent; undecided, 12 percent. Margin of error, 4.1 points.
The population breakdown of who has pets and who doesn't also may be a factor.
For example, the poll found 47 percent of whites own dogs, compared with just 24 percent of blacks. Whites tend to favor McCain, while blacks overwhelmingly favor Obama.
Some 64 percent of dog owners are married, slightly higher than the overall population. The poll found 47 percent of married people own dogs, compared with 39 percent of non-married people. Married people tend to favor McCain.
The AP-Yahoo! News poll is part of an ongoing study that tracks the attitudes and opinions of a group of more than 2,000 Americans to see how their political views evolve over the course of the election campaign.
The AP-Yahoo! News survey of 1,759 adults was conducted from June 13-23 and had an overall margin of sampling error of plus or minus 2.3 percentage points. The margin of sampling error for population subgroups is larger.
The poll was conducted over the Internet by Knowledge Networks, which initially contacted people using traditional telephone polling methods and followed with online interviews. People chosen for the study who had no Internet access were given it free.
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has done a far more effective job than Republican John McCain in recent weeks moving himself to the middle in the minds of voters, according to the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone surveys.
During the Primary campaign season, Obama was viewed as politically liberal by an ever-increasing number of voters that grew to 67% by early June. However, since clinching the nomination, he has reversed that trend and is now seen as liberal by only 56%.
Twenty-two percent (22%) characterize the Democrat as Very Liberal, down from 36% early last month.
McCain similarly has been seen as politically conservative by more and more voters, also hitting 67% a month ago, but he is still viewed that way by 66%. While19% saw him as Very Conservative in early June, that figure now has risen to 28%.
The Democratic candidate is viewed as a political moderate by 27%, up from 22% three weeks earlier, while McCain is seen as a moderate by 23%, down from 26% in the survey at the beginning of June.
Historically Democratic presidential candidates veer to the left politically and Republicans to the right during the party primary season, but once they have secured the nomination, the candidates of both parties begin courting more moderate voters in the center. Perhaps as a reflection of what the new numbers say, McCain, who has been forced to keep courting conservatives in his own party, last week shook up the highest levels of his campaign staff.
Obama, at the same time, has been working with his former rival, Hillary Clinton, to help retire her campaign debt and to heal the party for the fall elections.
Since Clinton quit the race, Obama has experienced a modest bounce in the polls and now maintains a modest lead over McCain nationally in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll.
The new numbers illustrate the continuing volatility of the current election cycle. Four years ago, President Bush was viewed as a conservative by 48% of voters in January, a figure that rose steadily to 64% by Election Day. Sen. John Kerry, his Democratic opponent, was seen as politically liberal by 37% at the beginning of the year and climbed to 53% in November.
Obama and McCain have far exceeded those numbers in terms of shifts in voter perception already, with four months until Election Day. Rasmussen Reports will continue to track this data on a weekly basis. Premium Members can review crosstabs each week. Summary updates can be found on the Obama-McCain By The Numbers page.
The shift for Obama is clear through the weekly surveys taken in June. Twenty-nine percent (29%) of voters surveyed June 7-8 rated Obama Very Liberal; by June 28-29, that number had fallen 5 percentage points to 22%. In the same time period, the number of voters who viewed McCain as Very Conservative stayed relatively constant -- 27% in early June and 28% three weeks later.
Obama made big gains during the month among women voters, 29% of whom rated him Very Liberal June 7-8 but only 20% did so by June 28-29. All of those numbers shifted to the Moderate column, with 29% of women rating the Democrat that way by the end of the month as opposed to 20% in early June.
For McCain, just the opposite is the case: 26% of women voters viewed him as a moderate in the June 7-8 survey but by June 28-29 that number had fallen to 22%.
Also, Obama has made gains among unaffiliated voters who are key to the outcome of the election. Where 28% viewed the Democrat as Very Liberal in early June, only 21% felt that way by the end of the month. For McCain, again the opposite is true. Rated Very Conservative by 24% of unaffiliated voters in the survey June 7-8, that number was up to 29% by June 28-29.
But McCain does appear to be healing the rift in his own party, where social conservatives have been among his loudest critics. He is now viewed as a conservative by 70% of those who describe themselves as socially, up from 63% in early June.
Currently, 15% of voters consider themselves Very Conservative and another 24% say they are Somewhat Conservative. Thirty-four percent (34%) identify themselves as politically moderate. Eighteen percent (18%) are Somewhat Liberal and 7% Very Liberal.
A recent analysis focused on how voters rated themselves ideologically on fiscal and social issues. One interesting tidbit from that story is that libertarian voters (fiscally conservative and socially liberal) favor Obama, not McCain.
The continuing influence of the Christian Right will mean little change in US foreign policy regardless of whether John McCain or Barack Obama is in the White House, claims a controversial new book.
Dr Lee Marsden, a lecturer in International Relations at the University of East Anglia, has had unique access to leading American Christian fundamentalists, thanks to his own background as a former ordained pastor in the Word of Faith movement.
He has also interviewed significant members of the US Administration and conducted in-depth research for his new book For God’s Sake, which argues that the religious core values of middle America have potentially disastrous consequences for the US and the world in the coming century.
“Despite McCain’s recently distancing himself from the views of right wing pastors – and despite Obama’s campaign theme of ‘change’ - Bush’s departure is not going to see the end of the influence of the Christian Right,” says Dr Marsden.
“This is an organised movement which seeks to prevent any resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict on anything other than Israeli terms. Obama’s and McCain’s recent speeches to AIPAC support this approach and Obama’s commitment to an undivided Jerusalem as Israel’s capital fits exactly with the Christian Right agenda and effectively destroys prospects of a peaceful resolution of the conflict.”
The Christian Right has been responsible for the Bush administration’s anti-abortion, anti-gay, pro-nuclear family stance, which has, among other things, deprived organisations such as Planned Parenthood of funding. Instead, the government has promoted abstinence in developing countries rather than the use of condoms and funded Christian organisations to deliver humanitarian services while evangelising.
“Although an Obama administration would lean more to the Christian Left, it would still share much of this social conservatism,” said Lee Marsden.
McCain will need to secure Christian Right votes to have any prospects of winning. Dr Marsden predicts increasingly bellicose foreign policy rhetoric and an uncompromising position on radical Islam. Both candidates have been equally aggressive towards Iran.
And, regardless of who is in the White House, Dr Marsden says conservative evangelicals are disproportionately represented in the US military and private security contractors.
“This presents a problem in terms of cultural sensitivity and Muslim perceptions of the US military being a Christian army engaged in a crusade against Islam.”
Dr Marsden is organising a public round table discussion for the week after the US Elections and teaches a number of courses at the University of East Anglia, including new Masters courses in International Security and Religion in International Relations.
For God’s Sake: The Christian Right and US Foreign Policy, by Lee Marsden, is published by Zed Books www.zedbooks.co.uk
Indeed interesting...especially considering a new study released today that said that despite such military culture's long-held beliefs, gays in the military don't undermine unit cohesion.
I mean, if the British and Israeli armies, probably two of the more hardcore national armies in the world in terms of tradition and history, can handle that shit, why not America?
The continuing influence of the Christian Right will mean little change in US foreign policy regardless of whether John McCain or Barack Obama is in the White House, claims a controversial new book.
Dr Lee Marsden, a lecturer in International Relations at the University of East Anglia, has had unique access to leading American Christian fundamentalists, thanks to his own background as a former ordained pastor in the Word of Faith movement.
He has also interviewed significant members of the US Administration and conducted in-depth research for his new book For God’s Sake, which argues that the religious core values of middle America have potentially disastrous consequences for the US and the world in the coming century.
“Despite McCain’s recently distancing himself from the views of right wing pastors – and despite Obama’s campaign theme of ‘change’ - Bush’s departure is not going to see the end of the influence of the Christian Right,” says Dr Marsden.
“This is an organised movement which seeks to prevent any resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict on anything other than Israeli terms. Obama’s and McCain’s recent speeches to AIPAC support this approach and Obama’s commitment to an undivided Jerusalem as Israel’s capital fits exactly with the Christian Right agenda and effectively destroys prospects of a peaceful resolution of the conflict.”
The Christian Right has been responsible for the Bush administration’s anti-abortion, anti-gay, pro-nuclear family stance, which has, among other things, deprived organisations such as Planned Parenthood of funding. Instead, the government has promoted abstinence in developing countries rather than the use of condoms and funded Christian organisations to deliver humanitarian services while evangelising.
“Although an Obama administration would lean more to the Christian Left, it would still share much of this social conservatism,” said Lee Marsden.
McCain will need to secure Christian Right votes to have any prospects of winning. Dr Marsden predicts increasingly bellicose foreign policy rhetoric and an uncompromising position on radical Islam. Both candidates have been equally aggressive towards Iran.
And, regardless of who is in the White House, Dr Marsden says conservative evangelicals are disproportionately represented in the US military and private security contractors.
“This presents a problem in terms of cultural sensitivity and Muslim perceptions of the US military being a Christian army engaged in a crusade against Islam.”
Dr Marsden is organising a public round table discussion for the week after the US Elections and teaches a number of courses at the University of East Anglia, including new Masters courses in International Security and Religion in International Relations.
For God’s Sake: The Christian Right and US Foreign Policy, by Lee Marsden, is published by Zed Books www.zedbooks.co.uk
POWDER SPRINGS, Georgia (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama proposed overhauling bankruptcy laws on Tuesday to ease the impact on people unable to pay their bills because of medical expenses or military service. ADVERTISEMENT
Obama, an Illinois senator, took aim at a 2005 overhaul of bankruptcy laws, which was strongly supported by credit card companies and other consumer lenders, that made it tougher for people facing personal bankruptcy to discharge debt.
"I'll reform our bankruptcy laws to give Americans who find themselves trapped in debt a second chance," Obama said at a town hall event in Powder Springs, Georgia, outside of Atlanta.
"While Americans should pay what they owe and we should be fair to those creditors who were fair to their borrowers, we also have to do more for the struggling families who need help the most," he added.
The 2005 bankruptcy law was passed by a Republican-led Congress and signed by President George W. Bush.
Obama and Republican John McCain, who will face each other in the November election, have been squaring off this week over the economy as they court voters who are increasingly anxious over soaring energy costs and a deteriorating job market.
Refocusing his message on the economy after a trip to Latin America last week, McCain on Monday pledged to balance the budget within four years if he is elected.
SEEKING TO LINK MCCAIN TO BUSH ON ECONOMY
Obama has sought to link McCain, an Arizona senator, to Bush's policies on the economy, which the Democratic candidate contends have favored the wealthy and left the middle class struggling.
He accused McCain of having "sided with the big banks" to support the rewrite of the bankruptcy laws.
But McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds pointed out the bankruptcy law was supported by 18 Senate Democrats and passed the Senate by a strong majority. He said Obama's opposition showed a lack of willingness to reach across party lines.
"Barack Obama's rigid partisanship and self-promoting political attacks show that he's a typical politician -- which is the problem in Washington, not the solution," Bounds said.
Obama said about half of all personal bankruptcies result in part from the burden of high medical expenses.
He said he would change the law so that Americans who can prove their bankruptcies resulted from high medical costs could get some relief from their debts.
Obama would also create a "fast-track" bankruptcy process for people serving in the military and their families who get behind on expenses because of long deployments, repeated moves and predatory lenders.
"If you're serving our country, you should be protected no matter where you live," Obama said.
In addition, he would make it easier for people over 62 to keep their homes if they are facing bankruptcy and give some relief to people burdened by bills because of a natural disaster.
Amid worries the U.S. economy may be sinking into a recession, personal bankruptcy filings are on the rise.
Such filings jumped 30 percent in the first six months of this year compared to the same period in 2007, according to the American Bankruptcy Institute, a research organization.
Rising mortgage costs in a slumping housing market and high levels of other household debt led to the jump in bankruptcy filings, the institute said.
----------- I think obama should be next president.
Historically Democratic presidential candidates veer to the left politically and Republicans to the right during the party primary season, but once they have secured the nomination, the candidates of both parties begin courting more moderate voters in the center. Perhaps as a reflection of what the new numbers say, McCain, who has been forced to keep courting conservatives in his own party, last week shook up the highest levels of his campaign staff.
Of course both candidates are moving toward the center. They're learning from Barry Goldwater's experience in '64, and George McGovern's eight years later. Both won their respective nominations through fervent support of a right-of-center (Goldwater) and left-of-center (McGovern) faction in their parties. And both lost by huge margins in the general election because they failed to reach out to the middle--they just preached to the choir. Even if Obama held onto everyone who voted for him in the primaries, and held most of Clinton's supporters, he still wouldn't have enough to beat McCain in November. He recognizes that he needs to reach out to those who didn't vote for him, including registered Republicans.
Even if Obama held onto everyone who voted for him in the primaries, and held most of Clinton's supporters, he still wouldn't have enough to beat McCain in November. He recognizes that he needs to reach out to those who didn't vote for him, including registered Republicans.
It is natural that candidates run toward the center, and Obama is getting it out of the way before he is "re-introduced" at the convention extravaganza he is planning. I expect to see him take a hit in the polls in the coming days or week because of his flip flopping on Iran and FISA. Bottom line is he base has no where else to go. IMHO the smartest thing hehas done was to support faith based intiiatives, which in fact he has always supported. That does not sit well with most liberals, but the Evangelicals love it. What he can accomplish by this is not winning many evangelical votes, but keeping them home on election day becase they do not like McCain.
This interview is suppose to air tonight on Access Hollywood. Gives a glimpse of the Obama family. What darling kids no? Yea, he's a real "elitist" isn't he?
Merkel warns Obama not to use landmark for 'electioneering'
German Chancellor Angela Merkel slammed a request by Barack Obama to give a speech this month before the Brandenburg Gate as "inappropriate", her deputy spokesman said Wednesday. The conservative leader said that while she would be pleased to meet the US Democratic presidential hopeful, it would be wrong for him to hold a "campaign rally" at the historic symbol of German unity.
"It is unusual to do electioneering abroad," spokesman Thomas Steg told reporters.
"It is unusual to hold election rallies abroad. No German candidate for high office would even think of using the National Mall (in Washington) or Red Square in Moscow for a rally because it would not be seen as appropriate."
Authorities in the capital have confirmed that Obama plans to visit Berlin on July 24 and is interested in speaking at the foot of the Brandenburg Gate.
The left-leaning government of the city-state, which has the sole right to approve such a request, has not yet made a formal decision but Mayor Klaus Wowereit gave his backing Tuesday.
Steg said Merkel had "limited understanding" for such a request and found the Obama team's initiative "a bit odd". But he said it was up to candidates such as Obama to decide what was "in good taste".
The gate, built in the late 18th century under Kaiser Friedrich Wilhelm II as a symbol of peace, became the country's most prominent symbol of German unification in 1990 after the fall of the Berlin Wall the year before.
In an unusual move, a spokesman for Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier sharply contradicted Merkel's views at a regular government press conference, saying they could be interpreted in the United States as an affront to Obama.
Foreign ministry spokesman Jens Ploetner said Steinmeier, a Social Democrat, was eager to meet Obama after speaking with him on the phone in April.
Republican presidential contender John McCain should also be welcome to speak at the Brandenburg Gate if he chose to, he added.
"The foreign minister does not find it odd," he said, adding that an Obama speech at or near the site would be "an expression of the vital German-American friendship" just days after Washington opened a new embassy next to the gate.
Ploetner rejected media reports that German diplomats in the United States had actively courted Obama to speak at the Brandenburg Gate.
But he said that German envoys had talked with his campaign about possible sites in Berlin he could visit such as the former Cold War border crossing at Checkpoint Charlie or the Holocaust Memorial.
German officials have noted in recent days that only elected foreign leaders have been invited to hold speeches at the gate and not political candidates.
These include the famous address at the landmark in 1987 by then US president Ronald Reagan, who called out to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, "Tear down this wall!"
Obama's staff said Saturday that he would visit France, Germany, Israel, Jordan and Britain to discuss "common challenges" with countries "critical to American national security". But it did not provide details of his programme.
Despite the flap over his visit, the Illinois senator, who is vying to become the first African-American US president, is wildly popular in Germany.
A survey released this month showed that 72 percent of Germans back Obama to become the next US leader, against just 11 percent for his presumed Republican opponent John McCain.
July 9, 2008 Jesse Jackson apologizes for comments critical of Obama Posted: 03:55 PM ET
(CNN) — The Rev. Jesse Jackson issued an apology to Barack Obama Wednesday for criticizing the Illinois senator's recent comments directed toward some members of the black community.
According to Jackson, a Fox News microphone picked up comments he meant to deliver privately that seemed to disparage the presumptive Democratic nominee for appearing to lecture the black community on morality.
"For any harm or hurt that this hot mic private conversation may have caused, I apologize," Jackson said in a statement issued to CNN. "My support for Senator Obama’s campaign is wide, deep and unequivocal. I cherish this redemptive and historical moment."
"My appeal was for the moral content of his message to not only deal with the personal and moral responsibility of black males, but to deal with the collective moral responsibility of government and the public policy which would be a corrective action for the lack of good choices that often led to their irresponsibility," Jackson also said.
"That was the context of my private conversation and it does not reflect any disparagement on my part for the historic event in which we are involved or my pride in Senator Barack Obama, who is leading it, whom I have supported by crisscrossing this nation in every level of media and audience from the beginning in absolute terms."
Over the course of the campaign season, Obama has at times directed criticism directly to the black community, most sharply in a Chicago speech on Father's Day that criticized some men for failing in their duties as parents.
"They have abandoned their responsibilities, acting like boys instead of men. And the foundations of our families are weaker because of it," Obama said then.
"You and I know how true this is in the African-American community. We know that more than half of all black children live in single-parent households, a number that has doubled — doubled — since we were children. We know the statistics: that children who grow up without a father are five times more likely to live in poverty and commit crime, nine times more likely to drop out of schools and twenty times more likely to end up in prison," he also said.
I'm just hearing about the Jesse Jackson comments now on CNN. They say they can't say exactly what he said. From what I gather, they are talking about a speech he made to the black community, which I think was wonderful. He said, among other things, that "there are far too many absent fathers in the black community" and went on to scold them (so to speak) for not being involved in their children's lives. Now keep in mind he was talking to a black community, but he also indicated that "all" fathers should be involved. Anyway, as usual, I find his speeches so "right on" an very inspirational.
I guess Jackson said something "off color" on open mike (don't know what) but his apologizing now. Like one commentator said, the Jesse Jackson era is over and this is a "new" way of thinking for the Black community.
Now, as far as the German Chancellor story goes, I have a feeling that Obama will be very well received in Germany and pretty much wherever he goes. One question to RR, or maybe Goombah, or someone who might know....isn't this German Chancellor the lady who our very tactful President tried to give a shoulder massage to???? You guys know what I'm talking about? The MSM of course wouldn't dare print a negative story on Bush, but he was at a Summit or some function put his hands on her shoulders and started to massage her. ha hah... She definitely was startled and jumped. Gotta love that cowboy charm. Idiot
JESSE JACKSON SAYS HE WANTS TO CUT OBAMA'S 'NUTS OUT' By CHARLES HURT, D.C. Bureau Chief
WASHINGTON - In a vulgar tirade caught on tape by Fox News, the Rev. Jesse Jackson said he wanted to "cut his [Barack Obama's] nuts out" and he accused the fellow Chicagoan of "talking down to black folks" by giving moral lectures to African-Americans, source said.
Jackson's shocking quotes were picked up by a hot mic before an interview on health care in Fox's Chicago studio last Sunday.
Fox planned to air the recording on Bill O'Reilly's "The Factor" show.
In an effort to blunt the controversy, Jackson issued an apology.
"For any harm or hurt that this hot mic conversation may have caused, I apologize," Jackson said in a statement.
Jackson said he couldn't recall everything he'd said in the studio but couched the remarks as part of a discussion about Obama speaking to black churchgoers.
In such settings, Obama has urged greater emphasis on fatherhood, advised parents to choose reading books over playing video games and most recently told young students to stick with school and forget about a career as a rap star or professional basketball player.
Jackson said that in doing so Obama was hurting his relationship with black voters, "that the senator was cutting off his you-know-whats with the black people and black churches."
Jackson told CNN that he called the Obama campaign to apologize and reiterated his support for the campaign of the first black nominee of a major party.
"My support for Senator Obama's campaign is wide, deep and unequivocal," he said in his statement. "I cherish this redemptive and historical moment."
Dan Abrams was talking about this and evidently Fox news (no surprise)was the only one that showed the clip. So, then Abrams showed the Fox News clip.
Anyway, Jackson was with another guy and it did seem neither realized they could be heard. They were talking low. Jackson made the "cutting off his balls" remark and although I couldn't actually see his hand, I swear, by his facial expression that he made a swift chopping motion (for lack of a better word) with his hand as he said it. He looked pissed. Jackson has been apologizing ever since and last I heard Obama accepted. Also, his son who is an avid Obama supporter sent a scathing statement about his father's remarks.
Of course both candidates are moving toward the center. They're learning from Barry Goldwater's experience in '64, and George McGovern's eight years later. Both won their respective nominations through fervent support of a right-of-center (Goldwater) and left-of-center (McGovern) faction in their parties. And both lost by huge margins in the general election because they failed to reach out to the middle--they just preached to the choir.
Think back. Why, exactly, did you prefer Obama over Hillary Clinton in the first place? Their policies were almost identical — except his health care proposal was more conservative. You liked Barack because you thought he could get us past the old brain-dead politics, right? He talked — and talked and talked — about how there were going to be no more red states and blue states, how he was going to bring Americans together, including Republicans and Democrats.
Exactly where did everybody think this gathering was going to take place? Left field?
When an extremely intelligent politician tells you over and over and over that he is tired of the take-no-prisoners politics of the last several decades, that he is going to get things done and build a “new consensus,” he is trying to explain that he is all about compromise. Even if he says it in that great Baracky way.
July 10 (Bloomberg) -- The Reverend Jesse Jackson's derogatory comments about Barack Obama could provide a boost for the presumptive Democratic nominee, giving him an opportunity to win over some voters who have been skeptical of his candidacy.
Jackson was appearing on Fox News on July 6 when a microphone picked up his remark suggesting that Obama was ``talking down to black people'' in recent speeches at black churches, according to a tape of the comments played on Bill O'Reilly's show on the Fox News Channel.
He then said, referring to Obama, ``I want to cut his nuts off,'' according to the Fox News Web site. At the time, he was speaking to Reed Tuckson, executive vice president and chief medical officer of United Health Group Inc.
Jackson, 66, apologized for his remarks, telling CNN yesterday that they were ``crude.'' The comments may turn out to help Obama by emphasizing his call for personal responsibility, a favorite topic of Republicans, said Mark Rozell, a professor of public policy at George Mason University in Arlington, Virginia.
``It reinforces Obama's effort to present himself as an advocate of responsible personal behavior, a position that Republican candidates like to secure as uniquely their own,'' Rozell said.
The Illinois senator, who in August stands to be the first minority candidate to be nominated for president by a major political party, spent Father's Day last month at one of Chicago's largest black churches telling the audience that they should set better examples for their children and shouldn't abandon them.
`Any Fool'
``Any fool can have a child. That doesn't make you a father,'' Obama, 46, said at the Apostolic Church of God, which has more than 20,000 members. ``Too many fathers are AWOL, missing from too many lives and too many homes.''
Jackson's comments help Obama in other ways as well, said Steffen Schmidt, a professor of political science at Iowa State University in Ames.
``This helps Obama make the case that he is not a `black' leader but just a Democratic candidate for president,'' Schmidt said. ``Cynics are asking if Jackson made this comment on purpose to help Obama.''
Jackson, who unsuccessfully sought the Democratic presidential nomination in 1984 and 1988, said he didn't know the microphone was on when he commented on Obama's speeches.
`I Offer Apologies'
``Anything I said in a hot-mic statement that's interpreted as a distraction, I offer apologies for that,'' Jackson said at a news conference yesterday after his remarks became public.
``I have supported Barack's campaign with passion from the very beginning. I thought the very idea made sense,'' Jackson said. ``We've been there all the way, because I think this campaign is a redemptive moment for America and a great opportunity to redefine America.''
Jackson told CNN that his criticism about Obama was that he ``comes down as speaking down to black people.'' He said Obama should also be talking in the black community about issues like health care, jobs and justice.
``That's a range of issues on the menu,'' he said. ``Then I said something I regret was crude.''
Jackson's comments were criticized by his son, Representative Jesse Jackson Jr., an Illinois Democrat and a national co-chairman of Obama's presidential campaign.
``I thoroughly reject and repudiate his ugly rhetoric,'' the lawmaker said in a statement. ``He should keep hope alive and any personal attacks and insults to himself.''
Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton said Obama ``will continue to speak out about our responsibilities to ourselves and each other, and he of course accepts Reverend Jackson's apology.''
He should do more than just forgive Jackson, said David Schultz, a professor in the graduate school of management at Hamline University in St. Paul, Minnesota.
``Obama should give Jackson and O'Reilly an award for helping his campaign with white voters,'' Schultz said.
Evidently McCains Economical adviser said that American is a nation of "whinners" and that this recession is a "mental" recession, or something of the sort.
Evidently McCains Economical adviser said that American is a nation of "whinners" and that this recession is a "mental" recession, or something of the sort.
What I love is how the other day, the McCain campaign was given a goldmine of an issue with the Iranian test missiles......but before that issue could be milked by them, two things happen:
The Jackson "Nuts" Incident, and now this "Nation of Whiners" comment.
Its funny, but with McCain calling Obama "Jimmy Carter II", you would think that McCain would have learned his lesson from Carter's infamous "malaise" speech, right?
Evidently McCains Economical adviser said that American is a nation of "whinners" and that this recession is a "mental" recession, or something of the sort.
I'm not whining, I'm disgusted with Gramm and his corprate criminal buddies rigging the game, lying and cheating. McCain really surrounds himself with "great" men.
Evidently McCains Economical adviser said that American is a nation of "whinners" and that this recession is a "mental" recession, or something of the sort.
I'm not whining, I'm disgusted with Gramm and his corprate criminal buddies rigging the game, lying and cheating. McCain really surrounds himself with "great" men.
Now Saladbar,
Quit your whinning. I'm sure it's just a "mental" thing. You don't like "straight talk?"
Puh-leeze. It's insulting. This jerk is an elitist in the worst way. It's as ridiculous as Barbara Bush saying that the Katrina refugees were enjoying the Astrodome because it was "much nicer" than what they were used to.
Evidently McCains Economical adviser said that American is a nation of "whinners" and that this recession is a "mental" recession, or something of the sort.
What I love is how the other day, the McCain campaign was given a goldmine of an issue with the Iranian test missiles......but before that issue could be milked by them, two things happen:
The Jackson "Nuts" Incident, and now this "Nation of Whiners" comment.
Its funny, but with McCain calling Obama "Jimmy Carter II", you would think that McCain would have learned his lesson from Carter's infamous "malaise" speech, right?
Not to mention that it turns out the Iranian missile pictures were doctored to make it appear they had more missiles than they did. The only question I have is who did the photoshop work...the Iranians or the Bush administration.
Our mortal enemy the Soviet Union possessed a bevy of ICBMs that could devastate US cities. The Chinese have such a fledgeling arsenal. But here we are "worried" about Iran with a handful of intermediate range missiles, but no arsenal and certainly nothing to top them off with except conventional warheads.
The MIRVd nuclear warheads atop the 24 ICBMs in a typical US nuclear submarine culd devastate not only Iran, but the entire middle-east and irradiate it for 10K years.
Evidently McCains Economical adviser said that American is a nation of "whinners" and that this recession is a "mental" recession, or something of the sort.
What I love is how the other day, the McCain campaign was given a goldmine of an issue with the Iranian test missiles......but before that issue could be milked by them, two things happen:
The Jackson "Nuts" Incident, and now this "Nation of Whiners" comment.
Its funny, but with McCain calling Obama "Jimmy Carter II", you would think that McCain would have learned his lesson from Carter's infamous "malaise" speech, right?
Not to mention that it turns out the Iranian missile pictures were doctored to make it appear they had more missiles than they did. The only question I have is who did the photoshop work...the Iranians or the Bush administration.
Berlin has not always been a friendly place for American politicians. Shortly after the Soviet Union began construction of the Berlin Wall, John F. Kennedy sent Vice President Lyndon Johnson to West Berlin. "They'll be a lot of shooting and I'll be in the middle of it," Johnson told an aide. "Why me?" Seven years later, West German leftists plotted to hurl pudding-filled balloons at Hubert Humphrey during his trip to the city; the police managed to disrupt the plan, but Humphrey was booed and heckled everywhere he went. And while history remembers Ronald Reagan's challenge to Mikhail Gorbachev to tear down the Wall, it's usually forgotten that Reagan's visit to West Berlin occasioned the worst rioting the city had seen since the 1960s, prompting officials to shut down the city's subway system for the only time in its history.
Barack Obama will surely receive a warmer reception in Berlin next week. But the mini-controversy that has surrounded his planned visit highlights the mix of admiration and suspicion with which Berliners view Presidential pilgrimages to their city. The current source of dispute is Obama's purported desire to give a speech in front of the Brandenburg Gate, the backdrop for Reagan's 1987 address. Through a spokesman, German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said she regards the possibility of Obama's speaking there "with a certain bewilderment ... No German politician would come up with the idea to do such a thing at the National Mall in D.C."
To some, it's Merkel's bewilderment that's bewildering. Speculation abounds that the White House pressured the Germans to deny Obama his made-for-cable-TV moment. So far not a shred of evidence has surfaced, but the whole affair led at least one German commentator to call on Obama to "put all this fuss to an end," have a quick tea with Merkel, pose for some pictures and get out of town.
Why the touchiness? Berlin has long been used by Presidential image-makers as a political prop. During the Cold War, the city was the proving ground of the East-West conflict, the principal theater in the struggle between freedom and authoritarianism. Truman made the first Presidential visit to postwar Berlin, driving through the ruins of the city in the wake of the Allied bombardment. The Allies' refusal to abandon the city to the Soviets, demonstrated most dramatically during the Berlin airlift of 1948, endeared a generation of Berliners to the U.S. When Kennedy arrived in Berlin in 1962, the city was gripped by something approaching mass hysteria; Kennedy later confided that had he called on the throng - an estimated 750,000 witnessed his "Ich bin ein Berliner" speech at Schoenberg City Hall — to tear down the Wall, they would have done it.
Kennedy's speech was highly choreographed: in the book Kennedy in Berlin, Andreas W. Daum writes that the White House wanted Kennedy "to see, to be seen and to publicize this visibility as much as possible throughout the world for the benefit of those not participating." Reagan's visit in 1987 was a similar exercise in stagecraft, orchestrated by the Michael Deaver-trained White House Advance office. Early that year, U.S. officials in Berlin approached the WEST German authorities with the idea of Reagan's speaking in front of the Reichstag or the Brandenburg Gate, in view of the Wall. The Berlin officials adamantly opposed the idea, fearing disturbances on the eastern side of the Wall. Once they got a glimpse of the Brandenburg backdrop, though, Reagan's men knew they had their site. "I've always felt that the content was driven by the location," says Jim Hooley, the head of Reagan's advance office. "The speechwriters came away inspired by the fact that Reagan would be giving the speech with the Wall at his back. Could you imagine Reagan saying, 'Tear Down that Wall that's over there three miles away, Mr. Gorbachev?'"
As it turns out, though, Kennedy and Reagan are remembered today less for the staging that went into their visits than for the power of the words they delivered. The two phrases that resonate — "Ich bin ein Berliner" and "Tear Down this Wall" — embodied the personalities of both Presidents and their intuitive flair for the moment; in both cases, Kennedy and Reagan personally saw to it that those phrases stayed in their speeches, despite the misgivings of some of their aides. Even more importantly, though, both speeches underscored the U.S.'s unshakable commitment to a free and unified Europe, a resolve that helped bring an end to the Cold War. Obama has yet to show that kind of clarity in articulating how to promote American ideals and interests in a much different world, but now would be a good time to do so. In the end it won't matter whether he speaks in front of the Brandenburg Gate. What matters is what he says.
(CNN) — Longtime Washington talk-show host John McLaughlin is facing fire Monday for referring to Barack Obama as an "Oreo" during a segment on his Sunday political program, "The McLaughlin Group.
The veteran Washington journalist was discussing the recent comments from the Rev. Jesse Jackson, who was caught last week by an open microphone on Fox News saying the Illinois senator is "talking down to black people" as he campaigns for the White House. Those remarks were largely seen in reference to Obama's recent admonishment at a Chicago church of some black men who he said were not living up to their responsibilities as parents.
Referencing Jackson's comments, McLaughlin said Obama "fits the stereotype blacks once labeled as an Oreo — a black on the outside, a white on the inside."
"Does it frost Jackson, Jesse Jackson, that…an Oreo should be the beneficiary of the long civil rights struggle which Jesse Jackson spent his lifetime fighting for?" McLaughlin asked his panelists.
The term "Oreo" is often viewed as a derogatory term toward some African-Americans who appear not to exhibit certain stereotypes of their race.
Watch: McLaughlin's comments cause uproar
Panelist Peter Beinart, a senior fellow on the Council of Foreign Relations, immediately called that depiction of Obama "completely unfair."
Michelle Bernard, another panelist on the program and the president of the Independent Women's Forum also said she disagreed with the comments, saying "If Barack Obama is an Oreo, then every member of this generation of African-Americans is an Oreo, because we stand on the shoulders of the people who fought for our rights, and all of us say that you cannot blame 'the man' or white racism for everything that ails the black community."
Roland Martin, a CNN contributor and host of a syndicated radio show, says some people may be overreacting to McLaughlin's remark.
"Obama's candidacy is bringing to light to the internal conversation that is taking place in black America and white America. I think a lot of people are uncomfortable with the dialogue," he said. "If John McLaughlin was an African American and who had made the comment, people would have said, well, he probably understands what he's talking about."
"The reality is we also have a white, his mother is white and his dad is from Kenya," Martin also said. "I think that is the qualifier there and this is a debate that you have heard take place inside of the black community that you also have people who question someone like Obama, where does he stand? Is he black enough?"
Just wondering what the thoughts are here regarding the Obama cartoon on the cover of the New Yorker. I understand when they say that the purpose was to highlight all of the stereotypes that he's been smeared with; however, I can't help but think that some people are too stupid to get it. And those are the people who will perpetuate the stereotypes.
Seriously, though, stereotype subversion always courts the same problems: that there are some who, as you say, won't "get" it. I've done it several times on this board and people have taken it the wrong way (because, essentially, the "joke" is an in-joke, not really designed to be understood by all).
Well,maybe I'm the only one,but I think it's awful...and I do believe in freedom of speech/press. I'm kind of torn.
I have seen the NYer publicaton before, but can't say I've read it to any extent. I only recently heard it tends to "lean left". By the cartoon, I would not have guessed it. They did explain that the joke is what all the falsehoods about Obama are. Ok, I get that now, BUT hadn't they explained it, I wouldn't have gotten it. And Yes, there are many many people who will take this as fact and/or confirm what people want to believe about him. I keep reading/hearing in their defense, how "sophisticated" the NYer is and that "it's" readers totally get it. Well, does that mean those who don't read it are idiots???? Unsophisticated? I don't think so.
By contrast, can they do one on McCain (I'm adding to a suggestion I read on a blog), perhaps in "depends" diaper (indicating the jokes about his age) and perhaps he can have his first wife by his side, while his hand can be on the ass of Cindy?? Would that be ok? Is there a line to be drawn?
I guess my analysis would be it's tasteless to say the least.
I guess my analysis would be it's tasteless to say the least.
Though Obama's opinion is as irrelevant as those who don't and won't understand the joke, would your opinion of it change if he said himself he found it amusing?
By contrast, can they do one on McCain (I'm adding to a suggestion I read on a blog), perhaps in "depends" diaper (indicating the jokes about his age) and perhaps he can have his first wife by his side, while his hand can be on the ass of Cindy?? Would that be ok? Is there a line to be drawn?
I guess my analysis would be it's tasteless to say the least.
TIS
The New Yorker knew what it was doing. So to be fair, why not put McCain on the cover with an enraged look on his face while being held captive as a POW? Or having McCain shouting at his wife, calling her the c-word? The New Yorker did it to sell copy and create a controversy, plain and simple.
I guess my analysis would be it's tasteless to say the least.
Though Obama's opinion is as irrelevant as those who don't and won't understand the joke, would your opinion of it change if he said himself he found it amusing?
I'd give kudos to Obama if that was the case, and say "good for him." Would I still find it "tastelss", yes.
One commentator yesterday, on one of the cable news stations, suggested it would have been totally different and more understandble take on this picture, had they inserted someone like Rove drawing these pictures.
This cartoon is satire that doesn't work very well. Though it’s a caricature of the stupid superficial nature of American politicking, it is way too subtle satire for most people. For example this cartoon is all over the right-wing blogosphere as fact, so it is being taken seriously as a boost to those it is meant to make fun of! So it fails because it instead of the intent of skewering the common misconceptions people have of the Obamas, it just further fuels the rumors.
This cartoon is satire that doesn't work very well. Though it’s a caricature of the stupid superficial nature of American politicking, it is way too subtle satire for most people. For example this cartoon is all over the right-wing blogosphere as fact, so it is being taken seriously as a boost to those it is meant to make fun of! So it fails because it instead of the intent of skewering the common misconceptions people have of the Obamas, it just further fuels the rumors.
True, but when it comes to politics of any kind (politics per se, religion, etc.), satire is always going to be "way too subtle for most people". The vast majority of people are too embedded in their own beliefs to see the (in)significance of it all. The Left takes it on the chin and smiles along with it, while the Right nods in ironic agreement how correct it was to hold firm to its stubborn beliefs.
All satire preaches to the converted, when looked at from within its own political sphere.
I guess my analysis would be it's tasteless to say the least.
Though Obama's opinion is as irrelevant as those who don't and won't understand the joke, would your opinion of it change if he said himself he found it amusing?
How funny and brilliant the joke is if no one really gets it? Oh we and the New Yorker writers may chuckle and lavish in our narcissistic irony and intellectual superiority over the masses, but this election is just too important right now this stuff. I am sensitive because I've been living under the Bush regime for 8 years, you haven't. See it from THAT perspective. I heard the polls going dead even today and it now looks to me like there's a good chance we're going to have a 3rd term of Bush. And if it happens it will be the sort of mindless bigotry portrayed by that cartoon that carries McBush over the top. Mindless bigotry the cool urban hip New Yorkers care more about chuckling over than using some of their power to change our actual lives and get us away from this neocon nightmare.
True, but when it comes to politics of any kind (politics per se, religion, etc.), satire is always going to be "way too subtle for most people". The vast majority of people are too embedded in their own beliefs to see the (in)significance of it all. The Left takes it on the chin and smiles along with it, while the Right nods in ironic agreement how correct it was to hold firm to its stubborn beliefs.
All satire preaches to the converted, when looked at from within its own political sphere.
Good satire in which we are meant to comprehend that the satirist does not believe what he or she is ostensibly portraying but is criticizing those who nurture such a belief, provides a context or a frame. It should have been deep in the magazine where people that actually READ the New Yorker that get it would understand. Not on the cover, this election is just far to important. Do the New Yorker editors have NO CLUE what the rest of the country thinks?
How funny and brilliant the joke is if no one really gets it? Oh we and the New Yorker writers may chuckle and lavish in our narcissistic irony and intellectual superiority over the masses...
Yes, in essence, this is correct. Satire is different from propaganda (though many may mistake it for propaganda) in that it's created by and for those who lie outside of the sphere involved. It's a cultural product, a form of intellectual humour, however much it strokes one's ego. However,
Originally Posted By: SB
...but this election is just too important right now this stuff.
Yes. I hadn't thought of it that way before, because, I must confess, I don't know the consequences; I didn't even know Bush could run for another term, and I've never heard of "polls going dead".
The magazine involved is aware of who it writes for, who reads it, and must have been aware of the feathers this would ruffle at this particular time. Your concern is a genuine and valid one.
It seems more badly-judged (or -timed, the two may mean the same thing) than "tasteless", though.
Yes. I hadn't thought of it that way before, because, I must confess, I don't know the consequences; I didn't even know Bush could run for another term, and I've never heard of "polls going dead".
Well, not BUSH third term, just a Bush-like third term with McCain/McBush.
Good satire in which we are meant to comprehend that the satirist does not believe what he or she is ostensibly portraying but is criticizing those who nurture such a belief, provides a context or a frame.
We are meant to comprehend, and should comprehend. (Satire is intellectually superior for the reasons that people don't comprehend it, choose not to comprehend it. But I mustn't think about it too much; it's too lamentable, too depressing, to think some people have reacted to this in the way they have.)
Quote:
It should have been deep in the magazine where people that actually READ the New Yorker that get it would understand. Not on the cover, this election is just far to important. Do the New Yorker editors have NO CLUE what the rest of the country thinks?
If a satirist has to go public to explain "it was just a joke," as the New Yorker did, then it was poor satire. This magazine appears on racks all over the country and many people have no idea what the New Yorker is, what its political leanings are or anything else. This was an irresponsible and tasteless act and it has lowered the standing of a great magazine.
BTW there is a counter cartoon going around the net depicting McCain as a senile old coot with his wife handling and popping all kinds of pills, a constitution burning in the fireplace and a picture of Cheney on the mantle. It is equaly tasteless.
If a satirist has to go public to explain "it was just a joke," as the New Yorker did, then it was poor satire. This magazine appears on racks all over the country and many people have no idea what the New Yorker is, what its political leanings are or anything else. This was an irresponsible and tasteless act and it has lowered the standing of a great magazine.
BTW there is a counter cartoon going around the net depicting McCain as a senile old coot with his wife handling and popping all kinds of pills, a constitution burning in the fireplace and a picture of Cheney on the mantle. It is equaly tasteless.
The BIG difference is that picture (below) was NOT on the cover of the magazine (National Review)... it was just a political cartoon:
.
When somebody runs for this country's highest elective office he (or she) MUST expect some satiric attention. Nobody complained when The New Yorker ran a cover showing Obama in bed with Hillary at 3 A.M.:
.
Where does the fine line between good taste and satire end and begin?
I was thinking of that, SC. He used to submit stuff to them, and was totally pissed when they didn't accept it. He used to rant about how the ones they did accept were FAR inferior to his.
Oh yea,I can imagine if PLaw were here. I think he'd be defending NYer to the max. I miss him too. He'd be a great contributor here, no doubt.
I don't recall seeing the Obama/Clinton picture.
Anyway, I don't think the McCain cartoon is nearly as scathing as the Obama one, but you do bring up a good point SC. Where is the line, if there is one? Does it come down to, "WHEN is something like this "Slander?" (although I believe it's "Libel" when it's in print no?). If so, I don't know when that would be. Yet, I'm guessing the media can go nearly anywhere they want to, or more media sources would be more careful/worried what they printed.
Kly would probably be able to enlighten us on legal aspects, if any.
Obama will be on Larry King tonight, and he's taking it like a champ. Here are some of his remarks:
"It's a cartoon ... and that's why we've got the First Amendment," Obama said. "And I think the American people are probably spending a little more time worrying about what's happening with the banking system and the housing market and what's happening in Iraq and Afghanistan, than a cartoon. So I haven't spent a lot of time thinking about it.
"I've seen and heard worse," he said. "I do think that, you know, in attempting to satirize something, they probably fueled some misconceptions about me instead. But, you know, that was their editorial http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/15/lkl.obama/index.html
OK. This is a little scary is you're a McCain supporter:
July 15, 2008 McCain again cites current events in 'Czechoslovakia' Posted: 06:32 PM ET
From CNN Associate Political Editor Rebecca Sinderbrand
McCain again referred to the nation of Czechoslovakia, which no longer exists.
(CNN) – For the second time in two days, John McCain has referred to current events in “Czechoslovakia” – a country that officially ceased to exist in January of 1993.
“And I regret some of the recent behavior Russia that has exhibited, and I’ll be glad to talk about that later on including reduction in oil supplies to Czechoslovakia after they agreed with us on a missile defense system, etcetera,” said the presumptive Republican nominee at a New Mexico town hall Tuesday.
More than fifteen years ago, Czechoslovakia officially split into two nations – the Czech Republic and Slovakia.
On Monday, the Arizona senator made virtually the same statement about recent Russian moves that troubled him, citing that country’s attempt to reduce “the energy supplies to Czechoslovakia.”
Later that evening, McCain’s campaign sent reporters a statement on the issue, which quoted the Arizona senator calling the nation “the Czech Republic” twice
Obama will be on Larry King tonight, and he's taking it like a champ. Here are some of his remarks:
"It's a cartoon ... and that's why we've got the First Amendment," Obama said. "And I think the American people are probably spending a little more time worrying about what's happening with the banking system and the housing market and what's happening in Iraq and Afghanistan, than a cartoon. So I haven't spent a lot of time thinking about it.
"I've seen and heard worse," he said. "I do think that, you know, in attempting to satirize something, they probably fueled some misconceptions about me instead. But, you know, that was their editorial http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/15/lkl.obama/index.html
TIS
I don't understand why a presidential candidate would refer to the first amendment as the reaason for a magazine cover or any speech, writing, or illustration. The free speech and press content of the first amendment is a constraint upon the lawmaking of the US Congress.
If a satirist has to go public to explain "it was just a joke," as the New Yorker did, then it was poor satire.
No, I disagree. Whether it's as intelligent as it assumes itself to be (I'm talking about satire in general, here, not this specific cartoon) is another matter, but satire operates on the grounds that some people are in on the joke; it's humour at the expense and probably ignorance of somebody else. Poor satire and good satire don't really exist; it's a meaningless criticism stemming from your own subjective viewpoint. That some people "get" this cartoon is proof alone that it (to them) didn't need to explain itself.
And if it tries/tried to manipulate its meaning from the viewpoint of the Right, it's the intellectual (political, therefore intellectual) shortcomings of the Right that makes this "poor satire". They won't care less; they were ignorant enough to take it literally in the first place, and so explaining the joke to them would prove difficult, whatever the case. People don't take well to being forced to look in the mirror at their own putrid selves; like everything else, they gild the image to their own tastes.
...but this election is just too important right now this stuff.
If the fate of the elections and in turn the country itself depends upon one cartoon, then there isn't much hope anyway, right?
Never said depended on it, rather "fuels" it. Though the 'Obama is a Muslim' rumor alledgedly was spread by just ONE man Andy Martin, a former political opponent of Obama's, by publishing it in his little known Internet newspaper. He based this solely on Obama's father's name. A little known internet paper can make so many waves, what about a bigger one?
OK. This is a little scary is you're a McCain supporter:
July 15, 2008 McCain again cites current events in 'Czechoslovakia' Posted: 06:32 PM ET
From CNN Associate Political Editor Rebecca Sinderbrand
McCain again referred to the nation of Czechoslovakia, which no longer exists.
(CNN) – For the second time in two days, John McCain has referred to current events in “Czechoslovakia” – a country that officially ceased to exist in January of 1993.
“And I regret some of the recent behavior Russia that has exhibited, and I’ll be glad to talk about that later on including reduction in oil supplies to Czechoslovakia after they agreed with us on a missile defense system, etcetera,” said the presumptive Republican nominee at a New Mexico town hall Tuesday.
More than fifteen years ago, Czechoslovakia officially split into two nations – the Czech Republic and Slovakia.
On Monday, the Arizona senator made virtually the same statement about recent Russian moves that troubled him, citing that country’s attempt to reduce “the energy supplies to Czechoslovakia.”
Later that evening, McCain’s campaign sent reporters a statement on the issue, which quoted the Arizona senator calling the nation “the Czech Republic” twice
Remember the last President we elected who was also quite ignorant about his geopolitics?*
*=Want a clue? He's the personification of "vacumm of leadership" at the moment.
Evidently there's more to the Jesse Jackson "nuts" story (when Jackson was overheard to say that he'd like to cut off Obama's nuts). The local Fox news station is reporting that Jackson used the "N" word just after the "nuts" comment. They (Fox) supposedly did not want to release that info to the public because they felt that it would do damage to Jackson's public appeal. SUPPOSEDLY someone leaked that info without Fox's knowledge.
So, we have a story that became newsworthy (evidentally) but the network censored part of it because they felt it would do harm to the offending person??
Jackson has already issued an apology to Obama, Obama's wife and the American public.
Evidently there's more to the Jesse Jackson "nuts" story (when Jackson was overheard to say that he'd like to cut off Obama's nuts). The local Fox news station is reporting that Jackson used the "N" word just after the "nuts" comment. They (Fox) supposedly did not want to release that info to the public because they felt that it would do damage to Jackson's public appeal. SUPPOSEDLY someone leaked that info without Fox's knowledge.
His public appeal? This is the same guy who called New York "Hymietown." Now he goes and uses the "N" word. Bottom line for Jesse is IT'S OVER. Time for him to shut up and move aside.
His public appeal? This is the same guy who called New York "Hymietown." Now he goes and uses the "N" word. Bottom line for Jesse is IT'S OVER. Time for him to shut up and move aside.
What makes it worse is that he was one of the black leaders asking the music industry to stop using the "N" word in songs because of it's negative effect on youth.
His public appeal? This is the same guy who called New York "Hymietown." Now he goes and uses the "N" word. Bottom line for Jesse is IT'S OVER. Time for him to shut up and move aside.
What makes it worse is that he was one of the black leaders asking the music industry to stop using the "N" word in songs because of it's negative effect on youth.
No doubt SC. Jackson is a long time shake down artist who will go after any money making inndustry, make demands that outwardly appear to be on the side of justice, but which come with them an economic agenda what usually favors him. As I have said before if Obama is elected (or maybe his being nominated is enough) shows that with the right education, ambition and brains anybody of any color can make it to the top in this country, and we don't need the Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons of the world making excuses for people. IN fact you could make a case that Jackson and Sharpton are the true racists.
Did anybody read or hear any portions of Obama's speech?? Keep in mind he was speaking to an African American crowd, but he has indicated in other interviews that it is true for all races. Anyway, basically he said that there are far two many "absent" fathers from the African American community and that they need to be responsible for their actions and involve themselves in their children's lives. I see absolutely no reason for JJ to oppose it.
There's been speculation that JJ is jealous, which may be true, but I really go with the opinion that this is a "new" time here in America and that Obama (much like Bill Cosby) is simply admitting the facts.
Political-wise it's probably a plus for Obama, who isn't, and I'm sure wouldn't want to be categorized as another JJ.
It's eating him alive. I read today that Jackson and Sharpton feel that Obama isn't "black" enough for their tastes. Well, sorry "Reverends," but no one is voting for a candidate with a rap sheet and a doo-rag on his head.
I agree with you PB. I guess my point is the JJ wouldn't "admit" to the jealousy.
Anyway, I hear further reports today that JJ used the "N" word also in this video. Can't confirm though. I have a feeling that this may be the beginning of the end of the JJ/Sharpton politics. Time will tell.
It really puts Obama in a tough spot because if he promises JJ and AS positions in the cabinet, he's going to piss off his moderate supporters. If he doesn't, he risks pissing off the inner city, low income black voters. I just hope to God that the Black community can finally see these two bums for what they are.
It really puts Obama in a tough spot because if he promises JJ and AS positions in the cabinet, he's going to piss off his moderate supporters. If he doesn't, he risks pissing off the inner city, low income black voters. I just hope to God that the Black community can finally see these two bums for what they are.
Why would Obama have either dipshit in his Cabinet?
Besides, with the black voters, Obama is like JFK in 1960 with the Irish-Americans...they're in it to get him into the White House.
Why would Obama have either dipshit in his Cabinet?
He wouldn't. Both Sharpton and Jackson are liabilities to Obama's political career. I'm sure Obama could up with someone more palatable to everyone if his intention is to pick a black man or woman for a cabinet post.
Obama will be visiting the UK (he's leaving today I think...for his overseas visit but don't know exactly when he'll be in the UK). I know you don't particularly follow our politics, but let us know, if you can, how he is received there ok??? We will have it all over the news here, but it'll be nice to get your prospective as a UK citizen.
It's eating him alive. I read today that Jackson and Sharpton feel that Obama isn't "black" enough for their tastes. Well, sorry "Reverends," but no one is voting for a candidate with a rap sheet and a doo-rag on his head.
Two hypocritical, race baiting pieces of shit.
They can meet up with Bill Clinton and have a big "pity party."
All kidding aside, Don T. That's one of the reasons that I didn't like the Clintons: Their pandering to the likes of Jackson and Sharpton. But I can see why Chelsea likes them, because, you know, if my father ever got a blowjob from a fat intern, if he held hands with Jesse and prayed it would make it all better.
(CNN) -- Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki told a German magazine that he backed a proposal by presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq within 16 months.
"U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months," he said in an interview with Der Spiegel that was released Saturday.
"That, we think, would be the right time frame for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes," he said.
Al-Maliki said his remarks did not indicate that he was endorsing Obama over presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain.
"Who they choose as their president is the Americans' business. But it's the business of Iraqis to say what they want. And that's where the people and the government are in general agreement: The tenure of the coalition troops in Iraq should be limited," he said.
"Those who operate on the premise of short time periods in Iraq today are being more realistic," al-Maliki said.
The interview's publication came one day after the White House said President Bush and al-Maliki had agreed to include a "general time horizon" in talks about reducing American combat forces and transferring Iraqi security control across the country.
The Bush administration has steadfastly refused to consider a "timetable" for withdrawing troops from Iraq.
But, in a statement issued Friday, the White House said that "improving conditions" in Iraq would dictate the pace of the negotiations and not "an arbitrary date for withdrawal."
"The day is coming when American forces will step back more and more from combat roles. The day is coming when will be doing more in the way of training and less in the way of fighting," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told CNN's Wolf Blitzer Friday.
"Those goals are being achieved now, as we speak. And so, it's not at all unusual to start to think that there is a horizon out there, in the not too distant future, in which the roles and responsibilities of the U.S. forces are going to change dramatically and those of the Iraqi forces are going to become dominant," she said.
White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said al-Maliki had made it clear that such decisions will be based on continuing positive developments.
"It is our shared view that should the recent security gains continue, we will be able to meet our joint aspirational time horizons," he said.
"It is because of the president's bold surge strategy that we've been able to achieve the gains we're seeing today, be it security, economic or political progress."
The prime minister's remarks emerged as Obama visited Kuwait and Afghanistan before embarking on a tour of the Middle East and Europe to boost his foreign policy credentials. He also plans to visit Iraq.
The Democratic candidate says he supports a phased withdrawal of troops, promising to remove all combat brigades from Iraq within 16 months of taking office if he becomes president.
McCain does not think American troops should return to the United States until Iraqi forces are capable of maintaining a safe, democratic state.
He has been a strong advocate of the 2007 "surge" to escalate U.S. troop levels and says troops should stay in Iraq as long as needed.
McCain says Obama is wrong for opposing the increased troop presence, and Obama says McCain's judgment is flawed.
This makes it more enjoyable, if this story is true claiming that the White House "accidently" sent this to the media.
TIS
White House Accidentally E-Mails to Reporters Story That Maliki Supports Obama Iraq Withdrawal Plan July 19, 2008 1:29 PM
The White House this afternoon accidentally sent to its extensive distribution list a Reuters story headlined "Iraqi PM backs Obama troop exit plan - magazine."
The story relayed how Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki told the German magazine Der Spiegel that "he supported prospective U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's proposal that U.S. troops should leave Iraq within 16 months … ‘U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes,'" the prime minister said.
The White House employee had intended to send the article to an internal distribution list, ABC News' Martha Raddatz reports, but hit the wrong button.
The misfire comes at an odd time for Bush foreign policy, at a time when Obama's campaign alleges the president is moving closer toward Obama's recommendations about international relations -- sending more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, discussing a "general time horizon" for U.S. troop withdrawal and launching talks with Iran.
This could be one of those unexpected events that forever changes the way the world perceives an issue. Iraq's Prime Minister agrees with Obama, and there's no wiggle room or fudge factor. This puts John McCain in an extremely precarious spot: what's left to argue? to argue against Maliki would be to predicate that Iraqi sovereignty at this point means nothing. Obviously, our national interests aren't equivalent to Iraq's, but... Malik isn't listening to the generals on the ground...but the "hasn't been to Iraq" line doesn't work here.
So how will the McCain campaign respond?
(Via e-mail, a prominent Republican strategist who occasionally provides advice to the McCain campaign said, simply, "We're fucked." No response yet from the McCain campaign, although here's what McCain said the last time Maliki mentioned withdrawal: "Since we are succeeding, then I am convinced, as I have said before, we can withdraw and withdraw with honor, not according to a set timetable. And I’m confident that is what Prime Minister Maliki is talking about, since he has told me that for many meetings we’'ve had."
..."One more thing, though: it's worth noting that among cell-phone-only users (i.e., people who don't have landlines at all and use cell phones exclusively), Obama beat McCain by a whopping 29 points, 61-32."
I saw parts of Senator Obama's speech from Germany today. He was always an impressive speaker, but he's grown even more so. He's gained a certain layer of confidence and assuredness. He truly LOOKS presidential now.
I'm a little concerned that he's only 6 points ahead in the latest polls. Let's face it, he should be swamping McCain at this point. His trip to Afghanistan hasn't increased his lead whatsoever.
And in all honesty, I'm a bit concerned about the "Bradley Effect." A 6 point lead may actually be a deficit.
Meh. It's still too far from November for polls to be TOO accurate. I'm sure his numbers will go up once he starts campaigning at home, once he starts going to the people, names his VP, appears in a debate or two. It's summer. People have their minds elsewhere.
I agree that the numbers make no sense, though. How can the current administration have such a low approval rating, but the the guy who promises to continue its policies be so high in the polls?
Meh. It's still too far from November for polls to be TOO accurate. I'm sure his numbers will go up once he starts campaigning at home, once he starts going to the people, names his VP, appears in a debate or two. It's summer. People have their minds elsewhere.
Ditto.
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
I agree that the numbers make no sense, though. How can the current administration have such a low approval rating, but the the guy who promises to continue its policies be so high in the polls?
Because the race isn't Obama/McCain, but "Obama or Not?" Consider that recent poll where over 60% of McCain's supporters say they support him because he's "lesser of the evils."
I saw parts of Senator Obama's speech from Germany today. He was always an impressive speaker, but he's grown even more so. He's gained a certain layer of confidence and assuredness. He truly LOOKS presidential now.
And the visual of 200,000 Germans waving American flags(!)....I guess we'll be debating in the next few days whatever this helps him or if he's running for "President of the World, not America"(as McCain campaign is already shouting)...
But you know, that whole visual scene today made me feel good, and isn't it nice to say that about a current President or possible President these days?
if he's running for "President of the World, not America"(as McCain campaign is already shouting)...
I find that golden, at least Obama's making the "effort" to "run" instead of just going ahead and muscling in on everyone without giving a fuck.
Plus, remember when the President was known as the leader of the Free World?
Just the fact that he's being received like Elvis everywhere shows me what I think everyone should've suspected along...no one appreciates a vicious cowboy, but diplomacy? Hey!
I'm a little concerned that he's only 6 points ahead in the latest polls. Let's face it, he should be swamping McCain at this point. His trip to Afghanistan hasn't increased his lead whatsoever.
And in all honesty, I'm a bit concerned about the "Bradley Effect." A 6 point lead may actually be a deficit.
His slide in the polls this week are a reflection of about ten days ago when he "clarified" some of the positions he took during the primary, thus re-positioning himself toward the center. He is having trouble with the left wing of the Democratic party and the Clintons aren't being especially helpful. I remain optimistic the lefties will come to their senses by November. He should get a bump in next week's polls which will reflect his gains from this trip alog with John McCain's geezer ride with Bush Sr., and his speech in front of the cheese counter. According to the elecotral map polls he is well ahead.
I have to tell you, the visual of McCain last night was fairly amusing. In response to Obama's speech in Germany, he was interviewed outside of a German restaurant, where I believe he had just made a speech. It looked like he was campaigning at the beer garden in Epcot!
I don't believe that McCain is stupid and easily manipulated, which I do think of President Bush. I think he might even be a decent man. However, I can't even consider voting for anyone who bases their campaign on the promise that we will have more of what we've had to endure for the past 8 years.
I have to tell you, the visual of McCain last night was fairly amusing. In response to Obama's speech in Germany, he was interviewed outside of a German restaurant, where I believe he had just made a speech. It looked like he was campaigning at the beer garden in Epcot!
I don't believe that McCain is stupid and easily manipulated, which I do think of President Bush. I think he might even be a decent man. However, I can't even consider voting for anyone who bases their campaign on the promise that we will have more of what we've had to endure for the past 8 years.
He should have gotten the GOP nod in 2000, and he probably would have been a better President than Bush....a pity that the Rove clique's "black lovechild" nonsense killed McCain's campaign in South Carolina...
Looks like McCain now endorses Obama's plan for a 16-month Iraq withdrawal time table....
"...But now the administration’s agreement to consider a “time horizon” for troop withdrawals from Iraq has moved it, at least in the public perception, in the direction of the policies of Senator Barack Obama . That has thrown Mr. McCain on the political defensive in his opposition to a timed withdrawal, Republicans in the party’s foreign party establishment say.
On Friday Mr. McCain went so far as to say that the idea of a 16-month withdrawal, which Mr. Obama supports, was “a pretty good timetable,” although he included the caveat that it had to be based on conditions on the ground.
Republicans also say the administration’s decision to authorize high-level talks with Iran and North Korea has undercut Mr. McCain’s skepticism about engagement with those countries, leaving the perception that he is more conservative than Mr. Bush on the issue.
Essentially, as the administration has taken a more pragmatic approach to foreign policy, the decision of Mr. McCain to adhere to his more hawkish positions illustrates the continuing influence of neoconservatives on his thinking even as they are losing clout within the administration. "
Frankly these polls are giving me a headache. Gallup in one poll has McCain up 2 poits and in another has Obama up nine. Maybe they just wat to keep us in suspense. In reality this thing won't come into focus until after the conventions when people other than political junkies start paying attention.
Also I do not understand why they give us these polls the way they do. It doesn't really matter if it is 50% each. What matters is the electoral map, and who is ahead in which states, and by how much. For some reason the media keeps this from us until election night.
Sometimes you can tell what the internal polls are showing. For instance allegedly Florida is more in play than the Dems had first thought and Obama is puttig some heavy money here, opening offices overywhere. If this continues then Flrida is in play. If suddenly in mid October he starts closing those office and opens others in Ohio and New Mexico we know what his polls are telling him. If these people on cable would stop yelling at each other and using McCain and Obama surrogates to make up total lies about the candidates, perhaps we could get a more intelligent analysis of what is really going on.
Hillary Clinton agrees to Denver keynote: Sign she's not running mate
BY DAVID SALTONSTALL DAILY NEWS SENIOR CORRESPONDENT
Wednesday, July 30th 2008, 9:52 AM
Hillary Clinton has agreed to speak on Day 2 of the Democratic convention to commemorate the 88th anniversary of women's right to vote - a move seen by delegates as another sign she won't be on Barack Obama's ticket, the Daily News learned.
A top Obama aide told party leaders in a conference call last night that Clinton has accepted the offer to be the featured prime-time Tuesday night speaker, a high-profile slot that some of Clinton's own people have floated in recent days.
Aug. 26 is the anniversary of the ratification of the 19th Amendment, which granted women the right to vote in 1920.
That historical tidbit was shared by Obama aide Jennifer Koch, one of Obama's deputy political directors for the Northeast, in a conference call last night night with a group of Massachusetts delegates, among them DNC Rules Committee co-chair James Roosevelt.
Koch added that Obama's vice presidential nominee - whomever that turns out to be - will likely speak Monday and Wednesday evening as part of the traditional build-up to Obama accepting the nomination on Thursday night.
Some of those on the conference call concluded Clinton was not under serious consideration for vice president, and would instead be filling a more limited - albeit historically charged - role at the Denver convention.
"She said Hillary Clinton has accepted the role of speaking on the passage of the 19th Amendment," said Gus Bickford, a DNC member and superdelegate from Massachusetts who was on the call. "It really does send the signal that Hillary will not be the vice president."
Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for the Obama campaign, had no immediate comment on when or in what context Clinton might be addressing the convention, in keeping with a general policy on the planned Denver pow-wow. "We are not talking about any convention decisions," he told The News.
The jockeying comes as Obama and his team are said to be seriously vetting several potential vice-presidential picks, among them Gov. Tim Kaine of Virginia and Sens. Joe Biden of Delaware and Evan Bayh of Indiana. All three men have been placed under the political microscope by Obama aides in a way that Clinton has not, insiders say.
Giving Clinton a prominent, prime-time speaking role - on a topic freighted with significance for Clinton, the first woman to almost win a presidential nomination - is a fitting consolation prize that should help to heal remaining tensions within the party, some said.
"For me, Barack Obama is the nominee and we all have to get together, because this is not going to be an easy election," said Bickford, a longtime Clinton supporter. "Having her be the keynote on one night is enough for me."
Quote: "We just got off a conference call with Camp McCain, defending their new ad comparing Barack Obama to Paris Hilton and Britney Spears. They said they thought the ad was legitimate because Obama is a big celebrity (which happens to be what John McCain was, too, when he came home from Vietnam and started to build his political career), and Britney and Paris were Number 2 and 3.
The problem: Anyone with even a vague sense of pop culture knows that Britney and Paris are yesterday's news. Paris and Britney don't even make the list any more. Instead, the top 10, in order: Oprah Winfrey, Tiger Woods, Angelina Jolie, Beyonce Knowles, David Beckham, Johnny Depp, Jay-Z, The Police, JK Rowling, Brad Pitt.
So, they didn't pick other big celebrities, who were either men, or black, or married. What they picked was two sexually available white women. But it must have been a coincidence, because we know John McCain wants to run an elevated campaign focusing on the serious issues that America faces."
You know, that article has a fucking good point. I hate to use the "R" word because I used to despise liberals who threw it around like candy, but.....that ad was Racist.
If not intentional, then it's indirect. Besides, if they were gonna go that angle, why not try something like the "3 AM" little white girl ad that Hillary ran earlier this year?
I've gotta think that the McCain internal polling must be showing something that is making them desperate to "define" Obama the way they are. McCain who spent a career trying to be a decent guy is going to lose a great deal of respect from undecided voters and moderate republicans if he continues down this Rovian road.
Clinton for VP drive folds, as hopes for dream ticket fade
WASHINGTON (AFP) - "Vote Both," a group dedicated to persuading Barack Obama to pick former foe Hillary Clinton as his vice presidential running mate, is folding, as hopes of a "dream ticket" fade.
Organizers Adam Parkhomenko and Sam Arora said they were halting their campaign, based on indications that the presumptive Democratic nominee was looking elsewhere for a right-hand man, or woman.
"Because it seems that Senator Obama has made his decision to offer the slot on the ticket to another candidate, we believe that continuing to ask him to pick Hillary is no longer helpful to our party's chances of winning in November," they wrote in a website message to supporters.
The two former Clinton staffers concluded that reports that Obama had offered Clinton a prime-time speaking role on the second night of the party's convention in Denver next month meant she would not be his pick for number two.
Vice presidential nominees traditionally speak on the penultimate night of the four-day convention.
"We worked for Hillary for a combined 10 years, so we know how many of you may be feeling," they wrote.
"And to those who are hesitant to support Obama right now, we urge you to keep giving him the chance to earn your vote. We are confident he will."
When she wrapped up her historic bid to become America's first woman president in June, Clinton pleaded with supporters to transfer their affections to Obama, to break the Republican stranglehold on the White House.
But some fervent supporters said they would find it hard to back Obama after such a drawn-out and bitter fight.
The former first lady, who piled up votes among women and working-class voters especially, has already campaigned with Obama, and has said she plans to throw herself into the fight to elect him in battleground states.
Vice presidential speculation surrounding Obama, and his Republican rival John McCain, is peaking in the month-long run-up to the party conventions.
The Democratic spotlight has recently fallen on Virginia Governor Tim Kaine.
Meanwhile Republican Mitt Romney, rumored to be on McCain's shortlist, was quoted in the Washington Post as saying "I don't plan on being part of the ticket" -- hardly a cast-iron refusal to serve if selected.
Think of it this way. Mccain has been a US Senator for over two decades. Among the 100+ Senators that have been in office during that period, he is one of the most well known and publicized. Also, he has run for President twice before.
So, my question is: why isn't he waxing Obama in the polls?
Think of it this way. Mccain has been a US Senator for over two decades. Among the 100+ Senators that have been in office during that period, he is one of the most well known and publicized. Also, he has run for President twice before.
So, my question is: why isn't he waxing Obama in the polls?
I just love how the media loves concentrating on why Obama isn't more ahead, and yet don't question why the media "golden boy" isn't ahead by a large margin, let alone ahead at all.
The current administration is like an albatross around McCain's neck. I almost feel bad for him (except not really).
Someone pointed out earlier that it might be a whole different world now if McCain had gotten the nomination in 2000 and run against Gore. Who knows what might have been?
The current administration is like an albatross around McCain's neck. I almost feel bad for him (except not really).
Someone pointed out earlier that it might be a whole different world now if McCain had gotten the nomination in 2000 and run against Gore. Who knows what might have been?
"For all sad words of tongue and pen, The saddest are these, 'It might have been'.” ..."
Think of it this way. Mccain has been a US Senator for over two decades. Among the 100+ Senators that have been in office during that period, he is one of the most well known and publicized. Also, he has run for President twice before.
So, my question is: why isn't he waxing Obama in the polls?
McCain can thank Bush.
Basically he is not a great campaigner. Can't stay on message, disorganized, and getting a little senile.
Early this morning my wife went to work out at our club and Barrack Obama was in the house doing his morning workout. She went completely nuts. When she got home she tld me, and I went there but he'd already left.
Early this morning my wife went to work out at our club and Barrack Obama was in the house doing his morning workout. She went completely nuts. When she got home she tld me, and I went there but he'd already left.
How cool!! I can imagine her suprise. I did hear that he works out daily though. As a matter of fact they had this ridiculous story (I am assuming it was for humor, but who knows) asking if Obama was too skinny to be President? Anyway, good for your wife. What a time not to have a camera (I assume), hu?
Here's a terrific collection of Obama's amazing gaffes over the past few months. My all time favorite is the '57 States' comment but all of them are pretty darned entertaining.
Someone pointed out earlier that it might be a whole different world now if McCain had gotten the nomination in 2000 and run against Gore. Who knows what might have been?
I would have have voted for JM in 2000. Gore had too much Clinton slime on him. I wanted JM to get the nomination, but now I feel his time has passed. GO BO - That's a great campaign slogan, don't you think?
Here's a terrific collection of Obama's amazing gaffes over the past few months. My all time favorite is the '57 States' comment but all of them are pretty darned entertaining.
Someone pointed out earlier that it might be a whole different world now if McCain had gotten the nomination in 2000 and run against Gore. Who knows what might have been?
I would have have voted for JM in 2000. Gore had too much Clinton slime on him. I wanted JM to get the nomination, but now I feel his time has passed. GO BO - That's a great campaign slogan, don't you think?
I can't see how this ad campaign can help McCain. He's basically sending a message that Obama is a star and generates excitement while McCain is dull. The ad projects a vibrancy about Obama while MCain comes off as bitter and unhip. This accentuates the age gap, which I don't think is a good idea for McCain.
Ready to lead on Day One? Well, the American people will decide that.
Truth is negative ads work. Barack has slid in the polls (although McCain has not gone over 45%). Barack needs to get back on message, and make the debate about the economy, not about him.
And all this time I thought that it was Monica who had Clinton's slime all over her dress!
I didn't see Clinton slime on Gore...if anything Gore tried to run away from Clinton, and got hammered for doing it. In retrospect given Clinton's recent behavior, Gore was probably right.
I can't see how this ad campaign can help McCain. He's basically sending a message that Obama is a star and generates excitement while McCain is dull. The ad projects a vibrancy about Obama while MCain comes off as bitter and unhip. This accentuates the age gap, which I don't think is a good idea for McCain.
Ready to lead on Day One? Well, the American people will decide that.
I think that Obama is trying to conserve resources and message until the Democratic Convention when he and the Party will unleash a storm of ads and campaigning against McCain - sort of a September surprise. Repeatedly, political pundits will state that independents are not paying much attention and won't until after the conventions. Obama may be hoping that McCain will punch himself out between now and then.
McCain's recent ads are meant to firm up his Republican base and distract people generally from negative economic news. One of them has a decidedly religious theme and is meant to remind some of the audience of the interpreted message of The Book of Revelation.
Good point Olivant. I was surprised to see that Obama was outspent by McCain given that Obama has far more resources. Once this dust up about race and who said what first is out of the way and the conventions are held, Obama should be in a superior position to outspend McCain and close the deal in October.
In looking at why Obama is underperforming, given the wide lead he should have, I think most Americans still have their doubts, just as they did in 1980 when Reagan didn't really see a big shift to him until the final weekend of the campaign.
I read a good analysis about how Obama really cannot be pegged as anything. He's not fully black or white, he's not your typical Chicago Pol, he is not really from any region of the country, and the fact that he lived in Indonesia during many formative years has an effect on his mannerisms, his bearing and everything else, so in our eyes he is not a "typical American," and it probably gives people pause.
File this one under "Bill Clinton just can't let go." I'm really beginning to resent him for being such a sore loser.
Bill Clinton refuses to say Barack Obama is 'ready' for White House
BY MICHAEL McAULIFF DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU
Even after his wife has dropped out of the presidential race, Bill Clinton has had only tepid praise for Barack Obama. WASHINGTON - Bill Clinton regrets some things he said - and didn't say - on the campaign trail. But there's one thing he still can't utter: Barack Obama is ready to be President.
"You can argue that nobody is ready to be President," the former President told ABC News.
"You can argue that even if you've been vice president for eight years, that no one can be fully ready for the pressures of the office," Clinton said Monday during a visit to Rwanda. That's probably not what Team Obama wanted to hear from the former commander in chief, whose role in Obama's election push and at the Democratic National Convention remains in flux.
Team Obama has said Clinton will be an asset, but so far he and the Illinois senator have spoken only once, by phone, since the primaries ended - a fact that has peeved some Obama supporters.
Bubba's backers concede his unwillingness to say his party's nominee is ready to sit in the Oval Office was a faux pas.
"The political answer is to just say, 'Yes,' period," said Democratic strategist Chris Lehane. "But as a former President, he has a special perspective on what it takes."
Clinton couldn't just say the political thing, Lehane added, because he's still smarting from Hillary Clinton's bitter defeat.
"This is someone whose spouse was on the ticket, a person he felt tremendously strong about, who he felt had the ability to become President," Lehane said.
Clinton and his wife argued in nearly every speech that she was ready tobe President on day one.
Bubba did praise some of the very same traits he ripped in the primaries - including Obama's ability to lead through inspiring words, which he trashed as empty rhetoric on the campaign trail.
"He clearly can inspire and motivate people and energize them, which is a very important part of being President," Clinton said. "And he's smart as a whip so there's nothing he can't learn."
Clinton repeatedly became a distraction for his wife's campaign, and many Obama supporters felt he and Hillary were racially insensitive.
In spite of Clinton's lackluster endorsement Monday, Team Obama will take it. "He and Sen. Clinton are tremendous assets," spokesman Bill Burton said.
Bubba said he wished he could have a few of his words back. "There are things that I wished I urged her to do, things I wished I said, things I wished I hadn't said," Clinton said. But he defended his record on race. "I am not a racist - I never made a racist comment and I didn't attack him personally," Clinton said.
Clinton, caught in numerous finger-wagging outbursts in the campaign, insisted he's not angry at Obama. "I think everybody's got a right to run for President who qualifies under the Constitution," Clinton said. "I'd be the last person to begrudge anybody their ambition."
Bill Clinton has always been a dick, but lately he's been a super dick.
As for people who vote for McCain because they fear Obama will make the Book of Revelations happen.....is it me, or is that just silly?
Now get on me for dissing religion. I'm not.
Consider this: If Obama was elected, and indeed he brings upon the Apocalypse, won't that prove to naysayers, agnostics, and atheists that God not only exists but the prophecies foretold in the Bible are true? I mean that's a good thing, isn't it?
Besides, you all want to go to Heaven, right? Why wait for suicide or natural death? You'll save yourselves the dying part and get a free trip to the Kingdom of Heaven.
Whoa! I missed this whole Obama-Apocalypse thing. Who is saying that? All I heard was that nut case Dobson is asking people to pray for rain the night of Obama's acceptance speech.
Obama stalls in public polling, by David Paul Kuhn
In the two months since Barack Obama captured the Democratic nomination, he has hit a ceiling in public opinion, proving unable to make significant gains with any segment of the national electorate.
While Obama still leads in most matchups with John McCain, the Illinois senator’s apparent stall in the polls is a sobering reminder to Democrats intoxicated with his campaign’s promises to expand the electoral map beyond the boundaries that have constrained other recent party nominees.
That gap between expectations and reality comes as Democrats enjoy the most favorable political winds since at least 1976. At least eight in ten Americans believe the nation is on the wrong track. The Republican president is historically unpopular. From stunning Democratic gains in party registration to the high levels of economic anxiety, Obama by most every measure should have a healthy lead. Yet in poll after poll, Obama conspicuously fails to cross the 50-percent threshold.
Or as ABC News polling director Gary Langer asked, “If everything is so good for Barack Obama, why isn’t everything so good for Barack Obama?”
Obama remains ahead, depending on the national poll, by low to high single digits. The Gallup Poll Daily tracking survey, which randomly interviews at least 1,000 voters each day, has recently found that Obama leads by 3 to 4 percentage points.
In the first full week of the general election, June 9 to 15, Obama led by between 2 and 7 percentage points. Just short of two months later, registered voters have not significantly shifted their view, as Gallup finds public opinion still fluctuating between roughly the same margins.
“What’s remarkable this summer is the stability of this race,” Gallup’s director Frank Newport said. “In a broad sense, it is similar to previous elections.”
In Gallup’s last national poll prior to the 2004 party conventions, for example, John Kerry led George W. Bush 47 percent to 43 percent. In 2000, also in Gallup’s last national poll prior to the party conventions, Bush led Al Gore 46 to 41 percent.
Three demographic groups have generally kept Obama ahead in the past two months: African-Americans, youth and Hispanics. But a lead based on those groups is a tenuous one. The youth vote, notorious for not meeting expectations, must turn out in significantly higher numbers than in past elections. Obama must continue to win the black vote nearly unanimously and still turn out new African American voters. McCain must continue to underperform with Hispanics by about 10 percentage points compared to Bush in the summer of 2004.
McCain might also be said to have hit a ceiling himself. At best, he has only statistically tied Obama for fleeting periods this summer.
Yet in this Democratic year, the subject that dominates chatter among pollsters is Obama’s stubbornly slim lead.
If there is a primary explanation as to why the race has remained close this summer, it is that Obama has failed to make gains overall with white voters, who still cast about three in four ballots on Election Day.
Like Gore in 2000, Obama nearly splits white women and loses white men by a large margin, according to an aggregate of polling in June and July 2008 and 2000 polling by the Pew Research Center for People and the Press.
Depending upon the week in June or July, by Gallup’s measure, Obama has roughly fluctuated between splitting or, at worst, trailing by about five percent with white women. In that same period, Obama has only won between 34 and 37 percent of white men.
In general—and with men in particular—Pew's data shows that Obama's gains with young whites compared to Gore in 2000 are offset by a weakness with older whites.
Obama also seems to have hit a ceiling with Hispanics. Latino support fluctuates between 57 percent by the latest weekly measure to 68 percent the week before—roughly the margin of Hispanic support that has marked the entire summer, by Gallup's measure.
What all this suggests is a general election that is much tighter than many analysts predicted and defined by far more stubborn levels of support.
As it stands, on August 3 the RealClearPolitics average of national polling had 46.6 percent of the public supporting Obama, putting him narrowly ahead of McCain. Exactly two months before, on June 3, that same average had Obama at the exact same level of support—46.6 percent.
Whoa! I missed this whole Obama-Apocalypse thing. Who is saying that? All I heard was that nut case Dobson is asking people to pray for rain the night of Obama's acceptance speech.
Your usual Republican Christian nutjobs...who else?
All I heard was that nut case Dobson is asking people to pray for rain the night of Obama's acceptance speech.
I don't think the word nutcase does James Dobson justice. He makes Pat Robertson look like a shaggy haired, patchouli wearing, kumbaya singing liberal.
It hit me last night that I am already sick and tired of McCain and Obama. They should just both shut up and go away until the conventions.
Funny, I was thinking the same thing. Problem is, if Obama takes too much time off, it looks like Hillary will start in with her 18 million voices need to be heard rhetoric; dividing the party even further than she already has.
If the rollcall vote occurs, it could be a Democratic Party strategy to enhance Hillary's presence at the convention and attract her supporters to Obama.
I think that Obama may be revisiting Hillary as VP and her high profile at the convention could facilitate his choice either way.
Only in fucking Florida. Relax Floridians, I own a home there too. Well, more fodder for Carl Hiaasen and Dave Barry.
Man held in Fla. on charge of threatening Obama By CURT ANDERSON, AP Legal Affairs Writer
MIAMI - A man who authorities said was keeping weapons and military-style gear in his hotel room and car appeared in court Thursday on charges he threatened to assassinate Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.
Raymond Hunter Geisel, 22, was arrested by the Secret Service on Saturday in Miami and was ordered held at Miami's downtown detention center without bail Thursday by a federal magistrate.
A Secret Service affidavit charges that Geisel made the threat during a training class for bail bondsmen in Miami in late July. According to someone else in the 48-member class, Geisel allegedly referred to Obama with a racial epithet and continued, "If he gets elected, I'll assassinate him myself."
Obama was most recently in Florida on Aug. 1-2 but did not visit the South Florida area.
Another person in the class quoted Geisel as saying that "he hated George W. Bush and that he wanted to put a bullet in the president's head," according to the Secret Service.
Geisel denied in a written statement to a Secret Service agent that he ever made those threats, and the documents don't indicate that he ever took steps to carry out any assassination. He was charged only with threatening Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee, but not for any threat against President Bush.
Geisel's court-appointed attorney declined comment. The charge of threatening a major candidate for president or vice president carries a maximum prison sentence of five years.
The Obama campaign declined comment Thursday on the alleged threat.
In the interview with a Secret Service agent, Geisel said "if he wanted to kill Senator Obama he simply would shoot him with a sniper rifle, but then he claimed that he was just joking," according to court documents.
A search of Geisel's 1998 Ford Explorer and hotel room in Miami uncovered a loaded 9mm handgun, knives, dozens of rounds of ammunition including armor-piercing types, body armor, military-style fatigues and a machete. The SUV, which has Maine license plates, was wired with flashing red and yellow emergency lights.
Geisel told the Secret Service he was originally from Bangor, Maine, and had been living recently in a houseboat in the Florida Keys town of Marathon, according to court documents. He said he used the handgun for training for the bail bondsman class, had the knives for protection and used the machete to cut brush in Maine.
In the affidavit, the Secret Service said Geisel told agents that he suffered from psychiatric problems including post-traumatic stress disorder, but he couldn't provide the names of any facilities where he sought treatment.
If Hillary wants to have a roll call vote, it can be done at 3:00 a.m. Its about time someone bitch slaps her and puts her in her place.
Agree, and I want Republicans on this site who plan to vote for McCain to admit this fact: If Obama wins this fall, that means Hillary..and Bill...are knocked out of the White House ever again probably.
Come on, even AppleonYa might be smiling at that prospect.
I'm on vacation, so posting will suffer this week and the next. But I was impressed by the responses--okay, some of the responses--to the previous item, in which I asked, Can a black man be elected president? Note the wide range of replies--from it's irrelevant to it's the main thing. Thus proving that we are indeed in the midst of a grand political science experiment, yet one with tremendous real-life consequences.
One noteworthy reply came directly to me in an email from Jeffrey Hart, a veteran conservative who has been a senior editor at The National Review since 1968 and who wrote speeches for Nixon and Reagan. He's an Obamacon, one of the rightwingers who are hot for Barack Obama. He writes:
I've read you Blog on maybe we can't elect a black president. But three weeks ago Obama was ahead in Gallup by 4-6 points. Obama was black then too. Then there came his trip to the Middle East, Iraq, Germany. Apparently successful. Now he and McCain are about equal in the national poll.
What explains that?
Only very recently Obama might have brought race into the foreground when he said "They will try to frighten you with etc. and the fact that "I don't look like those other presidents" on the currency. McCain seized on that. Hoped that race would not be part of the campaign. Sure. He's delighted to have race in the foreground. In the Sat. NYT Bob Herbert cites earlier McCain innuendoes about race.
But those weren't taking hold as Obama's polls remained very good. Did Obama make a big mistake in that "not looking like other presidents"? Or have McCain attack ads about flip-flopping been enough to pull Obama's polls down?
That is, I think Obama's polls sank before the recent race business. What to do? Obama should attack (and run TV spots): 1. McCain supported a hugely expensive war sold with lies. Be specific. 2. McCain wants to make Bush tax cuts permanent -- "Hood Robin" tax-cuts. Robin Hood took from the rich and gave to the poor. Bush-McCain Hood Robin cuts give to the richest and take from the rest. 3. McCain would appoint Judges "like Roberts and Alito." There goes Roe. Women Alert. 4. McCain would renew Bush's attempt to attach Social Security to the stock market. The stock market drops about 200 points every time you look. 5. McCain has no national plan for medical care. 6. Play clips of Gramm saying people are "whiners" about lousy economy. That was a "gaffe," defined as when a politician tells you what he really thinks. Gramm was McCain's economic guru until he let it out what McCain really thinks. 7. Play TV clips of McCain hugging and kissing Bush. That absurdity sez it all. It may be that Obama is too nice. But to win he must go on the attack, but with comic touches. 8. The three presidential debates will be devastating for McCain: Pericles vs. Donald Duck.
Wow. It's not every day that Obama gets such advice (and cheerleading) from a National Review editor and former Reaganaut. Whether Hart is correct or not--and his plan sounds good to me--the fact that a fellow with his pedigree is rooting for Obama and hoping for him to hit McCain damn hard shows that this sure is one different election--and not just because of the race of the candidates.
I'm on vacation, so posting will suffer this week and the next. But I was impressed by the responses--okay, some of the responses--to the previous item, in which I asked, Can a black man be elected president? Note the wide range of replies--from it's irrelevant to it's the main thing. Thus proving that we are indeed in the midst of a grand political science experiment, yet one with tremendous real-life consequences.
One noteworthy reply came directly to me in an email from Jeffrey Hart, a veteran conservative who has been a senior editor at The National Review since 1968 and who wrote speeches for Nixon and Reagan. He's an Obamacon, one of the rightwingers who are hot for Barack Obama. He writes:
I've read you Blog on maybe we can't elect a black president. But three weeks ago Obama was ahead in Gallup by 4-6 points. Obama was black then too. Then there came his trip to the Middle East, Iraq, Germany. Apparently successful. Now he and McCain are about equal in the national poll.
What explains that?
Only very recently Obama might have brought race into the foreground when he said "They will try to frighten you with etc. and the fact that "I don't look like those other presidents" on the currency. McCain seized on that. Hoped that race would not be part of the campaign. Sure. He's delighted to have race in the foreground. In the Sat. NYT Bob Herbert cites earlier McCain innuendoes about race.
But those weren't taking hold as Obama's polls remained very good. Did Obama make a big mistake in that "not looking like other presidents"? Or have McCain attack ads about flip-flopping been enough to pull Obama's polls down?
That is, I think Obama's polls sank before the recent race business. What to do? Obama should attack (and run TV spots): 1. McCain supported a hugely expensive war sold with lies. Be specific. 2. McCain wants to make Bush tax cuts permanent -- "Hood Robin" tax-cuts. Robin Hood took from the rich and gave to the poor. Bush-McCain Hood Robin cuts give to the richest and take from the rest. 3. McCain would appoint Judges "like Roberts and Alito." There goes Roe. Women Alert. 4. McCain would renew Bush's attempt to attach Social Security to the stock market. The stock market drops about 200 points every time you look. 5. McCain has no national plan for medical care. 6. Play clips of Gramm saying people are "whiners" about lousy economy. That was a "gaffe," defined as when a politician tells you what he really thinks. Gramm was McCain's economic guru until he let it out what McCain really thinks. 7. Play TV clips of McCain hugging and kissing Bush. That absurdity sez it all. It may be that Obama is too nice. But to win he must go on the attack, but with comic touches. 8. The three presidential debates will be devastating for McCain: Pericles vs. Donald Duck.
Wow. It's not every day that Obama gets such advice (and cheerleading) from a National Review editor and former Reaganaut. Whether Hart is correct or not--and his plan sounds good to me--the fact that a fellow with his pedigree is rooting for Obama and hoping for him to hit McCain damn hard shows that this sure is one different election--and not just because of the race of the candidates.
I'm not sure what it means when someone states or writes that America can't elect a black President. Given the vote totals accumulated by Obama through the primaries and the support Obama has accrued as indicated by polls is prima facia evidence that America can elect a black President.
In any case, it might be useful tot he reader to keep in mind that percentages reported through a poll may be of likely voters or of registered voters. Current polls state that likely voters favor McCain and registered voters favor Obama. However, many of the percentages reported in either type of poll are within the 3-4% typical matgin of error.
McCain Accepts Donations from Jordanian War Profiteer Under Federal Investigation
"If there were a group of questionable donations all with the name Abdullah that were funneled through a guy in Jordan who is a Jordanian national who is under investigation for war profiteering and it were Barack Obama instead of John McCain would this be a big ger deal?"
Remember the Gore-Chinese campaign funding nonsense years back? Here we go again.
I heard on one of the cable news channels that the Gov. of Ohio will not take the VP position. Doesn't want it.
I'm now thinking that it might be Bill Ricardson although Hillary is not out of the running. But one network has Obama with a projected 260 electoral votes already. If so, that makes Hillary expendable and a choice such as Richardson or Biden more likely.
Just my opinion, but I still think it will be Biden. Although anything is possible, I really don't think Hillary is in running. We should know this month sometime though.
I heard on one of the cable news channels that the Gov. of Ohio will not take the VP position. Doesn't want it.
I'm now thinking that it might be Bill Ricardson although Hillary is not out of the running. But one network has Obama with a projected 260 electoral votes already. If so, that makes Hillary expendable and a choice such as Richardson or Biden more likely.
Just my opinion, but I still think it will be Biden. Although anything is possible, I really don't think Hillary is in running. We should know this month sometime though.
TIS
I think Hillary is pretty much out of it, being that they've pretty much made her the star of the Tuesday night show at the convention. I just can't see the upside of having a Clinton looking over my shoulder if I'm Obama. But you never know.
Richardson would help him with the Latino vote, for sure. But I think most Democrats are coming to their senses anyway. Meaning that he'll probably carry the Latino vote either way.
Hey, if they ever do away with term limits, how about a Bill Clinton/John Edwards ticket? It would give hope to fat women and used up crack whores everywhere.
At this point it's becoming more about Electoral College votes than the national popular vote or racial/ethnic or gender components thereof. It doesn't get much press, but Obama has had an electoral vote lead for weeks now. That's probably one reason that Obama's campaign has not been as aggressive as they might otherwise be - they don't want to make any mistakes.
With the Democrats already pretty secure with about 66% of the Hispanic vote and probably 90% of the black vote, they may want Richardson on the ticket to selectively secure the elctoral vote in southwest states where there are plenty of Hispanics. The black vote may make the Carolinas a battleground anmd Biden may help there a Kaine certainly might also. It gets pretty complicated.
Hey, if they ever do away with term limits, how about a Bill Clinton/John Edwards ticket? It would give hope to fat women and used up crack whores everywhere.
Yes and they would change the National Anthem to "Blowin' In The Wind."
I didn't see this mentioned here and I don't know how many political "geeks" there are on the BB, but......Obama's website is sending it's member's an e-mail with the chance to hear via text message on your cell phone who his VP choice will be. (you can hear via e-mail too) How cool is that?
Granted, it may leak out before that, but supposedly, he will do it via text message/e-mail to the site's members just before he announces it. What an original concept. Anyway, I think it's really neat.
I didn't see this mentioned here and I don't know how many political "geeks" there are on the BB, but......Obama's website is sending it's member's an e-mail with the chance to hear via text message on your cell phone who his VP choice will be. (you can hear via e-mail too) How cool is that?
Granted, it may leak out before that, but supposedly, he will do it via text message/e-mail to the site's members just before he announces it. What an original concept. Anyway, I think it's really neat.
TIS
It is a good idea, TIS. If you think about it, it's almost a veiled swipe at McCain for being an out of touch "old man," being that Obama's people thought of it first. It's like they're saying, Hey, step into the 21st century. I mean, think about it, do you know many people in their 70's who even know what a text message is? Hell, most of them don't even know how to email.
Don't get me wrong, that alone wouldn't be a good enough reason to vote for anyone, but it's just another example of Obama being more "hip" than McCain.
Speaking of McCain. I think he's going to pick Ridge, and I have to admit, that's not a bad ticket. I also have to admit that I would have voted for that tandem had McCain gotten the nomination over Bush back in 2000.
I also think this situation with Russia and Georgia is going to give Mccain a boost; for how long is anyone's guess.
For the first time, I really think it's going to be a tight race. Obama has to start talking about more than just "change" right now. Mark Penn (Hillary's boy) recently remarked that, "just a 5 point swing can turn an Obama victory into a McCain landslide." Granted, it was a jealous, stupid thing to say, due to his very public chuminess with Hillary, but it's probably not too far from the truth.
It is still August, between now and election day is an eternity in politics. Obama needs to get more specific, and he needs to hammer the economy issue, and not get thrown off messsage by McCain's taunting him for being a "celebrity."
He can turn the Georgia - Russia issue on its head by tying Bush's "I saw Putin's soul" policy to McCain (even though that is totlly irrational and unfair).
I think Obama is waiting until after the convention to let loose with a barrage of ads, etc. that will pillory McCain for his association with Bush et al.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A policy memo by Sen. Hillary Clinton's one-time chief strategist challenging Sen. Barack Obama's "American roots" could make it difficult to close any remaining gaps between the former rivals, the magazine writer who revealed the memo said Tuesday.
In a March 2007 memo, Mark Penn, Clinton's former chief strategist, wrote, "all of these articles about his boyhood in Indonesia and his life in Hawaii are geared toward showing his background is diverse, multicultural and putting that in a new light. Save it for 2050," according to Atlantic magazine writer Joshua Green.
"It also exposes a very strong weakness for him -- his roots to basic American values and culture are at best limited. I cannot imagine America electing a president during a time of war who is not at his center fundamentally American in his thinking and in his values," Penn wrote.
Penn was forced out of his position as chief strategist in April after revelations that he lobbied for a U.S.-Colombia trade deal on behalf of the Colombian government despite Clinton's opposition to the measure. Penn, however, never left the campaign entirely.
The magazine article was posted on The Atlantic's Web site Monday evening. It will also appear in the September edition of the magazine, which is expected to hit newsstands August 19.
"Her top adviser suggesting that angle is striking," Jonathan Martin of Politico said. "These are the kinds of things you see in e-mails that you see circulating about Obama in this sort of subterranean smear campaign against him. You never see these things voiced by the candidates."
Green noted that Clinton did not pursue the strategy Penn suggested during the contentious Democratic primary battle, which resulted in Obama winning more delegate than the former first lady and locking up their party's presidential nomination.
"Had Sen. Clinton followed Mark Penn's advice, it would have caused her more angst than good," said James Carville, a Democratic strategist and a CNN contributor.
The revelations could keep any remaining animosity between the Obama and Clinton camps alive, Green said.
"What's going on right now is that a lot of Obama supporters and fundraisers are trying very hard to retire Sen. Clinton's debt. One reason they've had difficulty doing so is the dislike among Obama people for Mark Penn specifically," Green told CNN on Tuesday. "They tend to blame him for the nature of these negative attacks."
In the Atlantic article, which is based on internal Clinton campaign memos and e-mail messages, Green highlighted bitter fighting among Clinton's staff, writing that her advisers "couldn't execute strategy; they routinely attacked and undermined each other and Clinton never forced a resolution."
Frustrations over how the New York senator's campaign ended drove many Clinton staffers to turn over the campaign's internal communication, Green said.
"This was a historic campaign. People thought it would be an easy march to the nomination and then an easy win in the fall. And instead, we've had this historic presidential election where she's collapsed and a first-term senator has won the Democratic nomination," Green said. "So I think it's just the nature of the defeat has made a lot of people frustrated, and there's certainly people out there who really want the kind of full story to come to light so people can understand exactly what happened."
The internal communication suggests that the lack of clear lines of authority within the campaign meant that issues that ultimately led to Clinton's defeat -- her lack of support in the Iowa caucuses, the absence of a strategy to capture delegates after the Super Tuesday primaries and her failure to prepare for a protracted primary fight -- went unaddressed for months, Green wrote.
"What is clear from the internal documents is that Clinton's loss derived not from specific decisions she made but rather from the preponderance of the many she did not make," Green wrote. "Her hesitancy and habit of avoiding hard choices exacted a price that eventually sank her chances at the presidency."
The documents also suggest that Clinton's staff remained divided throughout the campaign on whether she should run a positive campaign or attack Obama and her other rivals for the Democratic nomination as being untrustworthy and underqualified, Green wrote.
"Clinton's top advisers never agreed on the answer. Over the course of the campaign, they split into competing factions that drifted in and out of Clinton's favor but always seemed to work at cross purposes. And Clinton herself could never quite decide who was right," he wrote.
Surprised Hillary rejected Penn and Bill's advice to take the low road. McCain has already started this with his first ad saying he was "The American Candidate," and seizing on Obama's staement that he was a citizen of the world.
The whole thing disgusts me. Only in America can someone rise from nothing, become president of the Harvard Law Review, be a professor of Law at U of Chicago, aauthor two books, become a U.S. Senator, be smart, articulate and able to have a huge following all by the age of 47, and have those pluses be used against him.
I don't know about his website, but supposedly here are campaign song possiblities for each candidate. Not bad, but seems like they both could come up with better songs. ( don't know the Fugees, Kanya West or Doolie Wilson (?) songs. The rest I know.
1. Ready or Not Fugees 2. What's Going On Marvin Gaye 3. I'm On Fire Bruce Spingsteen 4. Gimme Shelter Rolling Stones 5. Sinnerman Nina Simone 6. Touch the Sky Kanye West 7. You'd Be So Easy to Love Frank Sinatra 8. Think Aretha Franklin 9. City of Blinding Lights U2 10. Yes We Can will.i.am
JOHN McCAIN 1. Dancing Queen ABBA 2. Blue Bayou Roy Orbison 3. Take a Chance On Me ABBA 4. If We MakeIt Through December Merle Haggard 5. As Time Goes By Dooley Wilson 6. Good Vibrations The Beach Boys 7. What A Wonderful World Louis Armstrong 8. I've Got You Under My Skin Frank Sinatra 9. Sweet Caroline Neil Diamond 10. Smoke Gets In Your Eyes The Platters
Bill Krystol is reporting that Colin Powell will endorse Obama and speak at the Democratic Convention.
Now Andrea Mitchell of MSNBC states that Powell has not decided to endorse anyone and he won't be at either convention.
Same Krystol who said that Kaine would be the Democratic VP?
As for the story itself....that rumor has been going around for months, and if it happens, while leftie bloggists will bitch, that endorsement will help that campaign with the masses.
Powell himself has now said he is not going to the Democratic Convention. Powell wimped out to the neocons over Iraq, and had he been possessed of any guts he would have resigned. He also chickened out of running for president. Personaly I think he's gutless, and will either stay neutral or give McCain a lukewarm endorsement.
And what does Bill Kristol know? He should stick to doing stand up and comedic movies.
I don't know about his website, but supposedly here are campaign song possiblities for each candidate. Not bad, but seems like they both could come up with better songs. ( don't know the Fugees, Kanya West or Doolie Wilson (?) songs. The rest I know.
1. Ready or Not Fugees 2. What's Going On Marvin Gaye 3. I'm On Fire Bruce Spingsteen 4. Gimme Shelter Rolling Stones 5. Sinnerman Nina Simone 6. Touch the Sky Kanye West 7. You'd Be So Easy to Love Frank Sinatra 8. Think Aretha Franklin 9. City of Blinding Lights U2 10. Yes We Can will.i.am
JOHN McCAIN 1. Dancing Queen ABBA 2. Blue Bayou Roy Orbison 3. Take a Chance On Me ABBA 4. If We MakeIt Through December Merle Haggard 5. As Time Goes By Dooley Wilson 6. Good Vibrations The Beach Boys 7. What A Wonderful World Louis Armstrong 8. I've Got You Under My Skin Frank Sinatra 9. Sweet Caroline Neil Diamond 10. Smoke Gets In Your Eyes The Platters
TIS
Ready or Not for Obama, or possibly City of Blinding Lights would capture the excitement and inexperience that are associated with him.
For McCain I'd pick Sweet Caroline because it's a comfortable and familiar tune for a comfortable and familiar guy. Good Vibrations is a good choice too as it has the same qualities, but projects more energy.
Powell himself has now said he is not going to the Democratic Convention. Powell wimped out to the neocons over Iraq, and had he been possessed of any guts he would have resigned. He also chickened out of running for president. Personaly I think he's gutless, and will either stay neutral or give McCain a lukewarm endorsement.
And what does Bill Kristol know? He should stick to doing stand up and comedic movies.
Just in case your post was not in jest: it's Kristol, not Crystal.
In any case, I'm thinking that Powell could provide subtle support for the Dems. And I now wouldn't be surprised if McCain picks Tom Ridge as his VP. Both candidates need PA's 21 electoral votes. Obama leads there now, but Ridge could help McCain close the gap. Obama's choice: I thought maybe Richardson, but now I'm not so sure.
I wish that Howard Wolfson would just shut the fuck up.
Have you heard his latest pearls of wisdom? He made a statement the other day that Hillary would have won had the media not waited to expose John Edwards' affair. Whether that's true or not is inconsequential. He's supposed to be helping to unify the party, but he still can't admit that his horse lost the race.
I find it hard to believe that Hillary Clinton can't stop her people from making these outbursts. Bottom line: She doesn't want to. I've really come to loathe her.
Hillary and Bill have hijacked the Denver convention, making it into a carbon copy of what it would have looked like had she won until the last possible moment. By the time Obama gets up to speak and put his stamp on the convention, Hillary will have had one prime time night all to herself. Bill will have pre-empted a second night. Hillary will have had all the nominating and seconding speeches she wants. And the roll call of the states would record, in graphic detail, how the voters of state after state rejected Obama's candidacy in the primaries. Only then, after three and a half days of all Clinton all the time will the convention then, finally, turn to its nominee and allow him to have an hour in the sun!
And what leverage did the Clintons have to achieve all of this? None! Hillary could not have taken the convention by storm and any show of party disunity would marginalize her forever in the Democratic Party. Had she or her supporters tried to pull off distracting demonstrations or to recreate Lafayette Park in Chicago in 1968, she would have paid a permanent price among the party faithful for sabotaging Obama's candidacy.
This Clintonian tour de force raises a key question about Barack Obama: Is he strong enough to be president or can he be pushed around? His failure to stand up to the Clintons makes one wonder how effective he will be against bin Laden, Iran, Chavez, or Putin.
And now word emerges from the Obama camp that Indiana Senator Evan Bayh is on the short list for vice president. To select Bayh would bring Obama's nemesis, Mark Penn, in through the campaign's back door. Penn and Bayh are an item. Mark's second (and current) wife, Nancy Jacobson was the key fund raiser for the Senator during his Senate campaigns. Penn has always been Bayh's consultant and chief advisor. Penn played the key role in 1996 in getting Bayh a slot as the convention keynote speaker. Bayh has always marched to Mark Penn's tune.
This, of course, the same Mark Penn who structured the vilification of Barack Obama as a marginal American and orchestrated the campaign to summon the white working class in opposition to his candidacy.
How much will Obama take?
His weakness, if the face of the Clinton demands coupled with his refusal to debate McCain in the town forum meetings raise the question of whether he is tough when the teleprompter is turned off. Why is he afraid or unwilling to do tough interviews? It is not enough for him to say that he is the front runner and ask why he should risk such confrontations. In case he hasn't noticed, he's not the front runner. The tracking polls all suggest a tied race where taking certain risks would be reasonable, unless his handlers worry about his vulnerability in difficult or extemporaneous situations.
Is an unscripted Obama a pushover? Will foreign leaders conclude that he is not up to the job, just as Khrushchev did with JFK at his 1961 Vienna summit that presaged the Cuban Missile crisis? If he does so poorly in negotiating with the Clintons, how will he do with the Russians?
So Dick Morris doesn't recognize politics when it slams him in the face. Hijack the convention? Sure. What a stupid opinion. A relatively inexperienced candidate who outmaneuvered a hugely experienced candidate and is outmaneuvering a 26 year veteran of the US Senate is weak?
Yeah, he's a moron. Don't forget, he has a longtime love-hate thing going on with the Clintons. He's probably just using this as an excuse to call her out as a bully. Plus, he works for FOX News, so who really cares?
Powell himself has now said he is not going to the Democratic Convention. Powell wimped out to the neocons over Iraq, and had he been possessed of any guts he would have resigned. He also chickened out of running for president. Personaly I think he's gutless, and will either stay neutral or give McCain a lukewarm endorsement.
And what does Bill Kristol know? He should stick to doing stand up and comedic movies.
Just in case your post was not in jest: it's Kristol, not Crystal.
In any case, I'm thinking that Powell could provide subtle support for the Dems. And I now wouldn't be surprised if McCain picks Tom Ridge as his VP. Both candidates need PA's 21 electoral votes. Obama leads there now, but Ridge could help McCain close the gap. Obama's choice: I thought maybe Richardson, but now I'm not so sure.
Won't happen. McCain is getting part of the conservative base for the GOP to his side, and picking Ridge will tell them the overall same story of this campaign:
So Dick Morris doesn't recognize politics when it slams him in the face. Hijack the convention? Sure. What a stupid opinion. A relatively inexperienced candidate who outmaneuvered a hugely experienced candidate and is outmaneuvering a 26 year veteran of the US Senate is weak?
Madonne!
What you expect from the same guy who wrote a fucking BOOK back in 2004/2005 where he predicted Hillary Clinton would triumph over Condi Rice(!) in the 2008 elections.
To be fair, Bob Woodward(yes, Watergate) at the same time predicted it would be Hillary/Cheney(!)....opps.
Powell himself has now said he is not going to the Democratic Convention. Powell wimped out to the neocons over Iraq, and had he been possessed of any guts he would have resigned. He also chickened out of running for president. Personaly I think he's gutless, and will either stay neutral or give McCain a lukewarm endorsement.
And what does Bill Kristol know? He should stick to doing stand up and comedic movies.
Just in case your post was not in jest: it's Kristol, not Crystal.
In any case, I'm thinking that Powell could provide subtle support for the Dems. And I now wouldn't be surprised if McCain picks Tom Ridge as his VP. Both candidates need PA's 21 electoral votes. Obama leads there now, but Ridge could help McCain close the gap. Obama's choice: I thought maybe Richardson, but now I'm not so sure.
Won't happen. McCain is getting part of the conservative base for the GOP to his side, and picking Ridge will tell them the overall same story of this campaign:
It's not McCain vs Obama, but Yes or No on Obama.
Wait a minute. If McCain chooses Ridge, Ridge's pro-choice stand will alienate any number of conservatives. Thus, the election won't be just a referendum on Obama.
[quote=dontomasso]Powell himself has now said he is not going to the Democratic Convention. Powell wimped out to the neocons over Iraq, and had he been possessed of any guts he would have resigned. He also chickened out of running for president. Personaly I think he's gutless, and will either stay neutral or give McCain a lukewarm endorsement.
And what does Bill Kristol know? He should stick to doing stand up and comedic movies.
Just in case your post was not in jest: it's Kristol, not Crystal.
In any case, I'm thinking that Powell could provide subtle support for the Dems. And I now wouldn't be surprised if McCain picks Tom Ridge as his VP. Both candidates need PA's 21 electoral votes. Obama leads there now, but Ridge could help McCain close the gap. Obama's choice: I thought maybe Richardson, but now I'm not so sure.
Won't happen. McCain is getting part of the conservative base for the GOP to his side, and picking Ridge will tell them the overall same story of this campaign:
It's not McCain vs Obama, but Yes or No on Obama.
Wait a minute. If McCain chooses Ridge, Ridge's pro-choice stand will alienate any number of conservatives. Thus, the election won't be just a referendum on Obama.[/quote]
Well, it seems Obama will be announcing his running mate any time now; McCain supposedly will announce his on the 29th I believe.
For anyone following, the PUMAs supposedly will be protesting at the Dem convention to eliminate caucuses. Don't know if this will fizzle out or not, but talk about whiners.
I'm almost convinced that McCain has to pick Ridge to enhance his chance of picking up PA's 21 electoral votes. Obama? Either Richardson or Biden.
I can't say what Ridge as a VP candidate will do nationwide, but it will win Pennsylvania for McCain. Otherwise, I think Obama will carry the commonwealth in a fairly close race.
I'm almost convinced that McCain has to pick Ridge to enhance his chance of picking up PA's 21 electoral votes. Obama? Either Richardson or Biden.
I can't say what Ridge as a VP candidate will do nationwide, but it will win Pennsylvania for McCain. Otherwise, I think Obama will carry the commonwealth in a fairly close race.
There is always a problem when you pick someone simply to try to win a state, one that may or may not go to Obama regardless of your VP.
I mean, using this logic that Olivant is pimping, why doesn't McCain simply try to score Pawlenty (Minnesota) or Crist (Florida)?
I'm almost convinced that McCain has to pick Ridge to enhance his chance of picking up PA's 21 electoral votes. Obama? Either Richardson or Biden.
I can't say what Ridge as a VP candidate will do nationwide, but it will win Pennsylvania for McCain. Otherwise, I think Obama will carry the commonwealth in a fairly close race.
There is always a problem when you pick someone simply to try to win a state, one that may or may not go to Obama regardless of your VP.
I mean, using this logic that Olivant is pimping, why doesn't McCain simply try to score Pawlenty (Minnesota) or Crist (Florida)?
Pimping, huh?
Both Minnesota and Pennsylvania went Democratic in '04. Ridge is nationally known and is Catholic. In addition, he is pro-choice. Thus, he is a much stronger potential vote-getter for McCain. Pawlenty doesn't have a national reputation, is evamgelical, and is pro-life. McCain already has the great majority of evangelicals and pro-life support. Florida went Republican in '04. Chris wouldn't be much of an advantage.
At this point, McCain is trailing in electoral votes. He needs states such as Pennsylvania to catch up.
Both Minnesota and Pennsylvania went Democratic in '04. Ridge is nationally known and is Catholic. In addition, he is pro-choice. Thus, he is a much stronger potential vote-getter for McCain. Pawlenty doesn't have a national reputation, is evamgelical, and is pro-life. McCain already has the great majority of evangelicals and pro-life support. Florida went Republican in '04. Chris wouldn't be much of an advantage.
At this point, McCain is trailing in electoral votes. He needs states such as Pennsylvania to catch up.
That is assuming if McCain can retain the Bush states from 2004...and that is in doubt.
Plus, why are you assuming McCain has the majority of the Evangelicals?
I think you're missing my whole point of Ridge. Why did McCain win the GOP nomination? Because at the time, he was seen as the one guy who could beat Hillary in a national election in spite of Bushie. But did he have the Conservative kiss from the onset?
No.
He's been fighting to get their love, and if he goes with Ridge...it sends them the message that a GOP retainment of the White House isn't necessarily hardcore pro-life, and you think such Evangelicals will go down for that?
Come on, really?
I know you're a nerd for Ridge and all, and I can understand that, but shit remember 1988 when Dukakis' VP was a Conservative Democrat from Texas, and guess what? Dukakis got his ass whipped like cookie dough that fall by Bush Sr.
(CNN) -- John McCain's attacks on Barack Obama on national security issues seem to be working: Polls show McCain has cut the Democrat's lead in half.
Sen. John McCain speaks at the Veterans of Foreign Wars convention Monday in Orlando, Florida.
According to CNN's average of several recent national surveys, Obama's lead is now a slim 3 points over the Arizona senator, 46-43 percent -- half of his advantage in a CNN poll of polls one week ago, and down from a high of 8 points in mid-July.
A Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll out Tuesday evening was the latest national survey to indicate Obama's lead is dwindling, putting the Illinois senator ahead of McCain by only 2 points, well within the poll's margin of error. The CNN poll of polls also includes new surveys from Quinnipiac and Gallup.
Russia's invasion of Georgia gave McCain an anvil to hammer away at Obama's inexperience, CNN senior political analyst Bill Schneider said.
"The McCain campaign believes that some of Hillary Clinton's tactics, especially questioning whether Obama is ready to lead, can be a real winner," Schneider said. Watch how McCain is borrowing moves from Clinton »
Clinton nearly overtook Obama during the primary campaign after she started airing ads asking who voters would rather have answering a 3 a.m. call to the White House.
"The McCain team has been very open that they went to school on the Hillary Clinton campaign, that they learned from that," said CNN contributor David Gergen, a former counselor to three presidents.
"And, on this 3 a.m. ad, what's very striking, as some have pointed out over the last few days, is that Barack Obama was winning a steady streak of victories against Hillary Clinton," Gergen said. "And then she ran that ad, and she really went on the attack on the experience question. And she won the bulk of the primaries thereafter in the closing months of the Democratic primaries, and won 500,000 more votes than he did and almost took it away from him."
When Russian troops invaded Georgia two weeks ago, McCain vigorously denounced the action and warned of consequences. Obama's reaction was more measured, and potential voters noticed, Schneider said.
"Which candidate do voters believe is better qualified to deal with Russia? McCain by better than 2-1," Schneider said. "More experience in military matters and foreign affairs."
That argument may be even more effective for McCain than it was for Clinton, said political analyst Marc Halperin, a former Democratic strategist.
McCain is "going after more centrist voters, more swing voters, more conservative voters who will be a much bigger deal in the general election than they were in those primaries and caucuses," Halperin said.
That's exactly why Obama is making appearances this week in Ohio and Indiana, key swing states with plenty of those working-class voters, said CNN political correspondent Suzanne Malveaux.
By at least one important measure, McCain already has overtaken Obama. The Republican's current lead in key states would give him enough electoral votes to win the election, Gergen said.
McCain has taken other pages from the Clinton playbook, saying that Obama has great style but little substance.
"Not only did the Clinton campaign give McCain and his advisers a road map, but [they] actually started the McCains down that path," said Dan Schnur, who was McCain's communications director in the 2000 campaign.
"That's why you're hearing from Obama very specific policy-oriented proposals here," said Malveaux. "There's not a lot of that kind of flash, if you will, from the earlier days."
But the recent downturn in the polls for Obama may not last. The Democratic White House hopeful is headed for a week of what is likely to be overwhelmingly positive coverage as he names his running mate and officially accepts his party's presidential nomination.
"The big question now is whether Obama can successfully regain control of the campaign agenda as we head into the Democratic convention," said Alan Silverleib, CNN senior political researcher.
Clinton did ultimately lose to Obama, after all. But she showed how to hurt him.
"What the Clinton campaign demonstrated is when you bring (Obama) back down to earth, it's a better battle," Schnur said.
This is a story from my neck of the woods. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, a Clinton backer, is a superdelegate. According to the local news reports, she is not expected to survive. She was scheduled leave for the Democratic Convention in Denver.
Lieberman to Speak at GOP Convention By Perry Bacon Jr.
Sen. Joe Lieberman, completing a dramatic political transformation over the last eight years, is now scheduled to speak at the Republican National Convention next month, according to GOP sources.
The Connecticut senator, who calls himself an "independent Democrat" and attends some Democratic meetings on Capitol Hill, has become one of the McCain's closet allies, campaigning with him everywhere and rumored to be on his list of potential running mates. Lieberman is now on a trip to Georgia with Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, another close McCain ally. The pair is visiting the war-torn state in their capacities as members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, while also effectively acting as McCain's emissaries there.
Lieberman has at times sharply criticized Sen. Barack Obama, particularly on his opposition to the Iraq war, which Lieberman forcefully backed.
Lieberman, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee in 2000 and a White House candidate for the presidency himself four years later, seems unlikely to give the kind of fiery speech that then-Sen. Zell Miller (D-Ga.) offered against then Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry at the 2004 GOP convention in New York. Lieberman's speeches introducing McCain tend to focus on the Arizona senator's work on bipartisan compromises in the Senate and their shared views on Iraq.
Lieberman joins a list of speakers at the convention that already includes President Bush, Vice President Cheney and former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani.
(CNN) -- John McCain's attacks on Barack Obama on national security issues seem to be working: Polls show McCain has cut the Democrat's lead in half.
There is another poll out today showing Obama is now trailing McCain. No question Obama's slippin. Could McCain have gotten to him five months ago?
Its still a long way to November, and it may be McCain has peaked too soon.
Keep in mind neither man has crossed the 50% mark.
Good points DT. Few people realize that the campaigns are not looking mostly at the overall numbers, but at the numbers by state and within certain categories of potential voters such as race/ethnicity, and religious affiliation. Another thing. Those who report poll numbers usually don't tell us if the poll was of likely voters or of registered voters.
This is a story from my neck of the woods. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, a Clinton backer, is a superdelegate. According to the local news reports, she is not expected to survive. She was scheduled leave for the Democratic Convention in Denver.
I know who she is. I have seen her on many political shows. She was an avid Hillary supporter. She always seemed to have a smile on her face. Too bad.She was only 58.
This is a story from my neck of the woods. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, a Clinton backer, is a superdelegate. According to the local news reports, she is not expected to survive. She was scheduled leave for the Democratic Convention in Denver.
I know who she is. I have seen her on many political shows. She was an avid Hillary supporter. She always seemed to have a smile on her face. Too bad.She was only 58.
Yea, I guess she has died. Earlier today I think it was CNN that reported she died, only later to find she hadn't actually died, but was on life support and in very critical condition. Then CNN corrected their story.
Anybody who calls Rudy Guiliani to the carpet for using 9/11 as a political crutch is alright in my book. During the debates, Biden said "Rudy Giuliani. There's only three things he mentions in a sentence -- a noun, a verb, and 9/11. There's nothing else!"
Here is Newsweek's account of what went into the selection process. Of particular note is why Clinton was not selected.
I know a lot of Democrats considered the Obama/Clinton ticket the "Dream Ticket", and unbeatable. The fact of the matter is, putting Hillary on the ticket would have been the one thing that would have united the unhappy Republicans on the fence, and rallied them behind McCain. That's the last thing Obama needs in a so far close race. I still think Obama is going to win fairly easily, but putting Hillary on the ticket was very risky. Biden is the safest choice, which is the smart move when you're still the favorite to win.
I think it's a good , safe pick that will counter the experience issue to some extent. He didn't last long in the primaries though.
It goes to show that time seems to heal a lot of things. 20 years ago Biden had to drop out of the presidential race due to an embarrassing set of circumstances, overshadowed only by Gary Hart. The comedians had a lot of fun with him, and I thought his national aspirations were sunk completely.
McCain's campaign, apparently anticipating the Biden pick, has tv ads ready with video clips of Biden saying Obama is not ready to be president. They'll run in key battleground states.
I know a lot of Democrats considered the Obama/Clinton ticket the "Dream Ticket", and unbeatable. The fact of the matter is, putting Hillary on the ticket would have been the one thing that would have united the unhappy Republicans on the fence, and rallied them behind McCain. That's the last thing Obama needs in a so far close race. I still think Obama is going to win fairly easily, but putting Hillary on the ticket was very risky. Biden is the safest choice, which is the smart move when you're still the favorite to win.
Although I think, at this point anyway, it'll be very close, I agree with you JL. I think the Republians were salivating at the thought of HRC on the ticket. Biden was alway my choice. He is long winded, but he is a plus for Obama IMHO. Plus, I'd bet anything if he was asked, he'd know how many houses he owns.
Btw. I signed up for that famous text mail, and never got it. What a fun idea that was. The media was going crazy following all of the "possibles" all day long.
McCain's campaign, apparently anticipating the Biden pick, has tv ads ready with video clips of Biden saying Obama is not ready to be president. They'll run in key battleground states.
Kly,
I heard last night that the Republicans had ads ready for all of the possible candidates. I'm guessing the Dems are putting together theirs as well. Ahhhhh Politics.
...tv ads ready with video clips of Biden saying Obama is not ready to be president...
Not only that, but I'm sure we'll also get to see those clips of Biden saying that McCain WOULD make a good President, and that he (Biden) would be happy to serve with a President McCain.
... Biden said "Rudy Giuliani. There's only three things he mentions in a sentence -- a noun, a verb, and 9/11. There's nothing else!"...
Much as I hated to, I had to agree with that. I liked and still like Rudy, think he was a terrific Mayor and showed great leadership on and after 9/11. However, had it not been for 9/11 and the national fame it catipulted him into... Guliani would never have even been considered as a Presidential candidate. I was sorry he let people talk him into running at all.
I tried to tell that to many of my friends (including some here on the BB) who seemed to feel otherwise back in the day!!
psst...but we haven heard the last of Rudy. Besides delivering the Keynote Speech at the RNC...watch him be elected Governor of NY in 2010
I agree, Lou. As high as I've been on Obama, if the Clinton Pig's name ended up on the ticket, I honestly don't think that I could've voted for him. I've come to hate her that fucking much. I'm very relieved right now.
I agree with Apple about Rudy. As an almost 49 year resident of New York City, take it from me, he was the guy you wanted as Mayor after the Dinkins debacle (the absolute WORST mayor of my lifetime). BUT, Rudy had no business running for President. Touting himself as America's Mayor for the last seven years, constantly taking credit for the Post 9/11 revival of the City, and his overall boorish personality, made him a poor candidate. He wouldn't have even carried New York.
And I agree with TIS; I think it will be VERY close. But Biden gives him his best chance.
I know I'll probably get jumped on here BUT I heard that if she didn't get VP pick that Hillary may run for NY Governor (or was it Mayor?) Don't hit me!!!
Btw, I thought of a cute campaign bumper sticker.
"Get Your O-Jo Working. Hu????? Hu??? Ok, I won't quit my day job.
DJ, you know everything about these things. Why do you think I didn't get my text? Too many sent at one time. Could it be like "snail" mail and maybe I'll get it tomorrow?
... Biden said "Rudy Giuliani. There's only three things he mentions in a sentence -- a noun, a verb, and 9/11. There's nothing else!"...
psst...but we haven heard the last of Rudy. Besides delivering the Keynote Speech at the RNC...watch him be elected Governor of NY in 2010
Apple
Agreed.
With Rudy's "brand," how could he not beat a blind guy, who fell ass backwards into the job, who has admitted to more sexual conquests this side of Bill Clinton?
I know I'll probably get jumped on here BUT I heard that if she didn't get VP pick that Hillary may run for NY Governor (or was it Mayor?) Don't hit me!!!
You love her so much, get her to run against Ah-nold out in La-La Land.
Not only that, but I'm sure we'll also get to see those clips of Biden saying that McCain WOULD make a good President, and that he (Biden) would be happy to serve with a President McCain.
IMO, not nearly as damaging as the current and forthcoming ads of McCain paling around, praising, and endorsing Bush.
I just saw the ad. It's fairly effective, but nothing more. It shows Biden commenting on Obama's readiness, but it clearly shows it during a Primary Debate which takes away from it's impact. Obama's inexperience is also not exactly breaking news. It also shows his comment about "serving with McCain", but the exact quote is "I'd be honored to run with or against John McCain". Again, not much of an impact to me. Biden and McCain are known good friends
DJ, you know everything about these things. Why do you think I didn't get my text? Too many sent at one time. Could it be like "snail" mail and maybe I'll get it tomorrow?
It's not your phone, it's clearly a warning sign not to vote for Obama! Just think, what if that was your allowance from the weekly collective or your delivery of socialized medicine! Where would we be then?
I just saw the ad. It's fairly effective, but nothing more...
Possibly. But at the moment, we're looking at the ad only.
When you combine that, with whoever McCain's choice of running mate is, along whatever ads are to come (from both sides), AND with the Fall debates on top of that, then one party might be in a bit of a pickle as Election Day draws near.
Of course...I don't dare contemplate which party that may be.
I just saw the ad. It's fairly effective, but nothing more. It shows Biden commenting on Obama's readiness, but it clearly shows it during a Primary Debate which takes away from it's impact. Obama's inexperience is also not exactly breaking news. It also shows his comment about "serving with McCain", but the exact quote is "I'd be honored to run with or against John McCain". Again, not much of an impact to me. Biden and McCain are known good friends
You got to hand it to McCain, being prepared to get rolling with the anti-Obama/Biden ads from ther get go.
There are reports that he's so good at planning ahead, that he'll finish his concession speech by Labor Day.
I, for one, am glad that Guiliani is not going away. What Guiliani did for the country on 9/11 and its immediate aftermath is something that all Americans should commend. His presence at hundreds of 9/11 funerals was uplifting. But he bastardized the worst tragedy in American history to suit his own political agenda, which I found disgusting. So did Bush in 2004. I just do not think Rudy is qualified to be president. I would like to see him run for a senate seat or for governor. He would be tough to beat.
Goombah, I'm actually glad that Rudy never ran against Hillary for Senate. First of all, it kept him in NYC where he was desperately needed in 2001. Second, I don't think he would have made a very good Senator. The man's an executive. Governor, Mayor, but I can't picture him in the House or Senate.
You can support Rudy or not, but he and Pataki were a united front in the aftermath of September 11th, and it was a front of leadership, calm, and a little bit of "up yours", which was the exact blend that was needed. Remember, they not only dealt with the attacks and the aftermath, but also the anthrax cases.
You can see what good leadership produces during a tragedy, and what bad leadership produces. Just look at New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina, where both the governor and the mayor couldn't find their own asses with two hands and a flashlight.
Just look at New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina, where both the governor and the mayor couldn't find their own asses with two hands and a flashlight.
The President wasn't much help either. Although, as Commander-In-Chief, he probably has someone help him in the potty.
Just look at New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina, where both the governor and the mayor couldn't find their own asses with two hands and a flashlight.
The President wasn't much help either. Although, as Commander-In-Chief, he probably has someone help him in the potty.
Just look at New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina, where both the governor and the mayor couldn't find their own asses with two hands and a flashlight.
The President wasn't much help either. Although, as Commander-In-Chief, he probably has someone help him in the potty.
What do ya mean? Brownie did a good job.
TIS
That's where he gave him the nickname, in the potty!
I just saw the ad. It's fairly effective, but nothing more...
Possibly. But at the moment, we're looking at the ad only.
When you combine that, with whoever McCain's choice of running mate is, along whatever ads are to come (from both sides), AND with the Fall debates on top of that, then one party might be in a bit of a pickle as Election Day draws near.
Of course...I don't dare contemplate which party that may be.
'Nuff said.
Apple
Yeah and if the McCain (is stupid enough to) pick is Romney, just watch those DNC ads where Romney said in a debate that McCain wasn't a conservative because he was endorsed by the New York Times....
You know, that bullshit coming from the guy who was pro-choice while he was Governor?
Come on Apple, you're old enough I'm sure to understand the concept of political opportunism.
I mean remember Bush Sr. shitting on Reagan's supply-side economic plan in the 1980 GOP Primary as "Voodoo Economics"? He ended up as the Gipper's VP.
Remember Kerry saying that Edwards was "in his diapers" when Kerry was off in Nam? He ended up as his running mate.
And if Hillary had been picked as Obama's VP, we would have the same story there.
DJ, you know everything about these things. Why do you think I didn't get my text? Too many sent at one time. Could it be like "snail" mail and maybe I'll get it tomorrow?
It's not your phone, it's clearly a warning sign not to vote for Obama! Just think, what if that was your allowance from the weekly collective or your delivery of socialized medicine! Where would we be then?
Better I assume than our current socialized medicine.
You know, its amazing and will blow your mind, but America is strangely socialistic, and been roughly that way for the last 70 years or so.
... Biden said "Rudy Giuliani. There's only three things he mentions in a sentence -- a noun, a verb, and 9/11. There's nothing else!"...
psst...but we haven heard the last of Rudy. Besides delivering the Keynote Speech at the RNC...watch him be elected Governor of NY in 2010
Apple
Agreed.
With Rudy's "brand," how could he not beat a blind guy, who fell ass backwards into the job, who has admitted to more sexual conquests this side of Bill Clinton?
But give Bubba credit, at least he wasn't stupid enough to marry more than once.
DJ, you know everything about these things. Why do you think I didn't get my text? Too many sent at one time. Could it be like "snail" mail and maybe I'll get it tomorrow?
It's not your phone, it's clearly a warning sign not to vote for Obama! Just think, what if that was your allowance from the weekly collective or your delivery of socialized medicine! Where would we be then?
Better I assume than our current socialized medicine.
You know, its amazing and will blow your mind, but America is strangely socialistic, and been roughly that way for the last 70 years or so.
I know HOLY SHIT indeed.
But our wireless service kicks ass!
Want to buy a phone card? I have little red ones with McCain on them, and blue ones with Obama!
I mean remember Bush Sr. shitting on Reagan's supply-side economic plan in the 1980 GOP Primary as "Voodoo Economics"? He ended up as the Gipper's VP.
This is exactly what I first thought of. I didn't think you were old enough to get this.
I remember a turning point in that primary when Reagan funded a debate that was supposed to be between him and Bush, but unknown to Bush, Reagan had arranged to have the other candidates to crash the debate. Bush threatened to walk off the stage, and while Reagan was explaining himself, the moderator curtly said,to turn off Reagan's microphone whereupon the Gipper yelled, I'm paying for this microphone, Mr. Green (the guy's name was Breen, btw). That was
But we all know, if not for Kramer's nametag idea, Rudy's probably working for a third rate law firm right now.
Damn that Lloyd Braun!
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
Goombah, I'm actually glad that Rudy never ran against Hillary for Senate. First of all, it kept him in NYC where he was desperately needed in 2001. Second, I don't think he would have made a very good Senator. The man's an executive. Governor, Mayor, but I can't picture him in the House or Senate.
You can support Rudy or not, but he and Pataki were a united front in the aftermath of September 11th, and it was a front of leadership, calm, and a little bit of "up yours", which was the exact blend that was needed. Remember, they not only dealt with the attacks and the aftermath, but also the anthrax cases.
You can see what good leadership produces during a tragedy, and what bad leadership produces. Just look at New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina, where both the governor and the mayor couldn't find their own asses with two hands and a flashlight.
My eternal image of Guiliani is walking in the streets of NY on 9/11 with his advisors after the first tower collapsed.
I agree Rudy was much more of an asset than what happended during Katrina. But that was not the fault of NO mayor Ray Nagin. It was Bush sitting on his ass in Texas and the inaction of the federal government that compounded the Katrina disaster. The country had no choice but to protect its financial assets, which were considerably more in NYC than NO. That's why the government acted so swiftly. I think the Bush administration showed what little regard they had for its citizens since there was no big time money in NO compared to the not only physical devasation of the WTC attacks, but also the monetary ramifications.
Quite true, but the LA governor and NO mayor didn't offer their citizens the same sense of "I've got it under control," that Giuliani and Pataki did. And for Ray Nagin to start bad-mouting NY's "hole in the ground" was just stupid, IMO.
As for the federal response, or lack thereof, I don't care what anyone says, the victims of Katrina were, by and large, poor and black. I wonder what FEMA's response would have been if the hurricane had hit Newport or Nantucket.
As for the federal response, or lack thereof, I don't care what anyone says, the victims of Katrina were, by and large, poor and black. I wonder what FEMA's response would have been if the hurricane had hit Newport or Nantucket.
What happens in US municipalities is the responsibility of local and state authorities unless the state requests federal assistance (Ttile 42, US Code Emergency Assistance Act). Also, I don't think the two incidents were comparable. There were strategic differences between the two. A large part of NO (360 square miles) was under water while the Twin Towers and their environs were geographically, relatively, local.
Quite true, but the LA governor and NO mayor didn't offer their citizens the same sense of "I've got it under control," that Giuliani and Pataki did. And for Ray Nagin to start bad-mouting NY's "hole in the ground" was just stupid, IMO.
As for the federal response, or lack thereof, I don't care what anyone says, the victims of Katrina were, by and large, poor and black. I wonder what FEMA's response would have been if the hurricane had hit Newport or Nantucket.
Hell, if it was Newport/Nantucker, I doubt we would have people in Congresss publicly suggesting that we abandon the city, as some did with New Orleans.
Oh and ole Nagin, that guy who locked himself away in a hotel during the critical early hours of Katrina....what an asshole.
EDIT - Anyone notice that Appleonya never responded to my Putin "soul" comment made by President Bush some years back?
From the warped mind of the incomparable Dave Barry----My favorite journalist of all-time. Bar none.
Dave Barry: The DNC's on, let the drama begin By DAVE BARRY of THE MIAMI HERALD
The Democratic party has gathered in Denver for what will be without question one of the most exciting political conventions in decades.
Granted, this is like saying that Moe was without question one of the smartest Stooges. The political conventions have been pointless and boring for years, culminating in 2004, when MSNBC, during its prime-time coverage of the Republican convention, broadcast 38 straight minutes of Chris Matthews snoring and drooling into his lap. (This got by far the highest ratings.)
But this year will be different. This year there is high drama in the Mile High City as the Democrats gather under their official 2008 convention slogan: ``A Unified Party, United in Unity Together As One, Undivided.''
Already there has been sporadic gunfire between the Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton delegates. Political observers see this as indication that there is still some underlying tension between the two sides. Yes, Clinton has been making speeches urging her supporters to work for Obama; but at the same time she has also been using what one Obama adviser described as ``a lot of air quotes.''
It's hard to blame Sen. Clinton for being bitter. Here she is, the smartest human ever, PLUS she spent all those years standing loyally behind Bill Clinton wearing uncomfortable pantyhose (I mean Hillary was, not Bill) (although there are rumors), PLUS she went to the trouble and expense of acquiring a legal residence in New York State so she could be a senator from there, PLUS she assembled a team of nuclear-physicist-grade genius political advisors, PLUS she spent years going around to every dirtbag community in America explaining in detail her 23-point policy solutions for every single problem facing the nation including soybean blight. And after all that, she loses the nomination to a guy who has roughly the same amount of executive governmental experience as Hannah Montana. Hillary is like: ``Are you KIDDING me?''
Sen. Clinton is scheduled to address the convention Tuesday night, when she will either call on her supporters to unite behind Obama, or attempt to snatch the nomination and escape with it by helicopter to a secret mountain fortress. ''We are fully confident that Sen. Clinton will do the right thing,'' stated a Democratic party official, adding, ``but we have a net.''
The Obama-Clinton tension is only one of the dramatic storylines developing in Denver. Another one is Obama's choice of running mate. Following days of feverish media speculation over a list of names that at one point included the late Hubert Humphrey and a probably fictional congressperson named ''Chet Edwards,'' Obama, in a bold move, went with the one name guaranteed to send an electric shock of electricity through the spinal cord of American politics: Joe Biden.
This choice not only virtually locks up Delaware's electoral vote (which it shares with Wyoming) but it also buttresses the Obama team with one of the Senate's most vocal voices. Sen. Biden is scheduled to address the convention Wednesday night from 8:48 p.m. until dawn.
But in the end, the focus of this convention will be on Barack Obama, who on Thursday night will receive the nomination in long-overdue recognition of a distinguished career of seeking the nomination. His goal, in his acceptance speech, will be to win over the undecided voters -- the people who are unsure of what he really stands for, or who have received emailed rumors that he is a Muslim, or a socialist, or a vampire, or a lesbian. His goal will be to show, with no disrespect to the Muslim socialist vampire lesbian community, that he is a regular person just like you, except he has Vision and Leadership. After that, he will lay out his specific policies for building a brighter future. Then he will turn into a bat.
No, he won't, although that would make this the most fun convention EVER. But it still promises to be interesting. I'll be on hand to report all the convention-news developments to you from Denver as I think them up. Then next week I'll head to Minnesota or possibly Wisconsin and do the same from the Republican convention. Back-to-back party conventions! It's an exciting time to be a political ``junkie.''
This choice not only virtually locks up Delaware's electoral vote (which it shares with Wyoming)
I don't understand how Delaware and Wyoming share an electoral vote. How does that work and why? Are they the only two states that share such a 'connection.'
This choice not only virtually locks up Delaware's electoral vote (which it shares with Wyoming)
I don't understand how Delaware and Wyoming share an electoral vote. How does that work and why? Are they the only two states that share such a 'connection.'
This choice not only virtually locks up Delaware's electoral vote (which it shares with Wyoming)
I don't understand how Delaware and Wyoming share an electoral vote. How does that work and why? Are they the only two states that share such a 'connection.'
You ARE kidding right?
Uh, no. Is this some fundamental of american government 101 that I'm not privy to?
This choice not only virtually locks up Delaware's electoral vote (which it shares with Wyoming)
I don't understand how Delaware and Wyoming share an electoral vote. How does that work and why? Are they the only two states that share such a 'connection.'
You ARE kidding right?
Uh, no. Is this some fundamental of american government 101 that I'm not privy to? [/quote]
Delaware shares its vote with Wyoming because Rhode Island, which used to share the electoral vote with Delaware, became emancipated electorally by a state constitutional convention in the 1960s.
The only other states that share their electoral votes are South Dakota and Montana. This arrangement will last until 2016, at which time both states are free to enter into an electoral arrangement with another state. Idaho used to share with Wyoming until Wyoming linked up with Delaware.
Massachusetts, Texas, Tennessee and New Mexico are barred from sharing electoral votes with other states because of laws enacted by their state legislatures.
Delaware shares its vote with Wyoming because Rhode Island, which used to share the electoral vote with Delaware, became emancipated electorally by a state constitutional convention in the 1960s.
The only other states that share their electoral votes are South Dakota and Montana. This arrangement will last until 2016, at which time both states are free to enter into an electoral arrangement with another state. Idaho used to share with Wyoming until Wyoming linked up with Delaware.
Massachusetts, Texas, Tennessee and New Mexico are barred from sharing electoral votes with other states because of laws enacted by their state legislatures.
Also by virtue of double secret Amendment 22(a) to the U.S. Constitution votes in certain precincts in Sourth FLorida may be traded with precincts in New York so long as it can be demonstrated that 30% of the people in the Florida precincts coe from the same ten zip codes in New York where their votes may be counted.
Delaware shares its vote with Wyoming because Rhode Island, which used to share the electoral vote with Delaware, became emancipated electorally by a state constitutional convention in the 1960s.
The only other states that share their electoral votes are South Dakota and Montana. This arrangement will last until 2016, at which time both states are free to enter into an electoral arrangement with another state. Idaho used to share with Wyoming until Wyoming linked up with Delaware.
Massachusetts, Texas, Tennessee and New Mexico are barred from sharing electoral votes with other states because of laws enacted by their state legislatures.
Also by virtue of double secret Amendment 22(a) to the U.S. Constitution votes in certain precincts in Sourth FLorida may be traded with precincts in New York so long as it can be demonstrated that 30% of the people in the Florida precincts coe from the same ten zip codes in New York where their votes may be counted.
Guam and Puerto Rico have legislation pending to enter into a similar arrangement with Vermont in 2012.
Delaware shares its vote with Wyoming because Rhode Island, which used to share the electoral vote with Delaware, became emancipated electorally by a state constitutional convention in the 1960s.
The only other states that share their electoral votes are South Dakota and Montana. This arrangement will last until 2016, at which time both states are free to enter into an electoral arrangement with another state. Idaho used to share with Wyoming until Wyoming linked up with Delaware.
Massachusetts, Texas, Tennessee and New Mexico are barred from sharing electoral votes with other states because of laws enacted by their state legislatures.
Also by virtue of double secret Amendment 22(a) to the U.S. Constitution votes in certain precincts in Sourth FLorida may be traded with precincts in New York so long as it can be demonstrated that 30% of the people in the Florida precincts coe from the same ten zip codes in New York where their votes may be counted.
Guam and Puerto Rico have legislation pending to enter into a similar arrangement with Vermont in 2012.
You realize don't you that there may be Board members who will take seriously what you've written.
Also by virtue of double secret Amendment 22(a) to the U.S. Constitution votes in certain precincts in Sourth FLorida may be traded with precincts in New York so long as it can be demonstrated that 30% of the people in the Florida precincts coe from the same ten zip codes in New York where their votes may be counted.
He looks like he has aged 10 years in the last year already..
Who would want to be a politician?
Out of the mouths of babes . . .
Yogi, my friend, you hit it right on the head. I think the Royal Family is a much better idea than American politics. Plus, you guys speak good English for, you know, foreigners.
He looks like he has aged 10 years in the last year already..
If you look at photos of presidents just before they take office and then at the time they leave, it appears that they've aged more than the 4 or 8 years. This was especially true with Carter.
He looks like he has aged 10 years in the last year already..
If you look at photos of presidents just before they take office and then at the time they leave, it appears that they've aged more than the 4 or 8 years. This was especially true with Carter.
The same with our Prime Ministers...
Blair ended up looking like an old man and Brown is going the same way already!
He'll not be there much longer though so he may have time to reclaim his youth
He looks like he has aged 10 years in the last year already..
If you look at photos of presidents just before they take office and then at the time they leave, it appears that they've aged more than the 4 or 8 years. This was especially true with Carter.
Right. I wonder if presidential candidates truly understand just what they may be getting themselves into. The pressure of the Oval Office must be almost unbelievable.
[quote=klydon1][quote=Yogi Barrabbas]I saw Mr. Obama on the TV just before....
He looks like he has aged 10 years in the last year already..
Right. I wonder if presidential candidates truly understand just what they may be getting themselves into. The pressure of the Oval Office must be almost unbelievable.
There is a great line in Thirteen Days which dealt with JFK's handling of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Kevin Costner's character, who is special counsel to JFK, was talking to another charcter (possibly RFK) about the same issue. In essence he said, "I always look at that picture of Lincoln upstairs and how old he looked at the end. When we got here, I said 'That's not gonna happen to us.'"
While Bush will never be accused of being a hard worker, his approach has helped his appearance. He has definitely aged, but not significantly. I guess that's a benefit of spending nearly 1/3 of his presidency on vacation.
[quote=klydon1][quote=Yogi Barrabbas]I saw Mr. Obama on the TV just before....
He looks like he has aged 10 years in the last year already..
Right. I wonder if presidential candidates truly understand just what they may be getting themselves into. The pressure of the Oval Office must be almost unbelievable.
While Bush will never be accused of being a hard worker, his approach has helped his appearance. He has definitely aged, but not significantly. I guess that's a benefit of spending nearly 1/3 of his presidency on vacation.
You can't discount the longetivity in W's family. I mean, his mother, Barbara, looked 100 when she was 50, and his father does look his age, but they're both still here and in seemingly good health.
You can't dscount the longetivity in W's family. I mean, his mother, Barbara, looked 100 when she was 50, and his father does look his age, but they're both still here and in seemingly good health.
Do you remember that great late 80s SNL skit when Phil Hartman played Barbara Bush? It was a "60 Minutes" satire where the interviewer asked if Barbara was proud of her son, George H. Bush (a/k/a Bush 41) in a great poke at how old she looked. Hartman kind of flushed with embarrassment and said "George isn't my son, he's my husband."
Edgy Dems await Clinton By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer
DENVER - Already defeated and now confused, delegates supporting Hillary Rodham Clinton pleaded Tuesday to know whether they'll be allowed to cast roll call votes and demonstrate on the Democratic convention floor in her favor.
"Just tell me what you want me to do," Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter said, throwing up his hands and rolling his eyes in an Associated Press interview. Nutter, who had campaigned for Clinton during the Pennsylvania primary, later said he would support Obama in a roll call vote.
The confusion stems from a tentative deal between the Obama and Clinton camps that would allow some states to cast votes in a roll call before somebody — possibly Clinton herself — cuts short the tally and asks the convention to nominate Obama by unanimous consent. Clinton fueled confusion by refusing to publicly instruct her delegates how to vote, though she said she'll back Obama when the time comes.
Clinton backers said that while the process is in one respect meaningless — Obama is assured of the nomination — the tense negotiations over convention stagecraft are an important signal of whether Obama respects them and their favored candidate.
Party leaders said they fear a nationally televised floor demonstration that would underscore party divisions.
"It seems to be a little more of a problem than I anticipated," former Democratic Party chairman Don Fowler told the AP. "All you need is 200 people in that crowd to boo and stuff like that and it will be replayed 900 times. And that's not what you want out of this."
The hand-wringing played out as Clinton paid a morning visit to the Pepsi Center with daughter Chelsea to check out the podium where she was to deliver her evening speech.
Clinton offered a preview of her convention speech at an afternoon event for Emily's List, a group that supports women candidates.
"We need in the White House starting on January 20th Barack Obama and Joe Biden," she said.
And she took a couple of hard jabs at her Senate friend and colleague, Republican John McCain.
McCain, she said, "still doesn't believe that women deserve equal pay for equal work," drawing a chorus of boos from the 2,500-person auditorium.
"He doesn't believe that women deserve the right to choose," she said. "He would turn the clock back when what we need from our president is forward movement, more progress, the kind of opportunities that we expect for the next generation of Americans."
Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen encouraged Clinton to use her speech to give Obama a full-throated endorsement.
"What Obama has to have Hillary do is stand up and say — not only in words but it's got to be almost method acting — and say it in a way that's believable that she wants Barack Obama to be president," Bredesen told The AP. A classy backing "frankly goes toward any future political considerations she may have."
Still, Bredesen said Democrats shouldn't be overly concerned about floor demonstrations. It's part of the healing. "If there's some hard feelings," he said, "let it show a little bit."
Even some of Clinton's most loyal allies — New York Democrats — are increasingly frustrated by the silence from her and her advisers on how to proceed. New York delegates would likely play a key role in the roll call salute to Clinton but they still have no idea what it is they are supposed to do, according to several Democrats who spoke on condition of anonymity because they are supposed to be publicly backing Clinton.
___
Associated Press writers Devlin Barrett and Jim Kuhnhenn contributed to this report.
Is his name really Mayor Nutter?? That is one great name!
I thought Michelle Obama was extremely articulate last night. The woman definitely has a terrific presence. I also believe that Sasha Obama has a future in politics. The kid's hilarious.
...You can't dscount the longetivity in W's family. I mean, his mother, Barbara, looked 100 when she was 50...
It's fairly well known George Bush Sr. and Barbara Bush lost their daughter Robin to leukemia at age 3. I remember reading a quote from a friend of theirs at the time who said that after Robin's death, Barbara's hair 'literally turned white' within a few weeks. In addition, Mrs. Bush admitted in interviews years later that she began to fall into a deep depression, which she would've been quite content to wallow in...and forced herself back only because she knew her other children needed her. Also, she's on record saying that like Mike Wallace and others, she's suffered from chronic depression for many years.
So while Barbara Bush may not ever have been what we might call a beauty queen...I think there were personal circumstances that may have contributed to her looking 100 by age 50.
Apple
ps - But I do remember that Phil Hartman sketch. It was absolutely hilarious, and so was he.
Phil Hartman was a genius and a genuinely likeable guy (from what I've read about him).
I did read that about Barbara Bush in Kevin Phillips' AMERICAN DYNASTY. I expected it to be a hatchet job, but it's actually a very enlightening book. No argument, the woman had good reason to age prematurely.
I did read that about Barbara Bush in Kevin Phillips' AMERICAN DYNASTY. I expected it to be a hatchet job, but it's actually a very enlightening book. No argument, the woman had good reason to age prematurely.
You also have to consider that Barbara Bush pretty much raised her kids by herself because George was often away from home for long stretches of time. I read someplace that she drove herself, her children and a housekeeper back and forth between Texas and New England, and apparently in the South where there was segregation (housekeeper was African-American) she would either demand that they accommodate them or she would take her business elsewhere. As a result they often ate in the car and slep in the car as well. BTW she is also pro choice.
Too bad that kind of progressive didn't rub off on George and Jeb.
LATEST POLL OBAMA TRAILS MCCAIN SINCE CHOOSING BIDEN FOR NO. 2 By CARL CAMPANILE in Phoenix, GEOFF EARLE in Kansas City, Mo., and LEONARD GREENE in Denver
VEEP & WEEP: Joe Biden, getting emotional thanking his Delawaredelegation yesterday in Colorado, has another reason to shed tears - the Gallup Poll has the Democrats behind, even after all the publicity surrounding the ticket.
August 27, 2008
Barack Obama got exactly zero bounce from his new running mate, Joe Biden, according to a surprising new poll released yesterday - three days after the selection.
In fact, John McCain leads in the Gallup Poll, 46 to 44 percent - the Republican candidate's best showing in almost three months.
Although McCain's lead still falls within the poll's margin of error, the numbers are a worry for Obama supporters who were counting on Biden's selection as running mate - and the Democratic convention this week - to give them momentum.
"We've been waiting to see if there is a bounce for Barack Obama, and we have not seen it yet," Gallup Poll editor Frank Newport said. "It may take a few days for the convention effect to percolate through to the American public."
McCain wasted no time trying to capitalize on his narrow lead by blasting Obama on foreign policy. The Republican senator criticized Obama for equating the US "liberation" of Iraq from tyrant Saddam Hussein with Russia's invasion of "democratic" Georgia.
Obama had said Russia "can't charge into other countries," but added: "Of course, it helps if we are leading by example on that point."
McCain, appearing before the national convention of veterans of the American Legion in Phoenix, said Obama was clearly referring to America's invasion of Iraq that toppled Saddam.
"If he really thinks that, by liberating Iraq from a dangerous tyrant, American somehow set a bad example that invited Russia to invade a small, peaceful and democratic nation, then he should state it outright - because that's a debate I welcome," McCain said to applause.
Obama chided McCain for questioning his "love of country," and called McCain's remarks "detestable."
Though he didn't comment on the new poll, Obama acknowledged the difficulty of his challenge while campaigning at an American Airlines repair facility in Kansas City. "This is gonna be a close election," he allowed. "Republicans are gonna make it out as if I'm a scary guy, I'm gonna tax you to death. You don't know whether I can be trusted."
How is it racist to refer to someone as articulate or not articulate?? It describes their public speaking skills. Some people have it and some don't. Michelle Obama does. What does that have to do with race?
I must say, of all the ridiculous ways you've chosen to drag things on ad nauseam, this one has to be the most ridiculous.
I was half-joking, in case you couldn't tell by the Chappelle comment.
Nonetheless, my point was merely that people who tend to be closet racists often seem to point out things like how "articulate" a black person is as a sort of back-handed complement (again, leading into the second part of my post).
Ad Nauseam...sounds like a side-effect from taking a pill.
I was half-joking, in case you couldn't tell by the Chappelle comment.
Nonetheless, my point was merely that people who tend to be closet racists often seem to point out things like how "articulate" a black person is as a sort of back-handed complement (again, leading into the second part of my post).
Ad Nauseam...sounds like a side-effect from taking a pill.
And you're actually right, it is a back-handed slap.
Remember Barbara Bush's remark, upon hearing of the New Orleans refugees after Katrina when they were sent to the Astrodome for temporary shelter: "It's better housing than they've ever had."
My saying that Michelle Obama was articulate is comparable to Barbara Bush's Astrodome comment?? OK, I take back what I said earlier. THAT is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
If I had said that Ted Kennedy was extremely articulate that same night (which he was, because he's an excellent public speaker), what would that remark be considered??
It was an observation. She spoke at the convention. She spoke well.
My saying that Michelle Obama was articulate is comparable to Barbara Bush's Astrodome comment?? OK, I take back what I said earlier. THAT is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
If I had said that Ted Kennedy was extremely articulate that same night (which he was, because he's an excellent public speaker), what would that remark be considered??
It was an observation. She spoke at the convention. She spoke well.
I thought Michelle Obama was extremely articulate last night.
Now who is being racist?
Seriously, for some reason that reminds me of the Chappelle show with the colored milkman skit. "He's such a fine athlete and so well spoken!"
Go for it, Double-J!! Next thing you know, they'll be commenting on how 'clean' she looked. Honestly, I'm not sure why anyone would even feel compelled to point out how 'articulate' Michelle Obama was on Monday night. She's always been articulate, and her views have been quite clear for these past many months.
Seriously, though...I'll admit that in the general sense it is VERY exciting to witness the historic event of the first ever Black man to be the Presidential Nominee of a major political party. It would've been equally exciting had Hillary become the first woman to do the same.
That doesn't mean I'd vote for either one of these socialist pigs. But still...history has been made and we are here to see it.
Republican strategist Karl Rove called Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) late last week and urged him to contact Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) to withdraw his name from vice presidential consideration, according to three sources familiar with the conversation.
Lieberman dismissed the request, these sources agreed.
Lieberman “laughed at the suggestion and certainly did not call [McCain] on it,” said one source familiar with the details.
“Rove called Lieberman,” recounted a second source. “Lieberman told him he would not make that call.”
Rove did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Rove, President Bush’s former top campaign adviser and arguably the most prominent political operative of the past generation, has no formal role in McCain’s campaign. But he knows much of the Arizona senator’s high command and has been offering informal advice, both over the phone and in his position as a Fox News analyst, since McCain wrapped up the GOP nomination.
His decision to wade into the vice presidential selection process could provide Democrats fresh ammunition to tie McCain to the polarizing Bush.
It is also chafing some Lieberman allies and others wary of the selection of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.
“Rove is pushing Romney so aggressively some folks are beginning to wonder what's going on,” grumbled one veteran Republican strategist.
From his perch on Fox, Rove has touted McCain’s fierce primary rival as strong vice presidential material.
“Romney is already vetted by the media, has strong executive experience both in business and in government, has an interesting story to tell with saving the U.S. Olympics, and also helps McCain deal with the economy, because he can speak to the economy with a fluency that McCain doesn’t have,” Rove said on “Fox News Sunday” in June.
The sources spoke about Rove’s involvement after Robert Novak, writing his first column since being diagnosed with brain cancer, reported Wednesday that McCain and some of his close associates would like to tap Lieberman for the number two slot but that putting an abortion-rights-supporting former Democrat on the Republican ticket was likely to be unrealistic.
The column said Lieberman had made that clear to McCain personally at the behest of a “close friend,” but a Lieberman source called that “totally and absolutely false.”
Reached by phone, Novak would say only: "I don't talk about my sources."
The maneuvering comes just days before McCain is to publicly unveil his pick Friday at a large rally in Ohio. A senior campaign official said Wednesday that McCain has settled on his ticket mate and that the person is to be notified Thursday.
Lieberman has his advocates, especially among those who believe McCain needs to make a transformative pick to help disassociate himself from Bush and the GOP, but most establishment Republicans believe tapping the Connecticut senator would blow up next week’s Republican convention in St. Paul, Minn., and create major problems for McCain and the conservative base of the party this fall.
A source close to Lieberman said: "If it's Lieberman, none of us know about it" — meaning staff, aides and friends. The source said Lieberman is currently on vacation on Long Island, N.Y.
OMG... they're ending Bill's speech with a lame rendition of U2's "A Beautiful Day" -- the same song I was told to use for brides preparing for their weddings! -- and no one until me realized that that was one of the most DEPRESSING songs on the planet at the time! lol After my first wedding edit, I refused to use the song... but then Billaryama used it... haha
The speech was 4 hours ago. You're a little behind.
I missed it the first time, because I assumed it would be during the primetime coverage starting at 10pm ET -- but I chimed in at like 9:50 and discovered it already happened! I couldn't help but think that Obama didn't trust him enough (who would??) to be primetime -- but at the same time I was like, why the fuck are some unknown schmucks talking (and being ignored on Fox AND CNN) during primetime when Billy Boy wasn't??
They wanted the network coverage to start right off the bat with the "buzz" about Clinton's speech, and go right into the highlights, instead of starting off with speculation on what he might say. Then they could go right into Biden's nomination.
I didn't watch Biden yet -- I wanted to -- but had a buddy over, and had to catch up with a few eps of Gene Simmons Family Jewels -- and Saget's roast -- first... lol
....had to catch up with a few eps of Gene Simmons Family Jewels -- lol
Ok, sorry to take this topic off track, but Geoff, how great is that show? I am NOT a fan of reality tv whatsoever, but I really enjoy his show. He really is a very smart man, and is absolutely brilliant when it comes to promotions and marketing. Did you happen to catch the roast that they did for him? Hilarious!
Bill hit a grand slam imho last night. I urge anyone interested in this convention and the next one to consider watching it on C-Span. You actually get to hear every speaker, and you hear them uninterrupted by the network and cable gasbags who talk over the speakers, speculate about who is going to do what next (they are cinsistently wrong), what this or that means to the American people, and on and on. I finally folipped over to C Span and realized I don't ned these idiots telling me what to think.
I thought Michelle Obama was extremely articulate last night.
Now who is being racist?
Seriously, for some reason that reminds me of the Chappelle show with the colored milkman skit. "He's such a fine athlete and so well spoken!"
Go for it, Double-J!! Next thing you know, they'll be commenting on how 'clean' she looked. Honestly, I'm not sure why anyone would even feel compelled to point out how 'articulate' Michelle Obama was on Monday night. She's always been articulate, and her views have been quite clear for these past many months.
I hear Michy's actually in line to be the new mascot for Mrs. Butterworth and has a deal in the works as the next spokeswoman for Aunt Jemima...
Wiseass. On CBS here in NY, the Jets game is on until 10:00, when they'll air Obama's speech live. What happens if the game runs over? Will it be a Heidi moment??
On CBS here in NY, the Jets game is on until 10:00, when they'll air Obama's speech live. What happens if the game runs over? Will it be a Heidi moment??
I suspect the network would stay with the game. You can watch the speech on many other networks... MSNBC is carrying the whole coverage now.
I say no chance they'd stay with a pre-season football game, over Obama's speech. The Giants are on NBC right now too, and I'm sure there's no chance they stay with it too. These games are nothing more than "practice".
Regular season is a different story. ...It wasn't too long ago that the Networks didn't even broadcast the pre-season games. WPIX in NY would show an edited version at midnight.
I say no chance they'd stay with a pre-season football game, over Obama's speech. The Giants are on NBC right now too, and I'm sure there's no chance they stay with it too. These games are nothing more than "practice".
The Browns/Bears game is on the My Network so it's still on.
He is an excellent speaker, no doubt. However, he also spoke of hope. The last election was one of fear. This truly was a speech about hope, about what is possible in the future. He spoke of patriotism, of love for this country, for his family, and his plan to fix what he sees broken.
And yes, SC, when he said that in 10 years, we will end our dependence on foreign oil, it was very reminiscent of JFK's pledge that we would have a man on the moon by the end of the decade.
And yes, SC, when he said that in 10 years, we will end our dependence on foreign oil, it was very reminiscent of JFK's pledge that we would have a man on the moon by the end of the decade.
If I'm not mistaken, that pledge was from JFK's inaugural address. Hopefully we'll be hearing more from Obama like this in January.
I'm sure you noticed some of the similarities to JFK's style. One line that comes to mind that reminded me of JFK was Obama saying, "change doesn't come FROM Washington, change goes TO Washington".
I saw Senator McCain's ad, congratulating Senator Obama on making history tonight. Very classy of him, I must say. It's set to run just this one night.
Hey, TIS. I thought you might be watching tonight!
Wouldn't that be wonderful?? To be hopeful instead of our leaders trying to keep us afraid???
You said a mouthful, SB, and once again hit the nail on the head.
Beautiful speech. Stirring message (especially in the context of the 45th anniversary of the MLK speech). And a beautiful family.
My favorite line of the convention was Hillary Clinton's remark that it was appropriate that the Republican Convention be held in the Twin Cities because you can't tell Bush and McCain apart.
I saw Senator McCain's ad, congratulating Senator Obama on making history tonight. Very classy of him, I must say. It's set to run just this one night.
Hey, TIS. I thought you might be watching tonight!
Speaking of McCain, word non-leaked leaked that Governor Pawlenty of Minnesota may be McCain's VP.
Poor McCain, he sought to steal Obama's thunder by leaking this VP news tonight, and instead its just a fart.
Really, every strongly-pimped McCain VP candidate is toxic in some way, and while Pawlenty aint Chernobyl-lethal like Libermann and Romney would be, Pawlenty is possibly the biggest running mate-dud since Dan Quayle.*
Also, anyone really think Minnesota will actually go GOP this November? I mean to put it another way, how much money would you put on that?
*=Really, its amazing how in spite of that fuck-up of a pick, Bush Sr.'s campaign was strong and powerful enough to win in a landslide in spite of Quayle.
I'm sure you noticed some of the similarities to JFK's style. One line that comes to mind that reminded me of JFK was Obama saying, "change doesn't come FROM Washington, change goes TO Washington".
Very JFKish.
I thought that was his best line as it succinctly defined his message that his campaign wasn't about him, but about all of us.
He looked like a king in command.
I look forward to the Republican Convention and the debates. These campaigns will be spirirted...as they should be.
I saw Senator McCain's ad, congratulating Senator Obama on making history tonight. Very classy of him, I must say. It's set to run just this one night.
Hey, TIS. I thought you might be watching tonight!
Speaking of McCain, word non-leaked leaked that Governor Pawlenty of Minnesota may be McCain's VP.
Then Obama can modify one of his campaign slogans about McCain to "More of the same...and Pawlenty more." (That's a groan.
....had to catch up with a few eps of Gene Simmons Family Jewels -- lol
Ok, sorry to take this topic off track, but Geoff, how great is that show? I am NOT a fan of reality tv whatsoever, but I really enjoy his show. He really is a very smart man, and is absolutely brilliant when it comes to promotions and marketing. Did you happen to catch the roast that they did for him? Hilarious!
I'm not a regular watcher, but do catch parts of an episode every now & then. It's certainly better than the phony-baloney 'Hogan Knows Best' (in which Hulk Hogan appears to be the ONLY intelligent member of the family). George Foreman's show is a bit staged and stiff as well.
Family Jewels: Used to not like they way a member (or two) of his family did commentary while Gene sat there saying nothing...but then realized that's part of the schtick. As family reality shows go (and most of them suck), it's really not that bad.
Worth saying though, that NONE of these even comes close to 'The Osbornes', which was the daddy of ALL family shows.
I saw Senator McCain's ad, congratulating Senator Obama on making history tonight. Very classy of him, I must say. It's set to run just this one night.
Hey, TIS. I thought you might be watching tonight!
Speaking of McCain, word non-leaked leaked that Governor Pawlenty of Minnesota may be McCain's VP.
Then Obama can modify one of his campaign slogans about McCain to "More of the same...and Pawlenty more." (That's a groan.
.... One line that comes to mind that reminded me of JFK was Obama saying, "change doesn't come FROM Washington, change goes TO Washington". Very JFKish.
True.
Only difference is that when JFK said, "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what YOU can do for your COUNTRY!"...to the best of my knowledge he hadn't stolen it from another guy's speech and molded it into his own words so that he could make people think he was just like that other guy whose speech he just stole from.
*=Really, its amazing how in spite of that fuck-up of a pick, Bush Sr.'s campaign was strong and powerful enough to win in a landslide in spite of Quayle.
Not really. Bush was riding a wave of popularity from the Reagan years that saw enormous economic growth, peace and the crumbling of Communism. Dukakis was a weak nominee from a weak field (affectionately called the Seven Dwarfs") and never came close to Bush. Also, Quayle was a young, little known, good looking mid-western senator, and most of his gaffes ocurred after the election. He survived allegations that while in the National Guard, he received preferential treatment to stay out of Viet Nam.
.... One line that comes to mind that reminded me of JFK was Obama saying, "change doesn't come FROM Washington, change goes TO Washington". Very JFKish.
True.
Only difference is that when JFK said, "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what YOU can do for your COUNTRY!"...to the best of my knowledge he hadn't stolen it from another guy's speech and molded it into his own words so that he could make people think he was just like that other guy whose speech he just stole from.
Apple
"All artists borrow, but the great ones steal!" - Anonymous
*=Really, its amazing how in spite of that fuck-up of a pick, Bush Sr.'s campaign was strong and powerful enough to win in a landslide in spite of Quayle.
Not really. Bush was riding a wave of popularity from the Reagan years that saw enormous economic growth, peace and the crumbling of Communism. Dukakis was a weak nominee from a weak field (affectionately called the Seven Dwarfs") and never came close to Bush. Also, Quayle was a young, little known, good looking mid-western senator, and most of his gaffes ocurred after the election. He survived allegations that while in the National Guard, he received preferential treatment to stay out of Viet Nam.
Anyway, this is a memorable gem that stung him:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-7gpgXNWYI
All right, thanks for correcting me on that point. Thanks for the video too.
Speaking of post-speech reaction, Pat Buchanan.....yes, that conservative Pat Buchanan...called it the best convention speech he's ever heard.
Liked this one line from Obama's speech: ""We are the party of Roosevelt. We are the party of Kennedy. So don't tell me that Democrats won't defend this country." "
Technically, Kennedy escalated our involvement in Vietnam, Bay of Pigs failure came under him, but his administration did defuse the Cuban Missile Crisis without America looking weak or negotiating weakly, or coming out as such from the encounter.
Still, good assertive line, which the Democrats haven't done enough perhaps against McCain.
Not much else can be said about the speech. It was one helluva speech. I was watching it in my office, and stayed late just to see the whole thing. He did/said everything he had to. Now we'll see how McCain responds, and what happens in the next 2 months.
Ha ha ha... Barackopolis! I saw something about that yesterday on a political site. I was at work (just checking the news) but only saw a headline about the "pillars. Didn't open the link. Btw, I read there was 80,000 people there.
Anyway, SB yea, I watched. I have always been interested in who runs our country, but man, the last couple elections and this one in particular, I feel like a political geek. I am acutally considering a vacation or sick day the Wednesday after the election. I figure I'll have the day to do celebrate or mourn....either way, I'll need it.
Oh, don't try to race bait me, SC. It's not very becoming of you.
No baiting going on here. You're the one who keeps making racist references in regards to the Obamas (gorillas, Aunt Jemima, etc.). The only thing becoming of you here is that it's becoming tired and quite ugly.
Originally Posted By: Double-J
Besides, I don't have a K-Mart near me. I do know where you could get some Depends cheap though!
No thanks. I'll leave the wearing of sheep to you.
Wow. It's not unconfirmed, but it looks like McCain picked Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate. Is this a last desperate attempt to try and get the Clinton voters? Other than that, I don't see what else she brings to the table.
Wow. It's unconfirmed, but it looks like McCain picked Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate. Is this a last desperate attempt to try and get the Clinton voters? Other than that, I don't see what else she brings to the table.
....Watch she's not actually the pick.
I heard that earlier, too (unconfirmed). She'd bring the female vote to the party.
John McCain's is 73 years old. God forbid something happens to him, Sarah Palin will be the President? She's only been a Governor for 2 years, and the only other office she ever held is Mayor of Wasilla. Wow. Just wow.
She's going to appeal to a lot of social conservatives, and he hopes to get the Hillary voters. I can't see the people that are on the fence for Obama, but aren't sure due to the experience issue, voting for McCain now.
McCain is trying too hard to win over Hillary's die hard feminist supporters. In doing so, he'll chase away the blue collar men that Obama was having a hard time with.
He should have played to his strengths, rather than take advantage of Obama's biggest weakness (older white women).
It's being reported that Obama's campaign is "thrilled" with the pick because now the inexperience arguments are off the table with Sarah Palin one step from the White House.
I don't know this Sarah -- I don't know what she does -- I don't know what she lives on. Now why don't you tell her that the Vice Presidency is out of the question, and you don't want to see her anymore. Now she'll understand, believe me.
It's being reported that Obama's campaign is "thrilled" with the pick because now the inexperience arguments are off the table with Sarah Palin one step from the White House.
As they should be.
I think a reason McCain picked her was that she would be pro-life legit to calm the social conservatives down, and which McCain doesn't hate her guts (like he dd with Romney, and reportedly with Huckabee as well).
But there are some real drawbacks to this pick:
(1) As a GOP Governor, she's currently under a criminal probe led by a GOP-controlled Alaskan legislature, investigating whatever she without good cause fired a state trooper...who happened to be married to her sister, and whom was divorcing the trooper at the time.
(2) If McCain sought to capitalize on Hillary's supporters still upset/meh on Obama, consider two problems with this logic: #1 Palin is pro-life, and most American women according to polling data, about 55%, are still pro-choice, and #2 Go ask Walter Mondale how a female VP racked up the votes for him in 1984.
(3) Back to experience as Lou points out, this pick wipes out one of McCain's strongest arguments against Obama, that of not having enough experience. McCain plays that card at a debate, and Obama will demand why she's experienced in case the worst should happen, and not him.
Boom
Remember 2004 when GOPers (rightly) attacked the Edwards VP pick as not having enough experience for the top job? Consider that Obama has had what, 3+ years in the Senate and some years (can't remember exactly how much) in the Illinois State Senate?
Now consider Palin, who's been Governor of Alaska for more than a year and before that was only the Mayor of a city.
(4) As much as I've shit on the idea of Ridge as VP because of his pro-choice stance, some here have pointed out right that he would though put Pennsylvania into play, and score some moderate swing voters.
With Palin....Alaska hasn't gone Democratic in a Presidential election since 1964. Obama was about 10 points last I checked there, but still I would have called it a safe GOP state anyway, even if the Governor/Senator/Congressman are in legal deep shit.
(6) The name of her kids: TRACK, BRISTOL, WILLOW, PIPER, and TRIG.
Look, generally I don't diss names that people give to their kids, but admit it more than once alot of us have read the names given by celebrities to their offspring and laughed at how silly they were: Inspector Pilot (Jason Lee), Kal-El (Nic Cage), Apple(Gwyneth Paltrow), Jermajesty (Jermaine Jackson), Moon Unit and Dweezil and all that shit.
So now add Palin with Track and Trig.* At least we have a new political Frank Zappa as a punchline.
Again, is she from Alaska or Hollywood?
(7) Biden will shred her to bits in the VP debate, though her only chance might be that Biden will try to be softer than usual just so he won't be criticized as being too tough on a girl.
(8) Still, congrats to the GOP for nominating their first woman to a national ticket.
*=Though I feel bad with pointing that one out, considering he has down syndrome. Still.....Trig? Will Palin's next be called Calculus?
I could care less what she names her kids. I care about the fact that she's pro-life, has no experience, is a lifetime member of the NRA, wants to drill in the Alaskan refuge, and tried to get her brother-in-law fired because he was in a custody battle with her sister.
Maybe he was going for youth and feminism, but man did he miss the mark. Whoever advised McCain on this move must have been drinking, heavily.
I could care less what she names her kids. I care about the fact that she's pro-life, has no experience, is a lifetime member of the NRA, wants to drill in the Alaskan refuge, and tried to get her brother-in-law fired because he was in a custody battle with her sister.
Fair enough, I was simply bringing up stuff that the media will highlight for the next 2 months.
You know, its funny how the other day, I penned that WHAT IF? column on Curtis LeMay's disaster of a VP for George Wallace's 1968 presidential campaign.
Palin isn't LeMay nuclear bad (pun!), but....I doubt that 12,000 seat joint for McCain's GOP acceptance speech next week will break through the roof now.
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
Maybe he was going for youth and feminism, but man did he miss the mark. Whoever advised McCain on this move must have been drinking, heavily.
McCain needs to lay off the bottle.
But I agree with you, this pick is just a shitbasket for McCain.
Since she is under investigation for the brother-in-law thing, maybe he can replace her if she gets indicted.
Her lack of experience, while frightening, is nothing compared to her stand on issues I find to be of huge importance: Energy, Abortion and Gun Control.
And I still don't understand what he thinks she'll deliver. It can't be feminists because of her stand on abortion. Being from Idaho and Alaska, she's not going to deliver Pennsylvania, Ohio or Florida, which are critical. The only thing I can think of is her age, but that's canceled out by her inexperience.
Remember when McCain stated that Barack was willing to lose a war in order to win an election? Isn't McCain's choice of this relatively inexperienced person a version of that? Due to that inexperience, McCain is willing to put the Nation's wellbeing at risk in order to win an election.
By the way, the investigation of Governor Palin is not a criminal probe. The Legislative Council of Alaska's legislature will employ an investigator to probe the Governor's potential abuse of power which is a typical accusation against an elected official as the basis of the impeachment process.
August 29, 2008, 1:14 pm Palin Ethics Investigation By Michael Luo
DENVER—An issue for Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin that is already drawing attention in the opening moments of her debut as the Republican vice presidential pick is an ongoing state ethics probe that was launched just a few weeks ago.
An independent investigator appointed by a panel of state legislators earlier this month is looking into whether Mrs. Palin dismissed a top law enforcement official in her administration because he failed to fire a state trooper, Mike Wooten, who went through a messy divorce with Mrs. Palin’s sister.
The investigation follows on the heels of Mrs. Palin’s abrupt decision in mid-July to dismiss Walt Monegan, her Public Safety Commissioner. Mrs. Palin said she wanted to take the department in a different direction, but questions emerged after Mr. Monegan said he felt pressured to fire Mr. Wooten.
Mr. Monegan said members of Mrs. Palin’s administration, as well Mrs. Palin’s husband, Todd, and the governor herself talk to him about Mr. Wooten.
Mr. Monegan told the Anchorage Daily News that Mr. Palin showed him some of the findings of a private investigator the family had hired and accused him of variety of misdeeds, including drunk driving and child abuse.
Mr. Palin told the newspaper he feared for his wife’s safety and said that Mr. Wooten had made threats against her and her family.
As part of efforts to demonstrate she welcomed the inquiry, Mrs. Palin asked the state’s attorney general to look into the allegations as well.
Earlier this month, she released an audio recording of a top aide pressing a police lieutenant about why no action had been taken against Mr. Wooten, given the allegations against him. She also disclosed there had been more two dozen inquiries from members of her staff to the public safety department about him, but she said she only knew about some of the inquiries and had played no role in them.
Excerpts of the audio recording Mrs. Palin released showed Frank Bailey, the state’s director of boards and commissions, pushing Lt. Rodney Dial in February about Mr. Wooten.
“Todd and Sarah are scratching their heads, ‘Why on earth hasn’t this, why is this guy still representing the department?’ He’s a horrible recruiting tool, you know,” Mr. Bailey told the lieutenant.
Oh, don't try to race bait me, SC. It's not very becoming of you.
No baiting going on here. You're the one who keeps making racist references in regards to the Obamas (gorillas, Aunt Jemima, etc.). The only thing becoming of you here is that it's becoming tired and quite ugly.
Originally Posted By: Double-J
Besides, I don't have a K-Mart near me. I do know where you could get some Depends cheap though!
Racist references? Again, dare I say, I have yet to actually say anything racist about anyone...
Originally Posted By: SC
No thanks. I'll leave the wearing of sheep to you.
I really don't know much about her. It was kind of a surprising pick. I'm sure a lot of thought went into the selection, but wow.
She is anti-abortion and will appeal to Fundamentalist Christians... I will be REALLY surprised is she appeals to women, in fact it should make it clear to all the Hillary Clinton supporters just how much McCain really disagrees with the issues they care the most about!
Her husband also worked for an oil services company or at least as a supervisor. I am so tired of these politicians linked to BIG OIL.
McCain hasn't had any big reported scandals, but this woman has lot's of scandals in Alaska now: transparency in oil bidding process, thinks the fix has been in, current ethics investigation into HER conduct - allegation is she tried to have her ex-BIL fired from State Police, and this has credibility. What was McCain thinking?
Yes, SB, the appeal to the extreme right is the best path to election for a Republican candidate. And, yes, they're down-playing her husband's involvement in the oil industry, making it seem like he's just some blue collar guy who works for some oil thing.
She opposes gay marriage, abortion and gun control, she supports drilling in the Alaskan wildlife refuge and the death penalty, and she opposed making the polar bear an endangered species.
I do hear that she is quite dynamic. I haven't heard her speak, but I was just on the phone with someone who did, and they said that she definitely makes quite a presence.
Yeah, well it may just be a sop to white male working class demos who don't want to vote for Obama. They can say they voted for a ticket with a woman. Makes them feel better about making a crappy choice.
Yeah, well it may just be a sop to white male working class demos who don't want to vote for Obama. They can say they voted for a ticket with a woman. Makes them feel better about making a crappy choice.
The choice between the two is crappy because of the loaded issues behind it, but I see nothing inherently wrong with this election. If anything, it's a true landmark considering that we have the first black candidate with the full nomination, a female VP candidate, and another female who nearly took the democratic nomination.
What I can't understand is why HER??? I can understand why McCain may have wanted a female on the ticket with him. But she's totally unknown to the American public.
The same may have been true of Barack Obama two years ago, BUT the country has been exposed to him in those two years and they now know what he's about. Palin only has two months to get herself known and that ain't enough time IMO.
It's being reported that Obama's campaign is "thrilled" with the pick because now the inexperience arguments are off the table with Sarah Palin one step from the White House.
Yea, try to argue that one now.
God forbid if McCain is elected and something happens to him, and she's in charge we have a person that has a BA in journalism, then became a member of her <9,000-population small town's city council, then its mayor for 6 years, then governor of less than two years
versus
A person with a law degree from Harvard, who worked as a community organizer in Chicago's South Side before serving as its district's state senator for 7 years, then serves as US senator for 3 years.
Even Fox News is "reaching" by saying Sarah Palin does have foreign policy experience "because she is right up there in Alaska right next door to Russia"
So was Geraldine Ferraro. So was Dick Cheney. So, to a degree was Al Gore. So are MOST VP picks, unless as in recent years they've already run in the Primaries.
Gov. Palin may have been 'unknown' a month ago, but she won't be for long.
Even Fox News is "reaching" by saying Sarah Palin does have foreign policy experience "because she is right up there in Alaska right next door to Russia"
Well, it's worked before. We elected a relatively unknown governor of Georgia (Jimmy Carter) as president. And now Georgia is at war with Russia.
...That a white woman is more electable at this point in our nation's history than a black man? Not talking primaries, we're talking general election.
Double-J, my Republican compadre...
Politically, we are close to soulmates, and it's always nice to have you around to help knock down the liberal hordes.
But please, a word to the wise...do yourself and me (mostly yourself) a BIG favor and stop, stop, STOP the sarcastic references to race, either directly or indirectly in almost every post.
It isn't funny, it isn't clever and although you are apparently not worried about your reputation around here...all it does is throw a nasty wrench in what has been (and will continue to be) an entertaining and interesting thread.
Aside from that, it MAY get you suspended (again?) if you take a step too many over that invisible line.
Careful.
ON ANOTHER NOTE...whatever your 'Party', this is an extremely exciting, historic election cycle, one that will go in the books. Two years ago, Nancy Pelosi became the first ever female Speaker of the House. Not that I'm a fan of hers and the sooner her boney ass is out of that seat the better...but still, she broke the ceiling.
Earlier this year, we knew that either a woman or a black man would be the Presidential Nominee for the Democratic Party. Another first.
Now...come January 2009, our nation will have either the first African American President or the first Female Vice President.
It's incredible, it's happening, and it's fantastic to be a part of it.
Apple, I'll answer your comments with two words - "Dan Quayle".
The Republicans are bound to follow the same fate as '92.
But you're forgetting, SC...Dan Quayle and his running mate WON in 1988.
True, Bush Sr. sailed into the White House largely on Reagan's coattails and thanks in part to the abysmal campaign of one Michael Dukakis...but still, it was the Bush/Quayle ticket that won.
...Why Poppycock didn't dump Quayle, I'll never know.
Loyalty. Plain & simple.
It's all in Mary Matalin's book 'All's Fair - Love, War, and Running for President'...co-written with hubby James Carville about their budding romance while working for rival 1992 campaigns:
"Because his staff had been treated so badly (by the Reagan Administration), Bush was very good to Quayle. He also truly liked and respected the Vice President, and took his counsel. The rest of the President's staff was not always as generous."
There was talk of pulling Quayle as VP on the '92 ticket and moving to him a position in the President's Cabinet.
"Whatever the scenario, an absolute prerequisite was that Quayle himself step down voluntarily."
"Dan Quayle is an honorable guy. I believe if he had known empirically he was hurting Bush, and if a face-saving plan had been worked out, he would have pulled himself off the ticket. He said so that night on Larry King Live. He was never called upon to do so.
I honestly don't believe that DJ has posted anything overtly racist. Even if I don't agree with all of his political views, I respect the kid for speaking his mind and not wavering on his opinions. Politicians (Republican OR Democrat) should have the same character. But we know they won't .
I honestly don't believe that DJ has posted anything overtly racist.
The two board's administrators disagree. One of the moderators disagrees. Some of the members have voiced disagreement.
Originally Posted By: pizzaboy
Even if I don't agree with all of his political views, I respect the kid for speaking his mind and not wavering on his opinions. Politicians (Republican OR Democrat) should have the same character. But we know they won't .
No argument there.
Can we put this to rest and continue with what has otherwise been one of the best political threads in the board's history?
By the way...just noticed my 'Registered' date. Can't believe I've been a BB member for 7 years!!!
Happy Anniversary to ME !!!
Happy anniversary, Apple.
This is certainly an historic election, and will be particularly memorable. I thought the last two would be hard to top.
McCain and his staff must see something in Palin, and I believe she will want to make a splash at the convention. She has to if the ticket is to be viable. McCain certainly can't match the excitement of Obama, and perhaps if he picked Ridge (who, I thought, would have been a very good running mate), he wouldn't have been able to break free from the "More of the Same" theme.
By the way, Biden, who is sometimes called Pennsylvania's third senator, will spend some time here. Like Hillary Clinton, Biden spent a part of his childhood in Scranton and still has family there. He'll surely rely on his roots to make an impact on an area that went decisively for Hillary in the primary.
One thing to watch for is the fianncial impact that public campaign financing will have on McCain's ads, etc. Obama is flush with cash and will use it to unload on McCain after the Rep. convention. Of course, a financial variable is the amount of money raised by the RNC.
One thing to watch for is the fianncial impact that public campaign financing will have on McCain's ads, etc. Obama is flush with cash and will use it to unload on McCain after the Rep. convention. Of course, a financial variable is the amount of money raised by the RNC.
Its funny how in 2004, Kerry did what McCain is doing this election, while Obama now is like Bush 4 years ago....and Bush swamped and emptied his entire warchest and beat Kerry in states like Iowa, and almost in Minnesota.
Obama has the $$$, and he wants to win, and honestly I would have done the same thing. Sure it made him look like a dick for saying he wouldn't earlier, but again he don't wanna pull a Kerry.
...Why Poppycock didn't dump Quayle, I'll never know.
Loyalty. Plain & simple.
It's all in Mary Matalin's book 'All's Fair - Love, War, and Running for President'...co-written with hubby James Carville about their budding romance while working for rival 1992 campaigns:
"Because his staff had been treated so badly (by the Reagan Administration), Bush was very good to Quayle. He also truly liked and respected the Vice President, and took his counsel. The rest of the President's staff was not always as generous."
There was talk of pulling Quayle as VP on the '92 ticket and moving to him a position in the President's Cabinet.
"Whatever the scenario, an absolute prerequisite was that Quayle himself step down voluntarily."
"Dan Quayle is an honorable guy. I believe if he had known empirically he was hurting Bush, and if a face-saving plan had been worked out, he would have pulled himself off the ticket. He said so that night on Larry King Live. He was never called upon to do so.
"Alaskan State Senate President Lyda Green (R) said she thought it was a joke when someone called her at 6 a.m. to tell her the news.
"She's not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president?" said Green, a Republican from Palin's hometown of Wasilla. "Look at what she's done to this state. What would she do to the nation?""
I wonder if the GOP will postpone their convention due to Gustav? It really creates a problem for them. They had it planned pretty well that Bush and Cheney would speak on Monday during the Holiday, when most people won't be around paying any attention. If they postpone it, it also creates a scheduling nightmare. If they go on with it and the hurricane hits, they won't get the headlines and TV coverage they so want.
Obama had little choice, even running on change. He needed "experience" on the ticket.
McCain, I'm not so sure what he was thinking. I can only assume he wanted to appeal to the hardcore social conservatives and some of the Hillary supporters. In doing so, he chose someone that IMO is in no way qualified to be President if she had to be.
...And I don't want to hear that she "has more experience than Obama". Being the mayor of a small town that literally has more moose than people, does not give you the experience to be President of the United States.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- As Hurricane Gustav's power increased and the storm bore down on the Gulf Coast, Republicans grappled Saturday with problems both logistical and political.
Sen. John McCain's campaign manager, Rick Davis, plans to meet with officials in charge of the party's convention planning in Minneapolis-St. Paul on Sunday to review the latest news on Hurricane Gustav and what their options might be and then consult with the presumptive presidential nominee to determine what changes may need to be made.
"I wouldn't call it a nightmare, but it is a very perplexing challenge," said a GOP official planning the event.
A senior McCain source said Saturday that officials are considering turning the convention into a service event, a massive telethon to raise money for the Red Cross and other agencies to help with the hurricane.
"He wants to do something service-oriented if and when the storm hits and it's as bad as its expected to be now," the McCain source said.
They are also hoping to get McCain himself to a storm-affected area as soon as possible.
McCain had suggested to a Fox News interviewer that the convention could be suspended if it seemed that a festive gathering was inappropriate in light of the destruction the storm may bring. VideoWatch as the Gulf Coast prepares for Gustav »
Republican Govs. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Charlie Crist of Florida, Haley Barbour of Mississippi and Rick Perry of Texas -- whose states that lie in the path of Gustav, named a Category 4 hurricane Saturday afternoon -- will skip the GOP convention because of the storm.
The storm has forced last-minute changes in the convention's announced schedule: If the convention -- originally scheduled to start Monday -- commences by Tuesday, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's speech will probably move to that night from Wednesday.
Other changes were being contemplated Saturday afternoon.
The hardest decisions, like whether to cancel a day or two of the four-day gathering or to or condense days, will be made at the last second, GOP officials said. But the logistics of those decisions are being discussed.
There are two scenarios under consideration for President Bush's speech, slated for Monday night. If the president is on hand to speak, his wife, Laura, will give a short speech. If he is not, the first lady will give a longer speech, and the president will speak via satellite from the White House or a location affected by the storm.
That decision will probably not be made until Sunday evening or Monday.
Officials won't discuss in detail how McCain's plans might change. They won't talk about McCain in any detail, but he is likely to go Monday or Tuesday to an aid station in an area hit by the hurricane, if it continues on as expected.
Earlier Saturday, President Bush declared a state of emergency in Mississippi, following similar declarations in Louisiana and Texas.
The president ordered federal aid to supplement state and local efforts in the areas in the forecast path of Hurricane Gustav.
Bush checked in with the four governors whose states are in Gustav's potential route.
The president pledged the full support of the federal government to those states, White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said.
Bush and his administration were heavily criticized in 2005 for not moving fast enough to send federal help to the Gulf Coast when Hurricane Katrina hit.
I did hear for a while they were wondering if they should postpone the convention or not, first I've heard of a telethon though???? You can bet they don't want another "heck of a job Brownie" situation so they wouldn't want to come off as not caring.
I say there is no way they can have the convention next week. What will it look like when the news is showing destruction and devastation one minute, then cutting away to delegates partying at a convention? The Republicans are stuck between a rock and a hard place.
McCain choosing Palin is a weak move for someone running on experience.
Obama choosing Biden was a weak move for someone running on changing Washington. But at least he's a solid pick.
VP Edge: Obama
Yeah, if only by default.
My initial reactions upon hearing both:
Biden=Meh/Mediocre Palin=What the F*ck?
But really, its amazing how the GOP had a good argument of a punch against Obama in the "Experience" question, and now they're tripping over themselves saying how despite having less years than Obama, that 18 months as Governors means more than 4 years in the Senate.
Sorry guys, but its convulted argumentation like this that fucked Kerry 4 years ago.
I say there is no way they can have the convention next week. What will it look like when the news is showing destruction and devastation one minute, then cutting away to delegates partying at a convention? The Republicans are stuck between a rock and a hard place.
If that happens, I would like to see Joe Scarborough's reaction.
Back in 05, that former Florida Republican Congressman fucking ripped Bush a new asshole on MSNBC, about how he acted like he gave a damn in '03/04 with the numerous hurricanes that slammed Florida, but Bush acted indifferent to New Orleans in an off-election year.
Making the RNC into a telethon will be a bit weird, won't it?
"Please donate $100 to help the people down in Louisiana...oh, and Democrats will let Bin Laden kill your kids."
I don't see any harm in postponing it a week or so. He can still campaign, he has his VP pick. It's really just a formaliity no?
I don't think it would be that simple. Getting all of the most powerful Republicans, and all the delegates to change their schedule at the last minute, isn't going to be an easy task. Plus the venue has to be available all week, and all of the Networks have to change their plans.
...despite having less years than Obama, that 18 months as Governors means more than 4 years in the Senate....
Actually, that's TWO (2) years in the Senate. The U.S. Senate, that is.
And he's spent about half that time running for President and (in Hillary's own words) voting 'present'.
It appears to me that BOTH sides oughta stay clear of the 'experience' issue. Because one is going to have serious egg on its face come November.
Anybody wanna guess which one...???
Apple
3 Actually.
January 2005 to September 2008.
Again, if anything that issue disarmed helps Obama more than McCain.
I mean its like a Dirty Harry movie, you know how Eastwood always has a .44 Magnum? Why? Because it KICKS ASS and good at shooting holes into people.
Alright, then replace that weapon with blanks. There goes Dirty Harry's great advantage over creeps besides one-liners.
But more than anything, I don't know Democrats who ever thought Obama was more "experienced" than McCain, but more like "He's right more" or "His ideas are better" or "He proposed more troops in Afghanistan before McCain" or whatever.
I mean come on, nobody was gonna argue that. But now those that try to argue Palin is more experienced than Obama...
How about we say neither are experienced enough for the job? Neither side can argue that he or she is more "experienced," you just fucking can't.
Exactly. National conventions are a monumental undertaking all around. It would be like postponing the Superbowl or Olympics. Also, September is the month during which various legislative bodies such as local governments and state legislatures make last minute adjustments to their upcoming fiscal year budgets and grant approval to them. Many elected officials are delegates and have already arranged their schedules.
Exactly. National conventions are a monumental undertaking all around. It would be like postponing the Superbowl or Olympics. Also, September is the month during which various legislative bodies such as local governments and state legislatures make last minute adjustments to their upcoming fiscal year budgets and grant approval to them. Many elected officials are delegates and have already arranged their schedules.
What I don't get is why the GOP decided to have the '08 RNC in Minnesota this year.
Politico has been running tales of how while those 80,000 something tickets for the Obama speech sold out quickly, the GOP as of earlier this week had been having trouble in getting a sell-out for a 12,000 seat joint for McCain's speech. Nevermind that GOP apparently had to actively recruit local Minnesota folks as workers/activists for the RNC, while scores and truckloads of folks volunteered in Denver for the DNC.
Then again, what you expect from the same state that went for Mondale in 1984?
JL, Olivant, sure you are right there. I do understand as an average Joe, the enormous planning that a campaign must involve, with all the things it must entail from hotels, decorations, seating, all those attending making plans, etc. yea, that's gotta be a big deal.
I guess my point, or what I was trying to say(obviously not effectively) was it won't be a political disadvantage to McCain as far as being able to continue to campaign and promote himself, right? The convention itself is to make it "official". He can continue with his VP choice to campaign throughout the States just as Obama/Biden are doing.
... The convention itself is to make it "official"...
It's a bit more than that, TIS.
While the conventions to 'officially' nominate the candidates, and we see get to see the big speeches in prime time, there's alot more going on behind the scenes. Party officials from all over the country gather & decide on 'platform' issues, and lots more shoulder rubbing etc. that would probably bore us ordinary citizens to tears.
Thats' the case with both parties, and including the Green/Libertarian/Reform and all the rest who put their candidates on the ballot every four years right along with the Dems and Repubs.
The Convention is a major undertaking and Gustav or no Gustav, I don't see how they can possibly postpone it. They could try to make it a bit more low key if things are going very badly with the storm and there will probalby be some key people who will have to cancel their appearances.
I can't see anyone holding it against the Republicans if the convention goes on as scheduled and Gustav hits at the same time. Unfortunately for the GOP, they would get knocked off the front pages of newspapers, but that can't be helped now.
There's still time for Palin to change people's minds, but right now she has the lowest rating a selected running mate has had since Quayle.
ST. PAUL, Minn. – Most voters are unfamiliar with John McCain’s new running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, and many question her qualifications to be president, according to a USA TODAY/Gallup poll.
Meanwhile, another Gallup poll shows Barack Obama maintaining an 8 percentage point lead over John McCain following the end of the Democratic convention Thursday.
Republicans begin their four-day convention Monday here even as Hurricane Gustav picks up steam as it approaches the Gulf Coast. Palin is scheduled to speak Wednesday.
In the poll taken Friday, 39 percent said she is ready to serve as president if needed, 33 percent said she isn’t and 29 percent have no opinion.
That’s the lowest rating any running mate has had since then-Indiana Sen. Dan Quayle was selected in 1988 to join George H.W. Bush’s team.
By contrast, 57 percent of voters rated Delaware Sen. Joe Biden as qualified after Obama selected him last week. Eighteen percent said he wasn’t qualified.
Meanwhile, the Gallup daily tracking poll shows good news for Obama, following the close of the Democratic National Convention and his high-profile nomination acceptance speech Thursday.
The poll, taken from Wednesday to Friday, showed Obama leading McCain by 49 percent to 41 percent for the second day in a row — a campaign high for him.
Before the convention, the two presidential candidates were tied at 45 percent.
No. Moore's been an asshole for many years and most people know it.
However, when such a nasty, cold an callous statement is made especially by somebody who likes to portray himself as a compassionate fellow, it's going to make news.
However, when such a nasty, cold an callous statement is made especially by somebody who likes to portray himself as a compassionate fellow, it's going to make news.
I have nothing to add to any of this except that I just got off the phone with my dad and he informed me that me and my lefty generation decided to go ahead and elect ourselves a knee-gra--(jokingly, mind you)--referring to the fact that he thinks McCain just gave away the election with his VP choice. Personally, I think it's a brilliant move by the Republicans, I was saying just the other day that they needed to shake things up a bit to match the swagger and aura surrounding the Obama Campaign and this did IT!..I'll bet $1,000 McCain wins this November.
... Personally, I think it's a brilliant move by the Republicans, I was saying just the other day that they needed to shake things up a bit to match the swagger and aura surrounding the Obama Campaign and this did IT!..I'll bet $1,000 McCain wins this November.
Exactly!! Well said, Ice.
Frankly, it's been hilarious these past two days listening to virtually ALL the left-wing, from Larry King & James Carville (CNN) to Chris Matthews (MSNBC) to Tom Brokaw (NBC) to Mark Green & Ron Reagan (Air America) fall all over each other questioning nothing but the 'experience' of Gov. Palin. They are ALL either missing the boat completely, or simply don't want to see the forest for the trees.
(Apologies for the cliche', but it was the best way to put it.)
... Personally, I think it's a brilliant move by the Republicans, I was saying just the other day that they needed to shake things up a bit to match the swagger and aura surrounding the Obama Campaign and this did IT!..I'll bet $1,000 McCain wins this November.
Exactly!! Well said, Ice.
Frankly, it's been hilarious these past two days listening to virtually ALL the left-wing, from Larry King & James Carville (CNN) to Chris Matthews (MSNBC) to Tom Brokaw (NBC) to Mark Green & Ron Reagan (Air America) fall all over each other questioning nothing but the 'experience' of Gov. Palin. They are ALL either missing the boat completely, or simply don't want to see the forest for the trees.
(Apologies for the cliche', but it was the best way to put it.)
Apple
When I was growing up, I prided myself as a Republican for our argumentation being clear, straight, blunt, and forceful.
So McCain had a good argument against Obama on the experience issue, yes?
So yeah why disarm perhaps his best argument?
I've been reading GOPers trip over themselves of how her 16 months of being Governor is worth more than Biden's 20+ years of Senate work, which in token means that Palin is more experienced than McCain.
I doubt you Appleonya or DJ will argue that, right?
Remember 2004 when Kerry kept trying to trip himself over of how he voted for the Iraq War before he voted against it? Karl Rove called that quote the gift that kept on giving.
And Karl Rove earlier this year shat on the possibility of Tim Kaine as VP, saying that only 3 years as Governor is not enough experience for VP:
And Look what I found on youtube, Palin calling someone with cancer a "bitch."
I'd venture to say McCain values her for the inherent attempt to sway women voters than any cons with regards to her experience. Considering his age, having someone so youthful is probably not a bad thing. I'm really not having too much of a problem with her as VP anyways; like with Biden, I really didn't care too much about the VP choices anyways.
And Look what I found on youtube, Palin calling someone with cancer a "bitch."
Did you even listen to the clip? Palin didn't call Lyda Green a bitch, the host did. And Lyda Green is a cancer survivor, meaning she currently doesn't have cancer.
And Look what I found on youtube, Palin calling someone with cancer a "bitch."
Did you even listen to the clip? Palin didn't call Lyda Green a bitch, the host did. And Lyda Green is a cancer survivor, meaning she currently doesn't have cancer.
Damn, you're right.
Thanks for correcting me.
Speaking of which, can I now make fun of Lance Armstrong's testicular cancer? I mean he no longer has it, so can I?
When I was growing up, I prided myself as a Republican for our argumentation being clear, straight, blunt, and forceful.
Which is exactly what Gov. Palin is, and apparently has been, since she first took public office.
The argumentation my dear I'm talking about is, for example: "We must continue the fight in Iraq because..." then you state your case.
Argumentation is about making your case, taking into consideration your opponents talking points, then ripping them to shreds this side of Enron documents.
Notice that like the Putin statement days back, you didn't respond to my point about Karl Rove's statement, nor the radio address...but Geoff got me on the radio address.
Since you appleonya didn't respond with your counter-argument, it means you concede the point to me by default, and thus I won that angle.
Since Geoff got me with the radio gig, he won that one.
Originally Posted By: ronnierocketAGO
...So McCain had a good argument against Obama on the experience issue, yes? So yeah why disarm perhaps his best argument?
Because McCain himself never made that argument against Obama, as much as members of Obama's OWN Party did.
The banner logo of the GOP "War Room" during the DNC at Denver was a giant Obama poster saying: Not Ready Yet
Go look it up, it's true.
Originally Posted By: AppleOnYa
Nor was it ever his 'best' argument.
Which is what, that McCain is a conservative? That he aint a Democrat? That he served in the Army? That he was a proven bi-partisan "Maverick" at times while in the Senate? That he should have been the GOP nominee in 2000 instead of Dubya, but because of his anger and the black baby South Carolina nonsense, it wasn't to be?
Originally Posted By: AppleOnYa
And so, as Hillary Clinton & Barack Obama will soon learn...does every woman.
Apple
More like Hillary is already planning 2012. Shit, she and Bubba were undercutting Obama until several people got pissed over it, and she did had that whole "Roll Call" moment to save face.
So if McCain wins this time, its him against Hillary in 2012.
There's a report out that supposedly the McCain campaign didn't vet out Palin, which until I see it for myself, I refuse to believe. I mean, this is 2008...this aint 1972 for fucks sake.
Then again, if you don't dig up the skeletons or anything in your closet, a campaign can't work against it or be prepared for it when it does arise.
That's right...sorry, my mistake. For some reason I thought he was elected in 2006 but it was 2004.
As for the 'experience' issue, I don't recall McCain himself using it against Obama as much as Hillary (and Biden) did during the primaries.
Apple
And to think, perhaps a main reason why McCain got voted into the GOP Nomination was because many thought he was the one GOPer that could beat Hillary.
...Since you appleonya didn't respond with your counter-argument, it means you concede the point to me by default, and thus I won that angle....
You're getting a bit carried away, ronnie...
I really didn't see this discussion as a 'winning' or 'losing' one, on any 'angle'. Just a discussion about McCain's running mate selection.
Listen, I feel he made the right choice. Romney would've been fine with me, in fact that's who I was sure he would go with until the big news came out Friday morning. Most others on the BB do not think Palin, for whatever reason...although I've seen 'experience' as the number one beef people have.
In the end, it was Obama who made the 'safe' pick with Joe Biden. McCain made the daring choice and we'll see if it pays off. However, for someone who was a year ago one of the 'underdog' GOP candidates, who appeared to have seen his opportunity come and go in 2000 and is now about to become the Presidential nominee of his Party...McCain seems to have made all the right moves so far and I'm not about to doubt him now.
So, argue all you want, if that's what you feel you have to do. The decisions are made, the nominations will soon be 'official' and we'll have to see over the next few months of heavy campaigning by both the Presidential AND VP candidates, the debate series, and Election Night itself.
Gotta go order my 'McCain/Palin' bumper stickers!!
Best, AppleOnYa
ps - If former 'Golden Boy' John Edwards could look into a camera proudly claim he cheated on his wife while her cancer was 'in remission', then why not refer to another cancer survivor as a 'bitch'.
The Gallup polls will be interesting today. It will be the first full post Palin pick/Obama speech poll. Limited polling showed Obama getting a 8 point bounce, then McCain getting back 2 points for his pick of Palin. CNN's small poll showed Obama only getting a 1 point bounce.
Interesting. It seems the pick of Palin is more popular with men than women. From CNN 9/1/08:
"Less than 12 hours after Obama accepted the Democratic presidential nomination, McCain introduced Palin as running mate, surprising the political world.
So far, according to the poll, 4 in 10 Americans are not familiar with Palin; 38 percent of those questioned viewed her favorably and 21 percent unfavorably.
Men appear to have a slightly more favorable opinion of Palin than women; 41 percent of men view her favorably, five points higher than women.
Americans seem evenly divided on whether McCain made a wise choice in selecting Alaska's first term governor, who's been in office for less than two years.
Fifty-two percent rate the selection of Palin as excellent or pretty good; 46 percent rate it as fair or poor.
Is Palin qualified to be president?
Fifty percent say she's not qualified to assume the presidency if that becomes necessary; 45 percent say she is qualified.
In recent history, the only running mate to earn less confidence from the public was Vice President Dan Quayle in 1992.
Ultimately however, the Palin pick may have minimal effect on the race for the White House.
Almost 6 in 10 Americans say Palin's selection as McCain's running mate will have no effect on their vote. One in five say it makes them more likely to vote for McCain; one in five say it makes them less likely.
Three quarters of all voters think McCain chose a female running mate specifically because he thought adding a woman to the Republican ticket would help him win in November.
"If McCain was hoping to boost his share of the women's vote, it didn't work," Holland said.
"Women now appear slightly more likely to vote for Obama than they did a week ago, 53 percent now, compared to 50 percent. But McCain picked up a couple of points among men. "
By the way, check out the Drudge Report. There's a blogger who says that Palin's last baby is actually her daughter's baby. He presents pictures that don't appear to show Palin pregnant, but there's one that shows her daughter pregnant.
If I'm not mistaken, from what I saw on FoxNews, some Democrats were rationalizing the comments by saying it's not as bad as Jerry Falwell claiming 9/11 was punishment for the propagation of homosexuals.
If I'm not mistaken, from what I saw on FoxNews, some Democrats were rationalizing the comments by saying it's not as bad as Jerry Falwell claiming 9/11 was punishment for the propagation of homosexuals.
Can we just agree that both statements are fucking horrible?
If I'm not mistaken, from what I saw on FoxNews, some Democrats were rationalizing the comments by saying it's not as bad as Jerry Falwell claiming 9/11 was punishment for the propagation of homosexuals.
Can we just agree that both statements are fucking horrible?
If I'm not mistaken, from what I saw on FoxNews, some Democrats were rationalizing the comments by saying it's not as bad as Jerry Falwell claiming 9/11 was punishment for the propagation of homosexuals.
Can we just agree that both statements are fucking horrible?
I don't know...I think Falwell was right.
So you mean innocent and brave New Yorkers died because of homosexuals? Yeah I can't wait for SC or Don Cardi to get back to ya on that statement.
Remember when Dobson said he prayed to God that it would rain during Obama's Invesco Field speech?
"Sorry, but I'm not here. Please leave your name, number, and I'll might get to your prayer. BEEP"
[quote=Double-J]If I'm not mistaken, from what I saw on FoxNews, some Democrats were rationalizing the comments by saying it's not as bad as Jerry Falwell claiming 9/11 was punishment for the propagation of homosexuals.
Can we just agree that both statements are fucking horrible?
I don't know...I think Falwell was right.
Quote:
So you mean innocent and brave New Yorkers died because of homosexuals? Yeah I can't wait for SC or Don Cardi to get back to ya on that statement.
Do I really need to dig the sarcasm tag out again? Seriously?
By the way, check out the Drudge Report. There's a blogger who says that Palin's last baby is actually her daughter's baby. He presents pictures that don't appear to show Palin pregnant, but there's one that shows her daughter pregnant.
By the way, check out the Drudge Report. There's a blogger who says that Palin's last baby is actually her daughter's baby. He presents pictures that don't appear to show Palin pregnant, but there's one that shows her daughter pregnant.
[quote=ronnierocketAGO][quote=Double-J]If I'm not mistaken, from what I saw on FoxNews, some Democrats were rationalizing the comments by saying it's not as bad as Jerry Falwell claiming 9/11 was punishment for the propagation of homosexuals.
Can we just agree that both statements are fucking horrible?
I don't know...I think Falwell was right.
Quote:
So you mean innocent and brave New Yorkers died because of homosexuals? Yeah I can't wait for SC or Don Cardi to get back to ya on that statement.
Do I really need to dig the sarcasm tag out again? Seriously?[/quote]
Why is this a recurring problem with you, like my fights with Irishman were?
And now, perhaps Political Capitalization-disguised-as-Goodwill at its finest!
Obama will mobilize volunteers for Gustav
Sen. Obama gathered the pool outside after services at St. Luke's Lutheran Church. He told us that his camapaign plans to mobilize its huge e-mail list of supporters to volunteer or send money once the impact of Gustav becomes apparent and authorities know better what kind of help is needed. He said his campaign is coordinating with local authorities.
"We can activate an e-mail list of a couple million people who want to give back," he said. "I think we can get tons of volunteers to travel down there if it becomes necessary."
Your pooler asked him if McCain's visit now is appropriate.
His response: "A big storm like this raises bipartisan concerns and I think for John to want to find out what's going on is fine."
"The thing that I always am concerned about in the middle of a storm is whether we're drawing resources away from folks on the ground because the Secret Service and various security requirements, sometimes it pulls police, fire and other departments away from concentrating on the job."
"I'm assuming that where he went that wasn't an issue. Were going to try to stay clear of the area until things have settled down and then we'll probably try to figure out how we can be as helpful as possible."
If I'm not mistaken, from what I saw on FoxNews, some Democrats were rationalizing the comments by saying it's not as bad as Jerry Falwell claiming 9/11 was punishment for the propagation of homosexuals.
Can we just agree that both statements are fucking horrible?
I don't know...I think Falwell was right.
So you mean innocent and brave New Yorkers died because of homosexuals? Yeah I can't wait for SC or Don Cardi to get back to ya on that statement.
Do I really need to dig the sarcasm tag out again? Seriously?
Why is this a recurring problem with you, like my fights with Irishman were?
Maybe because you don't appreciate my sense of humor. I would have figured that by now people would realize I'm not serious 99% of the time. Pizzaboy gets it. Mikey Sulivan used to get it when he was here. Ice gets it. Blibble does too!
Anyways, yet again, this thread isn't supposed to be about me. Back to --> ontopic.
...There's a blogger who says that Palin's last baby is actually her daughter's baby. He presents pictures that don't appear to show Palin pregnant, but there's one that shows her daughter pregnant.
The blogger doesn't seem to have his story straight.
Gov. & Mr. Palin have released a statement that their unmarried, 17yr old daughter is currently pregnant. Gov. Palin and her husband are indeed the parents of the baby boy born last April.
If I'm not mistaken, from what I saw on FoxNews, some Democrats were rationalizing the comments by saying it's not as bad as Jerry Falwell claiming 9/11 was punishment for the propagation of homosexuals.
Can we just agree that both statements are fucking horrible?
I don't know...I think Falwell was right.
So you mean innocent and brave New Yorkers died because of homosexuals? Yeah I can't wait for SC or Don Cardi to get back to ya on that statement.
Do I really need to dig the sarcasm tag out again? Seriously?
Why is this a recurring problem with you, like my fights with Irishman were?
Maybe because you don't appreciate my sense of humor. I would have figured that by now people would realize I'm not serious 99% of the time. Pizzaboy gets it. Mikey Sulivan used to get it when he was here. Ice gets it. Blibble does too!
Anyways, yet again, this thread isn't supposed to be about me. Back to --> ontopic.
[/quote]
Considering how SC and Appleonya told you to quit your "sense of humor" involving race...:p
...There's a blogger who says that Palin's last baby is actually her daughter's baby. He presents pictures that don't appear to show Palin pregnant, but there's one that shows her daughter pregnant.
The blogger doesn't seem to have his story straight.
Gov. Palin and her husband have released a statement that their unmarried, 17yr old daughter is currently pregnant. Gov. Palin are the parents of the baby boy born last April.
She is?
Wow, that's news to me, and even more dirt for one nasty race.
I can just imagine what my mother will say now tomorrow: "What does this tell you about her parents, and how they raised her?"
ST. PAUL (Reuters) - The 17-year-old daughter of Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin is pregnant, Palin said on Monday in an announcement intended to knock down rumors by liberal bloggers that Palin faked her own pregnancy to cover up for her child.
Bristol Palin, one of Alaska Gov. Palin's five children with her husband, Todd, is about five months pregnant and is going to keep the child and marry the father, the
Board ladies: surf over to the link on the Drudge Report and look at the pictures of Palin when she was supposed to be 7 months pregnant and give us your opinion.
Board ladies: surf over to the link on the Drudge Report and look at the pictures of Palin when she was supposed to be 7 months pregnant and give us your opinion.
That's not going to go over to well with the evangelicals, that she supposed to help McCain with.
I don't know...in this day & age, an unwed, pregnant teenager is not all that earthshattering a news story. I would think the evangelicals would be more outraged had she aborted the pregnancy.
Anyway...I thought it was the former Hillary supporters Palin was supposed to help McCain with.
That's not going to go over to well with the evangelicals, that she supposed to help McCain with.
I don't know...in this day & age, an unwed, pregnant teenager is not all that earthshattering a news story. I would think the evangelicals would be more outraged had she aborted the pregnancy.
Anyway...I thought it was the former Hillary supporters Palin was supposed to help McCain with.
Whatever shoe fits, right, JustLou???
Apple
Anyone remember that report years back in 2000 of how McCain got an abortion for his daughter, and that report riled up Bush/Pro-Lifers?
Anyway...I thought it was the former Hillary supporters Palin was supposed to help McCain with.
Whatever shoe fits, right, JustLou???
Apple
Umm. No. She was supposed help him with both, along with all the social conservatives. It's turning out that in reality she's "Jack of all trades, master of none".
"...She was supposed help him with both, along with all the social conservatives...."
***************************
What I'm saying is, that along with 'experience' was the mantra this whole past weekend after McCain announced her on Friday.
Now, of course with this piece of news the shift changes (for the moment), and you and others like you will grasp at tidbit you can sink your fingernails into. But go ahead, have your fun...
"...She was supposed help him with both, along with all the social conservatives...."
***************************
What I'm saying is, that along with 'experience' was the mantra this whole past weekend after McCain announced her on Friday.
Now, of course with this piece of news the shift changes (for the moment), and you and others like you will grasp at tidbit you can sink your fingernails into. But go ahead, have your fun...
Apple
Speaking of which, why haven't you or DJ reported on that Biden statement allegedly made on the Iran issue, or how Biden had several deferments before he got a medical discharge from serving in Vietnam?
Board ladies: surf over to the link on the Drudge Report and look at the pictures of Palin when she was supposed to be 7 months pregnant and give us your opinion.
Board ladies: surf over to the link on the Drudge Report and look at the pictures of Palin when she was supposed to be 7 months pregnant and give us your opinion.
...Speaking of which, why haven't you or DJ reported on that Biden statement allegedly made on the Iran issue, or how Biden had several deferments before he got a medical discharge from serving in Vietnam?...
Well, I cannot speak for DJ but I have no need to 'report' on every statement and/or issue pertaining to every candidate, even those on the other side. The stuff I post here is the stuff I find most interesting.
But what the heck...as long as you're doing our 'ideological job' for us (proud Republican that you are)...why spend the energy?
...Speaking of which, why haven't you or DJ reported on that Biden statement allegedly made on the Iran issue, or how Biden had several deferments before he got a medical discharge from serving in Vietnam?...
Well, I cannot speak for DJ but I have no need to 'report' on every statement and/or issue pertaining to every candidate, even those on the other side. The stuff I post here is the stuff I find most interesting.
But what the heck...as long as you're doing our 'ideological job' for us (proud Republican that you are)...why spend the energy?
Apple
And that is why I'm awesome.
Now to quote MCP, aka Moses on SOUTH PARK...."make me some macaroni drawings!"
"...She was supposed help him with both, along with all the social conservatives...."
***************************
What I'm saying is, that along with 'experience' was the mantra this whole past weekend after McCain announced her on Friday.
Now, of course with this piece of news the shift changes (for the moment), and you and others like you will grasp at tidbit you can sink your fingernails into. But go ahead, have your fun...
Apple
Speaking of which, why haven't you or DJ reported on that Biden statement allegedly made on the Iran issue, or how Biden had several deferments before he got a medical discharge from serving in Vietnam?
[quote=olivant]Board ladies: surf over to the link on the Drudge Report and look at the pictures of Palin when she was supposed to be 7 months pregnant and give us your opinion.
[quote=ronnierocketAGO][quote=olivant]Board ladies: surf over to the link on the Drudge Report and look at the pictures of Palin when she was supposed to be 7 months pregnant and give us your opinion.
"I have said before and I will repeat again: People's families are off limits," Obama said. "And people's children are especially off-limits. This shouldn't be part of our politics. It has no relevance to Gov. Palin's performance as a governor or her potential performance as a vice president. So I would strongly urge people to back off these kinds of stories. You know my mother had me when she was 18 and how a family deals with issues and teenage children, that shouldn’t be a topic of our politics."
On charges that his campaign has stoked the story via liberal blogs:
"I am offended by that statement. There is no evidence at all that any of this involved us," he said. "Our people were not involved in any way in this, and they will not be. And if I thought there was somebody in my campaign who was involved in something like that, they would be fired."
"I have said before and I will repeat again: People's families are off limits," Obama said. "And people's children are especially off-limits. This shouldn't be part of our politics. It has no relevance to Gov. Palin's performance as a governor or her potential performance as a vice president. So I would strongly urge people to back off these kinds of stories. You know my mother had me when she was 18 and how a family deals with issues and teenage children, that shouldn’t be a topic of our politics."
On charges that his campaign has stoked the story via liberal blogs:
"I am offended by that statement. There is no evidence at all that any of this involved us," he said. "Our people were not involved in any way in this, and they will not be. And if I thought there was somebody in my campaign who was involved in something like that, they would be fired."
A really good statement, and full of shit.
Technically its true, I supposed. If he meant "we" as in the campaign, then sure but the leftie blogs aren't associated directly (i.e. funded/managed) by the campaign.
Its like that "Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth" nonsense from 4 years ago, it wasn't part of the Bush campaign. But it did hammer away at Kerry as an ally of Bush's campaign, as such are the leftie blogs are for Obama.
There is a much larger picture of Palin's daughter on the website cited above that shows her up close and in a dress. She looks pregnant. I dont remember when it was taken, but if she was pregnant, might she have had an abortion. There are several possibilities here given the timeline.
Ok, you know what? It's very difficult to raise a teenager today, and I have two girls in their teens. Never in a million years would I sit in judgment on anyone's parenting skills. Her daughter is pregnant, and their family is dealing with it in a way that they feel is the wisest choice for everyone.
However, Governor Palin had to know that, once she accepted this nomination, her daughter would be having this baby in the media's glare. I don't think I would do that to my daughter. It's hard enough to be 17 and pregnant. I certainly wouldn't want my daughter to have to do it with the world watching.
As for the rumors about her being Trig's grandmother, I would tend to think not. He has Downs Syndrome, which is most common in women how give birth later in life.
I just read a stat on the web that states that 51% of Downs babies are born to women under 30 and 72% to women under 35.
I have no idea where you read that statistic, but I had genetic counseling when I was pregnant with my second daughter. The geneticist showed me the odds of having a child with Downs Syndrome. With each passing year, the chances increased greatly.
Anyway, I think that Obama had the right attitude, self-serving though it might have been. Private lives should be private, especially when it comes to the children of candidates.
I just read a stat on the web that states that 51% of Downs babies are born to women under 30 and 72% to women under 35.
I have no idea where you read that statistic, but I had genetic counseling when I was pregnant with my second daughter. The geneticist showed me the odds of having a child with Downs Syndrome. With each passing year, the chances increased greatly.
Anyway, I think that Obama had the right attitude, self-serving though it might have been. Private lives should be private, especially when it comes to the children of candidates.
The stats I quoted referred to the raw number of Downs Syndrome babies and not the chances. Since younger women have the most babies, than the incidence of characteristics would be greater in their age cohort.
The following is an excerpt from the International Herald-Tribune:
"At the same time, they suggested, Palin would also be given the task of appealing to evangelical voters, who have long been unenthusiastic about McCain. In many ways, the choice of Palin may prove to have been as much an effort to drive up turnout among the Republican base as it was a move to compete for women.
"We had a solid Republican and evangelical base," said Charlie Black, a senior adviser to McCain. "But now it's going to be very intense."
James Dobson, the influential conservative Christian leader who said in the primaries that he could never vote for McCain, said the selection of Palin had won him over. If he went into the voting booth today, Dobson told the talk radio host Dennis Prager on Friday, "I would pull that lever."
If Palin motivates evangelicals to rally behind the Republican ticket as they did for Bush in 2004, it could prove significant in states like Iowa and Ohio, where Republicans won by slim margins in 2004. It could also have an effect in North Carolina, a solidly Republican state that Obama is trying to win by appealing to black voters and new residents.
Republican leaders in North Carolina, who had been increasingly anxious over Obama's intensive efforts there, said they were heartened by the selection of Palin.
"Our people are excited," said Linda Daves, the chairwoman of the North Carolina Republican Party. "The social conservatives are one area where she is going to resonate."
So, with a premarital pregnant teenage daughter, to what extent will Palin still "resonate" with Evangelicals and Christian Conservatives?
(CNN) – Alaska Governor Sarah Palin hired a lawyer three weeks ago to act on her behalf as state legislators investigate whether she may have abused her power in firing the state police chief for refusing to fire her ex-brother-in-law, a state trooper, CNN has confirmed.
A report of findings of a legislative inquiry that began several weeks ago is currently slated to be released just days before Election Day.
Whoa...wait...democrats are going to get uppity about teen pregnancy?
How do you come up with this stuff?
I'm just saying that it's strange a party with more liberal social values would (gasp) try to turn teen pregnancy into something with a negative connotation.
Chill, Double-J...sit back & enjoy the show while these bufoons grab at bubbles for the next two months.
It kinda reminds me of 1992...where the Rebubs tried to oust pin down Clinton on everything from Gennifer Flowers to dodging the draft...and nothing stuck, nobody cared.
I have no problem with Reagan. I voted for him. I might have even voted for McCain in 2000 if he would have beaten Bush. I loved Bob Dole too, but I thought he was too old, and Clinton deserved another term.
I'm just saying that it's strange a party with more liberal social values would (gasp) try to turn teen pregnancy into something with a negative connotation.
Gimme a break. You know damned well if the shoe was on the other foot, the Republicans would be jumping on the same shit.
I'm just saying that it's strange a party with more liberal social values would (gasp) try to turn teen pregnancy into something with a negative connotation.
Gimme a break. You know damned well if the shoe was on the other foot, the Republicans would be jumping on the same shit.
Oh, relax SC. It's good to know I can still get your blood pressure up as soon as I start taking a little chip at the libs.
Whoa...wait...democrats are going to get uppity about teen pregnancy?
How do you come up with this stuff?
I'm just saying that it's strange a party with more liberal social values would (gasp) try to turn teen pregnancy into something with a negative connotation.
It's not the pregnancy itself that the liberal social values party you refer to are commenting upon. Palin is an avowed Evangelical and all which that implies about her stand on premarital sex et al. Now, as is usually the case when perceived transgressions involve a family member, she is adoptng an accomodating tone with words of love and acceptance. So far, I haven't heard or read of her fellow Evangelicals or other religious people on the right questioning Palin's home environment in which such a pregnancy has happened. I bet that if such a pregnancy happened to one of Biden's daughters it's occurence would be laid at the door of her liberal upbringing.
Whoa...wait...democrats are going to get uppity about teen pregnancy?
How do you come up with this stuff?
I'm just saying that it's strange a party with more liberal social values would (gasp) try to turn teen pregnancy into something with a negative connotation.
It's not the pregnancy itself that the liberal social values party you refer to are commenting upon. Palin is an avowed Evangelical and all which that implies about her stand on premarital sex et al. Now, as is usually the case when perceived transgressions involve a family member, she is adoptng an accomodating tone with words of love and acceptance. So far, I haven't heard or read of her fellow Evangelicals or other religious people on the right questioning Palin's home environment in which such a pregnancy has happened. I bet that if such a pregnancy happened to one of Biden's daughters it's occurence would be laid at the door of her liberal upbringing.
ZOMG! A conservative with a child who has a child out of wedlock! Whatever will we do...it's sending our progressive family structure into a quandary! We want to support lesbian families who can get invitro kids, but gasp, a teen pregnancy from teh VP's daughter! ZOMG! Transgression FTL.
...A conservative with a child who has a child out of wedlock! Whatever will we do...it's sending our progressive family structure into a quandary! We want to support lesbian families who can get invitro kids, but gasp, a teen pregnancy from teh VP's daughter! ZOMG! Transgression FTL.
Hilarious, DJ
Honestly, they'd be happier if not only had the daughter had an abortion, but also if Palin had decided NOT to have that Down's Syndrome baby. Now THAT's their kind of candidate!!
I applaud Sarah Palin for having the courage of her convictions. There are many women who might have taken an anti-abortion stance until they were faced with such a challenge.
And, as I said, I believe that her daughter and the rest of her family are following the wisest choice for all involved regarding her daughter's pregnancy.
I don't think that this should be a public issue. Her daughter and the rest of her children should be completely off limits. Every politician's children should be.
I just read a stat on the web that states that 51% of Downs babies are born to women under 30 and 72% to women under 35.
I have no idea where you read that statistic, but I had genetic counseling when I was pregnant with my second daughter. The geneticist showed me the odds of having a child with Downs Syndrome. With each passing year, the chances increased greatly.
Anyway, I think that Obama had the right attitude, self-serving though it might have been. Private lives should be private, especially when it comes to the children of candidates.
That is true. The chances of having a Downs child are greater for a woman over 40. I don't doubt that 72% of the Downs babies come from mothers 35 and younger, but probably 95% + of pregnancies are from women under 35.
It is ironic that the present VP had it reported that his daughter is a lesbian. I had no problem with the coverage of the story because she was an adult, who was open and public about it and her support for gay rights. Also, for better or worse, children of our top executives have been a matter of public interest.
I wish this young lady the best. It's tough enough to be pregnant at 17, but to be so in the glare of the national media is a nightmare, and she has my sympathy. I also applaud her decision to give this child life.
SC, as I posted above, any comments are not directed at her daughter, but at Sarah as an avowed Evangelical. Premarital sex is not typically an advocated Evangelical article of faith. The shoe is definitely on the other foot.
Also, as I posted above, I bet that if such a pregnancy happened to one of Biden's daughters, Evangelical's would be laying its blame at the door of her liberal upbringing.
I wonder how enthusiastic James Dobson is now about Sarah.
[quote=olivant]I just read a stat on the web that states that 51% of Downs babies are born to women under 30 and 72% to women under 35.
I have no idea where you read that statistic, but I had genetic counseling when I was pregnant with my second daughter. The geneticist showed me the odds of having a child with Downs Syndrome. With each passing year, the chances increased greatly.
I don't doubt that 72% of the Downs babies come from mothers 35 and younger, but probably 95% + of pregnancies are from women under 35.
From the National Institutes of Health website:
Who is at risk for Down syndrome? The chance of having a baby with Down syndrome increases as a woman gets older—from about 1 in 1,250 for a woman who gets pregnant at age 25, to about 1 in 100 for a woman who gets pregnant at age 40. But, most babies with Down syndrome are born to women under age 35 because more younger women have babies.
SC, as I posted above, any comments are not directed at her daughter, but at Sarah as an avowed Evangelical. Premarital sex is not typically an advocated Evangelical article of faith. The shoe is definitely on the other foot.
Also, as I posted above, I bet that if such a pregnancy happened to one of Biden's daughters, Evangelical's would be laying its blame at the door of her liberal upbringing.
I don't know why you're explaining this to me. I never commented against this.
FWIW - I agree with you on both points here. I find it ironic that Palin is an abstinence-only supporter of sex education in schools.
Why's it always have to be partisan? Can't we just be simply commonly human sometimes? (didn't mean to sound all Rodney King, but...) C'mon... life isn't outlined by party lines. Life is the greatest gift we will ever get. This non-stop bickering about petty bullshit just kills me.
Nothing ever changes in politics! It makes NO difference who wins... it's always the same ol' shit. When was it not? Please... only the devil's spawn enter politics to begin with apparently...
Making the RNC into a telethon will be a bit weird, won't it?
"Please donate $100 to help the people down in Louisiana...oh, and Democrats will let Bin Laden kill your kids."
That's pretty much what I'd expect it to be.
Despite Gustav being weaker than expected... that's exactly what the GOP lusted after and to cash in on... with all the (admirable) plan changes and making it a public fund-raising movement. That'll get peoples' minds off actual politics! And of course Obama followed suit. But it makes the GOP look sympathetic (perhaps for the first time in decades)... so this natural disaster is a plus for them...
Nothing ever changes in politics! It makes NO difference who wins... it's always the same ol' shit. When was it not? Please... only the devil's spawn enter politics to begin with apparently...
Nothing ever changes in politics! It makes NO difference who wins... it's always the same ol' shit. When was it not? Please... only the devil's spawn enter politics to begin with apparently...
Whatever you think about the issues, this business about Sarah Palin's daughter is pure bullshit. Candidates children are OFF LIMITS, and it is a disgrace that this issue is even being aired.
The libs have to be careful about turning Bristol's pregnancy into a public matter. According to them, Clinton's adultery should have been a private matter between him and Hil. Last time I looked.......adultery was a lot worse than a teen pregnancy.
SC, as I posted above, any comments are not directed at her daughter, but at Sarah as an avowed Evangelical. Premarital sex is not typically an advocated Evangelical article of faith. The shoe is definitely on the other foot.
Also, as I posted above, I bet that if such a pregnancy happened to one of Biden's daughters, Evangelical's would be laying its blame at the door of her liberal upbringing.
I don't know why you're explaining this to me. I never commented against this.
FWIW - I agree with you on both points here. I find it ironic that Palin is an abstinence-only supporter of sex education in schools.
Sorry SC. I meant SB.
In addition to myself, someone else posted above that, essentially, Conservatives/Republicans/Evangelicals represent themselves as the paragons of virtue. They are the first to assign blame for a child's transgressions to the home environment, a permissive environment, a relaxation of moral standards, etc. They thus set up the potential for a huge contrast between their standards and what happens in their families. Well, it did happen in the Palin family. What lack of family standards led to the pregnancy of Palin's daughter? Does that pregancy reflect upon her upbringing?
You might also note that Conservatives/Repiblicans/Evangelicals are not commenting on the moral aspects pf her pregancy. Instead, they are engaging in a moral slight of hand that seeks to direct our attention to the loving family into which the child will be born, that the young couple will, post-facto, be married, and how the Palin's are looking forward to being grandparents. Those are echoes of the Chaneys also looking forward to being grandpartents to the child of their Lesbian daughter and ignoring the fact that their Conservatives/Republicans/Evangelical buddies would otherwise stone them all outside the city walls.
McCain said the country unarguably had a problem with teen pregnancy, but said Elders' approach would only make it worse. He said Elders started a program to distribute condoms in schools, but the rate of teen pregnancy actually rose in those counties. When it turned out many of the condoms were defective, Elders decided to continue the program rather than halt it or inform the public of the risk, McCain added.
"...Stein says that as mayor, Palin continued to inject religious beliefs into her policy at times. "She asked the library how she could go about banning books," he says, because some voters thought they had inappropriate language in them. "The librarian was aghast." The librarian, Mary Ellen Baker, couldn't be reached for comment, but news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire her for not giving "full support" to the mayor."
McCain said the country unarguably had a problem with teen pregnancy, but said Elders' approach would only make it worse. He said Elders started a program to distribute condoms in schools, but the rate of teen pregnancy actually rose in those counties. When it turned out many of the condoms were defective, Elders decided to continue the program rather than halt it or inform the public of the risk, McCain added.
^ Now that is epic.
Doesn't that figure? Government efficiency at work.
"You know what an efficient government is? A dictatorship." - Harry Truman.
The libs have to be careful about turning Bristol's pregnancy into a public matter. According to them, Clinton's adultery should have been a private matter between him and Hil. Last time I looked.......adultery was a lot worse than a teen pregnancy.
Honestly, I think both aren't good at all if you ask me.
I think what's worse for Palin is that she's a "Family Values" candidate, and that's what bugs the liberals. You're asking for a bullseye on your skull if something like this leaks out. Hell, remember that scandal from 2006 with Senator Vicker and his hooker problem?
Larry Flint busted him wide open, along with the then-Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives that was prosecuting Clinton.
In short, in all relativity my new religion, all is bullshit in love & war.
Evidently Palin supports some wacko political arty that wants Alaska to seceed from the United States.
It's reported that the Palins were members of the Alaska Independence Party in the 90s. There's no information I've come across that states their current affiliation.
She became a republican when she ran for Mayor of Wasilla (even though it was a "non-partisan" position) but has continued to voice support for the Alaska Independence Party.
I wrote earlier of how Karl Rove called Kerry's 2004 infamous "I voted for the war before I voted against it" gaffte the The Gift that keeps on Giving.
You know, if she proves to be everything against my initial reactions to that pick, then we'll all look back and piss laugh over the blabber.
Palin opposed sex-ed
Q: Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?
SP: Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.
Did I ever tell you all of how conservative East Tennessee is, as one of the focal points of the so-called "Bible Belt," and yet our marriage rate is about what, 60%?
She became a republican when she ran for Mayor of Wasilla (even though it was a "non-partisan" position) but has continued to voice support for the Alaska Independence Party.
Why am I getting flashbacks to Eagleton in 1972?
or to quote from the terrific novel and Mike Nichols movie PRIMARY COLORS: "I couldn't believe that he picked a lunatic!"
An interesting posting from the blog for The American Conservative magazine:
A Simple Question
There is a great deal of admiration for Sarah Palin among my colleagues, with the notable exception of Clark, which makes me want to ask the simple question: what has really changed since Thursday that makes the GOP ticket any more acceptable than it was last week when it was, I assume, somewhere between loathsome and horrible? As I said in the comments of another post, the choice of Palin will likely mean that, in the event that he wins, McCain believes that he has already bought off conservatives and need do nothing else for them. Palin will become merely a figurehead, dispatched to quell restless conservatives whenever McCain tries to get some foolish immigration legislation passed or when he calls for a deployment to guard the Mongolian frontier against the Russians. Having appeased social conservatives with a symbolic VP nod, he can ignore them even more than he already does. Should the ticket lose, social conservatives are then left holding the bag and legions of East Coast Republican pundits will stream forth to explain that the ticket failed because Palin’s pro-life views were “too extreme” and why the GOP needs to get over talking about abortion. How can we not get behind Palin? Because she has agreed to work for John McCain, that’s how.
Let’s also understand something very important: should McCain-Palin win in ‘08, Palin is not going to be the future of the Republican Party at a national level. Barring some accident or a one-term pledge, should they somehow prevail this time, Palin will likely remain second fiddle to McCain in 2012 as well and will probably then be reduced to the status of Thomas Marshall and, yes, Dan Quayle. Should McCain not seek renomination, Romney, Huckabee and Pawlenty are all going to be waiting to take advantage of discontent with a President McCain, of which there will be plenty.
Obama got a big boost in all the polls since the weekend, and went up 4 points since yesterday's CNN's Poll, where they claimed Obama didn't get a convention bounce.
Rumors are starting to float around the internet that Palin may withdraw from the ticket. Where's Sargent Shriver when you need him?
Unless there's something major we're about to find out, there is no reason for her to drop out. And if she does, it's game over for McCain. FWIW, I haven't heard that rumor.
The libs have to be careful about turning Bristol's pregnancy into a public matter. According to them, Clinton's adultery should have been a private matter between him and Hil. Last time I looked.......adultery was a lot worse than a teen pregnancy.
Honestly, I think both aren't good at all if you ask me.
I think what's worse for Palin is that she's a "Family Values" candidate, and that's what bugs the liberals. You're asking for a bullseye on your skull if something like this leaks out. Hell, remember that scandal from 2006 with Senator Vicker and his hooker problem?
Larry Flint busted him wide open, along with the then-Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives that was prosecuting Clinton.
In short, in all relativity my new religion, all is bullshit in love & war.
You can preach to your kids all you want and it still may not matter......Besides, the kid's not the vice-presidential candidate. She probably accidentally got pregnant. Did Slick Willy accidentally committ adultery? And he wasnt just a 17 yr. old kid.
John McCain just pulled his scheduled Larry King interview tonight because he's mad at the way his campaign spokesman Tucker Bounds was treated by CNN's Campbell Brown in an interview. IMO, she grilled him real good, but was not out of line.
It looks like McCain will be pulling out of a lot of interviews then.
I saw a different discussion on CNN last night and they pretty much tore apart the Republican spokeswoman who was very ineffective in "defending" McCain's choice of VP.
I have yet to hear a good argument in defense of Palin.
Obama got a big boost in all the polls since the weekend, and went up 4 points since yesterday's CNN's Poll, where they claimed Obama didn't get a convention bounce.
SC, I believe it's probably a combination of both. Candidates always go up in the polls right after their convention. Although the Republicans had to cancel many speakers, I don't think that not having the president and first lady speak last night is exactly going to hurt McCain. Depending on how the rest of the convention plays out, we may see McCain catch up later in the week.
It's probably a little of both, but Palin is getting torched non-stop now on all the cable news networks. Even on Fox News where they are defending her, they keep playing all the "questionable" things about her over and over before defending her. It still doesn't make her look good.
SC, I believe it's probably a combination of both. Candidates always go up in the polls right after their convention. Although the Republicans had to cancel many speakers, I don't think that not having the president and first lady speak last night is exactly going to hurt McCain. Depending on how the rest of the convention plays out, we may see McCain catch up later in the week.
I was watching some news show and they were talking about polls. They claim 50% is a "magic number". Once a candidate hits 50% and has a lead, it's much harder for the other candidate to catch up because the leading candidate now has to loose some support to loose the election. They say 2 candidates in the close 40's is much harder to call. Take it FWIW.
Well, she had to know what she was getting into, but I do feel bad for her daughter. Just like JFK, Jr., Amy Carter or the President's twins, they didn't ask to be born into this life, and I don't think that they should have to suffer for their parents' career choice.
Well, she had to know what she was getting into, but I do feel bad for her daughter. Just like JFK, Jr., Amy Carter or the President's twins, they didn't ask to be born into this life, and I don't think that they should have to suffer for their parents' career choice.
SC, I believe it's probably a combination of both. Candidates always go up in the polls right after their convention. Although the Republicans had to cancel many speakers, I don't think that not having the president and first lady speak last night is exactly going to hurt McCain. Depending on how the rest of the convention plays out, we may see McCain catch up later in the week.
I was watching some news show and they were talking about polls. They claim 50% is a "magic number". Once a candidate hits 50% and has a lead, it's much harder for the other candidate to catch up because the leading candidate now has to loose some support to loose the election. They say 2 candidates in the close 40's is much harder to call. Take it FWIW.
Amazing, indeed...what the Democrats will stoop to when they are tuly in fear of a candidate on the other side.
I almost feel sorry for Joe Biden, for in the upcoming VP debate he will apparently be the ONLY person who will need to go at it with Gov. Palin on relevant issues...!!!
Obama got a big boost in all the polls since the weekend, and went up 4 points since yesterday's CNN's Poll, where they claimed Obama didn't get a convention bounce.
I wonder if the upward swing for Obama is a late result of the Democratic convention OR an early reaction to McCain's choice of running mate.
It might be both, for if that one poll (anyone want me to cite?) reported that while the Conservatives ate up the Palin pick like ice cream, the moderates independents are "chilly" to it so far.
Amazing, indeed...what the Democrats will stoop to when they are tuly in fear of a candidate on the other side.
I almost feel sorry for Joe Biden, for in the upcoming VP debate he will apparently be the ONLY person who will need to go at it with Gov. Palin on relevant issues...!!!
Second, yeah Biden will have a tough dance to draw....or are we underestimating Palin and her experience from "bordering Russia"* as Fox News put it.
*=Did you know that Alaska would border Russia, save for a little thing called the Bering Sea and the Chukchi Sea. To make a point of how silly that statement was, MSNBC might as well argue that Biden has foreign affair experience because Delaware borders the same body of water as does Africa.
Why didn't Fox News simply say CANADA? Shit that would make sense, and certainly Alaska would need good affairs with the Mother Canuckers over fishing rights or oil exploration or whatever. That would make good sense.
Obama got a big boost in all the polls since the weekend, and went up 4 points since yesterday's CNN's Poll, where they claimed Obama didn't get a convention bounce.
I wonder if the upward swing for Obama is a late result of the Democratic convention OR an early reaction to McCain's choice of running mate.
It might be both, for if that one poll (anyone want me to cite?) reported that while the Conservatives ate up the Palin pick like ice cream, the moderates independents are "chilly" to it so far.
Again, keep in mind that it's the polls in each state that count.
It looks like McCain will be pulling out of a lot of interviews then.
I saw a different discussion on CNN last night and they pretty much tore apart the Republican spokeswoman who was very ineffective in "defending" McCain's choice of VP.
I have yet to hear a good argument in defense of Palin.
Yeah, that campaign isn't doing much of a job so far in selling it outside for those outside of the base.
BTW, some rumors are going around that some GOPers want Mccain to dump Palin, or Palin to "decline"....
BULLSHIT, aint gonna happen.
If that happens, then McCain is fucked. Not just lose a squeaker, but by a loud fart.
I always check links after I've posted them. Seems to work fine for me, before and just now as well.
But, just in case you & others have a problem I'll give it another whirl. For what it's worth, the link is also available on today's Drudge Report.
The Politico has received an opposition research file from the Alaska Democrats.....
In the file, the Democrats have released Sarah Palin's social security number minus the last four digits. Also tied to the information are her various home addresses.
Back in 2005, Democrats used Michael Steele's social security number to get his credit record.
It is atrocious that the Democrats would not only seek out Sarah Palin's social security number, but release it in opposition research to the press.
We need to know who did this. We also need to know what happened. We also need to know if it was used to bolster the Democrats' opposition research.
When it happened to Michael Steele, it turns out the Democrats knew about it and did nothing.
[quote=Just Lou]Obama got a big boost in all the polls since the weekend, and went up 4 points since yesterday's CNN's Poll, where they claimed Obama didn't get a convention bounce.
I wonder if the upward swing for Obama is a late result of the Democratic convention OR an early reaction to McCain's choice of running mate.
It might be both, for if that one poll (anyone want me to cite?) reported that while the Conservatives ate up the Palin pick like ice cream, the moderates independents are "chilly" to it so far.
Again, keep in mind that it's the polls in each state that count.[/quote]
Again, keep in mind that it's the polls in each state that count.
Very true. But if you check out all the current electoral vote maps based on current polling, Obama has over the 270 required votes in every one them too.
The libs have to be careful about turning Bristol's pregnancy into a public matter. According to them, Clinton's adultery should have been a private matter between him and Hil. Last time I looked.......adultery was a lot worse than a teen pregnancy.
Honestly, I think both aren't good at all if you ask me.
I think what's worse for Palin is that she's a "Family Values" candidate, and that's what bugs the liberals. You're asking for a bullseye on your skull if something like this leaks out. Hell, remember that scandal from 2006 with Senator Vicker and his hooker problem?
Larry Flint busted him wide open, along with the then-Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives that was prosecuting Clinton.
In short, in all relativity my new religion, all is bullshit in love & war.
You can preach to your kids all you want and it still may not matter......Besides, the kid's not the vice-presidential candidate. She probably accidentally got pregnant. Did Slick Willy accidentally committ adultery? And he wasnt just a 17 yr. old kid.
Is the Palin family story any of my business?
No, nor was Bubba getting a blowjob.
But, they're out there, and I was simply reporting what I was finding out there on the Net.
I was simply trying to explain why such Leftists/Clinton apologist bloggers are doing this. Doesn't mean that I agree with them, and I don't.
But back to Bubba, hate or like Clinton, the guy was probably one of the more intelligent men to be elected to the White House, and yet it was stupid idiotic bullshit like Lewinsky why, to quote Chris Matthews, "Instead of leaving office as a great statesman, he left as the high school prom king."
Plus, he embarrased his country. Was he the first President to fuck around? No, just the first to get busted wide open in the press, and instead of taking responsbility for it or Man Up, he denied it. When he caught as a liar, he then blamed everyone else.
What an asshole.
Eugene McCarthy died some years back, and Clinton spoke at his funeral, but McCarthy, the '68 Democrat who doomed Lyndon Johnson's re-election chances, called on Clinton to resign. Maybe I wouldn't go that harsh, but damn his attitude of "everyone's fault but mine" did annoy me at the time.
And yet, the GOP Congresss were assholes too over that whole impeachment nonsense, and some of them from Gingrich to Smith caught fucking around as well, I think the American public though "Fuck This" and wanted to move on.
CBS is reporting that Palin has cancelled all public appearances as the GOP convention finally kicked off today.
You know, I disregard those "Dump Palin" rumors, but still this automatically makes the 2008 RNC the most suspenseful-interesting main party convention since 1980 when the whole Reagan-Ford talks for VP evaporated until Bush got that gig.
Obama released one of his best ads yet today. He really does a good job tying Bush and McCain together. McCain states in his own words: "I voted with the President over 90% of the time. Higher than a lot of my Republican colleagues."
Obama released one of his best ads yet today. He really does a good job tying Bush and McCain together. McCain states in his own words: "I voted with the President over 90% of the time. Higher than a lot of my Republican colleagues."
Well, if Clinton was the biggest issue in 2000...then Bush is the biggest issue for 2008.
This is from Ed Kalnins, the senior pastor of Wasilla Assembly of God. Palin attended here for most of her adult life, until her new affiliation with a similar church in the state’s capitol, Juneau:
"What you see in a terrorist — that’s called the invisible enemy. There has always been an invisible enemy. What you see in Iraq, basically, is a manifestation of what’s going on in this unseen world called the spirit world. … We need to think like Jesus thinks. We are in a time and a season of war, and we need to think like that. We need to develop that instinct. We need to develop as believers the instinct that we are at war, and that war is contending for your faith. … Jesus called us to die. You’re worried about getting hurt? He’s called us to die. Listen, you know we can’t even follow him unless you are willing to give up your life. … I believe that Jesus himself operated from that position of war mode. Everyone say “war mode.” Now you say, wait a minute Ed, he’s like the good shepherd, he’s loving all the time and he’s kind all the time. Oh yes he is — but I also believe that he had a part of his thoughts that knew that he was in a war."
Did you see/hear the one to the tune of Sam Cook's "Wonderful World?" It never played in CA. - I only heard about it on-line and since I couldn't open the video at work, I only got to read the lyric. Something like: "Don't know much about the economy; don't know much about the price of gas; don't know what happened to the middle class." Sounds great. Such a ring of truth.
Conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly Chides McCain Camp for Palin Cancellation
ABC News' Teddy Davis reports: Conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly is taking the McCain campaign to task for notifying her at the last minute that Sarah Palin will be a no-show on Tuesday when the Republican National Coalition for Life holds an event honoring the Alaska governor.
"I think this is clearly somebody in the McCain campaign who doesn't understand where the votes are coming from," Schlafly told ABC News. "They only told me this at 10 o'clock last night, and it was a call from somebody down-the-line in the McCain campaign.
"The pro-lifers who paid $95 to come to this event because of Sarah Palin are going to be very unhappy," she added.
Schlafly is expecting 800 people, most of whom are delegates to the Republican National Convention, to attend Tuesday's reception at the Crowne Plaza Hotel in St. Paul, Minn. The event runs from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. CT.
The purpose of the event is to honor Palin for being a political figure who "not only talks the talk, but walks the walk" when it comes to putting "life first."
Debbie Joslin, a Republican National Committeewoman from Alaska, will accept the pro-life award on behalf of Palin.
Palin spokeswoman Maria Comella said McCain's running mate will not be attending the event because she is "preparing for her speech at the convention.
"Events that were set up before she was named McCain's running mate did not account for the fact that her schedule would be changing as a vice presidential nominee," said Comella.
The Republican National Coalition for Life event never appeared on Palin's vice presidential schedule.
Nevertheless, the McCain campaign did not notify Schlafly of the plan to back out of the event until Monday night, and Schlafly claims that the Secret Service scoped out the event site earlier in the day on Monday. The McCain campaign was not able to confirm Schlafly's claim about the Secret Service.
Schlafly, who gained her iconic status among conservatives by leading the fight against the Equal Rights Amendment, called the selection of Palin to be McCain's running mate "terribly smart."
"I cannot believe what she has done to energize the Republican Party and the people who were, at best, lukewarm about McCain," said Schlafly.
Schlafly noted how Monday's announcement that Palin's 17-year-old daughter, Bristol, is pregnant and planning to marry the father of her baby, did not alter the views of social conservatives about McCain's running mate.
"I don't think that has dampened enthusiasm in the slightest," said Schlafly.
Schlafly added that Tuesday's event would have been a good opportunity for Palin to quickly address her daughter's pregnancy and to eliminate further discussion of it.
"She was not going to be subjected to questions at this event," said Schlafly.
Asked what she plans to say about the cancellation at the event, Schlafly said, "I am certainly going to say that it was McCain that canceled."
Apparently the boyfriend of Sarah's daughter is going to the convention.
I just heard for the umpteenth time a Republican saying how Palin will energize the Republican campaign. Isn't the Presidential candidate supposed to do that?
My understanding is that Barack is a family name from his father's side.
I was being serious. Is it a cultural thing coming out of Alaska? I don't know very much about Alaska or its people.
Are the kind of names in the Palin family common? Does anyone know??
People Magazine interview:
Where do your children's names come from?
Sarah's parents were coaches and the whole family was involved in track and I was an athlete in high school, so with our first-born, I was, like, 'Track!' Bristol is named after Bristol Bay. That's where I grew up, that's where we commercial fish. Willow is a community there in Alaska. And then Piper, you know, there's just not too many Pipers out there and it's a cool name. And Trig is a Norse name for "strength."
Meanwhile, Hurricane Gustave has given McCain two huge breaks:
First, he found a great way to not have Bush and Cheney speak at the convention. Anything they said would have given the Dems a field day for tying the current administration's unpopularity to McCain. Second, Gustave only brushed New Orleans. But the administration's now bragging about how "they" "managed" this "crisis" "brilliantly."
The Republicans had a good night. But.... I don't think they did so well with Bush leading into the prime time network coverage though. Plus all the cable news networks talked about all night long was Palin, and none of it in a good light.
The media last night wasn't only focusing on her daughter. They were focusing more on "troopergate", her husband's connection to the Alaskan Independence Party, and the fact it appears now that McCain picked her literally at the last minute when it was clear he couldn't get away with choosing Lieberman. Apparently McCain chose Lieberman on or around 9/24, but was talked out of it on the 27th or 28th.
Mig, sorry. That's a complete and total copout. Perhaps the Republicans should have left President Clinton's family alone when they felt the need to expose his affair in front of the world. I'm sure that it was hurtful to Chelsea to see her family's private matters plastered all over the place.
Governor Palin made a conscious choice to accept the offer from Senator McCain. She knew that her daughter was pregnant. She knew that she was relatively unknown and that people would be curious to learn about her.
She knew that her daughter would be carrying this baby with the whole world watching. It was her choice, and you have to live with the consequences of your choices.
Btw, where did you get the term "liberal" media? Was it the "liberal" media that heralded the story of Senator Obama's pastor? It's the media, they are going to report what they believe will sell newspapers or give them ratings or bring them hits to their websites.
As I've said numerous times, I think that a candidate's family should be off-limits, but that's not reality.
Edit: Oh, and last time I checked murder was illegal and abortion wasn't. I understand that perhaps you are not pro-choice, but if she did decide to have an abortion, then that's her legal right.
This liberal media needs to stop focusing on her daughter.
Her daughter could've took the easy way out and murdered her baby but she is doing the right thing by having the baby and getting married.
I am beginning to like Palin.
I too respect her daughter's decision. I don't think that media attention on this will have an adverse effect on the campaign as most Americans aren't shocked by a 17 year old getting pregnant. On the contrary, I'm sure most are sympathetic, and the issue makes Palin and her family more real. The baby's father is apparently a high school hockey star, so it's no surprise he slipped one past the goalie .
The story won't be in the news long. I'm more interested in the troopergate issue, which is certainly relevant.
Classic. There's no better way to kill the excitement of naming a fresh, new, vibrant VP candidate by calling her by the wrong name at the party's convention.
The Republicans need some young faces to liven their convention.
You are right SB Palin knew full well what was going on in her family but I hope they drop it.
Maybe it's just me but It seems to me the media leans toward the left.
It's a known fact how you feel about abortion and how I feel. Murder is murder I don't care when the act happens if it's in the womb or someone who's 100.
Kudos to Obama for pointing out that he was born to an 18 year old, and that he would fire anyone in his campaign who made the issues in the Palin family issues in the campaign.
As for the convention, it looked like a bunch of grumpy old men .... the kind who yell at kids from being on their lawn.
As for the Palin thing, can you imagine if Obama or Biden had a daughter who was pregnant and unmarried? All the right wingers would be saying this proves they have no values, bla bla bla. Seems like I remember Dan Quayle getting his panties in a wad over Murphy Brown. How times change.
As for the Palin thing, can you imagine if Obama or Biden had a daughter who was pregnant and unmarried? All the right wingers would be saying this proves they have no values, bla bla bla.
You mean...pretty much what the left is doing right now towards Palin?
This liberal media needs to stop focusing on her daughter.
Her daughter could've took the easy way out and murdered her baby but she is doing the right thing by having the baby and getting married.
I am beginning to like Palin.
It's not the daughter they're focusing on. Her pregnancy is just a segue to the broader topic of how the right wing maligns the values of those on the left. At least since the vice-presidency of Spirew Agnew (60s/70s), the right has impugned the religiosity, morality, and patriotism of liberals. And one big way in which they have done so is to point to premarital sex among teens of liberal households and their pregnancy rate. Well, now you have a rightwinger whose daughter is pregnant. Should we suppose that the Palin's have eschewed morality in the upbringing of their children? Should we ask just what kind of moral instruction they've received? Is her pregnancy the result of an absentee mother who pursued a political career rather than give full, complete attention to raising the children she conceived? If it were Chelsea Clinton who was pregnant you can be sure that the right would not be asking these questions. Instead, they would be stating with certainty that they were the cause of her pregnancy.
I think Dr. Laura Schlesinger would give more than a piece of her mind to Sarah Palin.
I have to be honest with you. I haven't heard anything NEGATIVE about Governor Palin OR her daughter. I've just heard that her daughter is pregnant. I haven't heard or read anything saying that makes either one of them a bad person. I haven't heard or read anything that points her out as a bad mother, or her daughter a bad girl. So where is this negative press???
The criticism I have heard is that she may have fired someone because he wouldn't fire her sister's ex. I've heard that she originally supported the Alaskan "bridge to nowhere", although McCain specifically criticized the funding for it. I've heard that she and/or her husband have been involved in a political party that calls for Alaska's secession from the Union.
Those are areas of way more concern than her daughter's pregnancy.
The criticism I have heard is that she may have fired someone because he wouldn't fire her sister's ex. I've heard that she originally supported the Alaskan "bridge to nowhere", although McCain specifically criticized the funding for it. I've heard that she and/or her husband have been involved in a political party that calls for Alaska's secession from the Union.
Those are areas of way more concern than her daughter's pregnancy.
Way more important SB. There's also her quote that by being in the the Iraq war the U.S. is doing "God's will."
I just heard Laura Ingrahm state how excited and energized Republicans are about the Palin choice. I wonder why they weren't so excited and energized over the McCain pick.
I remember back in 1996 Bob Dole stating how his VP choice of Jack Kemp would energize Republicans. Of course, we all know how that energy dissipated.
But it does give one pause when a party relies on a VP choice to provide what that party's presidential choice should provide.
Maybe it's just me but It seems to me the media leans toward the left.
It's not just you. I believe there is a general media bias towards the left although there are conservative media outlets, like FoxNews.
I'm a former journalist. My experience tells me that reporters and editors who work on the news pages don't have a "liberal" or "conservative" bias--they have a bias toward cynicism and know-it-all attitudes. They think it's essential for the media to react critically and cynically to all people in authority, especially Presidents.
Since the GOP has held the White House for 36 of the last 55 years, more cynicism and criticism has landed on Republican Presidents than on Democrats. But just consider: the last Democrat who was treated well by the media was JFK. His successor, LBJ, was probably the most-hated by the media until W. No one in the media liked Carter, and the Clintons got their ass handed to them re. Travelgate, Whitewater and Monica.
The conventional wisdom now is that the media are in love with Obama. Well, the media spun the flap over Jeremiah Wright for a couple of months, and it almost derailed the Obama campaign. Meanwhile, McCain avidly sought and welcomed the support of Rev. John Hagee, the gay- and Catholic-basher; and dumped him only after Hagee made some totally outrageous remark about Hitler and Israel. That flap played in the media for less than 24 hours.
As a former journalist and as a lawyer who represented newspapers for more than a decade, I can tell you that there is definitely a media bias, but it cannot easily be defined by political ideology. Certain reporters and editorial staffs definitely have their "darlings," and I cannot say how often I have seen someone favored by a paper or a reporter be protected when something runs amock in his or her career, and someone not favored be excoriated for doing the same misdeed.
Recently here in the Tampa Bay area an African American lawyer was running for the democratic nomination for a state legislator's seat. This guy has gone through several wives, had a well known addition to crack cocaine (he is allegedly clean after two rehabs) trouble with the Bar and some minor criminal history. The local paper endorsed him saying he "has learned from his mistakes." Absolute bias.
Nationally look at the free pass McCain gets on all his gaffes. Again, abslute bias.
There is also an attitude that anyone can be taken down, anytime. Cross the media and watch how fast they'll do it.
Finally reporters have a tendency to buy into some kind of narrative and when the facts get in the way of the narrative, too often they ignore the facts. Examples...McCain is a free wheeling Maverick. He isn't. Biden is a "lunch bucket" working class guy. Not really.
As for the Palin thing, can you imagine if Obama or Biden had a daughter who was pregnant and unmarried? All the right wingers would be saying this proves they have no values, bla bla bla.
You mean...pretty much what the left is doing right now towards Palin?
YES.
Really, as I made the point earlier about the "experience" issue, logic and point of attack against the other side just amazingly disapears when it happens to one of your own.
Should the Palin kid be the center of all this? No. Really, do I care? No. I mean, Presidential candidates are known for dysfunctional families. Where's Billy Beer when you need it for such headaches?
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
Mig, sorry. That's a complete and total copout. Perhaps the Republicans should have left President Clinton's family alone when they felt the need to expose his affair in front of the world. I'm sure that it was hurtful to Chelsea to see her family's private matters plastered all over the place.
Washington Post months back ran some story of how back in the mid-1990s, McCain told this joke at a GOP Senate lunch:
Q: Why is Chelsea so ugly? A: Janet Reno is her father
Whatever that story is true or not, I don't know.
But the irony is that Chelsea was an...."awkward" kid, to put it nicely...and yet she grew up looking beautiful and well-presented when she was out campaigning for her mother in the primaries.
I may think her father is an asshole scumbag, and her mother a bitch, but I've got nothing against Chelsea.
Then again, I once got in trouble years back at a liberal-biased message board for saying that I had no problem with Laura Bush at all.
Now if I was McCain, I wouldn't worry about Minnesota, which despite nearly going against KErry in 2004, is traditionally a Democratic state. Shit, they're the lone state that went for freakin Mondale in 1984.
But Iowa....that polling above gives pause. Iowa went for Bush in 2008, after going for Gore, and one of McCain's strategies to win the White House was to retain the Bush Red states from 2004, though Colorado/Iowa/Virginia/Florida/Ohio/Montana/Nevada/New Mexico have been fucking shakey at this rate for him.
Hate to quote from liberal-wanker blogs, but this reverts to a theme presented months back, of the so-called "Obamacons," or Republicans supporting Obama (D), much like the Reagan Democrats who landed the Gipper the biggest electoral landslide in history in 1984.
Mayor (R) of Fairbanks, Alaska endorses Obama
Good evening.
We are Americans first. We're not Democrats. We're not Republicans. And I stand before you as a father, as a husband, as a mayor, as a proud Alaskan, but first and foremost I stand before you as an American.
I'm not here to speak against John McCain; I am a registered Republican.
I am here to endorse Barack Obama for the presidency of the United States of America.[/i]
Noonan, Murphy trash Palin on hot mike: 'It's over'
After a segment with NBC's Chuck Todd ended today, Republican consultant Mike Murphy and Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan were caught on a live mike ridiculing the choice of Sarah Palin.
"It's over," said Noonan, who then responded to a question of whether Palin is the most qualified Republican woman McCain could have chosen.
"The most qualified? No. I think they went for this — excuse me — political bullsh** about narratives," she said. "Every time Republicans do that ... because that's not where they live and it's not what they're good at and they blow it."
Murphy chimed in:
"The greatness of McCain is no cynicism, and this is cynical."
Noonan's blunt call contrasted with her conflicted column today saying Palin "could become a transformative political presence."
"The Sarah Palin choice is really going to work, or really not going to work," Noonan wrote. "It's not going to be a little successful or a little not; it's not going to be a wash. She is either going to be magic or one of history's accidents. She is either going to be brilliant and groundbreaking, or will soon be the target of unattributed quotes by bitter staffers shifting blame in all the Making of the President 2008 books."
You know, that talk does bring up a good point....why wasn't Hutchinson picked?
Also, why didn't they bring this up on air? I'm sure that whole brief chat was more interesting in a political debate than whatever bullshit MSNBC was running last week in their less-than-stellar DNC coverage.
...You know, that talk does bring up a good point....why wasn't Hutchinson picked?...
The possibility of Hutchinson was batted around even before Palin was announced. I like her, but there really would've been no point to that selection; you then would've had FOUR currently serving U.S. Senators as the nominees of both major Parties. Yawn.
Whether it had been Palin or somebody else, putting a Governor on the ticket was a smart move by McCain.
Considering the low expectations, and with a media backlash over the Palin coverage, wanna bet that the pundits after tonight's VP speech say that she did pretty well?
Then again, when is the last time that a Presidential-nominee's speech was second fiddle to the VP speech?
...You know, that talk does bring up a good point....why wasn't Hutchinson picked?...
The possibility of Hutchinson was batted around even before Palin was announced. I like her, but there really would've been no point to that selection; you then would've had FOUR currently serving U.S. Senators as the nominees of both major Parties. Yawn.
Whether it had been Palin or somebody else, putting a Governor on the ticket was a smart move by McCain.
Apple
3 is good but not 4? I'm confused.
Really, I'm still baffled as to why Hutchinson was passed over. Did she turn it down?
Speaking of which, word is out unconfirmed that the National Enquirer, the same tabloid scum who busted open recently the Edwards sex scandal, and years earlier the Jesse Jackson lovechild, are now apparently onto a Palin affair. True or not, fuck if I know.
All this stuff of the same person at the same time is giving me a headache.
Even 3 isn't terrific. History shows that Senators don't always do well in Presidential elections. The last successful one was JFK (and even that's questionable since his father practically bought him the election).
Governors...Carter/Reagan/Clinton/GW Bush...have won the Presidency in recent years. 3 out of 4 of them were elected to second terms. By having the advantage of announcing his running mate after Obama, McCain made the smart move by selecting a Governor, someone with administrative experience, who has run a State. Kay Bailey Hutchinson, while a terrific Senator, would have done absolutely nothing for the McCain ticket.
Holy shit. It's now #1 on the CNN.com latest news!
Hot mic catches GOP strategists trashing Palin pick Posted: 08:15 PM ET
(CNN) – Prominent Republican analysts Peggy Noonan and Mike Murphy became the latest victims of an open microphone Wednesday, caught after a segment on MSNBC trashing John McCain's pick of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate.
Noonan, a Wall Street Journal columnist and former speechwriter for Ronald Reagan, and Murphy, a campaign strategist and onetime aide to John McCain, can both be heard expressing disbelief with the pick of Palin after they apparently thought they were in a commercial break.
“I come out of the blue swing-state governor world, Engler, Whitman, Thompson, Mitt Romney,” Murphy said during the mishap which has since been posted on YouTube. Murphy later flatly says of the pick, "It's not going to work."
Noonan is heard going even further, saying of the presidential race, "It's over."
"I think they went for this — excuse me– political bulls–t about narratives," Noonan also said. "Every time the Republicans do that, because that's not where they live and it's not what they're good at, they blow it."
Murphy, who was a senior adviser to John McCain's 2000 presidential bid, also adds, "You know what's really the worst thing about it? The greatness of McCain is no cynicism, and this is cynical."
Noonan, Murphy trash Palin on hot mike: 'It's over'...
Yes, I heard this exchange, it was played on the radio station I listen to earlier this evening. The host then read a transcript since the audio wasn't the greatest.
I've always liked Peggy Noonan and she's certainly entitled to her opinion. However, I hope she's thoroughly embarrassed at this and if she isn't she should be.
Even 3 isn't terrific. History shows that Senators don't always do well in Presidential elections. The last successful one was JFK (and even that's questionable since his father practically bought him the election).
Governors...Carter/Reagan/Clinton/GW Bush...have won the Presidency in recent years. 3 out of 4 of them were elected to second terms. By having the advantage of announcing his running mate after Obama, McCain made the smart move by selecting a Governor, someone with administrative experience, who has run a State. Kay Bailey Hutchinson, while a terrific Senator, would have done absolutely nothing for the McCain ticket.
Don't agree? We shall see... !!
Apple
So you are using Jimmy Carter, the head of the 1976 Democratic ticket, to defend the back-up in 2008? Jimmy freakin Carter?
Shit, his 4 years is more "administrative experience" than your Palin, and guess what, just in case you forgot:
Carter as President SUCKED. OK, that peace deal was cool and all, but otherwise...yuck.
Sorry, I guess its a good argument and all, but when a Republican ends up having to use Carter...:D
Noonan, Murphy trash Palin on hot mike: 'It's over'...
Yes, I heard this exchange, it was played on the radio station I listen to earlier this evening. The host then read a transcript since the audio wasn't the greatest.
I've always liked Peggy Noonan and she's certainly entitled to her opinion. However, I hope she's thoroughly embarrassed at this and if she isn't she should be.
Apple
Pretty much, though I wonder what the reaction of her "boss" at WSJ in new owner Rupert Murdoch* will think of this.
*=Anyone heard that recent report that Murdoch's ultimate wish to end up owning the New York Times? Shit, imagine if the owner of Fox News owned the NYT as well.
Shit, who would conservatives use as the poster-child for MSM liberal bias, the LA Times? Pfft...
It's not quite as good as Rev Jessie wanting to cut Obama's nuts off.
Agree.
You know, that moment is sorta symbolic of how in the Age of the Obama, the political relevancy of folks like Jackson have grown lesser and lesser and lesser...
This is what I don't like about politics. It seems like many people just use it as an excuse to bash a different group of people. It should be about ideas. I'd hate to be labeled a Republican or a Democrat because of these people.
... So you are using Jimmy Carter, the head of the 1976 Democratic ticket, to defend the back-up in 2008? Jimmy freakin Carter?...
Funny you pulled up the one Gov. that DIDN'T get a second term as President. And we all know why.
However, he was defeated by another Governor.
I'm just saying that Governors have simply been more successful than Senators in Presidential elections. Not commenting on the performance of any of those past Chief Executives. Since John McCain is a sitting Senator, I think it was wise of him to choose a Governor as his running mate. Romney or Pawlenta would've been good, but safe choices...too similar to the 'safe' choice Obama made with plagarist Joe Biden.
With Palin, he's got a Governor, a maverick, a conservative...AND a woman who will kick ass!!!
... So you are using Jimmy Carter, the head of the 1976 Democratic ticket, to defend the back-up in 2008? Jimmy freakin Carter?...
Funny you pulled up the one Gov. that DIDN'T get a second term as President. And we all know why.
However, he was defeated by another Governor.
I'm just saying that Governors have simply been more successful than Senators in Presidential elections. Not commenting on the performance of any of those past Chief Executives. Since John McCain is a sitting Senator, I think it was wise of him to choose a Governor as his running mate. Romney or Pawlenta would've been good, but safe choices...too similar to the 'safe' choice Obama made with plagarist Joe Biden.
With Palin, he's got a Governor, a maverick, a conservative...AND a woman who will kick ass!!!
Yay.
Don't agree??? We shall see....
Apple
Speaking of plagarist, remember that report about a McCain speech on Georgia supposedly plagarized from Wikipedia?
As for your hypothesis....wasn't the bomb that was Dukakis a Governor too?
This is what I don't like about politics. It seems like many people just use it as an excuse to bash a different group of people. It should be about ideas. I'd hate to be labeled a Republican or a Democrat because of these people.
Sadly, it's the truth and which restricts free thinking on ideology.
Remember Pat Buchanan? Major conservative ideologue of the 1990s, even gave the 1992 RNC Keynote speech, and now he's "person non grata" with such ideologue rags like the National Review. Why?
Because he claimed that the Jewish-American "Israeli lobby" in America had WAY TOO MUCH influence on American foreign policy. To be honest, the guy is kooky at times but he has a point there. Maybe not totally agree, but he has a point.
But you know, to the Evangelical GOPers, you can't criticize Israel the holy land and so Buchanan was told to fuck off.
Strangely enough, Buchanan himself thinks the Palin pick will pay off.
I really wish Hunter S. Thompson was still around just to read what he'd be writing about this election. The democratic primaries would have been interesting to read as well.
I really wish Hunter S. Thompson was still around just to read what he'd be writing about this election. The democratic primaries would have been interesting to read as well.
Absolutely.
It's strange how perhaps the biggest Nixon hater of the 1970s, in his last days before his death, said that in retrospect, he would have voted for Nixon if it was between Nixon and Dubya.
Someone here on the BB was a huge Hunter Thompson fan. I should know who, but the name escapes me now. He had a H.T. quote in his signature I believe. You guys no who I mean???
Anyway, back to the topic. I just read that Obama will be on the O'Reilly Factor tomorrow???? And, on Countdown Monday (or Tuesday).
Who is this Arkansas Bozo speaking now? Abraham Lincoln founded the Republican Party???
BTW - The GOPers are always boasting that Lincoln was one of them... how come the GOP didn't support Lincoln in his re-election campaign?
They did, but the "National Union Party" was a scheme to combine both Republican and Northern pro-war Democrats under the same tent, thus why Johnson was Lincoln's VP for '64.
And no, Lincoln didn't form the GOP. I'm sure the real founders of the 1850s, a criss-cross of anti-slavery disgruntled Whig/Democrats before Whig Lincoln discovered and join them would not be pleased with that statement.
It was a joke. See, you post one thing, and then I post something that seems mildly amusing (but apparently wasn't).
And, yes, both Kennedy and Lincoln had a VP named Johnson. And Lincoln was in the FORD theater and Kennedy was in a Lincoln. Also, they were both shot. And they were both President at the time.
She's speaking well and seems earthy enough, but her energy plans for the future (concentrating on drilling in Alaska) don't seem realistic enough to concentrate on. We MUST concentrate on alternate energy!
I'm looking forward to see how she handles herself in the VP debate(s).
The end of her talk was the usual bullshit rhetoric (done by both parties) but overall I think she did a decent job tonight.
No, thats not what I was saying, I don't think Obama has any more experience, I think McCain should win, I am just a bit worried about Palin being able run the country, she may do a great job, who knows?
Mig, this woman has run a small city and the least populated state in the country. She is by no means experienced enough (although I don't really buy that argument anyway. Isn't that what they used against both Reagan and Clinton?). Don't believe the rhetoric that was spewed by the speakers tonight.
Oh, and she pretty much automatically gets a standing ovation, so don't be that impressed.
As for her not crying, she's been in the nation's eye for like four days. Let her have the relentless attention that Hillary has endured, and let's see what she does. AND Hillary didn't cry. She had a catch in her voice like she was fighting back tears, and everyone jumped all over her.
As for her speech, Governor Palin was energetic, she was dynamic and she was witty. She's obviously an intelligent woman, and I would like to see more of her. I don't agree with one thing she said tonight, but she sure is a firecracker.
I also didn't like the term "community organizer" to describe what Obama did. How about the fact that, despite graduating at the top of his class from Harvard, he decided to give back to the community instead of joining a powerful Chicago law firm for a huge salary. They don't mention that. Instead, they mock that commitment to public service, unless it's their own.
Mig, this woman has run a small city and the least populated state in the country. She is by no means experienced enough
But Obama is experienced enough cuz he was a city organizer in Chicago and and in the senate?
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
Oh, and she pretty much automatically gets a standing ovation, so don't be that impressed.
I know that's what they all do.
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
As for her not crying, she's been in the nation's eye for like four days. Let her have the relentless attention that Hillary has endured, and let's see what she does. AND Hillary didn't cry. She had a catch in her voice like she was fighting back tears, and everyone jumped all over her.
We shall see!! I happen to like this woman. I am looking forward to the VP debates. Both canidates need to be on top of their game.
I also didn't like the term "community organizer" to describe what Obama did. How about the fact that, despite graduating at the top of his class from Harvard, he decided to give back to the community instead of joining a powerful Chicago law firm for a huge salary. They don't mention that. Instead, they mock that commitment to public service, unless it's their own.
Both sides just feed us what we want to hear and then do what they want.
I also didn't like the term "community organizer" to describe what Obama did. How about the fact that, despite graduating at the top of his class from Harvard, he decided to give back to the community instead of joining a powerful Chicago law firm for a huge salary. They don't mention that. Instead, they mock that commitment to public service, unless it's their own.
Both sides just feed us what we want to hear and then do what they want.
I hate to be the one to break the news, but it's called Politics.
Tonight wasn't the test for Palin as she was in a room full of friends, who would cheer anything she said. Heck, they even cheered her promise to be an advocate for mentally disadvantaged children. And her husband, who wants to secede from the country, got a standing ovation. She did well as expected, and I liked her but I don't know that she can lead the country.
I've said before that the more I acquire experience, the less convinced I am that it is absolutely necessary. However, I think the Republicans are doing her a disservice by overstating and puffing up her qualifications as mayor and a brief tenure as governor of Alaska. Nobody's buying it, but we'll let her be judged on her merits. I'll give her a fair shot although the election will eventually come down to McCain and Obama, and I will vote for Obama.
By the way, as her family took the stage after the speech (and they are a good looking family), my attention was on the young man, who is now referred to as "Bristol's beau." I thought that only in America, can a young teenage high school hockey player from a remote town in Alaska knock up his girlfriend, and suddenly find himself on center stage with the presidential and vice-presidential candidate of a major party at their convention.
By the way, as her family took the stage after the speech (and they are a good looking family), my attention was on the young man, who is now referred to as "Bristol's beau." I thought that only in America, can a young teenage high school hockey player from a remote town in Alaska knock up his girlfriend, and suddenly find himself on center stage with the presidential and vice-presidential candidate of a major party at their convention.
On MSNBC Rachel Maddow stated that Politico.com is reporting that Palin sat through a church service during which a spokesman for a Messianic Jews organization stated that Israel deserved terrorist attacks because the Jews refues to accept Christ.
I also didn't like the term "community organizer" to describe what Obama did. How about the fact that, despite graduating at the top of his class from Harvard, he decided to give back to the community instead of joining a powerful Chicago law firm for a huge salary. They don't mention that. Instead, they mock that commitment to public service, unless it's their own.
Both sides just feed us what we want to hear and then do what they want.
I hate to be the one to break the news, but it's called Politics.
You don't say!! I never would've been able to figure that one out on my own. Thanks for the help.
JL, I agree. Yes, it was rousing, yes it was a crowd-pleaser. But it was attack after attack after attack. I didn't like the content, although it was certainly delivered with style.
On MSNBC Rachel Maddow stated that Politico.com is reporting that Palin sat through a church service during which a spokesman for a Messianic Jews organization stated that Israel deserved terrorist attacks because the Jews refues to accept Christ.
Jeremiah Wright 2: Electric Boogaloo
But really, what difference is there between these Evangelical nutjobs on both sides of the American political aisle, and the Taliban besides the fact that one totally transformed a whole country's law, culture, and law to their "holy standards" while the other is trying to do the same?
Anyway, the media as I predicted yesterday is praising the Palin speech to the high heavens.
Then again, am I the only one who thinks there might be a slight problem when the climax of expectations in last week's DNC was the Obama speech at Invesco Field, and this week at the RNC its a speech by the VP candidate?
To put it another way, imagine if everyone last week as more concerned with Biden's speech than they were with Obama's.
Tonight wasn't the test for Palin as she was in a room full of friends, who would cheer anything she said. Heck, they even cheered her promise to be an advocate for mentally disadvantaged children. And her husband, who wants to secede from the country, got a standing ovation. She did well as expected, and I liked her but I don't know that she can lead the country.
I've said before that the more I acquire experience, the less convinced I am that it is absolutely necessary. However, I think the Republicans are doing her a disservice by overstating and puffing up her qualifications as mayor and a brief tenure as governor of Alaska. Nobody's buying it, but we'll let her be judged on her merits. I'll give her a fair shot although the election will eventually come down to McCain and Obama, and I will vote for Obama.
At worst, if McCain wins, she'll be an Agnew as in:
(1) Attack Dog for White House (like most VPs are) (2) Irrelevant (3) A deterrent against impeaching the President.
Then again, some people have joked (inappropriately) that Hillary should have been Obama's running mate, just because she would be a good insurance policy for him against a sniper bullet.
Originally Posted By: klydon1
By the way, as her family took the stage after the speech (and they are a good looking family), my attention was on the young man, who is now referred to as "Bristol's beau." I thought that only in America, can a young teenage high school hockey player from a remote town in Alaska knock up his girlfriend, and suddenly find himself on center stage with the presidential and vice-presidential candidate of a major party at their convention.
Yeah, though if this had happened 20-30 years ago, most of us probably would have laughed at it and thought that we was France and not America.
Actually, everyone last week was more concerned with the Clintons' speeches, than Obama's.
Were they? I had the sense that they were the mid-card compared to Obama the main event, you know? The expectations were extremely high for him, and most people seem to think that he met them.
A friend of mine emailed me this question:
"With the McCain speech tonight, if I was to play a drinking game for how many times he mentions 9/11, should I not go to work tomorrow?"
Oh and Appleonya, you said that McCain didn't attack Obama for his lack of experience:
McCain questions Obama’s judgment, experience
By Jim Snyder Posted: 09/03/08 08:45 PM [ET] Nearly a week after Barack Obama questioned his judgment and temperament, Sen. John McCain fired back in an interview with ABC News, saying his opponent in the race for the presidency “doesn’t know how the world works.”
“He has no knowledge or experience or judgment. [He] doesn’t know … how the world works nor how the military works,” the Arizona Republican said.
“I do and I can lead and secure the peace.”
ABC News anchor Charlie Gibson had asked McCain to respond to Obama’s charge, delivered in his nomination acceptance speech in Denver last week, that McCain likes to say he would follow Osama bin Laden to the gates of hell, “but he won’t even follow him to the cave where he lives.”
Gibson also pressed McCain about his decision to select Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate. Some news reports have raised questions about how thoroughly the campaign vetted Palin after details of her unmarried daughter’s pregnancy, her past support for congressional earmarks and other issues became public.
McCain said Palin was “vetted by the people of Alaska,” and that she was “by far” the best candidate for the job.
He also offered kind words to Obama, in addition to the criticism. “He has accomplished great things and he has motivated people and so — he loves his country, just as I do. It’s just the differences that we have.”
Well, I just got mugged by the nature of modern media, and I wish it weren't my fault, but it is. Readers deserve an explanation, so I'm putting a new top on today's column and, with the forbearance of the Journal, here it is.
Wednesday afternoon, in a live MSNBC television panel hosted by NBC's political analyst Chuck Todd, and along with Republican strategist Mike Murphy, we discussed Sarah Palin's speech this evening to the Republican National Convention. I said she has to tell us in her speech who she is, what she believes, and why she's here. We spoke of Republican charges that the media has been unfair to Mrs. Palin, and I defended the view that while the media should investigate every quote and vote she's made, and look deeply into her career, it has been unjust in its treatment of her family circumstances, and deserved criticism for this.
When the segment was over and MSNBC was in commercial, Todd, Murphy and I continued our conversation, talking about the Palin choice overall. We were speaking informally, with some passion -- and into live mics. An audio tape of that conversation was sent, how or by whom I don't know, onto the internet. And within three hours I was receiving it from friends far and wide, asking me why I thought the McCain campaign is "over", as it says in the transcript of the conversation. Here I must plead some confusion. In our off-air conversation, I got on the subject of the leaders of the Republican party assuming, now, that whatever the base of the Republican party thinks is what America thinks. I made the case that this is no longer true, that party leaders seem to me stuck in the assumptions of 1988 and 1994, the assumptions that reigned when they were young and coming up. "The first lesson they learned is the one they remember," I said to Todd -- and I'm pretty certain that is a direct quote. But, I argued, that's over, those assumptions are yesterday, the party can no longer assume that its base is utterly in line with the thinking of the American people. And when I said, "It's over!" -- and I said it more than once -- that is what I was referring to. I am pretty certain that is exactly what Todd and Murphy understood I was referring to. In the truncated version of the conversation, on the Web, it appears I am saying the McCain campaign is over. I did not say it, and do not think it. In fact, at an on-the-record press symposium on the campaign on Monday, when all of those on the panel were pressed to predict who would win, I said that I didn't know, but that we just might find "This IS a country for old men." That is, McCain may well win. I do not think the campaign is over, I do not think this is settled, and did not suggest, back to the Todd-Murphy conversation, that "It's over."
However, I did say two things that I haven't said in public, either in speaking or in my writing. One is a vulgar epithet that I wish I could blame on the mood of the moment but cannot. No one else, to my memory, swore. I just blurted. The other, more seriously, is a real criticism that I had not previously made, but only because I hadn't thought of it. And it is connected to a thought I had this morning, Wednesday morning, and wrote to a friend. Here it is. Early this morning I saw Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, and as we chatted about the McCain campaign (she thoughtfully and supportively) I looked into her eyes and thought, Why not her? Had she been vetted for the vice presidency, and how did it come about that it was the less experienced Mrs. Palin who was chosen? I didn't ask these questions or mention them, I just thought them. Later in the morning, still pondering this, I thought of something that had happened exactly 20 years before. It was just after the 1988 Republican convention ended. I was on the plane, as a speechwriter, that took Republican presidential nominee George H.W. Bush, and the new vice presidential nominee, Dan Quayle, from New Orleans, the site of the convention, to Indiana. Sitting next to Mr. Quayle was the other senator from that state, Richard Lugar. As we chatted, I thought, "Why him and not him?" Why Mr. Quayle as the choice, and not the more experienced Mr. Lugar? I came to think, in following years, that some of the reason came down to what is now called The Narrative. The story the campaign wishes to tell about itself, and communicate to others. I don't like the idea of The Narrative. I think it is ... a barnyard epithet. And, oddly enough, it is something that Republicans are not very good at, because it's not where they live, it's not what they're about, it's too fancy. To the extent the McCain campaign was thinking in these terms, I don't like that either. I do like Mrs. Palin, because I like the things she espouses. And because, frankly, I met her once and liked her. I suspect, as I say further in here, that her candidacy will be either dramatically successful or a dramatically not; it won't be something in between.
Speaking of which, Obama will be on tonight's THE O'REILLY FACTOR, which surprises me.
Why? I mean just this week, McCain cancelled an appearance on softball interviewer Larry King's program, and now Obama will go into the Lion's Den of perhaps the one media personality many of them despise more than any other (Sorry Rush, you're so 1994).
Speaking of which, Obama will be on tonight's THE O'REILLY FACTOR, which surprises me.
Why? I mean just this week, McCain cancelled an appearance on softball interviewer Larry King's program, and now Obama will go into the Lion's Den of perhaps the one media personality many of them despise more than any other (Sorry Rush, you're so 1994).
Will it work or backfire? Who knows.
I can't believe he's on tonight, but for the opposite reason. Why would O'Reilly give Obama free prime time airtime on the night McCain is giving his acceptance speech?
Speaking of which, Obama will be on tonight's THE O'REILLY FACTOR, which surprises me.
In Feb. or March of 2003, I specifically recall O'Reilly on Good Morning America, discussing the pending war with Iraq. The invasion did not yet start, and he was making the case for war. He was asked, "What if we go to war and learn that there are no weapons of mass destruction?"
He replied arrogantly in no uncertain terms that he would never trust Bush again and become his most outspoken critic. I guess he meant "apologist."
Speaking of which, Obama will be on tonight's THE O'REILLY FACTOR, which surprises me.
Why? I mean just this week, McCain cancelled an appearance on softball interviewer Larry King's program, and now Obama will go into the Lion's Den of perhaps the one media personality many of them despise more than any other (Sorry Rush, you're so 1994).
Will it work or backfire? Who knows.
I can't believe he's on tonight, but for the opposite reason. Why would O'Reilly give Obama free prime time airtime on the night McCain is giving his acceptance speech?
New polling data, and I highlighted perhaps the more interesting points:
Women not impressed with Palin
Washington - Most US women are unimpressed by Republican John McCain's choice of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate, and have thrown their weight behind the Democratic ticket in the race for the White House, a national poll showed on Wednesday.
Six in 10 women voters see McCain's choice of a female running mate as a calculated political decision rather than one based on Palin's experience and qualities, the poll conducted by the Garin-Hart-Yang Research Group showed.
"Women voters see the choice of Governor Palin as being driven by politics rather than by any sense of conviction on Senator McCain's part that she has the experience and qualities to make a good vice-president," the research group said in a statement.
A majority of the 800 women polled - 56% - said they were put off by Palin's legislative record and her position on moral issues, such as abortion.
"When women voters learn that Palin opposes abortion even in cases of rape and incest, opposes stem cell research and, as governor, opposed funding for state pre-kindergarten programmes... a majority say... [they] feel less favourable toward her," the poll showed.
Palin's scant experience as an elected official - she was mayor of a small town for six years and has been governor of Alaska for less than two - "squanders" McCain's advantage over Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama in terms of experience in office and readiness to lead, the women voters said.
And even though the choice of Palin was a historic move for the Republican Party, marking the first time a woman has featured on a Republican presidential ticket, it has pushed many women voters over to the side of the Democrats.
Fifty-two per cent of women voters polled said they would vote for the all-male Democratic ticket of Obama and Joe Biden, while just 41% said they would back McCain and Palin in the November election.
I also didn't like the term "community organizer" to describe what Obama did. How about the fact that, despite graduating at the top of his class from Harvard, he decided to give back to the community instead of joining a powerful Chicago law firm for a huge salary. They don't mention that. Instead, they mock that commitment to public service, unless it's their own.
I'm with you. When Rudy then Palin attacked his service to his community and the crowd roared I about threw up. How messed up is the GOP that they would seriously denigrate the work of someone who sacrificed a comfy job in a high paying law firm to help the underprivileged?
I also didn't like the term "community organizer" to describe what Obama did. How about the fact that, despite graduating at the top of his class from Harvard, he decided to give back to the community instead of joining a powerful Chicago law firm for a huge salary. They don't mention that. Instead, they mock that commitment to public service, unless it's their own.
I'm with you. When Rudy then Palin attacked his service to his community and the crowd roared I about threw up. How messed up is the GOP that they would seriously denigrate the work of someone who sacrificed a comfy job in a high paying law firm to help the underprivileged?
The Detroit Free Press invited a panel of Michigan voters to weigh in on Gov. Sarah Palin's speech last night. Their reactions run the gamut, but the independents didn't seem to care for her very much.
Ilene Beninson, 52, Berkley independent: "Her speech contained few statements about policy or the party platform. … I am not convinced that Palin's experience as a mayor or governor in Alaska meet the qualifications to be vice president much less one stroke or heart attack away from being commander in chief.”
Mike Kosh, 38, West Bloomfield independent: “The way it looks to me, she's the Republican vice presidential nominee for one reason: Because Hillary wasn't selected.”
George Lentz, 66, Southfield independent: “I was completely underwhelmed. She was a Republican novelty act with a sophomoric script. It was not even a speech I would expect for someone running for the local PTA, much less for vice president.”
Diane Murphy, 42, Sterling Heights independent: “It appears that once she makes up her mind, that is the end of it. We live in a gray world, not every answer is black and white.”
Jan Wheelock, 58, Royal Oak independent: “Nothing worked for me. I found her barrage of snide remarks and distortions to be a major turnoff. She is not a class act. The most important point she made is that she will be an effective attack dog.”
Jan Wheelock, 58, Royal Oak independent: “Nothing worked for me. I found her barrage of snide remarks and distortions to be a major turnoff. She is not a class act. The most important point she made is that she will be an effective attack dog.”
..."According to Nicole Wallace of the McCain campaign, the American people don't care whether Sarah Palin can answer specific questions about foreign and domestic policy. According to Wallace -- in an appearance I did with her this morning on Joe Scarborough's show -- the American people will learn all they need to know (and all they deserve to know) from Palin's scripted speeches and choreographed appearances on the campaign trail and in campaign ads."
Salad, excellent point!! Why doesn't she?? Poor Obama had to justify that one to the point of being utterly ridiculous.
What did disturb me, and I don't know if it's been mentioned here, but until two years ago, Governor Palin never had a passport. This woman, for at least 42 of her 44 years on earth, was not able to leave the country, yet 4 months from now, she will be expected to represent the USA at meetings with the heads of state from all over the world.
As for Habitat for Humanity, what would be the bigger slap in the face - making fun of community organizers or McCain taking photos with those having their first homes built while he tries to remember how many homes he owns???
Palin's Convention Speech Brings in Cash for Obama
Sept. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin is bringing in campaign cash for the Democrats as well as her own party.
Barack Obama, 47, reported raising at least $10 million from more than 130,000 donors today after Palin, the Alaska governor, addressed the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minnesota, and criticized the Democratic presidential nominee.
``Sarah Palin's attacks have rallied our supporters in ways we never expected,'' Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton said. ``And we fully expect John McCain's attacks tonight to help us make our grassroots organization even stronger.''
The money followed an e-mail solicitation campaign manager David Plouffe sent out right after Palin's speech.
``You know that despite what John McCain and his attack squad say, every day people have the power to build something extraordinary when we come together,'' he wrote.
McCain, the Republican presidential candidate, raised $10 million after Palin was selected as his running mate Aug. 29, part of his record $47 million haul last month.
``She's energized the base,'' said former New York Senator Alfonse D'Amato, who has raised at least $250,000 for McCain, 72. ``Money will not be a problem.''
Palin Appeal
The McCain campaign sent out an e-mail from Palin, 44, today seeking additional donations. ``We must have the finances to respond to the latest attacks the Democrats have launched at us,'' she wrote.
Now that McCain is the nominee, he will receive $84.1 million for his fall campaign and cannot raise any private money except to cover legal and accounting costs. His fundraisers can continue to bring in money for the Republican National Committee, which, in turn, can spend it on McCain's behalf.
McCain also can contribute any unspent money from his primary campaign to the RNC, Federal Election Commission spokesman Bob Biersack said.
First of all his name is Senator Obama. Secondly, that was exactly Saladbar's point. If Senator Obama doesn't wear one and gets roasted slowly over a low flame for it, why is it not even brought up when Governor Palin doesn't have a flag in her lapel? And, by the way, I'm trying to stay awake right now during Senator McCain's speech, and he's not wearing one either.
And could you please expand on your opinion of Michelle Obama? I'm really curious as to how and why you decided that she was unpatriotic.
Edit: I've never seen Mrs. McCain before. My goodness, she looks amazing for 96!!
(CNN) -- Aides to Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin improperly obtained her former brother-in-law's state police personnel files and cited information from those records to raise complaints about the officer, the head of Alaska's state police union said Thursday.
"It's apparent to us that the governor or someone on her staff had direct access to his personnel file, as well as his workers' comp file, and those are protected," said John Cyr, executive director of the Alaska Public Safety Employees Association.
Palin, now the Republican candidate for vice president, is battling allegations that she sacked her public safety commissioner in July because he refused to fire Trooper Mike Wooten, her sister's ex-husband.
The governor has denied any wrongdoing.
In an ethics complaint filed Wednesday, the union names the governor and three aides, one of whom cited Wooten's records in a tape-recorded call to a state police lieutenant in February. And the former commissioner, Walt Monegan, said he believes his refusal to fire Wooten led to his firing.
Monegan said no one directly demanded Wooten's dismissal, but the trooper was the subject of "constant" questions or comments "either verbally or in e-mail saying, 'Is this the kind of trooper that should be representing the troopers?' or 'This is not the kind that we want to have as a poster child.' "
"In the center of all of the controversy is Trooper Wooten's continued employment," he said. "Trooper Wooten was an irritant to her."
Palin said Monegan was sacked because of disagreements over the state budget. His firing is under investigation by the Alaska Legislature, but Palin's attorneys filed papers this week to request Alaska's Personnel Board take over the probe.
In August, Palin admitted members of her administration had contacted people in Monegan's department more than 20 times regarding Wooten since she took office in December 2006.
"The individual inquiries taken by themselves are one thing. Many of these inquiries were completely appropriate; however, the serial nature of the contacts understandably could be perceived as some kind of pressure, presumably at my direction," she said.
But in papers requesting the probe be transferred to the personnel board, Palin's lawyer called Wooten a "rogue trooper" who threatened the governor's family during a bitter divorce and custody battle. Thomas Van Flein, the governor's attorney, said it was appropriate to complain to the head of the department about a trooper the Palins believed posed a threat to their security.
Van Flein had no immediate response to the union complaint.
Palin had been complaining to state police officials about Wooten since before she became governor. In March 2006, he received a five-day suspension for drinking beer in his patrol car, illegally shooting a moose under his wife's hunting permit and using a Taser on his 10-year-old stepson "in a training capacity."
Van Flein said Wednesday the Palins were unaware any action had been taken against Wooten until after Monegan's firing.
In the February 29 call by Frank Bailey, Palin's boards and commissions director, to state police Lt. Rodney Dial, Bailey complained there had been "absolutely no action for a year on this issue." During the call, he said there was some "really funny business" about a worker's compensation claim Wooten had filed and suggested he lied about a health condition on his state police job application.
"That's extraordinary for them to reference that," Cyr said. Police application files contain results of background checks and reference letters, "and those are sealed. Even Trooper Wooten doesn't have access to those."
And during the February conversation, Dial questioned how Bailey had obtained information that was "extremely confidential."
"I'm trying to find out how it was determined by anybody that he had indicated something on his application that later was found to be not true," he said.
Bailey replied, "I'm a little bit reluctant to say." But he added, "Over in admin is where, you know, we hold workers' comp right in there."
Efforts to contact either Bailey or his attorney on Thursday were unsuccessful.
When she turned over the recording to the Legislature, Palin said she was "truly disappointed and disturbed to learn that a member of this administration contacted the Department of Public Safety regarding Trooper Wooten. At no time did I authorize any member of my staff to do so."
Palin placed Bailey on paid leave until the investigation is over.
Cyr said the union's complaint has been in the works since August 13, when the Bailey-Dial conversation was disclosed. "Of course, we had no way of knowing that Gov. Palin was tapped to be the vice president," he said.
It was touching to hear him speak about his time in Vietnam, but his "I will do my best" is something best left for a 2nd grade election. Of course he'll do his best (as will his opponent) but tell us HOW you'll do that; tell us what your platform is.
By owing up to the fact that the Republicans fell down on the job (also blaming the Democrats in part of that) in the recent past, did he expect to win over converts? It's him saying, "We fucked up, but we'll try harder".
Hell, Palin spoke better than he just did, and that's not saying much.
You can say whatever you want about Senator Obama. Personally, I think that the little nicknames that opposing parties pin on the competition are demeaning and mean-spirited. That's why I don't use them, but feel free.
As for Michelle Obama, perhaps she's sick of the political system. Perhaps she's sick of how women and minorities are treated in this country, so she's finally proud. Perhaps she's exercising her right to free speech. Perhaps she's had thousands of words quoted and is being held to task for four of them. Perhaps there are things that she isn't proud of in this country (God knows there's plenty I'm not proud of) and is looking forward to being First Lady so that she can change that things she doesn't like.
I don't know Michelle Obama, so I wouldn't speak for her. I've never heard of the quote that you mentioned, so I wouldn't know where to begin.
SC, as for McCain's speech, he came across as a sincere man who would like to serve his country. Did he need to do more than that? I don't know.
In politics, there's a "daddy" and a "mommy" that get elected, one to comfort and aid, the other to be the tough leader. Perhaps on their ticket, it's McCain's rule to be the "mommy". I'm not trying to demean him. It might be a very smart move.
I don't know Michelle Obama, so I wouldn't speak for her. I've never heard of the quote that you mentioned, so I wouldn't know where to begin.
She said it, but it was taken mostly out of context. Here's the story. It happened a while ago during the primaries.
Barack Obama’s wife, Michelle, is under fire for leaving the impression that she hasn’t been proud of her country until now, when Democrats are beginning to rally around her husband’s campaign.
Speaking in Milwaukee, Wis., on Monday, she said, “People in this country are ready for change and hungry for a different kind of politics and … for the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback.”
Greeted with rousing applause after making the comment in Milwaukee, Obama delivered an amended version of the speech later that day in Madison, Wis.
“For the first time in my adult lifetime, I’m really proud of my country … not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change,” she said. “I have been desperate to see our country moving in that direction and just not feeling so alone in my frustration and disappointment.”
Obama was born in 1964, meaning her adult life began in 1982. Critics quickly seized on the newfound national pride.
“I am proud of my country,” John McCain’s wife, Cindy, said at a campaign stop in Brookfield, Wis., Tuesday. “I don’t know if you heard those words earlier … but I am very proud of my country.”
During a follow up press conference, the Arizona senator was asked if they were responding to Michelle Obama and he deferred to his wife.
McCain responded: “I just wanted to make the statement that I have and always will be proud of my country.”
Obama campaign spokeswoman Jen Psaki said the candidate’s wife wasn’t trying to knock her country, only underscore the meaning behind her husband’s campaign.
“The point is that of course Michelle is proud of her country, which is why she and Barack talk constantly about how their story wouldn’t be possible in any other nation on Earth,” she said. “What she meant is that she’s really proud at this moment because for the first time in a long time, thousands of Americans who’ve never participated in politics before are coming out in record numbers to build a grassroots movement for change.”
But conservative outlets aren’t so ready to let her off the hook.
“Can it really be there has not been a moment during that time when she felt proud of her country?” reads an article in Commentary magazine. “Forget matters like the victory in the Cold War; how about only things that have made liberals proud — all the accomplishments of inclusion? How about the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1991? Or Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s elevation to the Supreme Court?”
The article then says Michelle Obama’s comments suggest “the pseudo-messianic nature of the Obama candidacy is very much a part of the way the Obamas themselves are feeling.”
Weekly Standard Editor Bill Kristol said the comment “was sort of revealing.”
“She was an adult when we won the Cold War without firing a shot. She was an adult for the last 25 years of economic progress, social progress,” he told FOX News. “I think the Democrats have to be careful … they’re running against the status quo … You have to be careful not to let that slide into a kind of indictment of America. Because I don’t think the American people think on the whole that the last 25 years of American history is a narrative of despair and nothing to be proud of.”
Democratic strategist Bob Beckel said Obama “shouldn’t have said it the way she said it” but she gets the benefit of his doubt. He added that she most likely was just referring to the grassroots movement that’s swelled to support her husband, but she needs to be more careful.
“The Obama’s have to recognize they are now front-runners, and everything they say, it’s now open hunting season for people,” he said.
SC, as for McCain's speech, he came across as a sincere man who would like to serve his country. Did he need to do more than that? I don't know.
IMO, yes. He needed to speak of ideals and specifics for what he wants to get done as president. Don't you think Obama is sincere, and don't you think he would like to serve his country as well?
It was a bit lackluster, yes. But that's who he is. He's not a charismatic, animated kind of guy. I'm sure that's part of the reason that he brought Palin onto the ticket. They complement one another.
Just to clarify, are you commenting on the content or on the delivery???
Just to clarify, are you commenting on the content or on the delivery???
Content.
I know he's not as dynamic a speaker as Obama... that wouldn't be a reason to vote for him or against him, though.
He lit up when he spoke about Vietnam; that was personal, and I guess easy for him to talk about. He KNOWS that stuff. He didn't speak about any of the party's plans. Is he telling us that the party doesn't have any plans?
I haven't heard any fresh ideas from any of the Republicans in years. We keep hearing what a maverick Senator McCain is, but if he's voted with President Bush 90% of the time, then I guess he's really not.
As I know I've mentioned before, the Republicans seem to preach fear. Don't change! It would be bad! We were here on September 11, 2001, and we've prevented attacks since then. If you don't vote for us, those terrorists will be back!! Fear, fear, fear.
Personally, I don't want to live in fear. I prefer to live a hopeful life. And for me, that's a good enough reason not to vote Republican this time.
Where's Ross Perot when you need a third party candidate??
Two things about the speech. My son commented that he seems to be holding something back. Not just tonight, but whenever he speaks. He seems to be exercising immense control when he does so. And also, he seems to invest much in macho toughness, never giving up, victory, making history (where did that come from?) as if being tough is the end all and be all.
I also didn't like the term "community organizer" to describe what Obama did. How about the fact that, despite graduating at the top of his class from Harvard, he decided to give back to the community instead of joining a powerful Chicago law firm for a huge salary. They don't mention that. Instead, they mock that commitment to public service, unless it's their own.
I'm with you. When Rudy then Palin attacked his service to his community and the crowd roared I about threw up. How messed up is the GOP that they would seriously denigrate the work of someone who sacrificed a comfy job in a high paying law firm to help the underprivileged?
Community Service is a wonderful thing and Sen. Barack Hussein Obama should be applauded for it. Does it qualify anyone to be President of the United States. Nope.
Also, after nearly a week of scrutiny over Palins 'experience' while running for VP and who if she wins may or may not ever even assume the Presidency...it was and is completely appropriate to compare her experience as Mayor and Governor to Sen. Barack Hussein Obama's, who if he wins WILL be President...as a Community Organizer and U.S. Senator who is on record as voting 'Present' most of the time and passed barely a single piece of legislation during his time in office but has somehow found time to write 2 memiors.
The comparison was fair, it was warranted and it should be made time and time again if the media continues to harp on Gov. Sarah Palin's qualifications for the office of Vice President.
...As for your hypothesis....wasn't the bomb that was Dukakis a Governor too? ...
Yes, he was. And I'm not saying that ALL Governors who seek the Presidency succeed. However it's a historical FACT...not a hypothesis...that more sitting or former Governors have been elected President than sitting Senators.
This year, a Senator will definitely be elected President. It was a great move for McCain to put on his ticket a sitting Governor, a current Chief Executive of a HUGE State...instead of going for another Senator.
Apple
ps - Yet another Governor to be elected President in 'recent' history...Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
Apple, I have no problem with the fact that they compared their records and their experience. Compare away. As you said, it's only reasonable.
What bothered me is the disparaging and dismissive tone that both Mayor Giuliani and Governor Palin used when saying "community organizer". They left the impression that a "community organizer" is somebody who puts together pickup games on some public basketball court. It was not the comparison; it was the tone.
I would love to be able to vote for McCain, but just can't. He keeps talking about being a "Maverick", and shaking up Washington, but his record just doesn't support that. He votes along party lines and with George Bush 90% of the time. Plus his pick of Sarah Palin isn't putting "Country First". Does anyone in their right mind think she is best choice to be his VP? He picked her for one reason, to try to win an election. Obama is far from perfect, but he's about as opposite of George Bush you can get, and I'm willing to take the chance on "Change".
The truth is, I might have voted for Senator McCain 8 years ago. I really wish he had gotten the nomination back then. I wonder how the world would be different if he had.
As I said, I think that he's probably a decent man. He came across as quite sincere last night. However, I didn't hear anything new. I didn't hear any ideas. I didn't even hear acknowledgment that we're suffering an enormous fiscal crisis. To me, 8 more years of the same is just unacceptable.
Yes, Senator Obama may be in his first term. Yes, he may be weak on foreign policy. However, at least he understands that there are problems in this country. At least he knows that what's been going on isn't working.
I'm not thrilled with either of them. I'm concerned about Mccain's age. I'm not happy that Obama will raise taxes. My vote will come down to the lesser of two evils AGAIN!!!
I'm not thrilled with either of them. I'm concerned about Mccain's age. I'm not happy that Obama will raise taxes. My vote will come down to the lesser of two evils AGAIN!!!
With the deficits we're running and the need to improve infrastructure, develop energy independence and put a decent health care system in place, not to mention all kinds of existing and potential problems abroad, I don't see how we cannot raise taxes unless we do it GOP style by calling taxes by some other name and using gimmicks like selling highways to private companies, continuing to privatize prisons, and raising "fees" for everything.
OMG is nobody allowed to say anything against Senator Obama around here?
The thing about Michelle that ticked me off is this "For the First Time in My Adult Lifetime, I'm Really Proud of My Country"
Why was she never proud of her country before?
Yeah, that was a fucking blunder. I think I understand what she was trying to say, as in "I've always been proud before, but today I'm specially proud" or whatever.
But my immediate reaction to that statement was the same as yours.
I'm not thrilled with either of them. I'm concerned about Mccain's age. I'm not happy that Obama will raise taxes. My vote will come down to the lesser of two evils AGAIN!!!
With the deficits we're running and the need to improve infrastructure, develop energy independence and put a decent health care system in place, not to mention all kinds of existing and potential problems abroad, I don't see how we cannot raise taxes unless we do it GOP style by calling taxes by some other name and using gimmicks like selling highways to private companies, continuing to privatize prisons, and raising "fees" for everything.
Both candidates' tax plans really are problematic, but McCain's is "slash spending" and yet he won't cut any bit of the military budget.
So if not that route, then where to? I mean I'm pretty sure neither candidate will cut cash-bleeding projects like the Harriet Jet.
So what will get axed if its President McCain and a Democratic Congress, if anything?
I'm not thrilled with either of them. I'm concerned about Mccain's age. I'm not happy that Obama will raise taxes. My vote will come down to the lesser of two evils AGAIN!!!
Remember that deficit in the late 80s/early 90s that was one of the key reasons why Bush Sr. lost re-election to Clinton?
Well, that came from Reagan's Supply-Side Economics, in cutting taxes and not cutting anything, and in fact increasing the military budget. The problem was that the heavy cost from the economic prosperity in the 80s landed on Bush's doorstep, and Clinton/GOP Congress had to cut alot of shit to be not as much in the red.
I also didn't like the term "community organizer" to describe what Obama did. How about the fact that, despite graduating at the top of his class from Harvard, he decided to give back to the community instead of joining a powerful Chicago law firm for a huge salary. They don't mention that. Instead, they mock that commitment to public service, unless it's their own.
I'm with you. When Rudy then Palin attacked his service to his community and the crowd roared I about threw up. How messed up is the GOP that they would seriously denigrate the work of someone who sacrificed a comfy job in a high paying law firm to help the underprivileged?
Community Service is a wonderful thing and Sen. Barack Hussein Obama should be applauded for it. Does it qualify anyone to be President of the United States. Nope.
Also, after nearly a week of scrutiny over Palins 'experience' while running for VP and who if she wins may or may not ever even assume the Presidency...it was and is completely appropriate to compare her experience as Mayor and Governor to Sen. Barack Hussein Obama's, who if he wins WILL be President...as a Community Organizer and U.S. Senator who is on record as voting 'Present' most of the time and passed barely a single piece of legislation during his time in office but has somehow found time to write 2 memiors.
The comparison was fair, it was warranted and it should be made time and time again if the media continues to harp on Gov. Sarah Palin's qualifications for the office of Vice President.
Apple
Yet I doubt any Democrat or moderate was going to vote for Obama for his experience. More like for his pitch of no more S.O.S. ("Same Old Shit") or at least represent a change from the Dubya years, or new ideas or whatever.
I mean McCain's pitch is that he's been around long enough, he knows the game and how to play it BLAH BLAH, and it's worth running on.
There was a political cartoon, and I hate that I didn't save it, but which you had two cars: those new hybrid environmental/fuel-friendly cars (Obama) and a SUV (McCain), and you have people in the middle wondering which car to "buy."
On the hybrid, "Looks promising, but it's a risky move." On the SUV, its "It's proven in the past, but is this the solution now?"
Point is, experience was a cornerstone of McCain's run, and with his age, if he had picked someone like Hutchinson, I think moderates would have been more acceptive of that pick than a Palin. I mean Hutchinson has been in office for about what, 14-15 years as a Senator from Texas?
McCain/Hutchinson ticket would have been the complete "Experience" Value Meal.
Oh sure Democrats would find little shit to get pissed about her, but when polling indicates with Palin that with Republicans loving her, and Democrats hating her, but moderates in general are not biting...that's a problem.
To put it another way Apple, remember 4 years ago?
Edwards energized the Democratic base, but who won the race?
...As for your hypothesis....wasn't the bomb that was Dukakis a Governor too? ...
Yes, he was. And I'm not saying that ALL Governors who seek the Presidency succeed. However it's a historical FACT...not a hypothesis...that more sitting or former Governors have been elected President than sitting Senators.
This year, a Senator will definitely be elected President. It was a great move for McCain to put on his ticket a sitting Governor, a current Chief Executive of a HUGE State...instead of going for another Senator.
Apple
ps - Yet another Governor to be elected President in 'recent' history...Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
A question I ask you Apple, and I want you to answer completely and honestly:
Which candidate you prefer, McCain or Palin?
Also, you supporting McCain who was a leader of that failed attempt on that so-trashed "Amnesty Bill" 2 years ago, who led and got a bill passed condemning the Bush Administration for not following the Geneva Convention on torture, the McCain/Feingold Campaign Finance "Reform" that's not really worked as good as hoped, and against banning gay marriage?
I'm just trying to understand that a conservative like yourself is voting for a moderate who at times has gone contrary to your ideological parameters.
The best question of all...are you voting more for McCain, or more against Obama?
I'm not thrilled with either of them. I'm concerned about Mccain's age. I'm not happy that Obama will raise taxes. My vote will come down to the lesser of two evils AGAIN!!!
8 more weeks. Nice chart, SB. I'm sick of people saying Obama is going to tax, tax, tax. He has said over and over again. If your family is making less than $250,000 a year, you will not see a tax increase.
Presidents do not raise or lower taxes. Only the Congress can do so.
I think that with focus upon the preseidential candidates, some forget that all 435 members of the House of Representatives will be up for reelection and 1/3 of Senators. If you are concerned about effects upon taxes, one needs to pay attention to those runnning for election in your district and for senator in your state.
The truth is, incomes vary regionally. Someone making $100,000 per year in the tristate area or in areas of CA is very likely to be struggling to make ends meet. Someone in that same income bracket in an area of the country where real estate costs and taxes are lower may be living quite well. Applying federal taxes without using some formula for regional costs, someone's going to get screwed.
I would love to be able to vote for McCain, but just can't. He keeps talking about being a "Maverick", and shaking up Washington, but his record just doesn't support that. He votes along party lines and with George Bush 90% of the time. Plus his pick of Sarah Palin isn't putting "Country First". Does anyone in their right mind think she is best choice to be his VP? He picked her for one reason, to try to win an election. Obama is far from perfect, but he's about as opposite of George Bush you can get, and I'm willing to take the chance on "Change".
Right. Maverick or not, too many people are forgetting that you have this little group of people at the other end of Pennsylvania Ave. that are called collectively (I think this is right) the Congress. And I think I'm right again that it is only this group on the federal level that can pass laws and appropriate money.
8 more weeks. Nice chart, SB. I'm sick of people saying Obama is going to tax, tax, tax. He has said over and over again. If your family is making less than $250,000 a year, you will not see a tax increase.
Double J, I notice that you tend to make disparaging remarks regarding the comments of others. You seem to believe differently than what they've posted. Perhaps you could explain WHY you feel the way you do and how you believe that Senator McCain would do differently if elected.
I'm sure there are many undecideds out there. They do say that education is the key - so please explain.
Double J, I notice that you tend to make disparaging remarks regarding the comments of others. You seem to believe differently than what they've posted. Perhaps you could explain WHY you feel the way you do and how you believe that Senator McCain would do differently if elected.
I'm sure there are many undecideds out there. They do say that education is the key - so please explain.
I just find it utterly hilarious that Patrick asserts that if Obama is elected, anyone earning under $250,000 won't see a tax increase.
I echo what SC has posted just above. It might be helpful further if posters would state what taxes they believe a candidate as president will propose for increae or decrease. Afterall, the federal government assesses an array of taxes including corporate and personal income taxes, security taxes, medicare taxes.
You confusing me with SB again? Or are you agreeing with me that Double-J is a sheep wearer? (Careful with your answer.... you might make the "Rainman" signature).
Double J, I notice that you tend to make disparaging remarks regarding the comments of others. You seem to believe differently than what they've posted. Perhaps you could explain WHY you feel the way you do and how you believe that Senator McCain would do differently if elected.
I'm sure there are many undecideds out there. They do say that education is the key - so please explain.
I just find it utterly hilarious that Patrick asserts that if Obama is elected, anyone earning under $250,000 won't see a tax increase.
I don't even need to explain that.
I say you should, liberal.
Really, in the same week when McCain gets pissy and doesn't go on Larry "Softball" King's program, and Obama goes on THE O'REILLY FACTOR and apparently held himself well (enough to be complemented by O'Reilly as being "tough, not a wimp")...
What reality are we in when a Democrat candidate is seen as tougher than a Republican candidate?
ABC News has exclusively learned that Alaska Senator Hollis French will announce today that he is moving up the release date of his investigation into whether Gov. Sarah Palin abused her office to get the Alaska public safety commissioner, Walt Monegan, fired. The results of the investigation were originally scheduled for release Oct. 31 but will now come almost three weeks earlier, according to sources. The announcement is set for 9 a.m. AKDT time.
The Alaska state senator running an investigation of Gov. Palin had accused the McCain campaign of using stall tactics to prevent him from releasing his final report by Oct. 31, four days before the November election.
"It's likely to be damaging to the Governor's administration," said Senator Hollis French, a Democrat, appointed the project manager for a bi-partisan State Senate Legislative Counsel Committee investigation.
Palin, who has denied any wrongdoing and has said she has nothing to hide, has hired private lawyers to represent her in the matter.
Two things I wonder about this article: One its from ABC News, the other that statement about "damaging" came from a Democrat. Remember 4 years ago when CBS News had that botched scoop of how Bush didn't do his National Guard duty? Ehh...
Still haven't seen the Obama/O'Reilly interview, but apparently O'Reilly was impressed:
Chatting with Obama By Bill O'Reilly for BillOReilly.com Friday, September 5, 2008
Like him or not, you have to give Barack Obama credit for waging a smart, focused campaign. Destroying the Clinton machine was a major achievement and so was putting together a successful convention in Denver. Obama is now firmly a part of U.S. history, no matter what happens in the presidential election.
The problem some Americans continue to have with the Senator is that he is long on charisma but short on detail. This frightens some voters. Who the heck is this guy, anyway? So when Obama finally agreed to speak to me this week, specifics were on my mind.
First, the man. The Barack Obama I witnessed is self-confident, determined and driven. He was acutely aware of his surroundings from the moment he entered the room. He looks you in the eye and touches your shoulder. He understands how to connect one-on-one.
As far as philosophy goes, Senator Obama is convinced that the federal government should be in control of income distribution and, to some extent, should regulate the free marketplace. That is a classic liberal position, and Obama promotes it well.
The Senator also believes that poor Americans have a basic right to free health care and monetary supplements from the government with no strings attached. The American substance abuser, for example, would derive the same benefit as a hard working, laid off worker would. Again, classic liberalism. No judgments made regarding entitlements.
So, if Barack Obama does become president, there will definitely be change. His left-wing base will demand it, and he will come through. You can decide if that's change we should believe in, but keep in mind that the unintended consequences of government interference in the marketplace are impossible to predict. Free markets have a way of chafing under government imposition.
On the foreign policy front, Obama has convinced me that he is tough but cautious. He rose up quickly because he vehemently opposed the Iraq war. But now I see a man who understands the victory that has taken place in Iraq. I don't believe he wants to screw that up. I could be wrong.
After going mano-a-mano with Obama on television, I am also persuaded that he is a sincere guy—that he wants the best for all Americans. He's an ideologue, but not a blind one. He understands that his story is incredible, and, I have come to believe, he is grateful to the American system for allowing it happen.
It is true that we don't know whether Senator Obama has the ability to solve complex problems, but you can say that about all presidential contenders.
Like most politicians, Obama has used guile and good luck to accumulate his power. He can be ruthless, kind, unfair, and generous. In short, he's a real person trying to achieve an unreal position—that of the most powerful person in the world.
You confusing me with SB again? Or are you agreeing with me that Double-J is a sheep wearer? (Careful with your answer.... you might make the "Rainman" signature).
"Oops, I did it again..."
Mi Dispiace. I did mean SB. Those keys are just too close.
But, MSNBC and others seem to have confirmed that Palin listed the Alaska Governor's plane on eBay, but didn't sell it there. She sold it to a campaign contributor and at a loss.
MSNBC and others seem to have confirmed that Palin listed the Alaska Governor's plane on eBay, but didn't sell it there. She sold it to a campaign contributor and at a loss.
Double J, I notice that you tend to make disparaging remarks regarding the comments of others. You seem to believe differently than what they've posted. Perhaps you could explain WHY you feel the way you do and how you believe that Senator McCain would do differently if elected.
I'm sure there are many undecideds out there. They do say that education is the key - so please explain.
I just find it utterly hilarious that Patrick asserts that if Obama is elected, anyone earning under $250,000 won't see a tax increase.
I don't even need to explain that.
Perhaps we are all not as wise as you. Please explain.
...I just find it utterly hilarious that Patrick asserts that if Obama is elected, anyone earning under $250,000 won't see a tax increase. I don't even need to explain that.
Perhaps we are all not as wise as you. Please explain.
I'm almost as wise as Double-J, and apparently he momentarily forgot the way people think around here...so I'll try to explain.
While those people may not see an increase in personal taxes (which even that I don't believe, look what Clinton did in March, 1993)...it would certainly have an effect when businesses of all kinds have to raise prices, from the mom & pop store to the publishers who put out the magazines you buy at checkout (including 'US', which wasted no time trashing Gov. Palin); doctor/dentist fees; federal taxes on things like telephone and cable svc. among others, and employer taxes which may or may not result in hiring freezes, reduction in benefits and possibly layoffs.
You people who think 'taxes' just means what comes out of the paycheck (although that's plenty already)...well, I guess you're just not as wise as the rest of us.
The cost of living is going to rise regardless of who is elected in November. Clinton raised taxes and balanced the budget and we had one of the longest periods of economic expansion in our history. Dubya came in and slashed taxes and created an economy fueled by borrowing from China and then taking that money and sending it to Saudi Arabia and Venezuela. It is an insane policy which must be corrected. This means everyone is going to have to sacrifice. For you right wingers who are allergic to taxation, this will be a test to see if this "Country First" slogan McCain has recently adopted has any meaning or is just more republican rhetoric.
Thank goodness you explained that, Apple! There's no WAY I'm going to vote for Senator Obama if he's going to do something like THAT!! Gosh, I don't want to see a rise in the cost of goods, like food, fuel, utilities, people losing their homes because they can't keep up with rising costs, employers slashing jobs, unemployment on the rise...
Thank goodness you explained that, Apple! There's no WAY I'm going to vote for Senator Obama if he's going to do something like THAT!! Gosh, I don't want to see a rise in the cost of goods, like food, fuel, utilities, people losing their homes because they can't keep up with rising costs, employers slashing jobs, unemployment on the rise...
Oh, wait!! We have that NOW.
Good one.
Also, Apple, you might explain why the Republican controlled Congress from 2001 through 2006 with a Republican President increased the national debt by $5 trillion. As a result, mortgage and business finance as well as individual finance had to compete with the US Treasury for customers thus increasing interest rates and diminishing the capacity of businesses to invest.
I get a laugh out of McCain pointing a finger at the current administration in blame for the Freddie Mac/Ferdie Mae mess. No doubt he now wants to distance himself from Bush. You REALLY believe that W. didn't attend the convention because of Gustav? Bullshit. He was told to stay away. Same for the v.p. (what's his name - the guy who shoots his friends). They send him off on some Mickey Mouse trip (kind of sounds like Fredo).
OK... it's the smart political move (to try to back away from the terrible job the current administration has done) but didn't McCain vote 90% along with W. all along?
And what's this "change" thing McCain's talking about all of a sudden, stealing Obama's theme. Wasn't it Reagan who asked "are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?" It's been 8 years of a downhill spiral, enough of the bullshit already.
Anyway, for anyone else, on either side following this election closely, it is a roller coaster ride at times no?? And the polls, OMG!! How reliable are they? I wouldn't dare to ever get overly optimistic because who knows how it'll end up, but I have been reading a whole lot about the ground work Obama supporters are doing in registering new voters. While, we couldn't know how many will actually come out to vote, it sounds as though they are making huge strides in these registrations. Could this be a surprise in the end? Maybe, using Obama's word from his speech, "something's stirring."
The national polls mean less and less as time goes by. Pay increasing attention to the state by state polls. They indicate which candidate will receive their electoral votes.
The national polls mean less and less as time goes by. Pay increasing attention to the state by state polls. They indicate which candidate will receive their electoral votes.
You're 100% correct. I'll have to look for it, but there was one site that gave McCain only a 14% mathematical chance of winning the election, based on State polling and what the current Electoral Vote projections look like.
The national polls mean less and less as time goes by. Pay increasing attention to the state by state polls. They indicate which candidate will receive their electoral votes.
You're 100% correct. I'll have to look for it, but there was one site that gave McCain only a 14% mathematical chance of winning the election, based on State polling and what the current Electoral Vote projections look like.
CNN has Obama with 239 electoral votes to McCain's 189. Fox: 228 to 200
The national polls mean less and less as time goes by. Pay increasing attention to the state by state polls. They indicate which candidate will receive their electoral votes.
Who are the people being polled in all of these polls?
I get a laugh out of McCain pointing a finger at the current administration in blame for the Freddie Mac/Ferdie Mae mess. No doubt he now wants to distance himself from Bush. You REALLY believe that W. didn't attend the convention because of Gustav? Bullshit. He was told to stay away. Same for the v.p. (what's his name - the guy who shoots his friends). They send him off on some Mickey Mouse trip (kind of sounds like Fredo).
OK... it's the smart political move (to try to back away from the terrible job the current administration has done) but didn't McCain vote 90% along with W. all along?
Smoke and mirrors.
Nevermind that while the GOP is saying how Obama is wrong on this and that, I want to ask them this:
If so, then how come after Obama advocated sending more troops to Afghanistan, McCain/White House followed suite?
How about how McCain/White House was all about no time tables and no withdrawing or surrendering, but very soon after the Maliki government supported Obama's withdrawal plan, a mother fucking public political undercut punch if there ever was one, McCain/White House followed suite with that "Time Horizontal" or whatever the hell it was called.
If the guy is foolish, why follow him then?
"Who's more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him?" - Obi-Wan Kenobi
I'm starting to get tired with B. Hussein Obama's constant harping on McCain's record of voting 90% of the time with Bush. While this number is accurate, as recently as 2005 it was 77%. B. Hussein Obama's claim that we can't take a 10% chance on change is extremely misleading. He wants Americans to believe that every one of those votes was the wrong decision, when B. Hussein Obama himself has voted with Bush 41% of the time. In other words, B. Hussein Obama disagreed with only 49% of that original 90%. In fact, B. Hussein Obama has voted with the Democrats 97% of the time - not exactly breaking with traditional politics.
In other words, B. Hussein Obama disagreed with only 49% of that original 90%.
Only disagrees with half. Well, as long as it's only half...
Originally Posted By: svsg
B. Hussein Obama?
You know, we could as well call him B. Hussein O.
The Obama is needed for the Osama connection.
If we can link Obama to Osama (Joe Bi)n La(den) and Saddam (Barack) Hussein (Obama) we can get all the ignorant dumbfucks to vote for us and then the election is ours!
...Seriously. If You're trying to use a guy's middle name as a reason not to vote for him there is something wrong with you.
...Seriously. If You're trying to use a guy's middle name as a reason not to vote for him there is something wrong with you.
How about people are using his middle name because it's his middle name. Anyway, even the omitting the middle name doesn't eliminate his decades-long association with known terrorists.
Actually, that lunatic Keith Oberman initiated this association by 'middle name' thing during the primaries earlier this year...when he constantly referred to one of the Republican candidates as " Mitt 'Willard' Romney "
...Seriously. If You're trying to use a guy's middle name as a reason not to vote for him there is something wrong with you.
How about people are using his middle name because it's his middle name. Anyway, even the omitting the middle name doesn't eliminate his decades-long association with known terrorists.
Actually, that lunatic Keith Oberman initiated this association by 'middle name' thing during the primaries earlier this year...when he constantly referred to one of the Republican candidates as " Mitt 'Willard' Romney "
I'm starting to get tired with B. Hussein Obama's constant harping on McCain's record of voting 90% of the time with Bush. While this number is accurate, as recently as 2005 it was 77%. B. Hussein Obama's claim that we can't take a 10% chance on change is extremely misleading. He wants Americans to believe that every one of those votes was the wrong decision, when B. Hussein Obama himself has voted with Bush 41% of the time. In other words, B. Hussein Obama disagreed with only 49% of that original 90%. In fact, B. Hussein Obama has voted with the Democrats 97% of the time - not exactly breaking with traditional politics.
A fine point, but when a candidate is off about "Change" and criticized his party, i.e. President, and claims he is off about not doing the Same Old Shit of the last 8 years....that 90% number may be effective on the campaign trail.
If this election is about bullshit, so far McCain smells the worst.
When political junkies flip through television stations on Sunday morning, they'll find policy-driven interviews with three of the four candidates on the presidential tickets — John McCain, Barack Obama and Joe Biden. They won’t, though, see Sarah Palin.
Less than two months before voters hit the polls, Palin has yet to sit down for or even schedule an issues-oriented interview with any newspaper, magazine or television network.
Meanwhile, the McCain campaign has significantly scaled back the access of the national press he used to jokingly refer to as his “base,” and several speakers, including Palin, took shots at the media in their speeches at last week's Republican convention.
Since her debut in Dayton, Ohio, the McCain campaign has been receiving about 80-100 requests a day from news organizations around the world, according to spokesman Ben Porritt, who said interest in an interview was "through the roof" and that the campaign was going through them now.
"There's no doubt in my mind that the McCain campaign would like to run out on the clock on this," said David Chalian, political director for ABC News.
He expects the campaign will tightly manage access to Palin, but give some national interviews shortly before the Oct. 2 vice presidential debate with Biden, moderated by PBS' Gwen Ifill.
"They know they're not going to get through the next 60 days without doing interviews and being tested and prodded," Chalian said.
But even if Palin does submit to a few carefully selected interviews around the October debate, that means another month before the 37-million-plus viewers who tuned into Palin's speech and others get their first look at how the newcomer to the national stage performs outside of a campaign-controlled setting.
In the meantime, Fox News is rolling out a special (as are other networks): "Gov. Sarah Palin: An American Woman," a one-hour biography hosted by Greta Van Susteren that includes "exclusive video and photos" and "interviews with her family, friends and colleagues" — but not Palin herself.
Palin has already become a ubiquitous presence on newsstands. Presently, her face adorns the cover of traditional newsweeklies Time and Newsweek, Beltway favorites The New Republic and The Weekly Standard, and even celebrity glossies Us Weekly and Ok!.
While everyone from the New Yorker to CNBC has rushed to republish their older interviews with the Alaska governor, it's People magazine that has the only actual interview she’s done since joining to the ticket.
Larry Hackett, managing editor of People, said the McCain campaign offered the magazine an opportunity to photograph McCain and "Nominee TK" at the Aug. 29 event in Dayton.
In addition to a brief Q&A with both Republicans (as well as their spouses and McCain’s daughter Meghan) and an accompanying article that was mostly based on months-old reporting, the magazine also ran a lifestyle feature on Palin’s life as a working mother running a statehouse and her own house.
People has a long history of reporting on the personal side of candidates and their families, but Hackett acknowledges that "we have a different job" than overtly political titles.
"Are we going to ask about Pakistan?" Hackett said rhetorically, adding that it's not a focus for their readers.
That said, journalists are pushing hard to ask Palin about Pakistan — and Iraq, Iran, Russia, North Korea and Al Qaeda, not to mention a host of domestic issues, from the economy to health care.
Jay Carney, Time's Washington bureau chief, questioned McCain spokesperson Nicole Wallace about the lack of access on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" last Thursday, resulting in a heated exchange that quickly got passed around via YouTube.
"We know now that Sarah Palin can give one hell of a speech," Carney said. "She's a natural. And that's no mean feat. We don't know yet and we won't know until you guys allow her to take questions, you know, can she answer tough questions about domestic policy, foreign policy?"
"But I mean, like from who?” Wallace asked. "From you?”
When Carney answered "Yes," Wallace followed up with, "Who cares?
"I think the American people want to see her," Wallace continued. "Who cares if she can talk to Time magazine?"
Later that day, Carney — who last week had a much-buzzed about interview with McCain in which the candidate became testy, and refused to answer some questions — told Politico that the McCain campaign is acting "condescending and smug" toward the press.
"The national media," he added, "will be kept far away" from Palin.
They may be at once close and far away. Top newspaper reporters will be on the trail with her day after day, including The Washington Post's Juliet Eilperin. The New York Times will have a rotating cast, beginning with Monica Davey.
And each network will have an off-air producer, or embed, devoted to the Palin beat: Matt Berger (NBC/ National Journal), Shushannah Walshe (Fox), Imtiyaz Delawala (ABC), Scott Conroy (CBS), and Peter Hamby (CNN). The bigger-name, on-air correspondents will also be on the road with Palin from time to time.
Sam Feist, CNN's political director, said that since Palin has had to focus on regional issues as Alaska's governor, he expects she'll begin with media avails on the road and only offer wide-ranging interviews after getting thoroughly prepared for them by the campaign.
However, he said, "if a presidential candidate or a vice presidential candidate declines to do interviews, the news organizations will note that."
Even when Palin does begin taking interviews, it remains to be seen if she’ll grant them to outlets with which the campaign has had a hostile relationship — most notably the New York Times.
"There's no question that we've had less and less access to McCain himself," said Richard Stevenson, the paper's political editor. "Certainly the Times has had a strained relationship with that campaign for a while."
"Strained" might be putting it mildly.
Since February, when the McCain campaign talked about going to war with the paper over a front-page article that included allegations of an improper relationship with a female lobbyist, there have been several public disputes. This past Tuesday, a McCain spokesperson described Elisabeth Bumiller, one the reporters on the McCain beat, as a "fiction" writer.
"I know whether or not they cooperate with us, we will be very actively looking into who [Palin] is, what she's done, what her record is — as much as we can learn about her in as concentrated a time as we can," Stevenson said.
"One of the costs to them of not putting her out there," he added, "is the coverage is going to define her as much as the campaign."
...Seriously. If You're trying to use a guy's middle name as a reason not to vote for him there is something wrong with you.
How about people are using his middle name because it's his middle name. Anyway, even the omitting the middle name doesn't eliminate his decades-long association with known terrorists.
Actually, that lunatic Keith Oberman initiated this association by 'middle name' thing during the primaries earlier this year...when he constantly referred to one of the Republican candidates as " Mitt 'Willard' Romney "
Apple
You need to do more research or just consider not typing on this Board.
Mitt Romney "initiated" the name-game by referring to Barack as Osama during a speech Romney gave in South Carolina during October, 2007.
Keith Olbermann is just about the most articulate host of any talk show and the correctness of his facts are just about beyond dispute. He repeatedly points up the errors in O'Reilly's statements such as O'Reilly's statement that Americans massacred German soldiers at Malmedy during Battle of the Buldge.
...Seriously. If You're trying to use a guy's middle name as a reason not to vote for him there is something wrong with you.
How about people are using his middle name because it's his middle name. Anyway, even the omitting the middle name doesn't eliminate his decades-long association with known terrorists.
Actually, that lunatic Keith Oberman initiated this association by 'middle name' thing during the primaries earlier this year...when he constantly referred to one of the Republican candidates as " Mitt 'Willard' Romney "
Apple
You need to do more research or just consider not typing on this Board.
Mitt Romney "initiated" the name-game by referring to Barack as Osama during a speech Romney gave in South Carolina during October, 2007.
This the same Romney who made fun of his liberal state to conservatives at a dinner earlier this year while campaigning for President...you know, that state he was a PRO-CHOICE GOVERNOR of for 4 years?
What an asshole.
Originally Posted By: olivant
Keith Olbermann is just about the most articulate host of any talk show and the correctness of his facts are just about beyond dispute. He repeatedly points up the errors in O'Reilly's statements such as O'Reilly's statement that Americans massacred German soldiers at Malmedy during Battle of the Buldge.
I don't care much for Olbermann himself, just maybe a click or two better than O'Reilly on the dipshit meter, but oh I remember that WW2 gaffe by O'Reilly, and Fox News wiped it off the official transcript, but MSNBC showed the video of O'Reilly's screw up.
That's what I don't get about alot of TV personalities...can't they sometimes admit they fucked up on the facts, apologize, and move on?
Then again, as I've said it before, I would rather be corrected and look silly than be wrong just to stroke up my ego.
Olbermann can be an ass too. It is fun to watch him pick apart O'Reilly though.
McCain scores points with me for genuinely disliking Romney.
Remember that debate when Romney said that McCain wasn't conservative because the New York Times endorsed him?
The look on McCain's face, he wanted to strangle that fucker right on the spot.
But I tell ya, if Obama wins and its Romney that's the GOP nominee in 2012, and if I'm still around and DJ/Apple pimp him out as their Conservative Savior...
Romney is looking at 2012 no matter who wins. McCain isn't going to run for a 2nd term, and there's no way they'll let Palin run for the top spot. (I don't think)
Romney is looking at 2012 no matter who wins. McCain isn't going to run for a 2nd term, and there's no way they'll let Palin run for the top spot. (I don't think)
Has he said that he won't run for a second term?
And yeah, as someone at the American Conservative Magazine argued, Palin isn't the future of the GOP. If that scenario you described happens, Romney/Pawlenty/Huckabee will fight in a brutal steel cage match, with Palin perhaps the first to go.
I can't imagine McCain running a second term, but I don't think he's ever committed to one only.
Btw, has there ever been a President who, going in, says they only want to run one term???? I can't imagine it would be wise for any candidate to admit. Then again, considering McCain's age, maybe most people would find it acceptable? Then again, if they do, it show's they worry about him being too old to rule.
Anyway, as far as Palin goes, she is he "Obama" of the Republican party (at least I think that's how the Republicans feel). She's peaked IMHO, but holding back from interiews is only buying time. There has to be a reason......and we know what that must be. Bottom line, thus far, it still looks like a very very close race.
COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. - The banners, buttons and signs say McCain-Palin, but the crowds say something else.
"Sa-rah! Pa-lin!" came the chant at a Colorado Springs rally on Saturday moments before Republican nominee John McCain took the stage with Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, a woman who was virtually unknown to the nation just a week earlier. The day before, thousands screamed "Sa-rah! Sa-rah! Sa-rah!" at an amphitheater outside Detroit.
"Real change with a real woman," read one sign at a Wisconsin rally. "Hurricane Sarah leaves liberals spinning," cried another.
In the short time since McCain spirited the 44-year-old first-term governor out of Alaska and onto a national stage as his running mate, Palin has become an instant celebrity. And since her speech at the Republican National Convention, watched by more than 40 million Americans, she is emerging as the main attraction for many voters at their campaign appearances.
"She's the draw for a lot of people," said Marilyn Ryman, who came to see her at the Colorado rally inside an airport hangar. "The fact that she's someone new, not the old everything we've seen before."
McCain has sought to portray Palin as a bulldog who will help him "shake things up" on Capitol Hill.
Washington, he said Saturday, is "going to get to know her, but I can't guarantee you they'll love her."
"We do!" came a cry from the crowd.
At a rally in Albuquerque later, McCain acknowledged the juice she has injected into his campaign.
"The response to her has been overwhelming, it's been incredible," he said.
Perhaps recognizing the excitement she is generating, the McCain campaign was planning to keep Palin with McCain for several more days, rather than dispatch her to campaign by herself, as had initially been discussed.
On Saturday, McCain and Palin rode their post-convention wave into the competitive West, where Democrats have made recent gains in traditional Republican strongholds.
After a day of talking up economic themes in the Midwest, the pair attracted thousands at a rally in Colorado Springs, a city at the foot of Pike's Peak that is home to many conservatives and military families.
It was McCain's first appearance in Colorado since the Democrats had their convention in Denver last month.
Both campaigns consider the battleground state in play with the election less than two months away.
"Colorado, it's going to be a hard-fought battle here," Palin said. As soon as she began speaking, a group of supporters interrupted her with a cheer of "Sa-rah! Sa-rah!"
Palin is even getting the star treatment from celebrity magazines, Web sites and television programs, which have played up her personal story as a mother of five children, one of whom is 17 years old, unmarried and pregnant.
The excitement with which people are turning out to see Palin could complicate a key line of attack that the McCain campaign has been building against Democrat Barack Obama for months.
Republicans have sought to cast Obama's support as nothing more than shallow adoration and hype befitting a movie star. They have mocked his appeal among Hollywood types and compared his star status to that of lightweights like Paris Hilton and Britney Spears. They say there is nothing of substance to back up the candidacy of the Illinois senator.
Palin herself asked in her convention speech what happens "when the stadium lights go out, and those Styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot — what exactly is our opponent's plan?"
Obama has been careful in his comments about her, saying Saturday that she has flip-flopped on spending earmarks, but also calling her a "skillful politician."
While campaigning in New Mexico, which is shaping up to be another competitive state, Palin and McCain staged their own Hollywood-like entrance at a rally.
After a rousing introduction by actor Robert Duvall, McCain and Palin made their entrance by bounding off a "Straight Talk Express" bus that drove straight into the rally's convention hall, underneath a giant America flag that was raised like a curtain.
As a delighted crowd screamed its approval, the rally was clouded by either exhaust or stage smoke.
Voters interviewed at rallies said their support for McCain has been cemented with his pick of Palin, who is a social conservative and reassures many who were wary about McCain on those issues.
Patricia Hoskins said she was already backing McCain but that Palin "really lit the fire under me."
And in the brief time that McCain and Palin have been campaigning since she introduced herself to the nation, many women at their events have said they identify with her personal struggles.
"She's every mom," said Lindsey Denny, a mother of 7, including a set of quintuplets, two of whom have special needs like Palin's infant son with Down syndrome. Denny said Palin's inclusion on the ticket was "110 percent" the reason why she went to see her Saturday.
I can't imagine McCain running a second term, but I don't think he's ever committed to one only.
Btw, has there ever been a President who, going in, says they only want to run one term???? I can't imagine it would be wise for any candidate to admit. Then again, considering McCain's age, maybe most people would find it acceptable? Then again, if they do, it show's they worry about him being too old to rule.
William Henry Harrison...who died a month after his inaguration.
Originally Posted By: The Italian Stallionette
Anyway, as far as Palin goes, she is he "Obama" of the Republican party (at least I think that's how the Republicans feel). She's peaked IMHO, but holding back from interiews is only buying time. There has to be a reason......and we know what that must be. Bottom line, thus far, it still looks like a very very close race.
TIS
Two reasons why:
(1) She's practically become the star of the GOP ticket, and not McCain. They probably want him to be "the guy" again and regain the spotlight you know?
(2) Perhaps she may fold like a deck of cards under serious questions of foreign or domestic policy, or that she maybe seen as an airhead or worse, she'll say something that'll piss off McCain-lean voters with something like: "Victims of rape should be forced to bear their rapist's child."
All the speculation during the RNC was that Romney was sucking up to McCain knowing that 2012 he would get a chance to run again for the top spot no matter who won this election because McCain would not seek a 2nd term. AFAIK, McCain has never come out and said this, but he would be 80 years old at the end of his 2nd term.
Before anyone can compare Obama and Palin, the GOP has to take the leash off her. So far all she's capable of doing is give a speech with McCain looking over her shoulder.
...Seriously. If You're trying to use a guy's middle name as a reason not to vote for him there is something wrong with you.
How about people are using his middle name because it's his middle name. Anyway, even the omitting the middle name doesn't eliminate his decades-long association with known terrorists.
That's so true. He's just an under-achiever, in the long run. Why couldn't he go all out and make it a point to associate himself with terrorists and the nazi-party, like the Bush family?
Plus, he is black, which makes him less intelligent.
you might explain why the Republican controlled Congress from 2001 through 2006 with a Republican President increased the national debt by $5 trillion.
It would be so helpful if the Board's moderators would filter potential Board posters with an intelligence/cognition test.
The Congressional Joint Economic Committee published its fndings in November 2007 that estimated the costs of both the war in Iraq and in Afghanistan at $800 billion. There are 1,000 billions in a trillion. Do the math.
There are 1,000 billions in a trillion. Do the math.
OK. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, (why do I suddenly feel like I'm doing a McCain imitation of him trying to remember how many homes he owns?).... Damn, now I lost count.
The Congressional Joint Economic Committee published its fndings in November 2007 that estimated the costs of both the war in Iraq and in Afghanistan at $800 billion. There are 1,000 billions in a trillion. Do the math.
Yes, but that's 800 billion that had to be taken away from other programs who in turn had to ...borrow the funds to make up for the insufficiency caused by the allocation of war funds. Thus, when thought of in these terms--the amount of loans sought by those 'programs' who lost their funding to the war--that 800 billion figure begins to swell.
The Congressional Joint Economic Committee published its fndings in November 2007 that estimated the costs of both the war in Iraq and in Afghanistan at $800 billion. There are 1,000 billions in a trillion. Do the math.
Yes, but that's 800 billion that had to be taken away from other programs who in turn had to ...borrow the funds to make up for the insufficiency caused by the allocation of war funds. Thus, when thought of in these terms--the amount of loans sought by those 'programs' who lost their funding to the war--that 800 billion figure begins to swell.
That doesn't make any sense. $800 billion is $800 billion. It doesn't matter what it was spent on. You either have the revenue to spend on it or you don't. If you don't, you borrow it. Because federal reveunes from 2001 through 2006 were not sufficiient to pay for federal expenditures during those years, the Republican controlled Congress (which also formulates and approves the annual federal budgets) authorized the Treasury Departmdent to borrow approximately $5 trillion.
...Seriously. If You're trying to use a guy's middle name as a reason not to vote for him there is something wrong with you.
How about people are using his middle name because it's his middle name. Anyway, even the omitting the middle name doesn't eliminate his decades-long association with known terrorists.
Oh, that's why everyone says John Sidney McCain when talking about the republican candidate .
...Seriously. If You're trying to use a guy's middle name as a reason not to vote for him there is something wrong with you.
How about people are using his middle name because it's his middle name. Anyway, even the omitting the middle name doesn't eliminate his decades-long association with known terrorists.
Oh, that's why everyone says John Sidney McCain when talking about the republican candidate .
Any facts to back up your terrorist statement?
Don't bother, she'll simply ignore you when forced to confront with facts.
The Congressional Joint Economic Committee published its fndings in November 2007 that estimated the costs of both the war in Iraq and in Afghanistan at $800 billion. There are 1,000 billions in a trillion. Do the math.
Yes, but that's 800 billion that had to be taken away from other programs who in turn had to ...borrow the funds to make up for the insufficiency caused by the allocation of war funds. Thus, when thought of in these terms--the amount of loans sought by those 'programs' who lost their funding to the war--that 800 billion figure begins to swell.
That doesn't make any sense. $800 billion is $800 billion. It doesn't matter what it was spent on. You either have the revenue to spend on it or you don't. If you don't, you borrow it. Because federal reveunes from 2001 through 2006 were not sufficiient to pay for federal expenditures during those years, the Republican controlled Congress (which also formulates and approves the annual federal budgets) authorized the Treasury Departmdent to borrow approximately $5 trillion.
Governments typically finish in the red each and every fiscal year, there's nothing abnormal about that. The question is, how much. You say it's 5 trillion. And I say when you combine the 800 billion spent for the war (+) additional 800 billion or so that must be borrowed to make up for the 800 billion taken away from 'programs' and allocated to the war (-) about a 1/2 trillion from that 5 trillion figure that is interest accrued (+) about another trillion or so used for homeland security here at home and at our bases and embassies around the world: you end up with a deficit of about 2 trillion and not 5 trillion, with the remaining 3 trillion (rightfully) used in the 'war on terror'...Point Being: Republican is the party of economists, not Democrat.
Nixon, who wasn't mentioned at all at the 2008 RNC, unless I'm mistaken. Too bad because he was the last GOP President who oversaw the cutting of some spending, unless I'm mistaken.
[quote=Frank_Nitti][quote=olivant][quote=Frank_Nitti][quote=olivant] The Congressional Joint Economic Committee published its fndings in November 2007 that estimated the costs of both the war in Iraq and in Afghanistan at $800 billion. There are 1,000 billions in a trillion. Do the math.
Yes, but that's 800 billion that had to be taken away from other programs who in turn had to ...borrow the funds to make up for the insufficiency caused by the allocation of war funds. Thus, when thought of in these terms--the amount of loans sought by those 'programs' who lost their funding to the war--that 800 billion figure begins to swell.
That doesn't make any sense. $800 billion is $800 billion. It doesn't matter what it was spent on. You either have the revenue to spend on it or you don't. If you don't, you borrow it. Because federal reveunes from 2001 through 2006 were not sufficiient to pay for federal expenditures during those years, the Republican controlled Congress (which also formulates and approves the annual federal budgets) authorized the Treasury Departmdent to borrow approximately $5 trillion.
Governments typically finish in the red each and every fiscal year, there's nothing abnormal about that. The question is, how much. You say it's 5 trillion. And I say when you combine the 800 billion spent for the war (+) additional 800 billion or so that must be borrowed to make up for the 800 billion taken away from 'programs' and allocated to the war (-) about a 1/2 trillion from that 5 trillion figure that is interest accrued (+) about another trillion or so used for homeland security here at home and at our bases and embassies around the world: you end up with a deficit of about 2 trillion and not 5 trillion, with the remaining 3 trillion (rightfully) used in the 'war on terror'...Point Being: Republican is the party of economists, not Democrat. [/quote]
Where do you get these figures? They're hugely exaggerated and wrong. Where did you get 2 trillion, or 3 trillion or 5 trillion that you cite? Why do you refer to them as deficits. Do you uinderstand what a budget deficit is? It is the annual difference between what the federal government spends and the revenue it takes in. Do you understand what the national debt is? It is the unretired debt which the US Treasury owes to those who have lent funds to the federal government. The Congress has authoriized a national debt of $10.5 trillion. When President Bush took office the national debt was about $5 trillion. From then through 2006 while the Republicans were in control of the Congress, that debt rose to almost $10 trillion. Those annual Congresses made spending decisions (such as Earmarks) that greatly exceeded anticipated revenues.
By the way, someone posted that the last budget surplus was under Nixon in '69. Not so. The federal government experienced surpluses 1998-2001. Also, interest on the national debt is estimated at about $250 billion annually. [/quote]
...Seriously. If You're trying to use a guy's middle name as a reason not to vote for him there is something wrong with you.
How about people are using his middle name because it's his middle name. Anyway, even the omitting the middle name doesn't eliminate his decades-long association with known terrorists.
Actually, that lunatic Keith Oberman initiated this association by 'middle name' thing during the primaries earlier this year...when he constantly referred to one of the Republican candidates as " Mitt 'Willard' Romney "
Apple
How come no one uses McCain's middle name. And what terrorists are you referring to Apple? G. Gordon Liddy?
I say lets examine how many women and children McCain killed in the 25 bombing missions he flew before he was shot down. If he killed one then he is a terrorist.
I say lets examine how many women and children McCain killed in the 25 bombing missions he flew before he was shot down. If he killed one then he is a terrorist.
Yay! We're finally confronting the liberal belief that American soldiers in Vietnam were, in fact, terrorists.
Let's hope we don't have to wait much longer for them to get off their saccharine kick of how our current soldiers are "heroes" too so they can get back to their jeers and spitting and Cindy Sheehan.
The Congressional Joint Economic Committee published its fndings in November 2007 that estimated the costs of both the war in Iraq and in Afghanistan at $800 billion. There are 1,000 billions in a trillion. Do the math.
Yeah, but consider the profits that Dick Cheney's buddies at Halliburton have been making from the war...even before they were caught stealing from the American taxpayer...with impunity, of course. And it doesn't matter that the only weapon of mass destruction in Iraq is Halliburton.
On Oct. 22, 2006, the Anchorage Daily News asked Palin and the other candidates, “Would you continue state funding for the proposed Knik Arm and Gravina Island bridges?”
Her response: “Yes. I would like to see Alaska’s infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now — while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist.”
Palin’s support of the earmark for the bridge was applauded by the late Lew Williams Jr., the retired Ketchikan Daily News publisher who wrote columns on the topic.
Williams wrote on Oct. 29, 2006, that Palin was the only gubernatorial candidate that year who consistently supported the Gravina Island Bridge, the Knik Arm Bridge and improvements to the Parks Highway.
It's humorous that Palin was shielded by the McCain people from appearing on Face the Nation or Meet the Press or some of the other more substantive news programs. Yet they contend she's ready to serve as president, should something happen to McCain.
Ready to be president? She's not even ready for Face the Nation.
They did arrange an interview with Charlie Gibson whose not known to ask probing, difficult questions.
That's what gets me with politicians in both parties: the hypocrisy. It's especially galling with the GOP, because they're so quick to throw their "values" in your face.
Sorry, the family is OFF LIMITS. Sarah Palin deserves all the scrutiny that she can stand, but not her children.
She is a beautiful, intelligent and aggressive woman. Good for her. If it wasn't for the fact that she supports everything I loathe, I'd really like her!
She is a beautiful, intelligent and aggressive woman. Good for her. If it wasn't for the fact that she supports everything I loathe, I'd really like her!
McCain ahead in national polls; Obama up in electoral votes
(CNN) -- Sen. John McCain has inched ahead of Sen. Barack Obama in national polls, but the Democratic candidate holds a steady lead in the most recent Electoral College estimates.
In national surveys, McCain leads by two points -- 47 to 45 percent, according to CNN's poll of polls released Monday night.
In the Electoral College standings, the most recent survey shows 243 electoral votes either safely in Obama's column or leaning his way. At this point, McCain can claim only 189.
Many of the state polls used to determine the Electoral College standings, however, were conducted before the conventions.
Monday marked the first time McCain passed Obama in CNN's poll of polls. VideoWatch how the race has tightened »
On Saturday, Obama was up by three in the poll of polls. That lead shrank to just one point Sunday, before disappearing Monday.
In the most recent survey, eight percent of respondents said they were still unsure about who they were going to vote for.
The poll of polls is an average of five surveys: CNN (September 5-7), ABC/Washington Post (September 5-7), CBS (September 5-7), Gallup (September 5-7) and Diageo/Hotline (September 5-7). The poll of polls does not have a sampling error.
The CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll released Monday shows McCain and Obama tied at 48 percent.
The poll, which was conducted Friday through Sunday, carries a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. It was based on 1,022 telephone interviews.
Republicans are hoping that if McCain can close the popular vote gap, he can also make gains in the electoral gap. The Electoral College will ultimately decide who takes over the White House.
Although polls across the country are open on one day, the election is not a national poll but a series of 51 state-level elections that decide the members of the Electoral College.
Technically, voters aren't choosing a candidate but a slate of electors who have pledged to vote for that candidate when the Electoral College meets.
With 538 electors up for grabs, the candidate with more than half -- 270 -- wins the presidency. The number of electors from each state equals the number of senators and representatives the state sends to Congress
Both candidates are turning their focus to battleground areas as they try to stack the states in their column.
According to CNN's electoral map, the states that could go either way are Colorado, Florida, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, Nevada, Ohio and Virginia.
McCain and his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, are campaigning Tuesday in Lebanon, Ohio, just 30 miles from Obama, who is in Riverside. No Republican has won the White House without winning Ohio.
Obama's running mate, Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, is campaigning in Missouri.
Both parties are putting a lot of emphasis on Missouri. For the last century, the state has voted for the winning presidential candidate in every election except one. (Missouri picked Adlai Stevenson over Dwight Eisenhower in 1956).
McCain and Palin campaigned there Monday. They're hoping the state's landscape will help them take its 11 electoral votes.
The state has the 13th oldest population in the country, and Obama has struggled with older voters.
Also, 37 percent of Missourians are evangelical Christians, according to the Pew Forum. That's substantially higher than the 26 percent nationally.
If McCain can take Missouri and tilt the toss-up states of Florida and Ohio, which also have older populations, he will pull ahead of Obama.
She is a beautiful, intelligent and aggressive woman. Good for her. If it wasn't for the fact that she supports everything I loathe, I'd really like her!
Now Ted, let me behind the wheel! Mary Jo in the back! Whoo!
And you ask dt why he's stuck in Vietnam? Probably for the same reason that you're stuck in Chappaquiddick.
As always, you're such a master of obvious sarcasm, SC. Bravo.
Incidentally, I'm not stuck in Chappaquiddick like poor Mary Jo Kopechne because fortunately I don't ride in cars with Ted Kennedy, nor do I let any of my friends accept rides from Ed either.
By Mark Murray Deputy political director NBC News updated 8 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - Republican John McCain has nearly erased Democrat Barack Obama’s national lead and turned the presidential contest into a dead heat, according to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.
In that poll, Obama holds a narrow one-point lead over McCain (47-46 percent), which is down from his three-point advantage in August (45-42 percent) and six-point edge in July (47-41 percent).
She is a beautiful, intelligent and aggressive woman. Good for her. If it wasn't for the fact that she supports everything I loathe, I'd really like her!
I loathe what "democracy" has become. Here's what I wrote a few years ago:
Originally Posted By: Longneck a few years ago
Democracy was a good experiment, too bad it’s over. Only the richest can be president and they are the most corrupt of all. I suppose all we can do is vote for our favorite special interest groups nowadays since they control Washington like puppet masters. Republican, Democrat, it’s all the same… just different people pulling the strings.
I loathe what "democracy" has become. Here's what I wrote a few years ago:
Originally Posted By: Longneck a few years ago
Democracy was a good experiment, too bad it’s over. Only the richest can be president and they are the most corrupt of all.
I would disagree. More than a few of our presidents and quite a few of our reps and senators have emerged from modest, backgrounds. In fact, it is more common today than at any time in our history that a person, coming from the lower or middle classes, can achieve success in national politics. In the past 50 years or so, Truman, Nixon, Reagan and Clinton have all emerged from humble beginnings to become president, and Obama hopes to join them.
In fact, I believe that coming from a life of privilege could be a detriment to being president. W. Bush grew up never had to worry about paying a bill in his life. It was amazing when the price of gas hit $4 a gallon, he had no idea it was that high. Nor could he fully appreciate the effect that this has on middle America.
The truth is, the president doesn't worry about "everyday" things. Do you think he goes to the market and buys milk and bread or fills up the gas tank on his bullet-proof SUV??
But I do agree with Klydon that it is no longer true that only the wealthy and/or privileged become president, and Bill Clinton definitely stands out as an example, and Senator Obama as well. So, for that matter, does Sarah Palin.
Interesting article by the usually very liberal Michael Goodwin.
The straw that stirs the drink
By Michael Goodwin, The New York Daily News
Wednesday, September 10th 2008
Common sense and its snarky cousin, conventional wisdom, hold that presidential elections are won or lost at the top of the ticket. But there's an exception to every rule and Sarah Palin might be it.
Evidence abounds that Palin is rocking the race from the No. 2 spot. Most dramatic is the 10-point lead she and John McCain hold in the Gallup/USA Today poll, which shows them at 54%, the highest number yet for either ticket.
Almost every poll taken since Palin's convention speech shows the GOP ahead or tied, a reversal from most earlier findings. Crowds at McCain-Palin rallies are larger and more enthusiastic than when McCain appeared alone.
And here's the absolute proof Palin is the straw that stirs the drink: Democrats are attacking her more than McCain.
Days after he congratulated her and called her "an admirable person" who "will add a compelling new voice to this campaign," Barack Obama Tuesday called Palin a liar. You know she's hit a nerve when the opposing party's presidential nominee goes after the other party's VP nominee in such raw terms.
Then again, Sarah Palin is not your average VP nominee. She can, as Fred Thompson put it, field-dress a moose. She is a young mother. She is pro-life. She is from a small town in a sparsely populated state. She's a former beauty queen, smart, direct and winningly funny.
And, maybe most important, the left-wing media hate her. One or all of those factors is changing key voter preferences, at least for now.
According to the Gallup tracking survey, those flocking to McCain-Palin are the middle-of-the-road independents who were evenly split. They now favor the GOP ticket over the Democrats, 52% to 37%.
It wouldn't be surprising if a backlash against Big Media's unfair treatment of Palin is partially responsible. For 18 months, Americans were fed a daily diet of civil rights peas with a lecture that a vote against Obama or Clinton was a vote against history. You were a sexist if you voted against Clinton, a racist if you voted against Obama.
Comes now a woman on the GOP side, the first ever on its national ticket, and suddenly history doesn't figure in the new liberal media narrative of 2008. More important than shattering the glass ceiling is whether Palin could juggle five kids and still be vice president, and whether McCain was selling out by picking her.
Some in the press declared her unqualified before Obama did. Some argued her teen daughter's pregnancy proved she was unfit to be a heartbeat away from the presidency.
And was it just me, or were some of those stories about Trig, her baby with Down syndrome, hinting she should have had an abortion when she learned of his disabilities? Was I wrong to detect suggestions she was so ambitious she was neglecting her kids?
Those thoughts went through my mind as I read The New York Times' front-page report on how Palin began leaking amniotic fluid on a trip to Texas, then flew home to Alaska to give birth. TheTimes cited a doctor from Massachusetts who, having never examined Palin, nonetheless offered the opinion she should have been examined before the trip home, even though Palin's own doctor gave the okay in a phone consultation.
I also found it curious The Times assigned four women, and no men, to the story, perhaps aiming to inoculate itself against charges of gender bias.
But the real bias of the left-wing media isn't race or gender or age. It's political. Are any of the four women on the story pro-life? Are any Republican? How about their editors?
Diversity comes in all forms, and the newsrooms of the broadcast networks and most broadsheet newspapers share a suffocating conformity of political affiliation. Surveys show the vast, vast majority of journalists at such places vote for liberal Democrats.
It's no wonder the coverage tilts the same way. The wonder is that the election of Sarah Palin could be the payback.
You'll be pleased to know that I've registered the [/sarcasm] tag with the U.S. Copyright office, and will receive a quarter every time someone uses it.
Originally Posted By: Obama (in reference to Palin)
"You can put lipstick on a pig. It's still a pig. You can wrap up an old fish in a piece of paper and call it change. It's still going to stink after eight years. We've had enough,"
I found this quote to be particularly ironic, since he's calling the Republican VP candidate a pig.
In response, think the following is thus appropriate:
No, Senator Obama did NOT say it in reference to Governor Palin. He said it regarding Senator McCain's rather recent portrayal of himself as a promoter of change, while his record indicates that it will be 8 more years of the same exact policies as the current administration.
Secondly, Senator McCain used the EXACT same phrase when referring to Senator Clinton's healthcare plan. I didn't notice anyone finding it offensive when a Republican used it.
No, Senator Obama did NOT say it in reference to Governor Palin. He said it regarding Senator McCain's rather recent portrayal of himself as a promoter of change, while his record indicates that it will be 8 more years of the same exact policies as the current administration.
Secondly, Senator McCain used the EXACT same phrase when referring to Senator Clinton's healthcare plan. I didn't notice anyone finding it offensive when a Republican used it.
He's referencing the fact that she described herself as a "pitbull with lipstick" upon accepting the nomination.
From the McCain camp:
Quote:
The McCain-Palin campaign called the comments "offensive and disgraceful" and demanded an apology. The Obama camp said the remark was not a dig at Mrs Palin and accused the Republicans of a "pathetic attempt to play the gender card".
Asked how anyone could be sure the comment was directed personally at Mrs Palin, a McCain campaign spokeswoman said: "She's the only one of the four - the presidential and vice presidential candidates - who wears lipstick".
The quote is taken out of context. He was NOT referring to Governor Palin when he said it. Why should he apologize for something he didn't say??
And if the Republicans find the phrase so "offensive and disgraceful", then why did Senator McCain use it to describe a healthcare plan put forth by a certain female Democrat???
It was amazing when the price of gas hit $4 a gallon, he had no idea it was that high.
I don't think any president would personally care about the gas price on streets.
It may not affect the president personally, but most presidents would be aware of the effect it would have on the well being of the economy and budgets of middle America.
The quote is taken out of context. He was NOT referring to Governor Palin when he said it. Why should he apologize for something he didn't say??
And if the Republicans find the phrase so "offensive and disgraceful", then why did Senator McCain use it to describe a healthcare plan put forth by a certain female Democrat???
So you don't find it coincidental that the comment comes so shortly - and so closely worded - to her recent comment? There is nothing there, and we're all just making a huge deal out of nothing? Really? Seriously?
The quote is taken out of context. He was NOT referring to Governor Palin when he said it. Why should he apologize for something he didn't say??
And if the Republicans find the phrase so "offensive and disgraceful", then why did Senator McCain use it to describe a healthcare plan put forth by a certain female Democrat???
I agree. In a close election race would someone, who is as intelligent as Obamaand defied odds to get where he is, call a member of the opposing ticket a pig? The phrase "lipstick on a pig" was commomn before Gov. Palin arrived.
I would expect the Republicans to try to make an issue out of this as Palin is riding a wave of popularity. I would also expect the Democrats to try to gain support if it were reversed, but the fact that Palin used the term "lipstick" in her speech and it got a laugh does not give her a monopoly on the word.
Also, the McCain camp is forbidding any journalists from getting any "on the record" statements from Palin while travelling. It's time she stands on her own and says something more than "hockey mom", "PTA" and "sold it on ebay." She has generated a lot of interest, and is more appealing than McCain on the trail. I am interested in hearing something substantive from her.
It may not affect the president personally, but most presidents would be aware of the effect it would have on the well being of the economy and budgets of middle America.
I think middle class would be seen as a huge annoyance by presidents... always complaining about things they cannot fix
The quote is taken out of context. He was NOT referring to Governor Palin when he said it. Why should he apologize for something he didn't say??
And if the Republicans find the phrase so "offensive and disgraceful", then why did Senator McCain use it to describe a healthcare plan put forth by a certain female Democrat???
So you don't find it coincidental that the comment comes so shortly - and so closely worded - to her recent comment? There is nothing there, and we're all just making a huge deal out of nothing? Really? Seriously?
Yes.
And I think you mean to comment that it's not a coincidence. If someone does find it to be coincidental, then that means it's not intentional. But, you think it was intentional. Well, if it is, so what? Are you concerned that Palin's feelings are hurt? Madonne! A Vice-presidential candidate whose feelings get hurt? Sure, she's just the one to take the reins of government!
I agree. In a close election race would someone, who is as intelligent as Obamaand defied odds to get where he is, call a member of the opposing ticket a pig? The phrase "lipstick on a pig" was commomn before Gov. Palin arrived.
I would expect the Republicans to try to make an issue out of this as Palin is riding a wave of popularity. I would also expect the Democrats to try to gain support if it were reversed, but the fact that Palin used the term "lipstick" in her speech and it got a laugh does not give her a monopoly on the word.
If Obama is so smart, perhaps he would have had the foresight to expect this, like you did?
The quote is taken out of context. He was NOT referring to Governor Palin when he said it. Why should he apologize for something he didn't say??
And if the Republicans find the phrase so "offensive and disgraceful", then why did Senator McCain use it to describe a healthcare plan put forth by a certain female Democrat???
So you don't find it coincidental that the comment comes so shortly - and so closely worded - to her recent comment? There is nothing there, and we're all just making a huge deal out of nothing? Really? Seriously?
Yes.
And I think you mean to comment that it's not a coincidence. If someone does find it to be coincidental, then that means it's not intentional. But, you think it was intentional. Well, if it is, so what? Are you concerned that Palin's feelings are hurt? Madonne! A Vice-presidential candidate whose feelings get hurt? Sure, she's just the one to take the reins of government!
More like I find it ironic that if the Republicans implied Obama was an animal, we'd have a race war on our hands.
"Let's just list this for a second. John McCain says he's about change, too. Except -- and so I guess his whole angle is, "Watch out, George Bush, except for economic policy, health-care policy, tax policy, education policy, foreign policy, and Karl Rove-style politics. We're really gonna shake things up in Washington." That's not change. That's just calling some -- the same thing, something different. But you know, you can -- you know, you can put lipstick on a pig; it's still a pig."
Well, your retort is quite an exaggeration (and I think you use ironic incorrectly). But, if the Republicans did state what you suggest about Obama, then, given the history of pejorative epithets that have been directed at black Americans in this country, Senator Obama would have legitimate grounds to take offense.
Nevertheless, while one may choose to engage in self-deprecation (such as Governor Palin's lipstick statement), one must keep in mind the legal rule that the defense cannot profit from its own mistakes. By her statement Palin opened up that line of jab.
Are women in the public arena to be protected, to be cuddled? If so, how will Palin fare if she does become Vice-president (or President) when she is faced with national or international recrimination?
The quote is taken out of context. He was NOT referring to Governor Palin when he said it. Why should he apologize for something he didn't say??
And if the Republicans find the phrase so "offensive and disgraceful", then why did Senator McCain use it to describe a healthcare plan put forth by a certain female Democrat???
So you don't find it coincidental that the comment comes so shortly - and so closely worded - to her recent comment? There is nothing there, and we're all just making a huge deal out of nothing? Really? Seriously?
As Klydon stated, yes it is a "coincidence", something that happens by chance. And if you read the Senator's entire comment, rather than taking it out of context, you will see how ridiculous it is that is being touted as an insult aimed at Governor Palin.
And you still haven't replied to my original question. If it is SO offensive, if the phrase "lipstick on a pig" is a disgraceful and offensive remark because it was meant to insult a female candidate, then WHY wasn't it "offensive and disgraceful" when Senator McCain used it???
Originally Posted By: Obama (in reference to Palin)
"You can put lipstick on a pig. It's still a pig. You can wrap up an old fish in a piece of paper and call it change. It's still going to stink after eight years. We've had enough,"
I found this quote to be particularly ironic, since he's calling the Republican VP candidate a pig.
In response, think the following is thus appropriate:
[picture of a gorilla]
It's not appropriate. You've been called on that crap already, but insist on choosing to ignore the Board's management's warnings. Consider this a FINAL WARNING. Cut the shit out!
I assure you this has no bearing on the politics at hand here. I don't give two shits if you believe that, or not, but that's the way it is.
And you still haven't replied to my original question. If it is SO offensive, if the phrase "lipstick on a pig" is a disgraceful and offensive remark because it was meant to insult a female candidate, then WHY wasn't it "offensive and disgraceful" when Senator McCain used it???
Why are you unable to answer this direct question, despite the fact that you have been asked it three times??
And you still haven't replied to my original question. If it is SO offensive, if the phrase "lipstick on a pig" is a disgraceful and offensive remark because it was meant to insult a female candidate, then WHY wasn't it "offensive and disgraceful" when Senator McCain used it???
Why are you unable to answer this direct question, despite the fact that you have been asked it three times??
And you still haven't replied to my original question. If it is SO offensive, if the phrase "lipstick on a pig" is a disgraceful and offensive remark because it was meant to insult a female candidate, then WHY wasn't it "offensive and disgraceful" when Senator McCain used it???
Why are you unable to answer this direct question, despite the fact that you have been asked it three times??
Oh, I thought it was perhaps because there WAS no answer. It would make absolutely no sense for Senator McCain to use it and it's not offensive, and yet if Senator Obama uses it, it DOES become offensive. That would be two-faced, and we certainly wouldn't expect THAT.
Just like Governor Palin still insists on saying that she was opposed to pork barrel spending like the Alaskan "bridge to nowhere", despite the fact that it's been proven that she was actually quite in favor of it in the beginning.
Oh, I thought it was perhaps because there WAS no answer. It would make absolutely no sense for Senator McCain to use it and it's not offensive, and yet if Senator Obama uses it, it DOES become offensive. That would be two-faced, and we certainly wouldn't expect THAT.
I agree. In a close election race would someone, who is as intelligent as Obamaand defied odds to get where he is, call a member of the opposing ticket a pig? The phrase "lipstick on a pig" was commomn before Gov. Palin arrived.
I would expect the Republicans to try to make an issue out of this as Palin is riding a wave of popularity. I would also expect the Democrats to try to gain support if it were reversed, but the fact that Palin used the term "lipstick" in her speech and it got a laugh does not give her a monopoly on the word.
If Obama is so smart, perhaps he would have had the foresight to expect this, like you did?
Sure. He used a metaphor to make a point, and what will the Republicans get out of their protestations?
Probably a day or two of chest thumping. It's net value is of no consequence.
Anyone heard some of the recent 'classic' soundbites of Joe Biden?
First...he introduced a colleague who is confined to a wheelchair and told him to 'stand up'.
Ok, I'll cut him some slack for that as he immediately realized and corrected the mistake and probably felt terrible about it.
Next...he is heard actually stating that Hillary Clinton would have been a better choice than him as VP nominee. Whether he's right or not isn't the point...you just don't say something like that about your own ticket, it was a slap in the face to his running mate and NOT good for the campaign.
What annoys me just a bit about that remark is that while unlikely, this could be the hintings of the Dems finding a way for Biden to withdraw from the ticket, thereby allowing Obama a second chance to choose Hillary.
Not possible? I don't know if the nominating process is irreversible, BUT...don't put it past them...the Democrats are infamous for shamelessly finding ways to ignore the rules in order to fit their own needs.
Originally Posted By: Obama (in reference to Palin)
"You can put lipstick on a pig. It's still a pig. You can wrap up an old fish in a piece of paper and call it change. It's still going to stink after eight years. We've had enough,"
I found this quote to be particularly ironic, since he's calling the Republican VP candidate a pig.
In response, think the following is thus appropriate:
[picture of a gorilla]
It's not appropriate. You've been called on that crap already, but insist on choosing to ignore the Board's management's warnings. Consider this a FINAL WARNING. Cut the shit out!
I assure you this has no bearing on the politics at hand here. I don't give two shits if you believe that, or not, but that's the way it is.
I think that the candidates, the parties, the supporters, and even the supporters right here on these boards should stick to the real issues and stop the idiotic name calling and arrogant remarks.
In all this media created hoopla many leaders from BOTH parites seem to have forgotton that there are real serious issues at hand in this world like Wars, Starvation, Housing problems, Disasters, High Oil Prices, A hurting economy, etc.
And instead of the heads of the parties on down to the average voters talking, debating and offering possible resolutions to these kinds of problems, they seem to keep getting caught up in these ridiculous labeling, name calling and he said this about me and she said that about him kind of debates.
[quote=Obama (in reference to Palin)]"You can put lipstick on a pig. It's still a pig. You can wrap up an old fish in a piece of paper and call it change. It's still going to stink after eight years. We've had enough,"
I found this quote to be particularly ironic, since he's calling the Republican VP candidate a pig.
In response, think the following is thus appropriate:
[picture of a gorilla]
It's not appropriate. You've been called on that crap already, but insist on choosing to ignore the Board's management's warnings. Consider this a FINAL WARNING. Cut the shit out!
I assure you this has no bearing on the politics at hand here. I don't give two shits if you believe that, or not, but that's the way it is.
I think that the candidates, the parties, the supporters, and even the supporters right here on these boards should stick to the real issues and stop the idiotic name calling and arrogant remarks.
In all this media created hoopla many leaders from BOTH parites seem to have forgotton that there are real serious issues at hand in this world like Wars, Starvation, Housing problems, Disasters, High Oil Prices, A hurting economy, etc.
And instead of the heads of the parties on down to the average voters talking, debating and offering possible resolutions to these kinds of problems, they seem to keep getting caught up in these ridiculous labeling, name calling and he said this about me and she said that about him kind of debates.
[/quote]
Remember that McCain campaign spokesman said that the election wasn't about the issues?
...Remember that McCain campaign spokesman said that the election wasn't about the issues? Unfortunately, he may be right.
When key Democrats begin making remarks like this one (including the laughable spin afterwards) then he sure is right...!!
From Associated Press:
SC Dem Chief Says Sorry For Palin-Abortion Comment
S Carolina's Dem Party chairwoman said Wednesday that Republican VP nominee Sarah Palin's top qualification seems to be not having had an abortion. She later apologized.
In an interview posted on the political Web site Politico, Chairwoman Carol Fowler said Republican John McCain picked a running mate "whose primary qualification seems to be that she hasn't had an abortion."
Fowler later apologized, saying she made the statement during an interview about single-issue voters.
"I personally admire and respect the difficult choices that women make everyday, and I apologize to anyone who finds my comment offensive," Fowler said in a statement.
"I clumsily was making a point about people in SC who may vote based on a single issue. Whether it's the environment, the economy, the war or a woman's right to choose, there are people who will cast their vote based on a single issue," she continued. "That was the only point I was attempting to make."
Palin opposes abortion, including in cases of rape or incest, and has lived out her convictions by bearing son Trig in April, knowing he had Down syndrome.
A top McCain surrogate, SC Sen. Lindsey Graham, said it was an outrage to dismiss Palin's record and life with that kind of remark.
"I think it has more to do with the fact our Democratic colleagues and opponents are in a meltdown mode over Gov. Palin," Graham said. He said there would be a "firestorm of monumental proportion" if a Republican had said the same thing about a female Democrat running for vice president, and called on Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama to repudiate Fowler's remark.
"If he doesn't speak to this and condemn this statement, it will speak volumes about where we're at on the Democratic side," Graham said.
Obama spokesman Nick Shapiro said Fowler was not speaking for the campaign, "just as John McCain has said state parties don't speak for him."
"But obviously this does not reflect our view," Shapiro said.
A fellow Democrat, Rep. John Spratt of SC, also distanced himself from Fowler's comment.
"Her statement about Gov. Palin is outrageous and wrong, because Sarah Palin's qualifications are quite evident," the House Budget Committee chairman said in a statement. "She is the mother of five children who has been elected Mayor of her town and Gov. of her state, and she has shown herself to be an effective public speaker and an energetic campaigner. Sen. Obama has said that 'families are off-limits, and people's children are especially off-limits.' I could not agree more."
I say abortions for all. I mean, it would certainly help decrease the number of stupid people, most of them in Red states, from being able to keep the pseudo aristocracy in power.
DJ DJ...What have I ever done to make you treat me so disrespectfully? Had you come to me in friendship, then this scum that ruined your mind would be suffering this very day.
They aren't scum. You conservatives honestly make me sick. Not only are you people totally intolerant, but you feel the need to bash people for their diversity. It's absolutely putrid and I pray to Allah that Obama will win this election and eliminate the infidels from our government and country!
Pfft, you make me laugh. Considering how many innocent people are on death row and how many of our soldiers are off fighting in an illegal war and killing innocent Arabs, you're the real baby killers. Don't be intolerant of my culture.
Pfft, you make me laugh. Considering how many innocent people are on death row and how many of our soldiers are off fighting in an illegal war and killing innocent Arabs, you're the real baby killers. Don't be intolerant of my culture.
Me a baby killer? You are way off big boy. You vote for Obama and you and the other liberals will be killing innocent babies.
Pfft, you make me laugh. Considering how many innocent people are on death row and how many of our soldiers are off fighting in an illegal war and killing innocent Arabs, you're the real baby killers. Don't be intolerant of my culture.
Me a baby killer? You are way off big boy. You vote for Obama and you and the other liberals will be killing innocent babies.
I'm confused...explain to me why you think this is the case? Are you telling me that you think it's up to you to deny women the right of choice? You damn moralist conservatives make me sick.
Sadly, what had once been a good thread has gone to the crapper now.
Amen, SC. And IMHO in large part it has been put there by one particular poster who has suddenly "switched sides" and become even snarkier. Its time for a suspension or banishment.
If you haven't had time to watch the Republican National Convention, it is encapsulated in 60 seconds. My favorite is the Giuliani speech. (Okay, I'm sure the same can be done for the Democrats. ;))
And IMHO in large part it has been put there by one particular poster who has suddenly "switched sides" and become even snarkier. Its time for a suspension or banishment.
Why would you ban me when you've finally vanquished me, DT? Honestly, I am a liberal now, it's dead serious. I even argued that America was a terrorist nation in my class tonight. So can I get my ACLU card now?
Incidentally, I'm really excited for Obama's speech tonight. I'm having some friends of mine come over to watch.
And IMHO in large part it has been put there by one particular poster who has suddenly "switched sides" and become even snarkier. Its time for a suspension or banishment.
Why would you ban me when you've finally vanquished me, DT? Honestly, I am a liberal now, it's dead serious. I even argued that America was a terrorist nation in my class tonight. So can I get my ACLU card now?
Incidentally, I'm really excited for Obama's speech tonight. I'm having some friends of mine come over to watch.
Dude, fuck off.
If you're gonna be sarcastic, be funny about it at least.
And IMHO in large part it has been put there by one particular poster who has suddenly "switched sides" and become even snarkier. Its time for a suspension or banishment.
Why would you ban me when you've finally vanquished me, DT? Honestly, I am a liberal now, it's dead serious. I even argued that America was a terrorist nation in my class tonight. So can I get my ACLU card now?
Incidentally, I'm really excited for Obama's speech tonight. I'm having some friends of mine come over to watch.
Dude, fuck off.
If you're gonna be sarcastic, be funny about it at least.
Anyone catch Palin's first interview with Charles Gibson? Wow. Just wow. Talk about a deer in the headlights. She can't answer one question with a straight answer.
Anyone catch Palin's first interview with Charles Gibson? Wow. Just wow. Talk about a deer in the headlights. She can't answer one question with a straight answer.
We now know why the McCain camp keeps her on a short leash.
That was my original thought on McCain's picking her as his v.p. running mate - she doesn't have enough experience in handling the press, and the final weeks of the campaign is not the time to train her.
I prefer to discuss ISSUES in this campaign, and not play little games, or respond to those who do. I would suggest those that are truly interested in politics do the same.
JL, I didn't see the interview. I know that the McCain camp has limited her exposure to question, which begs the question, If she's not ready for a tough interview, how can she be one heartbeat away from the presidency??
I did see the McCain ad which declares that Obama funded sex education for kindergarten children. That his legislation funded a program that teaches children about sex before they can read.
The actual program teaches children about stranger danger and the difference between a "good touch" and a "bad touch".
The interview consisted of Palin rattling off memorized talking points, not knowing what the Bush Doctrine is, and trying to bluff her way through questions about it, saying Israel should be allowed to do "whatever it wants," and arguing the cae for the U.S. to go to war with Russia. Earlier in the day she said Saddam Hussein took part in the planning of the Iraq war.
So what is the media doing? Navel gazing about whether or not Charlie Gibson was too tough on her.
The interview consisted of Palin rattling off memorized talking points, not knowing what the Bush Doctrine is, and trying to bluff her way through questions about it, saying Israel should be allowed to do "whatever it wants," and arguing the cae for the U.S. to go to war with Russia. Earlier in the day she said Saddam Hussein took part in the planning of the Iraq war.
That's exactly what I thought. When asked if she agreed with the Bush Doctrine and she paused and said, "In what respect, Charlie?", I actually felt uncomfortable for her as she had no idea what it was. Her reply was a vague, rambling, general hodgepodge of platitudes and phrases, designed to mask her ignorance. I expected her to be more prepared and more direct.
I'm sure there is some internal fingerpointing within the McCain camp as to whose job it was to instruct her on this point.
I heard someone today defending her and saying that Gibson's question was an unfair "gotcha" question, like Bush 8 years ago being ambushed with questions about the names of world leaders. But the Bush Doctrine has been a cornerstone of our foreign policy since before the war, and knowledge of this is a more important foreign policy credential than being able to see a remote part of Russia from a remote island off the coast of Alaska.
I prefer to discuss ISSUES in this campaign, and not play little games, or respond to those who do. I would suggest those that are truly interested in politics do the same.
Okay, I'll stick with it then.
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
I did see the McCain ad which declares that Obama funded sex education for kindergarten children. That his legislation funded a program that teaches children about sex before they can read.
The actual program teaches children about stranger danger and the difference between a "good touch" and a "bad touch".
Yeah, that's like the same thing.
Interestingly, regarding Obama's education record, the schools in Obama's area in Chicago are some of the poorest in the nation (Read, for example, Kozol's Savage Inequalities) so I'm always intrigued to hear his position on education issues.
Considering the absenteeism in urban schools, I'm wondering whether anyone will be there to hear about this touching.
Well, since my brother taught in some of the poorest schools in the nation for over 35 years, I know that the rate of absenteeism that you are referring to tends to grow as the children get older. It would not relate as much to children of kindergarten age. Secondly, that has nothing to do with the fact that the McCain camp completely distorted the program that the funding was used for. If the McCain camp thought that the money could have been better used for something else rather than a program that taught young children about the potential dangers of pedophiles, then that's what the ad should have said. It should not have said that the legislation funded a program about sex education, because that's a complete and total lie.
And, lastly, I'm still curious as to why the phrase "lipstick on a pig" was "offensive and disgraceful" when it was used by Obama to describe McCain's economic policies, but not "offensive and disgraceful" when McCain used it to describe Clinton's healthcare plan.
And, lastly, I'm still curious as to why the phrase "lipstick on a pig" was "offensive and disgraceful" when it was used by Obama to describe McCain's economic policies, but not "offensive and disgraceful" when McCain used it to describe Clinton's healthcare plan.
Suffice it to say if they lie like this to get elected think hw much they'll lie if they are elected.
The interview consisted of Palin rattling off memorized talking points, not knowing what the Bush Doctrine is, and trying to bluff her way through questions about it....
When asked if she agreed with the Bush Doctrine and she paused and said, "In what respect, Charlie?", I actually felt uncomfortable for her as she had no idea what it was. Her reply was a vague, rambling, general hodgepodge of platitudes and phrases, designed to mask her ignorance. I expected her to be more prepared and more direct.
She really looked bad on that issue.
In all fairness to her, though, I didn't hold it against her about her vagueness in answering if we (the U.S.) could cross Afghanistan's borders to pursue terrorists. I think she gave a politician's answer of "vagueness" and that same type of response could be expected from the Democrats as well.
She didn't appear comfortable and giver her "appearance" at other functions (when she had McCain at her side), I found that a little troubling.
By nominating her as a vp candidate now is like bringing up a Class A minor league pitcher to pitch in the World Series. She's just not prepared and her inexperience is showing.
In all fairness to her, though, I didn't hold it against her about her vagueness in answering if we (the U.S.) could cross Afghanistan's borders to pursue terrorists. I think she gave a politician's answer of "vagueness" and that same type of response could be expected from the Democrats as well.
She didn't appear comfortable and giver her "appearance" at other functions (when she had McCain at her side), I found that a little troubling.
By nominating her as a vp candidate now is like bringing up a Class A minor league pitcher to pitch in the World Series. She's just not prepared and her inexperience is showing.
Agreed, SC. How do you account for what appears to be her turning around the MCain campaign?
I read a letter to the editor of my local paper today. It said that Governor Palin is the same old, same old with a younger and prettier exterior. I can't say that I disagree. However, people are influenced by appearances, DT, so I think that has a lot to do with it. She nailed that speech at the convention, and I think many people were impressed by her. That would also have a lot to do with it.
In all fairness to her, though, I didn't hold it against her about her vagueness in answering if we (the U.S.) could cross Afghanistan's borders to pursue terrorists. I think she gave a politician's answer of "vagueness" and that same type of response could be expected from the Democrats as well.
She didn't appear comfortable and giver her "appearance" at other functions (when she had McCain at her side), I found that a little troubling.
By nominating her as a vp candidate now is like bringing up a Class A minor league pitcher to pitch in the World Series. She's just not prepared and her inexperience is showing.
Agreed, SC. How do you account for what appears to be her turning around the MCain campaign?
Hell, I'll say it. The people who will be swayed are the "fringe" white voters who were just looking for an excuse not to vote for a black man.
There, I said it. You don't have to agree with it, but that's how I feel. There is more than a little something to the "Bradley Effect." How else do you explain Obama leading handily in both the California and Massacheusetts polls on Primary Day, then losing BOTH? It's the fringe, phony, white voters, who tell the pollsters, "Yay . . goodie for him . . . he's got my vote," until it's actually time to get in the voting booth. Then they look for an excuse.
I've been on the Obama train since the beginning, as everyone here knows. But I'm not delusional. This is going to be a VERY close election. And a very tough one for Obama to pull out.
How do you account for what appears to be her turning around the MCain campaign?
Post convention reactions always make changes in the polls (whether good or bad).
Palin is a master (mistress?) of double talk when she doesn't have a good answer. She'll revert back to whatever SHE wants to talk about and I'm sure her supporters thought she did well in the ABC interviews (saying that she spoke about her platforms, never mind that she didn't answer the questions).
I think her choice as running mate was a purely cosmetic one (that apparently went over well). Once she starts speaking on her own she'll start bringing down the "approval ratings" and the advantage of a surprise pick will disappear.
Well, since my brother taught in some of the poorest schools in the nation for over 35 years, I know that the rate of absenteeism that you are referring to tends to grow as the children get older. It would not relate as much to children of kindergarten age.
It's actually quite bad in Chicago. Do kids need books and safe classrooms or to fear Ronald McDonald?
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
And, lastly, I'm still curious as to why the phrase "lipstick on a pig" was "offensive and disgraceful" when it was used by Obama to describe McCain's economic policies, but not "offensive and disgraceful" when McCain used it to describe Clinton's healthcare plan.
I told you, I'm a democrat. I'm not physically able to answer a direct question with a faithful response.
In all fairness to her, though, I didn't hold it against her about her vagueness in answering if we (the U.S.) could cross Afghanistan's borders to pursue terrorists. I think she gave a politician's answer of "vagueness" and that same type of response could be expected from the Democrats as well.
She didn't appear comfortable and giver her "appearance" at other functions (when she had McCain at her side), I found that a little troubling.
By nominating her as a vp candidate now is like bringing up a Class A minor league pitcher to pitch in the World Series. She's just not prepared and her inexperience is showing.
Agreed, SC. How do you account for what appears to be her turning around the MCain campaign?
Hell, I'll say it. The people who will be swayed are the "fringe" white voters who were just looking for an excuse not to vote for a black man.
There, I said it. You don't have to agree with it, but that's how I feel. There is more than a little something to the "Bradley Effect." How else do you explain Obama leading handily in both the California and Massacheusetts polls on Primary Day, then losing BOTH? It's the fringe, phony, white voters, who tell the pollsters, "Yay . . goodie for him . . . he's got my vote," until it's actually time to get in the voting booth. Then they look for an excuse.
I've been on the Obama train since the beginning, as everyone here knows. But I'm not delusional. This is going to be a VERY close election. And a very tough one for Obama to pull out.
Why don't you stop this shit already instead of showing your ignorance? It's becoming quite tiring.
I'm confused. I basically said the exact same thing awhile ago - that I'm not sure that people will vote for a black candidate when it comes right down to it - and you called me a racist. So what's different?
I'm confused. I basically said the exact same thing awhile ago - that I'm not sure that people will vote for a black candidate when it comes right down to it - and you called me a racist. So what's different?
The difference doesn't come from your statement. You were labelled a racist for the incredibly poor taste you showed in posting pictures of gorillas and numerous references to the Obamas as Aunt Jemima, etc. You chose to make a personal statement against the race of the family, not a campaign issue as pizzaboy pointed out.
I think her choice as running mate was a purely cosmetic one (that apparently went over well). Once she starts speaking on her own she'll start bringing down the "approval ratings" and the advantage of a surprise pick will disappear.
I suspect you are correct about her giving the campaign a big bounce. I'm tracking a daily electoral vote map, and for the first time today McCain has 270. Obama has been as high as 300+. So Obama's definitely slippin.
You may want to rethink calling the choice "cosmetic," what with all this lipstick stuff going around.
And, lastly, I'm still curious as to why the phrase "lipstick on a pig" was "offensive and disgraceful" when it was used by Obama to describe McCain's economic policies, but not "offensive and disgraceful" when McCain used it to describe Clinton's healthcare plan.
It is very easy, no real problem ...when McCain said it, he clearly mentioned that he was talking about Clinton's healthcare plan being the pig with the lipstick. Obama left it so open that he sounded like he was talking about Palin herself. So some people are useing it as ammo.
Why don't you stop this shit already instead of showing your ignorance? It's becoming quite tiring.
You both need to move on!
Adults only in the Campaign sandbox please!
It is getting harder and harder to listen to all the bullshit being thrown around this tread with you two picking each other apart-
After all, there are already enough people who don't know "crap" trying to tell other people who don't know "crap" how much they do know about the "crap" being thrown around here!
I did see the McCain ad which declares that Obama funded sex education for kindergarten children. That his legislation funded a program that teaches children about sex before they can read.
The actual program teaches children about stranger danger and the difference between a "good touch" and a "bad touch".
Yeah, that's like the same thing.
The ad is so ridiculous, even the talking heads on Fox News were questioning it. It is also being made fun of on morning talk radio.
JL, I didn't see the interview. I know that the McCain camp has limited her exposure to question, which begs the question, If she's not ready for a tough interview, how can she be one heartbeat away from the presidency??
EXCERPTS: Charlie Gibson Interviews Sarah Palin Republican VP Candidate Speaks with ABC News' Charlie Gibson in Exclusive Interview
Sept. 11, 2008—
The following excerpts are from the ABC News exclusive interview with Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin in Fairbanks, Alaska, conducted by "World News" anchor Charlie Gibson on September 11, 2008
Watch Gibson's exclusive interviews with Palin tonight on "World News" at 6:30 p.m. ET, a special-edition of "20/20," at 10 p.m. ET, and "Nightline" at 11:35 p.m. ET
Sarah Palin on Experience:
GIBSON: Governor, let me start by asking you a question that I asked John McCain about you, and it is really the central question. Can you look the country in the eye and say "I have the experience and I have the ability to be not just vice president, but perhaps president of the United States of America?"
PALIN: I do, Charlie, and on January 20, when John McCain and I are sworn in, if we are so privileged to be elected to serve this country, will be ready. I'm ready.
GIBSON: And you didn't say to yourself, "Am I experienced enough? Am I ready? Do I know enough about international affairs? Do I -- will I feel comfortable enough on the national stage to do this?"
PALIN: I didn't hesitate, no.
GIBSON: Didn't that take some hubris?
PALIN: I -- I answered him yes because I have the confidence in that readiness and knowing that you can't blink, you have to be wired in a way of being so committed to the mission, the mission that we're on, reform of this country and victory in the war, you can't blink.
So I didn't blink then even when asked to run as his running mate.
GIBSON: But this is not just reforming a government. This is also running a government on the huge international stage in a very dangerous world. When I asked John McCain about your national security credentials, he cited the fact that you have commanded the Alaskan National Guard and that Alaska is close to Russia. Are those sufficient credentials?
PALIN: But it is about reform of government and it's about putting government back on the side of the people, and that has much to do with foreign policy and national security issues Let me speak specifically about a credential that I do bring to this table, Charlie, and that's with the energy independence that I've been working on for these years as the governor of this state that produces nearly 20 percent of the U.S. domestic supply of energy, that I worked on as chairman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, overseeing the oil and gas development in our state to produce more for the United States.
GIBSON: I know. I'm just saying that national security is a whole lot more than energy.
PALIN: It is, but I want you to not lose sight of the fact that energy is a foundation of national security. It's that important. It's that significant.
GIBSON: Did you ever travel outside the country prior to your trip to Kuwait and Germany last year?
PALIN: Canada, Mexico, and then, yes, that trip, that was the trip of a lifetime to visit our troops in Kuwait and stop and visit our injured soldiers in Germany. That was the trip of a lifetime and it changed my life.
GIBSON: Have you ever met a foreign head of state?
PALIN: There in the state of Alaska, our international trade activities bring in many leaders of other countries.
GIBSON: And all governors deal with trade delegations.
PALIN: Right.
GIBSON: Who act at the behest of their governments.
PALIN: Right, right.
GIBSON: I'm talking about somebody who's a head of state, who can negotiate for that country. Ever met one?
PALIN: I have not and I think if you go back in history and if you ask that question of many vice presidents, they may have the same answer that I just gave you. But, Charlie, again, we've got to remember what the desire is in this nation at this time. It is for no more politics as usual and somebody's big, fat resume maybe that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment, where, yes, they've had opportunities to meet heads of state ... these last couple of weeks ... it has been overwhelming to me that confirmation of the message that Americans are getting sick and tired of that self-dealing and kind of that closed door, good old boy network that has been the Washington elite.
Sarah Palin on God:
GIBSON: You said recently, in your old church, "Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God." Are we fighting a holy war?
PALIN: You know, I don't know if that was my exact quote.
GIBSON: Exact words.
PALIN: But the reference there is a repeat of Abraham Lincoln's words when he said -- first, he suggested never presume to know what God's will is, and I would never presume to know God's will or to speak God's words.
But what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that's a repeat in my comments, was let us not pray that God is on our side in a war or any other time, but let us pray that we are on God's side.
That's what that comment was all about, Charlie. And I do believe, though, that this war against extreme Islamic terrorists is the right thing. It's an unfortunate thing, because war is hell and I hate war, and, Charlie, today is the day that I send my first born, my son, my teenage son overseas with his Stryker brigade, 4,000 other wonderful American men and women, to fight for our country, for democracy, for our freedoms.
Charlie, those are freedoms that too many of us just take for granted. I hate war and I want to see war ended. We end war when we see victory, and we do see victory in sight in Iraq.
GIBSON: I take your point about Lincoln's words, but you went on and said, "There is a plan and it is God's plan."
PALIN: I believe that there is a plan for this world and that plan for this world is for good. I believe that there is great hope and great potential for every country to be able to live and be protected with inalienable rights that I believe are God-given, Charlie, and I believe that those are the rights to life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
That, in my world view, is a grand -- the grand plan.
GIBSON: But then are you sending your son on a task that is from God?
PALIN: I don't know if the task is from God, Charlie. What I know is that my son has made a decision. I am so proud of his independent and strong decision he has made, what he decided to do and serving for the right reasons and serving something greater than himself and not choosing a real easy path where he could be more comfortable and certainly safer.
Sarah Palin on National Security:
GIBSON: Let me ask you about some specific national security situations.
PALIN: Sure.
GIBSON: Let's start, because we are near Russia, let's start with Russia and Georgia.
The administration has said we've got to maintain the territorial integrity of Georgia. Do you believe the United States should try to restore Georgian sovereignty over South Ossetia and Abkhazia?
PALIN: First off, we're going to continue good relations with Saakashvili there. I was able to speak with him the other day and giving him my commitment, as John McCain's running mate, that we will be committed to Georgia. And we've got to keep an eye on Russia. For Russia to have exerted such pressure in terms of invading a smaller democratic country, unprovoked, is unacceptable and we have to keep...
GIBSON: You believe unprovoked.
PALIN: I do believe unprovoked and we have got to keep our eyes on Russia, under the leadership there. I think it was unfortunate. That manifestation that we saw with that invasion of Georgia shows us some steps backwards that Russia has recently taken away from the race toward a more democratic nation with democratic ideals.That's why we have to keep an eye on Russia.
And, Charlie, you're in Alaska. We have that very narrow maritime border between the United States, and the 49th state, Alaska, and Russia. They are our next door neighbors.We need to have a good relationship with them. They're very, very important to us and they are our next door neighbor.
GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?
PALIN: They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.
GIBSON: What insight does that give you into what they're doing in Georgia?
PALIN: Well, I'm giving you that perspective of how small our world is and how important it is that we work with our allies to keep good relation with all of these countries, especially Russia. We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it's in their benefit, also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along.
Sarah Palin on Russia:
We cannot repeat the Cold War. We are thankful that, under Reagan, we won the Cold War, without a shot fired, also. We've learned lessons from that in our relationship with Russia, previously the Soviet Union.
We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it's in their benefit, also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along.
GIBSON: Would you favor putting Georgia and Ukraine in NATO?
PALIN: Ukraine, definitely, yes. Yes, and Georgia.
GIBSON: Because Putin has said he would not tolerate NATO incursion into the Caucasus.
PALIN: Well, you know, the Rose Revolution, the Orange Revolution, those actions have showed us that those democratic nations, I believe, deserve to be in NATO.
Putin thinks otherwise. Obviously, he thinks otherwise, but...
GIBSON: And under the NATO treaty, wouldn't we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?
PALIN: Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help.
But NATO, I think, should include Ukraine, definitely, at this point and I think that we need to -- especially with new leadership coming in on January 20, being sworn on, on either ticket, we have got to make sure that we strengthen our allies, our ties with each one of those NATO members.
We have got to make sure that that is the group that can be counted upon to defend one another in a very dangerous world today.
GIBSON: And you think it would be worth it to the United States, Georgia is worth it to the United States to go to war if Russia were to invade.
PALIN: What I think is that smaller democratic countries that are invaded by a larger power is something for us to be vigilant against. We have got to be cognizant of what the consequences are if a larger power is able to take over smaller democratic countries.
And we have got to be vigilant. We have got to show the support, in this case, for Georgia. The support that we can show is economic sanctions perhaps against Russia, if this is what it leads to.
It doesn't have to lead to war and it doesn't have to lead, as I said, to a Cold War, but economic sanctions, diplomatic pressure, again, counting on our allies to help us do that in this mission of keeping our eye on Russia and Putin and some of his desire to control and to control much more than smaller democratic countries.
His mission, if it is to control energy supplies, also, coming from and through Russia, that's a dangerous position for our world to be in, if we were to allow that to happen.
Sarah Palin on Iran and Israel:
GIBSON: Let me turn to Iran. Do you consider a nuclear Iran to be an existential threat to Israel?
PALIN: I believe that under the leadership of Ahmadinejad, nuclear weapons in the hands of his government are extremely dangerous to everyone on this globe, yes.
GIBSON: So what should we do about a nuclear Iran? John McCain said the only thing worse than a war with Iran would be a nuclear Iran. John Abizaid said we may have to live with a nuclear Iran. Who's right?
PALIN: No, no. I agree with John McCain that nuclear weapons in the hands of those who would seek to destroy our allies, in this case, we're talking about Israel, we're talking about Ahmadinejad's comment about Israel being the "stinking corpse, should be wiped off the face of the earth," that's atrocious. That's unacceptable.
GIBSON: So what do you do about a nuclear Iran?
PALIN: We have got to make sure that these weapons of mass destruction, that nuclear weapons are not given to those hands of Ahmadinejad, not that he would use them, but that he would allow terrorists to be able to use them. So we have got to put the pressure on Iran and we have got to count on our allies to help us, diplomatic pressure.
GIBSON: But, Governor, we've threatened greater sanctions against Iran for a long time. It hasn't done any good. It hasn't stemmed their nuclear program.
PALIN: We need to pursue those and we need to implement those. We cannot back off. We cannot just concede that, oh, gee, maybe they're going to have nuclear weapons, what can we do about it. No way, not Americans. We do not have to stand for that.
GIBSON: What if Israel decided it felt threatened and needed to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities?
PALIN: Well, first, we are friends with Israel and I don't think that we should second guess the measures that Israel has to take to defend themselves and for their security.
GIBSON: So if we wouldn't second guess it and they decided they needed to do it because Iran was an existential threat, we would cooperative or agree with that.
PALIN: I don't think we can second guess what Israel has to do to secure its nation.
GIBSON: So if it felt necessary, if it felt the need to defend itself by taking out Iranian nuclear facilities, that would be all right.
PALIN: We cannot second guess the steps that Israel has to take to defend itself.
Sarah Palin on 'the Bush Doctrine':
GIBSON: We talk on the anniversary of 9/11. Why do you think those hijackers attacked? Why did they want to hurt us?
PALIN: You know, there is a very small percentage of Islamic believers who are extreme and they are violent and they do not believe in American ideals, and they attacked us and now we are at a point here seven years later, on the anniversary, in this post-9/11 world, where we're able to commit to never again. They see that the only option for them is to become a suicide bomber, to get caught up in this evil, in this terror. They need to be provided the hope that all Americans have instilled in us, because we're a democratic, we are a free, and we are a free-thinking society.
GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?
PALIN: In what respect, Charlie?
GIBSON: The Bush -- well, what do you -- what do you interpret it to be?
PALIN: His world view.
GIBSON: No, the Bush doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq war.
PALIN: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made. And with new leadership, and that's the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better.
GIBSON: The Bush doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with that?
PALIN: I agree that a president's job, when they swear in their oath to uphold our Constitution, their top priority is to defend the United States of America.
I know that John McCain will do that and I, as his vice president, families we are blessed with that vote of the American people and are elected to serve and are sworn in on January 20, that will be our top priority is to defend the American people.
GIBSON: Do we have a right to anticipatory self-defense? Do we have a right to make a preemptive strike again another country if we feel that country might strike us?
PALIN: Charlie, if there is legitimate and enough intelligence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country. In fact, the president has the obligation, the duty to defend.
GIBSON: Do we have the right to be making cross-border attacks into Pakistan from Afghanistan, with or without the approval of the Pakistani government?
PALIN: Now, as for our right to invade, we're going to work with these countries, building new relationships, working with existing allies, but forging new, also, in order to, Charlie, get to a point in this world where war is not going to be a first option. In fact, war has got to be, a military strike, a last option.
GIBSON: But, Governor, I'm asking you: We have the right, in your mind, to go across the border with or without the approval of the Pakistani government.
PALIN: In order to stop Islamic extremists, those terrorists who would seek to destroy America and our allies, we must do whatever it takes and we must not blink, Charlie, in making those tough decisions of where we go and even who we target.
GIBSON: And let me finish with this. I got lost in a blizzard of words there. Is that a yes? That you think we have the right to go across the border with or without the approval of the Pakistani government, to go after terrorists who are in the Waziristan area?
PALIN: I believe that America has to exercise all options in order to stop the terrorists who are hell bent on destroying America and our allies. We have got to have all options out there on the table.
Yes, children need textbooks, but AGAIN you avoided the ISSUE, which was that McCAIN LIED and DISTORTED the FACTS. The legislation was NOT for sex education, as his ad stated. If he felt that the money would be better spent on textbooks, then that's what the ad should have said instead of being DELIBERATELY MISLEADING (DoubleJ, I used all caps for you since you found them so helpful).
As for tempest in a teapot that the "lipstick" remark has become, FS, Senator Obama was not in the least bit open-ended. Here's his exact quote and he obviously is NOT referring to Governor Palin: "Let's just list this for a second. John McCain says he's about change, too. Except -- and so I guess his whole angle is, "Watch out, George Bush, except for economic policy, health-care policy, tax policy, education policy, foreign policy, and Karl Rove-style politics. We're really gonna shake things up in Washington." That's not change. That's just calling some -- the same thing, something different. But you know, you can -- you know, you can put lipstick on a pig; it's still a pig."
And regarding SC's comments, he is doing his job as a moderator and trying to keep the discussion in line and on topic. I, for one, am grateful.
Yes, children need textbooks, but AGAIN you avoided the ISSUE, which was that McCAIN LIED and DISTORTED the FACTS. The legislation was NOT for sex education, as his ad stated. If he felt that the money would be better spent on textbooks, then that's what the ad should have said instead of being DELIBERATELY MISLEADING (DoubleJ, I used all caps for you since you found them so helpful).
You don't have to use caps, I'm not illiterate like the children Obama's education record has failed in the past.
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
As for tempest in a teapot that the "lipstick" remark has become, FS, Senator Obama was not in the least bit open-ended.
No, I agree. It's pretty obvious what he implied.
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
And regarding SC's comments, he is doing his job as a moderator and trying to keep the discussion in line and on topic. I, for one, am grateful.
I agree. Maybe he can take me to the Bronx Zoo someday, I'd like to go.
You asked for a answer about the LIPSTICK issue, I told you what the difference was to many people. The feeling is that he played it lose and free knowing that it was a focal point in her speach about herself. I know it is starting to get petty, and the race is a close one. But I would expect more from the people who are running then this kind of ball busting in either direction. I'm sure we both can understand their points even if you don't agree with it.
and it dosen't take a college degree to understand what is going on between SC and Double-J so lets not even go there! Even if SC is your friend.
Not to get too far afield, although others apparently feel free to do so, friendship has nothing to do with any of it. SC has acted in his role as moderator, and done so efficiently and effectively. It's obvious from other member's posts that Double J's antics were annoying, at the least, and at times downright offensive. Please don't tell me where to go or not to go.
as for the caps, double j, you were the one that mentioned gratitude for them in an earlier post. i was just trying to make you happy. you guys are tough to please. you still, however, managed to avoid the issue, which was that mccain's ad was an outright, pants on fire lie.
As for the Lipstick remark, how could anyone, reading the entire quote as posted above, believe that it referred to Governor Palin? And my question about the ad was directed at double j, because I have asked him the question at least 5 times in this thread and he has never directly answered the question.
I guess I will always be amazed at what some people can see. or better yet what some people can't seem to see. What is that old expression. You can't see the forrest from the trees, or something like that.
I guess that old rule of: if you don't like something just ignore them/it is only words.
Well, If it is one thing I have learned, it is to know when I am wasting my time. I'm out of this mud puddle. SEE YA!
Well, If it is one thing I have learned, it is to know when I am wasting my time. I'm out of this mud puddle. SEE YA!
Oh, darn. And we so look forward to when you pop in, make your disparaging remarks and leave until the next time you feel compelled to spread your particular brand of nastiness. Ah, well. We'll just have to muddle on without you.
DC, I'm sure that Sarah Palin did some wonderful things as Governor and Mayor. My concern with her is the fact that she is totally and completely without experience outside of her little world. Saying that being able to see portions of Russia from Alaska gives her international experience is patently absurd. Also, she is a supporter of most issues that I am completely against, mostly the ecology, a woman's right to choose, and gun control.
As for Obama's record, you can spin those things any way you want. I'm sure I could go on a pro-Obama website and quote some glowing statistics. Actually, if you go on the Library of Congress' website, you will see that he has actually been quite active in his 3 years as a junior senator. Most of his legislative effort has been in the area of Energy Efficiency and Climate Change (25 bills), health care (21 bills) and public health (20 bills), consumer protection/labor (14 bills), the needs of Veterans and the Armed Forces (13 bills), Congressional Ethics and Accountability (12 bills), Foreign Policy (10 bills) Voting and Elections (9 bills), Education (7 bills), Hurricane Katrina Relief (6), the Environment (5 bills), Homeland Security (4 bills), and discrimination (4 bills). 15 of those bills became law.
If we're voting solely based on a candidate's beliefs, I personally could never vote for the McCain/Palin ticket. Obviously, there are those that would vehemently disagree with me.
Well, If it is one thing I have learned, it is to know when I am wasting my time. I'm out of this mud puddle. SEE YA!
Oh, darn. And we so look forward to when you pop in, make your disparaging remarks and leave until the next time you feel compelled to spread your particular brand of nastiness. Ah, well. We'll just have to muddle on without you.
Oh, so my remarks are disparaging and I have a particular brand of nastiness hu... OH I'm Soooo hurt by your attack. To think, I was the one leaving to avoid crap? Well if that was the case, and If I wanted to be nasty I would have addressed you by your nickname...hahahhhaa Which time and time again you prove to everyone that you deserve.
Maybe if you treated everyone on the boards with respect like you do to a select few then maybe, just maybe more of us would come around more often. And then there would be more then just your opinion on things. Which seems to be the only thing you allow.
"'Spontaneous me,' sang Whitman, and in his innocense, let loose the hordes of uninspired scribblers who would one day confuse spontaneity with genius. The breezy style is often the work of an egocentric, the person that imagines that everything that pops into his head is of general interest and that uninhibited prose creates high spirits and carries the day."
Maybe if you treated everyone on the boards with respect like you do to a select few then maybe, just maybe more of us would come around more often. And then there would be more then just your opinion on things. Which seems to be the only thing you allow.
I don't allow or disallow anything. That's strictly up to Geoff and SC. I don't make those decisions. And if I did, I wouldn't be NEARLY as nice as them.
Opine away. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I enjoy a good debate and I always will. However, when people hide in sarcasm, or silly and offensive photos, then I will object. They're not stating an idea or opinion.
And, FS, if I personally am the sole reason that you don't come around any longer, there are lots of members here who should slip me a bonus this Christmas.
If it is one thing I have learned, it is to know when I am wasting my time. I'm out of this mud puddle. SEE YA!
And reading 98% of your posts is a waste of time, too. Your only goal here is apparently to stir up shit. So..... SEE YA! until you can be a good boy. Some others may be following suit if THIS SHIT CONTINUES!
Nice to see you yucking it up with the riff raff. Will probably have to PM you though, as I see someone is looking for a 'bonus' of some sort.
DON CARDI -- EXCELLENT listing of Palin vs. Obama accomplishments. I'll have to get that into circulation!! Don't forget to add those two memoirs he found time to write while getting all that other stuff done.
Governors don't vote. They propose legislation, support legislation, or sign or veto legislation.
Mayors do not raise or lower taxes. They vote as a member of a city council to raise or lower property taxes or to implement or raise or lower sales taxes as well as other municipal fees.
By the way, ever since Geoff published his caution to Board members I've noticed that the tenor of Board posts has been pleasantly mitigated. However, I've also noticed that with the recent deluge of posts by this Double-J character, such tenor has deteriorated again. And now FS caustically reappears.
DC, I'm sure that Sarah Palin did some wonderful things as Governor and Mayor. My concern with her is the fact that she is totally and completely without experience outside of her little world.
Since JG deleted what I said, allow me to paraphrase:
SB, I guess that B. Hussein Obama did some mediocre things as Senator and as a career politician. My concern with him is the fact that he is totally and completely without experience outside of his little world.
I heard someone today defending her and saying that Gibson's question was an unfair "gotcha" question, like Bush 8 years ago being ambushed with questions about the names of world leaders.But the Bush Doctrine has been a cornerstone of our foreign policy since before the war, and knowledge of this is a more important foreign policy credential than being able to see a remote part of Russia from a remote island off the coast of Alaska.
This article is by Charles Krauthammer, the writer who coined the term "Bush Doctrine".
She also "defended" earmarks for Alaska. Gibson cited earmarks which, as Governor, she lobbied for and accepted. In response she stated that they were obtained because they were not slipped into unrelated Congessional bills. So, she does favor certain earmarks.
DC, I read your statements about Palin. Governors don't vote. They propose legislation, support legislation, or sign or veto legislation.
Mayors do not raise or lower taxes. They vote as a member of a city council to raise or lower property taxes or to implement or raise or lower sales taxes as well as other municipal fees.
Yes Olivant, you are absolutely correct. I stand corrected. I used the word VOTE when I should have said propose or supported, and also failed to correctly say that as mayor she voted along with city council to lower taxes. But I do believe that the point I was trying to make was actually made.
note :I've gone back to edit my post and replaced the words vote with the correct terminology.
Originally Posted By: fathersson
If I wanted to be nasty I would have addressed you by your nickname...hahahhhaa Which time and time again you prove to everyone that you deserve.
Interesting article by known Liberal Camille Paglia, who continues to support Barack Obama but nevertheless appreciates the impact of Sarah Palin's VP nomination. And I understand she's been getting alot of flack for this from her hypocrite Liberal colleagues:
(I've edited this slightly for space but link to FULL article may be found via Drudge Report...)
***** Conservative though she may be, I felt that Palin represented an explosion of a brand new style of muscular American feminism. At her startling debut on that day, she was combining male and female qualities in ways that I have never seen before. And she was somehow able to seem simultaneously reassuringly traditional and gung-ho futurist. In terms of redefining the persona for female authority and leadership, Palin has made the biggest step forward in feminism since Madonna channeled the dominatrix persona of high-glam Marlene Dietrich and rammed pro-sex, pro-beauty feminism down the throats of the prissy, victim-mongering, philistine feminist establishment.
In the U.S., the ultimate glass ceiling has been fiendishly complicated for women by the unique peculiarity that our president must also serve as commander in chief of the armed forces. Women have risen to the top in other countries by securing the leadership of their parties and then being routinely promoted to prime minister when that party won at the polls. But a woman candidate for President of the U.S. must show a potential capacity for military affairs and decision-making. Our President also symbolically represents the entire history of the nation -- a half-mystical role often filled elsewhere by a revered if politically powerless monarch.
As a dissident feminist, I have been arguing since my arrival on the scene nearly 20 years ago that young American women aspiring to political power should be studying military history rather than taking women's studies courses, with their rote agenda of never-ending grievances...Hillary Clinton, with her schizophrenic alteration of personae, has never seemed presidential to me - and certainly not in her bland and overpraised farewell speech at the Democratic convention (which skittered from slow, pompous condescension to trademark stridency to unseemly haste)....
...Over the Labor Day weekend, with most of the big enchiladas of the major media on vacation, the vacuum was filled with a hallucinatory hurricane in the leftist blogosphere, which unleashed a grotesquely lurid series of allegations, fantasies, half-truths and outright lies about Palin. What a tacky low in American politics - which has already caused a backlash that could damage Obama's campaign. When liberals come off as childish, raving loonies, the right wing gains. I am still waiting for substantive evidence that Sarah Palin is a dangerous extremist. I am perfectly willing to be convinced, but right now, she seems to be merely an optimistic pragmatist like Ronald Reagan, someone who pays lip service to religious piety without being in the least wedded to it. I don't see her arrival as portending the end of civil liberties or life as we know it.
...It is certainly premature to predict how the Palin saga will go. I may not agree a jot with her about basic principles, but I have immensely enjoyed Palin's boffo performances at her debut and at the Republican convention, where she astonishingly dealt with multiple technical malfunctions without missing a beat. A Feminist that cannot admire the bravura under high pressure of the first woman governor of a frontier state isn't worth a warm bucket of spit.
That is interesting, Apple. It actually leads me to wonder whether she'll actually vote for Obama or if she's just paying lip service to her party. As I stated in an earlier post, I really think there are a LOT of people telling pollsters that they'll vote for Obama, but won't in the end.
I heard Paglia do a radio interview earlier today...she made it crystal clear that she does not like John McCain, never has, and that she WILL vote for Barack Obama and wants Obama to win. I happen to believe her.
I've been listening to Paglia for a number of years & believe she's much too forthright and opionated to say one thing and do another.
Too bad I can't say the same for my ol' favorite Peggy Noonan, who if she DIDN'T care for the choice of Palin might as well have made it known before an open mike caught her off-air.
She also "defended" earmarks for Alaska. Gibson cited earmarks which, as Governor, she lobbied for and accepted. In response she stated that they were obtained because they were not slipped into unrelated Congessional bills. So, she does favor certain earmarks.
Of course, and that's what gets me with those who want to support Mccain for his anti-earmark campaign.
Notice that people in general hate so-called earmarks, but LOVE them when they are applied to their local regions or states.
It's the same when people polled think traditionally that every Congressman OUTSIDE of their district is a dishonest politician crook, but their guy/gal is awesome.
Yeah, that was really bone headed on her part. I must admit, she's an excellent journalist. She wrote a sensational book about Pope John Paul II a few years back.
[quote=olivant][quote=Frank_Nitti][quote=olivant][quote=Frank_Nitti][quote=olivant] The Congressional Joint Economic Committee published its fndings in November 2007 that estimated the costs of both the war in Iraq and in Afghanistan at $800 billion. There are 1,000 billions in a trillion. Do the math.
Yes, but that's 800 billion that had to be taken away from other programs who in turn had to ...borrow the funds to make up for the insufficiency caused by the allocation of war funds. Thus, when thought of in these terms--the amount of loans sought by those 'programs' who lost their funding to the war--that 800 billion figure begins to swell.
That doesn't make any sense. $800 billion is $800 billion. It doesn't matter what it was spent on. You either have the revenue to spend on it or you don't. If you don't, you borrow it. Because federal reveunes from 2001 through 2006 were not sufficiient to pay for federal expenditures during those years, the Republican controlled Congress (which also formulates and approves the annual federal budgets) authorized the Treasury Departmdent to borrow approximately $5 trillion.
Governments typically finish in the red each and every fiscal year, there's nothing abnormal about that. The question is, how much. You say it's 5 trillion. And I say when you combine the 800 billion spent for the war (+) additional 800 billion or so that must be borrowed to make up for the 800 billion taken away from 'programs' and allocated to the war (-) about a 1/2 trillion from that 5 trillion figure that is interest accrued (+) about another trillion or so used for homeland security here at home and at our bases and embassies around the world: you end up with a deficit of about 2 trillion and not 5 trillion, with the remaining 3 trillion (rightfully) used in the 'war on terror'...Point Being: Republican is the party of economists, not Democrat. [/quote]
Where do you get these figures? They're hugely exaggerated and wrong. Where did you get 2 trillion, or 3 trillion or 5 trillion that you cite? Why do you refer to them as deficits. Do you uinderstand what a budget deficit is? It is the annual difference between what the federal government spends and the revenue it takes in. Do you understand what the national debt is? It is the unretired debt which the US Treasury owes to those who have lent funds to the federal government. The Congress has authoriized a national debt of $10.5 trillion. When President Bush took office the national debt was about $5 trillion. From then through 2006 while the Republicans were in control of the Congress, that debt rose to almost $10 trillion. Those annual Congresses made spending decisions (such as Earmarks) that greatly exceeded anticipated revenues.
By the way, someone posted that the last budget surplus was under Nixon in '69. Not so. The federal government experienced surpluses 1998-2001. Also, interest on the national debt is estimated at about $250 billion annually. [/quote] [/quote]
Bottom line: the new Democratic Congress is on pace to borrow just as much if not more than the Republicans did.
You are mistaken. The 1969 federal budget was not in balance. Its revenues exceeded expenditures by $19 billion. Since President Nixon was in office during 1969, he took credit for the surplus (the last one until 1998 under Clinton). However, that year's budget was prepared by President Ford's staff.
You are mistaken. The 1969 federal budget was not in balance. Its revenues exceeded expenditures by $19 billion. Since President Nixon was in office during 1969, he took credit for the surplus (the last one until 1998 under Clinton). However, that year's budget was prepared by President Ford's staff.
Then who was the last then? I mean for curiosity's sake.
Great stuff, TIS. Tina Fey is brilliant. She's just the type of role model that young women should emulate more. Smart, pretty, career and family oriented.
On the other side of that, I really wish celebusluts like Lindsay Lohan and Pam Anderson would shut up about Sarah Palin. We really don't need them on the side of the Democrats. I really think they could end up chasing swing voters over to the Republican side.
She looks exactly like Governor Palin. It's astounding. The thing is, you have to figure that Hillary really IS about to shoot herself. She worked her ass off, and this woman, who for all her poise and intelligence barely knows her way to the mainland, is credited for making history and re-energizing the campaign!!
By the way, the President requested an FY 2009 budget of $3.1 trillion. The Congress approved $3 trillion. The shortfall of revenues is expected to be at least $340 billion. Of course, the budget does not include funding for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
This is scary, considering New York is one of the most heavily Democratic states in the nation.
Siena Poll: 5 Points Separate Obama And McCain In NY
By Elizabeth Benjamin, NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
September 15, 2008
The latest poll from the Siena Research Institute finds Barack Obama leading John McCain 46-41 among likely New York voters with just 50 days remaining in the presidential campaign.
Obama's lead in the Democrat-dominated state has dropped steadily - from eight points in August, 13 points in July and 18 points in June when he led 51-33.
Voters said they thought Obama would do a better job on the economy, the Iraq War, health care and education, while McCain leads when it comes to protecting the US from terrorism and enhacing America's strength in the world.
Overall, McCain was perceived as more qualified than Obama (79-67), while Joe Biden easily trumps Sarah Palin in this department (70-47).
In state politics, Gov. David Paterson's favorable and job approval ratings remain high (59-13 and 51-37, respectively) and the margin between the governor and Mayor Bloomberg in a hypothetical head-to-head match-up in 2010 has shrunk from eight points in the mayor's favor last month to five points.
In a match-up against Rudy Giuliani, Paterson wins, 50-40 - the same as in an August Siena poll.
Asked if they would prefer re-electing Paterson or someone else, 35 percent of voters sided with the governor, while 25 percent said they'd like a change, with no specific alternative in mind, and 39 percent didn't know. This, too, is practically unchanged from last month.
On whether the state Senate should remain in GOP hands or flip to the Democrats, voters are split 44-44 with 12 percent undecided.
That's good news for the Republicans, as the response last month favored the Democrats, 47-42 with 11 percent undecided
In state politics, Gov. David Paterson's favorable and job approval ratings remain high (59-13 and 51-37, respectively) and the margin between the governor and Mayor Bloomberg in a hypothetical head-to-head match-up in 2010 has shrunk from eight points in the mayor's favor last month to five points.
In a match-up against Rudy Giuliani, Paterson wins, 50-40 - the same as in an August Siena poll.
In state politics, Gov. David Paterson's favorable and job approval ratings remain high (59-13 and 51-37, respectively) and the margin between the governor and Mayor Bloomberg in a hypothetical head-to-head match-up in 2010 has shrunk from eight points in the mayor's favor last month to five points.
In a match-up against Rudy Giuliani, Paterson wins, 50-40 - the same as in an August Siena poll.
So much for Rudy's popularity in NY.
The guy is just very tiresome, and quite frankly, he's not that easy to look at.
It looks like it. His +6 Convention/Palin bounce is down to +2 in both the Rasmussen and Gallup Polls today. Time will tell if Obama get his lead back. Obama still have a fairly significant Electoral Vote lead when "leaners" are factored in.
It looks like it. His +6 Convention/Palin bounce is down to +2 in both the Rasmussen and Gallup Polls today. Time will tell if Obama get his lead back. Obama still have a fairly significant Electoral Vote lead when "leaners" are factored in.
I stand corrected. Obama's Electoral lead has shrunk:
From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Carrie Dann *** The map 50 days out: The Palin bounce has erased Obama's lead in the national polls, and it has now cut into his electoral-vote advantage, according to NBC’s latest map. Obama holds a 233-227 edge here, down from his 228-200 advantage from last week. The biggest changes: We moved Florida -- with its 27 electoral votes -- from Toss-up to Lean McCain, and New Mexico from Toss-up to Lean Obama. We also shifted Oregon and Washington from Likely Obama to Lean Obama, as well as Alaska, Georgia, North Dakota and South Dakota from Lean McCain to Likely McCain. The good news for McCain is that the map looks better for him than at any point so far in this race, and many of those red states that looked like opportunities for Obama (AK, GA, IN) look to be longer shots for him. The bad news for McCain is that given the wave his campaign has been riding from the Palin bounce, is this as good as it gets? If he isn’t leading in some states now, he might not ever lead in them. Bottom line: You'll know the map is starting to move in one direction or the other if either Pennsylvania or Florida moves back into Toss-up before Election Day.
It looks like it. His +6 Convention/Palin bounce is down to +2 in both the Rasmussen and Gallup Polls today. Time will tell if Obama get his lead back. Obama still have a fairly significant Electoral Vote lead when "leaners" are factored in.
I stand corrected. Obama's Electoral lead has shrunk:
From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Carrie Dann *** The map 50 days out: The Palin bounce has erased Obama's lead in the national polls, and it has now cut into his electoral-vote advantage, according to NBC’s latest map. Obama holds a 233-227 edge here, down from his 228-200 advantage from last week. The biggest changes: We moved Florida -- with its 27 electoral votes -- from Toss-up to Lean McCain, and New Mexico from Toss-up to Lean Obama. We also shifted Oregon and Washington from Likely Obama to Lean Obama, as well as Alaska, Georgia, North Dakota and South Dakota from Lean McCain to Likely McCain. The good news for McCain is that the map looks better for him than at any point so far in this race, and many of those red states that looked like opportunities for Obama (AK, GA, IN) look to be longer shots for him. The bad news for McCain is that given the wave his campaign has been riding from the Palin bounce, is this as good as it gets? If he isn’t leading in some states now, he might not ever lead in them. Bottom line: You'll know the map is starting to move in one direction or the other if either Pennsylvania or Florida moves back into Toss-up before Election Day.
I never figured Florida for Obama. North and South Dakota, most of the south I always figured for McCain.
Unless the economy makes an unexpected turn, it is going to continue to reflect bad numbers. Until people start borrowing and lenders start lending again, it will get worse. That will be reflected on the Electoral College map.
Also, it's about time to let go of the national polls. National figures will only be indicative if the separation between candidates is quite large.
September 15, 2008 CNN POLL OF POLLS: McCain's convention bounce gone Posted: 04:36 PM ET McCain is dead even with Obama in CNN's poll of polls.
(CNN) – The bounce John McCain received in national opinion polls following his party's convention and the selection of Sarah Palin to the GOP presidential ticket appears to have evaporated, a new CNN poll of polls suggests.
In the latest CNN survey of several recent national polls, Obama and McCain are locked in a dead heat at 45 percent each with 10 percent who remain undecided with 50 days remaining until Election Day.
“When we average the latest national polls, it is increasingly clear that neither candidate has any serious momentum at the moment,” said CNN Senior Political Researcher Alan Silverleib. “The convention bounces have faded and left us with a dead heat. Even though we are now in the final stretch of this historic marathon campaign for the presidency, the White House is still genuinely up for grabs.”
CNN's latest poll of polls consists of three recent surveys: Newsweek (September 10-11), Gallup (September 12-14), and Diageo/Hotline (September 12-14). It does not have a sampling error.
TODAY: Lehman Bros. goes bankrupt. AIG has to be bailed out by New York State. Merrill Lynch sees the writing on the walls and QUICKLY sells itself to Bank of America (before facing bankruptcy).
John McCain this morning said the U.S. economy was sound.
His staffers rush up to him and tell him otrherwise.
John McCain this afternoon changes his mind about the state of the economy but says we should talk about Barack Obama instead.
Smoke and mirrors. He and Palin are gonna be schooled on the economy over the next few days. Maybe then they'll sound like they know what they're talking about.
When you're the Republican Candidate, and Karl Rove says your campaign ads have gone "too far", then your campaign is in trouble. Now tonight, Palin announces she won't cooperate with the investigation against her because "it's being manipulated by Obama supporters". Last week she told Charlie Gibson: "she welcomed the investigation." The wheels may be about to fall off the McCain/Palin bus.
TODAY: Lehman Bros. goes bankrupt. AIG has to be bailed out by New York State. Merrill Lynch sees the writing on the walls and QUICKLY sells itself to Bank of America (before facing bankruptcy).
John McCain this morning said the U.S. economy was sound.
His staffers rush up to him and tell him otrherwise.
John McCain this afternoon changes his mind about the state of the economy but says we should talk about Barack Obama instead.
Smoke and mirrors. He and Palin are gonna be schooled on the economy over the next few days. Maybe then they'll sound like they know what they're talking about.
For whatever reason this smoke and mirrors tactic is working. McCain-Palin are up in all the polls, and in the most telling one Ohio Voters were asked which candidate do they relate to the most. The result? Palin was first, Obama second, McCain third and Biden fourth.
MAC MAKES MOVE ON DEM 'EMPIRE' CUTS BAM'S BIG NY LEAD TO 5 PTS.
By BRENDAN SCOTT, New York Post Correspondent
September 16, 2008
ALBANY - Surging Republican John McCain has moved to within 5 percentage points of Democrat Barack Obama in the true-blue Empire State, a stunning new Siena poll has found.
The Arizona senator trails Obama 46 percent to 41 percent, slashing his deficit from June, when he trailed 51-33. Last month, McCain lagged 47-39.
The close race is particularly dramatic for New York.
Democrats outnumber Republicans five to three in the state, and Democrat John Kerry beat Republican President Bush here by an 18-point margin in 2004.
"These numbers indicate that at the moment, seven weeks out, New York is in play," Siena Research Institute spokesman Steven Greenberg said. "If New York's in play in a presidential election, that is never good news for the Democrats."
The result follows both parties' conventions and a jam-packed month of campaigning during which McCain selected Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate and Obama passed over primary rival Hillary Rodham Clinton in favor of Delaware Sen. Joe Biden.
McCain gained significantly among women and Jews in the poll of 626 likely voters.
He made up all but 2 percentage points (45-43) of his 12-point gap among women last month (48-36), suggesting previously undecided women are breaking for McCain.
Obama has had a reversal of fortunes among Jewish voters. His support has plummeted 35 points, from a lead of 50-37 to a 54-32 deficit in the new poll.
"The momentum is heading our way," said McCain's New York campaign chairman, Edward Cox. "We're within striking distance."
It's unclear how much of McCain's newfound female support has come from former Clinton supporters.
The poll found most white women (55-36) support McCain, as do one in five of those who have a favorable view of Clinton.
A spokesman for New York for Obama cited its success recruiting 400 volunteers to campaign in nearby swing states, like Pennsylvania, as proof of Obama's grass-roots strength in New York.
"New York is a strong blue state that has rejected the disastrous policies of George Bush and John McCain for seven years and will do it again in November," Obama spokesman Blake Zeff said in a statement.
Meanwhile, a poll released yesterday in Ohio found McCain leading, Obama, 46-42, there.
Steven Greenberg, spokesman for the Siena New York Poll says: “The conventions are over. The running mates are set. And as voters begin to focus on the race, New York’s overwhelming Democratic enrollment advantage is not reflected in how voters tell Siena they plan to vote.”
Does anyone else think that keith Olbermann from MSNBC is an ass? He is so left wing it makes me sick! How can they have someone on that channel who is such a mental case? He wants Obama to win so bad its sick.
In lighter campaign news, did McCain invent the "Blackberry"?
McCain adviser: BlackBerry a 'miracle' he 'helped create' Posted: 12:19 PM ET
(CNN) – McCain senior domestic policy adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin said Tuesday the BlackBerry mobile e-mail device was a “miracle that John McCain helped create.”
Addressing the nation’s economic crisis, Holtz-Eakin told reporters traveling with the campaign “there’s no magic solution. And I don’t think that it’s at this moment imperative to write down exactly what the plan has to be.” He also said a president isn’t someone who needs to be heavily involved in policy specifics, which should be handled by “quality” advisers, and echoed McCain’s assessment that there might be a need for a “9/11-style commission” to determine what went wrong with the nation's economy, and to issue recommendations.
He added, though, that McCain — who has struggled to stress his economic credentials this cycle — did have experience dealing with the economy, pointing to his time on the Senate Commerce Committee. Pressed to provide an example of what McCain had accomplished on that committee, Holtz-Eakin said the senator did not have jurisdiction over financial markets — then held up his Blackberry, telling reporters: “He did this.”
“Telecommunications of the United States, the premiere innovation in the past 15 years, comes right through the Commerce Committee. So you’re looking at the miracle that John McCain helped create,” said Holtz-Eakin. “And that’s what he did. He both regulated and de-regulated the industry.”
During the 2000 presidential campaign, Al Gore drew controversy when he said that during his time in Congress, he “took the initiative in creating the Internet” – based on his work promoting funding and early research in that area.
UPDATE: The Obama campaign responded to the comments minutes after they were reported. “If John McCain hadn’t said that ‘the fundamentals of our economy are strong’ on the day of one of our nation’s worst financial crises, the claim that he invented the BlackBerry would have been the most preposterous thing said all week,” said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton.
Meanwhile, McCain senior aide Matt McDonald said that the senator "laughed" when he heard the comment.
"He would not claim to be the inventor of anything, much less the BlackBerry. This was obviously a boneheaded joke by a staffer," McDonald said.
Does anyone else think that keith Olbermann from MSNBC is an ass? He is so left wing it makes me sick! How can they have someone on that channel who is such a mental case? He wants Obama to win so bad its sick.
ds
He is a moron, DS. I loathe the far left every bit as much as I loathe the far right. They're opposite sides of the same dangerous coin. If we, as a nation, haven't learned the danger of extreme thinking in the last seven years, we'll never get it.
Read that article, and you might agree with me that whole move by the Democratic Majority was brilliant.
I mean its such a dickheaded political power play, and it works because if the GOP have been hammering about drilling, then if Bush vetoes (which looks likely) then the Dems can run ads of basically "Hey, we wanted offshore drilling too, but the Republicans tried to stop us!"
Yeah you can argue their measure was useless, but that's the point...the point is the direct political implications to the public, who'll read this possible headline in the future: Bush/GOP veto Off-Shore Drilling
Imagine McCain having to dance and tried to explain on that incident. The GOP may or may not have a good reason for trying to stop the bill, but that is irrelevant. The point is the short stick and the glance impression that most people will get from reading briefly that whole story.
I don't mind Olbermann. Chris Matthews has been pretty annoying lately though. I find I just don't like to hear him anymore.
I'll tell you though. I'd never want to be a politician. Too much bullshit and smearing.
I think the Obama Waffle thing is real slimey. I don't even want to link it, but those who are following will know what I mean. It's just plain awful IMHO.
I feel like a yo yo though. This election is so close that my head is spinning. I'm dizzy. I can't wait til election day.
Good ad. At least the Obama camp this time was very quick to pick up on this gaffe. Of course you must have heard by now that McCain invented the Blackberry too, right? He's a regular "Mr. Technology".
Good ad. At least the Obama camp this time was very quick to pick up on this gaffe. Of course you must have heard by now that McCain invented the Blackberry too, right? He's a regular "Mr. Technology".
TIS
I still remember back in 2000 making fun of Gore for inventing the Internet.
Anyway, why not if you're bullshitting in taking credit, claim you invented the Ipod? I mean be a relevant inventor you know?
(1) Brings up in random statistics of how shitty our economy is right now. (2) Ties into perception that McCain aint just old, but "senile" old (3) Ties into "3rd Bush Term" theme with that shot at the end.
McCain has a shitty track record with financial advisors, don't he?
Remember months back when his former advisor claimed that America was a "Nation of Whiners"?
And that guy in that TYT spot makes a point: Fiorina is the same person who ran a good company like HP into the damn ground, and she may or may not become McCain's Treasury Secretary?
I look at the doom and gloom that is the news each and every day. People's homes - gone. Companies that were once the backbone of this nation - gone. Our men and women in the armed forces - gone, sometimes for four or five times!
And I see the polls and I don't understand how it's possible that I'm reading the numbers I'm reading. To me (and yes, this is a personal opinion), voting Republican this time is the equivalent of that frat hazing, where a frat brother repeatedly spanks a pledge with a wooden paddle while the pledge is forced to say, "Thank you, sir. May I have another?"
The American people appear to be like a person who continuously bangs his head against a wall and things if he does it again the headache will go away.
One thing the polls don't take into consideration is 'voter turnout'. Supposedly Obama has an unprecedented army of volunteers around the country to "get out the vote". Only time will tell how effective it really is.
We recently went to a local craft fair. There was a very nice group of people from Obama's local office. They were asking people to vote, and also registering voters. It was perfect timing, since my daughter turned 18 this year and just kept forgetting to mail in her form.
I think that if he continues to get those that probably aren't even IN the polls, that's a strategy that may work for him.
Different polls use different methods, but most are via random telephone calls.
Here's how Gallup does it:
Gallup interviews 1, 000 adults nationally by telephone for the Gallup Poll Daily tracking program every day. The Gallup Poll Daily tracking updates track the well-being of U.S. residents 350 days of the year.
The Gallup Poll Daily tracking program is part of a larger project which interviews Americans on a continuous basis about their health and well-being across a range of income and conditions. The results are reported in continuous daily, weekly, and monthly averages.
The survey methods for the Gallup Poll Daily tracking program rely on live (not automated) interviewers, dual-frame random-digit (RDD) sampling (which includes landlines as well as wireless phone sampling to reach those in wireless-only households), and a random selection method for choosing respondents within a household. Additionally, Gallup Poll Daily tracking includes Spanish-language interviews for respondents who speak only Spanish, interviews in Alaska and Hawaii, and relies on a multi-call design to reach respondents not contacted on the initial attempt. The data are weighted daily to compensate for any disproportion in selection probabilities and non-response. The data are weighted to match targets from the U.S. Census Bureau by age, sex, region, gender, education, ethnicity, and race.
With inclusion of the cell phone-only households and the Spanish language interviews, 98%of the adult population is represented in the sample. By comparison, typical landline-only methodologies represent approximately 85% of the adult population.
FWIW, Obama is back up by +2 in today's Gallup Daily Poll.
TODAY: Lehman Bros. goes bankrupt. AIG has to be bailed out by New York State. Merrill Lynch sees the writing on the walls and QUICKLY sells itself to Bank of America (before facing bankruptcy).
John McCain this morning said the U.S. economy was sound.
His staffers rush up to him and tell him otrherwise.
John McCain this afternoon changes his mind about the state of the economy but says we should talk about Barack Obama instead.
Smoke and mirrors. He and Palin are gonna be schooled on the economy over the next few days. Maybe then they'll sound like they know what they're talking about.
Another government "bailout". Whereas I agree it is better to let AIG unravel slowly rather than fall I'm tired of this socialism for the rich: all these policies that are supposed to foster an economic environment where the market forces are left alone to optimize profitability has led to a situation where the government ends up having to bail out large corporations and take over.
Something is deeply wrong in a financial system that can take down a company with supposedly 1 Trillion in assets and was until last year rated "AAA". Maybe it is just so easy to take stupid risks when you know someone else going to bail you out.
Amazing how they came up with $85 billion virtually overnight, but it took how long to get the housing assistance passed?? And how long will it take the first applicant to wade through the red tape and get the actual check? Not quickly enough to stop foreclosures, that's for sure.
McCain has a shitty track record with financial advisors, don't he?
Remember months back when his former advisor claimed that America was a "Nation of Whiners"?
And that guy in that TYT spot makes a point: Fiorina is the same person who ran a good company like HP into the damn ground, and she may or may not become McCain's Treasury Secretary?
Oh FUCK.
*** When surrogates screw up: McCain’s top two economic surrogates had a tough day yesterday. First, Douglas Holtz-Eakin -- in a response to reporters’ questions about what McCain did at the Senate Commerce Committee to understand how markets work -- whipped out his BlackBerry. "He did this," he replied. “Telecommunications of the United States is a premier innovation in the past 15 years, comes right through the Commerce committee so you're looking at the miracle John McCain helped create and that's what he did." That produced a slew of McCain-invented-the-BlackBerry jokes. Next, Carly Fiorina answered “no” to a question in a radio interview whether Palin has the experience to run a corporation like Hewlett-Packard. In a later interview with Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC, Fiorina said that none of the candidates was qualifed. "Well, I don't think John McCain could run a major corporation; I don't think Barack Obama could run a major corporation; I don't think Joe Biden could run a major corporation.” The Obama camp immediately pounced. “If John McCain’s top economic advisor doesn’t think he can run a corporation, how on Earth can he run the largest economy in the world in the midst of a financial crisis?" Ouch.
Amazing how they came up with $85 billion virtually overnight, but it took how long to get the housing assistance passed?? And how long will it take the first applicant to wade through the red tape and get the actual check? Not quickly enough to stop foreclosures, that's for sure.
Imagine if Bush's privatization of Social Security had passed.
Amazing how they came up with $85 billion virtually overnight, but it took how long to get the housing assistance passed?? And how long will it take the first applicant to wade through the red tape and get the actual check? Not quickly enough to stop foreclosures, that's for sure.
Imagine if Bush's privatization of Social Security had passed.
McCain wants Social Security privatization along the lines of what was proposed by President Bush. Remember that nightmare? All that sky is falling about Social Security when it is fundamentally OK right now & will be able to pay all scheduled benefits through the year 2049 with no changes whatsoever.[ SOURCE ]
Polls: McCain, Obama tied in 5 battleground states
From Paul Steinhauser CNN Deputy Political Director
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- New polls in five battleground states that could decide the presidency suggest the fight for the White House between Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama remains a dead heat.
A new poll out Wednesday shows a virtually tied race between John McCain and Barack Obama in key states.
The CNN/Time Magazine/Opinion Research Corp. polls out Wednesday indicate the race for Florida and its 27 electoral votes is tied.
Florida decided the 2000 election between then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush and then-Vice President Al Gore. Four years ago, President Bush won Florida by 5 points over Sen. John Kerry.
The new survey, conducted Sunday through Tuesday, indicates 48 percent of registered voters in Florida back Republican presidential candidate McCain for president and an equal amount support Obama, the Democratic candidate.
"Florida is a state that would be directly affected by offshore drilling, but voters in that state may be more affected by high gas prices," said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "Two-thirds of all Floridians favor increased offshore drilling for oil and gas."
The poll shows a tight race for Ohio and its 20 electoral votes. The new survey suggests that 49 percent of registered voters in Ohio back Obama and 47 percent support McCain. Interactive: CNN's Electoral Map
The small Obama advantage is well within the poll's sampling error, making the race a tie. President Bush's narrow victory in Ohio four years ago clinched his re-election.
A CNN poll of polls in Ohio, also out Wednesday, gives McCain a 3-point lead, 48-45 percent. The poll of polls is an average of the latest public opinion surveys in the state.
"In Ohio, higher-income voters have moved more toward McCain in the last few weeks, while lower-income voters have trended toward Obama," Holland said. "It looks like economic issues are increasingly dividing voters along income lines -- at least in Ohio -- in the classic pattern that we have seen in previous elections."
The poll suggests Obama is staying competitive in two red states that his campaign is trying to turn blue.
In North Carolina, which Bush won by 12 points in the last presidential election, the poll indicates that 47 percent of registered voters back Obama, 1 point behind McCain. But other polls in the state suggest McCain has a larger lead, and when averaged in a new CNN poll of polls out Wednesday, McCain has a 10-point lead.
In Indiana, the survey puts McCain up by 6 points, 51-45 percent. The lead is within the poll's sampling error. Indiana has not favored a Democrat in a presidential election since 1964, but the Obama campaign is putting a lot of time, effort and money into trying to be the first since then.
Wisconsin has voted for the Democrats in the last four presidential elections, but it was extremely close last time, with Kerry topping Bush by 1 point. It seems Wisconsin remains divided, with 50 percent of voters questioned in the poll backing Obama and 47 percent supporting McCain.
"Obama's strength is in the city of Milwaukee and along the Wisconsin-Illinois border, where he may have a home-field advantage," Holland said. "McCain does well in the rest of the state."
Third-party presidential candidates could affect the results in some of these states.
When included in the results, independent Ralph Nader, Libertarian Bob Barr and Green Party candidate Cynthia McKinney grab a total of 7 percent of the vote in Indiana, 6 percent in Florida and Ohio, and 5 percent in North Carolina, which could be enough to influence the outcome in those states.
So, where does the overall race for electoral votes stand?
Taking into account these polls, CNN estimates if the presidential election were held today, Obama would win 233 electoral votes and John McCain 189. There are 116 electoral votes up for grabs; 270 electoral votes are needed to win the White House.
The CNN Electoral Map takes into account a number of factors, including the most recent state polls, voting trends and campaign ad spending and events in the particular states.
In the poll, 907 registered voters in Florida, 890 registered voters in Indiana, 910 registered voters in North Carolina, 913 registered voters in Ohio and 950 registered votes in Wisconsin were questioned by telephone.
The sampling error is 3.5 percentage points in Florida, Indiana, and North Carolina and 3 percentage points in Ohio and Wisconsin.
Clinton fundraiser backs McCain over Obama By ANN SANNER, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - A top Hillary Rodham Clinton fundraiser threw her support behind Republican John McCain on Wednesday, saying he will lead the country in a centrist fashion and accusing the Democrats of becoming too extreme.
"I believe that Barack Obama, with MoveOn.org and Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean, has taken the Democratic Party — and they will continue to — too far to the left," Lynn Forester de Rothschild said. "I'm not comfortable there."
Rothschild is also a member of the Democratic National Committee's Platform Committee. She said she would be stepping down from her position on the committee but will not switch political parties.
Clinton spokeswoman Kathleen Strand said in an e-mail that the New York senator disagrees with Rothschild's decision to endorse McCain.
"Senator Clinton has been criss-crossing the country and doing whatever she can to make the very clear case that the Obama-Biden ticket represents the new ideas and positive change we need right now, and the McCain-Palin ticket does not," Strand said in the e-mail.
Rothschild said she was excited by the prospect of a woman being in the White House, even though she and Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin disagree on issues. The Alaska governor opposes abortion except in the case of a threat to the mother's life. Rothschild said she supports abortion rights.
"I believe that the McCain-Palin government will be a centrist government," Rothschild said. "It's not going to be an ideological government."
Rothschild is a member of the DNC's Democrats Abroad chapter and splits her time living in London and New York. She was one of Clinton's top fundraisers, bringing in more than $100,000 for her presidential campaign. She built a multimillion-dollar telecommunications company before marrying international banker Sir Evelyn de Rothschild.
Rothschild said she has not discussed her support for McCain with Clinton.
"I'm sure she is not pleased with what I'm doing today," she said. "But you know what? I have to do what I believe in."
And I see the polls and I don't understand how it's possible that I'm reading the numbers I'm reading.
I'm paying very close attention to the polls because I fear that if it's even close, the Republicans will figure out a way to steal the election (as they did in 2000). Maybe I'm just being negative.
WASHINGTON — Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska on Wednesday became the nation's most prominent Republican officeholder to publicly question whether Sarah Palin has the experience to serve as president.
"She doesn't have any foreign policy credentials," Hagel said in an interview. "You get a passport for the first time in your life last year? I mean, I don't know what you can say. You can't say anything."
Palin was elected governor of Alaska in 2006 and before that was the mayor of a small town.
Democrats have raised questions about Palin since Sen. John McCain picked her as his vice presidential running mate. Most national Republican officeholders have rallied to Palin's candidacy.
Palin has cited the proximity of Alaska to Russia as evidence of her international experience.
Hagel scoffed at that notion.
"I think they ought to be just honest about it and stop the nonsense about, 'I look out my window and I see Russia and so therefore I know something about Russia,'" he said. "That kind of thing is insulting to the American people."
A senior member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Hagel has been an outspoken critic of the Bush administration's handling of the Iraq war and had considered making his own run for president. He skipped the Republican National Convention in favor of a trip to Central and South America.
Hagel, who says he has no plans to endorse either presidential candidate, traveled with Democratic nominee Barack Obama to the Middle East in July.
In criticizing Palin, Hagel broke with other Nebraska Republicans, including Gov. David Heineman, who have praised the selection.
Tom Kise, a McCain campaign spokesman, responded to Hagel's comments by questioning Obama's experience.
Kise pointed to statements that Obama's running mate, Sen. Joseph Biden, made during the Democrats' primary fight. At that time, Biden was seeking the nomination and questioned whether Obama was prepared to be president.
"It's much more alarming that Barack Obama's own vice presidential nominee doesn't think he has the experience or the judgment for the job," Kise said.
Palin herself has addressed the question of her foreign policy experience in a recent interview with ABC News.
"We've got to remember what the desire is in this nation at this time," she said. "It is for no more politics as usual, and somebody's big, fat résumé, maybe, that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment where, yes, they've had opportunities to meet heads of state."
"I'm ready," Palin said. "I have the confidence in that readiness and knowing that you can't blink."
Hagel offered a couple caveats on his assessment of Palin: Experience is not the only qualification for elected officials — judgment and character are indispensable.
Washington experience isn't the only kind of experience, Hagel said, and he noted that many White House occupants have been governors with no time inside the beltway.
"But I do think in a world that is so complicated, so interconnected and so combustible, you really got to have some people in charge that have some sense of the bigger scope of the world," Hagel said. "I think that's just a requirement."
So is Palin qualified to be president?
"I think it's a stretch to, in any way, to say that she's got the experience to be president of the United States," Hagel said.
Hagel supported McCain's unsuccessful bid for president in 2000.
Hagel said voters ultimately will decide between McCain and Obama, and he hopes that the debates will refocus both campaigns on the important issues of the day, including the economy, energy policy and international relations.
One recent squabble between the campaigns revolved around whether Obama was being sexist toward Palin when he used a turn of phrase about putting lipstick on a pig.
That kind of back-and-forth is not what the American people want or need, Hagel said.
"It's terrible," he said. "It debases the system."
You gotta feel for José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero. Here the Spanish prime minister is only four months from an end to his government's strained relations with that of President George W. Bush and blam! — along comes John McCain to suggest the next four years might not be any better. During an interview in Miami earlier this week with Spanish-language station Union Radio, a reporter asked McCain whether, if elected, he would receive Zapatero in the White House. McCain answered, "Honestly, I have to analyze our relationships, situations, and priorities, but I can assure you that I will establish closer relationships with our friends, and I will stand up to those who want to harm the United States."
Ouch. The question about Zapatero, clearly framed by the reporter as a question about Spain, came after inquiries on Venezuela, Bolivia, and Cuba. As a result, much of the Spanish press has decided that the Republican candidate, who hails himself as the experienced foreign policy choice in this election, confused Spain — a NATO member and key ally in the fight against terrorism — with one of those troublesome Latin American states. That was certainly the interviewer's impression, for she followed up with a gentle reminder that Spain was a country in Europe. As Spanish newspaper El País put it, "In the best-case scenario, [his answer] demonstrates his ignorance with respect to Zapatero."
Of course, there's a worse-case scenario: that McCain would, if elected, maintain his predecessor's chilly relationship with Spain. Spaniards may, on the whole, revile American politics and American comida de basura (junk food), but they still tend to measure their prime minister's international worth by the esteem in which the U.S. president holds him. And so, for the past four years, the Spanish prime minister has tried, ever so earnestly, to prove that he's one of the big boys. At every international summit he has tried to maneuver himself into position for a photograph with Bush. The press has breathlessly reported on every perfunctory exchange the two have had. And the much-longed-for invitation to the White House — let alone to a certain ranch in Texas — has been the object of countless pages of speculation. But for all the aspiration, Zapatero has never managed to achieve anything like that famous 2003 photo of his predecessor, José María Aznar in the Azores looking like he just got invited to the cool kids' party.
Of course, the fact that the cool kids' party happened to be taking place in Iraq explains a lot of the distance between the two current leaders: upon taking office in April 2004, Zapatero immediately pulled Spanish troops out of "the alliance of the willing." Which is one of the ironies of this situation — that Spain can so strongly support a foreign policy opposed to Bush doctrine (whatever that is), while so strongly hoping for a show of respect from Washington. On Thursday, Spanish newspaper ABC's regret was palpable when it lamented that "the coldness between the governments of the U.S. and Spain could continue if the Republican candidate John McCain reaches the White House. "
As for Zapatero himself, the prime minister is apparently taking this latest attack to his ego with characteristic equilibrium. McCain may not know who Spain's leader is, but Zapatero promised to work with the new administration "whatever it is."
If there is an upside to the stock market turmoil, it's that maybe finally McCain is forced to stop talking about lipstick, sexism and bullshit things.
I do look forward to the debates which is next Friday I think.
Does anyone else think an October surprise could be another terror threat???? Or, a better question, will the public buy into it?
the Republicans will figure out a way to steal the election (as they did in 2000). Maybe I'm just being negative.
Am I alone in this?
Didn't they also steal it in 2004?
Oh, and what about 1980 and 1984?
No, just 2000. I hate conspiracy theories, but the 2000 election was blatant. And for the record, I voted for Reagan both times. I'm very proud of the fact that I've never voted for a party in my life; always for the individual.
One talking head on CNN called McCain using the the words "the fundamentals of the economy are still strong" on 9/15 one of the biggest gaffes in political history.
Palin can't protect her email account, how can she protect the country!?
The news says she used this account for "official business". Who the hell would use a Yahoo account for official business?? I'm a pee-on in State Government, but I have a State of NJ email address for official business. Are they that far behind in Alaska that they're using Yahoo?
I'm watching the McCain rally live from Iowa, and at least twice Palin has the referred to the "Palin/McCain" administration. I wonder if that's a slip or intentional? I don't think it's intentional since she's said "McCain/Palin" the majority of the time.
I'm watching the McCain rally live from Iowa, and at least twice Palin has the referred to the "Palin/McCain" administration. I wonder if that's a slip or intentional? I don't think it's intentional since she's said "McCain/Palin" the majority of the time.
I guess Joe Biden felt left out after McCain's colossal gaffe, so he came up with a gaffe of his own telling 'Good Morning America': "paying more in taxes is the patriotic thing to do for wealthier Americans".
Like that won't be repeated. I was in the waiting room at the doctor's and watched Sarah Palin introduce her husband as The First Dude. Oh, Queen Elizabeth and Prince Phillip, please allow me to introduce you to Vice President Palin and The First Dude.
Is it only me that finds something so very WRONG with that?? I'm not trying to be a snob, but I DON'T want a "common" person in the White House. I want someone who is UNcommon, someone who is way smarter and way more driven than most people.
Within hours of him saying it, McCain/Palin both repeated it. Not that I blame them. Biden needs to keep to the script, and keep repeating 95% of Americans will be getting a tax cut. Not bringing up the 2% that will be paying more.
I found Palin "interesting" at first, but now I thinks she's totally obnoxious. Looking at how her approval ratings are dropping like a rock, it seems most of the American public is starting to feel the same way.
I found Palin "interesting" at first, but now I thinks she's totally obnoxious. Looking at how her approval ratings are dropping like a rock, it seems most of the American public is starting to feel the same way.
The polls are starting to trend back to Obama. I think by November Palin will be scaring the beejesus out of all reasonable people.
Palin excitement levels off as Democrats regain lead
(CNN) -- Is America's honeymoon with Sarah Palin over? Polls suggest that might be so.
Palin appears to be losing some of her initial appeal as Democrats make gains in the polls.
The Alaska governor came out swinging at the Republican National Convention, energizing her party's base and shifting the momentum to John McCain's favor.
At rallies in the week following the convention, the McCain-Palin duo saw their best attendance and a newfound zeal, and the Republican ticket took the lead in national polls for the first time.
But polls show the momentum has shifted once again.
Palin's favorable rating is at 40 percent, according to a CBS News/New York Times poll. That's down 4 points from last week. Her unfavorable rating is at 30 percent, rising eight points in a week.
The poll was conducted September 12-16 and has a sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.
Former Bush adviser Karl Rove predicted Wednesday that Palin's star power would wear off.
"Nothing lasts for 60-some-odd days," Rove told The Associated Press. "Will she be the center of attention in the remaining 48 days? No, but she came on in a very powerful way and has given a sense of urgency to the McCain campaign that's pretty remarkable."
But this week, the Democrats recaptured the headlines and Obama regained his lead in the national polls.
CNN's latest poll of polls, out Thursday afternoon, shows him ahead of McCain by two points, 47-44 percent.
The poll of polls consists of six recent surveys: CBS/NYT (September 12-16), Quinnipiac (September 11-16), IPSOS-McClatchy (September 11-15), Gallup (September 15-17), Diageo/Hotline (September 14-16) and American Research Group (September 13-15). It does not have a sampling error.
After a week in which McCain put Obama on the defensive over allegations of playing the gender card, the economic crisis has given Obama an opportunity to go on the offense. Most Americans see Obama as more capable than John McCain when it comes to handling the economy, polls show.
The Illinois senator has been aggressively attacking what he sees as shortcomings in McCain's economic plans.
Also this week, McCain handed Obama ammunition for what has turned out to be a weeklong attack.
Despite the shake up on Wall Street, McCain said Monday that "the fundamentals of the American economy are strong."
The Obama campaign jumped on those remarks, replaying them in a campaign ad, even after McCain clarified his comments. He said what he meant was that American workers are the fundamental strength of the economy and that the country will rebound with their help.
Obama continued to criticize the remark Wednesday at an event in Elko, Nevada: "His campaign must have realized that probably wasn't a smart thing to say on the day of a financial meltdown, so they sent him back out a few hours later to clean up his remarks."
Obama has filled this week's campaign speeches with a focused view of his economic agenda and sound-bite friendly slams to bruise McCain's image.
"This is somebody who has been in Congress for 26 years, who put seven of the most powerful Washington lobbyists in charge of his campaign. And now he tells us that he is the one who is going to take on the old boys' network. The old boys network, in the McCain campaign, that's called a staff meeting," he said Wednesday.
David Gergen, a senior political analyst for CNN and former presidential adviser, said neither candidate has shown expertise on the economic situation, but Obama has gained more from it than McCain.
"The momentum for John McCain and Sarah Palin has stalled out. There is a little momentum on Barack Obama's part. But he hasn't yet fully seized it and it is still very close," he said, adding that McCain could still recapture it.
But the Democratic ticket has shown a weakness in regards to the government takeover of insurance giant AIG.
A day after saying the federal government should not come to the rescue of AIG, Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden shifted his position Wednesday, saying he needs to get more details on the terms of the $85 billion takeover.
"The truth is I don't know what the bailout is yet," Biden said Wednesday afternoon in Mansfield, Ohio.
Obama was slow to respond when asked about the AIG deal. A statement issued from his campaign did not clarify whether he supports or opposes it.
McCain said he didn't want the government to have to take over the company, but it was necessary.
"When AIG was bailed out, I didn't like it, but I understood it needed to be done to protect hard working Americans with insurance policies and annuities. Sen. Obama didn't take a position. On the biggest issue of the day, he didn't know what to think. He may not realize it, but you don't get to vote present as president of the United States," he said Thursday in Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
He also accused Obama of seeing the economic crisis as a "political opportunity."
Obama's campaign responded by accusing McCain of flip-flopping on the issue because he said he opposed the bailout earlier this week.
"Barack Obama does not second guess the Fed's decision to take unprecedented action to prevent the failure of one of the largest insurance companies in the world from creating an even larger crisis, and he believes it must protect families who count on insurance," said campaign spokesman Bill Burton.
As the McCain campaign tries to regain its footing, they're hitting hard with a new ad accusing Obama of wasting taxpayers money.
The ad says Obama's economic policies would severely worsen the country's economic woes.
"When our economy's in crisis, a big government casts a big shadow on us all," the ad's narrator states. "Obama and his liberal Congressional allies want a massive government, billions in spending increases, wasteful pork. And, we would pay -- painful income taxes, skyrocketing taxes on life savings, electricity and home heating oil." "
Obama has repeatedly said the notion he will raise taxes on middle-class Americans is untrue.
According to a CNN fact check, Obama's tax plan would increase taxes in 2009 on the wealthiest 20 percent of households, while offering tax cuts for the other 80 percent. The largest increases would be on the top 1 percent of earners, according to analysis by the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan research group whose staff of experts includes former economic advisers to the White House and Congress under both Republicans and Democrats.
By comparison, the Tax Policy Center analysis says McCain would offer tax cuts across the board. Those at the top end of the scale would get the biggest percentage cuts under McCain, while households with the lowest incomes would receive the largest percentage cuts under Obama's plan.
Do you think that all African Americans will vote for Obama?
If Obama wins, they get their wish of a coloured guy a President. Will they then stop acting victimised on the slavery issue?
I thought their wish was a BLACK guy as President, not "colour," unless you mean Latino or Arab or whatever. BTW my anglo-friend, it's "color," not "colour."
As for the slavery issue.....sure they'll do that when the South will get over the Civil War.
I wonder what Chopper, or Yogi, or Turi would fell about that[/quote]
You mean Yogi with the avatar of an American Mafia mobster and Turi the Pittsburgh Steelers fan?
UK is cool and all, maybe better with the time-scale* and some other little things, but does American MPAA cut out headbutts for PG-13 like British censors do for their equivalent?
That is a great line RR. I wouldn't be surprised it was picked up by the Obama camp. I like it.
I did see the Olbermann segment also. Very good.
As far as the "Obama 'O' clip. Yea, that's funny. I can imagine if they wanted to do the same type of thing with McCain, they only need say over and over and over again..."My Friends"
If Obama wins, they get their wish of a coloured guy a President. Will they then stop acting victimised on the slavery issue?
Let's see. How about we send over some ships, chain up your parents, siblings and children, rape your women, drag them across the Atlantic, then reward them with jobs out in the field for the length of their lifetimes. Then we'll free their children, but we won't let them get a decent job for a hundred years or so, all the while excluding them from certain colleges, corporations and, gasp, even country clubs. Then you let me know how long it takes for you to stop acting "victimized."
Funny thing is, you're not even American, yet you think you know what goes on in the average American mind. Oh, and for the record, I'm a 49 year old white male of Italian descent.
"I think it's a stretch to, in any way, to say that she's got the experience to be president of the United States," Mr Hagel told the Omaha World-Herald newspaper. And he was dismissive of the fact that Mrs Palin, the governor of Alaska, has made few trips abroad. "You get a passport for the first time in your life last year? I mean, I don't know what you can say. You can't say anything."
Let's see. How about we send over some ships, chain up your parents, siblings and children, rape your women, drag them across the Atlantic, then reward them with jobs out in the field for the length of their lifetimes. Then we'll free their children, but we won't let them get a decent job for a hundred years or so, all the while excluding them from certain colleges, corporations and, gasp, even country clubs. Then you let me know how long it takes for you to stop acting "victimized."
Wasn't slavery over 300 years ago? Aren't people alway saying to each other nowadays,"Let it go, you'll feel better"?
Biden in hot water with some Ohioans Posted: 07:30 PM ET
Biden may have upset some crucial swing state voters.
(CNN) — Joe Biden's off-the-cuff remarks on the trail have at times taken the Obama campaign off-message, but the Delaware senator's latest riff just may have landed him in hot water with voters — and die hard football fans — in a key battleground state.
Speaking to members of the University of Delaware football team Friday morning, the Democratic VP candidate said he thinks the Fightin Blue Hens (1-1 this season) could thrash a certain team from Ohio.
"I was out in Ohio," he said while fiddling with a football in his hands. "I told the folks in Ohio that we'd kick Ohio State's ass!" (It remains unclear if Biden actually ever told Ohio voters this.)
Biden, a proud University of Delaware alum, was clearly trying to rally his Division 1-AA team ahead of their match-up with Furman this weekend, but the comments couldn't have come at a worse time for faithful Buckeye fans who saw their team suffer a 35-3 trouncing at the hands of USC last weekend.
The comments also come as polls show the race in Ohio could hardly be tighter: A CNN poll of polls in the Buckeye state shows Obama holding a slim 1 point lead there. Close enough, presumably, that enough angry OSU fans could just make the difference — at least that's what Republicans are hoping.
The state GOP is already attacking the Democratic ticket over the comments, as well as his comments yesterday suggesting it was patriotic for some wealthier Americans to pay higher taxes.
"As if his comments about it being a patriotic duty for Ohioans to pay higher taxes weren't bad enough, now Biden is taking pot shots at the Buckeyes," GOP State chair Bob Bennett said. "Barack Obama and Joe Biden must really think they can win this election without Ohio, because they're doing their best to lose it with stupid comments like these. Keep talking, Joe."
David Wade, a spokesman for Biden said, “I think this episode explains exactly why we’ll win Ohio: Joe Biden is loyal to his home team, and John McCain is loyal to President Bush."
"We forgive the Republicans on this one, though," he added. "After watching John McCain flip flop on everything from taxes to torture, they’re just mystified by someone who takes a position and sticks with it.”
UPDATE: Michigan Democrats, fans of OSU arch rival University of Michigan, weighed in on the back-and-forth, calling John McCain a "Panderer in Chief" for recently purchasing Ohio State apparel on a campaign swing.
"John McCain won't be hailing any victors on Election Day if he thinks Michigan fans will let this recent pander slide," said Liz Kerr, a spokesperson for the Michigan Democratic Party.
Do many of you voters here vote absentee???? I just registered before the CA primary and voted absentee for the first time then. It is very convenient, but I can't help but wonder if they counted my vote. Reading a poll on CNN I think about 25 percent polled aid they voted absentee.
The disadvantage, I noticed during the primary, was that there was a considerable amount of time between when I had to have my vote sent in, and the election.....well, enough that IF I had changed my mind, I couldn't do anything about it. I didn't change my mnd, but "if".
Anyway, I havent' gotten my ballot yet. Do you all know if there is a certain week in which they must be sent out? I must say, it is very convenient. I don't know if I'll miss the general patriotic feeling of just going to a polling place to vote or not, but this is pretty easy.
This is a neat segment on the Truman/Dewey election. Tom Brokow narrates noting that Truman was so far behind that they stopped polling in October. Although it turned out, in the end not to be an exceptionally close election, it was a definite upset.
I found this interesting, primarily because this was the year I was born. Yes, Truman was the President when was born. I have no memory of him however. The first President I rememember was Ike (Eisenhower) and then, I was a little kid. I remember going downtown with my mom 1950something and Ike was gonna be there. I saw a lot of people with the "I Like Ike" buttons.
Anyway, wouldn't you love to go back for a few moments to "be there" during some of these things? I know nothing about Dewey, but man, what a downer for him no?
I always thought you had to be out of state/country or in the military (and overseas) to vote absentee. When I moved to my new place they sent me info on it and said I could vote absentee if I wanted to.
Poll: Racial views steer some white Dems away from Obama By RON FOURNIER and TREVOR TOMPSON, Associated Press Writers
WASHINGTON (AP) — Deep-seated racial misgivings could cost Barack Obama the White House if the election is close, according to an AP-Yahoo News poll that found one-third of white Democrats harbor negative views toward blacks — many calling them "lazy," "violent," responsible for their own troubles.
The poll, conducted with Stanford University, suggests that the percentage of voters who may turn away from Obama because of his race could easily be larger than the final difference between the candidates in 2004 — about two and one-half percentage points.
Certainly, Republican John McCain has his own obstacles: He's an ally of an unpopular president and would be the nation's oldest first-term president. But Obama faces this: 40 percent of all white Americans hold at least a partly negative view toward blacks, and that includes many Democrats and independents.
More than a third of all white Democrats and independents — voters Obama can't win the White House without — agreed with at least one negative adjective about blacks, according to the survey, and they are significantly less likely to vote for Obama than those who don't have such views.
Such numbers are a harsh dose of reality in a campaign for the history books. Obama, the first black candidate with a serious shot at the presidency, accepted the Democratic nomination on the 45th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech, a seminal moment for a nation that enshrined slavery in its Constitution.
"There are a lot fewer bigots than there were 50 years ago, but that doesn't mean there's only a few bigots," said Stanford political scientist Paul Sniderman who helped analyze the exhaustive survey.
The pollsters set out to determine why Obama is locked in a close race with McCain even as the political landscape seems to favor Democrats. President Bush's unpopularity, the Iraq war and a national sense of economic hard times cut against GOP candidates, as does that fact that Democratic voters outnumber Republicans.
The findings suggest that Obama's problem is close to home — among his fellow Democrats, particularly non-Hispanic white voters. Just seven in 10 people who call themselves Democrats support Obama, compared to the 85 percent of self-identified Republicans who back McCain.
The survey also focused on the racial attitudes of independent voters because they are likely to decide the election.
Lots of Republicans harbor prejudices, too, but the survey found they weren't voting against Obama because of his race. Most Republicans wouldn't vote for any Democrat for president — white, black or brown.
Not all whites are prejudiced. Indeed, more whites say good things about blacks than say bad things, the poll shows. And many whites who see blacks in a negative light are still willing or even eager to vote for Obama.
On the other side of the racial question, the Illinois Democrat is drawing almost unanimous support from blacks, the poll shows, though that probably wouldn't be enough to counter the negative effect of some whites' views.
Race is not the biggest factor driving Democrats and independents away from Obama. Doubts about his competency loom even larger, the poll indicates. More than a quarter of all Democrats expressed doubt that Obama can bring about the change they want, and they are likely to vote against him because of that.
Three in 10 of those Democrats who don't trust Obama's change-making credentials say they plan to vote for McCain.
Still, the effects of whites' racial views are apparent in the polling.
Statistical models derived from the poll suggest that Obama's support would be as much as 6 percentage points higher if there were no white racial prejudice.
But in an election without precedent, it's hard to know if such models take into account all the possible factors at play.
The AP-Yahoo News poll used the unique methodology of Knowledge Networks, a Menlo Park, Calif., firm that interviews people online after randomly selecting and screening them over telephone. Numerous studies have shown that people are more likely to report embarrassing behavior and unpopular opinions when answering questions on a computer rather than talking to a stranger.
Other techniques used in the poll included recording people's responses to black or white faces flashed on a computer screen, asking participants to rate how well certain adjectives apply to blacks, measuring whether people believe blacks' troubles are their own fault, and simply asking people how much they like or dislike blacks.
"We still don't like black people," said John Clouse, 57, reflecting the sentiments of his pals gathered at a coffee shop in Somerset, Ohio.
Given a choice of several positive and negative adjectives that might describe blacks, 20 percent of all whites said the word "violent" strongly applied. Among other words, 22 percent agreed with "boastful," 29 percent "complaining," 13 percent "lazy" and 11 percent "irresponsible." When asked about positive adjectives, whites were more likely to stay on the fence than give a strongly positive assessment.
Among white Democrats, one third cited a negative adjective and, of those, 58 percent said they planned to back Obama.
The poll sought to measure latent prejudices among whites by asking about factors contributing to the state of black America. One finding: More than a quarter of white Democrats agree that "if blacks would only try harder, they could be just as well off as whites."
Those who agreed with that statement were much less likely to back Obama than those who didn't.
Among white independents, racial stereotyping is not uncommon. For example, while about 20 percent of independent voters called blacks "intelligent" or "smart," more than one third latched on the adjective "complaining" and 24 percent said blacks were "violent."
Nearly four in 10 white independents agreed that blacks would be better off if they "try harder."
The survey broke ground by incorporating images of black and white faces to measure implicit racial attitudes, or prejudices that are so deeply rooted that people may not realize they have them. That test suggested the incidence of racial prejudice is even higher, with more than half of whites revealing more negative feelings toward blacks than whites.
Researchers used mathematical modeling to sort out the relative impact of a huge swath of variables that might have an impact on people's votes — including race, ideology, party identification, the hunger for change and the sentiments of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's backers.
Just 59 percent of her white Democratic supporters said they wanted Obama to be president. Nearly 17 percent of Clinton's white backers plan to vote for McCain.
Among white Democrats, Clinton supporters were nearly twice as likely as Obama backers to say at least one negative adjective described blacks well, a finding that suggests many of her supporters in the primaries — particularly whites with high school education or less — were motivated in part by racial attitudes.
The survey of 2,227 adults was conducted Aug. 27 to Sept. 5. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 2.1 percentage points.
———
Associated Press writers Nancy Benac, Julie Carr Smyth, Philip Elliot, Julie Pace and Sonya Ross contributed to this story.
There's no doubt racism will play a role in how some people vote. It goes both ways though. Over 90% on the African American population will vote for Obama, and good percentage of them only because he's black. Also, the African American Voter turnout this election will be the largest in history, due to Obama.
I know, Lou. You know me, "Negative PB." I just think that if it's close, he can't win. Be it racism, or the hijacking of Florida. Didn't the Republicans do that once?
There's a good chance Obama is going to lose Florida anyway. Ohio is where you have to watch for shenanigans. My personal opinion is Obama is going to win fairly easily. I don't think McCain can recover from the week he's had. Obama should also do very well against him in the debates. Every day Palin's approval goes down, even amongst her own party and women. Unless Obama really stumbles in the last 6 weeks, it's his election to lose.
I've always figured Fla. going Republican. But Obama has a good chance in N. Carolina nd Virginia. I can't pick a winner yet, but Obama is in a good posiiton and like lou says, McCain may have trouble recovering from this week's events. However, keep in mind that the first debate is just a week away.
I've always figured Fla. going Republican. But Obama has a good chance in N. Carolina nd Virginia. I can't pick a winner yet, but Obama is in a good posiiton and like lou says, McCain may have trouble recovering from this week's events. However, keep in mind that the first debate is just a week away.
I expect Obama to do very well in the debates, especially the 3rd and final debate on the economy and domestic policy. McCain should have the have the upper hand on the first debate topic. Foreign Policy, and National Security. But, Obama by far will come across as the better speaker and more comfortable. I predict the Vice Presidential debate will be a disaster for McCain/Palin. Their only hope, (and it is a possibility), is that Biden says something really bad and stupid.
How to the American posters feel about this election, that it is a new era: You've either got first African American President or first woman Vice President.
I agree that as unfortunate as it is, race will be a factor for some. IMHO Obama would/should be ahead by much much more (sorry, but considering he competition especially), and all the flip-flopping and gaffes McCain's made. I keep hearing about this "Bradley affect" and think well that was then, maybe our nation has come a long way since then. Don't know.
I saw a video tape from David Plouffe (I beleive O's campaign manager). He had a detailed map of each swing state and explained their goal. He gave the numbers of how much Bush won won each state and how many votes Gore and then Kerry received, in the last two elections.
However, in each of those states, the Obama team registered in some cases 300,000(or enormous amounts of new voters. Part of me wants to go on record to say I have a gut feeling this will not be as close as many think. However, I hear that the young voters (which are most of the new registants) are the most unreliable ones to show up at the polls. So........who knows. Then too, there's the October surprise which could be a terror threat, in which case many assume everyone would run to McCain.
In any case, what an exciting and historic election this is.
Basically 5 minutes of Obama slamming McCain over the "fundamentally strong" gaffe and that recent quote of wanting to de-regulating the health industry BEFORE the recent market disaster.
Notice that propagandistic connection that Obama makes..."So let me get this straight, he wants to run healthcare...like they've been running Wall Street."
With all that, and bringing out McCain's potential Treasury Secretary's comment that America is a "Nation of Whiners" and only in a "Mental Depression,"...Is he hitting his stride here?
(UPI) -- A poll of Ohio voters Sunday indicated Republican John McCain with a slight lead over Democrat Barrack Obama in the U.S. presidential race.
The Ohio Newspaper Poll calculated a 6-point edge for McCain over Obama, though a sizable 19 percent of voters said they reserved the right to change their minds before Election Day.
The polling was carried out by the Institute for Policy Research at the University of Cincinnati and surveyed 869 likely voters from Sept. 12-16. The error margin was plus or minus 3.3 percentage points.
"Even though it seems like this presidential race has gone on for an eternity, in many ways, especially in Ohio, it's just getting started," Eric Rademacher, interim co-director of the institute told The (Toledo) Blade. "When you bring the margin of error into consideration, it's certainly a very close race in the state."
Among independent voters, Obama led McCain 38 percent to 33 percent with 19 percent undecided.
The (Cleveland) Plain-Dealer said the poll indicates McCain's age was not considered much of a factor in the race; however, black voters remained committed to Obama while McCain was favored among whites.
Guys, well you've known my position on this race so far, but that shit right above fucking pisses me off.
I think most of us would, or mostly thought up until now, that political disagreements aside, he probably was a decent man. Maybe he still is, but when you go from attacking CEOs getting million $$$ parachutes, yet employed such a person as his financial advisor...and hell, highlighted in a DNC attack ad last week.
Either he's really really really ignorant this side of Dubya, or he's...well, we expect politicians to lie to us, but first flip-flopping from non-regulation to regulation within 24 hours, now this shit...where are the campaign advisors of his to point this shit out, like that "fundamentally strong" remark gaffe last week?
"I suppose the McCain campaign's hope is that when there's a big crisis, people will go for age and experience. The question is, who in this crisis looked more presidential, calm and un-flustered? It wasn't John McCain who, as usual, substituting vehemence for coherence, said 'let's fire somebody.' And picked one of the most experienced and conservative people in the administration, Chris Cox, and for no apparent reason... It was un-presidential behavior by a presidential candidate ... John McCain showed his personality this week and it made some of us fearful," - Conservative columnist George Will
I am really trying not to put a lot of trust in the polls, but of course, I still find myself checking them. FWIW, CNN as the electoral map, updating daily. Right now 223 Obama and 200 McCain. I think O will end up getting MI and McCain Florida. Not sure about PA. Those states have the most electoral votes if I'm not mistaken.
I've seen many polls both before and after the convention in Pennsylvania, and despite the typical week to week vascillations, Obama generally comes out with a 46-44 margin.
Our local paper did a comprehensive breakdown of the state with polling, and while the Democrats usually win big in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and the Northeast, the midstate and upper tiers generally go Republican.
The Northeast part of the state (where I was born) gets a lot of attention in recent presidential elections. It's no coincidence that Scranton was the first stop for both Kerry and Bush after their respective conventions in 2004. There was also a calculated reason why Palin specifically mentiioned Scranton in her convention speech. The area is unusual in that it is heavily Democratic while being staunchly pro life. Also, Joe Biden is from the area and has great appeal among blue collar voters, the group that essentially won the primary for Hillary. Unfortunately for Obama, he came off as an elitist during the primary.
While McCain won't carry NE PA, his success in the state would depend, in part, upon how deeply he can penetrate the Democratic base in Scranton/Wilkes-Barre/Hazleton.
Looks like the electoral map is presently trending toward Obama, but things are fluid. In the present climate I really wonder what difference it will make who wins. In reality there is little a president can do about the economy, and truth be told the United States has lost its position as the financial capital of the world. Neither Obama or McCain will be able to change that.
In reality there is little a president can do about the economy, and truth be told the United States has lost its position as the financial capital of the world. Neither Obama or McCain will be able to change that.
Sad but true, Don T. Whether you're rich today, or poor today, odds are you'll be in the same boat four years from now.
Biden Fires Up the Gaffe-o-Matic Tuesday, September 23, 2008 12:25 PM By Andrew Romano
On the stump, Democratic vice presidential nominee Joe Biden likes to say that John McCain is disconnected from ordinary Americans. But lately it seems like Biden is the one who's "out of touch"--at least with his own campaign.
When Barack Obama selected Biden as his running mate late last month, the punditocracy immediately predicted that the Delaware senator's predilection for saying stupid stuff at regular intervals--the term of art is "gaffe machine," I believe--would prove detrimental to his new boss's presidential bid. Until now, though, Biden's loose tongue hasn't been much of problem. It's not that he hasn't slipped up on occasion; he has, after all, admitted that Hillary Clinton "might have been a better [veep] pick" and asked the wheelchair-bound Missouri politician Chuck Graham to "stand up" at a rally. But so far, Biden's bloopers have been eclipsed by the planet-sized celebrity phenomenon known to us earthlings as Sarah Palin--a good thing for the body politic, given that most of his mistakes to date have been of the "totally irrelevant but typically distracting" variety. Advertisement
Not anymore. In the past few days--just as Palinsanity has begun to die down--Biden has made a series of strange public statements that suggest he's either at odds with Obama on key policy issues or that he isn't aware of what Obama believes. Individually, they've served to cloud Obama's message on matters of substance; taken together, they suggest that someone in Chicago should give the guy a good talking to. If he or she can get a word in edgewise, that is.
Biden's string of slip-ups started last Monday. Asked by NBC's Meredith Vieira whether the Fed should bail out insurance giant AIG, the senator said no: "I don't think they should be bailed out by the federal government." Unfortunately, the remark had more in common with McCain's initial position on the bailout (instinctive opposition) than Obama's carefully cultivated claim that he would not "second-guess" the government. When the bailout went through, both Biden and McCain bowed to reality. But the shift left Obama in a tricky position--as Matt Lauer pointed out this morning on "Today." Noting that Obama had been hitting McCain for flip-flopping on the AIG bailout, Lauer asked the Illinois senator how he could criticize his Republican rival when his own running mate had made the same mistake. His answer? "I think Joe should have waited, as well." Awkward.
The past few days have been even worse. Speaking Thursday on ABC's "Good Morning America," Biden not only acknowledged that the wealthy would pay higher taxes if if he and Obama won the White House but said that doing so would be "patriotic." "It's time to be patriotic," he said. "Time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut." Whether or not you agree with that sentiment, emphasizing that Obama would raise rates on rich folks (instead of saying that he'd lower them on the middle-classes) was clearly off-message--and the "patriotism" sound bite gave the GOP something catchy to hang its "redistribution of wealth" hat on. Accompanied by a sarcastic ad, McCain's response was scathing: "Raising taxes in a tough economy isn't patriotic. It's not a badge of honor. It's just dumb policy." Expect to hear more on Biden's idea of patriotism before Nov. 4.
Incredibly, though, the senator seems to have saved the worst for last. Asked last night by Katie Couric on the "CBS Evening News," Biden delivered what has to be most off-message statement yet: that one of his campaign's own ads--the spot released earlier this month mocking McCain for not being able to use a computer--was "terrible." "I didn't know we did it and if I had anything to do with it, we would have never done it," he said. The campaign was soon forced to issue a less-than-convincing clarification in Biden's name. (Apparently he'd "never seen" the ad.") Meanwhile, video surfaced this morning of Biden telling a rope-line environmentalist in Ohio that he and Obama "are not supporting clean coal" in America--even though Obama, well, is. McCain quickly pounced, using Biden's error to pivot away from Wall Street and make the case that Democrats don't support comprehensive energy solutions; conference calls and ads are in the works. Biden may have opposed the technology in the primaries--he's on record as saying "clean-coal ... is not the route to go in the United States"--but he should probably brush up on his briefing books (or pay attention to his own speeches) now that his boss disagrees.
Don't get me wrong. I think that the GOP should take a page from Chicago's book and stop sequestering Palin from the press and the public as if she were a show pony instead of a potential vice president. And I hate that "gaffes"--often little more than trivialities--tend to dominate the political conversation in this country. But Biden's latest spree is more than an irrelevant testament to his uncontrollable verbosity. It's actually making Obama's message on substantive matters like taxes, energy, AIG and McCain more difficult to hear. In an election, that hurts the candidate more than anyone else. But what happens if Obama and Biden are elected? Having a vice president who's eager to hold forth on any subject--even when what he's saying bears no relation to administration policy--could get pretty complicated. Distracting a campaign is one thing. Distracting a president, a political party and, by extension, the country? Awkward doesn't quite cover it.
In the primaries, the senator showed an admirable sense of self-conscious restraint. Asked during the first Democratic debate whether he'd have the "discipline" he'd "need on the world stage," Biden delivered the perfect answer: "Yes." Nothing more, nothing less.
Obama might want to remind him of that exchange the next time they talk.
and I think some McCain campaign folks are gonna hand in their resignations...
McCain Aide’s Firm Was Paid by Freddie Mac
"WASHINGTON — One of the giant mortgage companies at the heart of the credit crisis paid $15,000 a month from the end of 2005 through last month to a firm owned by Senator John McCain’s campaign manager, according to two people with direct knowledge of the arrangement.
The disclosure undercuts a statement by Mr. McCain on Sunday night that the campaign manager, Rick Davis, had had no involvement with the company for the last several years. "
-----
They said they did not recall Mr. Davis’s doing much substantive work for the company in return for the money, other than speak to a political action committee of high-ranking employees in October 2006 on the approaching midterm Congressional elections. They said Mr. Davis’s firm, Davis & Manafort, had been kept on the payroll because of Mr. Davis’s close ties to Mr. McCain, the Republican presidential nominee, who by 2006 was widely expected to run again for the White House.
-----
On Sunday, in an interview with CNBC and The New York Times, Mr. McCain responded to a question about Mr. Davis’s role in the advocacy group through 2005 by saying that his campaign manager “has had nothing to do with it since, and I’ll be glad to have his record examined by anybody who wants to look at it.”
Such assertions, along with McCain campaign television ads tying Mr. Obama to former Fannie Mae chiefs, have riled current and former officials of the two companies and provoked them to volunteer rebuttals. The two officials with direct knowledge of Freddie Mac’s post-2005 contract with Mr. Davis spoke on condition of anonymity. Four other outside consultants, three Democrats and a Republican also speaking on condition of anonymity, said the arrangement was widely known among people involved in Freddie Mac’s lobbying efforts.
I was just gonna post this same clip. I just saw it on you tube came here and see it's posted. What a coincidence.
While I was at work today I was reading how the McCain camp first told the media they couldn't cover this story, and then said they could cover it, but not do any interviews or ask questions. A good job on her part. Glad someone in the media as a pair. Maybe McCain's free media ride is over.
I was just gonna post this same clip. I just saw it on you tube came here and see it's posted. What a coincidence.
While I was at work today I was reading how the McCain camp first told the media they couldn't cover this story, and then said they could cover it, but not do any interviews or ask questions. A good job on her part. Glad someone in the media as a pair. Maybe McCain's free media ride is over.
TIS
What gets me is how that with that campaign's approach to Palin, they've effectively handled her like rare 19th century China plates...very fragile.
Considering she's done only two media interviews, ABC and FOX NEWS, both softball, and both times I felt she acted like...well, a few cans short of a six-pack...a few track laps short of a mile....
But that's my opinion. But the McCain campaign's press-access with Palin so far just only re-enforces that image of someone not up to the challenge, much less be the sweating and brutal henchman for the top-ticket person, as Vice-Presidential candidates do traditionally.
I mean yeah Biden has said some dumb gaffes, but he's out there campaigning hard in Pennsylvania and Virginia and shit.
More than anything else, I wonder what appleonya thinks of her gal being handled with TLC by her "boss."
Take it FWIW, but a new ABC News/Washington Post Poll released this morning has Obama up +9! 52% to 43%
McCain is going to get hit harder on the bailout. The pendulum is now swinging in Obama's favor. What may be more gratifying to Obama is that pols have shown him stretching his small lead in MI, MN, WI,and NV.
On to the debates.
I too would like to see the McCain camp remove the plastic bubble that's protecting Palin. It's apparent they view her strong on personal appeal, weak on the issues.
I am always uncomfortable believing polls, but it would "seem" that because of this crisis economic crisis it could be true. It would be absolutely horrible to get two major "shakeups", but if we were to get another terror threat, would it swing toward McCain?
I look forward to the debates. Foreign policy is suppose to be McCain's knowledgeable area. I'm thinking, as important as it is, that, right now,today, this week, most people want to hear more about eonomic policy. Could this whole economic thing be he "Ocotber Surprise" early???
I too was reading that the McCain camp plans (or at least did plan before the Wall crises) to start up with Reverend Wright ads again.
Ha ha ha. I didn't hear her speak, but I saw brief shot of her in NYC yesterday. She looks/sounds justlike her. I have a feeling that she would be aasy to "imitate" no???
Poll: Economic fears give Obama lead Survey gives Democrat a 9-point edge over McCain among likely voters By Dan Balz and Jon Cohen The Washington Post updated 6:44 a.m. ET, Wed., Sept. 24, 2008
Turmoil in the financial industry and growing pessimism about the economy have altered the shape of the presidential race, giving Democratic nominee Barack Obama the first clear lead of the general-election campaign over Republican John McCain, according to the latest Washington Post-ABC News national poll.
Just 9 percent of those surveyed rated the economy as good or excellent, the first time that number has been in single digits since the days just before the 1992 election. Just 14 percent said the country is heading in the right direction, equaling the record low on that question in polls dating back to 1973.
More voters trust Obama to deal with the economy, and he currently has a big edge as the candidate who is more in tune with the economic problems Americans now face. He also has a double-digit advantage on handling the current problems on Wall Street, and as a result, there has been a rise in his overall support. The poll found that, among likely voters, Obama now leads McCain by 52 percent to 43 percent. Two weeks ago, in the days immediately following the Republican National Convention, the race was essentially even, with McCain at 49 percent and Obama at 47 percent.
As a point of comparison, neither of the last two Democratic nominees -- John F. Kerry in 2004 or Al Gore in 2000 -- recorded support above 50 percent in a pre-election poll by the Post and ABC News.
Last week's near-meltdown in the financial markets and the subsequent debate in Washington over a proposed government bailout of troubled financial institutions have made the economy even more important in the minds of voters. Fully 50 percent called the economy and jobs the single most important issue that will determine their vote, up from 37 percent two weeks ago. In contrast, just 9 percent cited the Iraq war as their most important issue, its lowest of the campaign.
But voters are cool toward the administration's initial efforts to deal with the current crisis. Forty-seven percent said they approve of the steps taken by the Treasury and the Federal Reserve to stabilize the financial markets, while 42 percent said they disapprove.
Anxiety about the economic situation is widespread. Just over half of the poll respondents -- 52 percent -- believe the economy has moved into a serious long-term decline. Eight in 10 are concerned about the overall direction of the economy, nearly three-quarters worry about the shocks to the stock market, and six in 10 are apprehensive about their own family finances.
Two weeks ago, McCain held a substantial advantage among white voters, including newfound strength with white women. In the face of bad economic news, the two candidates now run about evenly among white women, and Obama has narrowed the overall gap among white voters to five percentage points.
Much of the movement has come among college-educated whites. Whites without college degrees favor McCain by 17 points, while those with college degrees support Obama by 9 points. No Democrat has carried white, college-educated voters in presidential elections dating back to 1980, but they were a key part of Obama's coalition in the primaries.
The political climate is rapidly changing along with the twists and turns on Wall Street, and it remains unclear whether recent shifts in public opinion will fundamentally alter the highly competitive battle between McCain and Obama. About two in 10 voters are either undecided or remain "movable" and open to veering to another candidate. Nevertheless, the close relationship between voters' focus on the economy and their overall support for the Democratic nominee has boosted Obama.
Among white voters, economic anxiety translates into greater support for Obama. He is favored by 54 percent of whites who said they are concerned about the direction of the economy, but by just 10 percent of those who are less worried.
The survey also found that the strong initial public reaction to Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, McCain's running mate, has cooled somewhat. Overall, her unfavorable rating has gone up by 10 points in the past two weeks, from 28 percent to 38 percent.
She remains broadly popular -- 52 percent of voters view her positively -- but there have been some notable declines. Over the past two weeks, the percentage of independents with favorable views of Palin dropped from 60 percent to 48 percent. Among independent women, the decline was particularly sharp, going from 65 percent to 43 percent. Her favorable rating among whites without college degrees remained largely steady, but among those with college degrees, it dropped nearly 20 percentage points.
The survey also showed some backsliding in enthusiasm among McCain supporters. Overall, most supporters of each presidential candidate said they are enthusiastic about their choice, but 62 percent of Obama supporters said they are "very enthusiastic," compared with 34 percent of McCain's supporters. Coming out of the GOP convention, nearly half of those backing McCain said they did so fervently.
Among Republicans, conservatives and white evangelical Protestants, strong enthusiasm for McCain's candidacy has dropped by double digits.
The survey, conducted Friday through Monday, included telephone interviews with a random national sample of 1,082 adults, including 916 registered voters. The margin of error for the full sample is plus or minus three percentage points; it is four points for the sample of 780 likely voters.
Overall, Obama and McCain are tied among men in the new poll, while Obama has opened up a sizable lead among women. The candidates divide white voters, 50 percent for McCain to 45 percent for Obama, while Obama has an overwhelming advantage among African Americans, 96 percent to 3 percent.
Independents, key swing voters, now break for Obama, 53 percent to 39 percent, reversing a small lead for McCain after the Republican convention. McCain is the choice of 86 percent of Republicans, while about as many Democrats, 88 percent, back Obama.
In the new poll, voters once again gave Obama higher marks than McCain when it comes to dealing with the economy, 53 percent to 39 percent. Two weeks ago, Obama's edge on the question was a narrow five points, his lowest of the campaign. Among independents, Obama's advantage on the economy -- now 21 points -- is greater than at any point in the campaign.
McCain's advantages on national security issues have also been blunted. Two weeks ago, when those surveyed were asked who they trusted to deal with a major unexpected crisis, McCain led 54 percent to 37 percent. That lead is gone.
Similarly, McCain's once-sizable advantage in dealing with the battle against terrorism has all but disappeared. There were also big shifts toward Obama on handling Iraq and international affairs more broadly.
The first presidential debate, set for Friday evening, is slated to focus on foreign policy and national security, but economic issues seem likely to be included, given the developments on Wall Street. The debate appears poised to draw record levels of attention, as interest in the election has been sky high and continues to grow. Almost all voters are tuned in, and 55 percent are following "very closely," higher than at this time in 2004 and more than double the percentage so engaged in 2000.
A substantial hurdle for Obama is the widespread public skepticism about whether he would make a good commander in chief. On that question, he has made no significant headway in allaying voters' concerns. They remain evenly divided -- 48 percent said he would be effective in that role, 47 percent said he would not. Nearly three-quarters said McCain would manage the military well, and as many said he has the knowledge of world affairs to serve effectively.
Still, the candidates are rated about equally on the question of who is the stronger leader.
In the aftermath of the national conventions and the surprise pick of Palin, McCain had narrowed the gap with Obama on who is more likely to change Washington. In the new survey, Obama has reestablished his credentials on that front. He also now holds a double-digit lead as the more honest and trustworthy candidate, flipping what had been a slight McCain edge two weeks ago.
Obama has also cemented a clear edge among voters prioritizing the economy, a growing group. Among "economy voters," he now leads McCain by nearly 2 to 1. McCain holds advantages among voters prioritizing a range of concerns that rank lower on the issues list, making it harder for him to find ways to drive the agenda of the campaign into favorable territory.
I too was reading that the McCain camp plans (or at least did plan before the Wall crises) to start up with Reverend Wright ads again.
TIS
There are already Reverend Wright ads and racist ads cropping up in Michigan by groups "not connected with McCain's campaign." If Obama starts to pull away in the polls there's no question they'll lay the race card.
There's breaking news on CNN. McCain is suspending his campaigning, and wants to postpone the debate Friday to "work on the economy". He's asking Obama to do the same. I haven't heard any details, but this sounds like a desperation move.
* Story Highlights * NEW: McCain calls on Obama to join him in effort to focus on economy * NEW: Obama and McCain campaigns have spoken by phone * NEW: McCain also calls for postponing Friday's presidential debate * New CNN "poll of polls" shows McCain with slimmest of leads in Virginia
NEW YORK (CNN) -- Republican presidential candidate John McCain announced Wednesday that he is suspending his campaign to return to Washington and focus on the "historic" crisis facing the U.S. economy.
The Arizona senator called on his Democratic rival, Barack Obama, to do the same. He also urged organizers of Friday's presidential debate at the University of Mississippi to postpone the event.
"I am calling on the president to convene a meeting with the leadership from both houses of Congress, including Senator Obama and myself," McCain told reporters in New York. "It is time for both parties to come together to solve this problem."
There was no immediate response from the Obama campaign.
McCain and his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, were in New York to meet with world leaders at the United Nations. They had met with Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili and Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko.
"Senator, governor, I'm really honored to be here with you. I know you have a very important campaign to run," Saakashvili said. "Overall, I have to say I greatly appreciate the solidarity we felt from the American people."
Earlier, Palin met with Iraqi President Jalal Talabani.
Obama on Wednesday lashed out at the Bush administration and his opponent on the handling of the crisis on Wall Street as well as the $700 billion bailout plan by Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson.
Congress and the White House are trying to negotiate the details of what would be the most sweeping economic intervention by the government since the Great Depression. Bush has asked Congress to act quickly on the bailout proposal following news of failing financial institutions and frozen credit markets.
"The clock is ticking on this crisis. We have to act swiftly, but we also have to get it right," Obama said in Dunedin, Florida. "And that means everyone -- Republicans and Democrats, and the White House and Congress -- must work together to come up with a solution that protects American taxpayers and our economy without rewarding those whose greed helped get us into this problem in the first place."
Obama said it's unacceptable to expect the American people to "hand this administration or any administration a $700 billion check with no conditions and no oversight when a lack of oversight in Washington and on Wall Street is exactly what got us into this mess."
He said struggling homeowners must be taken care of in any economic recovery plan -- and that taxpayers should "not be spending one dime to reward the same Wall Street CEOs whose greed and irresponsibility got us into this mess." Read more on both candidates' recovery plans
He also hit McCain for switching from his stance as an advocate for market deregulation to a strong supporter of regulation since the Wall Street crisis became front-page news.
"He's suddenly a hard-charging populist," Obama said. "And that's all well and good, but I sure wish he was talking the same way over a year ago, when I introduced a bill that would've helped stop the multimillion-dollar bonus packages that CEOs grab on their way out the door."
McCain's bombshell comes as a new CNN "poll of polls" out of Virginia on Wednesday shows McCain with the slimmest of leads in a state that traditionally has been a safe bet for Republicans.
The latest polls could be a warning sign for McCain that he still has work to do to lock down certain states where previous GOP nominees had to spend little time or effort doing so. VideoWatch more on where the candidates stand in the latest polls »
In the new poll of polls, McCain holds a 1 percentage point lead over Obama (47 percent to 46 percent) in Virginia, while 7 percent remain undecided.
The poll of polls is an average of three recent surveys of the state -- MSNBC/Mason-Dixon (September 17-22), ARG (September 17-20) and ABC/The Washington Post (September 18-21). The poll of polls does not have a sampling error.
Another political stunt to try and change the game. First it was picking Palin, and now with him sliding in the National and Battleground polls, he pulls this.
Obama called McCain this morning, and suggested they put out a joint statement on the bailout. The McCain camp called back this afternoon, and said McCain wants to postpone his campaign and the debate.
Obama called McCain this morning, and suggested they put out a joint statement on the bailout. The McCain camp called back this afternoon, and said McCain wants to postpone his campaign and the debate.
That's apparently what happened, and what I don't get is, how is he going to impact those bailout negotiations?
If Obama had pulled this stunt, I would have said the same thing. Neither candidates would contribute anything substantial to those meetings.
Obama gave the best answer he could: "With only 40 days left, the debate is more important now then ever. The American people need to know what the candidates plans are to move the country forward during this crisis."
What amazes me is that not long ago McCain proclaimed that the fundamentals of the economy are strong...and now the economy is in such peril that it is necessary to suspend presidential campaigns to return to Washington "to fix it." Well, I don't think that the guy, who saw a strong economy weeks ago, is the guy, who is needed to fix it.
Postponing debates and suspening presidential campaigns in late September are unprecedented...unless you're a Libertarian or in the Green Party maybe. The timing is curious too. Obama just had a sudden favorable shift in the polls, the largest of this election, and stopping the campaigns would take some of the wind out of the sails.
What amazes me is that not long ago McCain proclaimed that the fundamentals of the economy are strong...and now the economy is in such peril that it is necessary to suspend presidential campaigns to return to Washington "to fix it." Well, I don't think that the guy, who saw a strong economy weeks ago, is the guy, who is needed to fix it.
Very well said.
I see McCain's move to postpone the debate as an act of desperation, but I'm sure he intends it to be seen as if he was doing something "presidential".
I see McCain's move to postpone the debate as an act of desperation, but I'm sure he intends it to be seen as if he was doing something "presidential".
McCain isn't president now, is really having him gone for a few hours from Washington really going to affect the economy in anyway? Can he walk and chew gum at the same time?
If he doesn't have the time then he should send Palin to stand in for him in the debates. It would be a great way to eliminate any lingering questions about whether she's qualified for the job. The first debate was on foreign policy, what a better time to talk about the view from her house.
McCain isn't president now, is really having him gone for a few hours from Washington really going to affect the economy in anyway?
Of course not. But that's irrelevant. He's trying to APPEAR as if he can do some magic now. What scares me is some people may actually believe it.
He's scared, plain and simple.
I don't know about that SC. According to one of the latest news reports :
______________________________________________________________ "At 8:30 this morning, Senator Obama called Senator McCain to ask him if he would join in issuing a joint statement outlining their shared principles and conditions for the Treasury proposal and urging Congress and the White House to act in a bipartisan manner to pass such a proposal," Burton said.
"At 2:30 this afternoon, Senator McCain returned Senator Obama's call and agreed to join him in issuing such a statement. The two campaigns are currently working together on the details," he said.
McCain said he was suspending his campaign and returning to Washington Thursday to help deliberations in Congress on an economic rescue deal. _______________________________________________________________
Perhaps both Senator's will have to postpone / delay their campaign so that as Senators they can work on the details to get Congress and the White house to pass the treasury proposal.
Perhaps both Senator's will have to postpone / delay their campaign so that as Senators they can work on the details to get Congress and the White house to pass the treasury proposal.
They have bigger fish to fry... they should continue with the planned debate. Let the voters decide on what they see.
Perhaps both Senator's will have to postpone / delay their campaign so that as Senators they can work on the details to get Congress and the White house to pass the treasury proposal.
Ha. But he's not even on the committee that will be drafting the legislation. He's got no input on this.
Ha. But he's not even on the committee that will be drafting the legislation. He's got no input on this.
Then why did Senator Obama call Senator McCain to ask if he would join him in outlining their shared principles and conditions for the Treasury proposal so that together they could get Congress and the White House to pass the proposal?
Ha. But he's not even on the committee that will be drafting the legislation. He's got no input on this.
Then why did Senator Obama call Senator McCain to ask if he would join him in outlining their shared principles and conditions for the Treasury proposal so that together they could get Congress and the White House to pass the proposal?
Obama called Senator McCain to ask him if he would join in issuing a joint statement outlining shared principles, not shut down and write the whole damn thing. Neither are in a position of economic leadership. Not even close.
But McCain knows he cannot win a debate. He figures he's got a 50/50 shot of winning a contest of meaningless gestures to the masses.
EDIT: Just read that deal on the "bail out" is 98% done. Treasury has capitulated on almost every point. It is circulating NOW. No need to miss a debate!
Speculation by Democrats is, a deal will be done in the next 48HRs. McCain knows this so he goes to Washington for a day or two, does really nothing, then tries to take credit for helping both sides get it done.
Speculation by Democrats is, a deal will be done in the next 48HRs. McCain knows this so he goes to Washington for a day or two, does really nothing, then tries to take credit for helping both sides get it done.
Which would amount to nothing more than a glorified photo-op, much like Obama's Europe/Middle-East tour earlier this summer.
That said, with Bush's address tonight asking both to come to the White House, I think Obama if he does do that tomorrow would get.....clemency in that its the President, not the Republican incumbent, asking him to help join in this bi-partisan moment, and not simply Obama's rival.
BTW, doesn't this make McCain look like a fucking pussy now considering he wanted Friday's debate canceled? If that bill is 98% done, as the channels and Saladbar claim it is....and Obama/McCain tomorrow at White House being a glorified photo-op...
I guess the McCain camp feels McCain is sliding in the polls everyday, and has little chance of beating Obama one on one in the debates, so they're pulling another "Palin" to try and change the game again.
Ha. But he's not even on the committee that will be drafting the legislation. He's got no input on this.
Then why did Senator Obama call Senator McCain to ask if he would join him in outlining their shared principles and conditions for the Treasury proposal so that together they could get Congress and the White House to pass the proposal?
It's called a photo-op, and if McCain had gone through with Obama's proposal, it would have helped that Obama campaign, thus McCain flipped it around today...
Originally Posted By: Just Lou
I guess the McCain camp feels McCain is sliding in the polls everyday, and has little chance of beating Obama one on one in the debates, so they're pulling another "Palin" to try and change the game again.
Yeah, and apparently it backfired. In a poll released hours after McCain's decision, 86% of Americans think the Debate on Friday Should Go On as Scheduled, with only 10% agreeing with McCain.
To be specific, 50% want the debate on-time, while 36% want that planned-debate on Foreign Policy to be shifted to the Economy.
Sometimes I wonder (lately) if perhaps McCain really doesn't want to win. While true, it' still neck and neck, some of his gaffes have been doozies. Maybe he just figures, I don't need this?
I read on Huffingto Post (FWIW) that McCain is asking to cancel/postpone the VP debate as well.
But, I agree wih SC, McCain's coming off as looking a little scared. Look, this debate on "foreign policy" is suppose to be in McCain's realm of knowledge, his ballpark, so why weasle out of that one? Although I did hear commentators say, with this financial crisis looming that even a foreign policy debate can be easily connected to economy, especially for a skilled politician.
Sometimes I wonder (lately) if perhaps McCain really doesn't want to win. While true, it' still neck and neck, some of his gaffes have been doozies. Maybe he just figures, I don't need this?
I read on Huffingto Post (FWIW) that McCain is asking to cancel/postpone the VP debate as well.
But, I agree wih SC, McCain's coming off as looking a little scared. Look, this debate on "foreign policy" is suppose to be in McCain's realm of knowledge, his ballpark, so why weasle out of that one? Although I did hear commentators say, with this financial crisis looming that even a foreign policy debate can be easily connected to economy, especially for a skilled politician.
TIS
He is trying to win. McCain only benefits by having as few debates as possible and, most especially, allowing Palin to speak as little as possible. Not debating HURTS Obama. McCain on the spot will have to explain why his campaign chief was being a lobbyist for Freddy Mac up until last month, why now he wants to vote on a bill--something he hasn't done in over a year despite being paid to do so, explain why he approved of near total deregulation for several decades, etc.... An unquestioned McCain can win.
Hi there SB, how are you??? How's everything in the Bay area?
So, am I hearing that there is a "debate commission" (or something of the sort). What happens if McCain wants to postpone and Obama does not????? IMHO there is no "real" reason to postpone. Are there any guidelines?
The Commission on Presidential Debates was set up in the late 80s. It is a non-profit group. A couple of its members are Caroline Kennedy and Alan Simpson.
Well, the Obama campaign has released a timeline of previous Presidential debates that have gone on despite occuring under a "Crisis"...
1960 DEBATES Sep 26, 1960 Soviets announce ready to put first astronaut into space Oct 7, 1960 Cuba accuses US of links to invasion Pentagon curbs spending in light of trade imbalance Oct 13, 1960 KRUSHCHEV BANGS SHOE ON DESK Bomb injures 33 in Times Square in 3rd explosion in 11 days US embargo on Cuba announced Oct 21, 1960 KRUSHCHEV SAYS USSR HAS NUCLEAR SUBS Gold price problems in world markets
1976 DEBATES Sep 23, 1976 SEC probing US Steel, including Gerald Ford Congressional activities Oct 06, 1976 Chinese nuke tests fallout on US soil Oct 22, 1976 Swine flu vaccine leads the news Oct 15, 1976 (VP) Castro says CIA involved in crash of airliner of Barbados, won’t renew anti-hijack agreement with US. Watergate: no investigation of Ford blocking probe
1980 DEBATES Sep 21, 1980 Iran/Iraq war developments, including US role Cutoff of rail access for West Germany to West Berlin. Follow-up on Titan II Missile explosion earlier in week Oct 28, 1980 Iranian parliament resumes debate on US hostages. Questions of arms to Saudi Arabia from US Record loss for car company from Ford
1984 DEBATES Oct 07, 1984 Space shuttle Challenger difficulties in orbit Oct 21, 1984 El Salvador reports CIA agents killed in plane crash Oct 11, 1984 (VP) Chief Justice Burger blocking abortion for retarded, dead, blind rape victim Threats confirmed of plan to crash plane into US embassy in Middle East
1988 DEBATES Sep 25, 1988 Oct 13, 1988 New stats on growing trade deficit Oct 05, 1988 (VP) US hostages in Lebanon Elections/violence in Chile
1992 DEBATES Oct 11, 1992 Reemergence of tuberculosis Oct 15, 1992 Oct 19, 1992 Oct 13, 1992 (VP)
2000 DEBATES Oct 3, 2000 Oct 11, 2000 Middle East violence erupts Oct 17, 2000 Debate goes in the aftermath of the sudden death of Senator Mel Carnahan Attack of USS Cole occurred 5 days earlier Oct 5, 2000 (VP) Middle East peace talks fall apart
2004 DEBATES Sep 30, 2004 “North Korea has said it has turned plutonium from 8,000 spent fuel rods into nuclear weapons.” [BBC, 9/28/04] Fannie Mae Agreed To ‘Major Changes’ In Its Accounting And Management Practices. [New York Times, 9/28/04] Oct 8, 2004 Oct 13, 2004 Oct 5, 2004 (VP)
Hadn't heard that yet RR. Interesting. Not surprised that Obama did his research.
Although, I can't claim I know the entire story as I was kind of young, I do remember seeing a pictue of Kruschev banging hoe on the desk. Wow!! Talk about ancient news. He always scared me for some reason (I mean just the looks of him ).
I don't know about where you guys live but here I'm not seeing Obama/McCain signs in front yards. With the Bush/Kerry election I seen yard signs all over the place.
I noticed that too. I have seen signs for some local officials but none for either Obama or McCain. Of course I can't say I am looking for them, but still it is odd.
I can't believe it'because nobody is paying attention. I mean this is a historic election in several ways.
I know California is traditionally a Blue state, and that Obama isn't really even campaigning here, but I have seen very very few political ads compared to the last election from either candidate.
Hi there SB, how are you??? How's everything in the Bay area?
So, am I hearing that there is a "debate commission" (or something of the sort). What happens if McCain wants to postpone and Obama does not????? IMHO there is no "real" reason to postpone. Are there any guidelines?
TIS
We need a wet winter very much in the Bay Area!!
Here is a good article about what is going on with the Presidential debates and how the McCain camp is unprepared and protecting Palin: Pack on debates
Anyone see Letterman rip McCain last night for canceling at the last minute? Wow. I don't think he'll be back on anytime soon. I'll have to find some video.
I bet Senator McCain will have a hard time sitting after that spanking!
I don't know who is advising Senator McCain right now, but I have to think that it's a complete idiot. First, picking an obscure and inexperienced person who can't deliver a single swing state as the VP candidate, and then suspending the campaign?? What was he thinking? Or was he?? I understand that he wanted to shift that focus away from the polls and look like he was on top of the economic crisis, but my oh my! That just didn't happen, did it??
1. Returns to Vietnam and jails himself. 2. Offers the post of "vice vice president" to Warren Buffett. 3. Challenges Obama to suspend campaign so they both can go and personally drill for oil offshore. 4. Learns to use computer. 5. Does bombing run over Taliban-controlled tribal areas of Pakistan. 6. Offers to forgo salary, sell one house. 7. Sex-change operation. 8. Suspends campaign until Nov. 4, offers to start being president right now. 9. Sells Alaska to Russia for $700 billion. 10. Pledges to serve only one term. OK, half a term.
WASHINGTON - Sen. John McCain's self-portrait as a bold leader willing to set politics aside to save an endangered financial bailout plan took a pounding Thursday from top Democrats and even some fellow Republicans.
His efforts to re-energize his presidential campaign will partly turn on who wins the public relations battle, destined to play out for days.
Top Democrats in Congress ridiculed McCain's claim Wednesday that negotiations were going nowhere, necessitating his hasty return to Washington to intervene while suspending his campaign.
"It was somewhat stunning" to receive McCain's phone call with that message, said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. Talks were proceeding fine without him, Reid said.
Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the chief House Democrat on the bill, said, "all of a sudden, now that we are on the verge of making a deal, John McCain airdrops himself to help us make the deal."
Even the House's Republican leader, John Boehner of Ohio, passed up a chance to praise McCain's leadership powers shortly before the two men met in the Capitol at midday Thursday. Asked by reporters if McCain could help win House Republican votes for the proposed package, Boehner shrugged and said, "Who knows?"
Other Republicans gave McCain more credit. "They got something done this morning only because McCain came back," said Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C. But DeMint later called the proposal "a trillion-dollar Band-Aid that does not contain a single item that will stimulate our economy."
President Bush's biggest worry is House Republicans, many of whom seemed unimpressed Thursday with McCain's heightened interest. Several said it was essential that both McCain and his Democratic opponent, Sen. Barack Obama, back the bailout plan together.
"If McCain and Obama would stand together and take this off the table" as a sharply partisan issue, then wary House Republicans might get on board, said Rep. Zach Wamp, R-Tenn.
Framing the issue in those bipartisan terms, however, complicates McCain's bid to differentiate himself from Obama on leadership issues.
In truth, McCain has faced a no-win situation for days. To support the bailout or a similar plan would put him at odds with millions of voters and many House Republicans at a time his campaign is sliding in the polls. Also, McCain has struggled to distance himself from the unpopular Bush, and embracing the administration's plan would clearly not help.
Obama has an easier path. No one will accuse him of being a Bush clone even if he ends up siding with the administration on this issue. And Democrats in general are more receptive to government regulation of powerful institutions.
McCain's other option was worse. Opposing the main thrust of Bush's plan would have opened him to fierce accusations of walking away from a national crisis. And if a congressional impasse triggered more Wall Street catastrophes, as the administration said it would, the criticism would have been still worse.
McCain's only real option was to say, "I'm the leader, I'm going to put country first," said Republican consultant John Feehery.
McCain tried to do that late Wednesday. Going before TV cameras shortly before Obama did, he signaled his likely support for some version of the costly plan and urged Bush to convene a meeting including Obama. Bush did so, giving McCain and his backers a chance to claim some leadership credit.
"It seemed like this deal yesterday was very close to dead," McCain adviser Mike DuHaime told Fox News on Thursday. "I think you've seen tremendous progress since he made that announcement."
McCain met separately with House and Senate Republicans in the Capitol Thursday. He did not attend meetings where the bailout legislation was being hashed out, and some rank-and-file lawmakers saw little impact from his visit.
"What do I know?" said Rep. Tom Reynolds, R-N.Y., when asked later about the affect of McCain's detour to Washington. Perhaps, he said, the combined efforts of McCain and Obama would give enough political cover to wavering lawmakers to bring more votes to the bailout package.
Meanwhile, Democrats scoffed at McCain's Wednesday night claim that "no consensus has developed" behind the administration proposal, making his intercession important.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., told reporters that McCain called her and urged the White House meeting because "nothing was happening and there was no progress being made on all of this."
"And I said, 'Well, Senator, I have good news for you.'" Pelosi said. "'Quite a bit has been done.'"
Reid, the Senate Democratic leader, previously had called on McCain to take a stand on the bailout proposal. By the time McCain called him on Wednesday, Reid told reporters Thursday, progress was well under way.
Reid spokesman Jim Manley said his boss gave McCain a cool reception. It included reading to him a statement that Reid had just released criticizing McCain's plans. "We need leadership, not a campaign photo-op," said the statement that Reid read to its intended target.
Even if McCain fully embraces a bailout package, many Republican candidates elsewhere on ballots will not go along. Rep. Ray LaHood, an Illinois Republican who is retiring, said he probably will vote for the bailout legislation that eventually emerges.
But the Republican running to replace him, LaHood said, "is running against it. Everyone's running against it."
Palin should step down, conservative commentator says
(CNN) – Prominent conservative columnist Kathleen Parker, an early supporter of Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin, said Friday recent interviews have shown the Alaska governor is "out of her league" and should leave the GOP presidential ticket for the good of the party.
The criticism in Parker's Friday column is the latest in a recent string of negative assessments toward the McCain-Palin candidacy from prominent conservatives.
It was fun while it lasted," Parker writes. "Palin’s recent interviews with Charles Gibson, Sean Hannity, and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who is clearly out of her league."
Palin's interview with Couric drew criticism when the Alaska governor was unable to provide an example of when John McCain had pushed for more regulation of Wall Street during his Senate career. Palin also took heat for defending her foreign policy credentials by suggesting Russian leaders enter Alaska airspace when they come to America. Palin was also criticized last week for appearing not to know what the Bush Doctrine is during an interview with Charlie Gibson.
“If BS were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself," Parker also writes. "If Palin were a man, we’d all be guffawing, just as we do every time Joe Biden tickles the back of his throat with his toes. But because she’s a woman — and the first ever on a Republican presidential ticket — we are reluctant to say what is painfully true."
Parker, who praised McCain's "keen judgment" for picking Palin earlier this month and wrote the Alaska governor is a "perfect storm of God, Mom and apple pie," now says Palin should step down from the ticket.
“Only Palin can save McCain, her party, and the country she loves," Parker writes. She can bow out for personal reasons, perhaps because she wants to spend more time with her newborn. No one would criticize a mother who puts her family first. Do it for your country."
Parker's comments follow those by prominent conservatives David Brooks, George Will, and David Frum who have all publicly questioned Palin's readiness to be vice president.
"Sarah Palin has many virtues," Brooks wrote in a recent column. "If you wanted someone to destroy a corrupt establishment, she'd be your woman. But the constructive act of governance is another matter. She has not been engaged in national issues, does not have a repertoire of historic patterns and, like President Bush, she seems to compensate for her lack of experience with brashness and excessive decisiveness."
Some here are saying that McCain is afraid to debate Obama. McCain has asked Obama to debate him at townhall meetings for the last 3 months. McCain also said he would pay for Obama to show up so you cannot say that mcCain is afraid to debate him.
Well, now I know why McCain wants to cancel next week's VP debate in favor of this friday's debate happening there:
Though this is my favorite exchange at the end, Couric asking Palin about McCain's "regulation" career:
COURIC:I'm just going to ask you one more time, not to belabor the point. Specific examples in his 26 years of pushing for more regulation?
PALIN:I'll try to find you some, and I'll bring them to you.
----------------------------
*Jaw Drops*
Is this the tough gal that Appleonya has praised?
Did anyone else watch the other 50 minutes of the interview where Palin kicked ass? Also did Al Gore know every little aspect of Bill Clintons public life? The news media sucks.
Although I'm not voting Republican this year, I can understand your frustration, Don Smitty.
For the most part, I think that Palin has been quite articulate and a great interview, and I honestly like her. The media does lean towards the left. There's no question about that.
Some here are saying that McCain is afraid to debate Obama. McCain has asked Obama to debate him at townhall meetings for the last 3 months. McCain also said he would pay for Obama to show up so you cannot say that mcCain is afraid to debate him.
Dude, debate is a debate. Some prefer one style or the other, so what?
And yet, McCain still wanted to cancel the debate this week...and will do it tonight in spite of his word.
Well, now I know why McCain wants to cancel next week's VP debate in favor of this friday's debate happening there:
Though this is my favorite exchange at the end, Couric asking Palin about McCain's "regulation" career:
COURIC:I'm just going to ask you one more time, not to belabor the point. Specific examples in his 26 years of pushing for more regulation?
PALIN:I'll try to find you some, and I'll bring them to you.
----------------------------
*Jaw Drops*
Is this the tough gal that Appleonya has praised?
Did anyone else watch the other 50 minutes of the interview where Palin kicked ass? Also did Al Gore know every little aspect of Bill Clintons public life? The news media sucks.
I'm sorry, but if that was so-called Republican "ass-kicking," then Reagan is kicking himself in the grave.
"It just proves his campaign is governed by tactics and not ideology. In the end, he blinked and Obama did not. The 'steady hand in a storm' argument looks now to more favor Obama, not McCain," - Craig Shirley, Republican consultant and former McCain adviser.
I can't believe I forgot that the debate was on tonight. I only got to see the last half hour. I can't really determine who "won" just from what I saw.
Obama I thought clearly was better than McCain early on, and McCain was slightly stronger near the end. I'd call it a draw. There was no knockout punches, no major blunders, and no real memorable moments. McCain probably needed a knockout, and a draw won't help him.
I was feeding my company dinner and totally forgot it. Afterwards, my daughter says, "Oh, I was supposed to watch that for homework." I wanted to smack her on the side of the head.
A McCain adviser called it a huge win, and that it exposed Obama for not being ready to be President. Joe Biden called the debate "fatal" for John McCain, and hopes he can do as well against Palin.
A McCain adviser called it a huge win, and that it exposed Obama for not being ready to be President. Joe Biden called the debate "fatal" for John McCain, and hopes he can do as well against Palin.
That's the way things are done now.... the "after-thoughts" made by so-called experts have become just as important, if not more so, than the meat and gravy issues debated by the candidates.
I think that McCain allowing Obama to control the stabilization bill made him look weak. I mean, Obama's 4 point plan is pretty much the same as the one that McCain's group presented the other day. Not mentioning it was a missed opportunity for him. A good night for Obama. Still, I really wish that Biden would just shut up until the election's over.
Not a bad debate. Obama did very very well considering foreign policy is McCain's area of expertise. I did notice McCain never looked at Obama though and came across as grouchy/sarcastic..I guess that's in his nature.
All and all, neither was a clear winner. Those who support O will go for him and those who support M will go for him. Yet, I think most already have their minds made up.
Eyewitness News has a poll going, and 72% give it to Obama. However, that's a NY station, and Obama's pretty popular here, so I don't know how much weight to give that number.
Edited to Add: SC, I swear I thought you wrote, "DVR it for the Little Brat."
Well, when Charles Krauthammer gives Barack a thumbs up you know he did well.
He was presidential, thoughtful, and came across as calm, cool, and collected. As many have commented already, so many of McCain's references were to the distant past.
The poll on CNN website has him as high 60 something too. However, those polls you can vote as many times as you like. Sometimes I have to turn off the talking heads or I get too pissed off because I get tired of the bullshit and have to abosrb everything on my own. Know what I mean? Yet, it's so addictive to watch.
I watched the debates. It will probably be rebroadcast by one of the cable networks, SB, so that your daughter can catch it. McCain certainly attempted to distance himself from Bush, and also emphasized the experience factor, suggesting that Obama was naive. In response Obama was direct, decisive and articulate, and appeared very presidential. This type of forum favors him, but both candidates walked away, satisfied. It was one of the more gentlemanly political debates in recent memory.
McCain has always been more comfortable in a town hall forum, which gives him more flexibility.
I love watching the talking heads on both sides. ...Despite my clear support now for Senator Obama, I've been a registered Republican most of my life. (I know a few of you just fell out of your chairs.)
I love watching the talking heads on both sides. ...Despite my clear support now for Senator Obama, I've been a registered Republican most of my life. (I know a few of you just fell out of your chairs.)
I started leaning more left back in the 90's when Republican N.J. Governor Christine Todd Whitman pretty much did to N.J. what George Bush did to the United States. When I moved to N.Y. last year, I chose not to enroll in either party.
I'm setting my DVR for the VP deabate. That has 'trainwreck' written all over it. Palin will be a comoplete deer in the headlights, and Biden will say at least 1 thing he really shouldn't have.
With wall street in the shitter and employment up why isnt Obama up by 10 pts in the polls? If hes not up by 8 to 10 points on Nov 4th hes not going to win.
With wall street in the shitter and employment up why isnt Obama up by 10 pts in the polls? If hes not up by 8 to 10 points on Nov 4th hes not going to win.
ds
You need to take off the blinders. McCain is sinking in the National Polls, and the Electoral Map. He was unable to win a debate on foreign policy. Now he must face a VP debate that will disastrous, and a debate on the economy that he is going to lose. Unless there's a "game changer" in the next month, this election is over.
With wall street in the shitter and employment up why isnt Obama up by 10 pts in the polls? If hes not up by 8 to 10 points on Nov 4th hes not going to win.
ds
You need to take off the blinders. McCain is sinking in the National Polls, and the Electoral Map. He was unable to win a debate on foreign policy. Now he must face a VP debate that will disastrous, and a debate on the economy that he is going to lose. Unless there's a "game changer" in the next month, this is election is over.
First off, I don't think the VP debate will matter at all in the polls. A train wreck it will be, an entertaining one at that, but not much difference for either ticket.
Second, DS asks why Obama aint higher, and the answer is that many people are still unsure if Obama has the goods or "the right stuff" to be President. Yet if last night's demographic-numbers are to be believed, Obama has narrowed the gap of the "readyness" question and, according to that one CBS poll, he acted more Presidential compared to McCain.
Those numbers that JustLou posted, are a good sign for Obama and perhaps reenforcement that if last night Obama either won or won by default in a draw.
But its 30+ days still left in the campaign, anything can happen.
First off, I don't think the VP debate will matter at all in the polls. A train wreck it will be, an entertaining one at that, but not much difference for either ticket.
Normally I'd agree with you. VP debates don't mean much. But this one could be different. They're expecting a ridiculous amount of people to watch this train wreck.
First off, I don't think the VP debate will matter at all in the polls. A train wreck it will be, an entertaining one at that, but not much difference for either ticket.
Normally I'd agree with you. VP debates don't mean much. But this one could be different. They're expecting a ridiculous amount of people to watch this train wreck.
Oh the viewership will easily make this the most watched VP debate in history, no doubt about that.
But just look at 1988, when Bentsen bitch-slapped Quayle with "You're NO Jack Kennedy!", and Dukakis/Bentsen still went down in flames.
Overall, I say Biden wins by default...if only because despite his assured-gaffes, his opponent was shown to be a flake by Kaite friggin Couric.
In my opinion, McCain won the debate. The economy talk in the beginning was nothing more than the differences between Republican and Democrat ideologies. As for foreign policy, McCain clearly has way more experience than Obama and has shown that he also has better judgment.
Obviously almost everyone on here is an Obama supporter. While I think he seems like a decent enough guy (despite all his radical associations), there is no way anyone can honestly say that he is more ready/qualified to be president than John McCain. I will be voting for McCain, and I am glad that I live in a toss-up state (PA) where my vote will actually matter, unlike other states which have already been decided.
No matter who wins, I am confident that both candidates will make decisions that they think are in the country's best interest, and that's all that really matters.
Also, I find the negative comments towards Sarah Palin very unfair. You people may not agree with her side of the issues which is fine, but to totally dismiss her as being a legitimate politician is wrong.
I realize I am opening myself up to attacks from some very articulate posters, but you have to agree that this thread needs some opposing views.
In my opinion, McCain won the debate. The economy talk in the beginning was nothing more than the differences between Republican and Democrat ideologies. As for foreign policy, McCain clearly has way more experience than Obama and has shown that he also has better judgment.
Obviously almost everyone on here is an Obama supporter. While I think he seems like a decent enough guy (despite all his radical associations), there is no way anyone can honestly say that he is more ready/qualified to be president than John McCain. I will be voting for McCain, and I am glad that I live in a toss-up state (PA) where my vote will actually matter, unlike other states which have already been decided.
No matter who wins, I am confident that both candidates will make decisions that they think are in the country's best interest, and that's all that really matters.
Also, I find the negative comments towards Sarah Palin very unfair. You people may not agree with her side of the issues which is fine, but to totally dismiss her as being a legitimate politician is wrong.
I realize I am opening myself up to attacks from some very articulate posters, but you have to agree that this thread needs some opposing views.
Opposing views are fine, as long as such folks BACK UP THEIR SHIT.
For example, you talk of how McCain was better in the foreign policy area....care to give us an example exactly how?
As for Palin, what does it tell you when her own campaign wanted to cancel the VP debate?
For example, you talk of how McCain was better in the foreign policy area....care to give us an example exactly how?
As for Palin, what does it tell you when her own campaign wanted to cancel the VP debate?
-McCain mentioned his experience with countries like Lebanon, Somalia, and Kosovo. -Obama kept talking about Afghanistan, yet has never even been there. -McCain said "Obama doesn’t know the difference between a tactic and a strategy". Really, what does Obama know about commanding the strongest military in the world? -Obama was dead wrong on the surge and still can't admit it. -McCain made Obama look foolish with his pledge to meet tyrants without preconditions. -Having known Henry Kissinger for 30 years, McCain obviously knows his positions better than Obama. -Obama was also proven wrong on the Russia/Georgia conflict. -McCain was right when he said "I don’t need any on-the-job training. I’m ready to lead now". The same cannot be said for Obama.
Are those examples good enough?
As for the vp debate, it would have simply been rescheduled in the event that the debate last night was pushed back.
Also, I find the negative comments towards Sarah Palin very unfair. You people may not agree with her side of the issues which is fine, but to totally dismiss her as being a legitimate politician is wrong.
Politico.com GOP concerns about Palin grow By: Alexander Burns and David Paul Kuhn September 27, 2008 02:44 PM EST
A growing number of Republicans are expressing concern about Sarah Palin’s uneven — and sometimes downright awkward — performances in her limited media appearances.
Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker, a former Palin supporter, says the vice presidential nominee should step aside. Kathryn Jean Lopez, writing for the conservative National Review, says “that’s not a crazy suggestion” and that “something’s gotta change.”
Tony Fabrizio, a GOP strategist, says Palin’s recent CBS appearance isn’t disqualifying but is certainly alarming. “You can’t continue to have interviews like that and not take on water.”
“I have not been blown away by the interviews from her, but at the same time, I haven’t come away from them thinking she doesn’t know s—t,” said Chris Lacivita, a GOP strategist. “But she ain’t Dick Cheney, nor Joe Biden and definitely not Hillary Clinton.”
There is no doubt that Palin retains a tremendous amount of support among rank-and-file Republicans. She draws huge crowds, continues to raise a lot of money for the McCain campaign, and state parties report she has sparked an uptick in the number of volunteers.
Asked about Palin's performance in the CBS interview, a McCain official briefing reporters on condition of anonymity said: "She did fine. She's a tremendous asset and a fantastic candidate."
But there is also no doubt many Republican insiders are worried she could blow next week’s debate, based on her unexpectedly weak and unsteady media appearances, and hurt the Republican ticket if she does.
What follows is a viewer’s guide to some of Palin’s toughest moments on camera so far.
Speaking this week with CBS’s Katie Couric, Palin seemed caught off-guard by a very predictable question about the status of McCain adviser Rick Davis’ relationship with mortgage lender Freddie Mac. Davis was accused by several news outlets of retaining ties — and profiting from — the companies despite his denials.
Where a more experienced politician might have been able to brush off Couric’s follow-up question, Palin seemed genuinely stumped, repeating the same answer twice and resorting to boilerplate language about the “undue influence of lobbyists.”
These missteps could be attributed to inadequate preparation and don’t necessarily reflect more deeply on Palin’s ability to perform as vice president. But when reporters have tried to probe Palin’s thinking on subjects such as foreign policy, she’s been similarly opaque.
In an interview with ABC’s Charlie Gibson, Palin gave a muddled answer to a question about her opinion of the Bush Doctrine.
And given the chance to describe her foreign policy credentials more fully, Palin recited familiar talking points, telling Gibson that her experience with energy policy was sufficient preparation for dealing with national security issues.
In the same interview, Palin let Gibson lead her into saying it might be necessary to wage war on Russia — a suggestion that most candidates would have avoided making explicitly and that signaled her discomfort in discussing global affairs.
Then, asked this week by Couric to discuss her knowledge of foreign relations — in particular, her assertion that Alaska’s proximity to Russia gave her international experience — Palin tripped herself up explaining her interactions with Alaska’s neighbor to the west.
On the economy, too, Palin has avoided taking clear stances. In a largely friendly interview with Fox News Channel’s Sean Hannity, Palin spoke in tangled generalities in response to a question about a possible Wall Street bailout — and even preempted her campaign by coming out against it.
On Thursday, Palin finally took questions from her traveling press — but shut things down quickly after Politico’s Kenneth P. Vogel asked her whether she would support Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, who has been indicted for corruption, and Rep. Don Young, who is under federal investigation, for reelection.
Unlike her other interviews, at least this time Palin had the option to walk away.
Freddie C. - I am so happy that you expressed your POV on this election. You do so in an intelligent and thoughtful manner. I welcome a good exchange of ideas.
Yes, I am voting for Obama. I actually wish that Senator McCain had won the nomination in 2000. I think that we would be in better shape than we are now. I think that he's probably a good, decent man, but I cannot support his candidacy for several reasons.
I think that he represents a continuation of the current administration, and that I cannot support. I also am concerned about his age. This campaign has aged him noticeably, and I can't imagine what a presidency would do to him. I am also concerned that, given his age, there is a very real chance he could die or become incapacitated in office. Therefore, his choice of VP was crucial, and I think he made a poor one.
Governor Palin may be a smart and aggressive woman (which I notice she is praised for, while Senator Clinton was vilified for the same traits), but she is not even close to ready to assume the office. I find her unworldly and unknowledgeable, and I think that she and The First Dude (I find that so trashy, btw) should stay in Alaska a few more years and get some experience under her belt before she tries a national campaign. She also believes in everything I loathe (pro-life, member of the NRA, etc.), so even if I didn't believe the above to be true, I still wouldn't vote for her.
And, btw, if anyone attacks you for expressing your views in such a thoughtful and engaging manner, then they are major jerks.
For example, you talk of how McCain was better in the foreign policy area....care to give us an example exactly how?
As for Palin, what does it tell you when her own campaign wanted to cancel the VP debate?
-McCain mentioned his experience with countries like Lebanon, Somalia, and Kosovo. -Obama kept talking about Afghanistan, yet has never even been there. -McCain said "Obama doesn’t know the difference between a tactic and a strategy". Really, what does Obama know about commanding the strongest military in the world? -Obama was dead wrong on the surge and still can't admit it. -McCain made Obama look foolish with his pledge to meet tyrants without preconditions. -Having known Henry Kissinger for 30 years, McCain obviously knows his positions better than Obama. -Obama was also proven wrong on the Russia/Georgia conflict. -McCain was right when he said "I don’t need any on-the-job training. I’m ready to lead now". The same cannot be said for Obama.
Are those examples good enough?
As for the vp debate, it would have simply been rescheduled in the event that the debate last night was pushed back.
First off, thanks for actually willing to debate your side, which I can't even say for DoubleJ or Appleonya of late.
As to your points, let me answer a few of them, in order of what you supplied:
(2) FDR never visited Germany or Japan either. Polk never visited Mexico as well. Yeah what do they know about overseeing military ass-kicking? (3) What he does know is that he called for more troops to be shipped to Afghanistan before McCain or the White House. Using your logic, they don't know jack shit either. Though the last 8 years, that might actually explain some things... (4) McCain was also wrong about the WMDs, a quick victory & occupation, and other things. Obama highlighted how UNDISPUTEDLY Iran has grown in prominence and in power after Saddam Hussein's downfall, when in fact that dictator helped kept Iran in-check. So Freddy my boy, you liked how Iran has become more powerful as a result partly by us?
Also, I should note Freddie C., unless you're unwilling to admit you're wrong, but General Petreaus refused to used the word "Victory" to describe Iraq, unlike McCain. If anything, the magic word is "Stability"...which is good. But victory? No. More like patching up Iraq using bribes and having such self-controlled local regions to stop the violence out of self-interest.
Tell me my boy, why is it the White House and McCain supported a timeline for Iraqi withdrawal only after Obama, who's plan was endorsed by the sovereign Iraqi government? The word not permitted is "coincidence."
(5) Obama has backed away from that, and yet McCain still presses how we shouldn't meet with hostile rival leaders...yet that is what Kissinger did secretly with the Chinese government in the 70s, setting up Nixon's visit to China.
So tell me Freddy, do we totally not meet with them or not? Does it matter if its face-to-face between the leaders, or between the Foreign departments?
Hell, what about YOUR President having authorized State Department "talks" on and off with the Iranians already?
(6) Same Kissinger that willingly believed that the North Vietnamese wouldn't invade South Vietnam after signing the Paris Peace Accords? Last I checked, his "detente" went out of style with Reagan. Why is Kissinger popular again anyway? Is his ideas good or bad Freddy C.? Do tell me.
(7) Try reading this interesting article from the American Conservative Magazine, about the so-called "Democratic" Georgia that wants us tied with them hand-in-hand in NATO: http://www.amconmag.com/article/2008/sep/22/00008//
(8) Lead now? Oh yes, like that demand that he won't leave Washington this week until a Bail-Out "fair" agreement was made, possibly missing friday night's debate....then when the talks collapsed (partly due to Congressional Republicans)*,the agreement NOT made, he left for the debate last night.
Yes, looking weak in leading failure, fairly or not, is so Presidential.
I have one more question for you Freddie C.....are you supporting McCain more for him, or more against Obama? Better question, why despite your opinions, the polled people (including a Fox News focus group, video I posted earlier) indicated that Obama won last night? I thought it was a draw in general, McCain refusing to roll over on economics, Obama standing up on foreign policy...though with McCain behind in the electoral polling, that "draw" may be a Obama victory by default.
Anyway, thanks for willing to talk in defending your side. Don't think I'm trying to be a dick with you, but I'm just up for a good spirited but smart discussion on political science and propaganda here.
*=Funny since President Bush and conservative-paper The Wall Street Journal is stressing them to agree to the Democrat/White House-negotiated bailout.
I've never understood what significant value there is in visiting a war theater. Unless you are fighting in that theater, any short-term visitor can get that kind of cursory information by conversing with the theater's commanders. Visitng Bagdad or Mosul for a few days instructs you in very little. You would gain as much knowlege of that theater as you would of performing an operation if you watch a couple of operations.
Freddie C. - I am so happy that you expressed your POV on this election. You do so in an intelligent and thoughtful manner. I welcome a good exchange of ideas.
Yeah, I especially appreciated that of him. A good discussion is always warranted.
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
Yes, I am voting for Obama. I actually wish that Senator McCain had won the nomination in 2000. I think that we would be in better shape than we are now. I think that he's probably a good, decent man, but I cannot support his candidacy for several reasons.
I supported McCain in 2000, only to see him lose to an inferior candidate simply because of the massive evangelical turn-out, and that whole "black baby" smear in South Carolina. In a way, at that time he represented to me a hope of accomplishing some vague hopes: The Environment (helped pass bi-partsan legislation on combating Global Warming), Gay Rights (voted against banning same-sex marriage), Campaign Finance Reform (McCain-Feingold), and so forth. Maybe not totally agree with the Democrats of that time in the ideology, but better than with Dubya.
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
I think that he represents a continuation of the current administration, and that I cannot support. I also am concerned about his age. This campaign has aged him noticeably, and I can't imagine what a presidency would do to him. I am also concerned that, given his age, there is a very real chance he could die or become incapacitated in office. Therefore, his choice of VP was crucial, and I think he made a poor one.
With the last four years, save for that anti-torture bill he got passed, McCain has gone deep into the NeoCon territory to get enough of their "streetcred" to win the nomination, a pity because he's above that bullshit.
I think I share my disgruntleties with the President for several reasons, as other BB.Neters do, but my chief reason is that he backed away from essential Conservative values, and NO I don't mean "NeoConservative" values which amount to wanting to spread freedom around the world like butter & herpes, fueled out of emotional evangelism, or pretty much for the 2000s like the naive Liberals were of the 60s/70s. No I mean true Conservative missions like cutting spending and deficit, despite having 6 years of Republican White House & Congress.
So why do I support Obama as an "Obamacon"? Because I have a distant, perhaps naive, hope that a considerable enough Obama victory would force the GOP to re-assemble 4 years from now, away from that bible-humping hysteria as personified in the VP choice, and back to basics. Trust me, I'm asshamed when Clinton, with a GOP Congress, were the last to balance the budget. Why couldn't Bush have done that?
Also, I agreed with Obama on Iraq. To quote another Iraq War-opponent in Pat Buchanan, "why would Saddam be stupid enough to step on Superman's cape?" That conflict served absolutely NOTHING for our strategic military defesive interests, and by default as caused a checkmate in Hussein's Iraq to make for a stronger and more powerful Iran. Nevermind us ignoring that little problem in Afghanistan.
Plus, as a Political Scientist, I would be intrigued as to what would happen if we elected the most liberal President in 40 years, or the impact of it. Would we actually get anything done on universal healthcare or the environment or gay rights or whatever? I must say, I'm intrigued.
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
Governor Palin may be a smart and aggressive woman (which I notice she is praised for, while Senator Clinton was vilified for the same traits), but she is not even close to ready to assume the office. I find her unworldly and unknowledgeable, and I think that she and The First Dude (I find that so trashy, btw) should stay in Alaska a few more years and get some experience under her belt before she tries a national campaign. She also believes in everything I loathe (pro-life, member of the NRA, etc.), so even if I didn't believe the above to be true, I still wouldn't vote for her.
Yeah, I despise the Palin pick in that it was done to win back those Social-Conservative votes for McCain, without any attention to assure folks that we would be in safe hands if McCain was to die, i.e. Cheney in 2000. Better yet, why didn't McCain offer it to Kay Hutchinson, the female GOP Senator from Texas who's been around in Washington for what, 14 years or so roughly? She's proven tough, and more than capable in case the worst was to happen.
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
And, btw, if anyone attacks you for expressing your views in such a thoughtful and engaging manner, then they are major jerks.
I've never understood what significant value there is in visiting a war theater. Unless you are fighting in that theater, any short-term visitor can get that kind of cursory information by conversing with the theater's commanders. Visitng Bagdad or Mosul for a few days instructs you in very little. You would gain as much knowlege of that theater as you would of performing an operation if you watch a couple of operations.
And I totally agree.
I mean, I laughed at anyone who seriously tried to push Obama's Europe/Middle-East trip back in the summer as "foreign/military policy" experience...same when Palin visiting the United Nations the other day, both glorified photo-ops, much like that "White House Summit" on the bailout the other day.
In my opinion, McCain won the debate. The economy talk in the beginning was nothing more than the differences between Republican and Democrat ideologies. As for foreign policy, McCain clearly has way more experience than Obama and has shown that he also has better judgment.
Obviously almost everyone on here is an Obama supporter. While I think he seems like a decent enough guy (despite all his radical associations), there is no way anyone can honestly say that he is more ready/qualified to be president than John McCain. I will be voting for McCain, and I am glad that I live in a toss-up state (PA) where my vote will actually matter, unlike other states which have already been decided.
No matter who wins, I am confident that both candidates will make decisions that they think are in the country's best interest, and that's all that really matters.
Also, I find the negative comments towards Sarah Palin very unfair. You people may not agree with her side of the issues which is fine, but to totally dismiss her as being a legitimate politician is wrong.
I realize I am opening myself up to attacks from some very articulate posters, but you have to agree that this thread needs some opposing views.
Right now I am leaning towards most of what you said. However I do not feel that McCain "won" the debate. Nor do I fell that Obama "won" the debate either....no matter what polls says what. Polls are BS as far as I am concerned. Polls taken by any party could be made to reflect favorable numbers in the interest of the said party.
I think that as someone else pointed out here ( think it was Klyd) overall this was a gentlemanly debate. And as far as I am concerned it was nice to see a gentlemanly debate without mudslinging and personal attacks. BOTH men debated the issues. I respected the both of them for that. Both presented themselves as legitimate Presidential material.
In my opinion this was a very tight and close debate.
I thought that McCain had the edge over Obama when they debate went in the direction of National Security and Foreign Policy. He seemed to cause Obama to stutter a couple of times when they were talkig foreign policy.
And in all fairness, I have to give Obama the edge when thay talked domestic policy.
McCain just doesn't speak with the conviction and passion when it comes to domestic policy as he does with foreign policy....and for obvious reasons of course.
And Obama doesn't speak with the conviction and passion when it comes to foreign policy as he does with domestic policy...and for obvious reasons of course.
For the next debate, McCain needs to strengthen up on his domestic views and experiences, and Obama needs to strengthen up on his foreign policy views and experiences. I think that the one who does a better job in strengthening up in the areas that they were weak on the first time around will have a legitimate chance to actually "win" the debate hands down the second time around.
I realize that many here posted their opinion right after the debate was over and it looks as though some of these opinions were given more out of being hyped up for the respective candidates. But in truth, after letting the hype of the first debate die down a bit, and really digesting what was addressed and what took place in this debate, one will realize that neither candidate actually "beat" the other or "won" the overall debate. It was a lot closer than many will really admit.
Certainly SC, as I wrote already, I thought the debate overall was a draw.
But one thing I noticed was how on the Economics issue, McCain's lines were the same lines I heard back in 2000 with George W. Bush, and before that in 1996 with Dole, 1992 with Bush Sr....
My point is, what helped Obama with many of those polls was that he articulated all the problems right now facing the middle/working class, and whatever those proposals/pitches actually would work or not is irrelevant; debates in themselves are about appearing to the normal person that you have the answer to a problem.
I think with McCain, some people may have felt that he was out of touch on it by spouting old lines about cutting spending and corporate taxes that helped win for Bush in 2000, but may be seen as non-grata as much in 2008.
(and certainly like Dubya, Obama has a bad tendency at times to "uh" repeatedly, you know?)
EDIT - In retrospect, I also noticed how McCain said that he was completely against ethanol subsidies....some have speculated that his campaign have decided to abandon Iowa (a Bush state in 2004) and its 7 electoral votes to re-direct that staff/funds down to North Carolina and Indiana to try to keep those usual GOP-safe states.
Earlier this week, McCain campaign had closed an office in Iowa, and with a new poll today staying that Iowa is pro-Obama at +8 points...I believe that speculation now.
Yes its only 7 votes with Iowa, but with Virgina's 13, Colorado's 8, New Mexico and Nevada's 5 each...remember that Bush won re-election with only 286 electoral votes...LEts do quick math:
7+13+5+5+8=38 286-38=248
Now what if Obama wins just Colorado/New Mexico/Iowa?
8+5+7=20 286-20=266
Remember, 270 Electoral votes is needed for election.
As my son has pointed out and I've posted previously, McCain almost always appears to be exerting immense control to keep from exploding.
On the subject of foreign policy, McCain's position is that of a typical conservative: he abhors nuance and refuses to acknowledge variables.
As far as judgement goes and his distate for war, McCain supported Bush's decision to commit this Nation to war by invading Iraq to find and destroy something that wasn't in Iraq.
Does anyone else have a problem that "undecided voters" will decide this election? How can someone still be undecided? It's a two party system! McCain or Obama! Both candidates have made their stances on the issues fairly clear. If someone hasn't made up their mind at this point, then they probably should do us all a favor and stay home on November 4th.
I can understand being undecided. I can understand needing to hear more from the candidates. BUT yea, it seems every election, we are as close as days before the election and there are still so called undecided voters. I say "make a decision" because there's not gonna be any game-changing realization that makes it for you. Maybe some people simply are not decision makers, I don't know.
That Family Guy video is hilarious. Exaggerated, but true, to a degree (sadly). Let's face it, politicians know how to spin and there will always be those who buy the spin.
Anyone see (or maybe posted it and I missed it), Obama's new ad showing McCain Won??? Gives me the chills.
RR, as far as 2012 prediction goes....who knows what issue/issues could be a factor in that election. Good possibility though since this bailout is pissing a lot of people off. Time will tell.
The two GOPers for 2012 that seem obvious to run are Romney and Huckabee, if simply because they aren't in government right now, and don't have to vote on that bailout.
But if the Conservative Savior 4 years from now is revealed to be Mitt Romney the pro-choice Governor of Massachussetts....:D
I agree. What could anyone learn about the candidates and their positions and proposals on issues that they don't know already. I think that those who consider themselves undecided do so because it puts them in a separate category and that somehow is special to them.
Just saw McCain on This Week. Noone maintains a demeanor such as his without an effort. He's holding something back.
Another question for you guys to ponder. It is said that many Republicans want McCain to drop Palin. Now, whether he will or not, I don't know. Say he did drop her...first of all, would that be a plus for him? I know much of his base might be pleased, but would the public see it as wishy washy and conclude that it was simply a political move in the first place?
Secondly, what if he did drop Palin and went with Romney, who is suppose to be the economic saavy candidate. How and would that change the ballgame in this election, at this point? Could it be an October surprise?????
Another question for you guys to ponder. It is said that many Republicans want McCain to drop Palin. Now, whether he will or not, I don't know. Say he did drop her...first of all, would that be a plus for him? I know much of his base might be pleased, but would the public see it as wishy washy and conclude that it was simply a political move in the first place?
Secondly, what if he did drop Palin and went with Romney, who is suppose to be the economic saavy candidate. How and would that change the ballgame in this election, at this point? Could it be an October surprise?????
TIS
McCain will NOT dump Palin. Why?
For two reasons:
(1) It will reflect badly on McCain as someone who had a rather poor choice in the minds of even more people. Remember McGovern with Eagleton? Yeah McGovern never did recover from that, though he didn't have much of a chance in the first place...
(2) The social-conservative GOP base will be very PISSED off, and they'll believe that McCain betrayed them. Thus they'll turn on him in terms of votes and fundraising.
And especially if McCain replaces Palin with Romney, if simply because of the two glaring strikes agianst him: (1) Mormonism and (2) Pro-Choice Governor of Mass.
We must also consider that this would be spun very easily, that Obama/Biden is stability while McCain/Whoever is as chaotic and uncertain as the stock market is right now.
I'm not sure if a VP can be dropped from the ticket. Afterall, the VP, although picked by the presidential candidate, is approved at the convention. If there is one, I don't know what the mechanism is within a party that alows for the VP's replacement.
It would be a public relations disaster for him. It would show him as indecisive and having poor judgment. Like it or not, he has to stick with her.
Exactly right SC. He must stick with her now.
Originally Posted By: olivant
McCain supported Bush's decision to commit this Nation to war by invading Iraq to find and destroy something that wasn't in Iraq.
Yes, it is a fact that McCain supported the decision to go into Iraq. It is also a fact that many from Obama's party also voted to go into Iraq. But that's neither here nor there at this point of the game. We are in there now regardless of if it was the correct decision or not. WE ARE THERE AND CAN'T GO BACK IN TIME! And that is the issue that must be addressed. I'm tired of those who keep pounding the same old drum that we shouldn't have gone there in the first place. Maybe, maybe not. It's a point that will be debated for many years. But it's a moot point now. That was one of the areas that felt Obama was a bit weak on in the debate. Everytime foreign policy and the war popped up in the debate he just kept going back to the old "we shouldn't have gone there" stand. Get off of it already. Address what is going on now, tell the people what plan you have for getting out of there and what plan you have for bolstering up the region. Enough already with the "we shouldn't have gone there" platform.
It's like telling your child that they shouldn't touch the stove because it is hot and they will get burned. But the child doesn't listen and gets burned. You don't KEEP saying "see, I told you so, you shouldn't have touched it" and then just sit there and let them suffer in pain. You may say it to them once or twice but being that it's happened, you now must address the problem and try to stop the crying and help relieve the pain.
Address the issue of our being there and how you, as the potential President of this nation, plans on getting us out of there. If Obama can do that in the next debate, I feel that he'll score big with the "undecided" voters.
But DC, what of the fact that McCain/White House overnight supported a Iraqi withdrawal timeline only after the Iraqi Government agreed with Obama's plan?
Palin Contradicts McCain On Pakistan, Seems To Back Obama’s Position
PHILADELPHIA) Sarah Palin told a customer at a Philadelphia restaurant on Saturday that the United States should “absolutely” launch cross-border attacks from Afghanistan into Pakistan in the event that it becomes necessary to “stop the terrorists from coming any further in,” a comment similar to the one John McCain condemned Barack Obama for making during last night’s presidential debate.
During Friday’s debate, Obama criticized the Bush administration for sending billions of dollars in aid to Pakistan without ridding the border region of terrorists.
“If the United States has al Qaeda, bin Laden, top-level lieutenants in our sights, and Pakistan is unable or unwilling to act, then we should take them out,” Obama added.
McCain fired back hard, arguing that newly elected Pakistani president Asif Ali Zardari has had his “hands full” and suggesting that Obama’s tough talk was naïve.
“You don’t say that out loud,” McCain said. “If you have to do things, you have to do things, and you work with the Pakistani government.”
Palin’s apparent disagreement with McCain’s position on Pakistan came as the Alaska governor was picking up a couple of cheesesteaks at Tony Luke’s in South Philadelphia. She was approached by a man wearing a Temple University t-shirt, who later identified himself as Michael Rovito.
“How about the Pakistan situation?” Rovito asked. “What’s your thoughts about that.”
“In Pakistan?” Palin responded.
“What’s going on over there, like Waziristian?”
“It’s working with Zardari to make sure that we’re all working together to stop the guys from coming in over the border,” Palin said. “And we’ll go from there.”
“Waziristan is blowing up,” Rovito replied.
“Yeah, it is,” Palin said. “And the economy there is blowing up, too.”
“So we do cross-border, like from Afghanistan to Pakistan, you think?” Rovito asked.
“If that’s what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should,” Palin said.
In her first national television interview after becoming the Republican vice presidential nominee, Palin was pressed by ABC’s Charlie Gibson on whether the U.S. should launch cross-border attacks into Pakistan. She said that the United States “must do whatever it takes” to thwart Islamic extremists and said, “America has to exercise all options in order to stop the terrorists who are hell bent on destroying America and our allies.”
But Palin did not, at that time, explicitly express her support for cross-border attacks, as she did at the Philadelphia restaurant on Saturday.
"But we can't do it if we are not willing to give Iraq back its country. Now, what I've said is we should end this war responsibly. We should do it in phases. But in 16 months we should be able to reduce our combat troops, put -- provide some relief to military families and our troops and bolster our efforts in Afghanistan so that we can capture and kill bin Laden and crush al Qaeda."
The reasons for our invasion of Iraq are still hugely important because they reflect judgement. There are only two candidates and one of them exercised incorrect judgement. You cannot so easily eschew an appraisal of that judgement especially since McCain is more militant than Obama and too easily seeks recourse to warfare as a remedy.
RR, as far as 2012 prediction goes....who knows what issue/issues could be a factor in that election. Good possibility though since this bailout is pissing a lot of people off. Time will tell.TIS
I can't or don't want to even think about the 2012 election now. It's gonna be hard enough to get through the next 4 years no matter who gets elected. IMHO
Of course, things can change but I believe CNN took Michigan out of the "toss-up" states and into the Obama column as far as electoral votes. Which, btw, O is in Detroit right now (showing on MNSBC shortly)
Obama is now up double digits in most polls in Michigan. He's also now up in Virginia and N.C. He's drawn even in Florida and Ohio, and opened up a 6 point lead in PA.
Won't you be shocked if O gets Florida? I can't say before the last two elections, did I necessarily pay attention to how Fla. voted, but by all accounts it is a RED state no?? I am both surprised and pleased to see it so close.
Nothing would surprise me in Florida. I don't know the last time it went to the Democrats. It has a popular Republican Governor, and a huge population of senior citizens. It would be a huge upset for O if he wins Florida.
Florida went Democratic in 1996. This year black voter registration is way up. Could go Dem again.
Florida was real micro-paper-razor-thin in 2000 and 2004, and I'm sure it'll go down the wire as well on election night.
But as TIS points out, if Michigan becomes a more guaranteed Obama state along with Pennsylvania and Iowa and Colorado and New Mexico and even Virginia...Florida will grow less relevant for that campaign.
Obama is now up double digits in most polls in Michigan. He's also now up in Virginia and N.C. He's drawn even in Florida and Ohio, and opened up a 6 point lead in PA.
Don't forget Indiana, which like NC that campaign has registered tens/hundreds of thousands of new voters, which is why those two traditionally super safe-GOP states are now in contention.
McCain retracts Palin's Pakistan comments that Agreed with Obama
WASHINGTON (CNN)— Sen. John McCain retracted Sarah Palin's stance on Pakistan Sunday morning, after the Alaska governor appeared to back Sen. Barack Obama's support for unilateral strikes inside Pakistan against terrorists
"She would not…she understands and has stated repeatedly that we're not going to do anything except in America's national security interest," McCain told ABC's George Stephanopoulos of Palin. "In all due respect, people going around and… sticking a microphone while conversations are being held, and then all of a sudden that's—that's a person's position… This is a free country, but I don't think most Americans think that that's a definitve policy statement made by Governor Palin."
Saturday night, while on a stop for cheesesteaks in South Philadelphia, Palin was questioned by a Temple graduate student about whether the U.S. should cross the border from Afghanistan into Pakistan.
"If that's what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should," Palin said.
During Friday night's presidential debate in Mississippi, Obama took a similar stance and condemned the Bush administration for failing to act on the possibility terrorists are in Pakistan.
"Nobody talked about attacking Pakistan," Obama said after McCain accused the Illinois senator of wanting to announce an invasion. "If the United States has al Qaeda, bin Laden, top-level lieutenants in our sights, and Pakistan is unable or unwilling to act, then we should take them out."
McCain emphasized Sunday, Palin "shares" his view on the matter.
Obama was 5 points ahead of McCain just prior to the debate. An axiom of Presidential debates is that they favor the underdog: he has less to lose than the leader; and when both share the podium, both have equal stature.
McCain showed two advantages:
First, he constantly put Obama on the defensive by making him respond to his criticisms. Time after time, McCain made an accusation that Obama chose to respond to, instead of moving the debate somewhere that Obama wanted it to go. As one observer said, "Obama needs to improve his counterpunching."
Second, McCain's answers were shorter, crisper, showed more "emotional" content. Obama's answers, while far more thoughtful, were longer, more convoluted, and he hesitated and stuttered.
Obama scored early on the bailout plan, but McCain rescued himself by accusing Obama of $932 million in earmarks for Illinois (which Obama didn't refute), and made him defend $18 billion in earmarks as being less than $300 million--when Obama should have said that the GOP invented earmarks.
Obama's position on talking to enemies was far more thoughtful than McCain's. But McCain, sensing that Obama is vulnerable with Jewish voters, hammered on Iran and "no preconditions." One of the reasons we've lost so much prestige and influence in the world is because we talk only to friendly nations, but I suspect the voters will like McCain's position better than Obama's because Obama's is harder to defend.
McCain undoubtedly thought out the use of "Senator Obama just doesn't understand..." Obama should have forcefully slapped him down with the first use of that phrase. He never took it on head-on.
I believe that, on content, Obama won. And McCain at times looked tired and old. But televised debates are about image and impressions. Even if it was a draw, it benefited McCain more than Obama.
I believe that, on content, Obama won. And McCain at times looked tired and old. But televised debates are about image and impressions. Even if it was a draw, it benefited McCain more than Obama.
I agree it was a Draw, but because its a draw, it helps Obama more by default because McCain needed a clear victory to gain traction back in the polls, and so far, that hasn't been shown to be the case. Maybe that won't be so tomorrow or next few days, who knows.
I got to hear it, but after it loaded, I had it going from the BB screen which RR loaded it, and the YouTube screen came up and played as well. I was getting an echo. So I stopped one ad heard the other.
Yea, I don't know if it's a matter of being "off", or if we are just getting to see more of McCain, thus knowing him better. With all that's going on, he could be a little "off."
TB, I can concede the debate, for the most part was a draw. Yet I see the edge still to favor Obama. For one thing, I don't think the attack mode McCain used, faired well, and/or he didn't use it properly; and the fact that he didn't look at Obama thru the entire debate didn't sit well with me either. But...that's just my opinion ad you what they say about opinions.
This is the Obama ad I mentioned earlier. It's not playing here in CA that I know of. Anyway, sort of a "wake up" call for Obama supporters. Note the banner at the bottom of ad, showing low voter turnout, not to mention the very close race.
"But we can't do it if we are not willing to give Iraq back its country. Now, what I've said is we should end this war responsibly. We should do it in phases. But in 16 months we should be able to reduce our combat troops, put -- provide some relief to military families and our troops and bolster our efforts in Afghanistan so that we can capture and kill bin Laden and crush al Qaeda."
And here is another.....
OBAMA: "I think the first question is whether we should have gone into the war in the first place."
No. The question now is how they plan on reducing troop presence in Iraq. Tell the voters EXACTLY how you plan to provide relief. Not IF we should have gone in there. We did and it's overwith. We are there. Move on and outline a plan! Stop with the generalizations and provide some real solid ideas. And that goes for BOTH candidates here.
"The next president of the United States is going to have to decide how we leave, when we leave, and what we leave behind. That's the decision of the next president of the United States."
And if it's a matter of Obama trying to discredit McCain's credibility, well then McCain supporters can also pick out quotes from that debate which could discredit Obama's credibility. They can go back and forth all day. But what does that solve?
That is NOT what this should be about. We've seen enough of the finger pointing and the he did this and he did that bullshit over the last 8 years between the parties and look at where it's gotten our country!
I want these two candidates to stick to the facts, and debate the issues and not to start in with the "we shouldn't have done this" and "your party shouldn't have done that" bullshit. What's done is done and now the people, the voters, need to hear from BOTH candidates exactly WHAT they respectively plan to do to remedy the problems that we are CURRENTLY facing in this country.
The liberal media and MSNBC are out of control. I don't know if anyone here has talked about it or have seen it but MSNBC has been playing a tv ad that talks about John McCains skin cancer. They are trying to make people think that he is going to die in office. These kind of attacks are disgusting. MSNBC is the only station that was airing these ads. As of a few days ago they stopped because of all of the complaints they have received. The ads were horrible. MSNBC is the official news station of Obama. They are horrible.
The liberal media and MSNBC are out of control. I don't know if anyone here has talked about it or have seen it but MSNBC has been playing a tv ad that talks about John McCains skin cancer. They are trying to make people think that he is going to die in office. These kind of attacks are disgusting. MSNBC is the only station that was airing these ads. As of a few days ago they stopped because of all of the complaints they have received. The ads were horrible. MSNBC is the official news station of Obama. They are horrible.
ds
But tell me, was FOX NEWS part of the "stabilized" news media when earlier they were pondering if Obama's campaign "fist bumps" were a terrorist signal or if Obama was a muslim operative or whatever nonsense?
And you worry so much about MSNBC...last I checked, they were 3rd in the cable ratings, behind Fox News and CNN.
With your opinions so far DS, I recommend that you only watch FNC for now on, and you won't ever be insulted ever again.
Of course, I watch none of them so I don't have to worry about any of this.
That is NOT what this should be about. We've seen enough of the finger pointing and the he did this and he did that bullshit over the last 8 years between the parties and look at where it's gotten our country!
I want these two candidates to stick to the facts, and debate the issues and not to start in with the "we shouldn't have done this" and "your party shouldn't have done that" bullshit. What's done is done and now the people, the voters, need to hear from BOTH candidates exactly WHAT they respectively plan to do to remedy the problems that we are CURRENTLY facing in this country.
Should be, but that's not American Politics. Two things move the world: Money and Bullshit, and both candidates want to win, and they'll say anything to get elected.
Besides, as for "facts," remember when Mondale at the 1984 DNC said that he admitted that he would raise taxes if elected? Well Reagan promptly beat him in the biggest landslide in American history.
Thank God for Fox News. If they were not on tv the airways would be over run with nothing but left wing crap. And your right they do beat up on CNN and MSNBC in the rateings. I guess most Americans want to know the truth. ds
To me, using right wing or left wing as an insult is like calling someone a pinko commie bastard, just not as funny. It says a lot about the person doing the talking.
DC, neither of the candidates is President yet. Thus, neither has the necessary exposure to military commanders and the Joint Chiefs or the level of information on which to base an Iraq exit strategy. Obama has stated that he anticipates withdrawal within 16 months. That's all he can realistically state.
Also, I reiterate, it is important for him to refer to the way we got into Iraq because McCain exercised bad judgement in backing the invasion. Thus, it is important for Obama to emphasize that distinction between he and McCain and McCain's judgement. Besides, not all Americans support our withdrawal from Iraq.
Thank God for Fox News. If they were not on tv the airways would be over run with nothing but left wing crap. And your right they do beat up on CNN and MSNBC in the rateings. I guess most Americans want to know the truth. ds
DC, neither of the candidates is President yet. Thus, neither has the necessary exposure to military commanders and the Joint Chiefs or the level of information on which to base an Iraq exit strategy.
Now that may be true about Senator Obama, I don't know for sure, but it certainly is NOT true about Senator McCain!
McCain served as the Navy's liaison to the U.S. Senate which eventually led to his becoming a member of the Armed Services Committee. He also was a member of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs. It's documented that Senator John McCain has had enormous exposure to Military Commanders and members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Exposure and talks with high ranking military officials such as Joint Chiefs Of Staff Chairman Richard Meyers and military Generals such as David Petraeus.
Originally Posted By: olivant
Obama has stated that he anticipates withdrawal within 16 months. That's all he can realistically state.
Ok, fine. But why doesn't he tell the people on what basis he "realistically" anticipates a withdrawal within 16 months? What does he base that anticipation on?
Again, I am not singling out Senator Obama or Senator McCain. I am simply stating that BOTH candidates need to make themselves clear on how they plan on resolving many of the issues that our country has faced both domestically and internationally.
I would rather watch a town hall meeting where the public can ask the canidates any question they want to. I wish Tim Russert was still alive he was a great moderator for the debates.
One of the CNN commentators this morning said that a lot of the debate-watchers who said Obama won are young Democrats. You could interpret that as Obama "preaching to the choir." But something else jumps to mind:
One of the things the GOP did right in 2004 was to make a big push to register new voters, most of whom voted for Bush. Bush's popular margin was 3% over Kerry, which doesn't sound huge--but it represented a 3 million-vote plurality, which is pretty good. Obama's people have registered a large number of new, young Democratic voters, and the debate polls may be an indicator of things to come.
A Fox News Poll showed that 51% thought McCain won the debate, and 49% said Obama won. If Obama can pull out a draw on Fox News, that's not good for McCain.
A Fox News Poll showed that 51% thought McCain won the debate, and 49% said Obama won. If Obama can pull out a draw on Fox News, that's not good for McCain.
Yeah, that surprises me, as much as that Fox News Focus Group that gave the victory to Obama.
I wish I could find where I read this article just today, BUT here in California there was something like 500,000 new voter registrations in just this past year. While some were Republican, in all Democrats were the majority (by far) of new registants. Granted, California is NOT a swing state, but if, like in other states this holds true, then we could all be surprised by the results of this election. I do know that many states have experienced a large increase in registration. Now, we'll see if all these people (who I am betting are mostly young voters) will show up to the polls.
I wish I could find where I read this article just today, BUT here in California there was something like 500,000 new voter registrations in just this past year. While some were Republican, in all Democrats were the majority (by far) of new registants. Granted, California is NOT a swing state, but if, like in other states this holds true, then we could all be surprised by the results of this election. I do know that many states have experienced a large increase in registration. Now, we'll see if all these people (who I am betting are mostly young voters) will show up to the polls.
TIS
That very fact is perhaps why Indiana/Iowa/New Mexico/Colorado/Nevada/North Carolina/Virginia are in such a great threat to flip from Bush in 2004 to Obama in 2008.
And considering that McCain has basically given up on Iowa, that strategy may be paying off.
All though the video does endorse a candidate, I am not posting it for that. The first 6 or 7 minutes does accurately describe why the housing crises happened. Even when you take out the shots made at Obama.
South Carolina mayor ‘just curious’ if Obama is the antichrist.
South Carolina mayor ‘just curious’ if Obama is the antichrist.» Fort Hill, SC Mayor Danny Funderburk said he forwarded a chain email suggesting Barack Obama is the antichrist because he was “just curious” if it was true:
“I was just curious if there was any validity to it,” Funderburk said in a telephone interview. “I was trying to get documentation if there was any scripture to back it up.”
The e-mail, which has circulated in the last six months, claims the biblical book of Revelation says the antichrist will be in his 40s and of Muslim ancestry. The Charlotte Observer reports, “There is no such scripture. And Obama is not a Muslim. But that hasn’t stopped the e-mail.” In March, CNN’s Glenn Beck wondered aloud “Is Obama the antichrist?“
Now that the Bailout Bill was voted down, will John McCain take back his comments taking credit for helping to "get it done"? Will he be 'suspending his campaign' again since he said he decided to go to the debate and resume his campaign because he was "confident enough progress was made" to get a bill passed?
So McCain is blaming the Bailout failure on Obama and the Democrats, and I shake my head.
If the bailout had passed, both Obama and McCain would have voted for it on wednesday. Neither could vote on it today, and to republish the roll-call I posted in the Economy thread...
Democrats backed the bailout by 140 - 95 votes, or roughly 60% - 40%. Republicans opposed it by 133 to 65, or 67% - 33%
To recap, 40% of Democrats defected, and 2/3rds of the GOP as well.
So what does this mean?
It's EVERYONE'S fault. I blame Pelosi for that speech before the vote, and for not keeping her soldiers in line as a truely effective, and not mediocre, Speaker of the House would do...I blame President Bush for having lost the leadership clout finally it seems with his own Party in the House. I blame both sides for trying to jockey today for 2012 or 2010 or even this year's elections, and try to pin the other team...
To be fair, OK not really, 60+ Democrats voted against the Bill as well.
True, but it is a Republican sponsored bill, and almost 2/3's of the Democrats voted for it. 2/3's of the Republicans didn't. Now McCain has the balls to come out and actually lay blame on Obama for not getting MORE DEMOCRATS in line. Un-friggin-believable.
"This bill failed because Barack Obama and the Democrats put politics ahead of country," McCain Advisor Douglas Holtz-Eakin said.
Governor Palin... is not even close to ready to assume the office. I find her unworldly and unknowledgeable, and I think that she... should stay in Alaska a few more years and get some experience under her belt before she tries a national campaign.
(I cut down that quote but it's still in proper context)
Can't the same be said of Obama? He was only in the senate for two years before he announced his candidacy, and he's the one running for president . Palin may also be unexperienced, but at least she's on the bottom of the ticket. There is a real double standard going on here, not just from you SB but anytime Palin's lack of experience is brought up without mentioning Obama's as well.
After Taking Credit For Bailout Bill, Is McCain Campaign Willing To Share Responsibility For Its Failure?
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) hasn’t been involved in the deep negotiations over details of the bailout bill. In fact, he was largely silent during a meeting with President Bush and top congressional leaders. As the AP reported, the one role that both Democrats and Republicans alike were counting on McCain to play was to “deliver GOP votes” for the bailout bill.
Over the past week, McCain’s (R-AZ) campaign has already been to touting the senator’s success and casting his role as pivotal to bringing the parties together. His supporters have hit the airwaves, giving McCain credit for negotiating a deal:
“[T]his bill would not have been agreed to had it not been for John McCain. … But, you know, this is a bipartisan accomplishment, a bipartisan success. And if people want to get something done in Washington, they just watch John McCain.” — Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, 9/29/08
“Earlier in the week, when Senator McCain came back to Washington, there had been no deal reached. … What Senator McCain was able to do was to help bring all the parties to the table, including the House Republicans.” — Senior adviser Steve Schmidt, 9/28/08
“But here are the facts, and I’m not overselling anything. The fact is that the House Republicans were not in the mix at all. John didn’t phone this one in. He came and actually did something. … You can’t phone something like this in. Thank God John came back.” — Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), 9/28/08
“Before John McCain suspended his campaign yesterday, the situation that we’re looking at today looked very different then. After he showed leadership and called for bipartisanship, for us to partisanship aside and tackle this solution head on, here we are.” — Spokesman Tucker Bounds, 9/25/08
However, today Republicans failed to deliver the 70-100 votes needed from conservatives for the deal to pass. On the Republican side, 133 lawmakers voted against the bill; just 65 voted for it.
If the McCain campaign was willing to take credit for the success of the bill, does McCain also deserve credit for its failure?
Governor Palin... is not even close to ready to assume the office. I find her unworldly and unknowledgeable, and I think that she... should stay in Alaska a few more years and get some experience under her belt before she tries a national campaign.
(I cut down that quote but it's still in proper context)
Can't the same be said of Obama? He was only in the senate for two years before he announced his candidacy, and he's the one running for president . Palin may also be unexperienced, but at least she's on the bottom of the ticket. There is a real double standard going on here, not just from you SB but anytime Palin's lack of experience is brought up without mentioning Obama's as well.
If you remember my bitching at the time of the Palin pick, I thought it undermined McCain's biggest/best argument against Obama, which was on the experience issue.
Now you've had GOP/McCain/Fox News lackeys whine about how Obama has no experience, but Palin does.
Sorry, but neither have the experience, if that is what you want. Even you can't argue against that Freddie C.
No, what concerns me about Palin is that from all the interviews so far, she may in fact possibly be dumber than our President.
I mean, to quote another BB.Net member, when you're wrangled by a "hard-hitting journalist" like Katie Couric, you're in troubled.
Then again, how about the fact that apparently in the same interview, Palin couldn't name one Supreme Court case besides Roe/Wade.
I hate the Law as a subject because it bores me, but look at these cases I can come up off the top of my head:
Bush/Gore McCullum/Maryland The Dred Scott Decision Brown/Board of Education Clinton vs City of New York (SC striking down Line-Item Veto)
After Taking Credit For Bailout Bill, Is McCain Campaign Willing To Share Responsibility For Its Failure?
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) hasn’t been involved in the deep negotiations over details of the bailout bill. In fact, he was largely silent during a meeting with President Bush and top congressional leaders. As the AP reported, the one role that both Democrats and Republicans alike were counting on McCain to play was to “deliver GOP votes” for the bailout bill.
Over the past week, McCain’s (R-AZ) campaign has already been to touting the senator’s success and casting his role as pivotal to bringing the parties together. His supporters have hit the airwaves, giving McCain credit for negotiating a deal:
“[T]his bill would not have been agreed to had it not been for John McCain. … But, you know, this is a bipartisan accomplishment, a bipartisan success. And if people want to get something done in Washington, they just watch John McCain.” — Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, 9/29/08
“Earlier in the week, when Senator McCain came back to Washington, there had been no deal reached. … What Senator McCain was able to do was to help bring all the parties to the table, including the House Republicans.” — Senior adviser Steve Schmidt, 9/28/08
“But here are the facts, and I’m not overselling anything. The fact is that the House Republicans were not in the mix at all. John didn’t phone this one in. He came and actually did something. … You can’t phone something like this in. Thank God John came back.” — Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), 9/28/08
“Before John McCain suspended his campaign yesterday, the situation that we’re looking at today looked very different then. After he showed leadership and called for bipartisanship, for us to partisanship aside and tackle this solution head on, here we are.” — Spokesman Tucker Bounds, 9/25/08
However, today Republicans failed to deliver the 70-100 votes needed from conservatives for the deal to pass. On the Republican side, 133 lawmakers voted against the bill; just 65 voted for it.
If the McCain campaign was willing to take credit for the success of the bill, does McCain also deserve credit for its failure?
Huckabee earlier thought McCain was wrong to have pulled that stunt last week...and really, fair ot not, his pledge has made him connected to the last few days, more ownership of the problem politically than his opponent.
I mean, when McCain takes credit BEFORE the vote for the bail-out, which fails...doesn't that undercut him this side of a punch to the jaw?
It’s too soon for the 29 state polls released since last Wednesday to reflect the post-debate political environment, but it’s clear that the recent economic news has been favoring Barack Obama. The Democrat continues to rise in the Electoral College, picking up 48 electoral votes from Michigan (17 EV), Pennsylvania (21 EV), and Wisconsin (10 EV) to bring him to 259 votes, his most since before the Republican convention. Both Missouri (11 EV) and North Carolina (15 EV) fell from McCain’s column to toss-up, leaving him with 163 electoral votes. 116 electoral votes remain a toss-up, but Obama now holds his largest lead over McCain since July 17th. With 36 days remaining before the election, each candidates has the time and ability to change the dynamic of the race – and I am confident that will happen several times more.
Forget about Sarah Palin for a second. She's running for vice president (a "heartbeat" away, I know ) Can one Obama supporter on here honestly say that he is ready to become president? What has he accomplished? When has he shown that he can be the leader of anything? Please educate me on this.
Forget about Sarah Palin for a second. She's running for vice president (a "heartbeat" away, I know ) Can one Obama supporter on here honestly say that he is ready to become president? What has he accomplished? When has he shown that he can be the leader of anything? Please educate me on this.
Either both are ready, or neither are. You can't have it both ways.
Either both are ready, or neither are. You can't have it both ways.
Take off your liberal/democratic hat for one second. There is obviously a big difference in the importance of experience between a presidential candidate and a vice presidential candidate. Obama is running against McCain, not Palin. Experience does make a difference in this case.
And please answer my previous questions. What has Obama accomplished that qualifies him to even run for the Democratic nomination, let alone as the nominee in the general election? When has he ever shown any type of leadership?
Forget about Sarah Palin for a second. She's running for vice president (a "heartbeat" away, I know ) Can one Obama supporter on here honestly say that he is ready to become president? What has he accomplished? When has he shown that he can be the leader of anything? Please educate me on this.
I don't care if Obama is inexperienced. What did 'experience' get us the last 8 years? The worst President in history. 2 wars. A crumbled economy. Debt that our great grandchildren will still be paying off. The only way I wouldn't vote for Obama is if he showed signs he couldn't handle the job. I've seen nothing in the last year that makes me believe he can't. He's shown better judgment than McCain. Was McCain putting "Country First" when he chose Palin? I don't think so. It was a gamble to get women voters and satisfy the conservative base. If Obama came across as clueless and unqualified as Palin, I would not be voting for him. If you want to vote for McCain and 4 mores years of the same, then that's your right. That's what makes this country so great.
Either both are ready, or neither are. You can't have it both ways.
Take off your liberal/democratic hat for one second. There is obviously a big difference in the importance of experience between a presidential candidate and a vice presidential candidate. Obama is running against McCain, not Palin. Experience does make a difference in this case.
And please answer my previous questions. What has Obama accomplished that qualifies him to even run for the Democratic nomination, let alone as the nominee in the general election? When has he ever shown any type of leadership?
So Palin, if McCain dies, this hypothetical situation is irrelevant? Interesting argument you have there...
As to Obama, let me give you at least one.
He did what Republicans had never been able to do: Beat the Clintons!
Poll: Public Rejects McCain's Claim That Dems To Blame For Bailout Collapse
It looks like the McCain campaign's efforts to pin the failure of the bailout on Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats aren't getting any traction, according to the new ABC/Washington Post poll, the first survey to look at this issue.
The numbers: Among registered voters, 44% blame the Congressional Republicans -- that is, the ones who actually voted against the bailout -- compared to only 21% who blame Congressional Dems, and 17% who blame both equally.
Also, the Democratic arguments over who is to blame for the crisis appear to be winning the day. George W. Bush is seen as the single most important cause of the crisis by 25% of voters, followed by financial institutions with 18%. Congress is blamed by only eight percent.
Forget about Sarah Palin for a second. She's running for vice president (a "heartbeat" away, I know )
Funny how we get the rolling eyes for a "heartbeat" away. It *is* a heartbeat away. McCain is a 72 year old man diagnosed with malignant melanoma requiring 4 surgeries (one surgery taking 5 hours to remove lymphnodes, so this isn't just surface skin removal), and a slough of other ailments including dizziness that was diagnosed as vertigo; blood in the urine, which was diagnosed as caused by an enlarge prostate and bladder/kidney stones; high cholesterol, degenerative arthritis; evidence of polyps and diverticulosis in th colon, and those are what we know since he won't release medical records.
I lost a good friend to his type of melanoma a few years back, he was only 45.
Palin should be seriously considered as more than a heartbeat and more scrutinized than any other vp in history. You can point fingers about Obama's lack of experience {3 years as a successful community organizer, over a decade as a Constitutional Law professor, 8 years in the Illinois State Senate (including chairmanship of their Health & Human Services Committee and where he fostered a compromise between law enforcement and the ACLU, something no one else had been able to do. Thus, the first laws in the US to mandate videotaping of police interrogations and the recording of race during stops and arrests to keep an eye on racial profiling became Illinois law. All other states to mandate this come from Obama's effort), and 4 years in the U.S. Senate, where he has sponsored almost a gross of bills}, but he's a very smart man. Mrs. Palin in her ABC interview revealed herself to be abysmally unqualified, and only last year got a passport, belongs a church which believes dinosaurs were around 4000 years ago, doesn't know what the Bush Doctrine is, and has less than two years experience governing a state with a population less than that of Wichita, Kansas or Raleigh, North Carolina and no one is allowed to TALK to because they fear of what she might say.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The House's failure to pass a $700 billion bailout package Monday not only held back billions for Wall Street, but also was a major blow to Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign.
The Republican presidential nominee raised the stakes for himself last week when he suspended his campaign and returned to Washington for negotiations over a solution to the financial crisis.
"Even before the House vote, voters blamed Republicans more than Democrats for the crisis. Then McCain suspended his campaign to come back to Washington to rally support for a rescue plan," said Bill Schneider, a CNN political analyst. "He failed, so he gets blamed by both supporters and opponents of the rescue plan."
During a campaign event in Des Moines, Iowa, on Tuesday, McCain appeared to distance himself from Monday's House vote, saying the congressional inaction had "every American and the entire economy at the gravest risk."
"Yesterday, the country and the world looked to Washington for leadership, and Congress once again came up empty-handed," he said.
But over the weekend, McCain had involved himself in the efforts to get the bailout package to the president's desk.
Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, the top Republican in the House, said that McCain was actively involved in lobbying Republican House members Sunday to line up behind the bailout.
"He has been making calls to members in support of this bill ... and I'm grateful for his support," Boehner said.
But it was a majority of McCain's own Republicans in the House who voted against the bailout by a 2-1 ratio Monday afternoon, leaving the outcome of the bailout in doubt and sending the stock market diving 778 points. Despite McCain's lobbying efforts, 133 House Republicans voted against the bill.
After the vote, McCain was defensive, accusing his Democratic rival, Sen. Barack Obama, of just wanting to "phone it in" when it came to the bailout and introducing partisanship into the process.
"Senator Obama and his allies in Congress infused unnecessary partisanship into the process. Now is not the time to fix the blame. It's time to fix the problem," the Arizona Republican said after the vote.
But on Tuesday morning, McCain said the bill failed "because we haven't convinced people that this is a rescue effort, not just for Wall Street, but for Main Street America, for working families, for small businesses, for the heartland of America.
"I may fail a first or second or third time, but we have to get this job done for America. And I have a plan to restore our economy," McCain added.
Before the House vote, McCain was losing ground to Obama because of the increasingly bad economic news. A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll conducted September 19-21 found that Obama was leading McCain 51 percent to 46 percent. Earlier, after the Republican convention, the two had been tied in the polls.
And the CNN poll found that Obama leads McCain 49 percent to 43 percent among those surveyed when asked who had showed better judgment in the economic crisis.
Terry Jeffries, a Republican strategist and CNN contributor, also said McCain may have hurt himself among conservatives by losing sight of his party's free-market principles.
"I think that John McCain failed to lead," Jeffries said. "He should be right there pushing the principles, and the conservatives in the House are doing that right now."
While Obama and McCain have mostly agreed on the principles of the bailout, Obama has mostly stayed out of negotiations and has used the financial crisis to attack the economic policies of the Bush administration and tie McCain to the unpopular President Bush. VideoWatch Obama call for calm »
"He didn't put himself in that process. He was smart enough to realize he couldn't control the House Republicans or Democrats," said Ed Rollins, another Republican strategist and CNN contributor.
But McCain's allies still said McCain made the right move when he inserted himself into the talks.
"He wanted to come back to Washington and to help with the crisis. And the fact it didn't work out, it's not on his shoulders," said Ron Bonjean, a Republican strategist. "Frankly, it's on the Democrats' shoulders, they're the ones who run Congress."
Funny how we get the rolling eyes for a "heartbeat" away. It *is* a heartbeat away. McCain is a 72 year old man diagnosed with malignant melanoma requiring 4 surgeries (one surgery taking 5 hours to remove lymphnodes, so this isn't just surface skin removal), and a slough of other ailments including dizziness that was diagnosed as vertigo; blood in the urine, which was diagnosed as caused by an enlarge prostate and bladder/kidney stones; high cholesterol, degenerative arthritis; evidence of polyps and diverticulosis in th colon, and those are what we know since he won't release medical records.
Andrew Sullivan, a Conservative ideologue, at ATLANTIC Magazine has probed both McCain and Biden to release their medical records, ESPECIALLY McCain.
Originally Posted By: Saladbar
Palin should be seriously considered as more than a heartbeat and more scrutinized than any other vp in history. You can point fingers about Obama's lack of experience {3 years as a successful community organizer, over a decade as a Constitutional Law professor, 8 years in the Illinois State Senate (including chairmanship of their Health & Human Services Committee and where he fostered a compromise between law enforcement and the ACLU, something no one else had been able to do. Thus, the first laws in the US to mandate videotaping of police interrogations and the recording of race during stops and arrests to keep an eye on racial profiling became Illinois law. All other states to mandate this come from Obama's effort), and 4 years in the U.S. Senate, where he has sponsored almost a gross of bills}, but he's a very smart man.
Wow, did not know that about that whole ACLU/Cops story. Thanks for letting me know.
Two things regarding what a couple Board members posted above:
1) Don't forget that the 25th amendment provides for the Vice-President's temporary assumption of the Presidencyy if the President is incapacitated (or resigns). So, when you consider Palin as a Vice-President, keep in mind that she could serve as President should McCain not be able to carry out his executive duties as President.
2) What are the standards by which one should judge the qualifications (other than those stated in the Constitution) of a presidential candidate? To tell you the truth, I don't have many. I identify with a candidate based on the candidate's position on issues and my party affiliation which is Democrat. I assume many of you do the same.
2) What are the standards by which one should judge the qualifications (other than those stated in the Constitution) of a presidential candidate? To tell you the truth, I don't have many. I identify with a candidate based on the candidate's position on issues and my party affiliation which is Democrat. I assume many of you do the same.
I refuse to pick one party or the other, I vote for the best candidate.
McCain has shown a complete lack of judgment just in running his campaign, I can only imagine what he'd do in office. This is one of many of my reasons for voting Obama in November.
To all Barack Hussein Obama supporters - please tell me if you honestly think this man is ready to become president and why.
And if it's ok to bash McCain and Palin, am I allowed to do the same to Obama and Biden. Can I post anti-Obama and anti-Biden articles and youtube clips too?
And if it's ok to bash McCain and Palin, am I allowed to do the same to Obama and Biden. Can I post anti-Obama and anti-Biden articles and youtube clips too?
No, democrats are known fascists.
John Hitler (wait, I mean Sidney) McCain has shown questionable judgment and would escalate a war we don't need to be in in the first place.
To all Barack Hussein Obama supporters - please tell me if you honestly think this man is ready to become president and why.
And if it's ok to bash McCain and Palin, am I allowed to do the same to Obama and Biden. Can I post anti-Obama and anti-Biden articles and youtube clips too?
To quote someone familiar to most if not all Board posters" This is the business we've chosen."
I haven't caught up with this thread, but just had to post that I saw that Billy Joel and Bruce Springsteen will be holding a concert in NYC on Oct. 16th. Boy, does it get any better? I'd love to see both of them. Of course the $500 ticket is kind of steep.
Freddie, As I stated before, feel free to air whatever views you may have. I, for one, love an exchange of good ideas.
It is not that Governor Sarah Palin is simply inexperienced. It is that she is unworldly and completely out of her depth that scares the heck out of me. And, as I said in an earlier post, it is not simply that she is all of the above, but she also represents views that I vehemently oppose.
Yes, she is not running for president, but given the age and medical history of the man she shares the ticket with, she rightly should be scrutinized very, very carefully.
I wish we had another choice besides the two we have. McCains age and his health problems bothers me and I don't share the same views as Obama. But I like Palin so I will pick the lesser of the two evils once again.
Freddie, As I stated before, feel free to air whatever views you may have. I, for one, love an exchange of good ideas.
It is not that Governor Sarah Palin is simply inexperienced. It is that she is unworldly and completely out of her depth that scares the heck out of me. And, as I said in an earlier post, it is not simply that she is all of the above, but she also represents views that I vehemently oppose.
Yes, she is not running for president, but given the age and medical history of the man she shares the ticket with, she rightly should be scrutinized very, very carefully.
I echo your post SB. To sum up Palin, she lacks gravitas.
In today's New York Times, former Bush speechwriter David Frum states: "I think she [Palin]has pretty thoroughly -- and probably irretrievably -- proven that she is not up to the job of being president of the United States,..."
Say Obama gets killed if he gets elected, Biden takes over as President. Something happens to Biden who gets the job then? Please say it's not that witch Pelosi.
As far as VP goes, I do see how a candidate should take time and consider who he/she picks. That's why I was really surprised at Palin. As much as I am not a fan of his, I would have thought Romney would have been the best choice for McCain. With his economy background, he'd be a plus, as Biden, with his foreign relations background is a plus for Obama.
Then again, I hear Romney and McCain don't really like each other. Still, I do think a poor and careless choice on McCain's part. But who knows how the publice will vote. We'll see.
Say Obama gets killed if he gets elected, Biden takes over as President. Something happens to Biden who gets the job then? Please say it's not that witch Pelosi.
The order of succession goes to the VP, then Speaker of the House, President pro tempore of the Senate (Robert Byrd), Sec. of State, Sec. of Treasury, Sec. of Defense, Atty. General, and Sec. of the Interior. I don't know the order from there, but they involve heads of cabinet posts, like the Sec. of Labor. The last would be the Homeland Security director.
Of course, one would hope that a new vp would be sworn in contemporaneously, or as close to it as possible, with the new president, and that VP jumps to the head of the line.
Biden could be sworn in without a vice president and then appoint one as Nixon appointed Ford, and get the approval of Congress. Presumably he would have someone named in advance and the congressional approval would be a formality.
Those poll numbers seem a tad high for Obama based on other polls I have seen. It is definitely trending his way right now, but we're a month away and in politics that is forever.
They seem more than a tad high to me. They seem unbelievably high. Quinnipiac usually does a good job though.
Quote:
"It is difficult to find a modern competitive presidential race that has swung so dramatically, so quickly and so sharply this late in the campaign. In the last 20 days, Sen. Barack Obama has gone from seven points down to eight points up in Florida, while widening his leads to eight points in Ohio and 15 points in Pennsylvania," said Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.
Say Obama gets killed if he gets elected, Biden takes over as President. Something happens to Biden who gets the job then? Please say it's not that witch Pelosi.
The order of succession goes to the VP, then Speaker of the House, President pro tempore of the Senate (Robert Byrd), Sec. of State, Sec. of Treasury, Sec. of Defense, Atty. General, and Sec. of the Interior. I don't know the order from there, but they involve heads of cabinet posts, like the Sec. of Labor. The last would be the Homeland Security director.
Of course, one would hope that a new vp would be sworn in contemporaneously, or as close to it as possible, with the new president, and that VP jumps to the head of the line.
Per the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 as amended, the line of succession runs down through the cabinet department's secretaries in the order that those department's were created. Thus, the last to succeed would be Michael Chertoff, Secretary of Homeland Security.
I also want to point out that as TIS mentions, the Presidential candidate picks his Vice-Presidential running mate and then it is sanctioned by his party's convention. Thus, the quality of that pick is a prime indicator of the candidate's judgement.
I wish we had another choice besides the two we have. McCains age and his health problems bothers me and I don't share the same views as Obama. But I like Palin so I will pick the lesser of the two evils once again.
So you're voting for someone that won't preside our nation...
Who exactly VOTES for the Vice-President? I mean come on, who will make the big decisions and preside over agendas and shit? McCain.
You know there are some very knowledgeable opinions expressed on this Board about the campaign and the Nation's Executive Branch. But, given some of the related questions that have been asked, I suggest that some posters simply take the time to read the US Constitution. It's your (in most cases) Nation's fundamental law which the next President will take an oath to preserve,protect, and defend.
No, per the 25th amendment, the President gets to "nominate" a vice-president who must be confirmed by a majority vote of Congress before assuming the office.
So you're voting for someone that won't preside our nation...
Who exactly VOTES for the Vice-President? I mean come on, who will make the big decisions and preside over agendas and shit? McCain.
You are putting words in my mouth. I said I like her (Palin)but I am voting for the lesser of the two evils between McCain and the messiah Obama. DUH!!!
The order of succession goes to the VP, then Speaker of the House, President pro tempore of the Senate (Robert Byrd), Sec. of State, Sec. of Treasury, Sec. of Defense, Atty. General, and Sec. of the Interior. I don't know the order from there, but they involve heads of cabinet posts, like the Sec. of Labor. The last would be the Homeland Security director.
Exactly.
Although someone forgot to tell that to then Sec. Of State Alexander Haig on the day that President Reagan was shot!
Our local paper has some of the most entertaining and "thought-provoking" opinion pieces. I found this one particularly.....stimulating. I thought you might find it helpful in deciding who to vote for.
From the "Voice of the People" section of The Press of Atlantic City, Sept. 29, 2008
Palin callous toward animals Sarah Palin is an attractive woman, but there is much callousness hiding behind her polished appearance. While her religious fanaticism, contempt for science, poor parental skills, cronyism and secrecy hardly qualify her as a vice presidential candidate, the most worrisome aspect of her character is her total disdain for animals.
Palin has the safari mentality of past centuries and may never have met an animal she didn't want shot. She takes pride and enjoyment in killing her defenseless victims and has often posed in front of their carcasses.
As governor, she promoted airplane shooting of bears and wolves and offered a bounty for wolf paws to encourage the slaughter, even though such predator extermination defies wildlife-management common sense. Also, against the opinion of wildlife experts, she denied protection to endangered polar bears and beluga whales for the sake of corporate interests.
Evidently, Palin is a ruthless and deeply disturbed individual. The thought that she might some day control the nuclear button is truly frightening.
There are hunters who enjoy employing their skills and who want to eat what they kill. I have no problem with hunters. As a matter of fact, while lots of people will shed tears over "Bambi" being shot, I see what overpopulation has done when I see mangled cars and equally mangled deer carcasses on an almost weekly basis on my drive to work. There's a sportsmanship to hunting that I can understand. Plus, I'm a carnivore. It would be rather hypocritical to condemn someone for shooting a deer and eating venison while I'm chowing down on a big old steak.
However, shooting animals from the air? That seems horrible and extremely unsportsmanlike.
There are hunters who enjoy employing their skills and who want to eat what they kill. I have no problem with hunters. As a matter of fact, while lots of people will shed tears over "Bambi" being shot, I see what overpopulation has done when I see mangled cars and equally mangled deer carcasses on an almost weekly basis on my drive to work. There's a sportsmanship to hunting that I can understand. Plus, I'm a carnivore. It would be rather hypocritical to condemn someone for shooting a deer and eating venison while I'm chowing down on a big old steak.
However, shooting animals from the air? That seems horrible and extremely unsportsmanlike.
My hubby loves to hunt no only for the kill itself (if he has good enough aim) but he likes being out in the weather elements rain or snow on the hunt. Gun season is coming up in November. I better make room in the freezer(just in case)
SB, I don't like the idea from shooting from the air though.
So you're voting for someone that won't preside our nation...
Who exactly VOTES for the Vice-President? I mean come on, who will make the big decisions and preside over agendas and shit? McCain.
You are putting words in my mouth. I said I like her (Palin)but I am voting for the lesser of the two evils between McCain and the messiah Obama. DUH!!!
Sorry, but with the train of thought as put down by you, you acted like you were voting more for Palin than McCain.
BTW Mig, can you name a Supreme Court case besides Roe/Wade?
Yes, I realize that he simply misspoke, but I have a feeling that some of you on here would have been quick to post this had McCain or Palin said it, in another effort to discredit them.
Yes, I realize that he simply misspoke, but I have a feeling that some of you on here would have been quick to post this had McCain or Palin said it, in another effort to discredit them.
Good to see that you didn't need anyone's permission to post anything.
Anyway, you might have a point.
Then again, Obama is green in gaffes compared to Biden.
[BTW Mig, can you name a Supreme Court case besides Roe/Wade?
To tell you the truth I can't. Why???
Because in the recent Couric interview at CBS News, Palin couldn't name one single Supreme Court case besides Roe/Wade.
The law bores me in general, but I can name a handful instantly, like:
Brown/Board of Education (desegregated public schools) Nixon/United States (his tapes not protected by executive privlege) Clinton/New York City (Line-Item Veto struck down) McCullum/Maryland (Federal authority over the states) The Dred Scott decision (struck down Missouri Compromise) Bush/Gore (sealed election for Dubya)
Obama has visited 57 states? Yes, I realize that he simply misspoke, but I have a feeling that some of you on here would have been quick to post this had McCain or Palin said it, in another effort to discredit them.
There's a good reason for posting it - it's funny.
I wonder why his staff wouldn't allow him to go to Alaska or Hawaii?
Probably because their total of 7 electoral votes aren't going to mean squat in the election. Plus, he was raised in Hawaii and most likely doesn't need to waste time or money campaigning there.
I wonder why his staff wouldn't allow him to go to Alaska or Hawaii?
Probably because their total of 7 electoral votes aren't going to mean squat in the election. Plus, he was raised in Hawaii and most likely doesn't need to waste time or money campaigning there.
I understand you really need to hit the swing states but shouldn't you hit all the states at least once?
I'm a carnivore. It would be rather hypocritical to condemn someone for shooting a deer and eating venison while I'm chowing down on a big old steak.
However, shooting animals from the air? That seems horrible and extremely unsportsmanlike.
At a standard beef slaughterhouse, approximately 250 cattle are killed every hour. They have their horns sliced off, they are branded, which obviously causes excruciating third-degree burns. On many occassions they are shipped without food or water to these slaughterhouses, and then a metal rod is shot through their brains and they are hung upside-down and have their throats slit. This is what is known as stunning. Because of time constraints, inadequate stunning is inevitable which usually means that a conscious animal is hanged upside down, kicking and struggling and bleeding to death.
However shooting animals from the air is much more horrible and extremely unsportsmanlike.
OK, DC. I'll remind you of that little diatribe the next time you go to Shula's. I SAID that it would be hypocritical of me to criticize a hunter since I'm a carnivore, or didn't I??
I don't object to the death of an animal if it's being slaughtered for food. However, there's not much of a market for wolf meat that I know of. It's not even a fur that people wear. So why would she advocate the shooting of wolves from the air, and put a bounty on their paws?
Yes, I realize that he simply misspoke, but I have a feeling that some of you on here would have been quick to post this had McCain or Palin said it, in another effort to discredit them.
Here's another good one for "your side". Biden tells Chuck Graham to stand up. Only problem is he's in a wheelchair and can't.
OK, DC. I'll remind you of that little diatribe the next time you go to Shula's. I SAID that it would be hypocritical of me to criticize a hunter since I'm a carnivore, or didn't I??
I don't object to the death of an animal if it's being slaughtered for food. However, there's not much of a market for wolf meat that I know of. It's not even a fur that people wear. So why would she advocate the shooting of wolves from the air, and put a bounty on their paws?
SB, SB......You know damn well that I, like you, love eating a juicy hamburger or a great steak. I'm not criticizing you by any means for that.
What bothers me in this thread is that all of a sudden people are nitpicking when it comes to Governor Palin. All of a sudden there seems to be an influx of animal rights advocates popping up all over the place. It's a hypocrisy. Let's be honest here, the only reason that people are pointing something like this out is because they are trying to attack Palin. It's not because they are really so appalled at the idea that wolves are being shot! If one is so offended by the shooting of wolves, then one should also be very offended by the mistreatment of cows too.
So?.... when are we going to get together for a nice big juicy steak dinner?
What bothers me in this thread is that all of a sudden people are nitpicking when it comes to Governor Palin. All of a sudden there seems to be an influx of animal rights advocates popping up all over the place. It's a hypocrisy. Let's be honest here, the only reason that people are pointing something like this out is because they are trying to attack Palin. It's not because they are really so appalled at the idea that wolves are being shot! If one is so offended by the shooting of wolves, then one should also be very offended by the mistreatment of cows too.
But cows don't look like our pet dogs at home, do they?
It's like that cafe conversation in PULP FICTION, where John Travolta goes at Samuel L. Jackson for thinking dogs are cleaner animals than pigs because they are "charming"...despite the fact that many of them each their own poop.
As for the Palin thing, the hunting doesn't bother me. Dubya was a hunter, as was Dick "Don't Hunt with Me" Cheney:D, and I've never criticized them for that. I mean why not?
But shooting from a helicopter? That's fucking "REDNECK" in a bad way...and that's coming from a genuine redneck.
The way I look at it is, last election man did these political threads get vicious. Nobody dared support Kerry here. There was slamming of him, his military record (God forbid anyone say anything at all about John Boy's record), there was constant mocking, anger, gloating you name it, every emotion imagineable. The board was much more on the conservative side than not. I have no qualms whatsoever this time around, it going to the left. As a matter of fact, I am enjoying it.
I can't finish my thoughts. My daughter's on the phone. Anyway, proceed.
The board was much more on the conservative side than not. I have no qualms whatsoever this time around, it going to the left. As a matter of fact, I am enjoying it.
An additional four years of Bush can have that effect.
I have no qualms whatsoever this time around, it going to the left. As a matter of fact, I am enjoying it.
In all honesty TIS, I don't see any kind of extremism here from either side this time around. I really think that overall, in general, both sides are actually going more towards the center.
I have no qualms whatsoever this time around, it going to the left. As a matter of fact, I am enjoying it.
In all honesty TIS, I don't see any kind of extremism here from either side this time around. I really think that overall, in general, both sides are actually going more towards the center.
No. YOU'VE moved towards the center. Almost everyone else here is two steps ahead, err, I mean, to the left of you.
DC, Sorry. If she can't stand the heat, then tell her to get out of the kitchen (and that's in no way meant to be sexist). Governor Palin agreed to be in the spotlight. She agreed out of ambition or out of a sense of dedication to public service, perhaps a bit of both. She had to know what she was getting into. If she can't take it, then too bad. If Senator Obama and his wife have to explain the cover of The New Yorker to their children, then I think she can handle having animal rights activists knocking at her door.
Personally, I think it's a disgrace, but it's what the campaigns come down to. It should be about the issues and her views, and how personally a voter feels about them. I am far more appalled about her devotion to a rigid and compassionless pro-life agenda than her wanting to shoot at wolves from a plane. I am far more appalled by her objection to gun control laws than her personal use of guns. I am more concerned that she believes that the war from Iraq is a holy one and that it's all part of God's plan. Personally, I believe in God. I believe He has a plan for all of us. But I'm not the President, I'm not a heartbeat away from the President, and if I were, my personal religious views should in no way, shape or form have any bearing on my decisions for the future of this country.
And, yes, Mig, I feel fairly confident that Katie Couric can name more than one case. And if she couldn't, I wouldn't be nearly as upset as I am about the fact that Governor Palin, who is running for the second highest office in the land, couldn't come up with Brown v. the Board of Education of Topeka or Plessy v. Ferguson, which I think just about any 12 year old in the USA can name.
The board was much more on the conservative side than not. I have no qualms whatsoever this time around, it going to the left. As a matter of fact, I am enjoying it.
An additional four years of Bush can have that effect.
And, yes, Mig, I feel fairly confident that Katie Couric can name more than one case. And if she couldn't, I wouldn't be nearly as upset as I am about the fact that Governor Palin, who is running for the second highest office in the land, couldn't come up with Brown v. the Board of Education of Topeka or Plessy v. Ferguson, which I think just about any 12 year old in the USA can name.
You think Palin would even escape the first round of ARE YOU SMARTER THAN A 5TH GRADER?
To be fair to Palin, she did respond months back to the Exxon/Valdez appeal decision by the Supreme Court:
""I am extremely disappointed with today's decision by the U.S. Supreme Court," Palin said. "While the decision brings some degree of closure to Alaskans suffering from 19 years of litigation and delay, the court gutted the jury's decision on punitive damages." "
Yes, I do. However, I also think that Governor Palin had to know that she was forcing her 17 year old unwed and very pregnant daughter to give birth in the media glare.
Yes, I do. However, I also think that Governor Palin had to know that she was forcing her 17 year old unwed and very pregnant daughter to give birth in the media glare.
Is that the same as a former married President forcing his intern to give blowjobs in the oval office? Aren't you one of the people who always said that the personal lives of those in office should have no bearing on the political position that is being served?
I know you weren't. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought you were decrying that the concentration was on nitpicking stupid stuff instead of sticking to the issues. However, the rest of my post went on to lament the fact that perhaps a concentration of the issues would be worse for her. At least from MY POV.
Yes, I do. However, I also think that Governor Palin had to know that she was forcing her 17 year old unwed and very pregnant daughter to give birth in the media glare.
Which leads me to another "vent" ...... Can you imagine IF that was Obama's pregnant 17 year old daughter?????? The media and the righteous right would have a field day.
DC, I agree thus far, this election is not quite as brutal thankfully. But, we have what 30 days to go???? A lot can happen in 30 days.
DC, yes. I DO. And if you read my post, then you will see that I AGREED with Mig that the media treated her daughter disgracefully. HOWEVER, I also believe that the media was going to go after her no matter what. And that Governor Palin had to know that in advance.
That doesn't make it right. It's just the reality.
Yes, I do. However, I also think that Governor Palin had to know that she was forcing her 17 year old unwed and very pregnant daughter to give birth in the media glare.
Is that the same as a former married President forcing his intern to give blowjobs in the oval office? Aren't you one of the people who always said that the personal lives of those in office should have no bearing on the political position that is being served?
And by the way, FORCING??? I don't think that Monica ever made any allegations of rape. Did I miss some big news story?
DC, yes. I DO. And if you read my post, then you will see that I AGREED with Mig that the media treated her daughter disgracefully. HOWEVER, I also believe that the media was going to go after her no matter what. And that Governor Palin had to know that in advance.
That doesn't make it right. It's just the reality.
And by the way, FORCING??? I don't think that Monica ever made any allegations of rape. Did I miss some big news story?
C'mon now SB, let's not play with words here. She was just ayoung girl. I am not sayig that he "physically" forced her to do so. I am in no way saying that she was totally innocent. But let's be realistic. He was the President of the USA and she was a young intern. I would venture to guess that while he absolutely did not "physically" force her, he did somehow force, or perhaps a better word is convince her to perform the act. Not saying that she didn't enjoy it, but common sense says that he, being who he was, somehow manipulated her.
I'm sure he did. He never would have been elected if he wasn't capable of manipulating people to a certain extent. No politician would have. To get people to vote for you, I'm thinking that manipulative is a key personality trait.
And it was a disgrace that his infidelity was smeared all over for the world to see, something that should have stayed private. Just as I agreed that it was a disgrace that the Governor's grandchild-to-be should not have been.
However, I'm more concerned with what happens on November 4th of THIS year.
Noone went after her daughter. What disgrace? Describe it. Palin's daughter is pregnant, 17, and unmarried. That was reported. Simple as that. Her daughter's pregnancy raises questions about her upbringing which was supposedly in an evangelical household. Her pregnancy provides a huge contrast with that household.
TIS raises a great point. If either of Barack's daughters had gotten pregnant that pregnancy would have been attributed to his liberal persuasion. And why in the world would the Palin's introduce her impregnator to Americans as if he was to be applauded. Where is the admonition and recrimination that evangelicals typically heap on others in such situations? He screwed their daughter; their daughter let him. What happened to the abstinence they taught her? Noone went after her daughter; they went after her.
I have to agree with Senor Cardi on this one. She twenty two at the time. He was 50
Just to put it in perspective, Babe. And please don't take this the wrong way. I just want to make a point. Your oldest is 18 now, right? Well, if a 46 year old powerful man took interest in her, don't you think you'd feel that the word coerce would be appropriate?
And it was a disgrace that his infidelity was smeared all over for the world to see, However, I'm more concerned with what happens on November 4th of THIS year.
I agree 100%.
I apologize for bringing up the Clinton saga. But I just wanted to point out that what was considered unfair for one should also be considered unfair for the other.
There is no way in hell that what he did was acceptable. None. But he was president a number of years ago, and has no bearing on THIS election.
And, Olivant, what her daughter did may or may not be morally objectionable. And, yes, I see what you mean about the parading of the baby's father. But, she's still a kid, a kid who made a mistake and is doing the best she can to live with the consequences of her actions. To have to do it under a microscope is a horrible situation.
What I fear is that this girl's pregnancy, and her parent's acceptance of it, makes it appear acceptable to OTHER young girls. And perhaps those girls won't have the family and financial support that Miss Palin does.
Edit: And I wouldn't have to worry about an older man making moves on my daughter. I would just send her Uncle Cardi after him. All taken care of.
I don't like to judge people. What may be morally objectionable to you may NOT be morally objectionable to me, and conversely. As I said, she's a kid. She made a mistake.
I don't like to judge people. What may be morally objectionable to you may NOT be morally objectionable to me, and conversely. As I said, she's a kid. She made a mistake.
How is that a mistake? Wait, I know. As long as she doesn't become pregnant, then it's not a mistake. I see.
She's a kid? The age of consent in Alaska is 16.
So, if murder is not morally objectionable to you, then murder is okay with you? This is so very interesting.
Just a couple observations that perhaps may open a discussion:
1. Anyone notice how CNN site use to show the polls at the bottom of their political page every day? Now, since Obama has a lead, you have to go to the political map to get info. (that's the rightwing media for you)
2. I assume most will watch the VP debate tonight right? Watching all the pundits, I am hearing of all the dos and don'ts that Biden should abide by so as not to come across as condesending, sexist or mean. LMAO. My God, is this precious little flower so delicate that she can't be debated?????
I'll bet the Neocons have their talking points already made up accusing Biden of just those things. Heck, Hillary camp did it too, making accusations of sexism. I just dontnecessarily buy into that. At times, it seems a handy excuse. If you want to debate, you can do it without insults sure, but expect a debate and don't expect to be handled with kid gloves just because you're a woman. Besides, she may do much better than expected, if we are to believe the taling heads tht she does hold her own in a debate.
All 3 cable networks seem to agree that Palin's expectations are so low now, that if she can finish the debate still standing, it will be considered a win for her. As for Biden, he has to keep his answers short and to the point. They expect him to avoid making any comments about Palin, and save all his attacks for McCain.
A new Washington Post/ABC News poll shows that 1/3 of registered voters now say they are less likely to vote for John McCain due to his pick of Sarah Palin. Ouch.
Well, I'm hearing too, that it's really too late for him to "change" his VP choice. It wouldn't make him look good, that's for sure. On the other hand, as far as the debates go, "they" say she does hold her own. They showed a tidbit of her debate with her opponent when she ran for governor. In her favor, I think she has a likeability factor. Granted, that is not reason to vote for someone, but that is the case for many people. She may not do as badly as many think. We'll see.
Yes, I do. However, I also think that Governor Palin had to know that she was forcing her 17 year old unwed and very pregnant daughter to give birth in the media glare.
Which leads me to another "vent" ...... Can you imagine IF that was Obama's pregnant 17 year old daughter?????? The media and the righteous right would have a field day.
TIS
I agree with TIS’ statement if the shoe was on the other foot. I can hear all the Fox, right-wing zealots now if Obama’s teenager was pregnant: “See, another black, unwed teenager having a baby. It never ends.” While I agree that these public officials families are off-limits, they are still going to come under some scrutiny regardless. Anyone seeking political office understands that.
Here is why I have no respect whatsoever for Palin as a person, let alone her political stances and her ignorance of so many important aspects regarding the office she is seeking. Palin is an abomination as a parent. I agree that it is not Palin’s fault that her 17 year old kid is pregnant. Regardless, a teenage daughter needs full support to raise a baby. My wife brought up a great point last night about when she had our first child at age 34. My wife called and needed her own mother consistently with many questions about the baby. How in the world is Palin’s 17 year old supposed to get support from the VP of the United State? Worst of all, the baby is the one who ultimately impacted by poor decisions of a teenage mother.
My biggest criticism of Palin as a mother is the neglect of her infant child. How can Palin sleep at night with a Downs Syndrome infant, who needs the attention, affection, and love of both parents far more than a healthy child? I respect Palin's attempt to juggle family and career. But she is running for the world’s 2nd most powerful position, which demands far more than 99% of the jobs we hold. What if the baby needs its mom and Palin is across the world in a meeting or is being briefed about a possible terrorist attack? This is not like you or I getting a call from school that our child is sick and we leave work. It’s quite obvious that Palin's career ambitions are number one and the needs of her family are a distant second. I find that despicable.
Here’s another scenario that scares the hell out of me: six months into the presidency, John McCain suffers a stroke or heart attack and cannot make decisions for the country. Palin assumes the role as Commander-in-Chief and needs to meet with Iraqi leaders, or to discuss a military response in Pakistan or Iran, etc. Or worse yet, McCain is incapacitated for 3 months and Palin has to nominate a Supreme Court Justice. Given the ignorance she displayed with Katie Couric in regarding Supreme Court decisions, our country cannot afford for Palin to be learning on the job. How these hypothetical (yet very possible) examples do not instill complete fear into all voters is incomprehensible to me.
As a mother who works outside the home, I would love to say, "Why should Sarah Palin be punished for being female?", and truly mean it. While it SOUNDS good, but it really isn't the truth. I know from experience that no matter where you are, you feel pulled towards the other, either work or home. And I can't imagine that nightmare if one my daughters had been a special-needs child.
Yes, it's unfair. Yes, it's sexist. Yes, nobody has asked Obama how he would juggle being President and having two young daughters. But the truth is, in most households the mother is the primary caregiver, even if both parents work outside the home. So, yes, Sarah Palin is being punished for being a woman and a mother, but I can't help feeling the way I feel.
A new Washington Post/ABC News poll shows that 1/3 of registered voters now say they are less likely to vote for John McCain due to his pick of Sarah Palin. Ouch.
I don't believe that.
Yeah I'm with several of you on Palin as a dud here, but people don't vote for the VP.
Let the record reflect that Barack Obama made the approach to John McCain tonight.
As the two shared the Senate floor tonight for the first time since they won their party nominations, Obama stood chatting with Democrats on his side of the aisle, and McCain stood on the Republican side of the aisle.
So Obama crossed over into enemy territory.
He walked over to where McCain was chatting with Republican Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida and Independent Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut. And he stretched out his arm and offered his hand to McCain.
McCain shook it, but with a “go away” look that no one could miss. He tried his best not to even look at Obama.
Finally, with a tight smile, McCain managed a greeting: “Good to see you.”
Obama got the message. He shook hands with Martinez and Lieberman — both of whom greeted him more warmly — and quickly beat a retreat back to the Democratic side.
I'm not posting this as a reflection on the candidates, but just as an interesting perspective on some of the issues raised in this thread, like teen pregnancy.
[Here’s another scenario that scares the hell out of me: six months into the presidency, John McCain suffers a stroke or heart attack and cannot make decisions for the country. Palin assumes the role as Commander-in-Chief and needs to meet with Iraqi leaders, or to discuss a military response in Pakistan or Iran, etc.
Her being the Alaskan Gov. Isn't she not in charge of the Alaskan National Guard?
What experience does Obama have concerning the Military? Besides him voting against a bill that would fund our military with more money for more armor?
Here is why I have no respect whatsoever for Palin as a person, let alone her political stances and her ignorance of so many important aspects regarding the office she is seeking. Palin is an abomination as a parent. I agree that it is not Palin’s fault that her 17 year old kid is pregnant. Regardless, a teenage daughter needs full support to raise a baby. My wife brought up a great point last night about when she had our first child at age 34. My wife called and needed her own mother consistently with many questions about the baby. How in the world is Palin’s 17 year old supposed to get support from the VP of the United State? Worst of all, the baby is the one who ultimately impacted by poor decisions of a teenage mother.
My biggest criticism of Palin as a mother is the neglect of her infant child. How can Palin sleep at night with a Downs Syndrome infant, who needs the attention, affection, and love of both parents far more than a healthy child? I respect Palin's attempt to juggle family and career. But she is running for the world’s 2nd most powerful position, which demands far more than 99% of the jobs we hold. What if the baby needs its mom and Palin is across the world in a meeting or is being briefed about a possible terrorist attack? This is not like you or I getting a call from school that our child is sick and we leave work. It’s quite obvious that Palin's career ambitions are number one and the needs of her family are a distant second. I find that despicable.
Here’s another scenario that scares the hell out of me: six months into the presidency, John McCain suffers a stroke or heart attack and cannot make decisions for the country. Palin assumes the role as Commander-in-Chief and needs to meet with Iraqi leaders, or to discuss a military response in Pakistan or Iran, etc. Or worse yet, McCain is incapacitated for 3 months and Palin has to nominate a Supreme Court Justice. Given the ignorance she displayed with Katie Couric in regarding Supreme Court decisions, our country cannot afford for Palin to be learning on the job. How these hypothetical (yet very possible) examples do not instill complete fear into all voters is incomprehensible to me.
Why so much hatred towards a seemingly nice lady? You can disagree with her stances on the issues all you want, but to so harshly criticize her as a mother is out of line in my opinion. It has nothing to do with this election and is very unfair.
Let the record reflect that Barack Obama made the approach to John McCain tonight.
As the two shared the Senate floor tonight for the first time since they won their party nominations, Obama stood chatting with Democrats on his side of the aisle, and McCain stood on the Republican side of the aisle.
So Obama crossed over into enemy territory.
He walked over to where McCain was chatting with Republican Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida and Independent Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut. And he stretched out his arm and offered his hand to McCain.
McCain shook it, but with a “go away” look that no one could miss. He tried his best not to even look at Obama.
Finally, with a tight smile, McCain managed a greeting: “Good to see you.”
Obama got the message. He shook hands with Martinez and Lieberman — both of whom greeted him more warmly — and quickly beat a retreat back to the Democratic side.
Her being the Alaskan Gov. Isn't she not in charge of the Alaskan National Guard?
Thanks for that laugh, Mig... I needed one today.
Obama worked on the south side of Chicago for a number of years... I'm sure he saw his share of "military action" there. (At least more than Palin saw in her tenure as governor).
Her being the Alaskan Gov. Isn't she not in charge of the Alaskan National Guard?
Maj. Gen. Craig Campbell, adjutant general of the Alaska National Guard said: he and Palin play no role in national defense activities, even when they involve the Alaska National Guard. The entire operation is under federal control, and the governor is not briefed on situations.
Her being the Alaskan Gov. Isn't she not in charge of the Alaskan National Guard?
Maj. Gen. Craig Campbell, adjutant general of the Alaska National Guard said: he and Palin play no role in national defense activities, even when they involve the Alaska National Guard. The entire operation is under federal control, and the governor is not briefed on situations.
Well, she has comandeered a few air strikes against those pesky polar bears.
Why so much hatred towards a seemingly nice lady? You can disagree with her stances on the issues all you want, but to so harshly criticize her as a mother is out of line in my opinion. It has nothing to do with this election and is very unfair.
If she were Obama's VP pick and was a dem. I don't think she would be getting all this negative criticism from the liberal media.
Obama worked on the south side of Chicago for a number of years... I'm sure he saw his share of "military action" there. (At least more than Palin saw in her tenure as governor).
All I got to say is I'm glad that the Col. retired and I feel so sorry for our military if Obama gets elected.
All I got to say is I'm glad that the Col. retired and I feel so sorry for our military if Obama gets elected.
Yeah, look how well they've done under Bush.
It really doesn't matter if you have had military service or not. Carter was an Annapolis grad and a long time officer in the Navy, but from a military standpoint he was awful. Neither Reagan nor Clinton served but both were strategic thinkers who did well militarily. Yes I know Reagan did some training films in WWII but that doesnt count.
Why so much hatred towards a seemingly nice lady? You can disagree with her stances on the issues all you want, but to so harshly criticize her as a mother is out of line in my opinion. It has nothing to do with this election and is very unfair.
It has nothing to do with hatred and plenty to do with the election. It has nothing to do with what is perceived to be "fair." Palin opened her entire past, including her family, to the public eye when she accepted the nomination. If she didn't want the attention, all she had to do was tell McCain "no thank you." This is not a part-time position in which she is seeking. How it has to do with the election is quite simple. It shows the character of the candidate. It also shows her judgment. I find both to be severely flawed.
I know two mothers of kids with Downs Syndrome. They are constantly going to doctors appointments or having to stay home with their Downs kids, who have a much tougher time staying healthy. Palin's 17 year old and infant need their mother right now, plain and simple. In particular, the infant needs its mom.
Palin made a conscious decision to place more emphasis on her own career and ambitions than the needs of two of her children. Is she the first parent to do so? Absolutely not. But the stakes are much higher here - our country. We are fighting two wars and are in economic trouble. And the United States cannot afford a Vice President zoning out at a national security meeting because her mind is distracted about children. The Vice Presidency is not a position where the country can afford splitting time between work and home life.
Why so much hatred towards a seemingly nice lady? You can disagree with her stances on the issues all you want, but to so harshly criticize her as a mother is out of line in my opinion. It has nothing to do with this election and is very unfair.
If she were Obama's VP pick and was a dem. I don't think she would be getting all this negative criticism from the liberal media.
That's a fair statement, Miggie. But as others have already posted here, if it was Obama's daughter who was pregnant, the right would be all over it.
That's politics. In a perfect world, the family (especially children) would be left out of it. But politics are far from perfect. It is what it is.
I know two mothers of kids with Downs Syndrome. They are constantly going to doctors appointments or having to stay home with their Downs kids, who have a much tougher time staying healthy. Palin's 17 year old and infant need their mother right now, plain and simple. In particular, the infant needs its mom.
You're 100% correct. I have a niece with Down syndrome, and my sister-in-law no longer works due to it. Taking care of her is now a full-time job.
Her being the Alaskan Gov. Isn't she not in charge of the Alaskan National Guard?
Thanks for that laugh, Mig... I needed one today.
Obama worked on the south side of Chicago for a number of years... I'm sure he saw his share of "military action" there. (At least more than Palin saw in her tenure as governor).
All I got to say is I'm glad that the Col. retired and I feel so sorry for our military if Obama gets elected.
Yeah, look how well they've done under Bush.
It really doesn't matter if you have had military service or not. Carter was an Annapolis grad and a long time officer in the Navy, but from a military standpoint he was awful. Neither Reagan nor Clinton served but both were strategic thinkers who did well militarily. Yes I know Reagan did some training films in WWII but that doesnt count.
Or shit guys, look at LINCOLN.
His grand miltary experience was basically a state militia, or volunteered-locals , to solve/deal with an indian problem at the time, and unless I'm mistaken, all that was rather an uneventful tour of duty.
Then he was forced to task in trying to keep a union intact as the Commander-In-Chief.
I think it's hilarious too, but I think the money could be better spent on other things. In fact. I don't think I've ever seen an attack ad aimed entirely on the VP candidate, and it's a a full minute too. Imagine if Obama put out a similar ad about Palin?
I still stand that the VP debate won't shift or do shit for either campaign, and really quite honestly, if McCain's people are hoping to turn things around with Palin tonight...
That's sad. Not pitiful, just sad like back in 1984, when Mondale deluded to himself that he could maybe have a slight chance of beating Reagan.
With Palin the porcelain doll, and Biden the gaffe machine, it might be an entertaining train wreck, though I doubt either will give the ultimate bitch-slap like this classic:
I think it's hilarious too, but I think the money could be better spent on other things. In fact. I don't think I've ever seen an attack ad aimed entirely on the VP candidate, and it's a a full minute too. Imagine if Obama put out a similar ad about Palin?
With Palin so far, he doesn't have to.
The last time, from my research, where a campaign attacked the opposition's VP was back in 1988 by Dukakis, against poor Dan Quayle.
And well, it didn't quite work out for that campaign in the end.
point is, think of VPs as like the B-side singles. You don't spend $$$ to buy that flip-tune, but at best its a bonus, at worst deadweight.
The best part of that clip is Bentsen's face when Quayle made the statement. Apparently he knew ahead of time that Quayle liked to make that comparison, and he couldn't wait to pounce. ...I was watching CNN yesterday, and I forget the name of the person being interviewed but she made the comment: "Sarah Palin makes Dan Quayle look like Colin Powell." That's the funniest comment so far.
The best part of that clip is Benson's face when Quayle made the statement. Apparently he knew ahead of time that Quayle liked to make that comparison, and he couldn't wait to pounce. ...I was watching CNN yesterday, and I forget the name of the person being interviewed but she made the comment: "Sarah Palin makes Dan Quayle look like Colin Powell." That's the funniest comment so far.
I tell ya, at this rate, she is.
If anything, I feel bad for poor Quayle now.
OK, I actually don't, but you wouldn't blame me if I did, right?
John McCain is pulling out of Michigan, according to two Republicans, a stunning move a month away from Election Day that indicates the difficulty Republicans are having in finding blue states to put in play.
McCain will go off TV in Michigan, stop dropping mail there and send most of his staff to more competitive states, including Wisconsin, Ohio and Florida. Wisconsin went for Kerry in 2004, Ohio and Florida for Bush.
McCain's campaign didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.
Republicans had been bullish on Michigan, hopeful that McCain's past success in the state in the 2000 primary combined with voter dissatisfaction with Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm and skepticism among blue-collar voters about Barack Obama could make it competitive.
McCain and his running mate Sarah Palin spent the night after the GOP convention at a large rally in Macomb County, just outside Detroit. The two returned later last month for another sizable event in Grand Rapids.
But recent polls there have shown Obama extending what had been a small lead, with the economic crisis damaging an already sagging GOP brand in a state whose economy is in tatters.
A McCain event planned for next week in Plymouth, Michiigan, has been canceled.
Dan Quayle was only humorous because never actually became President. If anything would have happened to Bush, God only knows what would have happened.
Dan Quayle was only humorous because never actually became President. If anything would have happened to Bush, God only knows what would have happened.
If he became President, "found God", he probably would have been Dubya about 8+ plus before our reality.
Isn't it unfortunate when so many Americans focus so much attention on the Vice-Presidential candidate? Isn't just as unfortunate (maybe even more so) when a Presidential candidate focus so much attention and hope on his Vice -Presidential running mate.
Of the Republicans, I am so much reminded of Bob Dole in '96 stating the his choice of Jack Kemp would energize the Party. Isn't the Party's Presidential candidate supposed to do that?
Why so much hatred towards a seemingly nice lady? You can disagree with her stances on the issues all you want, but to so harshly criticize her as a mother is out of line in my opinion. It has nothing to do with this election and is very unfair.
It has nothing to do with hatred and plenty to do with the election. It has nothing to do with what is perceived to be "fair." Palin opened her entire past, including her family, to the public eye when she accepted the nomination. If she didn't want the attention, all she had to do was tell McCain "no thank you." This is not a part-time position in which she is seeking. How it has to do with the election is quite simple. It shows the character of the candidate. It also shows her judgment. I find both to be severely flawed.
I know two mothers of kids with Downs Syndrome. They are constantly going to doctors appointments or having to stay home with their Downs kids, who have a much tougher time staying healthy. Palin's 17 year old and infant need their mother right now, plain and simple. In particular, the infant needs its mom.
Palin made a conscious decision to place more emphasis on her own career and ambitions than the needs of two of her children. Is she the first parent to do so? Absolutely not. But the stakes are much higher here - our country. We are fighting two wars and are in economic trouble. And the United States cannot afford a Vice President zoning out at a national security meeting because her mind is distracted about children. The Vice Presidency is not a position where the country can afford splitting time between work and home life.
Those of you who consider yourselves Conservatives might want to ask Dr. Laura Schlessinger her opinion of Palin's juggling children and career.
Well, you and I are pretty much on the same page, Olivant (conservative Democrats), but isn't Dr. Laura pretty much Ann Coulter with a psychology degree and a better dye job?
I like Bob Dole, but he had no chance in 96. Clinton was so popular, nobody was going to beat him.
There was no wars, the economy was prospering, and honestly the GOP that year didn't have anything to hang their hat on in terms of solutions/answers, or what they framed as the fundamental questions/issues.
The Dole campaign basically was that Clinton is a devilish whore-mongering scumbag*, and that we needed more tax cuts. That was it, that was Dole's whole campaign.
BTW, you all know that Dole is the only American to have been nominated for both President (1996) and Vice-President (1976) and win neither office?
Well, you and I are pretty much on the same page, Olivant (conservative Democrats), but isn't Dr. Laura pretty much Ann Coulter with a psychology degree and a better dye job?
BTW, what happened to Coulter anyway? She's been MIA since the primaries.
If she were Obama's VP pick and was a dem. I don't think she would be getting all this negative criticism from the liberal media.
Or from liberal gangsterbb members.
Liberal, liberal, liberal. Is that supposed to be akin to "Anti-Christ"?
You don't think she'd be getting criticism if she was running on the Democratic ticket?? Puh-leeze. If Biden was unable to name a newspaper or explain the Bush doctrine or had an unmarried pregnant 17 year old daughter or claimed that his foreign policy experience came from the fact that he could LOOK at another country from his state or if he was unable to name a Supreme Court case other than Roe v. Wade, then that's just reeks of partisan blindness.
Precisely. I thought she would be good, to be honest. She's been thoroughly prepped. And she certainly knows how to deliver a line. Truth be told, she's a more magnetic speaker than Biden.
However, she has also avoided several questions by talking around them until the time ran out, deregulation for example.
I think she's a little too prepped. She's obviously been filled with a lot of answers that sound good, but some aren't related to the question in any way.
She is quick to speak, many times getting out or around answering a question by either bashing Obama or telling Biden to move "forward. She gets away with it though because she is coming across as friendly/perky (even though I'm not quite sure cause I really don't know her)
It could have been a whole lot worse for her. I think she's holding her own. I think too Biden is probably holding back knowing he'll get bashed if he is anyting less than cordial to her.
(1) Will this debate have any impact, positive or negative, for either campaign? Historically they're sideline spectacles that are irrelevant to the outcome. I think this year is no different.
(2) BUT if there is impact....who's campaign is helped more by it?
CBS is also noting that Palin didn't use any of the chances to set the ticket apart from Bush, even though Biden gave her PLENTY of times to try to differ from him.
While reading through a liberal message board's response, they are just ripping shreds out of Geraldine Ferraro for saying that "both won." Want a sample?
Geraldine Ferraro offends me. Her implications that Sarah Palin being able to debate well proves herself worthy of the job is so offensive to women it makes me sick.
MY point was that she is very good when she is prepped. It's when the questions are unscripted that her wheels come off the wagon.
Sicilian Babe, I assume that you are a woman. How does this unscripted question strike you?
Do you agree?
I think that voting for the McCain/Palin ticket would be a major step backwards for ALL Americans.
As for the "winner" of the debate, I think that they both were well-spoken. However, I think that she danced and danced around answering certain questions by talking about what SHE wanted to and letting the clock run out.
(1) Will this debate have any impact, positive or negative, for either campaign? Historically they're sideline spectacles that are irrelevant to the outcome. I think this year is no different.
(2) BUT if there is impact....who's campaign is helped more by it?
I think the Republicans are probably happy as a pig in shit right now, simply because Palin didn't mess up with any major blunders. I think it is a "feel good" time for them and in that respect helped the Republicans.
As far as which campaign would be helped/hurt. I don't expect any big bounce but IF there is, I expect it to be short lived and very small. Everyone anticipated and looked forward to this debate but once everyone comes back down to reality, it'll be the Presidential debate that drives votes. And, we have two more debates to go.
Polling numbers coming in...Only 21% thought Palin won the debate on CBS (Biden at 43%). And only 18% swing voters were affected by the debate in general.
If you judge a "winner" by how they addressed the issues, then you have to give it to Biden, since Palin spent plenty of time dodging them. She spoke well on the points that SHE cared about, but refused to answer certain questions. What's the point of having the moderator ask questions??
As for the "winner" of the debate, I think that they both were well-spoken. However, I think that she danced and danced around answering certain questions by talking about what SHE wanted to and letting the clock run out.
First, I would like to say that I respect you for being the president of the Plawrence fan club. I really appreciated that he took an interest in my high school football career.
But to get back to my question, do you agree that if Governor Palin was elected that it would be a major step backward for women?
As for the "winner" of the debate, I think that they both were well-spoken. However, I think that she danced and danced around answering certain questions by talking about what SHE wanted to and letting the clock run out.
First, I would like to say that I respect you for being the president of the Plawrence fan club. I really appreciated that he took an interest in my high school football career.
But to get back to my question, do you agree that if Governor Palin was elected that it would be a major step backward for women?
Biden did well at countering Palin's "Obama voted to ..." with "McCain voted for it too because it...." a few different times. That was big to me that she tried to distort the facts and Biden constantly caught her and put everything into context.
She did better than expected but that doesn't say much about the public opinion of her, does it?
Biden did well at countering Palin's "Obama voted to ..." with "McCain voted for it too because it...." a few different times. That was big to me that she tried to distort the facts and Biden constantly caught her and put everything into context.
She did better than expected but that doesn't say much about the public opinion of her, does it?
If the CNN polling is any indication, and its not necessarily...
Is Palin Qualified to be VP?
Before Debate Yes: 42 No: 54
After Debate Yes: 46 No: 53
-------------------------
Alright, most CNN viewers usually are Democrat-leaning, so basically she didn't get much traction with them. No surprise at all.
No, I wanna see the ABC/CBS/NBC polls on this one.
Well yea, considering all the the other polls coming in, you gotta admit, Fox is a little slanted.
Btw, Barry is actually a nickname for Obama (maybe from childhood). I find it's used sarcastically for some reason by a lot of rightwing bloggers who like to tread on leftwing blogs. I actually think it's kind of a nice nickname.
"When did we change from a two party system to a choice between different flavors of statists? Please save us from the current abundance of pandering populists and find me a real Republican." Robert L. Borosage, Institute for America's Future
But to get back to my question, do you agree that if Governor Palin was elected that it would be a major step backward for women?
I answered your question to the best of my ability - I think that it would be a step backward for ALL Americans. I believe that the current Republican candidate and his running mate would simply be a continuation of the failed policies of the current administration. In all good conscience, I can't vote for anyone will is not committed to ending what I feel is an unjust war. I can't vote for someone who calls himself a maverick, and yet whose ideals are not very different from President Bush's. I can't vote for any candidate who is committed to overturning Roe v. Wade.
Those are personal choices that I make in voting. It has nothing to do with who Sarah Palin is as a person. I don't think it would be any different if it was McCain/Romney on the ticket. I think it simply would have been more of the same.
I looked at it like a football game. Biden won the game, but Palin covered the spread.
EXCELLENT analogy Lou! I like it! And perhaps Biden edged her out due to his scoring on a bad call by the officials.
"After further review the call on the field stands. McCain/Palin will be charged with their first timeout."
Palin may lack depth on the issues, but she is likeable and has a folksy appeal that resonates with many Americans." She and her family are unique among the candidates. I think Biden was well advised not to attack her or correct her. She was evasive on some questions, falling back on the energy issue often, but once the candidates get rolling, many forget what the question was.
I missed a half hour in the middle of the debate, but once again Biden made two references to Scranton. There is a flurry of campaign activity in northeastern PA. Yesterday, polls indicated that Obama has opened his largest lead yet.
I usually don't get into these discussions, but after last night -- while "likable and folksy" -- I have absolutely no faith in Palin as #2 of the free world. Many times debaters seem to avoid the questions asked, especially when they don't have a good answer, but she took it to a new level. She didn't "debate" so much as made it a point to use all her minutes to get her bullet-points in regardless of the question. Whenever Biden asked her a specific question, she danced around it. She also looked incredibly nervous and the antithesis of a candidate. Now, I'm not comparing her to the disaster by the name of James Stockdale (under Perot) or Dan Quayle, by any means, but she makes me nervous. I hate Hillary, but at least she presents herself as someone who knows what she's talking about -- whether right or wrong.
I don't particularly like either presidential candidate. We need something other than "more of the same" but at the same time, we need someone with experience who won't be irresponsible in finishing what we've started (regardless of how it was started). Almost every election it seems to be the lesser of two evils. I don't think anyone is particularly trustworthy, either.
The last two debates will hopefully produce a clear, convincing winner. And I hope the American people will listen to the issues discussed rather than voting strictly on party lines or because there's a minority or a woman on the ticket.
JG, While I agree that she seemed nervous at the very beginning, I think she got herself together rather quickly. I agree that Biden seemed to answer the questions far more directly than she did. The Republicans once again put up someone of the old guard and been surprised by a young candidate who has caught the imagination of the American people at a time when we are feeling financially insecure, just like Bill Clinton did in 1992. I think that the Republicans felt that if they preached more of their 2004 scare tactics, they would walk into the White House again. I don't think that anyone expected the economy to tank the way it has.
She also looked incredibly nervous and the antithesis of a candidate.
I expected her to be a bit nervous at the begining of the debate. Senator Biden has had many years of experience standing in front of television cameras and speaking to, and in front of, millions of Americans where as Governor Palin is just really getting her feet wet in addressing an Americn audience of this magnitute. All in all I think that she wound up doing a really good job and wound up being pretty calm and collective. And it looked as though Senator Biden himself saw this and respected her for it.
I would love to know what Biden and her were talking about and laughing about when they introduced each other to their respective families after the debate was over.
Originally Posted By: J Geoff
I hope the American people will listen to the issues discussed rather than voting strictly on party lines or because there's a minority or a woman on the ticket.
The real loser in the debate last night was Gwen Ifill. She was awful. She just mailed it in.
I agree to a point. She did nothing when Sarah Palin answered a question with a totally different topic. She had little choice though. Everyone knows she has an Obama book coming out, so she had to lay off Palin.
Biden won the debate, and he handled himself better than Obama did last week. Palin did ok. She avoided looking dumb and unready by sticking to a carefully prepared script of generalities and banalities. Two takeaways:
First, McCain put her on the ticket to shore up his support among the GOP Right. They were beginning to sweat after Palin's gaffes with Katie Couric. Now they're probably breathing sighs of relief. But McCain already had the GOP Right before Palin (realistically, would they ever vote for Obama?). He needs to reach out to the middle of both parties if he expects to win. Instead, he keeps looking to the Right.
Second, Palin's adequate performance last night probably will slow or stop the flow of free votes Obama had been getting thanks to the Couric interviews. Now he needs to take off the gloves and defeat McCain decisively. He can't afford any more ties--they benefit McCain.
So courtesy of the TMZ website, Larry Flynt is reportedly fast-tracking a porn to come out by election day called NAILIN' PAYLIN
From TMZ: The faux Sarah is Lisa Ann, who "will be nailing the Russians who come knocking on her back-door." In another scene -- a flashback -- "young Paylin's creationist college professor will explain a 'big bang' theory even she can't deny!"
There's also a threeway with Hillary and Condoleezza look-alikes.
Biden-Palin matchup most watched VP debate? Preliminary data shows 90-minute sparring session drew 45 rating Reuters updated 3:41 p.m. ET, Fri., Oct. 3, 2008
LOS ANGELES - The nationally televised debate between Sarah Palin and Joseph Biden appears likely to rank as the most highly rated matchup ever between U.S. vice presidential candidates, early Nielsen Media Research figures showed on Friday.
Preliminary Nielsen data shows the 90-minute sparring session on Thursday in St. Louis drew an average household rating of 45.0 — the percentage of all homes that were tuned to the debate — in the nation’s 55 largest metropolitan areas.
Nielsen said it expected to release final national ratings and a tally of individual viewers later in the day.
But the early figure far surpasses the corresponding preliminary 33.2 rating garnered by last Friday’s first debate between the two presidential nominees, Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama.
They ended up with a Nielsen national audience of 52.4 million U.S. viewers, so the final Palin-Biden tally is certain to easily eclipse that.
In fact, if the latest numbers hold up, Thursday’s debate will be the most highly rated ever between vice presidential candidates, eclipsing the old record held by the first woman on a major-party ticket, Geraldine Ferraro, and the Republican incumbent at the time, George H.W. Bush.
The Palin-Biden bout also appears likely to stand as the most watched of any nationally televised political debate in 16 years, going back to a three-way match in 1992 that included then-President George H.W. Bush, Democrat Bill Clinton and independent Ross Perot.
A larger-than-usual TV audience was expected for Palin and Biden going into their debate given the questions raised about the Alaska governor’s readiness and the widespread lampooning of her previous appearances in the media.
Snap polls by CBS and CNN said most viewers thought Biden, who curbed his tendency to be verbose and maintained a respectful tone toward Palin, won the debate.
While Gov. Sarah Palin didn't hurt her ticket in last night's debate, it's hard to see how she helped it. Palin has always been a favorite with the Republican base and last night's performance calmed any jitters they felt after watching a series of trainwreck interviews with Katie Couric. But with just over four weeks until the election, Palin did little to help McCain win over uncommitted voters.
Imagine if Sen. John McCain had chosen Mitt Romney as his running mate instead. While Romney would not likely have excited the Republican base as much as Palin did, he would be seen as a more steady hand with the nation's financial markets in crisis. And it's unlikely that McCain would be pulling out of Michigan if native son Romney was on the ticket.
It's just more evidence Palin will ultimately prove to be a bad pick for McCain.
I don't particularly like either presidential candidate. We need something other than "more of the same" but at the same time, we need someone with experience who won't be irresponsible in finishing what we've started (regardless of how it was started). Almost every election it seems to be the lesser of two evils. I don't think anyone is particularly trustworthy, either.
I don't particularly like either presidential candidate. We need something other than "more of the same" but at the same time, we need someone with experience who won't be irresponsible in finishing what we've started (regardless of how it was started). Almost every election it seems to be the lesser of two evils. I don't think anyone is particularly trustworthy, either.
Bob Barr 2008
Imagine if Ron Paul had gotten his act together and actually ran a 3rd party campaign, or at least threw his lot fully behind Barr, instead of pissing away his relevancy by supporting the Constitutional Party nominee, after he had already endorsed "All 3rd party candidates" (including Nader).
Some of Paul's stuff is just wacky, I admit, and yet on some issues from legalizing marijuana to being the only GOP Presidential candidate this year who thought invading Iraq was wrong, I think there is some segments of that party who aren't down for the Religious Right, and were/are hungry to make their fustrations be heard, i.e. back somebody.
Will Paul, and his little own "Convention" during the 2008 RNC in Minnesota, make any difference for the 2012 GOP primaries if Obama wins?
Palin was chosen in order to attract some of the female votes that the Republicans calcualted had gone to Clinton during the Democratic Party primaries. That's it; that's the reason she was chosen.
Now keep this in mind. Both presidential candidates were selected by a large component of US voters through that competitive and arduous primary process. Palin was chosen by one person. McCain chose her strictly for political reasons. Plain and simple. That's judgement for ya.
Palin's answer reagrading he Vice-Presidency was almost bizarre. I find nothing in James Madison's notes of the Constitutional Convention that express the Founding Father's desire to give the Vice-Presidency "flexibility" regarding legislative agendas as she stated they did. In Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution the VP is designated as President of the Senate. However, that position is only empowered in the Constitution to cast a vote when the Senate is tied. That's it. What flexibility was she talking about and intending to take advantage of?
But McCain already had the GOP Right before Palin (realistically, would they ever vote for Obama?). He needs to reach out to the middle of both parties if he expects to win. Instead, he keeps looking to the Right.
I strongly agree.
In the last two elections even those towards the middle of their respective parties still voted strictly along their own party lines. I believe that it's much different this time around. I believe that those who are more towards the middle of their respective parties can and will be swayed to vote for the candidate that they feel this country will be better served with. This time around I do not believe that those in the middle will strictly vote for a candidate just because he is from their own respective party. In my opinion, this time around, the votes from those in the "middle" on either side will be the deciding factor for this Presidential election. There will be a lot more of crossing party lines than in the last two elections.
That's your personal opinion. Which of course you are entitled to. And let's be real here for a moment. Regardless of which party you are a member of, or which candidate you support, they ALL make decisions for political reasons most of the time.
Listed below are 13 of JOE BIDEN’S 14 LIES during last night's debate:
1. TAX VOTE: Biden said McCain voted “the exact same way” as Obama to increase taxes on Americans earning just $42,000, but McCain DID NOT VOTE THAT WAY.
2. AHMEDINIJAD MEETING: Joe Biden LIED when he said that Barack Obama never said that he would sit down unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmedinijad of Iran. Barack Obama did say specifically, and Joe Biden attacked him for it.
3. OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING: Biden said, “Drill we must.” But Biden has opposed offshore drilling and even compared offshore drilling to “raping” the Outer Continental Shelf.”
4. TROOP FUNDING: Joe Biden LIED when he indicated that McCain and Obama voted the same way against funding the troops in the field. McCain opposed a bill that included a timeline, that the President of the United States had already said he would veto regardless of it’s passage.
5. OPPOSING CLEAN COAL: Biden says he’s always been for clean coal, but he just told a voter that he is against clean coal and any new coal plants in America and has a record of voting against clean coal and coal in the U.S. Senate.
6. ALERNATIVE ENERGY VOTES: According to FactCheck.org, Biden is exaggerating and overstating McCain’s record voting for alternative energy when he says he voted against it 23 times.
7. HEALTH INSURANCE: Biden FALSELY said McCain will raise taxes on people's health insurance coverage - they get a tax credit to offset any tax hike. Independent fact checkers have confirmed this attack is FALSE.
8. OIL TAXES: Biden FALSELY said Palin supported a windfall profits tax in Alaska - she reformed the state tax and revenue system, it's not a windfall profits tax.
9. AFGHANISTAN / GEN. MCKIERNAN COMMENTS: Biden said that top military commander in Iraq said the principles of the surge could not be applied to Afghanistan, but the commander of NATO's International Security Assistance Force Gen. David D. McKiernan said that there were principles of the surge strategy, including working with tribes, that could be applied in Afghanistan.
10. REGULATION: Biden FALSELY said McCain weakened regulation - he actually called for more regulation on Fannie and Freddie.
11. IRAQ: When Joe Biden LIED when he said that McCain was “dead wrong on Iraq”, because Biden shared the same vote to authorize the war and differed on the surge strategy. John McCain has been proven right.
12. TAX INCREASES: Biden said Americans earning less than $250,000 wouldn’t see higher taxes, but the Obama-Biden tax plan would raise taxes on individuals making $200,000 or more.
13. BAILOUT: Biden said the economic rescue legislation matches the four principles that Obama laid out, but in reality it doesn’t meet two of the four principles that Obama outlined on Sept. 19, which were that it include an emergency economic stimulus package, and that it be part of “part of a globally coordinated effort with our partners in the G-20.”
1. FANNIE MAE/FREDDIE MAC: Palin said “it was John McCain who pushed so hard with the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac reform measures,” but fact checkers say that’s “Quite A Stretch” And “Barely True,” and that McCain was a “latecomer” to the discussion.
2. FUNDAMENTALS ARE STRONG: Palin tried to say “John McCain saying our economy was strong” but McCain has used the phrase “The Fundamentals Of The Economy Are Strong” At Least 16 Times This Year.
3. PARTISAN POLITICS: Palin said McCain is “known for putting partisan politics aside to just get the job done,” but he has voted with Bush 90% of the time in the Senate and bragged about his support for Bush on important issues.
4. TAXES ATTACK: Palin repeated the attack that Obama voted for higher taxes 94 times, which the New York Times says is “false,” CNN says is “Misleading,” and FactCheck.org says is “inflated.”
5. TOBACCO REGULATION: Palin said to “look at the tobacco industry” as an example of McCain pushing for even harder and tougher regulations. But McCain opposed expanding the SCHIP children’s health insurance program for 5.8 million children because it would increase tobacco taxes.
6. SPENDING INCREASES: Palin said Obama is is proposing “nearly a trillion dollars in new spending,” but didn’t mention that he has also proposed cuts to balance it out, an attack CNN has already debunked as “misleading” and that ignores the far larger cost of McCain’s tax cuts and spending hikes.
7. HEALTH CARE: Palin claimed Obama’s health plan is “government run” which has been widely debunked as a “canard.”
8. HEALTH CARE. Palin says taxes wouldn’t go up under the McCain health care plan, a fact even his own campaign has acknowledged isn’t true.
9. TROOPS: Palin repeated what the AP called the “highly misleading” attack that Obama opposed funding for the troops, and Factcheck.org notes that the same methodology would lead to the same conclusion for McCain.
10. GLOBAL WARMING: Palin said “I don’t want to argue about the causes” for global warming, when she has clearly taken the position that she doesn’t not believe it is man-made.
11. MCCAIN IS CONSISTENT: Palin said McCain” doesn't tell one thing to one group and then turns around and tells something else to another group,” when that is exactly what he has done on immigration, telling Hispanic leaders he was for comprehensive reform instead of the enforcement focused approach he has taken with conservatives.
12. MCCLELLAN NOT MCKIERNAN: Palin referred to the US commander in Afghanistan, David McKiernan as “McClellan.”
13. MCKIERNAN ON “SURGE:” Palin said that did not say a surge wouldn’t work in Afghanistan, when just yesterday he said “The word I don’t use for Afghanistan is ’surge,’ ” McKiernan stressed, saying that what is required is a “sustained commitment” to a counterinsurgency effort that could last many years and would ultimately require a political, not military, solution
14. KILLING CIVILIANS. Palin said “Obama had said that all we're doing in Afghanistan is air raiding villages and killing civilians and such a reckless, reckless comment and untrue comment again hurts our cause. That's not what we are doing there.” Unfortunately, the Associated Press says that Obama was right in discussing a critically important point about avoiding civilian casualties.
15. TEACHING: Palin said we need to make sure “that education in either one of our agendas, I think, absolute top of the line,” when McCain has repeatedly favored tax cuts for the wealthy over funds for more teachers and class size reduction.
16. PARTISAN APPOINTMENTS: Palin said “You do what I did as governor. And you appoint people regardless of party affiliation. Democrats, independents, Republicans, you walk the walk, don't just talk the talk” when she repeatedly appointed friends and supporters to positions for which they weren’t qualified.
17. FOCUS ON CLIMATE CHANGE: Palin falsely claimed that she was the first governor to form a climate change subcabinet, when at least 28 states had already taken action.
18. DARFUR DIVESTMENT: Palin claimed that “when I and others” found out that the state had money invested in Sudan that “we called for divestment,” when the reality is that Palin’s appointees worked to kill a Darfur divestment plan.
Curiously, what's the 14th "lie" not mentioned for some reason?
And I have to be honest here... I don't know who wrote that list... but at a quick glance (and not knowing the details myself), some sound pretty dubious at best. It's almost a desperate attempt that will fail to change anyone's mind anyway.
Lists like these are pretty worthless and single-mindedly biased. Where's the list of Palin's "lies" to compare to it? There were plenty, trust me... on BOTH sides!
Listed below are 13 of JOE BIDEN’S 14 LIES during last night's debate:
1. TAX VOTE: Biden said McCain voted “the exact same way” as Obama to increase taxes on Americans earning just $42,000, but McCain DID NOT VOTE THAT WAY.
2. AHMEDINIJAD MEETING: Joe Biden LIED when he said that Barack Obama never said that he would sit down unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmedinijad of Iran. Barack Obama did say specifically, and Joe Biden attacked him for it.
3. OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING: Biden said, “Drill we must.” But Biden has opposed offshore drilling and even compared offshore drilling to “raping” the Outer Continental Shelf.”
4. TROOP FUNDING: Joe Biden LIED when he indicated that McCain and Obama voted the same way against funding the troops in the field. McCain opposed a bill that included a timeline, that the President of the United States had already said he would veto regardless of it’s passage.
5. OPPOSING CLEAN COAL: Biden says he’s always been for clean coal, but he just told a voter that he is against clean coal and any new coal plants in America and has a record of voting against clean coal and coal in the U.S. Senate.
6. ALERNATIVE ENERGY VOTES: According to FactCheck.org, Biden is exaggerating and overstating McCain’s record voting for alternative energy when he says he voted against it 23 times.
7. HEALTH INSURANCE: Biden FALSELY said McCain will raise taxes on people's health insurance coverage - they get a tax credit to offset any tax hike. Independent fact checkers have confirmed this attack is FALSE.
8. OIL TAXES: Biden FALSELY said Palin supported a windfall profits tax in Alaska - she reformed the state tax and revenue system, it's not a windfall profits tax.
9. AFGHANISTAN / GEN. MCKIERNAN COMMENTS: Biden said that top military commander in Iraq said the principles of the surge could not be applied to Afghanistan, but the commander of NATO's International Security Assistance Force Gen. David D. McKiernan said that there were principles of the surge strategy, including working with tribes, that could be applied in Afghanistan.
10. REGULATION: Biden FALSELY said McCain weakened regulation - he actually called for more regulation on Fannie and Freddie.
11. IRAQ: When Joe Biden LIED when he said that McCain was “dead wrong on Iraq”, because Biden shared the same vote to authorize the war and differed on the surge strategy. John McCain has been proven right.
12. TAX INCREASES: Biden said Americans earning less than $250,000 wouldn’t see higher taxes, but the Obama-Biden tax plan would raise taxes on individuals making $200,000 or more.
13. BAILOUT: Biden said the economic rescue legislation matches the four principles that Obama laid out, but in reality it doesn’t meet two of the four principles that Obama outlined on Sept. 19, which were that it include an emergency economic stimulus package, and that it be part of “part of a globally coordinated effort with our partners in the G-20.”
And watch as without supplying #14 and everyone pointing that out to you, that you'll go MIA again for the next few days.
Last night in Colorado (one of the key swing states we have our eyes on), the Democratic polling group Greenberg Quinlan Rosner brought together 40 undecided women voters to watch the vice-presidential debate. In pre-interviews before the festivities started, most of the women admitted that they didn't know much about either of the running mates. They'd heard plenty about Sarah Palin in particular, but they didn't know who she was, didn't know what she thought.
By the time the debate was over, the voters had a better sense of who the candidates were. But they still didn't know what Palin thought on any major issue other than energy. Even women who found her personally likeable and confident complained that she seemed "coached" and stuck so closely to "talking points and sound bytes" that they weren't sure what kind of vice-president (or, for that matter, president) she would be. As with the St. Louis focus group that watched the first presidential debate, however, generally favorable reactions to the Democratic team didn't translate into a significant shift of support from undecided voters. All forty women came into the undecided and after listening to the two running mates debate for 90 minutes, 8 had moved to the Obama camp, another 8 to McCain, and the remaining 24 were still uncommitted.
In a discussion that took place after the debate, some of the women who became Obama supporters said that they had been concerned about Obama's relatively brief political career but found themselves reassured by Biden. "If I vote for Barack Obama, it will be because of Joe Biden," said one unmarried women. A handful of women thought that Biden sounded too much like a Washington insider or an old-fashioned pol, a conclusion that probably wasn't helped by his use of Senate-speak and references to legislative procedures. But several had teared up when the Delaware senator talked about losing his first wife and daughter, and felt more favorably about him as a result. "He got emotional there in the end," said another unmarried women. "I didn't know his wife and child died. That touched me."
Overall, the women warmed up to both candidates throughout the evening—both Biden and Palin's favorability ratings rose 9 points from pre- to post-debate. They liked Palin's strength and confidence, and the married women particularly responded to her "folksiness" and "down-to-earth" personality. That personal regard, however, didn't necessarily mean they wanted to see her in the White House. "I'd like to have lunch with Sarah," said one married woman, "but have Joe running my country." Another agreed: "I think Sarah Palin is cute as a button and is good in sound bytes, but she just is not ready." Before the debate, only 10 of the women believed Palin was not ready to be vice-president or president; by the end of the evening more than half of them (21) shared that concern.
The economy has been the number-one issue for women voters—particularly unmarried women—throughout the campaign season, and that held true for this focus group as well. And on that point, they were much more impressed by Biden's ability to talk about the economy and relate to the concerns of middle-class voters. Before the debate, 14 women preferred Biden over Palin on the economy, but that number climbed to 23 afterward. A similar shift took place on the question of which candidate they trusted to handle health care—9 women initially preferred Biden, but that number more than doubled to 20 over the course of the evening. Several noted that they would have liked to hear Palin offer any details about what a McCain/Palin health care plan would look like.
Biden may not have closed the deal for the majority of these undecided women, but he impressed and reassured them on the issues that they say will determine their votes in November. And while Palin presented herself as someone voters can relate to, her performance seems to have raised even more questions—at least for this small group of undecided women—about whether she is qualified to be on the Republican ticket.
In the aftermath of John McCain's decision to pull out of Michigan, Republicans in the state are expressing shock and bewilderment at his move—and aren't willing to cede the state's 17 electoral votes just yet.
“We’re blindsided, along with everybody else in Michigan,” said Oakland County Executive L. Brooks Patterson. “I feel like I woke up this morning and there was a note on my pillow.”
“When the general leaves the battlefield when the fight’s still going on, it creates a lot of chaos,” he said.
Saul Anuzis, the chairman of the state party, sent out a fundraising message Friday morning that called McCain’s decision “a tough blow.”
“The McCain campaign announced they were shifting resources and staff out of Michigan to other targeted states. Other states ‘today’ offer a better opportunity for the campaign,” Anuzis wrote on his blog, paraphrasing the McCain campaign’s explanation. “We do NOT agree.”
Michigan had been seen as one of McCain’s top targets among the states Sen. John F. Kerry won in 2004, along with Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and New Hampshire. The Republican now appears resigned to the state's electoral votes—which Kerry claimed by a little more than 3 percentage points and the RealClearPolitics polling average now shows Barack Obama leading by 7 points—going to the Democrat.
Mike Duhaime, the McCain campaign’s political director, explained the decision as a necessary tactical choice.
"It's been the worst state of all the states that are in play," he said in a conference call Thursday. "It's the obvious state, in my perspective, to come off the list."
Some Democrats were hesitant to declare victory and viewed McCain’s move with suspicion, suggesting sinister motives behind the Arizona senator’s very public departure from the state.
“Who announces with such fanfare that they’re leaving, other than to let you think that they’re gone?” asked Democratic Lt. Gov. John D. Cherry, who predicted that McCain’s announcement could be a prelude to a flurry of anti-Obama advertising by independent groups.
“I think the announcement you’re reading is an invitation for independent groups to come in and do that sort of thing,” Cherry suggested, adding that for McCain to win the state Republicans would have to engage in “some very outrageous stuff.”
In September a group called Freedom’s Defense Fund launched a small buy of independent anti-Obama ads in Macomb County, Mich., where working-class “Reagan Democrats” are a powerful voting bloc, that attempted to tie Obama to his former pastor, Jeremiah Wright, and indicted Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick. Thus far, though, Michigan has yet to see any statewide or well-funded independent effort aimed at tilting the race against either candidate.
State Rep. Tonya Schuitmaker, the assistant Republican floor leader in the Michigan House of Representatives, said Cherry’s theory was not implausible.
“I don’t have any knowledge as to whether that will happen or not, but I think that’s definitely a possibility,” Schuitmaker said, explaining that she thought McCain’s pullout was ‘’the wrong decision to make.”
“Obviously he has to make it based on the financial information and the polling numbers, but I think it might’ve been a little premature,” she said. “He still has a fighting chance here.”
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, McCain’s running mate, seemed to agree with that assessment Friday, expressing dismay at her own campaign’s decision in an interview with Fox News Channel.
“I want to get back to Michigan and I want to try,” she told reporter Carl Cameron. “Todd and I, we’d be happy to get back to Michigan. We’d be so happy to speak to the people there in Michigan who are hurting.”
McCain supporter Chuck Yob, a former Republican National Committeeman for Michigan, underscored Palin's sentiments in a public email Friday.
"There will still be a campaign for John McCain in Michigan whether it is sanctioned by the professionals in Washington DC or not," Yob wrote.
As much as some Republicans might want McCain-Palin back in Michigan, McCain’s poll numbers have dropped precipitously in recent state polling. And while his campaign’s decision to leave the state was abrupt, it was not completely unforeseeable.
Since the crisis on Wall Street began two weeks ago, Obama has steadily widened his advantage over McCain. In a poll taken September 14-17 by the Michigan firm EPIC-MRA, McCain trailed Obama by just one point. In a new poll taken from September 20-22, that gap had widened to 10 points.
And in an even more recent survey conducted by the Iowa firm Selzer & Co., Obama led McCain, 51-38 percent.
“Among whites, I still think he is lagging among older white men without a college education, but everyone else, including independent women, [is] moving toward Obama,” EPIC-MRA president Bernie Porn.
Porn suggested that shift could largely be explained by the reemergence of economic issues as the central focus of the general-election campaign – and McCain’s shaky response to developing events on Wall Street.
“As much as it was about any positive messages Obama might have had, I think it also involved miscues on the part of the McCain campaign, inconsistencies, contradictions,” he said. “Calling off his campaign and everything, I’m not sure people responded to that the way the McCain campaign expected them to.”
Democrat Bill Crouchman, chair of the Macomb County Commission, agreed that economic issues were driving McCain’s numbers down.
“Southeast Michigan has really been in a recession now for about three years,” he said. “What the country’s feeling now, we’ve been going through for quite a while, so the economy, around here, is the issue.”
“Of course,” Crouchman jabbed, “[McCain’s] quote that he didn’t know much about economics didn’t help things for him.” Patterson acknowledged McCain could have had a stronger response to the economic meltdown.
“Maybe he’s not as quick on the draw as everyone would want him to be, but Obama’s given him many opportunities to respond and knock it out of the park,” he said. “I don’t know how the hell [the economic crisis] got laid off on Republicans,” he said. “McCain just wasn’t up to the task for some reason.”
Though he sounded similarly frustrated in an entry on his blog, Anuzis did his best to buck up Republican spirits, claiming the party would do its best to stay in the game.
“We will have a revised plan in effect by next week and are NOT conceding an inch to the Obama campaign or any Democrats in Michigan,” he wrote. “This is a battleground state, the numbers always tighten up and we will bring the McCain campaign back to Michigan by our own efforts statewide.”
TPM finds Sen. John McCain's campaign "has now shifted virtually 100% of his national ad spending into negative ads" attacking Sen. Barack Obama.
Analysis shows that as of October 1, McCain's $1.3 million weekly is being broken down as follows:
(1)Nearly half a million on "Dome," which attacks "Obama and his liberal allies" in Congress for favoring "massive government."
(2)A little more than half a million on "Mum," which attacks "Obama and his liberal allies" as "mum on the market crisis."
(3)Much of the remaining money on "Overseas," which says that "Barack Obama and his liberal allies are to blame" for jobs going overseas. The small remainder is going to a positive spot, the "Original Mavericks" ad.
This is a dramatic shift from the period before he suspended his campaign when he spent approximately half his ad money on the positive "Original Mavericks" ad, and around half on the negative "Dome" spot.
"Our opponent ... is someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect, imperfect enough, that he's palling around with terrorists who would target their own country." She also said, "This is not a man who sees America as you see America and as I see America." - Sarah Palin
You know, when the Swiftboard Ads 4 years ago were deployed, they were done by a 527 group, of which Dubya's campaign could plead no direct association with. Wouldn't this being done by the campaign itself hurt in the boomerang blowback?
Great ad RR..."Tricking our children into alternative lifestyles?"
JL, I also read that McCain "may" drop Pennysylvania as well, although I can't confirm. According to all the pundits, he supposedly has no choice but to go negative.
It's hard to tell, but there are people who think that works, and some people believe anything they hear and some just want to believe what they hear. You'd think perhaps America would be sick of it, or "unto" it, but I wouldn't necessariy put any money on that. Anything is possible. Then again, on the plus side, I think McCain is kind of careless and sometimes too "quick" in his responses and ads. Know what I mean? He could bury himself even deeper.
Clinton tried to go negative using the same exact theme, and it did not work. Traditionally, uncommitted voters do not like a candidate that goes negative. I don't see a whole lot of the committed voters changing their minds over negatives ads this late in the game.
JL, I also read that McCain "may" drop Pennysylvania as well, although I can't confirm. According to all the pundits, he supposedly has no choice but to go negative.
Great line by one of the talking heads on Fox News last night: "When the Democratic Candidate is still campaigning in North Carolina and Virginia in October, it's not a good sign for the Republicans."
JL or RR or anyone who wants to answer....Do you think it's even remotely possible that this election may very well be a much bigger win for Obama than the media is reporting?????? Granted, I'd love to see it, but don't dare believe it. I hear of all the thousands and thousands of new voter registrations in nearly all the states, many states say it's record breaking, and wonder, will this have a huge impact on the results of this election?
It's tough to tell. Obama has a lot of momentum right now. If it continues, he could win an Electoral Map landslide. Even if nothing changes, one thing polls can't predict is voter turnout. All indications are that Obama has had a record breaking voter registration drive. Whether all these people show up on Nov. 4th is another thing. My personal opinion is the election will not be close. But, strange things can happen. Just ask Al Gore.
TIS, in all liklihood most of the new registrants are Dems, especially among Blacks which typically vote Democratic. But it is important to not get too distracted by the national polls or voter registration. The polls that now count are those in each state. They indicate which way each state's electoral votes will go. Also, don't forget that registering to vote is not voting.
That Virginia and N. Carolina are, it seems, up for grabs, is a very good sign for Obama.
TIS, I think it will. There are so many new and young voters who are voting for the very first time in this election. My daughter just turned 18 and can't wait to vote, and my nieces, who are in their 20s and have never voted before, are voting this year. I went to a local street fair and the local campaign folks for Obama were out registering the new voters. I think as a candidate he appeals to young people (us included, TIS), not simply because of his age, but because he's energetic and enthusiastic.
I was at the mall last week, and there had to be at least 10 stores and kiosks selling different Obama T-shirts. ...And the Obama Halloween mask is outselling the McCain mask 2 to 1. A sure sign he is going to win.
In 2004, 47% of those aged 18-24 who were registered actually voted. In 2000, it was 40%, but the cohort then was 18-29. The % of young people voting appears to be increasing, but theere's no guarantee that such increase will continue. of course, a record 124 million of us voted in 2004, so that could be a harbinger of things to come.
I remember about the Hallloween masks. But ok, everyone knows I'm know nothing about sports, but what about the "Red Skins" game (am I thinking of the right team?). Anyone know what I'm talking about? Only they were wrong last time.
For 15 straight elections, if the Redskins won their last home game before Election Day, then the current party in power would win the election. If the Redskins lost, the opposing party would take over the White House. Unfortunately, the Redskins’ streak ended in 2004. The Redskins lost, but George Bush got re-elected.
That must be the same math that the Republicans used when they put the economy in the crapper.
In the 2006 elections, Democrats gained 31 seats in the House and took control of the house.
In September of 2007, the democratic controlled congress pushed for a bill to create a national housing trust fund that would be financed by diverting revenue from......guess where? ....... Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government sponsored mortgage giants!!! The Republicans opposed the bill, predicting that it could siphon too much money from the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac programs.
Guess what?
The bill was passed.
Guess what?
In September of 2008 that United States Government had to bail out....guess who?.... Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government sponsored mortgage giants!!!!
In truth, and looking at the OVERALL picture of the last 6 years or so, no single party deserves all the blame. Our government, as a whole, along with the banks and the mortgage brokers combined with all the finger pointing from both political parties is what really has caused our economy to go into the shitter!
The Housing Trust Fund includes a provision that directs both GSEs to make annual formula based contributions to the Fund. However, the legislation through which the Federal government bailed out both GSEs gave their custodian the authority to suspend such contributions which he did until FY 10. Thus, there is no relationship between the Fund and the GSEs that contributed to the GSE's demise.
How soon we forget that only a few short years ago John McCain was cozying up to Joe DioGuardi, an apologist for the radical Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). AntiWar.com's Justin Raimondo covered this back in 2000, during McCain's last presidential bid.
The picture at the right shows McCain with DioGuardi in New York on Feb. 11, 2000, when McCain was in town attending fundraising events. Raimondo called on the McCain campaign to "immediately release the figures, and give us some 'straight talk' about the KLA-McCain connection: how much did they get -- and in return for what?" That question remains unanswered.
Back in March of this year, Doug Bandow also addressed this issue, reminding us that DioGuardi once said of McCain, "He did everything that we asked of him, including arming the KLA." No big deal, right? After all, we were helping them fight off those "evil" Serbs.
But even our own government considered members of the KLA as terrorists. The Washington Times reported that as recently as 1998, "State Department officials labeled the KLA a terrorist organization, saying it bankrolled its operations with proceeds from the heroin trade and from loans from known terrorists like bin Laden." Yes, the same bin Laden who planned the 9/11 attacks and is still at large.
Isn't it odd that, on the threshold of the "most important election of our lifetime," none of this is being brought to our attention? McCain supporters should thank their willing accomplices in the "liberal" mainstream press.
The Housing Trust Fund includes a provision tha....
olivant, the national housing trust fund was funded by diverting money from the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac mortgage giants. Those who proposed and sponsored this bill were basically saying that the government needed to "loosen up" the tight financial restrictions in the housing/mortgage industry, claiming that those restrictions were unfair to lower income people because the tight restriction were preventing the lower income families from owning homes. This is what took place. It is documented fact.
Sounds like Obama already is already ahead of the game.
Regarding McCain's upcoming "smear" ad about Obama's character, etc....Supposedly, if this is true, the Obama camp plans to "nip it in the bud" so to speak on Monday, in what seems to be a good
Branding his opponent as “erratic in a crisis,” Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is preempting plans by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) to portray him as having sinister connections to controversial Chicagoans.
Obama officials call it political jujitsu – turning the attacks back on the attacker.
McCain officials had said early in the weekend that they plan to begin advertising after Tuesday’s debate that will tie Obama to convicted money launderer Tony Rezko and former Weathermen radical William Ayers.
But Obama isn’t waiting to respond. His campaign is going up Monday on national cable stations with a scathing ad saying: “Three quarters of a million jobs lost this year. Our financial system in turmoil. And John McCain? Erratic in a crisis. Out of touch on the economy. No wonder his campaign wants to change the subject.
“Turn the page on the financial crisis by launching dishonorable, dishonest ‘assaults’ against Barack Obama. Struggling families can't turn the page on this economy, and we can't afford another president who is this out of touch.”
Then Obama says: “I'm Barack Obama and I approved this message.”
McCain officials told Politico that the new offensive is likely to focus on Rezko and Ayers. The officials said the campaign will not bring up the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s former pastor, because McCain has forbade them from using that as a weapon. Without being specific, the officials said outside groups may focus on Wright.
When word of the planned attacks leaked Saturday, Obama officials said within hours that it was an attempt by McCain to distract voters from the economy.
“We think the McCain campaign made a huge error by telling the press that their strategy was to distract from the most important issue facing voters,” a senior Obama official said. “Every attack going forward will be easy to characterize for what it is – an attempt to distract from the Bush-McCain economic record."
McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds hinted at the tough new line Saturday on “Fox & Friends.”
“There are associations that are important to who Barack Obama is as a candidate, who he’d be as president,” Bounds said.
Obama-Biden communications director Dan Pfeiffer said about the new ads: “If John McCain thinks he can ‘turn the page’ on the economic crisis facing American families, he is even more out of touch than we imagined. Now there may be no good answers for John McCain due to his erratic response to the financial crisis, but his desire to avoid discussing the economy is something we will remind voters of everyday for the next month.”
The Housing Trust Fund includes a provision tha....
olivant, the national housing trust fund was funded by diverting money from the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac mortgage giants. Those who proposed and sponsored this bill were basically saying that the government needed to "loosen up" the tight financial restrictions in the housing/mortgage industry, claiming that those restrictions were unfair to lower income people because the tight restriction were preventing the lower income families from owning homes. This is what took place. It is documented fact.
No, you're wrong. The Fund received an initial appropriation through the federal budget process of about $800 million. The formula that its creation legislation established would have required contributions from the GSEs starting FY 08. That never happened. The GSE's Regulator James Lockhart suspended contributions until the GSEs achiecved fianncial stability which is projected to be FY 10.
Sounds like Obama already is already ahead of the game.
Regarding McCain's upcoming "smear" ad about Obama's character, etc....Supposedly, if this is true, the Obama camp plans to "nip it in the bud" so to speak on Monday, in what seems to be a good
Branding his opponent as “erratic in a crisis,” Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is preempting plans by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) to portray him as having sinister connections to controversial Chicagoans.
Obama officials call it political jujitsu – turning the attacks back on the attacker.
McCain officials had said early in the weekend that they plan to begin advertising after Tuesday’s debate that will tie Obama to convicted money launderer Tony Rezko and former Weathermen radical William Ayers.
But Obama isn’t waiting to respond. His campaign is going up Monday on national cable stations with a scathing ad saying: “Three quarters of a million jobs lost this year. Our financial system in turmoil. And John McCain? Erratic in a crisis. Out of touch on the economy. No wonder his campaign wants to change the subject.
“Turn the page on the financial crisis by launching dishonorable, dishonest ‘assaults’ against Barack Obama. Struggling families can't turn the page on this economy, and we can't afford another president who is this out of touch.”
Then Obama says: “I'm Barack Obama and I approved this message.”
McCain officials told Politico that the new offensive is likely to focus on Rezko and Ayers. The officials said the campaign will not bring up the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s former pastor, because McCain has forbade them from using that as a weapon. Without being specific, the officials said outside groups may focus on Wright.
When word of the planned attacks leaked Saturday, Obama officials said within hours that it was an attempt by McCain to distract voters from the economy.
“We think the McCain campaign made a huge error by telling the press that their strategy was to distract from the most important issue facing voters,” a senior Obama official said. “Every attack going forward will be easy to characterize for what it is – an attempt to distract from the Bush-McCain economic record."
McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds hinted at the tough new line Saturday on “Fox & Friends.”
“There are associations that are important to who Barack Obama is as a candidate, who he’d be as president,” Bounds said.
Obama-Biden communications director Dan Pfeiffer said about the new ads: “If John McCain thinks he can ‘turn the page’ on the economic crisis facing American families, he is even more out of touch than we imagined. Now there may be no good answers for John McCain due to his erratic response to the financial crisis, but his desire to avoid discussing the economy is something we will remind voters of everyday for the next month.”
I question the wisdom of a campaign that, with this Nation in such economic turmoil and no light at the end of the tunnel, thinks that voters care more (or anything) about associations than they do about their pocketbooks.
By the way, the opening segment of SNL tonight was hilarious.
SNL hasn't aired here yet. Do thy show Palin again??? I hardly ever manage to stay awake that long, but the segments I've seen lately have been hilarious.
What a joke. The Republicans have been in control for how many years?? The Dems finally took the majority less than two years ago, the White House remained Republican, and yet one little housing bill is to blame for the complete and total devastation that has rocked our economy??? Puh-leeze!!
How about the fact that if energy costs hadn't freaking NAILED the typical American family, if rising food costs hadn't freaking NAILED the typical American family, maybe the typical American family wouldn't have had trouble making ends meet and would have been able to actually MAKE their mortgage payments.
JL, I also read that McCain "may" drop Pennysylvania as well, although I can't confirm. According to all the pundits, he supposedly has no choice but to go negative.
If he quits Pennsylvania, the election is OVER.
Most of Obama's adds here have been focused on registering new voters, and a record number of registrations are in the books. PA's deadline for voter registration is tomorrow. Barring something unusual, PA should be a comfortable win for Obama.
October 5, 2008 Fact Check: Is Obama 'palling around with terrorists'? Posted: 09:00 AM ET
The Statement: Republican vice presidential candidate Gov. Sarah Palin said Saturday, October 4, that Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama is "someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect that he's palling around with terrorists who would target their own country."
Get the facts!
The Facts: In making the charge at a fund-raising event in Englewood, Colorado, and a rally in Carson, California, Palin was referring at least in part to William Ayers, a 1960s radical. In both appearances, Palin cited a front-page article in Saturday's New York Times detailing the working relationship between Obama and Ayers.
In the 1960s, Ayers was a founding member of the radical Weather Underground group that carried out a string of bombings of federal buildings, including the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol, in protest against the Vietnam War. The now-defunct group was labeled a "domestic terrorist group" by the FBI, and Ayers and his wife, Bernadine Dohrn — also a Weather Underground member — spent 10 years as fugitives in the 1970s. Federal charges against them were dropped due to FBI misconduct in gathering evidence against them, and they resurfaced in 1980. Both Ayers and Dohrn ultimately became university professors in Chicago, with Ayers, 63, now an education professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
Obama's Chicago home is in the same neighborhood where Ayers and Dohrn live. Beginning in 1995, Ayers and Obama worked with the non-profit Chicago Annenberg Challenge on a huge school improvement project. The Annenberg Challenge was for cities to compete for $50 million grants to improve public education. Ayers fought to bring the grant to Chicago, and Obama was recruited onto the board. Also from 1999 through 2001 both were board members on the Woods Fund, a charitable foundation that gave money to various causes, including the Trinity United Church that Obama attended and Northwestern University Law Schools' Children and Family Justice Center, where Dohrn worked.
CNN's review of project records found nothing to suggest anything inappropriate in the volunteer projects in which the two men were involved.
Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt told CNN that after meeting Obama through the Annenberg project, Ayers hosted a campaign event for him that same year when then-Illinois state Sen. Alice Palmer, who planned to run for Congress, introduced the young community organizer as her chosen successor. LaBolt also said the two have not spoken by phone or exchanged e-mail messages since Obama came to the U.S. Senate in 2005 and last met more than a year ago when they encountered each other on the street in their Hyde Park neighborhood.
The extent of Obama's relationship with Ayers came up during the Democratic presidential primaries earlier this year, and Obama explained it by saying, "This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood … the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago — when I was 8 years old — somehow reflects on me and my values doesn't make much sense."
The New York Times article cited by Palin concluded that "the two men do not appear to have been close. Nor has Mr. Obama ever expressed sympathy for the radical views and actions of Mr. Ayers." Other publications, including the Washington Post, Time magazine, the Chicago Sun-Times, The New Yorker and The New Republic, have said that their reporting doesn't support the idea that Obama and Ayers had a close relationship.
The McCain campaign did not respond Saturday to a request for elaboration on Palin's use of the plural "terrorists."
Verdict: False. There is no indication that Ayers and Obama are now "palling around," or that they have had an ongoing relationship in the past three years. Also, there is nothing to suggest that Ayers is now involved in terrorist activity or that other Obama associates are.
Sunday, October 5, 2008 6:10 AM By Darrel Rowland THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
Amid growing concerns about the economy, Ohio Democrats are coming home to Sen. Barack Obama, giving him a 7-point advantage in a new Dispatch Poll as the volatile presidential campaign swings into its final month.
The Illinois senator's lead of 49 percent to 42 percent over Republican Sen. John McCain comes at an especially opportune time for Obama because thousands of Ohioans already are casting ballots in the state's first presidential election allowing any registered voter to vote absentee. The new setup takes away some of the heft from the adage "the only poll that counts is the one on Election Day."
Ohio is even more critical to McCain's campaign this year since he pulled out of Michigan last week. Not only has no Republican ever won the presidency without carrying the Buckeye State, McCain almost has to run the 2004 electoral table to win, carrying every single state President Bush won four years ago, including Ohio. <snip>
That story is a dream of the Right. I doubt it'll get far, but they will try.
Btw, all the left blogs many times express a wish that the Obama team bring up the "Keathing Five." Obama though, prefers (for the most part) to stick with the issues. You guys know the story behind that?
Also, the Dems could show the Palin "witchcrat" video, but are not.
JL, I also read that McCain "may" drop Pennysylvania as well, although I can't confirm. According to all the pundits, he supposedly has no choice but to go negative.
If he quits Pennsylvania, the election is OVER.
Most of Obama's adds here have been focused on registering new voters, and a record number of registrations are in the books. PA's deadline for voter registration is tomorrow. Barring something unusual, PA should be a comfortable win for Obama.
You may be right. Look at Muhlenberg College Daily Poll, and notice the trend:
Really, Pennsylvania/Minnesota are McCain's two offensive strikes in a defensive season, and one seems to be blunted and the other a pipedream.*
StarTribune.com Minnesota Poll: Obama leaps ahead of McCain
By BOB VON STERNBERG, Star Tribune
October 5, 2008
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has opened up a commanding lead in Minnesota over Republican John McCain, according to a new Star Tribune Minnesota Poll.
The poll, conducted last week among 1,084 likely voters, found that 55 percent support Obama, while 37 percent back McCain.
That's a huge difference from the last Minnesota Poll, conducted in September, which showed the race dead even, with each candidate backed by 45 percent of likely voters. The new poll shows that Obama's surge in the state can be attributed to voters' belief in his ability to deal with the nation's worsening economy, his performance in the first presidential debate and an increase in the number of Minnesotans who call themselves Democrats.
Obama appears comfortably ahead among men, women, and voters of all ages and educational attainment.
The poll's findings come at a time when polls in several other battleground states and nationally are showing a sudden and significant shift to Obama. Gallup's daily national tracking poll released Friday showed Obama leading McCain by 7 percentage points.
Statewide polls conducted last week show Obama overtaking McCain in such key battleground states as Ohio, Virginia and Florida. In Florida, for example, the last four polls have shown Obama with leads of between three and eight percentage points; in the weeks prior, Obama trailed by as many as 10 points.
That story is a dream of the Right. I doubt it'll get far, but they will try.
Btw, all the left blogs many times express a wish that the Obama team bring up the "Keathing Five." Obama though, prefers (for the most part) to stick with the issues. You guys know the story behind that?
Also, the Dems could show the Palin "witchcrat" video, but are not.
TIS
I think Obama's strategy is to appear "above the fray" with dignity or whatever, and as this thread has discussed already, very negative ads this late in the game for a losing candidate generally don't work. Why stoop down to that level and cost yourself votes?
As for KEATHING FIVE, I believe that refers to McCain attending a meeting with 4 other Senators with a lobbyist who was later convicted as part of the S&L Loans scandals in the late 80s. The 527 independent groups are or will run with it, along with McCain ditching his first crippled wife and whatever other sleaze they can find.
Oh yes, Palin protecting herself from the Jews with some magic. Thing is, those knee-jerk liberals need to realize, she aint the story: McCain is the story.
Here's the AFL-CIO President defending Obama against racism, smething that we all know exists to a degree in this Presidential election, but few will admit.
You guys realize that the election is exactly 4 weeks from Tuesday??? I never have done this before in my life, but was debating taking a vacation day. I decided the day after the election was the best day to take off. I'll either have a day to celebrate or a day to mourn (hopefully the former) My kids think I'm nuts, but as a political geek, of late, I just say I'm "into it"
Anyway, you are all invited to my place for what hopefully will be a happy celebration marking an historic event.
That story is a dream of the Right. I doubt it'll get far, but they will try.
Btw, all the left blogs many times express a wish that the Obama team bring up the "Keathing Five." Obama though, prefers (for the most part) to stick with the issues. You guys know the story behind that?
Also, the Dems could show the Palin "witchcrat" video, but are not.
TIS
I think Obama's strategy is to appear "above the fray" with dignity or whatever, and as this thread has discussed already, very negative ads this late in the game for a losing candidate generally don't work. Why stoop down to that level and cost yourself votes?
As for KEATHING FIVE, I believe that refers to McCain attending a meeting with 4 other Senators with a lobbyist who was later convicted as part of the S&L Loans scandals in the late 80s. The 527 independent groups are or will run with it, along with McCain ditching his first crippled wife and whatever other sleaze they can find.
Oh yes, Palin protecting herself from the Jews with some magic. Thing is, those knee-jerk liberals need to realize, she aint the story: McCain is the story.
The Keating Five were Senators accused in 1989 were accused of improperly aiding Charles H. Keating, Jr., chairman of the failed Lincoln Savings and Loan Association, which was the target of an investigation by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (FHLBB).
They were Alan Cranston (D-CA), Dennis DeConcini (D-AZ), John Glenn (D-OH), John McCain (R-AZ), and Donald W. Riegle (D-MI), The result of the collapse of Lincoln Savings and Loan was that 21,000 mostly elderly investors lost their life savings. The Senate Ethics Committee determined in 1991 that Alan Cranston, Dennis DeConcini, and Donald Riegle had substantially and improperly interfered with the FHLBB in its investigation of Lincoln Savings. Senators John Glenn and John McCain were cleared of having acted improperly but were criticized for having exercised "poor judgment".
McCain's brother: "Northern Virgina is 'Communist country'"
Republican presidential candidate John McCain's brother made an apparent joke at a campaign rally this weekend that might not play well in parts of newly competitive Virginia.
Joe McCain, speaking at an event in support of his brother, called two Democratic-leaning areas in Northern Virginia "communist country," according to a report on The Washington Post's Web site.
"I've lived here for at least 10 years and before that about every third duty I was in either Arlington or Alexandria, up in communist country," Joe McCain said at an event in Loudon County, Va.
Joe McCain then apologized, but the remark drew laughter at the event, according to the report.
Virginia has long been a Republican stronghold in presidential elections, but Democrat Barack Obama is running even or ahead of McCain in recent state polls. Obama is being helped by fast-growing communities in the Washington, D.C., suburbs of Northern Virginia, which tend to vote more Democratic than other parts of the state.
One of those areas is Arlington, Va., where John McCain owns a condominium.
"This was Joe McCain's unsuccessful attempt at humor," said McCain campaign spokeswoman Gail Gitcho. "John McCain and Sarah Palin are committed to winning the support of voters in Northern Virginia and understand the region's importance to victory statewide."
I think Nader is insignicant this election. Of course he'll get some votes, but the days of him being a spoiler, I think, are over. Not to say that another spoiler couldn't enter the mix, but not this election, not for the Dems anyway.
Never did like Bob Barr, but I'd guess he'll do better than Nader. If this turns out to be a neck and neck race, maybe Barr would be a spoiler for the Repbulicans by getting even a small margin of votes.
What about Ron Paul? Is he on the ticket. I laugh, BUT he has a large number supporters. I've seen them pop up during the primary, even on liberal sites. He did very well considering.
Q: You not only have had combat experience in Vietnam, but you were also a prisoner of war. When you look at terrorism right now, with people like Osama bin Laden, do you have any reservations about watching strikes like that?
John McCain: You could say, Look, is this guy, Laden, really the bad guy that's depicted? Most of us have never heard of him before. And where there is a parallel with Vietnam is: What's plan B? What do we do next? We sent our troops into Vietnam to protect the bases. Lyndon Johnson said, Only to protect the bases. Next thing you know.... Well, we've declared to the terrorists that we're going to strike them wherever they live. That's fine. But what's next? That's where there might be some comparison.
Madeline Albright said today that that particular comment she made was not referring to politics, and was taken out of context. I haven't heard any further detail. Yea, I think we could let both McCain and Palin go for it. They're doing a "heck of a job" shooting themselves in the foot.
Madeline Albright said today that that particular comment she made was not referring to politics, and was taken out of context. I haven't heard any further detail. Yea, I think we could let both McCain and Palin go for it. They're doing a "heck of a job" shooting themselves in the foot.
TIS.
The actual statement: "There's a place in Hell reserved for women who don't help other women."
What a joke. The Republicans have been in control for how many years?? The Dems finally took the majority less than two years ago, the White House remained Republican, and yet one little housing bill is to blame for the complete and total devastation that has rocked our economy??? Puh-leeze!!
Originally Posted By: Don Cardi
In truth, and looking at the OVERALL picture of the last 6 years or so, no single party deserves all the blame. Our government, as a whole, along with the banks and the mortgage brokers combined with all the finger pointing from both political parties is what really has caused our economy to go into the shitter!
No, you are wrong olivant! The passing of the bill that was pushed through by the dems allowed the office of federal housing enterprise oversight to relax restrictions on the mortgage finance companies investment holdings. It allowed the easing up of, what was once, very strict bookkeeping restrictions. So in turn Fannie and Freddie went out and bought about $15 - $20 Million MORE in subprime mortgages. This was pushed for by the democrats because they wanted to help revive a market that they felt was hindered by very strict lending standards. Not only was this meant to try and help lower income families get mortgages, but it also was meant to allow others to refinance their existing mortgages. With the passing of this bill and the easment of lending restrictions and bookkeeping practices, subprime loans were being given to HIGH RISK borrowers with already shakey credit.
No, you are wrong olivant! The passing of the bill that was pushed through by the dems allowed the office of federal housing enterprise oversight to relax restrictions on the mortgage finance companies investment holdings. It allowed the easing up of, what was once, very strict bookkeeping restrictions. So in turn Fannie and Freddie went out and bought about $15 - $20 Million MORE in subprime mortgages. This was pushed for by the democrats because they wanted to help revive a market that they felt was hindered by very strict lending standards. Not only was this meant to try and help lower income families get mortgages, but it also was meant to allow others to refinance their existing mortgages. With the passing of this bill and the easment of lending restrictions and bookkeeping practices, subprime loans were being given to HIGH RISK borrowers with already shakey credit.
Try to keep track of what you post. Your post on the previous page that I replied to contained the following:
"... a bill to create a national housing trust fund that would be financed by diverting revenue from......guess where? ....... Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government sponsored mortgage giants!!!"
No such diversion ever took place. It is that part of your post that I quoted above to which I replied.
I promise to do so when you start keeping track of constitutional amendments! j/k
Seriously though, you really need to research about what I shared here in regards to what took place with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. There were a lot of little "added" side ammendments to that bill which at first may have been proposed with good intentions but in reality wound up hurting our economy.
ANCHORAGE (AP) — Seven Alaska state employees have reversed course and agreed to testify in an abuse-of-power investigation of Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin.
There is no indication, however, that Palin or her husband will do the same.
Palin, a fist-term Alaska governor, is the focus of a legislative inquiry into whether she abused her office by firing Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. Monegan says he was dismissed because he would not fire the governor's former brother-in-law.
Lawmakers subpoenaed seven state employees to testify in the inquiry but they challenged those subpoenas. A judge rejected that challenge last week. Because of that ruling, Alaska Attorney General Talis Colberg says the employees have decided to testify.
My daughter had a history assignment about the election. They were given a packet to read, and then asked questions. The first question asked what makes this election different from any other. I told my daughter that no matter who wins, either the first African-American president or the first female VP will be elected. She told me that this is the first election since the 1950s (I think she said 1952, but I could be wrong) that neither of the candidates is serving as either the current President or VP. Until she said that, it hadn't occurred to me.
My daughter had a history assignment about the election. They were given a packet to read, and then asked questions. The first question asked what makes this election different from any other. I told my daughter that no matter who wins, either the first African-American president or the first female VP will be elected. She told me that this is the first election since the 1950s (I think she said 1952, but I could be wrong) that neither of the candidates is serving as either the current President or VP. Until she said that, it hadn't occurred to me.
Hmmm. That's interesting. I find myself questioning it, thinking back to prove it wrong. I guess t just seems like thre must have been that scenario in recent years.
There are a few facts about the taser incident that aren't mentioned. It was a 'training cartridge' on the lightest setting and alligator clips on the boys shirt were used, instead of the usual skin contacts. The boy had asked to see what it felt like, and Palin's sister, who was present, didn't object.
Since we are on "firsts", I found this a while back on BHO.
June 7 (Bloomberg) -- [i]Barack Obama's political career boasts a long list of firsts. He is the first presumptive presidential nominee to be a native of Hawaii and the president of the Harvard Law Review. He's also the first candidate with more than 1 million contributors.
Obama, an Illinois senator, is the first presumptive presidential nominee in modern times to have a father who wasn't a U.S. citizen, the first to earn an undergraduate degree from Columbia University in New York and the first to have attended Occidental College in Los Angeles.
TIS, I started to think about it, and got as far back as Ford/Carter before I became exhausted!
Edit: Well, as for the ex-brother-in-law, he sounds like an idiot, but I don't know if that's legal grounds to fire him. And it's certainly not legal grounds to fire his boss.
Virginia Republicans are warning that John McCain's prospects for winning a state that has been in the GOP column in every presidential election since 1964 could be in jeopardy. With Barack Obama treating the Old Dominion like a battleground state and reliable polls showing a margin-of-error race there, some are cautioning that McCain is making a critical mistake by allowing the Democratic nominee to outpace him in terms of visits and resources committed.
The two best indicators of which states the campaigns are serious about – time and money – tell the story.
Since wrapping up the Democratic nomination in June, Obama, his wife, Michelle, and his running mate Joe Biden have visited the commonwealth a combined 12 times. The candidate himself was in the Tidewater city of Newport News Saturday.
Obama is also plowing millions into Virginia, blanketing the airwaves with TV and radio ads, filling up mailboxes with leaflets and, along with the state party, operating 49 campaign offices.
Together, McCain and his running mate, Sarah Palin, have held just one campaign event in Virginia. And the campaign has taken its ads off the pricey Washington, D.C. network affiliates that reach into the entire swath of the Northern Virginia, the commonwealth’s most populous region.
“I think [McCain] needs to get here,” said Rep. Tom Davis, a longtime member of Congress who represents a Northern Virginia district. “I think they’ve got to pay more attention.”
Davis predicted McCain would ultimately take Virginia because he has appeal to the center-right independents that usually swing statewide races and because Obama is less moderate than such successful Democratic figures as former Gov. Mark Warner and Sen. James Webb.
“Obama is not a Virginia Democrat,” Davis said.
But the former National Republican Congressional Committee chair, who is retiring this year, said because of the party’s troubled brand and Obama’s effort to increase African-American turnout, the Virginia race now stands even.
“The economy hurts us across the board and Obama is really running hard and putting more resources here than McCain – he’s got the money.”
Asked if he thought McCain was taking the state seriously enough, Davis paused before saying: “I think they’re going to.”
“It’s very, very tight,” agreed former governor and Senator George Allen. “Obviously Democrats have spent a lot of time here.”
“We are a true battleground state,” Allen said twice.
Rep. Eric Cantor, a Richmond-area Republican and member of the House GOP leadership who won some veep chatter this summer, agreed that Virginia would be tight.
“I think it is very competitive,” Cantor said.
Asked if McCain needed to return, he was judicious: “It’s up to them to allocate his time. We’re going to do everything we can for him.”
But discussing the boost Sarah Palin had given to the party’s grassroots, Cantor offered a standing invitation without being asked: “Anytime they want to send Gov. Palin in, we’ll welcome her with open arms.”
Longtime Virginia operatives are more outspoken, grumbling that McCain is now having to play catch up.
“He didn't take threat seriously soon enough,” said one Richmond-based GOP strategist in the state, noting that McCain had the nomination wrapped up in early March but didn’t have staff or infrastructure in Virginia until July. “One public visit since securing the nomination and I can’t tell you one significant surrogate who has come.”
It’s puzzling because McCain’s campaign is based in Arlington, Va., and the senator lives there when he’s at his headquarters or across the river in his Senate office. Yet whenever he’s back in the area he never ventures beyond the office and condo-filled Crystal City neighborhood to more politically competitive communities nearby where he could get extensive local media coverage by just dropping by a diner.
“He, not she, needs to return to northern Virginia,” said a veteran GOP operative from the region about the GOP ticket. “That's where he needs to perform, and where he can. He can get a lot of Mark Warner voters, but he needs to show the ticket-splitting centrists in voter-rich Fairfax and Loudoun [counties] some love and understanding.”
McCain’s top aide for the mid-Atlantic region, Trey Walker, held a conference call for party leaders on Friday and was pressed as to why McCain and Palin hadn’t been back to Virginia since their joint visit to Fairfax City last month.
“One of the hardest things we have to do is getting more folks to take a national view,” Walker told Politico, when told about concerns that the campaign wasn’t devoting enough attention to Virginia.
“It’s real simple – we’re pushing Obama in Pennsylvania and they’re pushing us in Virginia. We are engaged in a game of electoral chicken right now and we’ll see who blinks first.”
When it comes to Virginia, McCain and the GOP appear to be blinking.
Walker would only tell Politico that the GOP ticket would be back in Virginia “soon,” but other Republican sources say an announcement about a return visit will come this week.
McCain is also opening 12 more offices in the commonwealth and bringing on more staff.
And the independent expenditure arm of the RNC--which can't coordinate with the McCain campaign but which closely tracks state polling--last week began to broadcast TV ads for the first time in Virginia.
The RNC's move to go up on the air there tracks a similar move in Indiana, another state that hasn't gone Democratic since Lyndon Johnson's 1964 landslide win, and reflects the challenge facing the party: they're having to invest money to broaden their defenses in states that have until recently been safely red.
Beyond the financial implications of that approach, the GOP ticket is confronting new demands on its time. The McCain campaign would prefer to have the Arizona senator and Alaska governor campaign together, but they are now being forced to protect more states so they may have to spend more time apart.
It's a akin to a campaign version of whack-a-mole, where finite time and money is being spread across the landscape to defend against sudden and unexpected Democratic surges on GOP turf.
"We'd be happy if they spent the next 30 days in Virginia," Allen said. "But it's a big country and there are a lot of battleground states."
In the Old Dominion, though, the renewed attention can't come soon enough for Republicans, who are already despondent about the state of their party.
Part of McCain’s challenge in the state is out of his hands. The Virginia GOP is at a low ebb, lacking an obvious statewide leader as they had in the 1990s with former Governors Allen and Jim Gilmore. The party has lost consecutive gubernatorial races in 2001 and 2005 followed by Allen’s Senate seat in 2006. The other Senate seat, held by retiring Sen. John Warner, is almost certain to be won next month by former Democratic Gov. Mark Warner over Gilmore.
“We don’t have anybody with the kind of cache who can tell [the McCain campaign] that we need them here,” lamented one prominent Virginia Republican who asked for anonymity to candidly discuss the presidential race.
The party’s problems were on all-too-familiar display in a Saturday conference call organized by the campaign. The plan was to have Sen. Warner, the former chairman of the Armed Services Committee, counter-program Obama’s visit to the shipbuilding city of Newport News.
But the news of the call came when Warner declined to endorse Gilmore’s Senate bid, suggested he might back Warner and reminded reporters of his previous independence.
“I’m watching that race, following the positions of the two candidates,” Warner said. “There have been occasions when I have supported Democratic candidates. … But I’m not there yet.”
The popular five-term senator refused to endorse conservative Republicans running for statewide office in 1993 and 1994, enabling Democrats to win both times.
Virginia Republicans are concerned that Mark Warner’s winning margin – he leads Gilmore by well over 20 percentage points in every survey – could offer some reverse coattails to Obama.
Then there is Obama’s effort to spike core Democratic turnout, about 20% of the population in Virginia.
Over 300,000 new voters have been registered this year, with the highest percentage increase in heavily-black Richmond. Other localities with increased registration are liberal-to-moderate Alexandria and Fairfax.
“Obama wants to run up the margin in northern Virginia, increase black turnout and maximize the college towns,” Davis explained.
Virginia Republicans all express public optimism that McCain will ultimately pull out a win there.
“I’m very confident that we will win Virginia,” said Cantor, noting that presidential races bring out a larger turnout than the commonwealth’s off-year gubernatorial races.
In this vein, Allen pointed out that the military-heavy state – home to the Pentagon and the world’s largest naval base – behaves differently in presidential years.
“They’re voting for a commander-in-chief, not a governor,” Allen said of the troops, many of whom are deployed and are missed in polling.
It’s precisely that element which has kept Virginia in Republican hands every four years, even when Southern Democrats were on the top of the Democratic ticket.
“The disproportionate presence of national security voters among independents in Virginia is what has kept the state in the GOP column in presidential contests even as party fortunes have ebbed and flowed between Republicans and Democrats in state elections,” said Frank Atkinson, a longtime Virginia Republican and author of two books on the commonwealth’s political history.
But Atkinson offered a cautionary note.
“It is a marginal advantage, though, not an insurmountable one.”
If Virginia does flip, Davis said, it will be an indicator of a commanding Democratic win.
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) on Monday will launch a multimedia campaign to draw attention to the involvement of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in the “Keating Five” savings-and-loan scandal of 1989-91, which blemished McCain’s public image and set him on his course as a self-styled reformer.
Pushing back against what it calls “guilt-by-association” tactics by McCain, the Obama campaign is e-mailing millions of supporters a link to a website, KeatingEconomics.com, that will have a 13-minute documentary on the scandal beginning at noon Eastern time on Monday. The overnight e-mails urge recipients to pass the link on to friends.
A CNN/Time Poll had Obama up 9 in Virginia. That's hard to believe.
Was it Virginia or West Virginia that they interviewed people during he primary that didn't hesitate to say they wouldn't vote for a Black man????? :/Led me to believe it was definitely shakey ground for Obama. Must be WV.
I love the weekends, I can keep up with all these stories you guys are posting.
It is. Virginia is arguably more Purple than Red/Blue, because of the Red southwest, and blue north/coastal.
Though ironic that it would be West Virginia with the racial tinge, because those former western counties of Virginia left the state in early 1860s because they didn't want to go and join the Confederacy in the American Civil War.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!! RR that's fantastic. LMAO How did you do that? Was it on line somewhere???
Did anyone see the story about a letter BHO sent to some Norwegien couple 20 years ago???? He helped pay for their daughter's flight and they sent a thank you and he replied. For some reason it won't copy/past for me.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!! RR that's fantastic. LMAO How did you do that? Was it on line somewhere???
Did anyone see the story about a letter BHO sent to some Norwegien couple 20 years ago???? He helped pay for their daughter's flight and they sent a thank you and he replied. For some reason it won't copy/past for me.
Anyway, I love that picture RR.
TIS
No sorry, I copied/pasted it off another of those liberal blogs, like that Train-Analogy I posted earlier.
Anyway, I guess Obama is the Godfather, and Biden is Tom Hagen. Who's Fredo, Hillary?
And yes, I read that story about the letter. A rather nice story, I must say.
Old News, but for the first time in its history, the bi-partisan Humane Society Legislative Fund is endorsing a Presidential candidate....
Humane Society Legislative Fund Endorses Obama-Biden
"...his[McCain] choice of running mate cemented our decision to oppose his ticket. Gov. Sarah Palin’s (R-Alaska) retrograde policies on animal welfare and conservation have led to an all-out war on Alaska’s wolves and other creatures. Her record is so extreme that she has perhaps done more harm to animals than any other current governor in the United States.
Palin engineered a campaign of shooting predators from airplanes and helicopters, in order to artificially boost the populations of moose and caribou for trophy hunters. She offered a $150 bounty for the left foreleg of each dead wolf as an economic incentive for pilots and aerial gunners to kill more of the animals, even though Alaska voters had twice approved a ban on the practice. This year, the issue was up again for a vote of the people, and Palin led the fight against it—in fact, she helped to spend $400,000 of public funds to defeat the initiative.
The Republican National Committee plans to file a fundraising complaint against Democrat Barack Obama's presidential campaign Monday, alleging it has accepted donations that exceed federal limits as well as illegal contributions from foreigners.
RNC officials acknowledged Sunday that they do not have a list of foreign donors to Obama's campaign. Instead, the complaint is based largely on media reports, including one from the conservative Web site Newsmax.
The complaint asks the Federal Elections Commission to audit Obama's campaign fund, RNC chief counsel Sean Cairncross said in a conference call with reporters.
Cairncross said little is known about many of Obama's donors because the campaign is not required to disclose detailed information about people who give less than $200.
The Obama campaign, which is not accepting public funds, has raised more than $468 million. About half has come from small donors, a point of pride for the Obama campaign.
The Obama campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
It's hard to tell Lilo. I'll say this much though, IMHO most people don't understand these "donation/contribution" rules. I find the lobbyist issue somewhat confusing myself.
My first instinct is that any fundraising issue on either side may go astray because of that, but then again, you throw stuff out, and you don't really know what is gonna stick.
Could this be the first signs of panic or just more promotion of the "Obama's a foreigner" meme.
GOP to file fundraising complaint against Obama
Sun Oct 5, 9:35 PM ET
The Republican National Committee plans to file a fundraising complaint against Democrat Barack Obama's presidential campaign Monday, alleging it has accepted donations that exceed federal limits as well as illegal contributions from foreigners.
RNC officials acknowledged Sunday that they do not have a list of foreign donors to Obama's campaign. Instead, the complaint is based largely on media reports, including one from the conservative Web site Newsmax.
Could this be the first signs of panic or just more promotion of the "Obama's a foreigner" meme.
GOP to file fundraising complaint against Obama
Sun Oct 5, 9:35 PM ET
The Republican National Committee plans to file a fundraising complaint against Democrat Barack Obama's presidential campaign Monday, alleging it has accepted donations that exceed federal limits as well as illegal contributions from foreigners.
RNC officials acknowledged Sunday that they do not have a list of foreign donors to Obama's campaign. Instead, the complaint is based largely on media reports, including one from the conservative Web site Newsmax.
Unbelievable.
You know, I'm surprised Appleonya didn't post that news, considering that's where she probably gets most of her talking points.
Palin Attacks Obama Over Wright -- Even Though McCain Said Wright Was Off Limits
Sarah Palin has now attacked Barack Obama over his association with Reverend Wright -- even though John McCain himself explicitly said this spring that Wright was off limits and that attacking Obama over his former minister was "not the message of my campaign."
Palin made her comments about Wright in a new interview with New York Times columnist Bill Kristol, after he asked her whether Wright was a legit issue.
"I don't know why that association isn't discussed more," Palin said, "because those were appalling things that that pastor had said about our great country, and to have sat in the pews for 20 years and listened to that -- with, I don't know, a sense of condoning it, I guess, because he didn't get up and leave -- to me, that does say something about character."
"I guess that would be a John McCain call on whether he wants to bring that up," Palin added.
But in April, when the North Carolina GOP released a TV ad on behalf of two local GOP candidates hitting Obama over Wright in terms virtually identical to those used by Palin here, McCain expressly condemned the attack and said his campaign wanted no part of it.
The ad attacked Obama as "too extreme," asserting that "for 20 years Barack Obama sat in his pew listening to his pastor." That's precisely the same point Palin made.
At the time, McCain his campaign called the North Carolina GOP and asked them to take down the ad.
"It's not the message of the Republican Party," McCain said then. "It's not the message of my campaign. I've pledged to conduct a respectful campaign."
When told that the N.C. party would continue to air the ad, McCain rejoined: "Unfortunately all I can do is, in as visible way as possible, is disassociate myself from that kind of campaigning."
So will McCain now disassociate himself from what Palin said? Or has McCain changed his mind and decided that the gutter attack on Wright he previously condemned in such high-minded terms is now a legit tactic for his campaign?
And if it's the latter, what's changed since then aside from the fact that his campaign is in trouble?
So Palin, as part of a Church that thinks Israel deserves to be bombed, part of that "Jews for Jesus" evangelical converssion nonsense, and got witchcraft protection years back from the Israelites, is blasting Obama's Church behavior?
'I'm Catholic, staunchly anti-abortion, and support Obama
Despite what some Republicans would like Catholics to believe, the list of what the church calls "intrinsically evil acts" does not begin and end with abortion. In fact, there are many intrinsically evil acts, and a committed Catholic must consider all of them in deciding how to vote.
-------------------
Obama's support for abortion rights has led some to the conclusion that no Catholic can vote for him. That's a mistake. While I have never swayed in my conviction that abortion is an unspeakable evil, I believe that we have lost the abortion battle -- permanently. A vote for Sen. John McCain does not guarantee the end of abortion in America. Not even close.
Was it Virginia or West Virginia that they interviewed people during he primary that didn't hesitate to say they wouldn't vote for a Black man????? :/Led me to believe it was definitely shakey ground for Obama. Must be WV.
Interesting article. But 3 planes (which cost us the equivalent of 8.6 million dollars [in 2008 dollars] )? I read it was 4, and a fifth was blown-up where he became a POW. BTW Did you know he was a POW?
Interesting article. But 3 planes (which cost us the equivalent of 8.6 million dollars [in 2008 dollars] )? I read it was 4, and a fifth was blown-up where he became a POW. BTW Did you know he was a POW?
He NEVER would have been a pilot in the first place being at the bottom 1% of his class if it weren't for his high ranking connections.
From what I understand, that stray rocket wasn't fired from McCain's plane, but that his plane was the one that got hit, which exploded and caused that chain-reaction.
The guy has a questionable military record, pre-POW days, but I don't think it was his fault at all for that fire, though you can argue how dickish McCain was after that incident, if that ROLLING STONE article is to be believed.
NASHVILLE, Tennessee (CNN) -- A new national poll suggests Barack Obama is widening his lead over John McCain in the race for the White House.
Sen. Barack Obama leads Sen. John McCain by 8 points, according to CNN's latest poll.
The CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll out Monday afternoon suggests that the country's financial crisis, record low approval ratings for President Bush and a drop in the public's perception of McCain's running mate could be contributing to Obama's gains.
Fifty-three percent of likely voters questioned in the poll say they are backing Obama for president, with 45 percent supporting McCain.
That 8-point lead is double the 4-point lead Obama held in the last CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll, taken in mid-September.
President George Bush may be part of the reason why Obama's making gains. Only 24 percent of those polled approve of Bush's job as president, an all-time low for a CNN survey. See the latest polling
"Bush has now tied Richard Nixon's worst rating ever, taken in a poll just before he resigned in 1975, and is only 2 points higher than the worst presidential approval rating in history, Harry Truman's 22 percent mark in February 1952," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.
And that's bad news for McCain, because the poll suggests a growing number of Americans believe the Republican presidential nominee would have the same policies as the current Republican president. Fifty-six percent say McCain's policies would be the same as Bush, up from 50 percent a month ago.
The financial crisis also appears to be contributing to Obama's increased lead in the poll. Sixty-eight percent are confident in the Democratic presidential nominee's ability to handle the financial crisis, 18 points ahead of McCain, and 42 points ahead of President Bush.
More Americans appear to have an unfavorable view of Gov. Sarah Palin, and that may also be helping Obama in the fight for the presidency. Forty percent now have an unfavorable view of Palin, up from 27 percent a month ago and from 21 percent in late August, when McCain surprised many people by picking the first-term Alaska governor as his running mate.
"A majority of Americans now believe that Sarah Palin would be unqualified to serve as president if it became necessary, and her unfavorable rating has doubled," Holland said.
Another hurdle for the Arizona senator is expectations. Six in 10 questioned in the poll predict that Obama will win the November election.
The poll was conducted Friday through Sunday, just after President Bush signed the $700 billion federal bailout into law. By a 53 percent to 46 percent margin, Americans oppose the bill.
"One in five might have supported a different bill, but one in three believe that the government should have stayed out of the crisis completely and let the markets attempt to recover on their own. A majority think that the bailout package will not prevent the economy from going into a deep and prolonged recession -- but they turn thumbs-down to another bailout package if this one does not work. Only one in five would support more assistance beyond Friday's $700 billion package," Holland said.
The CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll was conducted by telephone on October 3-5. The survey questioned 1,006 people. The survey's sampling error is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.
Let's not let hubris take over. There's plenty of time left for campaigning and for any number of variables to affect the election.
I agree.
That said, I think Obama campaign played the Keating card well today, by pushing it out the same day as the Ayers shit, they've blunted the media framing.
Instead of MSNBC asking if Obama "Pals around with terrorists," the news is that both campaigns are slinging mud at each other, which both stories are, since McCain was technically cleared of any wrong-doing in the Keating affair along with John Glenn, though both got a verbal slap on the wrist.
I plan on watching it. McCain needs to kick ass tomorrow night. Like I said before now is the time for him to pull out all the stops.
At this rate, those debates are his last hope, and as fivethirtyeight.com explored recently, debates don't make as gigantic movement in the polls as we tend to think that they do.
Interestingly, 538 has Obama more likely to win Louisiana than McCain is to win the general election. Obama has a better shot in Montana than McCain does in Virginia, and a better shot in North Dakota than McCain has in Colorado.
Obama apparently had today's Charles Keating attack in the can, ready to deploy against an attempt to revive Bill Ayers, and it seems to be working.
A glance at Google Trends finds "keating economics" the second-most-popular search term right now. Numbers 8, 11, 12, and 21 are terms like "keating five" and "charles keating."
Bill Ayers shows up at 36, just after "mccain keating."
The first term is Neel Kashkari, newly tapped to head the bailout. Voter registration terms also rank high.
Obama apparently had today's Charles Keating attack in the can, ready to deploy against an attempt to revive Bill Ayers, and it seems to be working.
A glance at Google Trends finds "keating economics" the second-most-popular search term right now. Numbers 8, 11, 12, and 21 are terms like "keating five" and "charles keating."
Bill Ayers shows up at 36, just after "mccain keating."
The first term is Neel Kashkari, newly tapped to head the bailout. Voter registration terms also rank high.
The "Keating Economics" videos are among the most viewed for the day on YouTube also. McCain might regret his new game plan. Unlike 2004 when Kerry fought back too late, Obama isn't taking any shit.
'TURN THE PAGE'.... Explaining the campaign's intention to shift from policy to personal attacks, Greg Strimple, one of John McCain's top advisers, told the Washingtn Post that the campaign is "looking forward to turning a page on this financial crisis." It's a quote Strimple probably wishes now he hadn't made.
The Obama campaign's Dan Pfeiffer told the Politico yesterday that McCain's "desire to avoid discussing the economy is something we will remind voters of everyday for the next month."
And according to the prepared text of a speech Obama is scheduled to deliver today in Asheville, North Carolina, the senator is taking full advantage of the opportunity.
"[O]n Friday, we learned that we'd lost another 159,000 American jobs in September. It was the ninth straight month of job losses -- more than three quarters of a million this year, including 24,000 here in North Carolina. And it came just as we finished a week in which our financial markets teetered on the brink of disaster.
"Yet instead of addressing these crises, Senator McCain's campaign has announced that they plan to turn the page on the discussion about our economy and spend the final weeks of this campaign launching Swiftboat-style attacks on me.
"Think about that for a second. 'Turn the page' on the economy? We're facing the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, and John McCain wants us to 'turn the page?' Well, I know the policies he's supported these past eight years and wants to continue are pretty hard to defend. I can understand why Senator McCain would want to 'turn the page' and ignore this economy.
"But I also know this: You're trying to pay your bills every week and stay above the water -- you can't ignore it. You're worrying about whether your job will be there a month from now -- you can't ignore it. You're worrying about whether you can pay your mortgage and stay in your house -- you can't turn the page. [...]
"Senator McCain and his operatives are gambling that he can distract you with smears rather than talk to you about substance. They'd rather try to tear our campaign down than lift this country up. It's what you do when you're out of touch, out of ideas, and running out of time."
The Obama campaign is laying the groundwork for the rest of the week very effectively, and with some ill-advised quotes, the McCain campaign is helping them. The next time McCain and his surrogates bring up Ayers (or Rezko, or Wright), the immediate and obvious question will be, "Why are you trying to stop talking about the economy?"
This is the kind of stuff that needs to be out there; those 'Independents' who seem to be leaning toward Obama need to have their eyes opened.
*****************************************
Do Facts Matter? Thomas Sowell Friday, October 03, 2008
Abraham Lincoln said, "You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time."
Unfortunately, the future of this country, as well as the fate of the Western world, depends on how many people can be fooled on Election Day...
Right now, the polls indicate that a whole lot of the people are being fooled a whole lot of the time.
The current financial bailout crisis has propelled Barack Obama back into a substantial lead over John McCain - which is astonishing in view of which manand which partyhas had the most to do with bringing on this crisis.
It raises the question: Do facts matter? Or is Obama's rhetoric and the media's spin enough to make facts irrelevant?
Fact: It was liberal Democrats, led by Sen. Christopher Dodd & Congressman Barney Frank, who for years - including the present year - denied that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were taking big risks that could lead to a financial crisis.
It was Sen. Dodd, Rep. Frank and other lib Dems who for years refused requests from the Bush administration to set up an agency to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
It was lib Dems, again led by Dodd & Frank, who for years pushed for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to go even further in promoting subprime mortgage loans, which are at the heart of today's financial crisis.
Alan Greenspan warned them four years ago. So did the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to the President. So did Bush's Secretary of the Treasury, five years ago.
Yet, today, what are we hearing? That it was the Bush administration "right-wing ideology" of "de-regulation" that set the stage for the financial crisis. Do facts matter?
We also hear that it is the free market that is to blame. But the facts show that it was the government that pressured financial institutions in general to lend to subprime borrowers, with such things as the Community Reinvestment Act and, later, threats of legal action by then Attorney General Janet Reno if the feds did not like the statistics on who was getting loans and who wasn't.
Is that the free market? Or do facts not matter?
Then there is the question of being against the "greed" of CEOs and for "the people." Franklin Raines made $90 million while he was head of Fannie Mae and mismanaging that institution into crisis.
Who in Congress defended Franklin Raines? Liberal Democrats, including Maxine Waters and the Congressional Black Caucus, at least one of whom referred to the "lynching" of Raines, as if it was racist to hold him to the same standard as white CEOs.
Even after he was deposed as head of Fannie Mae, Franklin Raines was consulted this year by the Obama campaign for his advice on housing!
The Washington Post criticized the McCain campaign for calling Raines an adviser to Obama, even though that fact was reported in the Washington Post itself on July 16th. The technicality and the spin here is that Raines is not officially listed as an adviser. But someone who advises is an adviser, whether or not his name appears on a letterhead.
The tie between Barack Obama and Franklin Raines is not all one-way. Obama has been the second-largest recipient of Fannie Mae's financial contributions, right after Sen. Christopher Dodd.
But ties between Obama and Raines? Not if you read the mainstream media.
Facts don't matter much politically if they are not reported.
The media alone are not alone in keeping the facts from the public. Republicans, for reasons unknown, don't seem to know what it is to counter-attack. They deserve to lose.
But the country does not deserve to be put in the hands of a glib and cocky know-it-all, who has accomplished absolutely nothing beyond the advancement of his own career with rhetoric, and who has for years allied himself with a succession of people who have openly expressed their hatred of America.
Apple, correct me if I'm wrong but Isn't that Raines one of Obama's campaign advisors.
With all these polls that are being posted everyday, I would like to know what the ratio is. How many Dems/Rep are being polled. Is there more Dems than Reps or visa versa?
The Community Reinvestment Act was passed in 1977. It is a bit much in my opinion to blame a crisis in 2008 on that legislation.
I doubt that Sowell even believes that. Unfortunately a great many conservatives have an ideological blind spot when it comes to deregulation or the free market. Progressives and liberals have similar blind spots of course. Desperation to not be blamed for something which is a result of their ideology makes people say funny things.
However the facts are that most subprime loans were made by banks or brokers that were not subject to the CRA. Most loans made under the CRA were not subprime and were not securitized or sold.
In addition over the past eight years the Bush Administration has been weakening, not strengthening the CRA.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac do not originate loans. The private marketplace does that. The private marketplace then chopped these risky loans up, labeled them as AAA grade investments and sold them off. The repeal of Glass-Steagall under Clinton and the removal of bank capitalization and deposit requirements under Bush added more risk to the marketplace. Both of these things were demanded by conservatives.
In short the bankers and financial institutions demanded and received increasing autonomy from regulation, along with low interest rates from the Fed. Now that the entire world is on the brink of a financial meltdown and credit freeze some of the same cheerleaders for deregulation STILL can't admit that they were wrong.
Incredible. Sowell is something else.
Below are some links which explain much of what really happened. The column by the conservative economist Ben Stein is particularly good. The rage just jumps off the page.
This is the kind of stuff that needs to be out there; those 'Independents' who seem to be leaning toward Obama need to have their eyes opened.
*****************************************
Do Facts Matter? Thomas Sowell Friday, October 03, 2008
Yes, please. Get more stuff out there from Thomas Sowell. Especially the stuff where he compares Obama to Adolf Hitler. That's sure to do wonders for McCain.
Apple, you need to realize that until Jany, 2007 Republicans had been in control of the Cingress since 1994. They were in a position to impose whatever regulations they chose to impose. Sincd january 2001 through December 2006, Republicans were in control of the Congress and the White House. There has been plenty opportunity for Republicans to take steps to regulate all federal agencies.
WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican presidential candidate John McCain's brother made an apparent joke at a campaign rally this weekend that might not play well in parts of newly competitive Virginia.
Joe McCain, speaking at an event in support of his brother, called two Democratic-leaning areas in Northern Virginia "communist country," according to a report on The Washington Post's Web site.
"I've lived here for at least 10 years and before that about every third duty I was in either Arlington or Alexandria, up in communist country," Joe McCain, a Navy veteran, said at an event in Loudoun County, Va.
Joe McCain then apologized, but the remark drew laughter at the event, according to the report.
Virginia has long been a Republican stronghold in presidential elections, but Democrat Barack Obama is running even or ahead of McCain in recent state polls. Obama is being helped by fast-growing communities in the Washington, D.C., suburbs of Northern Virginia, which tend to vote more Democratic than other parts of the state.
One of those areas is Arlington, Va., where John McCain owns a condominium.
"This was Joe McCain's unsuccessful attempt at humor," said McCain campaign spokeswoman Gail Gitcho. "John McCain and Sarah Palin are committed to winning the support of voters in Northern Virginia and understand the region's importance to victory statewide."
WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican presidential candidate John McCain's brother made an apparent joke at a campaign rally this weekend that might not play well in parts of newly competitive Virginia.
Joe McCain, speaking at an event in support of his brother, called two Democratic-leaning areas in Northern Virginia "communist country," according to a report on The Washington Post's Web site.
"I've lived here for at least 10 years and before that about every third duty I was in either Arlington or Alexandria, up in communist country," Joe McCain, a Navy veteran, said at an event in Loudoun County, Va.
Joe McCain then apologized, but the remark drew laughter at the event, according to the report.
Virginia has long been a Republican stronghold in presidential elections, but Democrat Barack Obama is running even or ahead of McCain in recent state polls. Obama is being helped by fast-growing communities in the Washington, D.C., suburbs of Northern Virginia, which tend to vote more Democratic than other parts of the state.
One of those areas is Arlington, Va., where John McCain owns a condominium.
"This was Joe McCain's unsuccessful attempt at humor," said McCain campaign spokeswoman Gail Gitcho. "John McCain and Sarah Palin are committed to winning the support of voters in Northern Virginia and understand the region's importance to victory statewide."
Yes, because anyone voting Democrat is obviously a commie.
So yeah, fuck you American people who voted for FDR 4 times you commies!
RICHMOND, Va. - The wife of Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel plans to endorse Democrat Barack Obama.
Lilibet Hagel has scheduled a 10 a.m. news conference in Alexandria, Va., on Tuesday with Susan Eisenhower, the daughter of Republican President Eisenhower.
Hagel, R-Neb., has made no endorsement. Lilibet Hagel said in an Associated Press interview that her decision was independent of her husband. She said she didn't know whether he would make an endorsement or whom he would support.
"You'd have to ask him," Lilibet Hagel said.
She said it will be her first endorsement of a Democrat and that perilous world conditions were a factor.
"The fact is we're in two wars, two of the longest we've ever been in. We've run up a third of our nation's debt in just the past eight years. We're in the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression," she said.
The Hagels know John and Cindy McCain, and she said her endorsement was not meant to slam them.
"This isn't anti-McCain. This is pro-Obama. I'm just convinced he's the right person," she said.
The Hagels vote in Nebraska, but they have lived in Washington's Virginia suburbs since Hagel won his first Senate term in 1996.
A moderate Republican and veteran wounded in combat in the Vietnam War, Hagel has been a fierce and credible critic of the Bush administration's Iraq policies. During the summer, he accompanied Obama and Democratic Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island to Iraq and Afghanistan. He was briefly the object of speculation as a possible surprise Obama running mate selection.
Hagel has decided not to seek a third Senate term.
Political Wire got an advance look at a new West Chester University/NPR poll in Pennsylvania that shows Sen. Barack Obama leading Sen. John McCain, 52% to 42%, in the key battleground state.
McCain forced to defend N.C. By: Carrie Budoff Brown and Richard T. Cullen October 6, 2008 08:23 PM EST
ASHEVILLE, N.C.—For the third weekend in a row, Barack Obama campaigned in North Carolina as part of the most vigorous Democratic effort since at least 1992 to win this reliably Republican state.
At a surprise stop Saturday night at a North Carolina Democratic Party dinner and again a rally here Sunday in the state’s conservative western edge, Obama sounded a confident note:
“Despite the pundits, despite the prognosticators, despite the cynicism,” Obama said at the dinner, “we are right here in the hunt in North Carolina. We can win at the top of the ballot in North Carolina. And we win at the bottom of the ballot in North Carolina. We can win in the eastern part of the state and in the western part. We can elect a new Democratic governor here in North Carolina and we can elect a new U.S. senator here in North Carolina.”
To the dismay of North Carolina Republicans, Obama may not be overstating matters.
Aides to John McCain consider North Carolina a must-win state and expressed optimism last week about their chances here, but there are signs of concern: Vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin this week will make the Republican ticket’s first visit to the state since June, and the first public appearance since a McCain speech at Wake Forest University during the primaries in May.
“They’re having to defend their turf—Republicans—in a way that they haven’t had to since 1992,” said Ferrel Guillory, director of the Program on Southern Politics, Media and Public Life at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. “And so, even if Obama doesn’t win the electoral votes here, McCain can’t take the state for granted.”
The turmoil on Wall Street and the economic downturn have helped turn North Carolina into more fertile ground for Obama, who took his first lead over John McCain in the Real Clear Politics average of state polls a week ago. As a national leader in the banking industry, the state suffered more bad news last week as it faces the loss of thousands of high-paying bank jobs—and a blow to its state pride—when Charlotte-based Wachovia Corp. put itself up for sale last week.
Similar to its flood-the-zone strategy in Virginia, which is experiencing its first competitive presidential race in decades, the Obama campaign has been aggressive in its pursuit of North Carolina.
Obama chose this city in the Blue Ridge Mountains to prepare for Tuesday’s presidential debate with the state's 15 electoral votes in mind. It’s his fifth visit since clinching the Democratic nomination in June, while vice-presidential nominee Joe Biden has made two stops and Michelle Obama traveled to Charlotte and Greensboro last month, and returns again Tuesday.
Obama is also dominating the airwaves, running about three TV ads for every one from McCain, according to North Carolina political experts.
The prospect of North Carolina as a battleground has put the McCain campaign in a bind, stirring a debate on how much time and resources it should devote to a state that has voted for Republican presidential nominees since 1976.
“Obama has basically gotten a free ride,” said a North Carolina Republican strategist who asked to remain anonymous so that he could talk candidly about the race. “He is killing McCain on the air, even running two-minute ads and new radio ads. Meanwhile, most of what we have seen from McCain has come from national cable buys. That is not a recipe for success in a state that no one thought we’d be talking about this late.”
McCain has not visited the state since June, when he met privately with evangelists Billy and Franklin Graham. There are no immediate plans for McCain to return to North Carolina, according to Brent Woodcox, a spokesman for the state Republican Party.
"Certainly we would love to see the senator in the state," he said. "But with 30 days left, the campagn has to make the decision on where to go."
Palin’s trip Tuesday to East Carolina University in Greenville for a rally shows the campaign, which has also increased its ad buys in recent weeks, is beginning to make a stronger push in the unexpectedly competitive state.
McCain advisers said they expect North Carolina, similar to other GOP states where Obama is competitive, will go with the Republican nominee at the end of the day because the Democrat is out of step with voters.
“One of the strategic decisions our campaign has made is to let Mr. Obama spend his resources in there to the point that we got closer to the election,” McCain senior advisor Greg Strimple said. “These are states with conservative voting constituencies where you have the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate running on the top of the ticket. … I believe he is going to have a hard time winning votes and I think it will be money he has spent in vain.”
Obama chief strategist David Axelrod countered, “I am happy to have them wallow in their self confidence.”
Woodcox acknowledges that the race is competitive, but said that the GOP retains the edge because it knows how to win statewide races there.
“The events nationally have an effect on how the race plays in North Carolina and there has been a lot of up and down since the convention, gaining momentum and losing,” Woodcox said. “We may still see two or three up-and-down, game-changing moments. I still think we can feel confident because of our past experiences.”
But the Obama campaign, which political observers say is waging the most organized Democratic bid here since Bill Clinton’s 1992 effort—when he fell just 20,000 votes short of victory, out of two-and-a-half-million cast — is drawing its confidence from a mix of factors.
Obama already built a statewide political network during the North Carolina Democratic primary, which he won by 14 percentage points despite a serious effort from Hillary Rodham Clinton.
North Carolina voter rolls gained more than 600,000 new registrants this year, with almost half choosing the Democratic Party and one third registered as independent. Of the state’s 6 million voters, 45 percent are Democratic, 32 percent are Republican and 22 percent are independent.
A surge in population over the last 20 years in the metropolitan areas has reshaped the electorate, as well.
“They don’t necessarily fit the old pattern, or at least the old pattern isn’t imbedded in their head,” Guillory said. “And so there are a lot of persuadable voters out there, and that’s why this state has been more competitive. It isn’t the old South, or the more rural part of the state that has become more competitive. It’s these surging metropolitan areas that make this state more competitive.”
As the momentum has shifted in Obama’s direction over the last two weeks, state political experts are just beginning to consider the real possibility of North Carolina as decisive on Election Day.
“Someone asked me the other day, ‘Do you really think at the end of the day that North Carolina voters will vote for an African American?’ I’ve got to tell you, I think the worse the economy gets, the less race matters,” said Morgan Jackson, a North Carolina Democratic political consultant. “The economy changes the dynamics so much that people don’t care what race, or creed, or gender you are. If the economy is in such decay, they’re going to want somebody who can make a change.”
Haven't had a whole lotta time to browse the news Monday, but I did see a short clip from a McCain rally in which a McCain supporter called Obama a terrorist. You can see McCain appeared to look surprised, but said nothing.
Anyway, I do plan to watch the debate tonight. I am hoping that(and expect) O keeps to the economy and the issues. Let McCain ramble and attack. I just don't think that's what people want. I know don't.
Yet, right now, at this moment, that is all McCain has. I hear even the McCain camp admitted that much, saying if the talk about the economy they'll lose. So, let them imply that O is a terrorist or, God forbid, actually utter his middle name "Hussein" That should anger everyone.
Then again, it's so easy to get hopeful for the Dems, and I am hopeful, BUT I want to be cauioius and not assume anything. If we have learned anything it's that "shit happens" and nothing is in the bag yet.....although damn, it's looking good. Can't wait til it's over though.
It was liberal democrats that caused the economic crisis?? Really?? When, as olivant pointed out, the Republicans have had control for years? Really??
Apple, you must be so ridiculously blinded by partisanship, racial hatred, I don't know what, that I can't imagine why you would continue to post the things that you do. With electric and heat shut-off in NY up 17% because people can't afford to pay their bills, with the housing market in shambles, with the NYSE in shambles, with no credit available to people who need it, with children having to transfer out of private colleges because the credit crunch has dried up the student loan market, with a federal deficit of unfathomable proportions, while we conduct a war based on lies which cost trillions of dollars, and, more importantly, thousands of lives, how can you possibly still try to point the finger of blame on anyone else besides the party that has had the reins of power for YEARS. The Republicans had the majority and the White House and could have kept things under control, no matter what they felt "the lib dems" supported.
I think at this point, the Republicans best chance would be to lobby to lower the voting age to six, then nominate SpongeBob SquarePants, with Barney as his running mate.
It was liberal democrats that caused the economic crisis?? Really?? When, as olivant pointed out, the Republicans have had control for years? Really??
Well I don't see the saviors that have the power now doing anything.
Saviors? You're 100% right, Mignon. You do need a savior to raise THIS economy from the dead. No wonder the Republicans like to refer to Senator Obama as the messiah.
It truly WILL take a miracle to unravel the mess that the Republicans are leaving behind.
I think at this point, the Republicans best chance would be to lobby to lower the voting age to six, then nominate SpongeBob SquarePants, with Barney as his running mate.
Otherwise; say goodnight, Dick. See ya in 2012.
Considering your last electoral prediction, I think I'll pass.
I think at this point, the Republicans best chance would be to lobby to lower the voting age to six, then nominate SpongeBob SquarePants, with Barney as his running mate.
Otherwise; say goodnight, Dick. See ya in 2012.
Considering your last electoral prediction, I think I'll pass.
I was just being cautious, Ronnie. I'm a bit older than you, and I've seen elections turn on a dime. But this one is looking pretty good right now for Obama.
Haven't had a whole lotta time to browse the news Monday, but I did see a short clip from a McCain rally in which a McCain supporter called Obama a terrorist. You can see McCain appeared to look surprised, but said nothing.
At another rally, reportedly when McCain was in his speech, saying what should we do with Obama, someone yelled: "Kill him!"
Washington Post also reports this:
Worse, Palin's routine attacks on the media have begun to spill into ugliness. In Clearwater, arriving reporters were greeted with shouts and taunts by the crowd of about 3,000. Palin then went on to blame Katie Couric's questions for her "less-than-successful interview with kinda mainstream media." At that, Palin supporters turned on reporters in the press area, waving thunder sticks and shouting abuse. Others hurled obscenities at a camera crew. One Palin supporter shouted a racial epithet at an African American sound man for a network and told him, "Sit down, boy."
Add that with the "Terrorist" and "Kill'em!" shout-outs....
Is this how McCain wants to be remembered? He wants to be the new George Wallace?
Really, you could tell from that "Terrorist!" shout-out how disturbed he was by it, and yet he did nothing else. Why couldn't he have simply stopped his well-rehearsed speech, and ask people to not say such things. Yes it would come out as hypocritical considering his VP's attack platform, but still.
But Johnny, that was a moment you could have asserted some leadership on the spur of a moment. You could have hit a double, instead you struck out.
Then again, aint that the story of the McCain campaign?
I think at this point, the Republicans best chance would be to lobby to lower the voting age to six, then nominate SpongeBob SquarePants, with Barney as his running mate.
Otherwise; say goodnight, Dick. See ya in 2012.
Considering your last electoral prediction, I think I'll pass.
I was just being cautious, Ronnie. I'm a bit older than you, and I've seen elections turn on a dime. But this one is looking pretty good right now for Obama.
[I was just being cautious, Ronnie. I'm a bit older than you, and I've seen elections turn on a dime. But this one is looking pretty good right now for Obama.
Well keep your dime until November 5.
Al Gore was up 8 in October, and lost the election. ....Oh wait. He didn't really lose the election.
[quote=pizzaboy]I think at this point, the Republicans best chance would be to lobby to lower the voting age to six, then nominate SpongeBob SquarePants, with Barney as his running mate.
Otherwise; say goodnight, Dick. See ya in 2012.
Considering your last electoral prediction, I think I'll pass.
I was just being cautious, Ronnie. I'm a bit older than you, and I've seen elections turn on a dime. But this one is looking pretty good right now for Obama.
10/07/08 By Alan Silverleib CNN Senior Political Researcher
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Polls in five key battleground states in the race for the White House released Tuesday suggest that Sen. Barack Obama is making major gains.
The CNN/Time magazine/Opinion Research Corp. polls of likely voters in Indiana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio and Wisconsin reflect a significant nationwide shift toward the Democratic presidential nominee.
Obama has made significant strides in New Hampshire, the state credited with reviving Sen. John McCain's Republican primary campaign in both 2000 and 2008.
Fifty-three percent of New Hampshire's likely voters are backing Obama, while 45 percent are supporting McCain. Obama held a lead of 5 percentage points in the last CNN New Hampshire poll, taken in early September. VideoWatch what the poll numbers mean »
Four years ago, Sen. John Kerry narrowly carried New Hampshire -- a one-time GOP stronghold. George W. Bush squeezed out a slender win by 1 percentage point in 2000.
In Indiana, 51 percent of likely voters say McCain is their choice for president, with 46 percent backing Obama, a Democratic senator from neighboring Illinois. Indiana went for Bush by 21 percentage points four years ago; Democrats have not carried Indiana since 1964. See the latest polling
In North Carolina, the two major party nominees are locked in a dead heat, with McCain and Obama each claiming the support of 49 percent of likely voters.
"Obama's strongest region is in the Raleigh/Durham area," said Keating Holland, CNN's polling director. "McCain does best in Charlotte and the surrounding counties."
The last Democrat to carry North Carolina was Jimmy Carter, a Southerner, in 1976. The state's 15 electoral votes are considered critical for any successful Republican presidential campaign.
McCain trails Obama in Ohio; 50 percent of likely voters favor Obama, while 47 percent support the senator from Arizona. No Republican has won the White House without carrying the state.
"McCain has a 6-point lead in the Cincinnati area," Holland said. "But a GOP candidate normally needs to do better than that in southwestern Ohio in order to win the state. And overall, Obama actually has a 2-point edge among suburban communities across the state."
In Wisconsin, which hasn't voted Republican since 1984, Obama is holding a 51 percent to 46 percent lead among likely voters.
"Obama continues to maintain a 'home field advantage' in the southern Wisconsin counties that border Illinois," Holland said. "He has nearly a 30-point lead in the city of Milwaukee, although he loses the Milwaukee suburbs by nearly as large a margin."
The new polls are behind several shifts in the CNN Electoral College map.
CNN is shifting North Carolina from leaning toward McCain to a tossup. CNN is moving Wisconsin and its 10 electoral votes, and New Hampshire and its four electoral votes, from tossup to leaning toward Obama.
Finally, CNN is switching Michigan and its 17 electoral votes from leaning toward Obama to safe for Obama. The McCain campaign announced last week that it was shifting its resources out of the once hotly contested industrial state, instead intensifying efforts in Pennsylvania and Ohio.
With these moves, CNN estimates that if the presidential election were held today, Obama would win states with 264 electoral votes and McCain would carry states with 174 electoral votes, with 100 electoral votes still up for grabs. To win the White House, 270 electoral votes are needed. See CNN's Electoral College map
Obama's lead has expanded by 29 electoral votes in comparison with his margin in CNN's last electoral map, which was released on October 1.
The CNN/Time/Opinion Research polls were conduced October 3-6, with 677 likely voters in Indiana, 813 likely voters in New Hampshire, 666 likely voters in North Carolina, 749 likely voters in Ohio and 859 likely voters in Wisconsin. Respondents were all questioned by telephone.
The survey's sampling error is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points in New Hampshire, Ohio and Wisconsin, and plus or minus 4 percentage points in Indiana and North Carolina.
Jack Bogdanski (Lewis & Clark) & Bryan Camp (Texas Tech) have independently reviewed the tax issues raised by the release of Gov. Palin's 2006 and 2007 tax returns and financial disclosure form, as well as the remarkable opinion letter issued from Washington D.C. tax lawyer Roger M. Olsen. Jack and Bryan conclude that there are serious errors in Gov. Palin's returns as filed and that she and her husband owe tens of thousands of dollars in additional taxes.
Anyone who can sit in a church pew for 20 some years and listen to such hate coming out of his preachers mouth and not doing nothing about it until recently.
Anyone who has ties to an American terrorist Bill Ayers. That goes against Obama's judgement and character.
Anyone who can sit in a church pew for 20 some years and listen to such hate coming out of his preachers mouth and not doing nothing about it until recently.
Anyone who has ties to an American terrorist Bill Ayers. That goes against Obama's judgement and character.
Just my feelings might not be yours.
I agree, Miggie. He is hardly a Messiah. Last time I checked there was still only one.
For the past couple of months, I've been going toe-to-toe with a friend of mine who was a strong supporter of McCain. Yesterday, he informed me he isn't voting. He's says "he can't stomach Palin anymore", and McCain "no longer has any message to lead the country". So far, he refuses to vote for Obama, but I'm working on it.
For the past couple of months, I've been going toe-to-toe with a friend of mine who was a strong supporter of McCain. Yesterday, he informed me he isn't voting. He's says "he can't stomach Palin anymore", and McCain "no longer has any message to lead the country". So far, he refuses to vote for Obama, but I'm working on it.
And that will be the difference. The conservatives who can't stand Palin and are on the fence about McCain won't show up to vote.
Anyone who can sit in a church pew for 20 some years and listen to such hate coming out of his preachers mouth and not doing nothing about it until recently.
First off, Obama wasn't there at the infamous "Goddamn America" sermon.
Second, I hate to bring this up Mig but....preachers/priests can be rather fucking crazy. Back when I actually went to church, had a preacher who told us of how supporting the then-upcoming Tennessee Lottery sinful, in that voting for it was "a ticket on the bus to hell."
Better yet, he later told us how that "we Christians are united with the Jews against the Muslims, even if the Jews that won't accept Jesus Christ as their savior will be destroyed on judgment day."
The difference with me and Obama is that I quit that church. Then again, Obama is like George W. Bush unfortunately in terms of the social conservative friends they tend to hang out with.
Hell mig, he's played that piety card more than McCain has, despite that one being the Republican nominee.
Originally Posted By: Mignon
Anyone who has ties to an American terrorist Bill Ayers. That goes against Obama's judgement and character.
Just my feelings might not be yours.
I have a neighbor, who occasionally I come upon in my daily walks, who is a Christian Scientist.
Does that make me, by association, a fucking quack?
For the past couple of months, I've been going toe-to-toe with a friend of mine who was a strong supporter of McCain. Yesterday, he informed me he isn't voting. He's says "he can't stomach Palin anymore", and McCain "no longer has any message to lead the country". So far, he refuses to vote for Obama, but I'm working on it.
Better yet, he later told us how that "we Christians are united with the Jews against the Muslims, even if the Jews that won't accept Jesus Christ as their savior will be destroyed on judgment day."
These "Bible Belt" family values are making me feel warm and fuzzy all over.
My friend has said some horrible things about Obama, that I won't repeat here. But I'm sure that there's a lot of Americans that have similar feelings about Obama. Just the fact he has those feelings, and yet he can't vote for whomever is running against him, is not good for McCain.
On the eve of the penultimate presidential debate, a new TIME/CNN poll shows John McCain still struggling in states won by George W. Bush in 2004, a sign that last week's vice presidential debate had little effect on voter opinion.
In North Carolina, which Bush won by more than 12 percentage points in both 2000 and 2004, McCain and Obama are locked in a dead heat, with each candidate garnering the support of 49% of likely voters. In Indiana, which Bush won by 21 points in 2004 and 16 points in 2000, McCain maintains a slight 5 point lead over Obama, with 51% of likely voters, compared to Obama's 46%.
In the crucial swing state of Ohio, which Bush won by slight margins in both 2000 and 2004, McCain trails Obama by 3 points, with the support of 47% of voters, compared to Obama's 50%. Obama also holds a statistically significant 8 point lead over McCain in New Hampshire and a 5 point lead in Wisconsin, two states that Democrat John Kerry was able to win in 2004.
As a result of the new survey, CNN now considers New Hampshire and Wisconsin to be Obama-leaning states, after previously being considered tossups. North Carolina is now considered a tossup, after previously being categorized as a McCain-leaning state.
The polls were conducted between October 3 and 6, after last Thursday's debate. They have a margin of error of +/- 3.5 to 4 percentage points.
Last week, the McCain campaign reacted to a polling downturn by shuttering its operation in the state of Michigan and redistributing staff to Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Maine, where electoral votes are distributed by congressional district. In a conference call last week, Mike DuHaime, the McCain campaign's political director, acknowledged that the national mood and Obama's deep pockets had put previously solid Republican states like Indiana in play.
"I do think just the overall environment right now that we face is one of the worst environments for any Republican in probably 35 years," DuHaime said. "Any time you have that, you have states move within that margin."
After two grueling years, only two major events remain in the 2008 presidential campaign, a candidate town hall forum Tuesday in Tennessee, and a debate on October 15 in New York. In a nod to the dwindling window of opportunity, McCain again sharpened his attacks on Obama during a stump speech Monday in New Mexico, charging that Obama harbors a "back story" on every issue that needs to be explored.
"All people want to know is: What has this man ever actually accomplished in government? What does he plan for America?" McCain said. "In short: Who is the real Barack Obama? But ask such questions and all you get in response is another barrage of angry insults."
Campaigning in North Carolina, Obama countered by charging that McCain and his aides were "gambling that they can distract you with smears rather than talk to you about substance."
People outside the US would prefer Barack Obama to become US president ahead of John McCain, a BBC World Service poll suggests.
Democrat Mr Obama was favoured by a four-to-one margin across the 22,500 people polled in 22 countries.
In 17 countries, the most common view was that US relations with the rest of the world would improve under Mr Obama.
If Republican Mr McCain were elected, the most common view was that relations would remain about the same.
The poll was conducted before the Democratic and Republican parties held their conventions and before the headline-grabbing nomination of Sarah Palin as Mr McCain's running mate.
BBC diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus says the results could therefore be a reflection of the greater media focus on Mr Obama as he competed for the presidential candidacy against Hillary Clinton.
The margin of those in favour of Mr Obama winning November's US election ranged from 9% in India to 82% in Kenya, which is the birthplace of the Illinois senator's father.
On average 49% preferred Mr Obama to 12% in favour of Mr McCain. Nearly four in 10 of those polled did not take a view.
On average 46% thought US relations with the world would improve with Mr Obama in the White House, 22% that ties would stay the same, while seven per cent expected relations to worsen.
Only 20% thought ties would get better if Mr McCain were in the Oval Office.
The expectation that a McCain presidency would improve US relations with the world was the most common view, by a modest margin, only in China, India and Nigeria.
But across the board, the largest number - 37% - thought relations under a president McCain would stay the same, while 16% expected them to deteriorate.
In no country did most people think that a McCain presidency would worsen relations.
Oddly, in Turkey more people thought US relations would worsen with an Obama presidency than under Mr McCain, even though most Turks polled preferred Mr Obama to win.
In Egypt, Lebanon, Russia and Singapore, the predominant expectation was that relations would remain the same if Mr Obama won the election.
The countries most optimistic that an Obama presidency would improve ties were US Nato allies - Canada (69%), Italy (64%), France (62%), Germany (61%), and the UK (54%) - as well as Australia (62%), along with Kenya (87%) and Nigeria (71%).
When asked whether the election as president of the African-American Mr Obama would "fundamentally change" their perception of the US, 46% said it would while 27% said it would not.
The US public was polled separately and Americans also believed an Obama presidency would improve US ties with the world more than a McCain presidency.
Forty-six per cent of Americans expected relations to get better if Mr Obama were elected and 30% if Mr McCain won the White House.
A similar poll conducted for BBC World Service ahead of the 2004 US presidential election found most countries would have preferred to see Democratic nominee John Kerry beat the incumbent George W Bush.
At the time, the Philippines, Nigeria and Poland were among the few countries to favour Mr Bush's re-election. All three now favour Mr Obama over Mr McCain.
In total 22,531 citizens were polled in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Egypt, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Kenya, Lebanon, Mexico, Nigeria, Panama, the Philippines, Poland, Russia, Singapore, Turkey, the UAE and the UK. A parallel survey was conducted with 1,000 US adults.
Anyone who can sit in a church pew for 20 some years and listen to such hate coming out of his preachers mouth and not doing nothing about it until recently.
So the McCain campaign's answer for overtaking Obama's lead is to dig up old attacks that Hillary tried and failed miserably at? Attacks McCain himself previously condemned in such high-minded terms?
This would make McCain's Reverend Hagee and the Palin's Kenyan witch hunter now fair game. Or when didn't Palin sat -- and NOT get up and leave -- during a sermon that declared terrorist attacks on Israeli citizens to be God visiting judgment upon the Jews? She sat through a blatantly anti-semetic sermon. What does that say about her character?
Originally Posted By: Mignon
Anyone who has ties to an American terrorist Bill Ayers. That goes against Obama's judgement and character.
Obama was 8 when Ayers was a radical (now a former anti-war extremist who long ago changed his ways) and didn't know him. OTOH McCain was 58 when he hung around with good buddy and major rip-off artist Charles Keating.
Who cares about the economy? I certainly don't. Two wars? Meh. What I really want to hear more about is Obama's distant associations. That's going to make the difference in my life how he suddenly does a Vulcan mind meld and appropriates the past lives and thoughts of everyone he comes in contact with.
My favorite ad of the year so far. Agree or not, vote or not for Obama, his campaign have been undisputedly the kings of the campaign commercial so far this fall:
Look, I can understand people being upset about the Senator's association with Reverend Wright. He was his pastor. The Obama Family christened their children in his church. Why they didn't leave the church is a personal decision. Perhaps they felt that our Constitution protected their pastor's right to say what he wants about the imperfections of this country. That's what it's there for.
As for his association with Ayers, c'mon, Mig, you can't be that easily influenced. Senator Obama was EIGHT years old when Ayers was committing his crimes. They served on a non-profit board together, they live in the same neighborhood and their children go to the same school. I serve on the board of the Music Parent's Association at my daughter's school. I haven't done a background check on the other members or asked them what they were up to 40 years ago. If I decided to run for local office and one of them offered to host a "Meet the Candidate" night at their home, would I hesitate? NO, and neither should have Obama. It's patently absurd to say that this association means that Senator Obama "pals around with terrorists". It's demeaning to him and to the American public.
As for your remark about Ronnie not needing to worry about his neighbors because he's not running for President, do you realize how silly that sounds?? You have to worry about who lives next to you before you can think about running for President?? WHAT??????
As for calling Senator Obama a messiah, you can thank the McCain campaign for that. They're the ones that "christened" him that, not me.
Perhaps they felt that our Constitution protected their pastor's right to say what he wants about the imperfections of this country. That's what it's there for.
Why did he choose to strongly condemn him now during the primaries and leave the church after so many years, if he believed in the constitutional right of the priest?
Perhaps they felt that our Constitution protected their pastor's right to say what he wants about the imperfections of this country. That's what it's there for.
Why did he choose to strongly condemn him now during the primaries and leave the church after so many years, if he believed in the constitutional right of the priest?
Politics.
Yet because of that whole incident, Obama did give his "A More Perfect Union" speech, which went from an expected rebuttal/expedient exorcism of the Wright shit, to that of flipping the topic into that of race and religion in America. When Republicans like McCain(!) and Newt Gingrinch called it brave and praised it (if more subdued compared to the liberal/Democratic rejoicing), I think you did something right.
To quote my old political science professor, win or lose the election, that speech will be included in rhetorical text books for years to come.
Perhaps they felt that our Constitution protected their pastor's right to say what he wants about the imperfections of this country. That's what it's there for.
Why did he choose to strongly condemn him now during the primaries and leave the church after so many years, if he believed in the constitutional right of the priest?
There's this thing, oh what's it called? Damn. Oh yeah, Politics.
An old essay written by someone at the Ashcroft Center, from 2004 after Obama gave his star-making DNC keynote address, and its interesting in retrospect:
Barack Obama: A Republican Soul Trapped Inside a Democrat’s Body
by: Lucas Morel
With unity as the mandate for the Democratic Convention, a little known State Senator from Illinois, Barack Obama, took the ball and ran so far with it that this listener thought he was witnessing Obama’s conversion to the Grand Old Party. Remove all the references to John Kerry, along with the not-so-veiled digs against Bush, and the remaining speech would have fired up a Republican audience.
Touting his home state as "the land of Lincoln," praising the Declaration of Independence as "the true genius of America," and repeatedly affirming that Americans "don’t expect government to solve all their problems," Obama sounded less like the Democratic Party and more like the current president. Even his comments on education, which emphasized parental responsibility and higher student expectations, were right out of Bush’s playbook. Add his concern that Americans couple their devotion to individualism with a belief that "I am my brother’s keeper," and Obama looked like a cheerleader for compassionate conservatism.
That Obama spent most of his speech singing the glories of America must have shocked the Democratic elite. Instead of mouthing the multicultural platitudes of Jesse Jackson’s Democratic Party, Obama pledged allegiance to "one American family." He went so far as to exclaim, "There’s not a black America and a white America and Latino America and Asian America—there is the United States of America." Jackson stood up and applauded at all the right moments, but he was clearly sitting down and harrumphing on the inside.
Despite his call to unity and hope, Obama established his Democratic bona fides through several criticisms of George Bush’s presidency. But these amounted to just so many throw-away lines and "straw men" arguments. Republicans have little to fear that any of these blows will land when the gloves come off after the convention. Bush has not used "faith as a wedge to divide us," spoken or acted as if war was "the first option," or ignored unemployment or "the health care crisis." And if Obama really thinks the Bush presidency has been "this long political darkness," then Jimmy Carter’s quagmire of a presidency becomes a political black hole.
Obama is widely referred to as a rising star in the Democratic Party. But if Barack Obama, whose first name means "blessed of God" in Swahili, is destined to be God’s gift to Democrats and Republicans alike, he will need to show how the principles of equal freedom and opportunity lead to the policies he has espoused so far as a state senator. His support of Roe v. Wade, affirmative action, tax increases, and increased gun controls—none of which were mentioned in his 15-minute ode to American exceptionalism—says more about his Democratic roots than his seemingly Republican convictions.
Can Obama’s political diversity leaven the Democratic Party? Time will soon tell, given that he is running unopposed for the U.S. Senate. One scenario is that a few years of "going along to get along" with the likes of Daschle, Clinton, and Pelosi will lead him to shed his Lincolnian rhetoric in exchange for a fast-track promotion to a cabinet-level position or even vice-presidential consideration.
For now, his proclamation of a "politics of hope" contrasts greatly with the typical pessimism of the Democratic Party. That it played so well with the Democratic rank and file bodes well for the immediate future of American political discourse.
Who cares about the economy? I certainly don't. Two wars? Meh. What I really want to hear more about is Obama's distant associations. That's going to make the difference in my life how he suddenly does a Vulcan mind meld and appropriates the past lives and thoughts of everyone he comes in contact with.
If you were running for any office SB, would you except a donation from a known terrorist?
I hate the guy, but Michael Moore years back did a movie called THE BIG ONE, where through phoney organizations existing only on paper, he donated money to several Presidential campaigns in 1996.
For example, "Pro-Choicers for Pat Buchanan" (when he ran for the GOP nomination that year), he gave money, just to prove that despite ideological differences or where it came from, all those campaigns would eat it up.
And besides, boxing promoter Don King (who's killed certifiable at least 3 people) donated money to Bush in 2004. Where were you Mig?
Originally Posted By: Mignon
He had big time bad judgement when he went into that mans house for that meet and greet.
JFK got the endorsements of several Segregationist Governors deep in the South during the 1960 Presidential primaries/Election.
Anyone who can sit in a church pew for 20 some years and listen to such hate coming out of his preachers mouth and not doing nothing about it until recently.
Or when didn't Palin sat -- and NOT get up and leave -- during a sermon that declared terrorist attacks on Israeli citizens to be God visiting judgment upon the Jews? She sat through a blatantly anti-semetic sermon. What does that say about her character?
Mig, if you can't get past the Reverend Wright thing, that's your right. But as a New York City Catholic and a strong advocate of Judaism, I have to ask, how come you didn't answer the question about Palin? By your way of thinking, if Obama is guilty by association to Wright, Palin is an anti-semite.
If you were running for any office SB, would you except a donation from a known terrorist?
He had big time bad judgement when he went into that mans house for that meet and greet.
I know I would, but I would say that if I returned it I was giving a known terrorist money to fund terrorist activities so it'd be better for everyone if I just kept it. And the votes would pour in.
If you were running for any office SB, would you except a donation from a known terrorist?
He had big time bad judgement when he went into that mans house for that meet and greet.
Like I said, I don't ask for a background check on every single person I encounter. I sit on several boards and committees in my community and I have no idea what the others on these boards (some with as many as 30+ members) were doing when I was EIGHT. Nor would it occur to me to ask. Again, it's silly to hold something this insignificant against Senator Obama.
Mig, if you can't get past the Reverend Wright thing, that's your right. But as a New York City Catholic and a strong advocate of Judaism, I have to ask, how come you didn't answer the question about Palin? By your way of thinking, if Obama is guilty by association to Wright, Palin is an anti-semite.
That was wrong as well. She should've got up and left mad as a hornet.
Originally Posted By: ronnierocketAGO
And besides, boxing promoter Don King (who's killed certifiable at least 3 people) donated money to Bush in 2004. Where were you Mig?
I'm sorry I didn't know about it. It is wrong for anybody to accept money from someone like that.
Obama is a politician. He's better than some, worse than others. But ultimately he is a politician. Anyone who gets in the way of his goal of attaining the White House is going to be expendable on some level. That's not a criticism of Obama by any means. I think all politicians at that level would behave in the same manner.
As far as the substance and manner of what Wright said, the sci-fi writer, producer and screenwriter Steven Barnes gave a cogent analysis of the reasons -intellectual and emotional-why Wright made the points that he did and why Obama may have attended that church. Of course this was written before Obama threw Wright under the bus but the points Barnes makes are still valid. The thing to keep in mind is that to understand is not to agree.
Obama is a politician. He's better than some, worse than others. But ultimately he is a politician. Anyone who gets in the way of his goal of attaining the White House is going to be expendable on some level. That's not a criticism of Obama by any means. I think all politicians at that level would behave in the same manner.
As far as the substance and manner of what Wright said, the sci-fi writer, producer and screenwriter Steven Barnes gave a cogent analysis of the reasons -intellectual and emotional-why Wright made the points that he did and why Obama may have attended that church. Of course this was written before Obama threw Wright under the bus but the points Barnes makes are still valid. The thing to keep in mind is that to understand is not to agree.
A piece on the Ayers issue written by a leading "Obamacon" (Republican for Obama) in Andrew Sullivan:
The far right is obsessed with the question of Bill Ayers, much more obsessed than with the war in Iraq or Afghanistan or the Palin farce or the financial meltdown. Their obsession is unseemly but it is not, alas, without any basis in truth. I find Bill Ayers' refusal to disown his use of political violence in the 1960s to be repulsive. If I were forced to meet him, I would not shake his hand. Obama's fault, however, is not being a terrorist sympathizer, as Palin absurdly declares to mob cheers. Obama's fault is in being a go-along-to-get-along Hyde Park liberal. You can see why he made the decision not to wreck polite liberal society in Chicago by calling out these former thugs. But I do not admire him for it. It's a corner he cut. He deserves to be criticized for it - if not in the fascistic way Hannity does it.
But the question of association raises broader questions.
I don't think I could serve on a board with Ayers in good conscience. But neither could I serve on a board or participate in an organization that employs a war criminal. John Yoo is such a war criminal, a man who gave oral consent to war crimes and then provided phony legal cover for torturing suspects. He is responsible for policies that have led to the death-by-torture of well over a dozen individuals that we know of, and the brutal torture of countless more. Without Yoo's green light, and willingness to make a mockery of the rule of law by signing off on torture, these people would be alive or susceptible to real and reliable non-coercive interrogation. If Obama deserves some censure for consorting with Ayers, why is there no censure in Washington or Berkeley for consorting with a war criminal?
I live for this stuff, but I found it to be rather routine. McCain's $300 billion mortgage renegotiation plan was interesting because it's always intersting when a candidate starts coming his opponents way. That plan is not going to go over very well with many Republicans.
I thought the town hall format sucked, and Brokaw was terrible. McCain was supposed to be the "Town Hall Specialist", but I thought clearly Obama was much more comfortable and relaxed tonight. McCain looked like he didn't want to be there. Even the talking heads on TV are noting how McCain ran out of there as soon as it was over, and Obama was still there 15 minutes after it ended, still talking to the people in the crowd.
I didn't find it quite as boring as a couple of you. Gosh, what does that say about me??? I think the media is the one who wanted a brawl. That's all they've been talking about all day.
I thought Obama easily won. He seems to be getting better each debate. I agree that McCain looked like he didn't want to be there, and this is suppose to be his "setting". I didn't like the way he referred to Obama as "that one" (Note: I see it's just posted)when he was rambling about who voted for what. I did like and agree with Obama's answer on Health care being a "right" and I like how Obama prioritized the issues he'd put first.
I really think though (and am hearing on the news) that these two don't like each other. I think Obama is respectful and McCain comes off has kind of mean. Right at the end of the debate, be quickly shook Obama's hand and left the stage.
I didn't get to see the debate, but from what I read here and from what I see on tv now (the excerpts from the debate) it looks like I didn't miss much.
I didn't get to see the debate, but from what I read here and from what I see on tv now (the excerpts from the debate) it looks like I didn't miss much.
You didn't. I have to say that I have paid more attention to this presidential campaign than any other I can think of, even the 2004 election. However, I had to struggle to stay awake through most of it, a struggle I eventually lost.
They both seemed to care more about scoring points off of one another than answering the questions. Two points stood out for me:
When Senator McCain was talking about the economy and said that the American people were "probably a little scared". Gee, you THINK?? I would imagine that many of the American people are pooping in their pants right about now!!!
When Senator Obama said to one of the people in the audience who asked a question, "But you want to know more about...not hear us go back and forth." I wanted to smack him on the back of the head.
The American people are scared, lots of them may be hungry, a few of them may be on the verge of being homeless, and they want someone to shine a light on their lives. BOTH candidates had the opportunity to do so last night and failed, IMO. I don't believe that either of them was aggressive enough.
Back to the debate, I wanted to hear more about Social Security. Btw, They had a segment on foreign policy, which was the topic of the last debate???
Anyway, one more debate to go. I saw a poll where they asked people if a debate has ever changed their minds as to whom they will vote for. A large majority said "no."
Even more dramatic was the shift in the voters’ personal reactions to the two candidates. Before the debate, McCain had a 48/46 favorability rating; that improved to 56/36 by the end. But that’s about where Obama started the evening—54/36. After an hour and a half, Obama’s favorability numbers were 80/14. As Joe Biden would say, let me repeat that: 80% of the undecided voters had favorable views of Obama and only 14% saw him negatively for a net rating of +66. Not even Bill Clinton got such a warm response in town hall formats.
Well, I really gotta run, but one more topic for disussion. Do you think these polls are anywhere close to being "right?" In particular, I'm referring to this "Bradley Affect" which I really only heard about since Obama was in the running? Do you sense that it's different today then it was then? Even tho, yes, we know some simply won't vote for a black man. Just wondering. What "if" McCain ended winning by a fairly decent margin. Wouldn't you conclude that must be the reason for the polls inaacuracies?
I think we saw the "Bradley Effect" as recently as the Democratic primaries, where Obama was leading in the polls in Mass. and Ca. on primary morning, but Hillary won both handily. So mixed feelings about race still obviously exist for some people.
BUT, at this point, I don't think it will be enough to steer the election away from Obama.
I think we saw the "Bradley Effect" as recently as the Democratic primaries, where Obama was leading in the polls in Mass. and Ca. on primary morning, but Hillary won both handily. So mixed feelings about race still obviously exist for some people.
BUT, at this point, I don't think it will be enough to steer the election away from Obama.
It is interesting that we are hearing a lot about this and about whether white people will really go into the voing booth and pull the lever from the Obama camp. I think it is a strategy to innoculate people from having that problem. After last night's debate he solidified the notion that he can be the president, and with a month to go he needs to continue to appear "presidential," thus allowing the idea of his inevitability to become a reality.
MCCain just looks . . . constipated . . . like he ate too many bananas.
I know you'll get this reference, Pizza Boy: "George likes his bananas. Then let him have them on the side!"
Last night, McCain looked like a bitter, old man. While I share the fears that when push comes to shove, some racists will not pull the lever for Obama, I do believe that McCain has turned off plenty of undecides with his responses from last night. Particularly the "that one" comment and the answers regarding the economy.
I also think that enough new Obama supporters have been registered (2:1 in some swing states) to overcome the rednecks, biggots, and white supremists who simply will not vote for any black candidate. I think the turnout of the new voters will be stronger than in previous elections.
Anyway, I thought that McCain's response on fixing Social Security was underwhelming. We know what to do and it's easy?? Are you kidding me?? If it's so easy, why hasn't anyone DONE IT???
All those houses are tough for these multi-millionaires to keep track of.
I understand that the basic question was unfair to ask him, mostly because some of the homes are investments his wife made, they have lots of assets, etc., BUT he does have to realize that it was quite possibly one of the most stupid answers ever given. How does his campaign have the nerve to refer to Obama as elitist after that answer??
I think we saw the "Bradley Effect" as recently as the Democratic primaries, where Obama was leading in the polls in Mass. and Ca. on primary morning, but Hillary won both handily. So mixed feelings about race still obviously exist for some people.
BUT, at this point, I don't think it will be enough to steer the election away from Obama.
Some people believe race could cost Obama as much as 6 points in the election, and it is the great unknown whether or not it is showing in the polls. On the positive sign for Obama, all signs points to a huge voter turnout for him, which will probably more than offset the 6 point race factor, should it happen.
I wish Plaw were here to explain it to me yet again, but basically: Obama is the favorite. To win $100 on the bet for Obama, you'd risk $450. A $100 bet on McCain (the underdog) would get you $275 profit if he were to win.
Please don't ask me to explain that. But you can read about it here and maybe understand it better than I do.
You can monitor Sportsbook's odds here, under Hot Events | Exotics: Presidential Odds
You explained it pretty good. It's exactly what you said. If you want to win $100 and bet on Obama, you'd have to wager $450. If you want to bet on McCain, for every $100 you wager, you'd get back $275.
October 8, 2008 Gallup Daily: Obama’s Lead Over McCain Expands to 11
52% share of the vote is Obama’s highest to date
PRINCETON, NJ -- The latest Gallup Poll Daily tracking report shows Barack Obama with a 52% to 41% lead over John McCain.
These results, based on Oct. 5-7 polling, are the best for Obama during the campaign, both in terms of his share of the vote and the size of his lead over McCain. (To view the complete trend since March 7, 2008, click here.)
Nearly all interviews in today's report were conducted before Tuesday night's town hall style debate in Nashville. Any movement in voter preferences as a result of this debate will be apparent in coming days.
Voter preferences seem to have stabilized for the moment, as Obama has held a double-digit lead over McCain in each of the last three individual nights of polling.
Concern about the economy seems to be playing to Obama's advantage; he overtook McCain when the financial crisis worsened in the middle of September, and his strong showing today coincides with the worst rating of the economy this year (59% of Americans describe current economic conditions as "poor"). -- Jeff Jones
Keep in mind Lou that Gallup's daily tracking poll reflects preferences of registered voters and not likely voters. So, the 11 point margin may be exaggerated.
True. It's really just a 'guide' to where the candidates stand among voters. With all signs pointing to record voter registrations by the Obama campaign, the 11 points might be underestimated. ...But 'race' is still the great unknown.
I wish Plaw were here to explain it to me yet again, but basically: Obama is the favorite. To win $100 on the bet for Obama, you'd risk $450. A $100 bet on McCain (the underdog) would get you $275 profit if he were to win.
Please don't ask me to explain that. But you can read about it here and maybe understand it better than I do.
You can monitor Sportsbook's odds here, under Hot Events | Exotics: Presidential Odds
Odds are easy (or maybe it's because I grew up in illegal gambling dens?) and you have it down.
But I don't know anyone who would risk $475 for $100 except for gambling addicts who like to lose.
About race: I think the people voting for Obama because he is half black will probably come close to canceling out the ones who don't vote for him because he is half black. Maybe because it is the first time a partially black person has a shot some people won't vote for him, but after that they might feel more comfortable with it. Personally, I don't care what color you are unless you're purple. I don't vote for purple people.
PHILADELPHIA (AP)—Sarah Palin’s next faceoff will come at center ice at an NHL arena, not at a debate.
The GOP vice presidential nominee will drop the ceremonial first puck when the Philadelphia Flyers open the regular season against the New York Rangers on Saturday. Palin, the Alaska governor and self-described “hockey mom,” will join the winner of a team promotion for the “Ultimate Hockey Mom” to drop the puck.
Last month, Palin visited a Philadelphia bar with Flyers owner Ed Snider, who has donated money to Republican presidential nominee John McCain’s campaign.
“Because of the tremendous amount of publicity she has brought to our sport, we invited the most popular hockey mom in North America to our home opener to help us get our season started,” Snider said in a team statement Wednesday. “We are very excited she has accepted our offer and we are very proud of the publicity she is generating for hockey moms and the sport of hockey.”
The team will award all hockey moms entered into the contest with a free “puck-er peach” lipstick and four tickets to a hockey game of the Flyers’ minor league affiliate, the Philadelphia Phantoms. The winner will appear on the ice with Palin for opening faceoff.
I wish Plaw were here to explain it to me yet again, but basically: Obama is the favorite. To win $100 on the bet for Obama, you'd risk $450. A $100 bet on McCain (the underdog) would get you $275 profit if he were to win.
Please don't ask me to explain that. But you can read about it here and maybe understand it better than I do.
You can monitor Sportsbook's odds here, under Hot Events | Exotics: Presidential Odds
I never understood this kind of betting. I'd love to give it a shot, not if I don't know what the hell I'm doing. Then again, I should think twice on even "fun" betting. Look how cappy I'm doing on the dead pool.
One of the first things Martin Chalfie wanted to do after learning that he won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry is endorse Barack Obama for President of the United States. That brings the total number of Nobel Prize winners in science endorsing Obama to 63.
Chalfie won the prize for his early work on using green fluorescent protein to mark cells. This is by far the largest number of Nobelists to ever endorse a candidate for President. This is by far the largest number of Nobelists to ever endorse a candidate for President.
(CNN) -- With just 26 days left until the election, Sen. John McCain's campaign is staying true to its pledge to ratchet up the attacks on Sen. Barack Obama's judgment and character.
The McCain campaign says Barack Obama is "too risky for America," in its new Web ad.
The McCain campaign calls Obama "too risky for America" in a new Web ad that focuses on his political relationship with Bill Ayers, a founding member of the radical Weather Underground.
"Barack Obama and domestic terrorist Bill Ayers. Friends. They've worked together for years. But Obama tries to hide it," the announcer says in the 90-second ad.
"But Obama's friendship with terrorist Ayers isn't the issue. The issue is Barack Obama's judgment and candor," the announcer says.
Weather Underground was involved in bombings in the early 1970s, including attacks on the Pentagon and the Capitol. Obama was a young child at the time of the bombings.
Obama and Ayers, now a university professor, met in 1995, when both worked with a nonprofit group trying to raise funds for a school improvement project and a charitable foundation. CNN's review of project records found nothing to suggest anything inappropriate in the volunteer projects in which the two men were involved. Fact check: How close are Obama and Ayers?
Quoted in The New York Times, Obama called Ayers "somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8."
Michelle Obama brushed off the latest round of attacks in an interview with CNN's Larry King on Wednesday.
"I don't know anyone in Chicago who's heavily involved in education policy who doesn't know Bill Ayers. But, again, I go back to the point that the American people aren't asking these questions," she said.
"The thing that I just encourage people is to judge Barack and judge all of these candidates based on what they do, their actions, their character, what they do in their lives, rather than what somebody did when they were 8 or 6 years old," she said.
The McCain campaign started pushing hard on the Ayers connection this past weekend when Gov. Sarah Palin accused Obama of "palling around with terrorists who would target their own country."
The Obama campaign retaliated on Monday with a 13-minute documentary Web video detailing the Arizona senator's involvement in the Keating Five scandal in the 1980s.
Cindy McCain, McCain's wife, lashed out at Obama earlier this week, telling a Tennessee newspaper that the Illinois senator has waged the "dirtiest campaign in American history."
Obama's running mate, Sen. Joe Biden put the blame on the McCain campaign Wednesday, saying the attacks on Obama are "beyond disappointing."
"Those attacks don't hurt Barack Obama or me. They hurt you," Biden told a crowd in Tampa, Florida.
"Every single false charge and baseless accusation is an attempt to get you to stop paying attention to what's going on in this country. Beyond the attacks, what is John McCain really offering?"
Biden said McCain's campaign has become "erratic" and is "relying on political stunts instead of offering real solutions."
Obama said Wednesday, "I can take four more weeks of John McCain's attacks, but America can't take four more years of John McCain's Bush policies."
Obama on Thursday is campaigning in Ohio, where he will focus on jobs and the economy. The Democratic presidential candidate is expected to continue to question McCain's suggestion that the government could buy up bad mortgages. Read more on McCain's proposal
Biden is in Missouri, where he will discuss the choice in the election on the economy.
McCain and Palin are taking their campaign to Wisconsin for a town hall meeting with voters.
Remember the guy McCain said may not have heard of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac during the debate??
How did I feel about Sen. McCain stating "You probably never heard of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac before this."
Well Senator, I actually did. I like to think of myself as a fairly intelligent person. I have a bachelor degree in Political Science from Tennessee State, so I try to keep myself up to date with current affairs. I have a Master degree in Legal Studies from Southern Illinois University, a few years in law school, and I am currently pursuing a Master in Public Administration from the University of Memphis.
In defense of the Senator from Arizona I would say he is an older guy, and may have made an underestimation of my age. Honest mistake. However, it could be because I am a young African-American male. Whatever the case may be it was somewhat condescending regardless of my age to make an assumption regarding whether I was knowledgeable about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Gibbs did exactly the perfect counter to a blusterface like Hannity, in taking his argumentation's logical paradigm and making him look like a fool.
I mean, if that same board that had Ayers and Obama also included the wife of a McCain campaign donor, and an Ambassador of the Reagan administration, using Hannity and the extreme right's "Guilt by Association" claim...
So basically, they're saying that President Ronald Reagan was a pal of terrorists.
I SO dare Freddie C. and Mignon and Appleonya and Double J to try their best to argue out of this one.
Exclusive: Obama buys half-hour of network primetime
Barack Obama has purchased a half-hour of airtime on CBS and NBC, sources confirm.
The Obama campaign will air a primetime special on Wednesday, Oct. 29, at 8 p.m. -- less than a week before the general election.
The direct purchase of such a large block of national airtime right before an election used to be more commonplace before campaigns began to focus their end game strategies exclusively on battleground states. Such a move is not without precedent in modern presidential politics, however -- Ross Perot did a similar purchase in 1992.
The special is a smart move for the Obama campaign, said Larry Sabato, a political analyst and director of the Center of Politics at the University of Virginia.
"Obama's theme is not just change but unity, so he's appealing to the whole nation rather than a handful of toss-up states," Sabato said. "He wants to win the popular vote by a good margin, which will enable him to govern."
And he's got the cash for it, said Sabato.
"This is another indication, if there needs to be any more, that Barack Obama's got more money than [available] television time to buy," said Evan Tracey, COO of the Campaign Media Analysis Group in Arlington, Va.
Whether the McCain campaign will do the same remains to be seen, although there's one big thing moving against it: Money. Unlike Obama, who rejected public financing of the presidential campaign, McCain is accepting it. That means that McCain is limited in the amount of money that it can spend and raise, and in its TV buying has been limited mostly to ads in battleground states like Pennsylvania and Florida.
"There will be no second guessing the Obama campaign on decisions involving resources," Tracey said. "He's not doing this and pulling down [ad] buys in Florida. This is not an either/or decision. They've got 25 days and unlimited amounts of money."
Neither Sabato nor Tracey could say whether the McCain campaign could buy its own time on the networks, even if they wanted to, because of the cost involved. The networks are obligated to offer the similar time and the same price to McCain. After Obama bought about $4 million of ads in the Summer Olympics telecasts including national time, McCain bought about $5 million worth in the Olympics. But now, with money and time being tight, it might be more difficult with making hard choices. The McCain camp has already pulled its ads from Michigan, once considered a key battleground state.
"This is where Obama being off public financing really boxes in McCain," Tracey said. "I don't think this is a move that the McCain campaign would be able to match."
Beyond Perot's 30-minute campaign ads in the last month of the 1992 presidential campaign, you have to reach back even further for similar instances. Sabato said that national broadcasts were not uncommon in the 1960s and early 1970s, when TV time wasn't as expensive and the current campaign financing limits weren't in place. It's also a common strategy for candidates for statewide office to patch together stations on a statewide telecast.
CBS and NBC spokespersons declined comment. Sources say the Obama camp also talked to Fox, but the network may not be able to accommodate the campaign as the time period may conflict with a potential Game 6 of the World Series.
The buy will push CBS comedy "The New Adventures of Old Christine" to 8:30 p.m. and pre-empt "Gary Unmarried." NBC typically airs the hour-long "Knight Rider" in the slot, and will likely throw in a comedy repeat at 8:30 p.m. The buy is being placed by Washington-based ad firm GMMB. Obama's ad will air on the night before the start of November sweep.
This year has seen the first time in many years that presidential campaigns have bought national broadcast TV advertisements. In the past 12 years, much of the billions of dollars in political advertising spent has gone to local TV stations in battleground states. While some money has gone to national cable channels, the thinking has always been that it would be more prudent to target battleground states' voters instead of addressing the entire nation, including states that reliably vote for one party or another.
The first instance was in August, when Obama spent $5 million and McCain spent $6 million, to advertise in NBC's coverage of the Summer Olympics from Beijing. The networks' evening newscasts have also seen campaign ads for the first time in years. Before that, the last nationally broadcast campaign ad ran in the 1996 campaign.
The Obama campaign earlier this year opted out of the public financing system, which meant that it was free to raise and spend as much as it could. It has, in states like Michigan, outspent the publicly financed McCain campaign by a margin of at least 3-to-1.
It's not unprecedented for a candidate to buy longform broadcast network time, though it hasn't happened in a while. In October 1992, Perot drew audiences of 16.5 million and 10.5 million for 30-minute lectures/campaign ad aimed at voters. But in Perot's second run in 1996, the candidate was rebuffed by the Big Four networks in an attempt to sell airtime. The FCC backed the networks in denying Perot airtime, saying that they acted legally in refusing.
Earlier this year, the Hillary Clinton campaign bought time on the Hallmark Channel, a nearly fully distributed cable channel, for a town-hall meeting before Super Tuesday.
Obama has run many 30-second spots across the country. One ad was considered particularly effective, a two-minute spot where Obama directly faced the camera and spoke to viewers about their economic hardships.
While broadcast networks in the past have given presidential candidates free time for campaign statements in the final days before the election, those were done during news programs -- outside the expensive primetime hours.
From the start, Obama has been more focused on primetime than any other presidential candidate. Defying conventional wisdom to have political ads clustered around local news, during the primary season the Obama campaign poured 40% of its TV cash in primetime, compared with about 18% for Clinton.
Obama up 8 in West Virginia? I find it hard to believe, but that's what a new poll shows:
West Virginia
Interview dates: October 4-8, 2008
Sample size: 600 likely voters
Margin of error: ± 4 percentage points, 95% of the time
Question wording and responses:
If the general election were being held today between John McCain for president and Sarah Palin for vice president, the Republicans, and Barack Obama for president and Joe Biden for vice president, the Democrats, for whom would you vote - McCain and Palin, Obama and Biden (names rotated), or someone else?
Obama up 8 in West Virginia? I find it hard to believe, but that's what a new poll shows:
West Virginia
Interview dates: October 4-8, 2008
Sample size: 600 likely voters
Margin of error: ± 4 percentage points, 95% of the time
Question wording and responses:
If the general election were being held today between John McCain for president and Sarah Palin for vice president, the Republicans, and Barack Obama for president and Joe Biden for vice president, the Democrats, for whom would you vote - McCain and Palin, Obama and Biden (names rotated), or someone else?
Obama 50% McCain 42%
Just read that 6 minutes ago, and I am shocked.
And since Likely Voters matter more in polling than Registered Voters....McCain is in deep dodo. Look at this chart, spelling out how Obama has (apparently) closed the gap in the very red Bush state of West Virginia from 2000 and 2004:
I think we saw the "Bradley Effect" as recently as the Democratic primaries, where Obama was leading in the polls in Mass. and Ca. on primary morning, but Hillary won both handily. So mixed feelings about race still obviously exist for some people.
BUT, at this point, I don't think it will be enough to steer the election away from Obama.
It is interesting that we are hearing a lot about this and about whether white people will really go into the voing booth and pull the lever from the Obama camp. I think it is a strategy to innoculate people from having that problem. After last night's debate he solidified the notion that he can be the president, and with a month to go he needs to continue to appear "presidential," thus allowing the idea of his inevitability to become a reality.
I think Obama will not suffer from as much of a Bradley effect as Bradley did..
The economy is so bad people who might not have voted for him are considering it.
That being said though there are quite a few people who wouldn't vote for Obama no matter what. Anger and low information is a dangerous combination.
“All of the things they said about Barack Obama in the TV, on the TV, at their rallies, and now on YouTube … John McCain could not bring himself to look Barack Obama in the eye and say the same things to him. In my neighborhood, when you’ve got something to say to a guy, you look him in the eye and you say it to him.” - Joe Biden, at a rally this morning.
Gee, thanks for all the updates RR. I just read about the Keating letter. Very interesting.
I am surprised at the VA polls JL posted, and although things are definitely looking up for Obama and his supporters, I still am cautiously optimistic. Then again, damn, he is doing well.
I kind of think should McCain stay on this "destroy" mission of his (and sounds like he will), that in the long run it will make him look worse and worse. IMHO it is "mostly" his base that's eating it up. We'll see. As a matter of fact, I'm looking forward to the polls within the next few day, because I suspect another small bounce for BHO. Maybe wishful thinking, but I kind of think that will be the case.
As far as this 30 minute primetime ad, I just am reading about that as well. Do we know exactly what that half hour will consist of? I mean, I'm sure it'll be to promote his campaign, but what will they cover in a half hour?
As far as this 30 minute primetime ad, I just am reading about that as well. Do we know exactly what that half hour will consist of? I mean, I'm sure it'll be to promote his campaign, but what will they cover in a half hour?
TIS
Probably be 30 minutes highlighting, to use propaganda language, "the issues that are facing us at this most critical time in our history," the campaign would probably give their talking points in solving the following domestic and foreign policy problems like:
(1) Trying to stabilize and rebound in our current stalled economy, i.e. with that "tax cut for 95% of the Working Class" (which is pure rhetoric, but accuracy/reality are no place in propaganda, but only to highlight the narrative that a campaign wants to paint.) (2) Stop American jobs from outsourcing overseas (3) 30-40+ million Americans without healthcare (4) The resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan/Pakistan. (5) The emergence of a more powerful, and possibly nuclear, Iran (6) Iraq Iraq Iraq, and us getting the fuck out of there in 2010. (7) Russia too perhaps?
Now all this I assume won't be presented as simply a speech. IF anything, I assume it will be done in a "conversationalist" fashion, with Obama talking to the viewers out there in Prime Time America, much like that 2 minute ad of his on the economy done some time ago.
Also assume that the campaign will try to make the case that Obama represents an "America United for Change," and have people from various backgrounds across the country, blue and red states, to give testimony of their support for the candidate. From Iraq/Afghanistan Veterans to unemployed blue collar Workers to gun-owning Sportsmen to financially struggling male Southerners/Westerners to Women (At-Home Suburban Moms) to minorities (black, Latino, Asian, White, etc.) to religious piety people (Evangelicals? Catholics? Jews?), Rural Farmers and Urban Dwellers, disgruntled Republicans/Conservatives (so-called "Obamacons") and so forth.
Don't expect to see people that would/may offend other interests, like Muslim-Americans (may taint Obama further as a "foreign terrorist spy") to Gays (don't wanna offend Virgina, North Carolina, Indiana, etc.) and so on.
I would also expect for the campaign to highlight in personalizing the candidate in contrast with his opponent: Young, Dynamic, Charismatic, Sexy* and most of all NEW. This will be done by several ways, but assuredly they'll deploy one of the oldest prop image cliches in politics....the family.
Worked for Kennedy, didn't it? Plus notice how JFK had several photo-ops of playing football, in contrast with his predecessor Eisenhower's legendary love for golf. And make a point that Obama has been shown a few times playing BASKETBALL**, which like football, is synomonous with energy and stamina and durability.
I might be right or wrong, but don't be shocked if alot of that stuff I've just mentioned do appear in that 30 minute commercial.
Perhaps the Obama campaign is hoping that this would be the club that would smash the skull of the McCain campaign once and for all, blood and brains all over the wall.
*=Don't look at me. Betty White on Craig Ferguson's late night program said she wanted to jump him and give him some "experience." Yuck! **=About time we had a President who played an American-invented sport.
All good suggestions RR. I can imagine he'll absolutely cover the economy, since that has to be the number one issue. Boy, talk about paying a pretty price or that half hour. He's at a definite advantage there. I am curious what his campaign took for September.
Listening to NPR just this afternoon (I have a long drive to/from work), the were talking to people from a swing state. I can't remember which one, FLA or OH I think. Anyway, the guy on the phone said that there were tons of BHO commercials. Me, not living in a swing state, see them, but I can't say I've felt bombarded with them. I can imagine how FL/MI/OH/CO/PA and all the other swing states must feel.
All good suggestions RR. I can imagine he'll absolutely cover the economy, since that has to be the number one issue. Boy, talk about paying a pretty price or that half hour. He's at a definite advantage there. I am curious what his campaign took for September.
Someone at a blog wrote this, speculating the strategy:
"Obama has alot of money; McCain does not. This is how he gets him to spend it all. Either McCain spends it and his slime commercial money dries up OR he allows Obama to have 30 minutes with minimal response. This is a strategy move. Obama's campaign is unconventional to say the least."
Considering how Obama is the first American presidential candidate in history to have over a million campaign donors, and how before it was retracted, the campaign flied the idea that the number had grown to 4 million!
That's right. I can imagine McCain will want his half hour too.
And, not only that, with Obama doing well in swing states, it likely will force McCain to spend money in states (I think Indiana is one) that he didn't think he'd have to spend money on. Who would have thought it'd be so close in some of these states.
We won't know til it's over, but I am very curious to see what voter turnout is, considering how man people O had on the ground.
Anyway TIS, I realized something else after posting my speculation on that 30 minute commercial.
Every candidate's campaign pushes the myth of the politician, their life narrative, which has a mixture of truth, half-truths, and outright bullshit.
For instance, Bob Dole/George H.W. Bush/JFK/McCain/Kerry were all war heroes who suffered with valor for their nation.
Eisenhower/Grant/Washington/Jackson/Zach Taylor were all Victorious War Generals.
Clinton/Nixon/Lincoln were both from impoverished homes, who rose to become President, the American Dream in real life. You get the picture.
With Obama, its that he was born to a white mother and a black father, who left that family permanently shortly after his birth. Growing up in places around the world from Kansas(her origin) to Hawaii (where he was born) to Indonesia, he did go to Ivy League elite schools in Columbia and Harvard, where he was elected the first black President of the school's prestigious Law Review.
He had the most prestigious options available to him after law school, including clerking in the U.S. Supreme Court, but he decided instead to go to Chicago to work as a community activist for the struggling low-income/working class residents.
But the propaganda beginnings of his "Change" campaign slogan began in 2004 at the DNC, where in his keynote address, he said: "There is not a liberal America and a conservative America; there's the United States of America." In fact, he announced his presidential campaign in front of the Old State Capitol in Springfield, Illinois, the site where Abraham Lincoln in 1858 gave his "House Divided" speech.
Symbolism is forever vital in politics. Notice how his "A More Perfect Union" speech on race (in response to the Jeremiah Wright scandal earlier this spring) was given at the Constitutional Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, just a stone's throw away from Independence Hall (where of course the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution were both signed.)
But more than anything else, that ad may play up the narrative of his bi-racial family, how he's got "...relatives that look like Bernie Mac and Margaret Thatcher,", his white grandfather who fought in General Patton's Army during World War 2, his Asian Buddhist half-sister, his (supposed) ironic distant relations to Jefferson Davis, the President of the rebellious southern Confederate States of America, you get the picture.
Now this aint a love letter or a sloppy kiss. I'm just speculating on the political image crafted so far by the campaign, how much of all those factors will be pounded possibly, if they go that far on the topic, in the 30 minute commercial.
A couple of weeks ago, I believe it was MSNBC that ran McCain's biography one night and Obama's the other. They both have completely different yet interesting backgrounds. Needless to say, I was more familiar with McCain's, as most are. It would be good for Obama to add that personal story in the half hour. With all the spin implying he's scary or a terrorist or whatever, people can see a personal side of his story.
Btw, where do you get those poll results? CNN use to have their Daily poll at the bottom of their political page. I'd check it daily. Ever since Obama took a decent lead, they took it down.
Btw, where do you get those poll results? CNN use to have their Daily poll at the bottom of their political page. I'd check it daily. Ever since Obama took a decent lead, they took it down.
TIS
There are many sites, but this site lists just about every poll there is. It also updates them as they are released, and has a link to the source.
Btw, where do you get those poll results? CNN use to have their Daily poll at the bottom of their political page. I'd check it daily. Ever since Obama took a decent lead, they took it down.
TIS
There are many sites, but this site lists just about every poll there is. It also updates them as they are released, and has a link to the source.
I think when someone starts pulling too far ahead the media does its best to keep it competitive. No one wants a story about how someone is running away with it.
McCain faces conservative backlash over mortgage plan
By Alexander Mooney CNN
(CNN) -- John McCain is facing a fresh round of anger from members of his own party deeply opposed to the Arizona senator's proposal for the federal government to purchase troubled mortgage loans.
The pointed backlash from several economic conservatives -- many of whom already distrust McCain's commitment to free-market principles -- couldn't come at a worse time for the Republican presidential nominee less than four weeks before Election Day as he stares at a significant deficit in national and state polls.
But at a time when McCain can't afford to worry about a lack of support from his party's base, several conservatives are openly criticizing the plan as a flagrant reward for reckless behavior among lenders.
In a sharply worded editorial on its Web site Thursday, the editors of The National Review -- an influential bastion of conservative thought -- derided the plan as "creating a level of moral hazard that is unacceptable" and called it a "gift to lenders who abandoned any sense of prudence during the boom years." VideoWatch the candidates' plans get the 'no bull' test »
Prominent conservative blogger Michelle Malkin went one step further, calling the plan "rotten" and declaring on her blog, "We're Screwed '08."
Matt Lewis, a contributing writer for the conservative Web site Townhall.com, told CNN the plan only further riles conservatives upset with McCain's backing of the massive government bailout plan passed last week.
"Fundamentally, the problem is John McCain accepts a lot of liberal notions, unfortunately. There is somewhat of a populist streak," he said. "Most conservatives really did not like the bailout to begin with, and this was really kind of picking at the scab."
It's not just the plan conservatives are unhappy with, but how it was first unveiled as well -- out of the blue at Tuesday's town-hall debate during which Republicans were instead hoping McCain would present a spirited attack on what they view as Obama's overly liberal positions.
"Here we are watching the debate hoping this is a good format for John McCain to excel at, and the first thing he does is spring this on us," Lewis said. "This is not a good way to win friends and influence people."
"He spent the entire debate assailing massive government spending -- while his featured proposal of the right was to heap on more massive government spending to pursue home ownership retention at all costs," Malkin said.
It's a proposal that is fundamentally at odds with the conservative principle of individual responsibility, and is the latest in a string of public spats conservatives have had over the years and in this election with their party's standard bearer.
But for McCain, the move is another gamble for a candidate in need of a game-changer and one that lends credence to the self-proclaimed maverick's repeated claim that he's unafraid of bucking his own party.
Under the plan, the government would buy up bad mortgage loans, converting them into low-interest, FHA-insured loans. To qualify, homeowners would have to be delinquent in their payments or be likely to fall behind in the near future.
They also would have to live in the home in question -- no investment properties would be eligible. They would need to have demonstrated their creditworthiness when they purchased the property by making a substantial down payment and by providing documentation of their income and other assets.
McCain economic adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin said on a conference call Wednesday that the McCain plan could start quickly because the authority was granted by last week's passage of the $700 billion economic bailout bill. The plan could also fall under the umbrella of the Hope for Homeowners program authorized by the housing rescue bill passed in July and the government takeover of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
But the plan, which the McCain campaign appeared to be finalizing even after the candidate announced it, significantly departs from the Arizona senator's original proposal and has left many conservatives scratching their heads:
"The original plan relied on lenders taking the hit," Holtz-Eakin said on the conference call. "This bypasses that step."
Instead, the estimated $300 billion tab essentially gets transferred to taxpayers, among the funding already provided by the bailout bill -- a proposal that may rile not only fiscal conservatives, but also struggling homeowners who have worked to keep up their mortgage payments.
"The guy who works two jobs and struggles to actually pay his mortgage is penalized. He would be better off under this plan to just quit paying his mortgage," Lewis said. "And this fundamentally goes against a lot of conservative principles and individual responsibility."
Barack Obama is counting on McCain's proposal not playing well with a broad swath of middle-class voters. Obama said at a rally Thursday morning it guarantees "the taxpayers would lose," and banks and lenders would be rewarded.
But McCain is hoping the plan will resonate with moderate and undecided voters, many of whom viewed the bailout as a giveaway to Wall Street CEOs. This plan, the McCain campaign argues, better steers the money to Main Street, where struggling homeowners need immediate relief.
"John McCain's plan represents absolutely no new expense to the taxpayer, but simply refocuses priorities to more directly assist the homeowners who are hurting instead of greed on Wall Street," said Tucker Bounds, a spokesman for the McCain campaign.
But it remains to be seen if the Arizona senator's latest roll of the dice will pay off.
"Liberals who might actually be inclined to support a welfare check such as this are already going to vote for Barack Obama, and conservatives, who view this as irresponsible and even apostasy, are turned off by it," Lewis said. "This is both bad policy and bad politics."
High school grades: Foreign Language - D Physical Sciences - C Social Studies - C Math - C English - B Biological Sciences - B
------------------------------
I wouldn't put much stock in grades. Shit, Kerry and Bush both had the same grade-range at Yale, and most of us have the perception that we've kicked buckets smarter than Dubya, right?
I don't know, Ronnie. Getting Cs in college is a little different. With grades like that in high school, what kind of college could one expect to get into in the first place?
But I'm sure some of the conservatives just don't know what the fuss is all about. I mean, who needs a President with all that fancy book learnin', right?
The National Journal's Political Insiders Poll finds that 80% of Republicans believe there's a high likelihood that Sen. Barack Obama will win the presidential election.
In addition, 67% of Republicans said Obama did more to help himself in the second presidential debate than did Sen. John McCain.
Honestly, though, I think it's completely irrelevant to post what Sarah Palin's high school grades were. She shouldn't be judged on who she was at 17. Nobody should be. She's obviously WAY smarter than those grades indicate. She may try to dumb herself down with her "hockey mom" and "Joe Six Pack" references (and my least favorite-"you betcha") to try and relate to the "average dumb guy", but the truth is that she's WAY WAY smarter than that.
Honestly, though, I think it's completely irrelevant to post what Sarah Palin's high school grades were. She shouldn't be judged on who she was at 17. Nobody should be. She's obviously WAY smarter than those grades indicate. She may try to dumb herself down with her "hockey mom" and "Joe Six Pack" references (and my least favorite-"you betcha") to try and relate to the "average dumb guy", but the truth is that she's WAY WAY smarter than that.
Let me be the latest conservative/libertarian/whatever to leap onto the Barack Obama bandwagon. It’s a good thing my dear old mum and pup are no longer alive. They’d cut off my allowance.
Or would they? But let’s get that part out of the way. The only reason my vote would be of any interest to anyone is that my last name happens to be Buckley—a name I inherited. So in the event anyone notices or cares, the headline will be: “William F. Buckley’s Son Says He Is Pro-Obama.” I know, I know: It lacks the throw-weight of “Ron Reagan Jr. to Address Democratic Convention,” but it’ll have to do.
I am—drum roll, please, cue trumpets—making this announcement in the cyberpages of The Daily Beast (what joy to be writing for a publication so named!) rather than in the pages of National Review, where I write the back-page column. For a reason: My colleague, the superb and very dishy Kathleen Parker, recently wrote in National Review Online a column stating what John Cleese as Basil Fawlty would call “the bleeding obvious”: namely, that Sarah Palin is an embarrassment, and a dangerous one at that. She’s not exactly alone. New York Times columnist David Brooks, who began his career at NR, just called Governor Palin “a cancer on the Republican Party.”
As for Kathleen, she has to date received 12,000 (quite literally) foam-at-the-mouth hate-emails. One correspondent, if that’s quite the right word, suggested that Kathleen’s mother should have aborted her and tossed the fetus into a Dumpster. There’s Socratic dialogue for you. Dear Pup once said to me sighfully after a right-winger who fancied himself a WFB protégé had said something transcendently and provocatively cretinous, “You know, I’ve spent my entire life time separating the Right from the kooks.” Well, the dear man did his best. At any rate, I don’t have the kidney at the moment for 12,000 emails saying how good it is he’s no longer alive to see his Judas of a son endorse for the presidency a covert Muslim who pals around with the Weather Underground. So, you’re reading it here first.
As to the particulars, assuming anyone gives a fig, here goes:
I have known John McCain personally since 1982. I wrote a well-received speech for him. Earlier this year, I wrote in The New York Times—I’m beginning to sound like Paul Krugman, who cannot begin a column without saying, “As I warned the world in my last column...”—a highly favorable Op-Ed about McCain, taking Rush Limbaugh and the others in the Right Wing Sanhedrin to task for going after McCain for being insufficiently conservative. I don’t—still—doubt that McCain’s instincts remain fundamentally conservative. But the problem is otherwise.
McCain rose to power on his personality and biography. He was authentic. He spoke truth to power. He told the media they were “jerks” (a sure sign of authenticity, to say nothing of good taste; we are jerks). He was real. He was unconventional. He embraced former anti-war leaders. He brought resolution to the awful missing-POW business. He brought about normalization with Vietnam—his former torturers! Yes, he erred in accepting plane rides and vacations from Charles Keating, but then, having been cleared on technicalities, groveled in apology before the nation. He told me across a lunch table, “The Keating business was much worse than my five and a half years in Hanoi, because I at least walked away from that with my honor.” Your heart went out to the guy. I thought at the time, God, this guy should be president someday.
A year ago, when everyone, including the man I’m about to endorse, was caterwauling to get out of Iraq on the next available flight, John McCain, practically alone, said no, no—bad move. Surge. It seemed a suicidal position to take, an act of political bravery of the kind you don’t see a whole lot of anymore.
But that was—sigh—then. John McCain has changed. He said, famously, apropos the Republican debacle post-1994, “We came to Washington to change it, and Washington changed us.” This campaign has changed John McCain. It has made him inauthentic. A once-first class temperament has become irascible and snarly; his positions change, and lack coherence; he makes unrealistic promises, such as balancing the federal budget “by the end of my first term.” Who, really, believes that? Then there was the self-dramatizing and feckless suspension of his campaign over the financial crisis. His ninth-inning attack ads are mean-spirited and pointless. And finally, not to belabor it, there was the Palin nomination. What on earth can he have been thinking?
All this is genuinely saddening, and for the country is perhaps even tragic, for America ought, really, to be governed by men like John McCain—who have spent their entire lives in its service, even willing to give the last full measure of their devotion to it. If he goes out losing ugly, it will be beyond tragic, graffiti on a marble bust.
As for Senator Obama: He has exhibited throughout a “first-class temperament,” pace Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.’s famous comment about FDR. As for his intellect, well, he’s a Harvard man, though that’s sure as heck no guarantee of anything, these days. Vietnam was brought to you by Harvard and (one or two) Yale men. As for our current adventure in Mesopotamia, consider this lustrous alumni roster. Bush 43: Yale. Rumsfeld: Princeton. Paul Bremer: Yale and Harvard. What do they all have in common? Andover! The best and the brightest.
I’ve read Obama’s books, and they are first-rate. He is that rara avis, the politician who writes his own books. Imagine. He is also a lefty. I am not. I am a small-government conservative who clings tenaciously and old-fashionedly to the idea that one ought to have balanced budgets. On abortion, gay marriage, et al, I’m libertarian. I believe with my sage and epigrammatic friend P.J. O’Rourke that a government big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take it all away.
But having a first-class temperament and a first-class intellect, President Obama will (I pray, secularly) surely understand that traditional left-politics aren’t going to get us out of this pit we’ve dug for ourselves. If he raises taxes and throws up tariff walls and opens the coffers of the DNC to bribe-money from the special interest groups against whom he has (somewhat disingenuously) railed during the campaign trail, then he will almost certainly reap a whirlwind that will make Katrina look like a balmy summer zephyr.
Obama has in him—I think, despite his sometimes airy-fairy “We are the people we have been waiting for” silly rhetoric—the potential to be a good, perhaps even great leader. He is, it seems clear enough, what the historical moment seems to be calling for.
So, I wish him all the best. We are all in this together. Necessity is the mother of bipartisanship. And so, for the first time in my life, I’ll be pulling the Democratic lever in November. As the saying goes, God save the United States of America.
TROY — Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's last name is spelled "Osama" on hundreds of absentee ballots mailed out this week to voters in Rensselaer County. The misspelling, which elections officials on both sides of the aisle insist was simply a typo, is causing embarrassment for the county.
''No question this is an honest mistake innocently done,'' said Edward McDonough, the Democratic commissioner. ''We catch almost everything.''
''This was a typo,'' said Republican Commissioner Larry Bugbee. ''We have three different staff members who proof these things and somehow the typo got by us.''
Officials say the flawed ballots were sent to approximately 300 voters. On row 1A Barack Obama's name is spelled Barack Osama.
Is it a Freudian slip, intentional act or a mistake? Voters are sure to have opinions, and one pol pointed out that the letters 's' and 'b' are not exactly keyboard neighbors.
But even the county Democratic election commissioner is apologizing for what he calls a terrible mistake.
McDonough said the absentee ballots went out to voters in Brunswick, Nassau, Sand Lake, Schaghticoke and Schodack with the error.
So far three people have called to point it out, he said. Those people will get new ballots sent to them.
One Sand Lake resident who caught the misspelling, and who asked to remain anonymous, was skeptical.
''It's a little suspicious and at least grossly incompetent,'' the voter said. "If I crossed out the name and wrote in the right spelling my ballot would be invalid."
''No question this is an honest mistake innocently done,'' said Edward McDonough, the Democratic commissioner. ''We catch almost everything.''
''This was a typo,'' said Republican Commissioner Larry Bugbee. ''We have three different staff members who proof these things and somehow the typo got by us.''
I must be too cynical; I don't believe this was a simple mistake.
A man in the audience stood up and told McCain he's "scared" of an Obama presidency and who he'd select for the Supreme Court.
"I have to tell you. Sen. Obama is a decent person and a person you don't have to be scared of as president of the United States," McCain said as the crowd booed and shouted "Come on, John!"
"If I didn't think I'd be a heck of a lot better, I wouldn't be running for president of the united states."
You know, McCain does the right thing in saying all this, and those people, HIS people, at the rallies boo him for it.
Last week we told you about several Barack Obama signs being stolen from people's front lawns but what happened to a family in Irondequoit late last night is a whole lot worse. They are the only black family on the street and their Obama sign was burned.
“I’m not sure what the definition of a hate crime is but it certainly felt like one.”
The evidence is on John's front lawn (not his real name). It's the burned metal frame of what was his Barack Obama sign. It was set on fire sometime in the middle of the night and for John, it brought back memories of attacks against African-Americans.
“They would terrorize good God-fearing Americans, usually black, by burning items - usually a cross on their lawns. I just see this as an act of domestic terrorism or something very similar to what the KKK used to do.”
The street is not a very busy street and the house is tucked away here in the neighborhood. So whoever did this had to know that this Obama sign was at this particular house.”
Over the last several weeks dozens of Obama signs have been stolen in Irondequoit, Brighton and the city. This is the first instance of a sign getting burned.
CNN Political Commentator David Gergen says he's worried about what might happen before the election. “There is this free floating sort of whipping around of anger that could lead to some violence. I think we're not far from that.”
John says the burning of his political sign got his attention. “It made me feel as though an act of domestic terrorism has been delivered to my little part of the world, my very own property.”
Irondequoit Police say they're going to investigate, although it's very tough to solve these crimes.
The local chapter of the ACLU said, in their opinion, this was a hate crime.
I just saw a video replay of an elderly woman at a McCain rally who stated to McCain that Obama was an Arab. Thank God McCainhad the decency to tell her that Obama was not and thathe was a decent person.
But it makes me wonder just how stupid people can be. I don't know of what ethnicity the elederly woman was. But I wonder, since I'm Italian, what her reaction to my ethnicity would be if I ran for President.
I just saw a video replay of an elderly woman at a McCain rally who stated to McCain that Obama was an Arab. Thank God McCainhad the decency to tell her that Obama was not and thathe was a decent person.
But it makes me wonder just how stupid people can be. I don't know of what ethnicity the elederly woman was. But I wonder, since I'm Italian, what her reaction to my ethnicity would be if I ran for President.
I'm just getting home and just saw the same clip. Yesterday he was talking to some other people, fueling the hate. I am so glad he said something, but man what angry people he's attracting. Earlier, the audience booed him when he said something.
I have a lot to catch up on today, but wanted to post this comment from the head Prosecutor in the Ayers case, defending Obama.
As the lead federal prosecutor of the Weathermen in the 1970s (I was then chief of the criminal division in the Eastern District of Michigan and took over the Weathermen prosecution in 1972), I am amazed and outraged that Senator Barack Obama is being linked to William Ayers’s terrorist activities 40 years ago when Mr. Obama was, as he has noted, just a child.
Although I dearly wanted to obtain convictions against all the Weathermen, including Bill Ayers, I am very pleased to learn that he has become a responsible citizen.
Because Senator Obama recently served on a board of a charitable organization with Mr. Ayers cannot possibly link the senator to acts perpetrated by Mr. Ayers so many years ago.
I do take issue with the statement in your news article that the Weathermen indictment was dismissed because of “prosecutorial misconduct.” It was dismissed because of illegal activities, including wiretaps, break-ins and mail interceptions, initiated by John N. Mitchell, attorney general at that time, and W. Mark Felt, an F.B.I. assistant director.
Cynical, SC?? Not at all. That is either a typo of glaring proportions or the proofreaders all overlooked it for the fact that they think "all those names sound alike," if you know what I mean.
I'm just getting home and just saw the same clip. Yesterday he was talking to some other people, fueling the hate. I am so glad he said something, but man what angry people he's attracting.
I also just saw a clip of people in PA entering a McCain rally who actually said (several of them) that Obama was a terrorist and a Muslim.
What is wrong with people? Sounds like a naive question, but it never gets answered. Again, how stupid can these people be?
Boy this keeps getting worse and worse for McCain. It seems it was decided Palin did abuse her power in the Troopergate story. Not only that I read Obama has a 10 point lead in one poll anyway. Greatfor the Dems though.
TIS
"Gov. Palin knowingly permitted a situation to continue where impermissible pressure was placed on several subordinates in order to advance a personal agenda," the report states.
Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan's refusal to fire State Trooper Mike Wooten from the state police force was "likely a contributing factor" to Monegan's July dismissal, but Palin had the authority as governor to fire him, the report by former Anchorage prosecutor Stephen Branchflower states.
Republican Strategist, McCain supporter, and former Campaign Manager for Ronald Reagan, Ed Rollins, told Anderson Cooper on CNN tonight that the McCain campaign "is out of control". He said sometime during the summer McCain "changed", and he doesn't know what happened to him. The old John McCain would never allow what is currently going on in his campaign. He also told Anderson Cooper Wednesday night that the race is over, and Obama is going to win by a landslide.
Republican Strategist Ed Rollins told Anderson Cooper on CNN tonight that the McCain campaign "is out of control". He said sometime during the summer McCain "changed", and he doesn't know what happened to him. The old John McCain would never allow what is currently going on in his campaign.
I saw that bit, and he hit the nail right on the head.
Really, Mccain has gone from the admired McCain that I campaigned for in 2000, to that of a living and breathing Bush Sequel, which the liberals actually may have pegged correctly.
Your campaign is in trouble when you try to tell your own rally crowds to calm down with the "Terrorist/Arab" ignorant shit at your opponent, and they BOO you.
From a retired Navy Admiral (who spoke at this year's DNC) to a Doctor who did his piece in front of the birthplace of the Republican Party, to a former Reagan advisor, there are many disgruntled Republicans/Conservatives out there....like me....of the last eight years with the bullshit.
Cynical, SC?? Not at all. That is either a typo of glaring proportions or the proofreaders all overlooked it for the fact that they think "all those names sound alike," if you know what I mean.
They corrected the typo...Ballots were sent out reading Saddam Hussein Obama.
Boy this keeps getting worse and worse for McCain. It seems it was decided Palin did abuse her power in the Troopergate story. Not only that I read Obama has a 10 point lead in one poll anyway. Greatfor the Dems though.
This is a blow to Palin's credibility and image. She denounces old boy politics and croneyism, but these findings suggest that she's a croney. It's disturbing that she allowed her husband such intimate access to the governor's office to do this.
This campaign has turned very ugly over the past week. While I wouldn't blame it all on Palin's "terrorist" comment, it does have something to do with it. I understand that most of the McCain supporters are non-violent and passionately support their choice, which I respect their right to do so. And Palin's comment was typical of the Karl Rove inspired strategy: when you can't win on the issues, do anything else to distract the voters.
But Palin's comment, which she had to know would do, did trigger some whack-jobs to take that as the cue to spew their hate and stupidity. For example, the idiot at a rally yesterday stating that she felt Obama was an Arab. The shouts of "terrorist" at McCain rallies. The fact that McCain has to tell people to calm down is a sad reflection of how low his campaign has gone.
There are plenty of others out there, probably minus the shotgun, who are saying and/or thinking the same thing. I hope that there is extra security around Obama, particuarly now and in the days after the election (no matter the outcome).
Yss, I read that article Goombah. Wow!! I agree this is becoming so hateful. Let's face it, having a nominee who is half black is drawing this type of people to the forefront, and they need little encouragement to go off. And, while you can't control these kinds of things, you can try to tone them down, which finally McCain did. Today I heard Obama thank him.
While I am all for freedom of speech and everybody having their say, for and against, I really really don't want to see anybody on either side feel or be threatened. This is the election of a lifetime, and I am glad to be a part of this history, no matter how it turns out. But, I have to admit, I do worry about Obama (since the hate seems directed at him), especially when I see these kinds of people. They may be few, but all it takes is one crazy like this. (God, at 75 wouldn't you think life's lessons alone would tone down his anger?)
But I wonder, since I'm Italian, what her reaction to my ethnicity would be if I ran for President.
The bottom line is, we're about to vote in a black president and a Catholic vice-president. That's a GIANT step (I know, JFK was Catholic, but still).
If that's possible, why not an Italian president or a Jewish president or a Latino president, or, gasp, even a president of Middle Eastern descent?
This country is no longer in the control of the WASP descendants of the slave traders who made life miserable for most of our forefathers. It's a great time to be an American.
Oh, Olivant, in direct response to your question: Fuck that old bat. Who gives a shit what her opinion of Italians is? I know I don't, and I'm as proud of my Italian background as one can be.
Cynical, SC?? Not at all. That is either a typo of glaring proportions or the proofreaders all overlooked it for the fact that they think "all those names sound alike," if you know what I mean.
They corrected the typo...Ballots were sent out reading Saddam Hussein Obama.
I heard they were almost sent out reading Saddam Hussein Osama bin Laden.
ANCHORAGE, Alaska (CNN) -- Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin denied Saturday that she had abused her power as Alaska's governor, a conclusion reached by a state investigator in a report released the day before.
"If you read the report, you will see that there was nothing unlawful," Palin said as she emerged from her hotel in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Palin violated state ethics law by trying to get her former brother-in-law fired from the state police, a state investigator's report for the bipartisan Legislative Council concluded Friday.
"Gov. Palin knowingly permitted a situation to continue where impermissible pressure was placed on several subordinates in order to advance a personal agenda," the report states.
Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan's refusal to fire State Trooper Mike Wooten from the state police force was "likely a contributing factor" to Monegan's July dismissal, but Palin had the authority as governor to fire him, the report by former Anchorage prosecutor Stephen Branchflower states.
The investigator's report states Palin's efforts to get Wooten fired broke a state ethics law that bars public officials from pursuing personal interest through official action. VideoWatch what led to investigation »
The lawyers representing Palin and her husband, Todd Palin, issued a three-page attack on the investigative report, including the contention that Ethics Act violations can only involve financial motives and financial "potential gain, or the avoidance of a potential loss."
"Here, there is no accusation, no finding and no facts that money or financial gain to the governor was involved in the decision to replace Monegan," the lawyers said.
Any abuse of power, they said, was on the part of the Legislative Council members, not the Palins.
"Sen. French and Sen. Green may have abused their government power by using public money to pursue a personal vendetta against the governor..."
"Put bluntly, Branchflower completely misapplied the Ethics Act and has instead sought to create a headline to smear the governor," the lawyers wrote.
Monegan has said he was fired in July after refusing pressure to sack Wooten, who had gone through an acrimonious divorce and custody battle with Palin's sister. View a timeline of the investigation »
Monegan said he felt vindicated by the findings.
"I believed and had the opinion that I was terminated because I did not fire Wooten," he told CNN. "Now these findings say that that's what happened, so I feel relieved."
Palinand her husband have consistently denied wrongdoing, describing Wooten as a "rogue trooper" who had threatened their family -- allegations Branchflower discounted.
"I conclude that such claims of fear were not bona fide and were offered to provide cover for the Palins' real motivation: to get Trooper Wooten fired for personal family reasons," Branchflower wrote.
The Branchflower report states Todd Palin used his wife's office and its resources to press for Wooten's removal, and the governor "failed to act" to stop it. But because Todd Palin is not a state employee, the report makes no finding regarding his conduct.
The bipartisan Legislative Council, which commissioned the investigation after Monegan was fired, unanimously adopted the 263-page public report after a marathon executive session Friday.
About 1,000 more pages of documents compiled during the inquiry will remain confidential because they involve private personnel matters, according to the council's chairman, state Sen. Kim Elton.
"I believe that these findings may help people come to a conclusion on how they should vote" in the presidential election, Elton said.
McCain-Palin campaign spokeswoman Meg Stapleton said Palin would cooperate with the Personnel Board investigation. The Palins' lawyer has said an investigator named by that board wants to question them in late October.
Stapleton called the investigation "a partisan-led inquiry" run by supporters of Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, but hailed its finding that Monegan's firing broke no law.
"Gov. Palin was cleared of the allegation of an improper firing, which is what this investigation was approved to look into," she said.
McCain spokeswoman Stapleton said the Legislature exceeded its mandate in finding an ethics violation. "Lacking evidence to support the original Monegan allegation, the Legislative Council seriously overreached."
Rep. John Coghill, a Republican who criticized the handling of the investigation, said it was "well-done professionally."
He said Palin "bumped right against the edges" of the state's ethics laws but that he would give "the benefit of the doubt to the governor, though, at this point."
Palin originally agreed to cooperate with the Legislative Council inquiry, and disclosed in August that her advisers had contacted Department of Public Safety officials nearly two dozen times regarding her ex-brother-in-law.
But once she became Sen. John McCain's running mate, her advisers began painting the investigation as a weapon of Democratic partisans.
Ahead of Friday's hearing, Palin supporters wearing clown costumes and carrying balloons denounced the probe as a "kangaroo court" and a "three-ring circus" led by supporters of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.
The state senator managing the probe, Sen. Hollis French, fueled those complaints with a September 2 interview in which he warned the inquiry could yield an "October surprise" for the GOP.
But Palin's lawyers already had begun pushing for the state Personnel Board to launch its own investigation, calling it the proper legal venue for the matter.
"The report speaks for itself," French told CNN Friday night.
PALMS -- A suspicious envelope caused the evacuation of the Palms campaign office for Senator Barack Obama.
The LAPD bomb squad and haz-mat teams were called to the office on Motor Avenue Thursday night after a report about a suspicious envelope found inside.
As a precaution officers evacuated the building. But, officers determined the contents of the envelope was not an explosive device. Authorities, however, are declining to say exactly what was inside.
The envelope has now been turned over to investigators for further examination.
Obama threat, white powder sent to Los Angeles Times
I'm told the Los Angeles Times mailroom opened a hand-scrawled letter today that read "death to Obama" and contained a white powder that triggered a call to the FBI and a city hazardous materials team. No one was injured and the powder proved to be harmless. My sources say the letter was addressed to staff writers Richard Serrano and Ralph Vartabedian and included a demand for a retraction to their story this week that detailed flying mishaps early in John McCain's Navy flying career. The nut mail was said to carry an upside-down stamp and language about saving babies in addition to the Barack Obama threat.
Apples to oranges, Longneck. True, Bush has been safe. Do not forget someone lobbed a live grenade (that obviously never detonated) at Bush in his first term.
As much true hatred as there is for Bush, it is for his policies. I think you can safely take all the Bush haters, then add another 25%, for Obama. For no other reason than the color of Obama's skin.
Goombah is so right. I fnd that I try not to think about that horrible possibility and hope and pray that those in charge of protecting our nominees take that extra step to insure our nominees' safety. Yes, especially BHO because we can already see the hate coming from a few. Like I said, all it takes is one.
BUT..
On a much lighter (and fun note) Guess what BHO's favorite movie is???? Hu? You got it. Sounds like he's a Sopranos' fan as well. Maybe we'll get him to join. How cool would that be?
It's no wonder that when Katie Couric asked that most famous of all post-baby boomers, Sen. Barack Obama, to name his favorite movie, he answered with The Godfather and The Godfather: Part II. Echoing a Sopranos comedy line, he added, "Three - not so much."
The candidates are vulnerable. But, despite what Michael Corleone says, it's almost impossible now to assassinate a President of the United States. The protection is monumental and the exposure activities of a President are minimal and tightly controlled. To be successful would probably require what some refer to in the military as rain. You would have to take out a large number of people, buildings, and vehicles surrounding or accompanying the President.
The candidates are vulnerable. But, despite what Michael Corleone says, it's almost impossible now to assassinate a President of the United States. The protection is monumental and the exposure activities of a President are minimal and tightly controlled. To be successful would probably require what some refer to in the military as rain. You would have to take out a large number of people, buildings, and vehicles surrounding or accompanying the President.
I would argue that Obama is SAFER than Dubya right now.
Anyway, there was a reason why he was the earliest candidate to receive Secret Service protection in history.
EDIT - There is something telling, and not in a good way, when my father seriously thinks that Obama is like Bobby Kennedy in that "someone will try to shoot him."
Can you imagine if, GOD FORBID, he ever was assassinated?
The uprising and riot potential in the urban areas of this country would be catastrophic. They'd make the '60s riots and the Rodney King aftermath look like Disneyland. And I, for one, love city life. I don't want to move to the Ozarks.
Can you imagine if, GOD FORBID, he ever was assassinated?
The uprising and riot potential in the urban areas of this country would be catastrophic. They'd make the '60s riots and the Rodney King aftermath look like Disneyland. And I, for one, love city life. I don't want to move to the Ozarks.
Fucking redneck, racist trash.
To be fair, that "Monkey" incident was at a PENNSYLVANIA rally, so its not just us rednecks.
But really, if our fears do come true....outside of nuclear war/terrorism, it would be the worst thing to happen to this country at the worst possible time.
Sorry, Ronnie. I honestly didn't mean it like that. It just infuriates me that these hateful pieces of shit would be so short sighted, as to possibly incite a civil war, out of their hatred and spite.
Sorry, Ronnie. I honestly didn't mean it like that. It just infuriates me that these hateful pieces of shit would be so short sighted, as to possibly incite a civil war, out of their hatred and spite.
God, this topic honestly sends chills thru my body and I hate to even think of it happening. However, since we are being blunt, what "if", God forbid, BHO is taken from us (I hate to even use the word) . Where does that leave the election? Does, Hillary, being the runner-up, so to speak, automatically become the Dem Nominee? McCain wouldn't automatically win. Do we have another primary? Is there even an answer?
God, this topic honestly sends chills thru my body and I hate to even think of it happening. However, since we are being blunt, what "if", God forbid, BHO is taken from us (I hate to even use the word) . Where does that leave the election? Does, Hillary, being the runner-up, so to speak, automatically become the Dem Nominee? McCain wouldn't automatically win. Do we have another primary? Is there even an answer?
TIS
I hate to think about this too, but in regards to your quesiton...
If its after the election, as stipulated in our Constitution, the Vice-President-elect Biden would ascend to the top office on the day of Inaguration. Afterwards, he'll nominate somebody for VP and Congress will approve it. The last episode of THE WEST WING covered this, FYI.
If its BEFORE the election...more likely, the ballots would already be finalized with Obama/Biden, and wouldn't be changed. But Biden would then be asked, and he'll accept, to take over as the main candidate. He'll ask somebody within party ranks, i.e. Hillary Clinton or Bill Richardson, to take over for VP.
You all might remember in 2000, in the Missouri Senate race, when the Democratic candidate was killed in a plane crash a few weeks before election day. His name stayed on the ballot, and his wife took over. The GOP challenger John Ashcroft (yes, THAT John Ashcroft) couldn't attack an opponent who was dead, nor attempt and be slammed for criticizing a corpse. The wife won.
I'm just saying, Biden would probably win, if simply for the sympathy vote. But if the assailant is White...Pizzaboy's assertion of urban racial riots is a troubling stark-real possibility.
McCain may be partly blamed, fairly or not, for the murder if because his campaign stirred up alot of bottled-up tensions and angers within the extreme-fringes of the Republican Party out of the closet, and into the daylight of his rallies. Notice how a prominent black Congressman this weekend compared McCain to George Wallace.
Notice how McCain stopped his "Who is Barack Obama?" speech-line after many people yelled "Traitor!" "Terrorist!" "Arab!" and other shit at his rallies. Hell, you all read of how after trying to correct a woman that Obama wasn't an Arab, his own supporters BOOED him.
Now mind you, alot of psycho-loons of the Left have been out there as well, being fucking ugly, most prominently the 9/11 "Loose Change" Conspiracy advocates and the ultra-anti-war factions. They're loud assholes, and even liberal Bill Maher threw those Loose Change folks out of one of his tapings last year.
But like that shit said by the Virginia GOP leader above...the news on the McCain campaign isn't that McCain has the better economical plan or new pitches, but that of the crowds at his and Palin's rallies.
Hell, even Charlie Crist, the popular GOP Governor of Florida, is publicly distancing himself.
I do remember that plane crash with the Missouri Senator (don't know his name). Also, here in CA, if I am not mistaken, when Sonny Bono was tragically killed in a skiing accident, his wife took over (Mary Bono) and still is the Congresswoman in Plam Springs, CA.
Back to Obama though, this election is so new and different for America and it's unfortunate to see so many can be so hateful. It's a hard reality though that we must face. Win or lose for Obama, history is being made as we speak.
There are many potential questions and conflicts involved.
If a party's presidential nominee dies before the election, it is up to that party's national committee to select a successor.
Since federal law mandates the Presidential election date, Congress could change that date.
Changed or not, the electoral votes would still have to be counted and that date is up to Congress also. However, it is state law that governs the electoral college vote casting in each state so a vice-presidential candidate could receive a state's electoral votes as President. Once those votes are cast, it is up to Congress to canvas them (Jan. 6) and declare a winner. But Congress may not validate the vote in which case the Constitution would require that the House select a President and the Senate a Vice-President.
Alot of this is murky because we've never had to go through each scenario.
Good ones DC. I have to admit, I really have seen very few of either Obama or McCain bumperstickers or signs. I'm sure they are around, but I haven't seen many for some reason.
I've had problems posting images ever since we changed boards. Anyway, here's a link. Boy, it sure doesn't take long for these companies to pick up on new ideas does it?
TIS, I'm starting to see more signs pop up lately. In my neighborhood I'm seeing more McCain than Obama. But I was at my inlaws in Sheffield Lake/Lorain Ohio area and I seen more Obama signs.
I've been so consentrated on the Presidential one I need to pay attention to whose running local plus the local issues.
Tell me about it. I just voted today (absentee) and will be mailing my vote in tomorrow. I had so much stuff to go thru (literally about 3 books showng not only Presidential candidates and such, but pros/cons of every proposition. It's overwhelming and I admit confusing. I first like to read the proposition, see pro/con and also tells supposedly where the money is going to come from and/or the fiscal impact.
There's one proposition regarding energy conservation, one for supplying more "treatment" for drug/alcohol abusers. We have one, Prop 2 that I never heard about til I got the ballot, requiring certain farm animals to be contained in cages large enough for them to extend their limbs, stand and turn around. I'm not an animal person, but that just sounds like a given to me.
Anyway, that's one of about 12 or so propositions we have.
RRA, Actually, the West Wing episode you're referring to dealt with the Vice Presidential candidate. He died 2/3 of the way through Election Day.
Could Biden really become the candidate? The American public didn't vote for him. As a matter of fact, I think that the Democrats made it rather obvious that they did NOT want him to be President. So, how does that make sense??
RRA, Actually, the West Wing episode you're referring to dealt with the Vice Presidential candidate. He died 2/3 of the way through Election Day.
Could Biden really become the candidate? The American public didn't vote for him. As a matter of fact, I think that the Democrats made it rather obvious that they did NOT want him to be President. So, how does that make sense??
RRA, Actually, the West Wing episode you're referring to dealt with the Vice Presidential candidate. He died 2/3 of the way through Election Day.
I was talking about the last episode, where the new-sworn-in-President (Jimmy Smits) planned to appoint his VP, instead of doing that during the transitional-period. But you knew what I was talking about.
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
Could Biden really become the candidate? The American public didn't vote for him. As a matter of fact, I think that the Democrats made it rather obvious that they did NOT want him to be President. So, how does that make sense??
He would simply because he's the bottom-half of the ticket, and since VPs take over for an incapacitated President, Biden would be the natural replacement.
This reminds me of back in 1968 when Teddy Kennedy was asked by the RFK campaign to take over after that assassination. He turned it down, but I'm just highlighting that Biden would be the assumptive replacement.
The candidates are vulnerable. But, despite what Michael Corleone says, it's almost impossible now to assassinate a President of the United States. The protection is monumental and the exposure activities of a President are minimal and tightly controlled. To be successful would probably require what some refer to in the military as rain. You would have to take out a large number of people, buildings, and vehicles surrounding or accompanying the President.
True. That's why a nut job would not likely be able to pull it off.
Incidentally, the presidential limousine is designed to withstand pretty much anything.
It seems like McCain did the right thing by telling that woman Obama was a decent man and a solid citizen, and I notice Palin is now talking baout abortion and other "solidify the base" issues, whis is fair game. I also note Obama thanked McCain and distanced himself from the "George Wallace" comments Rep. Lewis made. Good to see that cooler heads at the top seem to be prevailing.
It is not over by a long shot, but if McCain loses it will be for the same reason Gore lost (or won by too little) in 2000. Namely, after he got the nomination he stopped being himself. As long as McCain was the accessible guy at the back of the bus the press forgave him all kinds of gaffes and off the top of his head comments, because that was who he was. Sinilar to how they cut Biden the same slack. But unfortunately for him McCain listened to his handlers and morphed into a different person. I think his first mistake was Palin. He wanted Lieberman, but his handlers told him "no." I wonder if by picking lieberman McCain would not have locked up Florida and given Obama more problems than he needed in New York and other places with high concentrations of Jewish voters who don't trust him anyway. McCain should have told his aides he was the nominee, f*ck the polls, and gone with his gut.
Since Romney is supposed to be an "economic genius", McCain would probably be ahead right now. Or at the worst, in much better position. If he would have picked Lieberman, he would have lost all support from the conservative base. His support from them is still shaky as it is. It would have probably locked up Florida for him, but cost him in many other states.
Commentary: McCain campaign following in Hillary's footsteps
By Ed Rollins CNN Contributor
Editor's Note: Ed Rollins, who served as political director for President Reagan, is a Republican strategist who was national chairman of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee's 2008 presidential campaign.
NEW YORK (CNN) -- A campaign at war with itself cannot fight its opponent effectively.
We have seen two major campaigns this year that could be described as internally divided -- Sen. Hillary Clinton's losing primary campaign and now Sen. John McCain's general election effort.
And while chaos and disarray reigned supreme in Sen. Barack Obama's opponents' campaigns, the steady, disciplined and strategically driven Obama campaign marches forward toward likely victory.
Clinton's campaign had several different groups setting and implementing strategy. They include the first campaign team led by pollster Mark Penn, her loyalists from the White House days led by eventual campaign manager Maggie Williams and campaign chairman Terry McAuliffe, and a rump group led by her husband. Prior to this year and his efforts on his wife's behalf, President Clinton was viewed as one of the best political strategists around.
All that brain power couldn't come together and agree on a consistent strategy to beat a young inexperienced outsider. There will be second guessing and finger pointing for years to come.
We now see something similar in the McCain campaign. There have been at least three major managerial changes or overthrows in the past 18 months.
The first was the Rick Davis/John Weaver battle. Weaver and Mike Murphy, one of the best media strategists in the business, were the key players in the 2000 McCain effort and Weaver was the political guru who guided McCain's efforts since then. Davis, with a major assist from Cindy McCain and his former lobbying partner, Charlie Black, ousted Weaver.
Davis and Black, who masterminded Bob Dole's unsuccessful 1996 campaign and Phil Gramm's aborted presidential effort before that, are super lobbyists, and they opened the doors to their K Street allies.
Davis was then replaced -- in reality if not in title -- by Steve Schmidt, part of Karl Rove's operation. Schmidt is a first-rate tactician but new to McCain's world, and he still shares power with Black and Davis. This campaign would have been a much different operation if Weaver and Murphy had been brought back; but that was never going to happen with Davis and Black.
In the end, it's not relevant who holds what title in the McCain operation, because it is not being run by campaign professionals, but by the Washington lobbying class.
And no one seems to be in charge, least of all the candidate. The end result is a campaign suffering from "schizophrenia."
John McCain is saying one thing on the stump, his running mate another. But the worst sin is that his advertising campaign is incoherent and putting out multiple and inconsistent messages.
What McCain and his campaign need to understand is that whatever happened in the past is no longer relevant. James Carville's famous slogan in Bill Clinton's 1992 victory over the first Bush: "It's the economy stupid!" can now be replaced with "You morons, what have you done with my money, my life and my kids' future?"
If John McCain wants anyone to pay attention to him in the last three weeks of this campaign, he must address those concerns.
Attacking Obama for his association with Bill Ayers -- the unrepentant Vietnam-era terrorist who should have been jailed four decades ago for bombing New York City Police Headquarters, the United States Capitol building, and the Pentagon -- is a legitimate tactic. So is asking questions regarding the influence of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's controversial pastor.
The problem is that few voters care about what happened 40 years ago when in the last few weeks they have seen their savings and retirements and possibly their jobs and homes going up in flames. If you don't talk to voters about their concerns they will not spend one minute listening to you in the closing days of a campaign.
Government is not working. President Bush's leadership has failed the country and Congress has not done much better. How are you going to be better? That's the question voters want answered.
With one debate remaining and less than three weeks of campaigning left, John McCain's 10-year quest to be president is coming to a close and -- as of today -- a dreadful one.
All I can advise is "Engage us, John!" You are an honorable man who has dedicated your life to serving this country. Quit the name calling and make the last weeks about leadership and solutions.
Accept Obama's challenge issued last week: "The American people aren't looking for someone who can divide this country. They're looking for somebody who will lead this country."
Tell us how you will lead this country through the greatest crisis we have faced in modern times.
And Sen. McCain, remember your own words of last week about Obama: "He's a decent family man -- citizen -- that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues."
Tell us what those disagreements are. Then, at least voters can make their final choices on things that matter to them now.
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the writer.
Since Romney is supposed to be an "economic genius", McCain would probably be ahead right now. Or at the worst, in much better position. If he would have picked Lieberman, he would have lost all support from the conservative base. His support from them is still shaky as it is. It would have probably locked up Florida for him, but cost him in many other states.
With Lieberman, he would have bet that the conservatives would have supported McCain, because they sure as hell aint gonna vote for Obama.
As for Romney, I don't know if he would have helped them. I mean yeah some Conservatives think of him as their savior, despite being a Morman Pro-Choice Governor, but he has another problem that hurt him in the primaries...
I gotta say things are looking really good for Obama. It's hard not to get over confident. In politics, 3 weeks can change everything. Still, I have a very good feeling.
I'm just skimming some stories this evening, but Obama gaining in swing states, his favorability rating is high and Christopher Hitchens is supporting Obama???
I heard McCain say he was gonna kick O's "you know what" at the debate Wednesday. Hmmmmm.
Which reminds me, did you all see that skit (I think from one of the late night shows) mimicking the last debate, showing McCain wandering around the stage aimlessly asking if anyone's seen his dog.
I gotta say things are looking really good for Obama. It's hard not to get over confident. In politics, 3 weeks can change everything. Still, I have a very good feeling.
I'm just skimming some stories this evening, but Obama gaining in swing states, his favorability rating is high and Christopher Hitchens is supporting Obama???
"On "the issues" in these closing weeks, there really isn't a very sharp or highly noticeable distinction to be made between the two nominees, and their "debates" have been cramped and boring affairs as a result. But the difference in character and temperament has become plainer by the day, and there is no decent way of avoiding the fact. Last week's so-called town-hall event showed Sen. John McCain to be someone suffering from an increasingly obvious and embarrassing deficit, both cognitive and physical. And the only public events that have so far featured his absurd choice of running mate have shown her to be a deceiving and unscrupulous woman utterly unversed in any of the needful political discourses but easily trained to utter preposterous lies and to appeal to the basest element of her audience."
Originally Posted By: The Italian Stallionette
I heard McCain say he was gonna kick O's "you know what" at the debate Wednesday. Hmmmmm.
Before the second debate, he promised that "the gloves would be off." How did that work for ya John?
Originally Posted By: The Italian Stallionette
Which reminds me, did you all see that skit (I think from one of the late night shows) mimicking the last debate, showing McCain wandering around the stage aimlessly asking if anyone's seen his dog.
"Part of reassurance is intellectual. Like Palin, he's a rookie, but in his 19 months on the national stage he has achieved fluency in areas in which he has no experience. In the foreign policy debate with McCain, as in his July news conference with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, Obama held his own -- fluid, familiar and therefore plausibly presidential.
Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. famously said of Franklin Roosevelt that he had a "second-class intellect, but a first-class temperament." Obama has shown that he is a man of limited experience, questionable convictions, deeply troubling associations (Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, Tony Rezko) and an alarming lack of self-definition -- do you really know who he is and what he believes? Nonetheless, he's got both a first-class intellect and a first-class temperament. That will likely be enough to make him president."
-- Charles Krauthammer (Conservative FOX NEWS Analyst)
I'll ask you this cause I know you do the sports thread but anyone else feel free to answer. It would be fun to do some "NON" money betting game in regards to the election. Something that everyone can join in on without it mattering who you are voting for. For instance, whoever comes closest to the total electoral votes for each candidate, or popular votes (don't think I can count that high) ? Or who will win the swing states Something that we could all contribute or something on-going. Since this election IS historic, it might be fun. Yes? No? Bad idea? I'm just not good at composing these things.
Just heard on Countdown that people at a Palin rally were yelling for her to speak louder. She thought they were protestors and launched into a thing about honoring veterans. What a cafona!
I'll ask you this cause I know you do the sports thread but anyone else feel free to answer. It would be fun to do some "NON" money betting game in regards to the election. Something that everyone can join in on without it mattering who you are voting for. For instance, whoever comes closest to the total electoral votes for each candidate, or popular votes (don't think I can count that high) ? Or who will win the swing states Something that we could all contribute or something on-going. Since this election IS historic, it might be fun. Yes? No? Bad idea? I'm just not good at composing these things.
TIS
I'll play. We can just post our predictions here, and see what happens. My prediction is: Obama: 349 51% McCain: 189 45%
WVEC-TV: "The Virginia Beach Fire Marshal's office estimated the size of the crowd to be 12,000. A McCain campaign spokeswoman claimed the crowd size was 25,000, but the Convention Center's capacity is only 16,000."
Last week we noted unconfirmed sightings of an “Obama for President” billboard in the Xbox 360 racing game Burnout Paradise. Today we’re able to report that it is, in fact, an official advertisement placed by the senator’s campaign team.
RICHMOND, Va. - Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin mistook some of her own fans for hecklers Monday at a rally that drew thousands.
A massive crowd of at least 20,000 spread across the parking lot of Richmond International Raceway, and scores of people on the outer periphery more than 100 yards from the stage could not hear.
"Louder! Louder!" they began chanting, and the cry spread across the crowd to Palin's left. Some pointed skyward, urging that the volume be increased.
Palin stopped her remarks briefly and looked toward the commotion.
"I hope those protesters have the courage and honor to give veterans thanks for their right to protest," she said.
Some in the crowd tried to shout toward her what was really being said, but she couldn't hear them.
On a sunny day in which many had stood in place for more than three hours without shade, at least 25 people collapsed from heat-related illnesses and three were hospitalized, according to the Henrico County fire department.
Palin had campaigned with John McCain earlier Monday in Virginia Beach, only the second time the GOP ticket has campaigned in Virginia since June. Democrat Barack Obama or his running mate, Joe Biden, together visited the state eight times during that span.
Virginia has been solidly Republican for 40 years but is now a battleground, with both sides locked in a very close race for the state's 13 electoral votes.
Addressing the crowd, Palin largely avoided her recent criticisms of Obama. Instead, she acknowledged the emotion that has built up on both sides, particularly since the financial collapse.
"There is a lot of anger. There is anger at the inside dealing and anger at lobbyists and anger at the greed on Wall Street. There is anger at the Washington elite and there is anger at voter fraud," she said.
She promised a spending freeze if she and McCain win, and evoked cheers of "Drill, Baby, Drill!" in calling for greater domestic mining and oil drilling. The crowd roared when she criticized Biden for remarks he made in Ohio that the United States had little interest in coal-fired electrical power.
The afternoon's loudest ovation came when country music star Hank Williams Jr. offered a rendition of his hit "Family Tradition" that opened by assailing "the left-wing liberal media."
Palin later appeared in northern Virginia, raising half a million dollars at a fundraiser in McLean. About 400 people attended the $1,500 per person event Monday evening at the Ritz Carlton in Tysons Corner. The money goes to the Republican Party since the McCain campaign can't raise any more money under federal rules.
Palin said voters will not be fooled into thinking that McCain's election would be the equivalent of a third term for President Bush. She said McCain "took the gloves off" at his campaign appearances Monday and shouldn't be faulted for pointing out differences in the two tickets' records.
About 40 Democratic protesters waved signs at rush-hour commuters in busy Tysons Corner before the event.
Will someone with more of a sense of political history than I possess please falsify the following statement, if possible: "the GOP has given us the first-ever Presidential/Vice Presidential slate with one member adjudicated guilty of a severe ethics violation and the other formally accused of a severe ethics/law violation. "
With the crowds at McCain's rallies yelling for blood, when he (thankfully) finally admonished them to be sane, saying that they had nothing to fear from Obama, he was BOOED by his own people. Shows the ugliness that he and Palin had been stoking...but I have to give him credit for backing away from the edge of THAT abyss. There is something uglier here than Clinton's stoking of her followers, and how she seemed to realize in the final days that she may have pushed things to the point that it would be difficult for the Democrats to pull together to beat the Republicans.
In the same way, I think that cooler heads are whispering to McCain that he is raising the possibility of actual violence, and, if he loses, that the Republican base might be so angry and frightened that the country would be difficult to govern. A Pyrrhic victory is bad enough. But a Pyrrhic DEFEAT would be flat insane. And McCain isn't nuts. Brittle and angry, yeah. I think he's experiencing a bit of what the Clinton's felt: "how in the hell is this happening?" If ANYONE here had grasped how smart Obama is, they might have laid better plans. I really, seriously, think they underestimated him, thinking that somehow Affirmative Action had raised this naive, inexperienced but charismatic guy to the national level. They were playing checkers, he's playing chess. ᅠ
I repeat my original impression: not that this would make him a great President, but Obama is the smartest person I've seen on the national stage running for national office. Watched his latest move? A British paper says that he's offered McCain a job in his new administration.
What? I see this as multi-pronged, and I don't think there is a direct riposte:
1) It is supremely confident, at a time Americans need desperately to believe in their leaders as BOTH capable and confident.
2) It suggests he's ready to reach "across the aisle". Supposedly, the post would be a bi-partisan post on Veterans Affairs.
3) IF McCain DOESN'T reciprocate in some way, independant voters may think that he is ingracious. If he DOES, then it undercuts his argument that Obama can't be trusted. ᅠ
Note the way he dared McCain to call him a terrorist sympathizer to his face? In all likelihood, McCain hasn't been looking him in the eye as an attempt to keep his temper under control. (Ah...if this is true, is there anyone out there who thinks this is a valid strategy for a chief executive or a diplomat..?) So he is tempting McCain into a trap. First, Obama has far more emotional control. Second, he has an answer up his sleeve that will be HARSH, designed to both rebut and trigger an outburst. Watching McCain wandering around the stage...I regretfully conclude that he is on the borderline of losing some control factors. I would say that his best days are not in front of him, and it is sad to watch.
Palin? I cannot begin to imagine her on "Meet The Press" or any kind of remotely antagonistic forum. McCain, Obama, and Biden would survive such grilling without a sweat. Does anyone out there think she would have been chosen if she weren't pretty? I think McCain thought she'd give America a chubby.
What a fascinating, fascinating election this has been. And it ain't over yet.
Best case? McCain tones down the rhetoric, sharpens his message, and runs a campaign more in alignment with his stated values. He either wins, or loses, with honor.
Worst case? I don't even want to go there. But I have never heard more violent rhetoric in a Presidential campaign. Maybe I just haven't been paying attention?
For those of you who heard Fox News referring to "Obama's Baby Mama" and speculating about assassination, and heard the crowds spouting venom while Palin and McCain stoked the fires...if you weren't repelled, if you didn't automatically demand more from your candidate or network of choice...what would you say to yourself if an actual violent incident occurred. "Oh well?" "I didn't realize..?" "Thank goodness!"
I would bet that the proportion of the population that considers this acceptable political discourse overlaps remarkably with that percentage that has negative views of black people to begin with.
I have a theory that I'm calling the "Obama Effect" that suggests that there is a threshold beyond which his race could actually work in his favor. It goes like this: IF it is pretty clear he's going to win anyway, I suspect that there are many, many Americans who are waffling on the borderline, and that in the voting booth, if they think Obama's going to win anyway...they may decide to vote FOR him simply for the sake of being on the right side of history. They will want to be able to say they voted for him. This might actually give him a boost over polling at the last minute, a sort of "reverse Bradley effect" created by 300 years of pressure. I can see how it might happen...once.
But it's like that guy with the refrigerator on his back in the roller skating contest: IF you can get to the top of the hill, the trip down is a little faster. But making it up the hill is a b****, and it's quite amusing to see those unencumbered ones complaining that "refrigerator guy has an unfair advantage..."
It's a particular and, to me, palely amusing form of blindness.
Notice how quickly the Republicans screamed that scrutiny of Palin was sexism? That tactic, screaming sexism, racism, ageism, whatever, is one of the first things any group does to oppress criticism. Blacks have done it plenty. Hell, Republicans claim "Liberal Bias" in the media even when their candidates are stomping butt. So the game is played across the board, but it doesn't remove the fact that there is very real sexism, racism, etc. out there. How we negotiate this ground in the 21st century will be one of our greatest tasks. How do we sort out the real complaints from the purely political posturing?
Someone school me for a second. What does Mc Cain mean by "Maverick"?
When referring to McCain it means that John has opposed his party's positions on some issues and bills on several occasions. For example, his recent proposal to have the federal government purchase foreclosure-bound mortgages is considered abhorrent by most Republicans. He is sort of the George Will of elected politicians.
I just saw that story too RR. I also read that the polls are showing that most people don't like McCain's negative attacks (well they think they are too negative) by recent polls.
Anyway, in spite of that, I'm reading that McCain "may" go after Obama on the Ayers issue tomorrow at the debate. I think McCain's kind of lost really. He wants to please those who want him to attack and he's had poor campaign management (it seems) that nobody is guiding him. Either that or Mr. Maverick thinks he's doing it right and is doing it his way.
Buckley Leaves Magazine His Father Founded After Backing Obama
By Christopher Stern
Oct. 14 (Bloomberg) -- Author and humorist Christopher Buckley resigned from the National Review, a conservative magazine his father founded, after readers complained about his endorsement in another publication of Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.
Buckley, son of the late William F. Buckley, wrote today in theDailyBeast.com, an online publication in which he endorsed Obama, that he resigned from the National Review after it was deluged with critical responses to his column at the rate of 700- 1.
``The only thing the right can't quite decide is whether I should be boiled in oil or just put up against the wall and shot,'' Buckley wrote.
Buckley, who has worked as a speechwriter for Republican presidential nominee John McCain and former President George H.W. Bush, endorsed Obama in a column titled, ``Sorry Dad, I'm Voting for Obama.'' Buckley is a trustee of the National Review, a position he was given in 2004 when his father gave up control of the magazine.
Calls to Buckley's book publisher and to the Daily Beast seeking his comment weren't immediately returned.
National Review Editor Rich Lowry responded to Buckley today, writing that messages were actually running 100-1 against him, not 700-1.
Lowry also wrote that Buckley was writing the column in the National Review on a ``trial basis'' while another columnist was on leave. ``We continue to have the highest regard for Chris's talent and wit, and extend to him warmest regards and understanding,'' Lowry wrote in his online response.
Calls to the National Review were referred to Lowry's online comments on the matter.
I hope tonight's debate is a bit livelier than last week's snoozefest. And I would implore BOTH candidates to remember that many people right now are frightened about their future, and that they need to show some leadership instead of scoring points off of one another.
NYT/CBS poll finds that if the election were held today, Obama would win
By MICHAEL COOPER and MEGAN THEE
The New York Times
The McCain campaign’s recent angry tone and sharply personal attacks on Senator Barack Obama appear to have backfired and tarnished Senator John McCain more than their intended target, the latest New York Times/CBS News poll has found.
After several weeks in which the McCain campaign unleashed a series of strong political attacks on Mr. Obama, trying to tie him to a former 1960s radical, among other things, the poll found that more voters see Mr. McCain as waging a negative campaign than Mr. Obama. Six in 10 voters surveyed said that Mr. McCain had spent more time attacking Mr. Obama than explaining what he would do as president; by about the same number, voters said Mr. Obama was spending more of his time explaining than attacking.
Over all, the poll found that if the election were held today, 53 percent of those determined to be probable voters said that they would vote for Mr. Obama and 39 percent said they would vote for Mr. McCain.
Opinions of McCain getting worse The findings come as the race enters its final three weeks, with the two candidates scheduled to hold their third and last debate on Wednesday night, and as separate polls in critical swing states that could decide the election giving Mr. Obama a growing edge. But wide gaps in polls have historically tended to narrow in the closing weeks of the race as the election nears.
Voters who said that their opinions of Mr. Obama had changed recently were twice as likely to say that they had gotten better as to say they had gotten worse. And voters who said that their views of Mr. McCain had changed were three times more likely to say that they had gotten worse than to say they had improved.
The top reasons cited by those who said that they thought less of Mr. McCain were his recent attacks and his choice of Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska as his running mate. (The vast majority said that their opinions of Mr. Obama, the Democratic nominee, and Mr. McCain, the Republican nominee, had remained unchanged in recent weeks.) But in recent days, Mr. McCain and Ms. Palin have scaled back their attacks on Mr. Obama, although Mr. McCain suggested he might aggressively take on Mr. Obama in Wednesday’s debate.
With the election unfolding against the backdrop an extraordinary economic crisis, a lack of confidence in government, and two wars, the survey described a very inhospitable environment for any Republican to run for office. More than 8 in 10 Americans do not trust the government to do what is right, the highest ever recorded in a Times/CBS News poll. And Mr. McCain is trying to keep the White House in Republican hands at a time that President Bush’s job approval rating is at 24 percent, hovering near its historic low.
Other polls show smaller margin While the poll showed Mr. Obama with a 14 percentage-point lead among likely voters, when Ralph Nader and Bob Barr, the Libertarian candidate, were included in the question, the race narrowed slightly, with 51 percent of those surveyed saying that they were supporting Mr. Obama and 39 percent supporting Mr. McCain, with Mr. Nader getting the support of 3 percent and Mr. Barr 1 percent. Other national polls have shown Mr. Obama ahead by a smaller margin.
The poll suggested that the overwhelming anxiety about the economy and distrust of government have created a potentially poisonous atmosphere for members of Congress. Only 43 percent of those surveyed said that they approved of their own representative’s job performance, considerably lower than it has been at other times of historic discontent. By way of comparison, just before the Democrats lost control of Congress in 1994, 56 percent of those polled said that they approved of the job their representative was doing.
And after nearly eight years of increasingly unpopular Republican rule in the White House, 52 percent of those polled said that they held a favorable view of the Democratic Party, compared with 37 percent who said they held a favorable view of the Republican Party. Voters said that they preferred Democrats to Republicans when it came to questions about who would better handle the issues that are of the greatest concern to voters — including the economy, health care and the war in Iraq.
The nationwide telephone poll was conducted Friday through Monday with 1,070 adults, of whom 972 were registered voters, and it has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points for both groups.
After several weeks in which the McCain campaign sought to tie Mr. Obama to William Ayers, a former member of the Weather Underground terror group, 64 percent of voters said that they had either read or heard something about the subject. But a majority said they were not bothered by Mr. Obama’s background or past associations. Several people said in follow-up interviews that they felt Mr. McCain’s attacks on Mr. Obama were too rooted in the past, or too unconnected to the nation’s major problems.
“What bothers me is that McCain initially talked about running a campaign on issues and I want to hear him talk about the issues,” said Flavio Lorenzoni, a 59-year-old independent from Manalapan, N.J. “But we’re being constantly bombarded with attacks that aren’t relevant to making a decision about what direction McCain would take the country. McCain hasn’t addressed the real issues. He’s only touched on them very narrowly. This is a time when we need to address issues much more clearly than they ever have been in the past.
Obama drowning out McCain in TV ads By: Jeanne Cummings October 15, 2008 09:07 AM EST
In the first three weeks of September, Barack Obama ran 1,342 television commercials in the Washington media market that reaches heavily populated and contested Northern Virginia.
According to The Nielsen Company, in the same period and market, John McCain aired just eight commercials on broadcast stations.
Similar disparities are playing out across the country as the Illinois Democrat flexes his financial muscle to outspend McCain and the Republican National Committee on television advertisements, in some cases by ratios of as much as 8-to-1.
As of close of business last week, Obama had spent approximately $195 million on primary and general election ads compared with $99 million by the Arizona Republican and the Republican National Committee, according to the Campaign Media Analysis Group.
And the gap is widening in the final weeks. As McCain constricted his Virginia ad campaign to cable stations and smaller, downstate media markets, Obama doubled down on Northern Virginia.
The Democrat’s average weekly broadcast buy of about $700,000 in Washington jumped last week by nearly threefold to about $2 million, according to station public records.
The spending figures are significant because they demonstrate how Obama’s fundraising advantage has helped him drown out his opponent and maintain a longer — and more positive — presence in the living rooms of voters in critical swing states.
“Obama is spending $3.5 million a day on television ads,” said Evan Tracey, CMAG’s chief operating officer. “If he does that through Election Day, it will be more than McCain got from the government for his entire general election campaign.”
The RNC is feverishly raising cash to augment McCain’s $85 million allotment from the taxpayer-backed presidential campaign financing account.
The party headquarters is expected to spend $19 million in coordinated campaign activities with McCain and another $45 million in hybrid ads that promote McCain and other Republican candidates.
The tactic, which was introduced by the Bush-Cheney reelection committee in 2004, allows a 50-50 split on ad costs for the RNC and McCain. But the results can be messy since the candidate isn’t in full control of his own message.
McCain’s much-anticipated first ad attacking Obama’s ties to former domestic terrorist Bill Ayers was widely panned because it also included an attack on congressional Democrats over federal spending, a muddling of messages deemed necessary to justify the RNC’s portion of the costs.
Even if the messaging went smoothly, though, the financial maneuvering would still only boost McCain’s spending to about $150 million for the general election.
The remaining spending gaps will have to be filled by the RNC with independent expenditures and transfers of cash to state party operations for swing-state voter turnout operations. According to Federal Election Commission disclosure forms, about $11 million has already been doled out by the RNC to seven states, most of which are in presidential battlegrounds.
But Obama’s recent purchase of two 30-minute blocks of time on two national networks — which could cost about $1 million apiece and negotiations are continuing with two other networks — has many Republicans worrying that they are up against an even bigger machine than they’d imagined.
The staggered release of fundraising disclosure reports isn’t helping their plight. Obama’s September donations totals will be released next week. Republicans won’t know how much he collects in this final month until after Election Day.
Meanwhile, Obama is urging backers to pony up for the final push and to grow his already record-breaking 2 million donors by at least 100,000 by this Friday.
The consequences of such a significant financial mismatch are already becoming evident on the Electoral College playing field.
Again, look at Virginia, a state that hasn’t backed a Democratic candidate since 1964 and is now considered a tossup.
During the heated primary with Hillary Rodham Clinton, Obama spent $1.5 million in the Old Dominion. McCain, who was cruising to the nomination and had little money at that point in the GOP primary, spent just $330,000 on ads.
Since the Democratic primary ended in June, Obama has spent another $13 million in Virginia, compared with McCain’s $5.5 million, CMAG found.
Obama’s buying power allows him to run a mix of positive and negative ads and to spread them over a wider swath of turf. He is also able to play in all media markets, expensive or not. That’s a luxury McCain can’t afford, as evidenced by his near-blackout in Northern Virginia.
"McCain is virtually invisible in the commercial breaks,” said Bill Lord, vice president of news for WJLA-TV, the Washington ABC affiliate that is owned by Politico parent company Allbritton Communications Co.
To stay competitive in Virginia and elsewhere, McCain has made a series of ad buys in smaller markets or those that can provide a two-fer by bleeding into more than one state.
Nebraska is one of just two states that distributes its Electoral College votes based on the outcome in each of its three congressional districts, an unusual allocation that enticed the Obama campaign to fight for the Omaha-based district vote while all but conceding the rest of the traditionally Republican state to McCain.
While Obama is significantly outspending McCain in the Omaha television market, McCain has been making major buys in less expensive, nearby Sioux City, Iowa, which reaches both Omaha and Hawkeye State voters.
In the first three weeks of September, McCain ran more than 1,000 ads on those smaller stations while Obama didn’t run any.
Though Iowa voted for President Bush in 2004, it is another state that Democrats are confident they can flip from red to blue come November.
Dissatisfaction with the war and the economy are helping their effort. But Obama’s early work in the primary is also paying dividends and may have put the state out of Republican reach before the general election even began.
Since June, McCain and the RNC have spent about $4 million in Iowa, airing mostly negative ads aimed at raising doubts about his opponent.
But they appear to have had little effect on Obama, who spent $10 million on television commercials introducing himself to voters before the winter caucuses.
Since June, he’s invested another $2 million on ads in in Iowa — a paltry sum by Obama’s standards but one that may reflect confidence that a roughly 12-point lead in state polls will hold up until Election Day.
A study recently released by the Wisconsin Advertising Project, an arm of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, documented similar imbalances in other key states.
The report zeroed in on one week of spending, Sept. 28 to Oct. 4. It found that Obama was outspending McCain and the RNC by more than 3-to-1 in Florida, 2-to-1 in New Hampshire and 8-to-1 in North Carolina.
“Because of Obama’s fundraising advantage, his campaign is able to spend more in more states than we’ve seen in recent memory,” said Ken Goldstein, the project’s director.
McCain and the RNC are still trying to play a little offense: Pennsylvania is a rare state they hope will flip from blue to red.
Both campaigns have spent about $16.5 million on advertisements in the Keystone State since June.
But, as in Iowa, McCain’s messages are being delivered to an audience that has already had plenty of exposure to Obama.
When his primary television budget is added to the general election spending, Obama’s overall advertising in Pennsylvania — so far — comes to $27 million, compared to McCain’s $17 million.
"Obama is matching McCain’s negative ads and using the excess spending to do positive spots. He’s able to be both the good cop and the bad cop,” said Tracey.
Tonight's campaign is being held 5 miles away from me. I had to run an errand this morning and drove past Hofstra University (where the debate will be held)... it's a total traffic mess there... tv vans all over the place.
I would hope that they're in favor of it. If people want to legally own a gun, even though that's not my thing, they should be able to. What I will never understand is why people oppose stricter regulations, like a waiting period while they check out who you are.
I hope they talk about other issues tonight. I would love to hear how they feel about gun control.
I don't know if they have that much of a different opinion on it.
The real problem is getting them to answer the questions regardless of the issue.
I would like to see Bob Schieffer start the debate with thess questions:
Senator Obama, you have come under attack for your association with Bill Ayers and Reverend Wright, and you have been criticized not only for those associations but the way you seemed to diminish these relationships when they become political liabilities. Please tell us precisely when you knew of Mr. Ayers' past, what your relationship was and is, and why you felt comfortable working with him in Chicago. As for Reverend Wright, how could you have been a member of his church for so many years and been unaware of the kinds of things he was saying from the pulpit?
Senator McCain, you have criticized Senator Obama's judgment by his associations with Bill Ayers and Reverend Wright. Can you describe your social relationship with Charles Keating when you had one? Also both your running mate and her husband have openly stated their support for an extremist political party that if for Alaska's secession from the United States. Why shouldn't the American people question your judgment for picking a running mate who has voiced support in recent years for breaking up the United States?
After they get through those two questions then we can get to the economy and forein policy.
With only 2.5 weeks until the election, I want to commend my fellow Board members (most of them anyhow) for what I consider to be intelligent, thoughtful posts. I teach this stuff and it does my heart good to know that there are alot of Americans who take this stuff seriously and thoughtfully. Yes, some posts are funny and that's okay. We should never lose our sense of human despite the seriousness of it all. Some posts are a bit sarcastic or pejorative, but that's okay too. Keep it all up.
RNC out of Wisconsin, Maine; focuses on red states
By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer 2 hours, 29 minutes ago
The Republican National Committee is halting presidential ads in Wisconsin and Maine, turning much of its attention to usually Republican states where GOP nominee John McCain shows signs of faltering.
The party's independent ad operation is doubling its budget to about $10 million and focusing on crucial states such as Colorado, Missouri, Indiana and Virginia where Democrat Barack Obama has established a foothold, according to a Republican strategist familiar with presidential ad placements.
Florida and North Carolina have also been in the RNC ad mix. Pennsylvania is the only Democratic leaning swing state apparently left in the party's ad campaign.
The shift in advertising resources suggests that the RNC has decided to focus on defending reliably Republican-voting states against Obama's onslaught of advertising. Flush with money, Obama is outspending the joint efforts of the Republican Party and the McCain campaign by more than 2-1.
While a pullout from Wisconsin is a significant strategic move, it does not represent a full GOP retreat from the state. McCain's campaign has notified Wisconsin stations that it planned to continue to buy air time through Oct. 26.
Like McCain, the RNC's independent ad operation has targeted Obama with critical ads.
The Republican Party has been helping McCain through various means. It had been spending more than $5 million a week on ads independently of the campaign. It also has teamed up with the campaign to run combined ads whose costs are split by the campaign and the RNC in certain situations allowed by federal election law.
Only the independent RNC spots will be affected by Wednesday's decision to shift ad spending.
Wisconsin has been a seriously contested state in seven of the last eight presidential elections. Democrats won narrowly in six of them. Al Gore and John Kerry barely edged out George Bush in the 2000 and the 2004 elections.
A poll in Wisconsin by Quinnipiac University of New York for The Wall Street Journal and the Web site of The Washington Post, taken after last week's presidential debate, had Obama at 54 percent and McCain at 37 percent.
"Like most campaigns, we don't talk strategy and tactics," said McCain Wisconsin spokeswoman Sarah Lenti. "That said we are extremely excited by our chances in Wisconsin and will continue to run ads, period. We are up and running."
Two weeks ago, McCain halted his spending in Michigan after polls there showed Obama with a growing lead.
The RNC had record fundraising in September, collecting more than $66 million. McCain, meanwhile, is largely limited to the $84 million he agreed to accept in public financing for September and October.
Obama, however, bypassed public financing and has continued to raise money during the campaign. His extraordinary spending suggests his fundraising is at record levels. His campaign has not revealed its September fundraising but must file financial reports with the federal Election Commission by Monday night.
Obama is holding a major fundraising concert Thursday in New York to benefit his campaign and the Democratic National Committee. The concert will feature performances by Billy Joel and Bruce Springsteen. Tickets range from $500 to $10,000.
In a sign of his vast resources, Obama has purchased millions of dollars in national network time, airing spots during the Major League Baseball playoffs and during Sunday NFL games. On Sunday, he spent more than $5 million on ads, about half of that on national network spots, according to Evan Tracey, head of TNS Media Intelligence/Campaign Media Analysis Group, which tracks political advertising.
According to Tracey's data and ad information from ad buyers, Obama spent about $32 million during the week ending last Sunday, McCain spent about $9 million and the RNC spent about $5 million.
Obama has made inroads in the traditional Republican strongholds Indiana, North Carolina and Virginia. The two campaigns also are fighting for supremacy in Colorado, Ohio, Florida, Iowa, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico — all of which Bush won in 2004. They are also battling in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire, states that John Kerry won.
McCain has led Obama in ad spending only in Iowa and Minnesota. But television stations in Minneapolis-St. Paul said Wednesday that Obama is increasing his spending and is committed to run ads through Nov. 3.
Anyone else find the faces that McCain is making while Obama is talking "disturbing"? He's constantly smirking, and even rolled his eyes. Is it just me, or does anyone else think it isn't helping him?
McCain avoids answering questions and instead attacks Obama at every turn (which I guess he has no choice at this point). But, I think Obama is explaining things (like his health care) and McCain tries to answer , but then goes on to his stump speeches like "we can do it", "I know how to do it"....Know what I mean?
If you are watching CNN it has the audience meter, and everytime John mentions "Joe the Plumber" the line goes way down. Notice? It's not working.
Obama won this won handily too IMHO!! Seriously, who looks and acts more Presidential????? No contest.
I'm now definitely convinced McCain doesn't know he's on camera when Obama is speaking. He's now looking all around when Obama is speaking, while Obama continues to look right at him when he speaks.
Report: Obama Mega-Ad Could Delay World Series Game
Barack Obama has secured three networks to air his 30-minute ad in late October, and it may even cut into World Series time
FOXNews.com
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
At least three of the major broadcast television networks have agreed to air a 30-minute ad from the Barack Obama campaign in late October, according to a report in Advertising Age.
The article also says that if there is a sixth game of the World Series, Major League Baseball will push the game's start later by 15 minutes so the FOX network can air the ad on Oct. 29. The start time was moved from 8:20 to 8:35 p.m.
According to Advertising Age, the Obama campaign is spending close to $3 million to air the 8 p.m. program on FOX, CBS and NBC.
The Republican National Committee scolded Obama on Wednesday for interfering with professional baseball's proceedings.
"It's unfortunate that the World Series' first pitch is being delayed for Obama's political pitch. Not only is Obama putting politics before principle, he's putting it before our national pastime," spokesman Alex Conant said.
The Obama campaign has not revealed the content of the half-hour ad.
My question is: Is Joe The Plumber a Maverick? Can I vote for him?
Meet Joe The Plumber:
That's Mr. Clean.
I turned on the debate during commercials of the ball game. McCain had a good line in distancing himself from Obama's comparison of him to Bush ("If you want to run against Bush, you should have run 4 years ago"). But this response is a little late as Obama has been hammering this comparison away since the convention.
I watched the meter too, TIS, and Obama has been much more popular than McCain on the healthcare issue. It's kind of hard for the American people to look past the McCain proposal to tax people's healtcare benefits.
I get the impression that the negative campaigning came from campaign advisors within the Republican Nat. Com. as they saw the gap in the polls widen and realized they were getting beat on the issues. McCain seems very uncomfortable with it. I think he also did not take kindly to the recent suggestions from supporters in crowds, admonishing him to fight and get tough. It is embarrassing and unpresidential to be told by a guy off the street that you have to toughen up.
By the way, Obama gave another gratuitous shout out to Scranton as he's looking to soldify the blue collar support that Biden is working hard for.
I actually thought McCain came out of the gate with guns blazing, on full attack. He was doing okay challenging Obama, until he started losing it around the middle, and then floundering in desperation at the end.
Keep in mind they are BOTH politicians, therefore they're both liars and conniving jerkoffs.
This used to be a solidly Republican group. In 2004, they went for President George W. Bush 54%-46%. This summer, John McCain was leading Sen. Obama among these voters 43% to 40%, according to a study by John Green of the University of Akron.
But an ABCNews/Washington Post poll released Monday showed Sen. Obama now leading among Mainliners 53%-44%, indicating that the undecided voters are breaking heavily for the Democratic candidate.
Senator Lugar (R-IN), ranking Republican Member of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, endorses Barack Obama (at least, on foreign policy): http://www.republicansforobama.org/?q=node/3286
Karl Rove also forecasts an Obama win, 313 to 174 with 51 still up for grabs. The only states rated as "toss ups" were won by President Bush four years ago: Nevada, Missouri, Ohio and North Carolina.
I thought McCain did better, but he really had nowhere to go but up after his first two debates. His line about not being George Bush was good, but he should have been saying that months ago. I heard a lot of fluff, but never did I get the impression that McCain had full confidence in Palin.
Obama let McCain off the hook by not throwing the "fundamentals of the economy are strong" comment back in McCain's face. That statement summarizes how out-of-touch McCain has been with the financial crisis. I also thought Barack should have pressed the point of how Palin did nothing to quell the "kill him" shouts at recent rallies. I may have missed something, but I think even McCain asked the crowd only to reign it in when someone shouted "terrorist," not when "kill him" was shouted.
McCain's flippant comment about the "health" of a woman in an abortion should come back to bite him in the ass with some of his base, not to mention many women voters.
I agree on a certain level with you, goombah. I would have liked to see a feistier Obama. However, he really didn't need to be. He's leading in the polls by double digits. All he needed to do was exactly what he did - stay calm. Let McCain bluster away and come off looking a bit cranky. McCain baited Obama several times, and Obama took it all in stride and kept a level head.
Theirs a picture of them in my paper this morning. McCain has his finger up as if he's scolding someone. Obama is sitting across from him with his arms open, palms up, great body language. It's the perfect picture of the contrast between the two.
You're correct, SB. Obama did not have to be feisty. In fact, he was praised on CNN and MSNBC as being cool & collected. But he was also criticized by some for "not closing the deal" like he failed to do in the primaries. Had he done what I said, without getting personal and nasty, he may have scored a few more points with undecideds or independents. But in the end, Obama did what needed to not have a major gaffe and to maintain his lead.
One other thing that made me chuckle. McCain looked so mad at points last night that I thought a vein in his forehead would burst. The camera would do the split screen while Obama was talking and McCain's face would contort and his one eye would close a bit. That look by McCain reminded me of Popeye.
This from Fox News. Even they're saying it's over.
McCain Sees His Chances Slip Away Thursday, October 16, 2008
By Susan Estrich
You can count them on one hand. Alabama, Kansas, Georgia and South Carolina. Every morning, realclearpolitics.com lists all the public polls, both state and national, released that day. Since Saturday, John McCain has been behind in every single national poll. He has also been behind in every major swing state. He’s down by double digits in Pennsylvania and Virginia, down by 13 in New Mexico, down by 10 in Virginia.
The “safe” states for McCain are few and far between, and not even close to a majority in the electoral college.
McCain’s defenders call it a “mid-single digit” deficit. Presidential elections don’t work like horsehoes. A “mid-single digit” defeat means you get clobbered. A “high-single digit” defeat means a landslide.
Right now, the race is somewhere between clobbered and landslide, somewhere between 1988 (seven points/clobbered) and 1980 (nine points/landslide). Not close. Not pretty.
Wednesday night was John McCain’s last big chance to change things. It was the last moment that a significant percentage of Americans will tune in to see the two candidates. It was the last chance for McCain to take on Barack Obama on an even playing field.
Starting Thursday, and for the 18 days that follow, Obama will be outspending McCain everywhere that matters by 2-1 or 3-1 – or more. Starting Thursday, Republicans everywhere will be covering their rear ends, trying to make sure that they are not swept up in what looks like a wave; trying to cut their losses, avoid taking people with them.
Wednesday night was McCain’s last best chance to avoid triage. He needed to make something happen. He didn’t. Wednesday night was not a “game-changer.” Don’t take my word for it. Ask Republican Mike Huckabee. He said it, and he’s right.
Joe the Plumber may be the new icon of the campaign, but Obama’s comment that we need to “spread the wealth around” is not going to cost him this election. It’s not that kind of year. It’s the kind of year where people who never worry are worried, where economic insecurity is rampant, where the problem is not too much government but not enough. By all means spread the wealth around, if there is any to spread around.
Maybe there was nothing McCain could have said to change things. Maybe the die was cast when the housing bubble exploded, when the Dow dropped, when the credit market froze. It may well be that we’ll look back and say, as we did in 1980, that thinking this would be a close election was a denial of economic reality; that all people needed was the barest reassurance that it was safe to say no to the incumbent party, and the party was over.
Maybe we’ll say that no matter who McCain picked, or how much he raised, or what he did, the end would have been the same, that Mitt Romney could not have done any better, in the first or second spot; that that when the percentage of Americans who think the country is heading on the right track is in the single digits, a single-digit defeat is the best the incumbent party can expect.
The Republican talking heads are all saying that McCain “won” on Wednesday night. What they mean is that they liked what they heard. As well they should. McCain played to his base on Wednesday night, and played hard. He played to avoid having the floor fall out from under him. He played for a single-digit defeat, not a victory.
October is not the time to play to your base. October is not the time for liberals to be proud of being liberals, or conservatives to be proud of being conservatives. That’s August. September, latest.
October is the time for Democrats to point out that abortion is a difficult issue, that reasonable people can disagree; that’s what Obama did Wednesday night. He was playing to the middle, because his base is secure.
As Jimmy Carter once said, life isn’t fair. It isn’t. Hillary Clinton supporters now understand that all that stood between her and the White House was a failed caucus strategy; that she, too, could have beaten John McCain, and would have.
True enough. John McCain supporters, particularly those who were with him eight years ago, must be pained by the realization that the man who beat them, slammed them, threw mud at them then is costing their man the election now. Wednesday night, at long last, John McCain insisted that he wasn’t George Bush, that if Barack Obama wanted to run against George Bush, he should have run four years ago.
It was a good line. It was a long overdue effort to draw a line in the sand. But it doesn’t work. Politics is not about fairness.
It may not be George Bush’s fault that the economy is in the toilet, but it happened on his watch. He would have taken credit for peace and prosperity. So he gets blamed for their absence. And so does his party, and its new leader. Live by the sword and die by the sword, even if it’s someone else’s sword.
Barack Obama is a very lucky guy. But it is also the case that he made his luck. The fat lady has yet to sing, but she is definitely getting ready.
One other thing that made me chuckle. McCain looked so mad at points last night that I thought a vein in his forehead would burst. The camera would do the split screen while Obama was talking and McCain's face would contort and his one eye would close a bit. That look by McCain reminded me of Popeye.
After the debate, Fox News was talking about the split screen reactions. Brit Hume said Obama looked "confident", and McCain looked "peculiar". ....Apparently all the networks didn't run split screen, or only limited split screen. For those that missed it, watching McCain's reaction was probably the most entertaining thing about the debate.
Wait for the payoff at about 1:15 into this one. McCain's reaction to Obama answering the question about a "healthcare fine" is priceless. Obama needs to put out an ad with this one.
Joe the Plumber is not exactly a plumber and he's "not even close" to making the kind of money that would result in higher taxes from Democrat Barack Obama's proposals.
Such is the whirlwind of information that has come out about Joe Wurzelbacher of Holland, Ohio, since Republican John McCain made him famous in last night's debate. McCain mentioned him more than 20 times to use him as a symbol of hard-working Americans who would be hurt by Obama's tax policies. Obama and Wurzelbacher met earlier in the week in Toledo, where Wurzelbacher said Obama's plans to raise taxes on those making $250,000 a year or more would penalize him in his plans to buy the plumbing business for which he works.
Wurzelbacher since then has been on Fox News, interviewed by CBS's Katie Couric and appeared on ABC's "Good Morning America."
Not all the attention has been welcomed. Wurzelbacher, 34, told the Associated Press that he was not a licensed plumber. Because he works for a small company that does residential work, he said, he doesn't need to be licensed.
Wurzelbacher said he is of modest means, but worried Obama's tax plans would eventually hurt him. "You see my house. I don't have a lot of bells and whistles in here, really. My truck's a couple of years old and I'm going to have it for the next 10 years probably. So I don't see [Obama] helping me out,'' he told reporters this morning.
He also sounded concerned about the attention he is receiving. "I'm completely flabbergasted with this whole thing and just hope I'm not making too much of a fool of myself and hope I can get my message out there," he said.
...and I'm only making a little joke. Not making fun of his cancer. I'm a cancer survivor too.
I'm a thyroid cancer survivor. Fortunately, I never had to have any type of therapy.
About McCain:
If you see the pictures of his face, you will no doubt see a scar running down the left side and persistent puffiness of his left cheek. This is from the aggressive operation he had to remove the cancer as well as the lymph nodes in the area, as well as part of his parotid gland. When we show those pictures to independent doctors, some have told us an operation of that magnitude would’ve been done only for a much more serious and aggressive cancer than IIA melanoma. Other doctors disagree, saying McCain’s aggressive operation may have been done out of an abundance of caution, where doctors removed more lymph nodes and other tissue than is normally done, because he is, well, John McCain.
I'd say that's an accurate description, Olivant. I imagine it was a matter of choice; almost like a woman choosing a double mastectomy, after detecting cancer in one breast (Christina Applegate, for instance). Better safe than sorry.
I was 34, which is almost unheard of for that type of cancer. But it was my own stupidity that almost killed me. I was sick for almost a year, and refused to go for any tests. I thought I had an ulcer. It wasn't until I was so sick that I passed out from bleeding internally that I got tested.
Thanks. ....A cancer thread might be kind of depressing.
Are you kidding me??? A cancer thread is NOT depressing!! Personally, when I was diagnosed, I found the stories of other survivors to be so incredibly inspiring. If I can off that sort of inspiration to others, I'm all for it.
Edit: JL, I certainly didn't mean that in any negative way towards you. I'm sorry if it came out that way, and I apologize profusely. I tend to open my mouth rather quickly, if only to insert my foot.
No problem SB. Everyone looks at it a different way. I'd be willing to participate if I could help others. When PL was sick, we exchanged a lot of emails on the subject, and I tried my best to keep him positive. I knew what he had, but I never really knew how advanced he was. I tried to use myself as an example that anyone could beat it despite what doctors tell you. To this day, my Oncologist still smiles when he sees me because I'm one of his positive stories.
You are right. Everyone deals with it in their own way. And I certainly didn't mean to push my way on you.
However, to bring this back on topic - I wonder if there was any other primary where two of the Republican candidates were cancer survivors? I don't think any of the Democrats were. It just goes to show you how advanced the treatments have become.
Dont think so. Biden had some kind of benign brain tumor and aneurisms, but no cancer. Kerry was a cancer survivor, and I remember it being an issue with Paul Tsongas in 1992. He was far worse than he let on.
Time to bring the funny back to this thread. Here's the best of the "Angry McCain Reaction Shots" from yesterday's debate. Watch how they increase as the debate goes on.
The October newsletter by the Chaffey Community Republican Women, Federated says if Obama is elected his image will appear on food stamps -- instead of dollar bills like other presidents. The statement is followed by an illustration of "Obama Bucks" -- a phony $10 bill featuring Obama's face on a donkey's body, labeled "United States Food Stamps."
The October newsletter by the Chaffey Community Republican Women, Federated says if Obama is elected his image will appear on food stamps -- instead of dollar bills like other presidents. The statement is followed by an illustration of "Obama Bucks" -- a phony $10 bill featuring Obama's face on a donkey's body, labeled "United States Food Stamps."
The October newsletter by the Chaffey Community Republican Women, Federated says if Obama is elected his image will appear on food stamps -- instead of dollar bills like other presidents. The statement is followed by an illustration of "Obama Bucks" -- a phony $10 bill featuring Obama's face on a donkey's body, labeled "United States Food Stamps."
That alleged fraud is bad, but there's always voting fraud in EVERY Presidential election. I mean what else is new? Besides, its a proud Democratic Party tradition. Right 1960?
But damn, that racist shit just embarrases a former Republican like myself.
That alleged fraud is bad, but there's always voting fraud in EVERY Presidential election. I mean what else is new? Besides, its a proud Democratic Party tradition. Right 1960?
But damn, that racist shit just embarrases a former Republican like myself.
It's not actually "voting fraud", it's "registration fraud". There's a big difference. The idiots that ACORN hired to register voters decided it was easier to make up phony registrations than actually register real voters, since they get paid based on the number of people that they register. In reality, none of those phony registrants would have been able to vote, unless you believe "Mickey Mouse" and/or the Dallas Cowboys would show up to vote in Ohio.
If that "food stamp" bill was really posted I find it entirely despicable.
".....She said she doesn't think in racist terms,"
Give me a break.
In all fairness, just as Senator Obama should not be held directly responsible for what's been done by some democratic organization and what some from the democratic party are being investigated for, the same benefit of the doubt should apply to Senator MaCain in regards to this mailing put out by some members of the republican party.
In all fairness, just as Senator Obama should not be held directly responsible for what's been done by some democratic organization and what some from the democratic party are being investigated for...
To what Democratic organization are you referring?
ACORN Responds to Senator McCain's Desperate Attack
Last update: 12:41 a.m. EDT Oct. 16, 2008
WASHINGTON, Oct 16, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ --
Maude Hurd, ACORN's National President, issued the following statement in response to Senator McCain's attack: "We appreciate that Senator McCain's effort to stir up the Republican base by attacking a community organization working to increase public participation in our democratic process. However, these attacks reflect an increasingly panicked candidate; unfortunately the Senator McCain we saw tonight is very different than the Senator McCain who stood shoulder to shoulder with ACORN at a February 20, 2006 immigration reform event. It is clear for us to see that John McCain was for ACORN before he was against ACORN; he was for reform before he was against reform; and he was a maverick before he became erratic. What is really going here is that Senator McCain and his allies are part of a coordinated effort to engage in what appears to be an unprecedented effort to suppress voter turnout. Repeating a lie doesn't make it true, and the McCain campaign has resorted to the worst type of deceptions in regards to ACORN. The Facts: - ACORN has helped 1.3 million citizens from all parties and all walks of life apply for voter registration. - In most states, ACORN is required by law to turn in every voter registration card - even in cases where the cards are not valid. - It is ACORN that has reported almost all of the issues regarding voter registration cards. - Invalid voter registration cards do NOT constitute voter fraud. Even RNC General Counsel Sean Cairncross has recently acknowledged he is not aware of a single improper vote cast as a result of bad cards submitted in the course of an organized voter registration effort. - ACORN hired 13,000 field workers to register people to vote. In any endeavor of this size, some people will engaged in inappropriate conduct. ACORN has a zero tolerance policy and terminated any field workers caught engaging in questionable activity. At the end of the day, as ACORN is paying these people to register voters, it is ACORN that is defrauded. ACORN's Fight Back Thursday: Tomorrow, at 11:00 am EST, ACORN will be convening a conference call unveiling a pointed critique to Senator McCain's outlandish assertion that ACORN was responsible for the housing crisis: Thursday, October 16th : ACORN Call on ACORN Critique of McCain on Housing/Financial Crisis: Call in #: 800-247-5110, pass code 8388 ACORN is the nation's largest community organization of low- and moderate-income families, with over 400,000 member families organized into neighborhood chapters in 100 cities across the country. Since 1970 ACORN has taken action and won victories on issues of concern to our members. Our priorities include: better housing for first time homebuyers and tenants, living wages for low-wage workers, more investment in our communities from banks and governments, and better public schools. ACORN is an acronym, and each letter should be capitalized. ACORN stands for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. ACORN's website is at http://www.acorn.org. SOURCE Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN)
Senator Obama hired ACORN? Is that what you're saying, DC???
Well, if he did, and they falsely registered voters, and let's say "Mickey Mouse" shows up to vote, complete with ID and all, and he signs in to vote, and the signatures match, and he goes into the booth and pulls the curtain, what guarantee would Senator Obama have that he would vote on the Democratic ticket?? How would it be to his advantage??
McCain tells Letterman, ‘I screwed up’ After the Republican nominee sat down, Letterman asked, ‘Can you stay?’ The Associated Press updated 8:35 p.m. ET, Thurs., Oct. 16, 2008
PHILADELPHIA - John McCain told David Letterman that “I screwed up” by canceling a “Late Show” appearance three weeks ago, then faced a sharp round of questioning about Sarah Palin and his campaign tactics.
Not willing to risk the wrath of Letterman again, the Republican presidential candidate rented a helicopter to fly to New York after a weather delay grounded his campaign airplane in Philadelphia. He had canceled a Sept. 24 appearance during the brief suspension of his campaign because of the economic crisis, and Letterman has been hammering him ever since.
The band played the Who’s “I Can’t Explain” as McCain walked onstage at the Ed Sullivan Theater. After he sat down, Letterman asked, “Can you stay?”
“Depends on how bad it gets,” McCain answered.
Letterman had replaced McCain with the GOP hopeful’s persistent critic, MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann, on Sept. 24. Olbermann was waiting in the wings Thursday — and McCain had a pained expression when he noticed that.
Although Letterman said he was “willing to put this behind us,” he came after McCain hard with questions. He asked whether Palin was his first choice as vice president.
“Absolutely,” McCain answered.
He said he didn’t know her well before choosing her, but that he was impressed by her reputation as a reformer.
Letterman repeatedly pressed McCain on her qualifications, asking if he was confident she could lead the country in a time of crisis.
“In all due respect, one of the people I admired most was an obscure governor of a southern state called Arkansas and he turned out to be a fairly successful president,” McCain said, complimenting Bill Clinton. “Ronald Reagan was a cowboy, no experience in international affairs. I think she has shown leadership.”
As Letterman pressed on, McCain asked, “Have we pretty well exhausted this?”
“No, no,” Letterman said. “I’m just getting started.”
Letterman questioned him about Palin’s claim that Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama “palled around with terrorists,” and McCain backed her up, saying his opponent need to better explain his relationship with former Weather Underground activist William Ayers.
Tough questions, joke answers “Did you not have a relationship with Gordon Liddy?” Letterman asked about Watergate burglar G. Gordon Liddy.
McCain said he knew him. Then, after a commercial break, McCain said, “I know Gordon Liddy. He paid his debt, he went to prison ... I’m not in any way embarrassed to know Gordon Liddy.”
“You understand the same case could be made of your relationship with him as is being made with William Ayers?” Letterman said.
McCain said he has been completely open about his relationship with Liddy.
Letterman appeared to ridicule McCain about the implication that Obama and Ayers had a relationship.
“Are they double-dating, are they going to dinner, what are they doing?” Letterman asked. “Are they driving across country?”
“Maybe going to Denny’s,” McCain said.
Letterman said that Obama was 8 when Ayers was 29, and McCain appeared exasperated. “There’s millions of words said in a campaign. C’mon, Dave,” he said.
McCain said he thought Palin would appear on NBC’s “Saturday Night Live,” where Tina Fey has been doing a dead-on impersonation of her. “Probably get more of an audience than our debate did,” he said.
Although Letterman had said he felt like an “ugly date” after McCain’s initial cancellation, representatives for the two men never stopped talking about a return date.
While McCain risked a rough appearance — “I haven’t had so much fun since my last interrogation,” he said — it gave him the chance to show courage in the face of fire. Letterman reaches about 4 million people a night, a number sure to increase with McCain as guest. With clips on the Internet and Friday morning news, countless more people will undoubtedly learn about their encounter.
McCain did offer one campaign promise that he was probably more likely to keep after he left the stage.
“It’s not the time to raise anybody’s taxes — except yours,” he said to Letterman. “I guarantee you if I become president, I’ll do it. First executive order.”
Senator Obama hired ACORN? Is that what you're saying, DC???
Well, if he did, and they falsely registered voters, and let's say "Mickey Mouse" shows up to vote, complete with ID and all, and he signs in to vote, and the signatures match, and he goes into the booth and pulls the curtain, what guarantee would Senator Obama have that he would vote on the Democratic ticket?? How would it be to his advantage??
Go up a few posts where you will see that I clearly stated that Senator Obama should not be held directly responsible for what's been done by some organization.
Senator Obama's CAMPAIGN hired a firm which is tied in with ACORN, for a get-out-the-vote effort. Not Senator Obama personally.
What guarantee does he have that they will vote for him ONCE they go into the voting booth and pull the curtain closed? Well there are no guarantees in life, but c'mon now, PHULEEESE, let's not be naive about this. ACORN themselves have said that they have registered 1.3 million young people, minorities and poor and working-class voters — most of whom tend to be Democrats.
My post was in no way meant to be an attack on Senator Obama. My intention was only to say that there should be some fairness here for BOTH candidates. What applies to one should apply to the other. Just as Obama should not be held personally responsible for what ACORN has done, Senator McCain should not be held responsible for what that republican woman's party put out. That was my point.
Is anyone watching MSMBC? There is a dinner of some kind with McCain, Obama and Congress (I guess). McCain spoke first and cracked all kinds of jokes (I tuned in at the end of McCain). Now Obama is on and is quite funny.
Some tidbits from Obama for those who ask "Who is Obama?"
"Contrary to gossip, I was not born in a manger" (McCain had a good joke to that affect before O got up to speak)
"Barack means "That One" and (per Obama) "I got my middle name obviously from someone who never thought I'd run for President."
I wish I could remember more and I just heard it. I wish I could have seen it from the beginning, even McCain was funny.
TIS
Note: It's the Afred E. Smith Memorial dinner, A Catholic gathering evidently.(I guess he is the first Catholic to run for an office or something)They are playing McCain again, if anyone wants to see it.
A great line from McCain, "I call him 'The One', but he has a pet name for me too.....George Bush.
Some funny stuff...! But kinda surreal to me. Are these presidential candidates or hosts of SNL? I'm really not sure what to think of all this comedy right now... but on the other hand, it is kind of a breath of fresh air!
BTW, not surprisingly, it didn't seem like McCain knew who Alfred E. Neuman was...
Note: It's the Afred E. Smith Memorial dinner, A Catholic gathering evidently.(I guess he is the first Catholic to run for an office or something)
Smith was the governor of New York in the 1920's. He ran for president in 1928 and lost to Herbert Hoover. Franklin Roosevelt replaced Smith as governor, and the rest is history.
It's an annual affair (in which politicians roast each other).
TAMPA - Al Austin, a high-level Republican fundraiser from Tampa, sent an e-mail to his list of his political contacts Wednesday containing a joke that refers to the assassination of Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.
In an interview, Austin said it was a mistake and apologized, that he hadn't fully read the e-mail and wouldn't knowingly have circulated it.
Later in the day, Austin sent a follow-up e-mail saying it was "a serious mistake on my part" and that the joke "was entirely wrong and certainly does not represent my feelings."
The punch line says that if an airplane carrying Obama and his wife were blown up "it certainly wouldn't be a great loss, and it probably wouldn't be an accident either."
Austin acknowledged sending the e-mail to his list of political contacts, but said he did so while distracted by a conversation with his doctor and didn't know what it said. That list included at least two reporters.
According to the forwarding history on the e-mail, it had gone through at least two other individuals before being sent to Austin on Tuesday. Those two individuals didn't immediately respond to e-mails seeking comment.
Austin, a prominent real estate developer long known as one of the state's leading Republican campaign fundraisers, has served in recent years as finance chairman for both the national and state Republican parties.
Controversy has arisen in the presidential race concerning virulent anti-Obama outbursts among the crowds at some rallies for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.
On Wednesday, the Secret Service was looking into a second allegation that a Palin rallygoer shouted, "Kill him!" after mention of Obama's name, according to The Associated Press.
The Scranton Times-Tribune reported the shout.
A similar incident occurred at a Palin rally in Clearwater last week, according to a news report and some witnesses, when Palin talked about Obama's relationship with former anti-Vietnam War radical William Ayers.
The Secret Service investigated that allegation and found no proof that "Kill him!" was said, or if it was said, that the remark was directed at Obama, according to the agency's spokesman, Eric Zahren.
"We would ask that anyone overhearing threatening language bring it to the attention of the Secret Service or other law enforcement at the event immediately," Zahren said.
That is so scary and so hateful. Just plain WRONG!!!! I do hope the authorities that be follow up on all these things. How sad that some are so hateful.
The race is tightening a little, but I get the sense that the Palin phenomenon has run its course. I think she becomes a serious drag on the ticket in the next few days.
Interesting that you mention that, DT. I saw a focus group of six being interviewed after the debate. Two were Obama supporters, two were McCain supporters and two were undecided. They were asked to raise their hands if they believed that Governor Palin has hurt McCains campaign. All six raised their hands.
The Washington Times op-ed piece endorsed Obama, which is not altogether surprising. To tie into DT's comment, the Times had this interesting comment:
"The choice is made easy in part by Mr. McCain's disappointing campaign, above all his irresponsible selection of a running mate who is not ready to be president."
What bothers me is that I believe that Governor Palin's rhetoric at these rallies is what is whipping these people into such frenzy.
I was just watching Palin's Ohio rally. In the the middle of it, she makes the disclaimer that what she's about to say isn't negative or an attack. Then she proceeds to attack Obama for the next 10-15 minutes.
McCain must have spent less time vetting "Sam the non-Plumber", than he did for Governor Palin.
Is 'Joe the Plumber' a plumber? That's debatable
HOLLAND, Ohio (AP) — Joe the Plumber's story sprang a few leaks Thursday. Turns out that the man who was held up by John McCain as the typical, hard-working American taxpayer isn't really a licensed plumber. And court documents show he owes nearly $1,200 in back taxes.
"Joe," whose name is Samuel J. Wurzelbacher, was cited repeatedly in Wednesday night's final presidential debate by McCain for questioning Barack Obama's tax policy.
Wurzelbacher instantly became a media celebrity, fielding calls during the debate and facing reporters outside his home near Toledo on Thursday morning for an impromptu nationally televised news conference.
The burly, bald man acknowledged he doesn't have a plumber's license, but said he didn't need one because he works for someone else at a company that does residential work.
But Wurzelbacher still would need to be a licensed apprentice or journeyman to work in Toledo, and he's not, said David Golis, manager and residential building official for the Toledo Division of Building Inspection.
State and local records show Wurzelbacher has no license, although his employer does. Golis said there are no records of inspectors citing Wurzelbacher for unlicensed work in Toledo.
And then there was the matter of his taxes.
Wurzelbacher owes the state of Ohio $1,182.98 in personal income tax, according to Lucas County Court of Common Pleas records.
In January 2007, Ohio's Department of Taxation filed a claim on his property until he pays the debt, according to the records. The lien remains active.
At the debate, McCain cited Wurzelbacher as an example of someone who wants to buy a plumbing business but would be hurt by Obama's tax plans.
Wurzelbacher, a self-described conservative, had spoken to Obama at a rally Sunday near his home and asked him whether his tax plan would keep him from buying the business that currently employs him, which earns more than $250,000 a year.
"Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn't it?" Wurzelbacher asked.
Obama said that under his proposal taxes on any revenue from $250,000 on down would stay the same, but that amounts above that level would be subject to a 39 percent tax, instead of the current 36 percent rate.
McCain said Obama's plan would stop entrepreneurs such as Wurzelbacher from investing in new small businesses and keep existing ones from growing.
The McCain campaign posted a Web ad featuring the exchange between Wurzelbacher and Obama.
During an afternoon taping of "Late Show with David Letterman," McCain said he had not yet spoken to Wurzelbacher, and apologized for the press attention he had received.
"Joe, if you're watching, I'm sorry," McCain said.
Wurzelbacher had to deal with a clog of two dozen reporters outside his home on a narrow street lined with ranch- and split-level homes Thursday morning. No detail about the divorced father of a 13-year-old boy was too small: Was he a registered voter? Did he have a plumbing license? Whom will he vote for?
Leaning against his black Dodge Durango SUV, Wurzelbacher at first was amused by it all, then overwhelmed and finally a little annoyed.
"I don't have a lot of pull. It's not like I'm Matt Damon," he said "I just hope I'm not making too much of a fool of myself."
He indicated he was a fan of the military and McCain but wouldn't say who will get his vote. He is registered as a Republican, the county elections board said, because he voted in the GOP primary in March.
Wurzelbacher said a McCain campaign official contacted him several days before the debate to ask him to appear with the candidate at a Toledo rally scheduled for Sunday.
He told reporters he's unsure if he'll attend, since he's now scheduled to be in New York for TV interviews.
On Thursday in New Hampshire, Obama said McCain was misleading voters by proposing tax plans that favor the rich while criticizing an Obama tax plan that would raise taxes only on people making more than $250,000 a year, just 5 percent of all taxpayers.
"He's trying to suggest that a plumber is the guy he's fighting for," Obama said. "How many plumbers you know that are making a quarter-million dollars a year?"
Wurzelbacher said he felt a bit overwhelmed by all the attention.
"I'm kind of like Britney Spears having a headache. Everybody wants to know about it," he joked.
You know, political campaigns have been and will continue to include an element of attack. There are different versions of attack and some are inappropriate, but some are not. Nevertheless, such attacks are inevitable.
Our country's 24/7 news coverage probably provides us with too much information, some of which does not lend itself to our intelligent perception, discussion, and absorption of issues, questions, proposals, etc. While we may inveigh against those attacks that are nothing less than pejorative, we need to preclude them from distracting us from the quality of candidates' proposals by which they would, if elected, govern us.
Our country's 24/7 news coverage probably provides us with too much information, some of which does not lend itself to our intelligent perception, discussion, and absorption of issues, questions, proposals, etc.
I agree, and don't forget to factor in the Internet. Dear God, could you imagine if we had the Internet during some of the more volatile elections of the past century? Who knows what difference it could have made?
What is truly awful about the 24/7 coverage is that we probably learn less about the issues than anything. IMHO none of the debate hosts asked good questions and/or follow up questions, and no one called the candidates out on double talk and evasion. As in, "Senator McCain you keep saying you are going to push the wars and cut taxes. You also say you will balance the budget by cutting waste. Name 5 programs in the defense department you consider wasteful and five social programs you consider wasteful, and the degree to which you will cut them."
"Senator Obama we are trillions in debt, you say we need to draw down in Iraq and refocus on Afghamistan. We are in an economic meltdown and you want to add a national health care program to the mix. How will this be paid for?"
No, instead we get snide comments about who associated with whom, and a bunch of cable gas bags predicting what tomorrow's polls are going to say.
I think the complaints at the 24/7 networks are valid, but I think PBS gives time for the most part some reasonable and smart discussions on the topics, instead of 5 minute screaming fits?
The Los Angeles Times has endorsed Barack Obama for president, following up on the Washington Post's earlier editorial supporting the Illinois Senator.
It's the Times' first presidential endorsement since 1972, and Obama becomes the first Democrat to get the editorial board's support. The LAT editorial, which will appear in Sunday's paper, went online this afternoon.
So will the New York Times endorsement also be published in the fat Sunday edition? It will, at least according to Drudge, and unsurprisingly supporting Obama.
Andy Rosenthal, the NYT's editorial page editor, declined to comment on the Drudge teaser. But unlike the LAT, he told Politico, the paper has no intention of posting earlier online.
UPDATE: Editor & Publisher reports that Obama's endorsement lead is now a 3-1 margin.
Colin Powell might endorse Obama By: Mike Allen October 17, 2008 04:21 PM EST
Retired Gen. Colin Powell, once considered a potential running mate for Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), now may endorse his opponent, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), according to Republican sources. But an air of mystery surrounds Powell's planned live appearance Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press," and no one is sure what he will say.
Powell’s unassailable national security credentials could sway voters who are vacillating about whether Obama is ready to be commander in chief, and his endorsement of the Illinois senator would make a national security emphasis by McCain in the election's closing days extremely difficult.
Powell, 71, a professional soldier for 35 years, has advised the last three Republican presidents.
The general’s camp is being coy about what he might or might not say on Sunday. But some McCain advisers suspect, without being sure, that Powell will endorse Obama.
“It’s going to make a lot of news, and certainly be personally embarrassing for McCain," a McCain official said. "It comes at a time when we need momentum, and it would create momentum against us.”
Powell, a four-star Army general, was national security adviser to President Ronald Reagan; chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the 1991 Persian Gulf war, when George H.W. Bush was president; and President George W. Bush’s first secretary of State,
Powell has consulted with both Obama and McCain, and the general’s camp has indicated in the past that he would not endorse.
On “Meet the Press” in June 2007, Powell said: “I’ve met with Sen. Obama twice. I’ve been around this town a long time, and I know everybody who is running for office, and I make myself available to talk about foreign policy matters and military matters with whoever wishes to chat with me."
Asked by moderator Tim Russert if he would come back into government, Powell said: “I would not rule it out. I’m not at all interested in political life, if you mean elected political life. That is unchanged. But I always keep my, my eyes open and my ears open to requests for service.”
Asked about an endorsement, he said: “It’s too early.”
NBC’s ‘Andrea Mitchell broke the news of Powell’s surprise “Meet the Press” appearance on the “Today” show Friday.
“In what promises to be a dramatic moment Sunday, Colin Powell — a lion of the Republican establishment, whom McCain and Obama both have courted for months — will finally speak out on a variety of issues, appearing exclusively on ‘Meet the Press,’” Mitchell said. “Of course, years ago, he was talked about as the possible first … African-American nominee of a major party.”
Last week, Powell appeared as a character witness at Sen. Ted Stevens’ (R-Alaska) corruption trial, telling jurors that Stevens is someone he trusts completely. "As we say in the infantry, this is a guy you take on a long patrol," Powell said.
Breaking: Obama Demands Special Prosecutor Investigate GOP Voter Fraud Activities
Charging that the FBI probe of ACORN represents an “unholy alliance” between Republican operatives and potentially illegal conduct by law enforcement targeting voter fraud, the Obama campaign demanded Friday that the U.S. special prosecutor looking into the U.S. attorneys scandal investigate the matter.
General counsel Bob Bauer sent a letter to Atty. Gen. Michael Mukasey charging that coordinated “misconduct” by McCain campaign representatives and GOP officials were relevant to the special prosecutor’s work, because the activities may relate to the dismissal of seven U.S. attorneys in late 2006.
The letter requests that the special prosecutor’s inquiry “include a review of any involvement by Justice Dept. and White House officials in supporting the McCain-Palin campaign [and RNC's] systematic development and dissemination of unsupported, spurious allegations of vote fraud.”
To advance the effort, the Obama campaign convened a conference call with national reporters, though Friday afternoon is not a time that campaigns usually push priority messages.
"In the end the Palin candidacy is a symptom and expression of a new vulgarization in American politics. It's no good, not for conservatism and not for the country. And yes, it is a mark against John McCain, against his judgment and idealism."
Conservative Radio Talk Show host Michael Smerconish endorses Obama
On his talk show on WPHT today, conservative Philadelphian Michael Smerconish endorsed Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.
Smerconish did so by reading a couple paragraphs from his pending op-ed in the Philadelphia Inquirer.
"I’ve decided," he said. "My conclusion comes after reading the candidates’ memoirs and campaign platforms, attending both party conventions, interviewing both men multiple times, and watching all primary and general election debates.
"John McCain is an honorable man who has served his country well. But he will not get my vote. For the first time since registering as a Republican 28 years ago, I’m voting for a Democrat for president.
"I may have been an appointee in the George H.W. Bush administration, and master of ceremonies for George W. Bush in 2004, but last Saturday I stood amidst the crowd at an Obama event in North Philadelphia," says the Republican.
Smerconish has given us some more from his op-ed:
"Terrorism. The candidates disagree as to where to prosecute the war against Islamic fundamentalists. Barack Obama is correct in saying the front line in that battle is not Iraq, it’s the Afghan-Pakistan border. Osama bin Laden crossed that border from Tora Bora in December 2001, and we stopped pursuit. The Bush administration outsourced the hunt for bin Laden and, instead, invaded Iraq.
"No one in Iraq caused the death of 3,000 Americans on 9/11. Our invasion was based on a false predicate, so we have no business being there, regardless of whether the surge is working. Our focus must be the tribal-ruled FATA region in Pakistan. Only recently has our military engaged al-Qaeda there in operations that mirror those Obama was ridiculed for recommending in August 2007.
"Last spring, Obama told me, 'It’s not that I was opposed to war [in Iraq]. It’s that I felt we had a war that we had not finished.' Even Sen. Joe Lieberman conceded to me just last Friday that 'the headquarters of our opposition, our enemies today,' is the FATA."
Smerconish is taking a lot of heat from his fellow GOPers, as one might imagine.
Bush-Supporter Dennis Hopper Switches His Vote: "I Pray Obama Wins"
One of Hollywood's few Republicans has switched his vote. Dennis Hopper, 72, told reporters in France that he's praying for an Obama victory, despite decades as a Bush supporter.
"I voted for Bush, father and son, but this time I'll vote for Obama," he told journalists at the opening of a show on his life and work.
"I was the first person in my family to have been Republican," he added. "For most of my life I wasn't on the left."
"I pray God, Barack Obama is elected," he said, calling the current administration's many "lies."
Hopper stars in "An American Carol," a conservative comedy that spoofed Michael Moore and last donated money, in 2004, the RNC.
French Culture minister Christine Albanel also named Dennis Hopper as Commander of the 'Ordre des Arts et des Lettres' medal on Monday night.
...an Obama tax plan that would raise taxes only on people making more than $250,000 a year,......
Regarding Senator Obama's plan to raise taxes on anyone who makes over $250,000 a year, I wish that McCain would have asked this question :
Will Senator Obama's plan to tax anyone who makes over $250,000 in a year affect someone who sells their home where their profit puts them at an income level that brings them over $250,000 for that tax year?
Under a bill that was passed several years ago, homeowners who sell their primary residence are allowed to take a ONE time tax exemption on the profits made from the sale of their home ( I believe the one time exemption is up to $500,000).
I wonder how Senator Obama's potential tax plan affects that homeowner's right to that one time tax exemption.
Keep in mind that federal income taxes are imposed on adjusted gross income less standard or itemized deductions. So, if one is taxed on $250k, they are grossing quite a bit more.
[quote]Regarding Senator Obama's plan to raise taxes on anyone who makes over $250,000 a year,...
That's not his plan. "Families making more than $250,000 will pay either the same or lower tax rates than they paid in the 1990s. Obama will ask the wealthiest 2% of families to give back a portion of the tax cuts they have received over the past eight years to ensure we are restoring fairness and returning to fiscal responsibility. But no family will pay higher tax rates than they would have paid in the 1990s. In fact, dividend rates would be 39 percent lower than what President Bush proposed in his 2001 tax cut. "
Yes, the exclusion is up to $500,000 if the couple is married and files jointly; it's $250,000 otherwise.
But strictly speaking it's capital gains taxes, not income taxes.
Right now there are some situations in which a wealthy person could theoretically pay less percentage in capital gains taxes than a working class person could pay in income taxes. See Warren Buffet's repeated example of paying less (%) taxes than his secretary.
Obama has proposed to raise the capital gains tax from 15% to 20%. But as far as I know he has not suggested eliminating either the exclusion of primary home sale proceeds from capital gains taxation or the mortgage interest deduction.
Funny, someone at that liberal-wanker Huffington Post blog is now worried that McCain's "October Surprise" will be proposing a new FLAT TAX.
Since unlike movies, foreign policy, and the Miami Dolphins, I'm rather ignorant on Economics...
Would a FLAT TAX actually work?
My take? No it wouldn't. To actually have a true flat tax you'd have to get rid of the mortgage interest deduction which is pretty politically unfeasible.
Also there's not enough money under a flat tax system to do everything that the government's doing now. While I think there are a lot of things the government shouldn't be doing (spying on people, bloated defense budget, etc) somehow I think those things would still be done and the shortfall would be made up in things I really care about (SS, Medicare, roads)
But the main reason that I don't think a true flat tax would work is that it doesn't take into account the declining marginal utility of money. That is to say that at the extremes of income (one schmuck who makes $30,000 /year and one guy that pulls in $10,000,000/year taking a equivalent percentage of their income say (20%) is going to hit the smaller guy a lot harder than it will the wealthier fellow.
So even though the percentage taken is equivalent, the impact is far from equivalent. A person making 30K a year who loses 6K now has some very serious choices and trade offs to make about food, health care ,shelter and insurance, etc. A person making 10 million a year who loses 2 million still has all of his needs met and likely most of his hobbies/interests as well.
So much to cover. Just a few random political thoughts/opinions.
I am glad that the Obama camp his asking for an expansion of this "voter fraud" investigation. I've read it is possibly a Republican "exaggerated" story with political motivations (not surprisingly). As the lawyer put it, you don't want "legal manuerving" be able to pick off people one by one from having their votes cast. I read in one state (maybe Ohio) that they were excluding people who lost their homes due to foreclosure, because they basically had no address.
I know right now the economy is "the" issue, I too am interest in SS.
On lighter notes, I hear that Joe the Plumber (wait, he's not really a plumber is he?) may be joining the McCain campaign. Ha ha. Raise your hand if your surprised.
I also read (I think Daily Kos) that some audio tape of Michelle Obama on a rampage about how "they" are treating her husband was getting the right all excited, until it was proven to be an (obvious) fraud.
I didn't see it posted but did you guys see the SNL skit of the "crazy lady at the McCain Rally" that told McCain she didn't want Obama to win because he was "Muslim"?? Ha ha ha. This lady in the skit looked just like he lady at the rally. SNL has always walked the edge, histerically. I wonder what that lady thinks??? Btw, I am not Muslim, BUT since when is Muslim a bad thing? I mean really???? Does Muslim equal terroist?? I think not. I think it's politcal bullshit.
Finally, will there be an October surprise, or was the late September economy bust it????? Me, I think anything is possible. A terror threat comes to mind. Would that be the "turn-around" for McCain?
All I know is I'm taking Nov. 5th off figuring,(I never take any mid-week day off) one way or another, I'll need it. I know anything can happen, BUT, it's so hard not to think I won't be partying at this point.
In all fairness, just as Senator Obama should not be held directly responsible for what's been done by some democratic organization and what some from the democratic party are being investigated for, the same benefit of the doubt should apply to Senator MaCain in regards to this mailing put out by some members of the republican party.
I agree. John McCain is a very decent human being, and I can't see him being a party to that nonsense. Dear God, did you see that woman and her family on the news last night? When questioned about those Obama "food stamps," her fat ass daughter comes on and says "My Daddy's part Messcin, how can Mama be a racist?" And for the record, that's just how she pronounced Mexican (mess-kin). All that was missing was the banjo music and Ned Beatty. The scary part is, this was in California!
But getting back to McCain; he's a good man. And even though I'm voting Democrat this year, it soothes me to know that no matter what happens on Election Day, at the end of January we'll have a better man occupying the White House than we do right now. Whether it's McCain or Obama.
Funny, someone at that liberal-wanker Huffington Post blog is now worried that McCain's "October Surprise" will be proposing a new FLAT TAX.
I'm not going to pretend I know anything about "flat taxes", but I heard a rumor that McCain's October surprise might be to announce that he will only serve 1 term if elected.
Funny, someone at that liberal-wanker Huffington Post blog is now worried that McCain's "October Surprise" will be proposing a new FLAT TAX.
I'm not going to pretend I know anything about "flat taxes", but I heard a rumor that McCain's October surprise might be to announce that he will only serve 1 term if elected.
Wouldn't that be counterproductive, as far as "October Surprises" go?
Wouldn't that be counterproductive, as far as "October Surprises" go?
Probably not, since even most of McCain's supporters are concerned about his age. The thing is though, it's not much of a surprise since many believed he'd probably only stay for 1 term anyway.
Fact check: Obama said he would 'spread his wealth around'?
What did Obama say?
The Statement: Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain, during a speech on October 16 outside Philadelphia, recounted the story of "Joe the Plumber," a man who held a conversation with Democratic candidate Sen. Barack Obama and who became the surprise star of the candidates' October 15 debate when McCain gave an account of the story. McCain said the man told Obama, "'Look, I've been working all my life — 10, 12 hours. I want to buy the business I'm in, but you're going to raise my taxes.' And you know what Senator Obama had to say to Joe? He wanted to spread his wealth around. He wanted to spread his wealth around."
Get the facts!
The Facts: Sen. Obama had been campaigning outside Toledo, Ohio, on October 13 when he met Joe Wurzelbacher, 34, who works for Newell Plumbing & Heating Co., a small firm in the Toledo area. "I'm getting ready to buy a company that makes $250-270-80 thousand a year," Wurzelbacher said. "Your new tax plan is going to tax m more, isn't it?"
Obama explained his tax plan during the roughly five-minute exchange — telling Wurzelbacher that the tax rate on the portion of his income that was more than $250,000 would be increased from 36 percent to 39 percent. But he also mentioned that his plan includes a 50 percent small-business tax credit for health care and a proposal to eliminate the capital-gains tax for small businesses that increase in value. Obama said his tax plan, which he said focuses on bigger breaks for people making lower incomes, would be good for the economy. "If you've got a plumbing business, you're going to be better off if you've got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you," he said. "Right now, everybody's so pinched that business is bad for everybody. And I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
Wurzelbacher said, "The reason I ask you about the American Dream, I mean I've worked hard. I'm a plumber. I work 10, 12 hours a day and I'm buying this company and I'm going to continue working that way. … I'm getting taxed more and more while fulfilling the American Dream."
In an interview with CNN on Thursday, October 16, Wurzelbacher said he had misunderstood Obama's plan and that the company he wants to buy makes well less than $250,000 a year — which Obama says means his taxes would not be increased.
The Verdict: Misleading. McCain's remark was an oversimplification of a five-minute-long conversation. Obama replied in great detail about his tax plan, and the "spread the wealth" remark was one small part of the conversation.
The question is impossible to answer. Is that net income that "Joe" is referring to? How does Joe plan on filing his taxes? Is he an S Corp.? Does his income from the business get added to his personal income? Is he married? Does his wife work? Do they file jointly? Do they have children? Own a home?
There are so many factors that would impact his taxable income that the question is next to impossible to answer.
By the way, I saw on the news that there is an ACTUAL Joe the Plumber in Texas. That's the name of his company and his website is joetheplumber.com.
I could've sworn that said 5 or 6 points yesterday, but the headline doesn't say "Obama's lead drops to 4 points" or "Latest figures show bump for McCain" (both of which are true according to the article)
Hmmmm.... I thought Reuters and AP were supposed to simply report the news.
I had a dream that Obama was assassinated last night. He was shot right next to a cartoon caricature of him that was spray painted on the wall. I think it was outside of a store or something. The Campagin immediately became Biden/Someone else. I could see the name in the dream but I can't remember it now. I couldn't believe how sad it made me feel in the dream.
I could've sworn that said 5 or 6 points yesterday, but the headline doesn't say "Obama's lead drops to 4 points" or "Latest figures show bump for McCain" (both of which are true according to the article)
Hmmmm.... I thought Reuters and AP were supposed to simply report the news.
Are you being serious? You're really upset that the headline isn't different, over a 2 point change in a poll?
Anyone who is still undecided, see below and beware.
Any Conservatives/Independents who are smart enough to know what's at stake...see below and GET THE WORD OUT.
Any far leaning lefties who truly believe they are making the right choice...you are fools and not worth wasting precious time.
Best, AppleOnYa
****************** Pat Buchanan Oct. 17, 2008
As Americans render ... judgment on George Bush, are they aware of the radical course correction they are about to make?
This center-right country is about to vastly strengthen a liberal Congress whose approval rating is 10 percent and implant in Washington a regime further to the left than any in U.S. history. Consider.
As of today, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the San Francisco Democrat, anticipates gains of 15-30 seats. Sen. Harry Reid, whose partisanship grates even on many in his own party, may see his caucus expand to a filibuster-proof majority where he can ignore Republican dissent.
Headed for the White House is the most left-wing member of the Senate, according to the National Journal. To the VP's mansion is headed Joe Biden, third most liberal as ranked by the National Journal...
What will this mean to America? An administration that is either at war with its base or at war with the nation.
America may desperately desire to close the book on the Bush presidency. Yet there is, as of now, no hard evidence it has embraced Obama, his ideology, or agenda. Indeed, his campaign testifies, by its policy shifts, that it is fully aware the nation is still resisting the idea of an Obama presidency....
Obama's convention put him eight points up. But, as soon as America heard Sarah Palin in St. Paul, the Republicans shot up 10 points and seemed headed for victory.
What brought about the Obama-Biden resurgence was nothing Obama and Biden did, but the mid-September crash of Fannie, Freddie, Lehman Brothers, AIG, the stock market...and John McCain's classically inept handling of the crisis.
In short, Obama has still not closed the sale. Every time America takes a second look at him, it has second thoughts, and backs away...Obama knows Middle America harbors deep suspicions of him. Thus, he has jettisoned the rhetoric about the "fierce urgency of now," and "We are the people we've been waiting for," even as he has jettisoned position after position to make himself acceptable.
His "flip-flops" testify most convincingly to the fact that Obama knows that where he comes from is far outside the American mainstream...
Thus, though he is the nominee of a party that is in thrall to the environmental movement, Obama has signaled conditional support for offshore drilling and pumping out of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
While holding to his pledge for a pullout of combat brigades from Iraq in 16 months, he has talked of "refining" his position and of a residual U.S. force to train the Iraqi Army and deal with Al Qaeda.
On Afghanistan, he has called for 10,000 more troops and U.S. strikes in Pakistan to kill Bin Laden, even without prior notice or the permission of the Pakistani government.
Since securing the nomination, Obama has adopted the Scalia position on the death penalty for child rape and the right to keep a handgun in the home. He voted to give the telecoms immunity from prosecution for colluding in Bush wiretaps. This onetime sympathizer of the Palestinians now does a passable imitation of Ariel Sharon.
No Democrat has ever come out of the far left of his party to win the presidency. McGovern, the furthest left, stayed true to his convictions and lost 49 states.
Obama has chosen another course. Though he comes out of the McGovern-Jesse Jackson left, he has shed past positions like support for partial birth abortion as fast as he has shed past associations, from William Ayers to ACORN, from the Rev. Jeremiah Wright to his fellow parishioners at Trinity United.
One question remains: Will a President Obama, with his party in absolute control of both Houses, revert to the politics and policies of the Left that brought him the nomination, or resist his ex-comrades' demands that he seize the hour and impose the agenda ACORN, Ayers, Jesse, and Wright have long dreamed of?
Whichever way he decides, he will be at war with them, or at war with us. If Barack wins, a backlash is coming.
Anyone who is still undecided, see below and beware.
Any Conservatives/Independents who are smart enough to know what's at stake...see below and GET THE WORD OUT.
Any far leaning lefties who truly believe they are making the right choice...you are fools and not worth wasting precious time.
Best, AppleOnYa
I read as far as
Quote:
Pat Buchanan Oct. 17, 2008
and knew I needed to read no farther.
But what about his evolved views on:
Gays: "Someone's values are going to prevail. Why not ours? Whose country is it, anyway? Whose moral code says we may interfere with a man's right to be a practicing bigot, but must respect and protect his right to be a practicing sodomite?"
Guns: "The Second Amendment guarantees the individual right to own, possess, and use personal firearms, and as President I will ensure that this right is not compromised. People convicted of violent crime should forfeit their right to own firearms, but sportsmen, hunters, & law-abiding Americans should be allowed to use guns for pleasure or personal or family safety. Private ownership of guns gives citizens of this free republic the means to protect life, liberty and property -- and I will fully & faithfully protect that right."
Race: "Any man or any woman, of any color or creed, can be a good American. We know that from our history. But when it comes to the ability to assimilate into a nation like the United States, all nationalities, creeds, and cultures are not equal. To say that is ideology speaking, not judgment born out of experience."
Adolf Hitler: "An individual of great courage...Hitler's success was not based on his extraordinary gifts alone. His genius was an intuitive sense of the mushiness, the character flaws, the weakness masquerading as morality that was in the hearts of the statesmen who stood in his path."
Israel: "The Israelis want this war desperately because they want the United States to destroy the Iraqi war machine. They want us to finish them off. They don't care about our relations with the Arab world."
To point out just a few. So yeah, if Pat Buchanan wrote it, it must make sense.
The media is leans so far right it's sickening Yea, there are some Left leaning, some way leftleaning but IMHO generally speaking it's way way way rightwing. Think about it. We heard all about Obama's Rev.Wright; Did the media cover Palin's witchdoctor episode? NO
"If" Obama had a pregnant unmarried daughter don't even try to tell me the media wouldn't be shouting "disgrace" from the mountaintops. Palin's daughter gets a pass that Obama's would not.
Barely did they touch the "Keating Five". We can't criticize McCain (he's a war hero ya know) BUT get all over Obama for Ayers story.
A while back there was a story about McCain having an affair with a campaign woker. True or not true, IF it were Obama, he'd be front and center headlines. I challenge anyone to say it's not the case. I am sure "they" are still searching for dirt as we speak.
If it were Obama who left his first "ill" wife and was carrying on with his current, you bet your ass the media would be covering it and the right would express their self-righteous phony outrage.
If Obama's rally's were inciting the hate (I'm not talking pidly stuff like NoBama or McBush type stuff..I'm talking hate) The media would be right there front and center.
Let's not even get into how the media has been kissing GWB's ass for 8 years, giving him a free ride (along ith the ball-less Congress). People call it leftwing because the rightwing is so good at what they do in bullshitting people.
ST. LOUIS - Standing under the Gateway Arch, Sen. Barack Obama spoke this afternoon before a crowd his campaign said totaled 100,000, a new U.S. record for his presidential bid. "All I can say is wow," Obama said as he took the stage, his home state behind his back across the Mississippi River.
The Illinois Democrat had in May attracted about 75,000 to an event in Portland, Ore., before that state's primary election. In Berlin, he drew more than 200,000 during a foreign trip in July.
The campaign provided a name and number for a St. Louis police officer to verify the estimate. He could not be immediately reached.
In the first of two Missouri stops today, Obama misspoke at one point, mentioning where he will be this evening instead of where he was this afternoon. "If we can rebuild Baghdad, we can rebuild Kansas City," he said.
Obama also defended his tax cut proposals, which Sen. John McCain had criticized earlier in the day during a stop in North Carolina.
"John McCain is so out of touch with the struggles you are facing, he must be the first politician in history to call a tax cut for working people 'welfare.'" Obama said. "George Bush and John McCain are out of ideas, they are out of touch, and if you stand with me in 17 days they'll be out of time."
Every four years, Missouri commands attention because of its bellwether status. It has voted for every presidential winner since 1900, with the exception of 1956.
And a CNN/Time/Opinion Research poll released earlier this week showed Obama and McCain in a virtual tie in the state.
As a resident from a neighboring state, including one that shares a major media market with Illinois, has also offered Obama advantages in Missouri.
His campaign said this was his seventh trip to Missouri since he secured the nomination. McCain, meanwhile, is schedule to stop in the state on Monday.
The ability of Obama to give attention to Missouri so just more than two weeks before Election Day stands in stark contrast to Sen. John Kerry, the 2004 Democratic nominee who had virtually conceded Missouri at this point in his campaign.
As it has in other states, economic stress in Missouri has boosted Obama's campaign here, as voters express strong frustration with the nation's current direction.
If he is to win the state, Obama will need to boost turnout in the urban centers of St. Louis and Kansas City to counter the state's strong base of conservative evangelicals.
Obama's campaign, however, has been aggressively registering new voters, especially in the major urban centers of St. Louis and Kansas City, where it hopes to dramatically increase voter turnout.
"We are going to break every turnout record in Missouri and this nation," said Rep. William Lacy Clay, a Missouri congressman who was part of Obama's warm up act.
Clay and others cautioned voters waiting to hear Obama to be aware of potential polling place problems, while offering a toll free number for those who have trouble casting their votes.
Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri said she expects her state's outcome to be close because of its tradition that "sometimes a one-point victory in Missouri is called a landslide."
McCaskill also criticized Republican running mate and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin for a comment she made this week about campaigning in "pro-America" places.
"We have reached a new low in American politics when someone dares to say that one part of America is more pro-American than another part of America," McCaskill countered.
Even before Obama secured his party's nomination, he started making trips into the state, including one in May where he met with workers in Cape Girardeau, the boyhood home of conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh.
"We're going to spend a lot of time in Missouri making sure we win this state," Obama said during that stop.
Everything is still looking good for Obama. He is sooo right telling everyone not to get "cocky" BUT, am I the only one that thinks there is a "chance" that this election could be, dare I say the "L" word?????? I know, I know!!! This is so different though. I have a gut feeling.
I do believe on election day, we will get a fairly good idea when they start showing voting turnout.
All that aside, as far as the electoral votes go, all the sources show Obama with close to or more than the 270 (some 300). According to Chuck Todd and others McCain simply must", not only keep the states that Bush won, but steal at least one of the blue states from Obama.
With early/absentee voting starting already (I voted last week), I doubt they have a planned "October surprise" But that doesn't mean that shit can't heppen (that's where we try not to get too cocky)
With Obama being black, I wouldn't put any money on what is going to happen in the end. All indications are that Obama could double McCain's Electoral Vote.
It's okay, TIS. Put it in the books; this one's over.
My advice to the right leaning, inbred, trailer dwellers, who continually lower the national average on IQ points: Enjoy your guns and religion now, Suckeeeeerrrrrrrrs.
I really don't like the electoral votes trumping the popular votes BUT wouldn't it be a kick in the ass for the Republicans IF McCain won the popular vote and Obama the electoral votes? Paybacks can be a mutha!!!! (I feel safe in saying, that's not gonna happen)
I could've sworn that said 5 or 6 points yesterday, but the headline doesn't say "Obama's lead drops to 4 points" or "Latest figures show bump for McCain" (both of which are true according to the article)
Hmmmm.... I thought Reuters and AP were supposed to simply report the news.
Are you being serious? You're really upset that the headline isn't different, over a 2 point change in a poll?
I didn't say I was upset, or that it was outrageous -- I was just pointing out a subtlety in wording. If the article talks about a 2-point change in the polls, then the headline should reflect that fact -- not simply saying so-and-so's leading in the polls.
If you would have told me a year ago that I would turn into a full blown Obama supporter, I would not have believed you.
Me too, Lou. I think the protracted battle against Hillary is what really endeared him to me. I still HATE the Clintons.
I never hated the Clintons. In fact, I probably was leaning towards Hillary when it was a 3 person race. After 8 years of Bush, I probably would have voted for anyone running as a Democrat. I just didn't think I'd be enthusiastically voting for anyone.
I didn't say I was upset, or that it was outrageous -- I was just pointing out a subtlety in wording. If the article talks about a 2-point change in the polls, then the headline should reflect that fact -- not simply saying so-and-so's leading in the polls.
But meh. I don't know who I'm voting for, like many others across the States. But at least I, for one, don't fall for that shit. May the best man win! (I just wish the best man was running, too -- whoever that might be)
If you would have told me a year ago that I would turn into a full blown Obama supporter, I would not have believed you.
Me too, Lou. I think the protracted battle against Hillary is what really endeared him to me. I still HATE the Clintons.
I never hated the Clintons. In fact, I probably was leaning towards Hillary when it was a 3 person race. After 8 years of Bush, I probably would have voted for anyone running as a Democrat. I just didn't think I'd be enthusiastically voting for anyone.
Not sure what I would have done. I know I couldn't have voted for her, but would I be willing to throw away a vote on an independent nutball like Ralph Nader? That's the question.
I had never heard of Obama until his speech at the Dem convention in 04. I remember asking myself, "who is this guy?" When he was considering running for President, I knew who he was and took interest in what he had to say.
Bottom line, for me anyway, is I haven't felt this much hope or excitement in a Presidential election since JFK. That hope/change feeling is here again. I was too young to vote for JFK, but even at 12 I felt the excitement he brought about.
Anyway, I don't look for any benefits for he first 4 years, as far as noticing change. I think to dig us out of this mess we are in, it'll take at least one term for us to notice and real change, but let's hope that our new President can get the country back on it's feet again.
McCain and Palin today accused Obama for being directly responsible for the attacks on "Sam the non-Plumber", and the fact the media won't leave him alone. Excuse me, but it was McCain that decided that this guy would be the center of his campaign for the last 3 weeks. I guess the media shouldn't have reported the guy isn't a licensed plumber, owes back taxes, and only makes $40K a year.
I had never heard of Obama until his speech at the Dem convention in 04. I remember asking myself, "who is this guy?" When he was considering running for President, I knew who he was and took interest in what he had to say.
I don't think 99.9% of the people ever heard of him until that 04 speech. I remember before the speech, the commentators stating how "Obama was going to electrify the convention, and we would be seeing him running for national office in the near future".
I was too young to vote for JFK, but even at 12 I felt the excitement he brought about.
Stop, TIS. You know you weren't 12 until the Reagan administration; probably his second term.
Oh, you are so nice PB. Where do I send the check???
Slightly off topic, back to JFK. He sparked my political interest actually. I was at a Catholic school at the time (which consisted of about 50 kids total). JFK's motorcade came down the street. Needless to say the nuns/Priests were all jazzed at the thought of the first Catholic President. Even at a young age, I watched some of his speeches, was drawn to his sense of humor and charm. Anyway, what a thrill to wave as he sat atop the seat of the car. That day I purchased a JFK pin for $1.00 (must have been at least two weeks allowance) . My mom was pissed off that I "wasted" my allowance. Deep down though, I was glad I did.
I was too young to vote for JFK, but even at 12 I felt the excitement he brought about.
Stop, TIS. You know you weren't 12 until the Reagan administration; probably his second term.
Oh, you are so nice PB. Where do I send the check???
Slightly off topic, back to JFK. He sparked my political interest actually. I was at a Catholic school at the time (which consisted of about 50 kids total). JFK's motorcade came down the street. Needless to say the nuns/Priests were all jazzed at the thought of the first Catholic President. Even at a young age, I watched some of his speeches, was drawn to his sense of humor and charm. Anyway, what a thrill to wave as he sat atop the seat of the car. That day I purchased a JFK pin for $1.00 (must have been at least two weeks allowance) . My mom was pissed off that I "wasted" my allowance. Deep down though, I was glad I did.
TIS
TIS, that reminds me of a "mock" election that I voted in while I was in the 4th grade. In November 1968, in a student election at Our Lady of Mount Carmel school, on Bathgate Avenue in the Bronx, a nine year old Pizzaboy "voted" for, gasp, Richard M. Nixon.
I'm looking for coverage/story on the 100,000 crowd in St. Louis Mo. That's gotta be some kind of record no? Our "lefty" media doesn't seem to be covering it much though.
TIS
NOTE: I had to go Daily Kos, a Leftwing blog, to find pics, but here is what 100,000 people look like. Continue to scroll down for pics. The picture I posted is from Huffington Post.
One is registered voters. One is "likely voters current intentions". And one is "likely voters current intentions and past voting history". It's strange. You can read more on Gallup's website:
Newspapers that Endorsed Bush in 2004 who Endorse Obama in 2008
NEW YORK The Denver Post, which had backed George W. Bush in 2004 and is owned by Republican-leaning William Dean Singleton, this evening endorsed Barack Obama for president. So did the Chicago Sun-Times, Kansas City Star. Southwest News-Herald (Ill.) and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. And to top it off: two more Bush backers in 2004, The Salt Lake Tribune and Las Cruces (N.M) Sun-News.
This followed this afternoon's surprises: the Chicago Tribune, which has never in 150 years endorsed a Democrat, backed Obama, as did its fellow Tribune paper, the Los Angeles -- which had endorsed no one in more than 30 years. It seems like a dam broke yesterday with the unexpectedly early choice of Obama by The Washington Post.
In E&P's exclusive count, Obama now leads 62-18 in editorial endorsements. New additions for him include the Miami Herald, the Philadelphia Inquirer and The Oregonian of Portland. Check out our running list, updated Saturday here.
Colorodo, of course, is a key swing state. Georgia is also now, surprisingly, in play and the Atlanta paper is the state's largest.
The Salt Lake paper complained that "out of nowhere, and without proper vetting, the impetuous McCain picked Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate. She quickly proved grievously underequipped to step into the presidency should McCain, at 72 and with a history of health problems, die in office. More than any single factor, McCain's bad judgment in choosing the inarticulate, insular and ethically challenged Palin disqualifies him for the presidency.
"Still, we have compelling reasons for endorsing Obama on his merits alone. Under the most intense scrutiny and attacks from both parties, Obama has shown the temperament, judgment, intellect and political acumen that are essential in a president that would lead the United States out of the crises created by President Bush, a complicit Congress and our own apathy."
The Kansas City paper also hit McCain hard for choosing an "unqualfied" running mate.
The Denver paper posted on its site this evening: "The Denver Post's editorial board today has endorsed Democrat Barack Obama for president."
The Post decided Obama is "better equipped to lead America back to a prosperous future....In unsteady times, it may seem obvious to gravitate toward the veteran politician, but in this campaign, it's been the newcomer who has had the steady hand."
Today's endorsement will appear in Sunday's print edition of The Denver Post. Like most of the other major papers making a pick this week, it came out on the Web well before landing in print.
The paper's site also boasts a dissenting view from the editorial board (see editorial writer Chuck Plunkett's column). And Editorial Page Editor Dan Haley explains how it all went down, pointing out that the "independent" paper has split its last 14 picks for president right down the middle in party choice. He writes: "Today, with our endorsement of Obama, we lean further to the left than my own personal compass. But it's where the majority of our board is, and that's OK.
"We know our endorsement is likely to anger about, oh, 47 percent of the people in Colorado. And that's OK, too. Endorsements are meant to stoke a public dialogue."
GOP turnout lagging in heavy N. Carolina early voting
Thursday's first day of early voting drew record numbers across North Carolina, election officials said, as more than 100,000 people turned out.
That exceeded the 2004 figure by about 40 percent, said Gary Bartlett, executive director of the State Board of Elections.
"We blew it away," Bartlett said Friday, encouraging other voters to take advantage of the early voting period before it ends on Nov. 1. "If not, it will be a long day on Election Day."
Mecklenburg County, where Chgarlotte is located, also set records, with an updated count showing more than 10,000 voting on the first day, and an additional 7,000 on Friday. Michael Dickerson, the county's elections director, suspects Friday's totals might have been higher if not for the rain.
Across the state, Democrats showed the most first-day enthusiasm. Of the nearly 114,000 first-day voters, 64 percent were Democrats, 21 percent Republicans and 15 percent unaffiliateds.
African American turnout was up significantly. Black voters, who make up about 22 percent of registered voters, were 36 percent of Thursday's early voters.
In 2004, blacks made up 18.6 percent of voters.
Experts estimate that Barack Obama needs a black turnout in North Carolina of between 22 percent to 23 percent to carry the state. No Democratic presidential candidate has carried North Carolina since Jimmy Carter in 1976.
Experts estimate that Barack Obama needs a black turnout in North Carolina of between 22 percent to 23 percent to carry the state. No Democratic presidential candidate has carried North Carolina since Jimmy Carter in 1976.
Hmmm. If the black vote was almost 19% for Kerry/Bush, it shouldn't be that difficult to get 23% for Obama/Bush.
CONCORD — Another 100,000 North Carolina voters cast a ballot in the second day of early voting, sustaining a breakneck pace that began when polls opened Thursday, elections officials said Saturday.
Braving hours-long lines, voters eager to cast a ballot amid presidential, Senate and governor’s races that are too close to call have surged to the polls in record numbers. State Board of Elections figures show that some 214,000 voters have now voted at one-stop sites in North Carolina.
The numbers have clearly favored Democrats. Some 62 percent of voters who have cast a ballot in early voting are registered with the party. Only 22 percent are registered Republicans.
By comparison, about 46 percent of all registered voters in the state are declared Democrats while 32 percent are with the GOP.
Amy Black, 40, of Kernersville, said she’s not concerned by the low early turnout of registered Republicans like herself. She plans to early vote next week to beat the lines.
“It’s only been two days,” she said after attending a rally for Republican presidential nominee John McCain in Concord.
The state GOP cautions that many Democrats and independents in North Carolina — where President Bush won by 12 points four years ago — may trend to McCain. Voters in the state generally prefer Democrats for state offices and Republicans to hold national seats.
And while Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama pushed voters to the polls on opening day, the Republicans are planning a number of political events in the upcoming week to emphasize the voting option. They’ve also invested in mail-in absentee balloting.
Elections officials and campaign observers expects that one-third of North Carolina voters could go to the polls before Election Day.
TIS, I know exactly what you mean when you talk about the hope and excitement that Senator Obama generates. I think that's one of the things I like so much about him. After the 2000 election, when all we heard about was how we should be ashamed of our last president, and the 2004 and 2008 elections when the Republicans have preached fear and terrorists, it is so wonderful to feel a sense of hope. I love to watch Obama approach a podium, the energy he exudes as he skips up some stairs and strides to the podium - it's such a contrast, like a breath of fresh air.
McCain draws bipartisan criticism for 'robo calls'
10/18/2008
LAS VEGAS (AP) — Senators in opposing political parties asked Republican presidential candidate John McCain to stop the automated phone calls that link Democratic candidate Barack Obama to a 1960s radical.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, Sen. Norm Coleman, a Minnesota Republican and Sen. Susan Collins, a Maine Republican, made separate appeals to McCain on Friday. Collins faces a tough race for re-election and serves as a co-chairwoman of his Maine campaign.
"These kind of tactics have no place in Maine politics," Collins spokesman Kevin Kelley said. "Sen. Collins urges the McCain campaign to stop these calls immediately."
Coleman, in a tight re-election campaign, said he hoped all candidates and outside groups would stop their attacks.
In Nevada, a four-page campaign flier mailed this week by the state Republican Party also focused on Obama's past relationship with former Weather Underground leader Bill Ayers, calling the college professor a "terrorist, radical, friend of Obama" and featuring several images of Obama and Ayers.
Reid told reporters at a news conference in Las Vegas that he's surprised at the "scummy" tactics employed by McCain's presidential campaign and "can't believe John McCain knows what's going on."
The McCain campaign says the calls are warranted because Obama's connection to Ayers — the two met many years after Ayers' anti-Vietnam War activities had ended — raises questions about the Democrat's judgment and record.
"This is an association that is highly questionable and not out of bounds," McCain spokesman Rick Gorka said.
The automated calls in Maine, Nevada and other states — they are commonly known as "robo calls" — say Obama "has worked closely with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, whose organization bombed the U.S. Capitol, the Pentagon, a judge's home and killed Americans." The charge is misleading: The bombings, which took place more than 35 years ago, didn't result in fatalities and the group didn't claim responsibility for the attack on the judge's home.
Obama has condemned Ayers' radical activities, which took place in the late 1960s and the 1970s, when Obama was a child. In the debate Wednesday with McCain, Obama said Ayers played no role in his presidential campaign.
Ayers, an education professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, lives in Obama's neighborhood in Chicago. In 1995, he hosted a meet-the-candidate session at his home as the young Harvard Law School graduate prepared to run for the Illinois Senate. The two also worked with two nonprofit charitable organizations in Chicago.
McCain Adviser Says Northern Virginia Not "Real" Virginia
October 18, 2008
It might be a good idea for the folks from the McCain campaign to take a day off, take a breath, and then return to work. Republicans unaffiliated with the campaign tell me the "bunker" mentality there is really starting to hurt them.
To wit: McCain senior adviser Nancy Pfotenhauer on MSNBC today.
"As a proud resident of Oakton, Virginia, I can tell you that the Democrats have just come in from the District of Columbia and moved into northern Virginia," Pfotenhauer said, speaking of Democratic gains in that part of the state. "And that's really what you see there.
"But the rest of the state, 'real Virginia,' if you will, I think will be very responsive to Senator McCain’s message," she continued.
Pfotenhauer went on to make a totally valid point about Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., having to play defense in Pennsylvania, as areas in battleground states where Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., could do well.
"And remember that, you know, you’ve got places in other states like northern Wisconsin, the iron range of Minnesota, south-central and southeastern Pennsylvania, the St. Louis suburbs and the rural areas of Missouri that are very responsive to our message," she said. "And again we're taking it to them in Pennsylvania and New Hampshire. He’s having to fight to defend there, as you can tell because he's deployed people like the Clintons out in Pennsylvania. And every speech Joe Biden gives, he says, 'I’m from Scranton.' You don't know what else he's going to say, but he sure gets that line in."
But the "real Virginia" line -- made in the wake of the nominee's brother, Joe McCain, referring to Arlington and Alexandria as "Communist country" -- is what's most likely to make news, and help Team Obama drive up Democratic turnout in the battleground state.
"Hey Nancy," said the MSNBC anchor, "I’m going to give you a chance to climb back off that ledge. Did you say 'real Virginia'?"
"I did say outside of north – well, I mean real Virginia, because northern Virginia is where I’ve always been, but real Virginia I take to be the – this part of the state that is more southern in nature, if you will," she said. "Northern Virginia is really metro D.C., as you're aware, Kevin."
Bottom line, for me anyway, is I haven't felt this much hope or excitement in a Presidential election since JFK. That hope/change feeling is here again. TIS
Well TIS where you see hope and excitement I see dread & doom if Obama gets elected(which I think he will) Take it from me this nation will be screwed if Obama gets elected. Plus you call the media rightwing leaning, man that is laughable the media is so damned left wing it's not even funny.
My advice to the right leaning, inbred, trailer dwellers, who continually lower the national average on IQ points: Enjoy your guns and religion now, Suckeeeeerrrrrrrrs.
I see dread & doom if Obama gets elected(which I think he will) Take it from me this nation will be screwed if Obama gets elected.
I can't predict the future, so who knows. I'm pretty in the middle in politics, generally. But when it comes to foreign affairs -- at least while during a mission, regardless of how we ended up in there -- I gotta lean toward the right. The left doesn't seem to know shit about anything beyond our borders. And just to show I'm not some right-winger, I'm starting to believe that republican presidents purposely get our nation involved in long, drawn-out affairs JUST to help perpetuate their party's prominence in the White House!
Hell, I'll probably vote for McCain simply because I totally support a RESPONSIBLE withdrawal from Iraq. That's NOT a vote for going in there to begin with, and that's certainly not a vote against withdrawal. But it'd be a vote for a RESPONSIBLE withdrawal. Our commanders know what's going on there a helluva lot better than any U.S. citizen does, including Obama. And for that matter, McCain as well.
We can't lose that "war", or we'll be in deep shit. McCain knows that, and I think he also knows that we need to get (fully) back into Afghanistan, and, we need to hit Pakistan as well.
But now we're conveniently in a recession -- shit, almost globally at this point. Sheesh. Who's to blame? I don't know. But certainly the Left's typical protocal of raising taxes like Robin Hood isn't gonna help much, while at the same time international affairs turn even worse. So go ahead, let's give That One a shot at it. Tell me how it is 4 yrs from now when the economy gets better ON ITS OWN, despite more attacks on the Free World due to a lax in military force.
If we were in a peaceful time, I'd have no problem giving Obama a shot. But we're not. And we certainly won't be 4 years from now if he's president (IMHO).
But now we're conveniently in a recession -- shit, almost globally at this point. Sheesh. Who's to blame? I don't know. But certainly the Left's typical protocal of raising taxes like Robin Hood isn't gonna help much, while at the same time international affairs turn even worse. So go ahead, let's give That One a shot at it. Tell me how it is 4 yrs from now when the economy gets better ON ITS OWN, despite more attacks on the Free World due to a lax in military force.
Really? You can't say who is to blame? Like wanting a war and at the same time and not wanting to raise taxes to pay for it? And you think it would get better on its own? Like a war would start paying for itself? Like it has been getting better and better these past eight years, right? With printing money out of thin air with absolutely no back up, and sharing in the world's wealth?
Personally, I'm not sure why anyone from the left would want to get in the office at the moment and pick up the pieces. The aftermath of all the economical and global irresponsibilities of this administration in these past eight years has not yet sank in. Anyone who gets elected would have to raise taxes to pay for the debt anyway. McCain would do it, as would Obama.
And as for the foreign affairs, they equally know nothing and war in Iraq is pretty much lost anyway. But what makes me cringe from right, even more than when Bush was in charge is imagining Palin end up being the president. And when I thought no one can make Bush look good. McCain would've actually made a fine president if he had not made this desperate choice of running mate.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Retired U.S. Gen. Colin Powell, a former secretary of state in the Bush administration, on Sunday endorsed Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.
In an appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press," Powell backed Obama over fellow Republican John McCain, calling the Democratic nominee a "transformational figure" who could be an "exceptional president."
Powell said he plans to vote for Obama in the November 4 election but does not intend to campaign for the Illinois senator as Obama and McCain enter the final weeks of their battle for the White House.
Powell, who served in the military and government for 40 years, said he is not looking for a job in an Obama administration. However, he said, "I've always said if a president asks you to do something, you have to consider it."
McCain, appearing on "Fox News Sunday," said Powell's support of Obama did not come as a surprise and said four other secretaries of state had endorsed him.
In picking Obama over McCain, Powell said either "man would be a good president."
Powell praised Obama's "depth of knowledge" and "steadiness," while he was critical of what he described as McCain's uncertainty over how to deal with economic crisis.
Powell also voiced concern about McCain's selection of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate.
"She is a very distinguished woman and she is to be admired," Powell said. "But ... I don't believe she is ready to be president of the United States."
Hell, I'll probably vote for McCain simply because I totally support a RESPONSIBLE withdrawal from Iraq. That's NOT a vote for going in there to begin with, and that's certainly not a vote against withdrawal. But it'd be a vote for a RESPONSIBLE withdrawal. Our commanders know what's going on there a helluva lot better than any U.S. citizen does, including Obama. And for that matter, McCain as well.
Err, sorry to rain on your parade, but the U.S. is negotiating with the Iraqi "government" (about as stable as Alec Baldwin with his kids) a security pact where our frontline combat troops would withdraw in 2009, and the last Americans military personel would leave on December 31, 2011.
So really, you can't vote on this issue, if there is NO issue then. I am pretty sure that if Dubya gets that deal sealed before he leaves office, Obama won't void or nullify it.
Originally Posted By: J Geoff
We can't lose that "war", or we'll be in deep shit. McCain knows that, and I think he also knows that we need to get (fully) back into Afghanistan, and, we need to hit Pakistan as well.
Yes because we as a nation were so fucked after we left Vietnam. Oh wait, the USSR collapsed in 1991. Holy shit, we won the Cold War in spite of losing Nam! Whoa Macaroni!
Anyway, you know that Obama...and here is my spin-doctor dipshit moment of the day....anyway, Obama called for a surge in troops for Afghanistan before the White House did, the same as well on a Iraq withdrawal plan/timetable. As I've said before, if Obama is so wreckless, why did the White House follow his lead on both points?
Usually the President, NOT a candidate, leads our foreign policy.
Originally Posted By: J Geoff
But now we're conveniently in a recession -- shit, almost globally at this point. Sheesh. Who's to blame? I don't know. But certainly the Left's typical protocal of raising taxes like Robin Hood isn't gonna help much, while at the same time international affairs turn even worse.
You know, I don't think Obama will govern from the left, at least for the first year, to the surprise of you and dismay of the liberals. In fact, I wouldn't be shocked if Obama has more fights with HIS party than the GOPers.
An interesting discussion on THIS WEEK today, where Gergen and Gingrinch both agreed that Obama shouldn't raise anyone's taxes for at least the first year.
Originally Posted By: J Geoff
So go ahead, let's give That One a shot at it. Tell me how it is 4 yrs from now when the economy gets better ON ITS OWN, despite more attacks on the Free World due to a lax in military force.
If we were in a peaceful time, I'd have no problem giving Obama a shot. But we're not. And we certainly won't be 4 years from now if he's president (IMHO).
Compare Iran in 2001 when Clinton left office to Iran in 2009. Notice how the great failure perhaps of the Dubya Administration was allowing Iran to grow in prominence in the region. Before Iraq, Iran was contained by Saddam, and despite what facts you or DJ or appleonya can give me to excuse for that war, Iran was contained.
To put it another way, why fight when your enemies can fight each other? Shit, Iran almost went to war with the Taliban regime in Afghanistan in the late 90s because of a Taliban attack on a Iranian diplomatic envoy.
If anything Geoff, look at history, and I see Obama trying to imitate more Kennedy than the Liberal Doomsday scenario that you seem to be dreaming about.
Yeah JFK is seen as a liberal, but he also had the CIA overthrow the regimes in Iraq and South Vietnam (indirectly leading to Diem getting skull-capped), escalated our involvement in Vietnam, and he was willing to start nuclear WW3 over fucking Cuba.
All I'm saying is, instead of trying to play Rambo, we should be like Ninjas. Use smarts, mobility, quick-action/withdrawal guerilla warfare, fight on our schedule instead of our enemies.
Bottom line, for me anyway, is I haven't felt this much hope or excitement in a Presidential election since JFK. That hope/change feeling is here again. TIS
Well TIS where you see hope and excitement I see dread & doom if Obama gets elected(which I think he will) Take it from me this nation will be screwed if Obama gets elected. Plus you call the media rightwing leaning, man that is laughable the media is so damned left wing it's not even funny.
Considering how screwed we are already....I doubt he can do any worse.
We have had 8 years of "fucked-up"....8 years. My God, what has to happen to acknowledge this?? I am ready to take a chance and go with something new. Our nation is more than ready for it. A President with a brain is a great concept.
Anyway, here is Powell's appearance on MTP, and his rather intelligent argument for why a former Republican Secretary of State is endorsing a Democratic candidate:
Reasons include
- Obama's more "inclusive" party platform (the GOP has gone too far-right for his taste) - The irrelevancy/racial tinge of the McCain campaign in recent weeks in continuing the smears that OBama is a muslim or/and a terrorist or whatever nonsense. - the Obama campaign's handling of when the Economy went to hell.
I tell ya, his whole piece on the Muslim-American soldier who died in Iraq actually left a tear on my eye.
This just reaffirms how moderates/disgruntled Conservatives from within the Republican Party have just been alienated by the Dubya Years, and either are staying home or giving non-official blessings to the Obama campaign, or outright endorsements, like George Will and now the most promiment "Obamacon" (Republicans for Obama) in Colin Powell.
This just reaffirms how moderates/disgruntled Conservatives from within the Republican Party have just been alienated by the Dubya Years, and either are staying home or giving non-official blessings to the Obama campaign
Thanks for the history lesson, RRA - I was never good in that subject. But please don't lump me into the Conservative group; I consider myself in the middle, as I said. I don't dislike Obama -- in fact he's quite likable and I would have no problem if (when) he wins. I don't really trust either one, though. But whenever I think of Palin, my mind does lean in Obama's direction more! I still need to read their positions in more depth, however. You can't get the whole picture from debates - it should be more than a talent show.
Zogby has Obama up by 2 points among likely voters.
Do you mean he's up by only 2 points, or that his lead has increased by 2 points?
Obama is +3 in today's Zogby Poll. Down 1 point from yesterday. Obama is +6 in today's Rasmussen Poll. Up 1 point from yesterday. Gallup's Sunday Poll won't be out until after 1PM.
We have had 8 years of "fucked-up"....8 years. My God, what has to happen to acknowledge this?? I am ready to take a chance and go with something new. Our nation is more than ready for it. A President with a brain is a great concept.
TIS
Pretty much how I feel. I'm willing to take a chance. I can't imagine the next 4 years being worse than the last 8.
Like I said in an earlier post. Come hell or high water, at the end of January we'll have a better President in office than we do right now. Whether it's Obama or McCain. Not necessarily a better person, because I'm not at all convinced that Bush is a "bad" person, just a lousy President.
If they can reach 60, commonly called the "magic 60," it would virtually prevent Republicans from blocking legislation on the Senate floor. I believe both parties need the other one to keep themselves in line somewhat.
If they can reach 60, commonly called the "magic 60," it would virtually prevent Republicans from blocking legislation on the Senate floor. I believe both parties need the other one to keep themselves in line somewhat.
Well TIS where you see hope and excitement I see dread & doom if Obama gets elected(which I think he will) Take it from me this nation will be screwed if Obama gets elected.
Yes, because I'm living in fucking Candy Land now, where it's all happiness and sparkles and pretty pink fucking unicorns.
How bad does it have to get before you will wake up and admit that the last eight years have been the nightmare of all nightmares?
Do we need to get into a war that was based solely on lies - a war that will cost 4000 American lives and put us smack dab in the middle of a recession? Oh, wait, mission accomplished there!
Do we need a natural disaster to sink an entire CITY of our citizens, have them stranded and starving and dying of thirst for DAYS before help even BEGINS to arrive?? And then have the President tell the man in charge that he's doing a "heck of a job"? Oh, wait, that happened, too.
Do we need to have the highest energy costs in our history, which then drives up the cost of every other fucking thing in this country so that families will have to choose between eating and commuting to work? Do we have to have the elderly, living on fixed incomes, become popsicles because they can't afford to heat their homes? Oh, wait, check off another one! And don't you DARE tell me that the costs have come down, conveniently close to Election day, and that's just until OPEC decides to drive up the cost again by tightening the supply, which they will.
Do we need to experience the worst economic crisis in the world's history? Oh, CHECK!!
How can you sit there and say that CHANGE would be a disaster?! How much worse can it possibly be? Oh, yes, let's all vote Republican because I've been told that their's is the party of inclusion. Let's all line up to vote for the party that wants to limit the choice of women, but not limit the ability of any psycho who wants to arm himself with a fucking Uzi. Let's vote for the party that wants to garner my vote by telling me how afraid I should be to wake up every morning in America. I want to vote for the party that wants to push school prayer and the theory of creationism down my children's throats, in spite of the fact that it is against the Constitution. Let's vote for the party that has a pregnant unwed teenager on the stage of its convention, but then wants to tell me that sex education and the distribution of condoms is BAD.
Puh-leeze. How BAD, how AWFUL, how completely FED UP do you have to be before you would consider thinking outside that teeny, tiny little box that you reside in??
Well TIS where you see hope and excitement I see dread & doom if Obama gets elected(which I think he will) Take it from me this nation will be screwed if Obama gets elected.
Puh-leeze. How BAD, how AWFUL, how completely FED UP do you have to be before you would consider thinking outside that teeny, tiny little box that you reside in??
To be fair, they just got indoor plumbing in his little box, and rumor has it that cable tv is in the offing, so he'll be good for a while.
This Nation has a Constitution and that Constitution has severn articles among which the first three are first because they are the most important. Article I defines the powers of the Congress, Article II defines the powers of the Executive, and Article III defines the powers of the Judiciary.
As such Presidents can only do so much and very little without the consent of Congress or a portion thereof(Senate). Congress is not monolithic not only because it is composed of Republicans and Democrats primarily but because within those parties, there are differences among their members.
This magic 60 referred to is a function of Senate rules in certain cases. It's not law. It can be changed and must be used judiciously. It is there in order to encourage political bipartisanship. It is no more an impediment to Republican efforts in the House than the 233 Democratic members of the House are there.
There are a myriad of Congressional rules that govern business there (many fewer in the Senate than in the House). Many, if not most of them, can be employed to obstruct legislation. Filbuster in the Senate is one such rule, but is judiciously employed by Senators and can only be stopped by 60 votes. However, regardless of the number of seats in the Senate that either parties wins, it will not "disallow" a filibuster.
And Mig, our system of checks and balances comes from the Constitution. It is there to enable one branch of the federal government to check and balance another branch of governent when such checks and balances are deemed necessary by those branches. Although divided government is more dynamic and potentially more beneficial, it's apposite is not necessarily a bad thing. Afterall, we the people have put the members of Congress and the President where they are and we only have to wait 2 years to unseat members of the House and a number of Senators.
Zogby has Obama up by 2 points among likely voters.
Do you mean he's up by only 2 points, or that his lead has increased by 2 points?
Obama is +3 in today's Zogby Poll. Down 1 point from yesterday. Obama is +6 in today's Rasmussen Poll. Up 1 point from yesterday. Gallup's Sunday Poll won't be out until after 1PM.
Gallup's Daily Poll 10/19/08:
Code:
National Gallup (Traditional) Obama 49, McCain 46 Obama +3
National Gallup (Expanded) Obama 51, McCain 44 Obama +7
National Gallup (Reg. Voters) Obama 52, McCain 42 Obama +10
[quote=olivant]Zogby has Obama up by 2 points among likely voters.
Do you mean he's up by only 2 points, or that his lead has increased by 2 points?
Obama is +3 in today's Zogby Poll. Down 1 point from yesterday. Obama is +6 in today's Rasmussen Poll. Up 1 point from yesterday. Gallup's Sunday Poll won't be out until after 1PM.
Gallup's Daily Poll 10/19/08:
Code:
National Gallup (Traditional) Obama 49, McCain 46 Obama +3
National Gallup (Expanded) Obama 51, McCain 44 Obama +7
National Gallup (Reg. Voters) Obama 52, McCain 42 Obama +10
[/quote]
Thanks JL! The Gallup spokesman was on CNN this morning, and said that the best poll is "the Middle", or the Expanded poll.
Anyone thinks that the Powell endorsement will do anything? I think it'll give Obama a point, maybe make some shakey McCain supporters reconsider their votes AT THE MOST.
The Obama campaign announced this morning that it had raised a record $150 million last month, and had added 632,000 new donors to its total.
The amount shattered the campaign’s previous record from August. The McCain campaign also had a record-breaking month in August, but is now operating with the $84 million provided by public financing for the general cycle and assistance from the Republican National Committee under certain limits.
In announcing the Obama figure, David Plouffe, the campaign manager, said the average donation for September was less than $100. Mr. Obama, however, did hold several mega fund-raisers in September that pumped millions of dollars each into his coffers, including a Barbra Streisand-Hollywood event that alone collected a reported $11 million.
All counted, 3.1 million people have contributed to his campaign, Mr. Plouffe said.
Mr. Obama decided to forgo public financing for the general cycle, while Mr. McCain opted into it.
Further details will be available once the formal filings are submitted to the Federal Election Commission for September. The deadline for those reports is Monday.
(For an inkling of how a sizable portion of the money is being spent this year, The Times’s Jim Rutenberg reported late last week that Mr. Obama is set to break the advertising record established by President Bush’s 2004 campaign — $188 million in ad buys — by early this week. Our interactive ad feature documents the spending and where the ads are being broadcast.)
3.1 million donors, an average donation of less than $100, and $150 million raised in September alone. The Obama campaign may in fact raise more $$$ than Kerry and Bush did combined in 2004, which would be what, $700 million?
Anyone thinks that the Powell endorsement will do anything? I think it'll give Obama a point, maybe make some shakey McCain supporters reconsider their votes AT THE MOST.
It won't hurt, that's for sure. What I thought was more important is, Powell seems open to a position in an Obama Administration. He would be a great help to Obama.
Anyone thinks that the Powell endorsement will do anything? I think it'll give Obama a point, maybe make some shakey McCain supporters reconsider their votes AT THE MOST.
It won't hurt, that's for sure. What I thought was more important is, Powell seems open to a position in an Obama Administration. He would be a great help to Obama.
I doubt that, but certainly Powell has good opinions and advice worth giving to any President who will listen and take under consideration. Plus, I honestly think that Powell is tired of the political bullshit he had to go through in the Dubya years.
But more than anything else with this endorsement, its become THE STORY for today and tomorrow on the networks.
Compare Iran in 2001 when Clinton left office to Iran in 2009. Notice how the great failure perhaps of the Dubya Administration was allowing Iran to grow in prominence in the region. Before Iraq, Iran was contained by Saddam, and despite what facts you or DJ or appleonya can give me to excuse for that war, Iran was contained.
To put it another way, why fight when your enemies can fight each other? Shit, Iran almost went to war with the Taliban regime in Afghanistan in the late 90s because of a Taliban attack on a Iranian diplomatic envoy.
LOL!
You know, that's why I say both sides equally know nothing about foreign affairs. Saddam was chicken shit when the US attacked Iraq. And I mean Literally! After being hammered attacking Kuwait, and with Iraq's economy in shambles during the embargo, Saddam actually let Iranian pilgrims in and would throw them one night dinner party for their 7 day stay in the holy sights, just to collect from tourism industry, Iranian religious people being the only morons who would go to that country as tourists. He couldn't really kill a mosquito flying around his head, let alone develope WMD and be any threat to Iran. He was finished already.
But I don't argue that the US military now is not in good shape because of this war and that would make Iranian government get their say, since the US can't afford another war at the moment.
This is very disturbing, a effigy of Obama hanging from a tree. The chicken-shit Ohio man responsible or this, won't show his face on camera. He may be part of a minority, but we all know there are these kinds of losers around and it is very very scary. Disgusting.
But when it comes to foreign affairs -- at least while during a mission, regardless of how we ended up in there -- I gotta lean toward the right. The left doesn't seem to know shit about anything beyond our borders....
.....I totally support a RESPONSIBLE withdrawal from Iraq.....
...... it'd be a vote for a RESPONSIBLE withdrawal. Our commanders know what's going on there a helluva lot better than any U.S. citizen does, including Obama. And for that matter, McCain as well.
We can't lose that "war", or we'll be in deep shit. McCain knows that, and I think he also knows that we need to get (fully) back into Afghanistan, and, we need to hit Pakistan as well.
Well said Geoff, well said. And not only will WE be in deep shit if we don't handle this war, our withdrawel from Iraq, and overall situations in the middle east in a responsible, careful and well planned manner, but so will Israel. Especially when you still have sick bastards like Ahmadinejad & Hashemi-Rafsanjani over in Iran who have continuously said things like "Israel must be wiped off the map, " and that "Muslims should use nuclear weapons against Israel."
Originally Posted By: J Geoff
If we were in a peaceful time, I'd have no problem giving Obama a shot. But we're not. And we certainly won't be 4 years from now if he's president (IMHO).
I feel exactly the same. I don't dislike Senator Obama. I think that he, unlike the Dems last Presidential candidate John Kerry, is a very well versed and well educated man who is sincere in wanting to turn things around for the American people in this country. But personally I just do not feel that now is the right time to have an inexperienced man like him as our Commander in Chief.
I feel exactly the same. I don't dislike Senator Obama. I think that he, unlike the Dems last Presidential candidate John Kerry, is a very well versed and well educated man who is sincere in wanting to turn things around for the American people in this country. But personally I just do not feel that now is the right time to have an inexperienced man like him as our Commander in Chief.
DC, everything you and JG say is logical makes total sense. But, I'm willing to take the chance. I can't take another 4 years of the same failed policies. If Obama surrounds himself with competent advisors and staff, I think he'll be fine. Whoever is next President is walking into a mess. I hope the American people have patience and realize things will not be fixed overnight.
Obama opens 6-point lead over McCain Mon Oct 20, 2008
By John Whitesides, Political Correspondent
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrat Barack Obama has expanded his national lead over Republican John McCain in the U.S. presidential race to 6 percentage points, according to a Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll released on Monday.
Obama leads McCain 50 percent to 44 percent among likely U.S. voters in the latest three-day tracking poll, up from Obama's 3-point advantage on Sunday. The telephone poll has a margin of error of 2.9 percentage points.
The rally by Obama broke a string of three consecutive days when McCain had gained ground on the Illinois senator after their final debate on Wednesday. It was the first time in 14 days of the tracking poll that Obama has reached 50 percent.
"Obama has really consolidated his base, and now has huge leads among young people, African-Americans and Hispanics," said pollster John Zogby.
"Reaching 50 percent puts him in winning territory."
Obama also increased his support among two key swing groups that could be vital in the November 4 election. His edge with independents rose from 8 points to 11 points, and his lead among women grew from 6 points to 8 points.
McCain narrowly trails Obama among men and leads by 13 points, 53 percent to 40 percent, among whites.
"McCain seems to have slipped a little bit, but in the grand scheme it's still a very close race," Zogby said.
Obama has led McCain, an Arizona senator, by between two and six points in all 14 days of polling. "This race has not really moved all that much in two weeks," Zogby said.
POWELL ENDORSEMENT
The expanding lead for Obama came as he received the endorsement of Republican former Secretary of State Colin Powell and announced he had raised a stunning $150 million in September.
His fundraising haul shattered the records he already owns and will fuel a huge advantage for Obama in paid advertising in the final 15 days of the campaign.
Some other tracking polls also showed the race tightening in the last few days, but with the help of his huge spending advantage Obama has continued to hold an edge on McCain in some key battleground states.
The poll, taken Friday through Sunday, showed independent Ralph Nader and Green Party candidate Cynthia McKinney with 1 percent support. Libertarian Bob Barr barely registered any support.
The rolling tracking poll surveyed 1,211 likely voters in the presidential election. In a tracking poll, the most recent day's results are added while the oldest day's results are dropped in an effort to track changing momentum.
The U.S. president is determined not by who wins the most national votes but by who wins the Electoral College, which has 538 members apportioned by population in each state. Electoral votes are allotted on a winner-take-all basis in all but two states, which divide them by congressional district
By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer Laurie Kellman. 10/20/2008
WASHINGTON – Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama says that Colin Powell is welcome to campaign for him and might have a place in his administration.
Obama told NBC's "Today" show Monday that Powell "will have a role as one of my advisers." Whether Powell wants to take a formal role, Obama said, would be "something we'd have to discuss."
Obama said Powell, a retired four-star general who served as President Bush's secretary of state, did not give him a heads-up before he crossed party lines and endorsed the Democratic presidential candidate Sunday on the network's "Meet the Press." Powell said on that program he didn't plan to campaign for Obama before the Nov. 4 election.
Obama said he would love to have Powell on the campaign trail.
Lou, I obviously agree with you that it's time for a change. The Republicans tell me I should be afraid, and right now I am - of them! I'm afraid of losing my house and my job if things keep going the way they are. People are calling Obama a socialist, which is what they also said about FDR and his WPA.
I know not all McCain supporters are like the ones depicted in this video. But I almost feel sorry that there are people walking around out there who are so dumb, gullible, and uneducated.
Not as funny as the 2004 version, but this year's Jib Jab election song is somewhat amusing:
UNITED NATIONS – The Russians have turned down Sen. John McCain's request for campaign money — and had a bit of a laugh at his expense.
Russia's ambassador to the U.N., Vitaly Churkin, and several other diplomats at the mission received a fundraising appeal from the Republican presidential nominee on Thursday, according to Ruslan Bakhtin, a spokesman for Russia's U.N. mission.
But the letters, which were dated Sept. 29, did not use formal titles. That led Churkin and his colleagues to conclude that the requests stemmed from "a computer failure" by McCain's campaign, Bakhtin said.
"It's evident that it was a mistake. It happens," said Bakhtin, who along with another Russian official at the mission acknowledged they were entertained by the mixup. "Normally, they don't circulate these kinds of letters to diplomatic posts."
Bakhtin emphasized, too, that the "Russian authorities are in no way engaged in funding political campaigns or political activities abroad."
He said the mission had not sent any direct reply to the McCain campaign.
Brian Rogers, a spokesman for the campaign, said Monday that he was unable to pinpoint what had caused the blunder.
"It sounds like they might have been sent to the wrong place. We obviously don't solicit campaign contributions from people who aren't able to contribute," he said.
Presidential campaigns are legally barred from accepting foreign contributions.
Just read that Obama is leaving campaign trail to help sick relative. This might make McCain jump in popularity, thus making him win.
It's Obama's grandmother....and I hate to calculate on such an occasion, BUT it might help Obama more. I say that because if McCain or his surrogates try to attack him on any policy or whatever, lefties/bloggers/Obama campaign can spin this as "How dare you attack the guy while his granny is gravely ill?"
The Right aint helping itself when some right-wing bloggers/pundits already are claiming that she either aint that sick or that Obama taking the week off is a stunt.
CNN reports that top officials of Sen. John McCain's campaign are "making tough decisions" as they now see Colorado, New Mexico and Iowa no longer winnable.
Instead, the campaign's "risky strategy" is counting on Florida, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Virginia, and a comeback in Pennsylvania.
The McCain campaign responds: "We see the race tightening both internally and in public polling. We are within striking distance in the key battleground states we need to win."
Obama says we need to tighten our belts. I guess the Obama's don't have to.
Perhaps the Obamas can drop by the McCain's house and share some of that lobster bisque. Hmmmm....where would that be?? Oh, wait, that's right! McCain doesn't KNOW how many houses he owns!
I've stayed at the Waldorf and Judging from the menus I've looked at, that's a pretty standard room service bill!
Obama says we need to tighten our belts. I guess the Obama's don't have to.
Perhaps the Obamas can drop by the McCain's house and share some of that lobster bisque. Hmmmm....where would that be?? Oh, wait, that's right! McCain doesn't KNOW how many houses he owns!
I've stayed at the Waldorf and Judging from the menus I've looked at, that's a pretty standard room service bill!
Mignon, I know your candidate is tanking in the polls, and I know that the Reagan era may finally be at an end, but you dont have to publish lies to prove your point. Iranian caviar is illegal in the United States, and could not be on the Waldorf's menu. Also no self respecting liberal would order Krug champagne.
Obama says we need to tighten our belts. I guess the Obama's don't have to.
Perhaps the Obamas can drop by the McCain's house and share some of that lobster bisque. Hmmmm....where would that be?? Oh, wait, that's right! McCain doesn't KNOW how many houses he owns!
I've stayed at the Waldorf and Judging from the menus I've looked at, that's a pretty standard room service bill!
Mignon, I know your candidate is tanking in the polls, and I know that the Reagan era may finally be at an end, but you dont have to publish lies to prove your point. Iranian caviar is illegal in the United States, and could not be on the Waldorf's menu. Also no self respecting liberal would order Krug champagne.
It has to be true. The source of that blog is rushlimbaugh.com.
Even if it WERE true, why would I care? Michelle Obama makes boatloads of money, and if she wants to order caviar and champagne for her mid-afternoon snack, then why shouldn't she?
What does bother me is the spirit with which these things get posted, and then sent around. Because they're in writing, everyone assumes that they're "fact". I was with someone (who I am ashamed to know, quite frankly) who believes all the shit they're shoveling. He believes that Obama's campaign money came from terrorists, he believes that Obama is really an Arab, he believes that he really was a cohort of Ayers while he was bombing things (when I tried to drive home the point that Obama was 8 and lived quite far from Ayers, his response was, "That's what he says NOW."), that his association with ACORN has caused the current fiscal crisis (they stood over people's shoulders and FORCED them to make shaky loans), that he was raised overseas so he's really not American and doesn't understand America, his expensive home was bought and paid for by terrorists...I could go on and on and on. When I called this man a narrow-minded bigot, he agreed with me, as if this were something to be proud of!!
The complete and total ignorance of people makes me afraid. You can pray that education is the key, but the truth is, there are some people who will cling to their ignorance rather than face the fact that they might be wrong about everything they've believed in all their lives.
The complete and total ignorance of people makes me afraid. You can pray that education is the key, but the truth is, there are some people who will cling to their ignorance rather than face the fact that they might be wrong about everything they've believed in all their lives.
Obviously education is NOT the key. Obama went to Columbia and Harvard, and for that they call him an "elitist." Real Americans like Sarah Palin who went to 6 third rate colleges before she finally graduated shoujld run this country.
I think I've said it once before, DT, I WANT the elite to run my country. I want the smartest guy in the room. I want someone so intellectually superior that he leaves all others in the dust.
When did it become "elitist" to be well-educated? This was not a man who walked into those schools. He had to work his ass off to get there. Just like Bill Clinton worked his ass off to go from Texarkana to Rhodes Scholar. Not only are they the smartest people in the room, but they worked their asses off to get where they are. THAT'S the kind of person I want as my leader.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Democrat Barack Obama has opened an 8-point lead over Republican John McCain two weeks before the U.S. presidential election, according to a Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll released on Tuesday.
Obama leads McCain 50 percent to 42 percent among likely U.S. voters in the latest three-day tracking poll, up from a 6-point advantage for Obama on Monday. The telephone poll has a margin of error of 2.9 percentage points.
"It was another very big day for Obama," said pollster John Zogby. "Things clearly are moving in Obama's direction."
It was the second consecutive day that Obama gained ground on McCain as the two head into the final sprint to the November 4 election.
Obama, an Illinois senator, expanded his lead among two key swing groups. His advantage with independent voters grew from 11 to 15 points, and his edge with women voters grew from 8 to 13 points.
Obama also took a lead among voters above the age of 70 and expanded his lead among Hispanics and Catholics. His support among Republicans grew from 9 percent to 12 percent a day after he received the endorsement of Republican former Secretary of State Colin Powell.
"Maybe this is the Powell effect," Zogby said. "That wasn't just an endorsement, that was a pretty powerful statement."
McCain narrowly trails Obama among men and saw his lead among whites drop from 13 points to 9 points, 51 percent to 42 percent. Zogby said Obama was doing better than 2004 Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry among crucial sub-groups.
"He is clearly outperforming Kerry," Zogby said. "But two weeks is a lifetime in politics."
This was the first time Obama has stretched his advantage over McCain, an Arizona senator, to more than 6 points since the tracking poll began more than two weeks ago. Obama's edge had been between 2 and 6 points in all 15 days of polling.
Some other tracking polls have showed the race tightening in the last few days. But with the help of his huge spending advantage, Obama has maintained an edge on McCain in key states.
The poll, taken Saturday through Monday, showed independent Ralph Nader gaining 2 percent support. Green Party candidate Cynthia McKinney and Libertarian Bob Barr each registered 1 percent support.
The rolling tracking poll surveyed 1,214 likely voters in the presidential election. In a tracking poll, the most recent day's results are added while the oldest day's results are dropped to monitor changing momentum.
The U.S. president is determined by who wins the Electoral College, which has 538 members apportioned by population in each state. Electoral votes are allotted on a winner-take-all basis in all but two states, which divide them by congressional district.
John McCain edges ahead in Ohio; does Joe the Plumber get an assist?
At the least, the surprise spotlight John McCain put on "Joe the Plumber" may have helped the Republican presidential candidate in the working man's home state.
Last Tuesday, a poll by Rasmussen Reports showed Barack Obama ahead of McCain in the oh-so-important state of Ohio, 49% to 47%. In that particular survey, it was the first-ever Obama advantage.
Then, on Wednesday, McCain made Joe Wurzelbacher of Holland, Ohio, a nationally known figure by mentioning him again and again in his final debate with Obama as a short-handed way of arguing that the Democrat's tax policies were wrong-headed.
Today comes a new Rasmussen poll showing the two candidates' positions in Ohio have flip-flopped -- McCain leads Obama, 49% to 47%.
Here, though, is the survey's bottom line -- and the reason both campaigns spend so much time and energy on the Buckeye State:
It’s hard to classify Ohio as anything but a pure toss-up. For four straight weeks, the two candidates have been within two points of each other or closer. During that time, neither man has topped 49% support or fallen below 47%. If the four polls are averaged together, Obama and McCain are within a half-point of each other.
The state polls are all over the place. A Suffolk University Poll released yesterday has Obama up +9 in Ohio. There's a good chance Obama could lose Ohio and Florida, and won't even matter. Rasmussen now has Obama up +10 in Virginia.
I think I've said it once before, DT, I WANT the elite to run my country. I want the smartest guy in the room. I want someone so intellectually superior that he leaves all others in the dust.
When did it become "elitist" to be well-educated? This was not a man who walked into those schools. He had to work his ass off to get there. Just like Bill Clinton worked his ass off to go from Texarkana to Rhodes Scholar. Not only are they the smartest people in the room, but they worked their asses off to get where they are. THAT'S the kind of person I want as my leader.
Kudos. That's one of the most intelligent opinions ever posted in General Discussion. What is so noble about an average guy? Why wouldn't one want the best and the brightest as this Nation's Chief Executive? Why wold you want an average person to be president of the United States? What the hell is average anyway? And tell me, how do you rise to a level to become the Democratic or Republican party's presidential nominee and be average? That doesn't make any sense.
Mignon, I know your candidate is tanking in the polls, and I know that the Reagan era may finally be at an end, but you dont have to publish lies to prove your point. Iranian caviar is illegal in the United States, and could not be on the Waldorf's menu. Also no self respecting liberal would order Krug champagne.
First of all I have accepted the fact that McCain will probably not win the election. My hubby told me how he heard about that Michelle ordered all that stuff. So I found that blog and posted it. I don't care if it's Rush's blog or whose blog it is.
I am not the type of person who will post a lie on purpose. If this story is not true then I apologise but if it is true then shame on her.
Kudos. That's one of the most intelligent opinions ever posted in General Discussion. What is so noble about an average guy? Why wouldn't one want the best and the brightest as this Nation's Chief Executive? Why wold you want an average person to be president of the United States? What the hell is average anyway? And tell me, how do you rise to a level to become the Democratic or Republican party's presidential nominee and be average? That doesn't make any sense.
What I don't get is that we idolize people who are athletic, even if we are a nation of mostly couch potatoes, and even elect them into office. Yet we want the POTUS to be just 'like us'.
I want the man or woman who controls the world's biggest economy and the second largest nuclear arsenal to be a whole lot smarter than you, me and the average Joe the plumber combined many times over. That's the kind of person I want as president. Someone who makes me feel utterly inadequate and to hell with my tender ego.
Obama SHOULD embody the American dream. He worked his ass off to get a good education (no trust fund kid), and he didn't waste that education sitting around getting drunk and high. He is exactly the kind of role model this country needs, yet he is seen as "elite"?? I'll never get it.
Obama says we need to tighten our belts. I guess the Obama's don't have to.
Perhaps the Obamas can drop by the McCain's house and share some of that lobster bisque. Hmmmm....where would that be?? Oh, wait, that's right! McCain doesn't KNOW how many houses he owns!
I've stayed at the Waldorf and Judging from the menus I've looked at, that's a pretty standard room service bill!
Mignon, I know your candidate is tanking in the polls, and I know that the Reagan era may finally be at an end, but you dont have to publish lies to prove your point. Iranian caviar is illegal in the United States, and could not be on the Waldorf's menu. Also no self respecting liberal would order Krug champagne.
First of all I have accepted the fact that McCain will probably not win the election. My hubby told me how he heard about that Michelle ordered all that stuff. So I found that blog and posted it. I don't care if it's Rush's blog or whose blog it is.
I'm sure Rush Limbaugh will do the right thing and inform his audience 20 million strong of his mistake, and resign.
Riiiight.
Originally Posted By: Mignon
I am not the type of person who will post a lie on purpose. If this story is not true then I apologise but if it is true then shame on her.
You're not allowed to go out and treat yourself every now and then? I'll go out about once a month and have a really nice dinner. I still donate my money to charities, volunteer my time, etc. But I work really hard and make a lot of money and you better bet I'm going to go out and enjoy it every now and then. Yet shame on Michelle and yet Rush who was addicted to prescription pain medication, prosecuted for illegal possession, and loses his hearing or something like that is OK to believe.
I just listened to Hardball with Chris Matthews and he showed a clip of Palin at a sit down interview. She stated that the Vice President is in charge of the Senate. That is not only stupid; it is profoundly stupid. God, she hasn't even read that part of the Constitution for which she is applying. From Article I:
"The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no vote, unless they be equally divided.
The Senate shall choose their other officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the office of President of the United States."
I just listened to Hardball with Chris Matthews and he showed a clip of Palin at a sit down interview. She stated that the Vice President is in charge of the Senate. That is not only stupid; it is profoundly stupid. God, she hasn't even read that part of the Constitution for which she is applying. From Article I:
"The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no vote, unless they be equally divided.
The Senate shall choose their other officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the office of President of the United States."
Well, she did state prior to her getting chosen that someone would have to tell her "what exactly the Vice Presdient does", so it isn't a surprise. It looks like nobody told her.
..Haha, they're playing that clip on David Gregory's show now too. They're calling it a Dan Quayle moment.
RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — If Michelle Obama is her husband's "rock," his grandmother is a big part of the ground beneath it.
Madelyn Payne Dunham gave young Barack Obama a place to call home while his mother traveled the world. When he needed money for school, she went without new clothes to help pay his tuition.
And when the Illinois Senator decided to seek the Democratic presidential nomination, Dunham provided the "Kansas heartland" pedigree he needed to appeal to conservative white voters — and a personal anecdote about racial prejudice that helped the man with the foreign name and Ivy League resume connect with the African-American experience.
The 85-year-old former bank executive is said to be "gravely ill" after falling and breaking her hip, and some reports suggest she might not live to see the results of the Nov. 4 election. Whatever happens, she's already lived long enough to see her "Barry" achieve what she'd wanted for him, her brother says.
"I think she thinks she was important in raising a fine young man," Charles Payne, 83, said in a brief telephone interview Tuesday from his Chicago home. "I doubt if it would occur to her that he would go this far this fast. But she's enjoyed watching it."
Although he made his mark thousands of miles from the Honolulu apartment where she helped raise him, Obama and others credit Dunham — whose birthday is Sunday — with instilling in him an appreciation for education and hard work, and with setting an example of thrift, practicality and tolerance.
"I think there's nobody more important than her, except his mother, in shaping his character," said David Mendell, who interviewed Dunham in 2004 for the Chicago Tribune and later wrote the book, "Obama: From Promise to Power."
Mendell said Obama got "that dreamer quality" seen in his speeches from his late mother. But when he has to decide whom to trust in politics, "that's his grandmother's practicality coming out in him."
"His grandmother was a real no-nonsense, no-frills woman who was far more skeptical of human nature than his mother," Mendell said Tuesday. "And in politics, he has to rely on both of those characteristics."
The oldest of four children to an oil company clerk and a teacher, Madelyn Payne grew up in a "company house" on the edge of Augusta, Kan. She was a good student and an avid reader, with a special fondness for a good murder mystery.
A couple of weeks before her high school graduation in 1940, without her parents' knowledge or blessing, she married Stanley Dunham — making her a maverick long before Arizona Sen. John McCain turned the term into a campaign buzz word. While her husband was away in the Army during World War II, she was home raising their daughter, Stanley Ann, and supervising a B-29 bomber assembly line at the Boeing plant in Wichita.
After the war, she followed her husband around the country as he took a series of sales jobs and got a college degree on the GI Bill — an accomplishment she always dreamed of, but was never quite able to find the time for. Despite that, she worked her way up from a bank secretary to one of the first female bank vice presidents in Hawaii.
The couple were living in Honolulu when their daughter met Barack Obama Sr., a student from Kenya. Barack Jr. was born there in 1961 and remained with his grandparents after his father left to pursue his education. Aside from a four-year interlude during which he lived in Indonesia with his mother and stepfather, Obama spent his childhood in Honolulu — most of it in the two-bedroom, high-rise apartment where Dunham still lives.
Obama often speaks fondly of "Toot" — his version of the Hawaiian word "Tutu," or grandparent. In his memoir, "Dreams From My Father," he wrote of looking up from the basketball court to find her watching him practice from the 10th-floor window — and of how she took the secretarial job at Bank of Hawaii "to help defray the costs of my unexpected birth."
But an incident that occurred when he was a teenager also reminded him just how deep the mistrust between whites and blacks goes in this country.
In the book, he recalled overhearing Toot ask her husband for a ride to work, because a particularly aggressive panhandler had accosted her for money at the bus stop the day before. When Stanley Dunham refused, his grandson couldn't understand why.
"Before you came in, she told me the fella was black," his grandfather explained, according to the memoir. "That's the real reason why she's bothered."
Obama said the words were "like a fist in my stomach."
"Never had they given me reason to doubt their love; I doubted if they ever would," he wrote. "And yet I knew that men who might easily have been my brothers could still inspire their rawest fears."
Obama revived the story in March, when comments by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright prompted Obama to publicly address race relations in America.
"I can no more disown him," he told an audience in Philadelphia of his former pastor, "than I can my white grandmother — a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe."
Charles Payne said his sister's reaction to being made a campaign issue was "no more than just sort of raised eyebrows." Although she was too ill to travel for the campaign, she followed it closely on television — even undergoing a corneal transplant earlier this year so she could watch the coverage.
"She was almost totally blind," Payne said. "She's not physically able to" campaign, he said, "but it doesn't mean her interest has flagged."
Obama's campaign announced that he had canceled events later this week to spend some time with his grandmother. Payne said his sister was hospitalized briefly but is back home in her Honolulu apartment, where Obama's sister, Maya Soetoro-Ng, cares for her.
When Payne spoke with his sister on the telephone Monday, they talked about family matters.
"We had a short and as upbeat as possible conversation," said Payne, 83, a retired university library administrator. "She's unhappy with the condition that she's in, I can tell you that."
The campaign didn't come up, and Payne wasn't sure whether his sister had cast her vote yet.
Some reports have Dunham close to death. Payne declined to speculate on how long his sister might have, and whether she had the strength to see her grandson through the election.
"I think, of course, it's been terribly important to her," he said. "And she would like nothing better than to see that."
Well TIS where you see hope and excitement I see dread & doom if Obama gets elected(which I think he will) Take it from me this nation will be screwed if Obama gets elected.
Yes, because I'm living in fucking Candy Land now, where it's all happiness and sparkles and pretty pink fucking unicorns.
How bad does it have to get before you will wake up and admit that the last eight years have been the nightmare of all nightmares?
Do we need to get into a war that was based solely on lies - a war that will cost 4000 American lives and put us smack dab in the middle of a recession? Oh, wait, mission accomplished there!
Do we need a natural disaster to sink an entire CITY of our citizens, have them stranded and starving and dying of thirst for DAYS before help even BEGINS to arrive?? And then have the President tell the man in charge that he's doing a "heck of a job"? Oh, wait, that happened, too.
Do we need to have the highest energy costs in our history, which then drives up the cost of every other fucking thing in this country so that families will have to choose between eating and commuting to work? Do we have to have the elderly, living on fixed incomes, become popsicles because they can't afford to heat their homes? Oh, wait, check off another one! And don't you DARE tell me that the costs have come down, conveniently close to Election day, and that's just until OPEC decides to drive up the cost again by tightening the supply, which they will.
Do we need to experience the worst economic crisis in the world's history? Oh, CHECK!!
How can you sit there and say that CHANGE would be a disaster?! How much worse can it possibly be? Oh, yes, let's all vote Republican because I've been told that their's is the party of inclusion. Let's all line up to vote for the party that wants to limit the choice of women, but not limit the ability of any psycho who wants to arm himself with a fucking Uzi. Let's vote for the party that wants to garner my vote by telling me how afraid I should be to wake up every morning in America. I want to vote for the party that wants to push school prayer and the theory of creationism down my children's throats, in spite of the fact that it is against the Constitution. Let's vote for the party that has a pregnant unwed teenager on the stage of its convention, but then wants to tell me that sex education and the distribution of condoms is BAD.
Puh-leeze. How BAD, how AWFUL, how completely FED UP do you have to be before you would consider thinking outside that teeny, tiny little box that you reside in??
Jesus Christ I sense I hit a nerve SB, don't get so riled up it's just my view. For the record I don't reside in a teeny tiny box as you say. I'm looking at the big picture, and I just don't think Obama is the right man for the job. So don't start attacking me just because someone else shit in your bowl of wheaties.
Originally Posted By: pizzaboy
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
Originally Posted By: The Iceman
Well TIS where you see hope and excitement I see dread & doom if Obama gets elected(which I think he will) Take it from me this nation will be screwed if Obama gets elected.
Puh-leeze. How BAD, how AWFUL, how completely FED UP do you have to be before you would consider thinking outside that teeny, tiny little box that you reside in??
To be fair, they just got indoor plumbing in his little box, and rumor has it that cable tv is in the offing, so he'll be good for a while.
The above quote wasn't really necessary. & for the record I have satelite.
Ya know, here in the UK, we don't have these types of political spats. Everywhere I've seen it: Obama supporters V McCain supporters. Whys it so controversial an election?
Obama opens double-digit lead over McCain: poll Tue Oct 21, 2008 7:25pm
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has opened up a 10-point lead over Republican opponent John McCain two weeks before the November 4 U.S. election, according to Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll released on Tuesday.
The poll found 52 percent of voters favor Obama compared with 42 percent for McCain, up from a 6-point Obama edge two weeks ago, the Wall Street Journal reported.
The 10-point lead is the largest in the Journal/NBC poll to date and represents a steady climb for Obama since early September, when the political conventions concluded with the candidates in a statistical tie, the newspaper reported.
The poll also found that the popularity of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has fallen. Voters are less likely to see the Republican vice presidential nominee in a positive light, and much more likely to report negative feelings, the Wall Street Journal said.
Forty-seven percent view Palin negatively, compared with 38 percent who see her in a positive light.
Fifty-five percent of voters say Palin is not qualified to be president, up from 50 percent two weeks ago.
The poll of 1,159 registered voters was conducted from Friday to Monday and has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.9 percentage points.
(Writing by Joanne Allen; editing by Chris Wilson)
Jesus Christ I sense I hit a nerve SB, don't get so riled up it's just my view. For the record I don't reside in a teeny tiny box as you say. I'm looking at the big picture, and I just don't think Obama is the right man for the job. So don't start attacking me just because someone else shit in your bowl of wheaties.
I notice that you didn't respond to one of the points that I made. What i don't get is how anyone can say that they fear the "horror" that electing Obama will visit upon this country. We aren't living a nightmare NOW???
And as for who shit in my Wheaties, it's the Republicans, and they've been doing it for eight looooooong years.
Jesus Christ I sense I hit a nerve SB, don't get so riled up it's just my view. For the record I don't reside in a teeny tiny box as you say. I'm looking at the big picture, and I just don't think Obama is the right man for the job. So don't start attacking me just because someone else shit in your bowl of wheaties.
And as for who shit in my Wheaties, it's the Republicans, and they've been doing it for eight looooooong years.
Two mentions of a bowel movement in a cereal bowl and I didn't make one of them?
In a new NBC/Wall Street Journal Poll that has Obama up +10, Sarah Palin has overtaken George Bush as the #1 anchor around McCain's Campaign. Also, she has the lowest approval rating in the 28 year history of the poll.
I just saw that WSJ poll. Great news! It's hard not to get my hopes up. Deep down I sense that Obama is even further ahead, but the media loves to say it's "close". I'll be happy with a small win mind you, but I think it'll be much bigger than most think (FWIW)
I hear that the states having absentee voting are having huge turnouts. I hope they are prepared for Nov. 5, because I predict it to be chaos. I hear of all the people Obama has "on the ground" and I just don't think all the newbies will stay home this time. I think most WILL vote. We'll see. I'll bet anybody a pretty blue drink that I'm right.
On Countdown, Keith Olberman just played several clips of Palin discussing the VP. It was hilarious. After each clip he would yell out "Nooo". I had seen the clips before, but not in awhile. God, I can't believe that she keeps repeating these stupidities about the VP's Constitutional authority. Why hasn't someone in the campaign taken her aside? This is embarrassing even for me. She actually said that the FFs gave the VP flexibility and authority if he chooses to use it. Madonne!
Keih also discussed this story of voter fraud on the part of the Republican party. This "Jacoby" guy was arrested the other day right here in Ontario, CA.
I agree with Keith, watch McCain's charges of voter fraud taper off. Ya think??? How sad that it comes to this
She was answering the question for a 2nd Grader, y'know...
Oh those third graders with those liberal bias questions..what can you do?
She was talking to a reporter in a national tv interview. The question was sent in by a third grader but the answer was for everybody. And even if it was a simplification for a third grader, it was still mostly wrong. The Vice President IS formally the President of the Senate, but all that really entails is overseeing procedure and occasionally casting a tie-breaking vote. The VP does not have any more ability to "really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes" than any other citizen. There's very little power over the Senate granted to the VP. The branches are still mostly separate.
Today Governor Rendell said he was urging Obama to come back and campaign in Pennsylvania for another day or so. He was also urging the Clinton's to join him. Many media outlets reported today that the McCain campaign has said that Pennsylvania is now considered a must win. A CNN poll on the Pennsylvania average showed Obama with a 53 % - 40 % lead today in our state.
----
How do you guys feel about the Columbian Free Trade Agreement?
People are taking every word she says and analyzing it to see if they can find a flaw.
With all due respect, there is not much analyzing that needs to be done. Palin clearly does not know the duties of the vice presidency as outlined in the Constitution. This was not the first time that she gave such an answer. One would think that her advisors would be coaching her to improve upon her answer. Not being able to communicate the basic function of her role as a vice presidential candidate is downright embarrassing.
Don't forget that Palin is getting these types of questions because of her lack of experience. The more she speaks in a format that is unscripted, the more her lack of readiness is apparent. I was also horrified that Palin was unable to cite one U.S. Supreme Court case other than Roe V. Wade. Considering that she could be in a position to have to make an appointment to the Supreme Court one day, that lack of knowledge is incredible.
On Countdown, Keith Olberman just played several clips of Palin discussing the VP. It was hilarious. After each clip he would yell out "Nooo". I had seen the clips before, but not in awhile. God, I can't believe that she keeps repeating these stupidities about the VP's Constitutional authority. Why hasn't someone in the campaign taken her aside? This is embarrassing even for me. She actually said that the FFs gave the VP flexibility and authority if he chooses to use it. Madonne!
AP: Palin children traveled on state funds VP hopeful charged state for children's travel, amended expense reports The Associated Press updated 5:23 p.m. ET, Tues., Oct. 21, 2008
ANCHORAGE, Alaska - Gov. Sarah Palin charged the state for her children to travel with her, including to events where they were not invited, and later amended expense reports to specify that they were on official business.
The charges included costs for hotel and commercial flights for three daughters to join Palin to watch their father in a snowmobile race, and a trip to New York, where the governor attended a five-hour conference and stayed with 17-year-old Bristol for five days and four nights in a luxury hotel.
In all, Palin has charged the state $21,012 for her three daughters' 64 one-way and 12 round-trip commercial flights since she took office in December 2006. In some other cases, she has charged the state for hotel rooms for the girls.
Alaska law does not specifically address expenses for a governor's children. The law allows for payment of expenses for anyone conducting official state business.
As governor, Palin justified having the state pay for the travel of her daughters — Bristol, 17; Willow, 14; and Piper, 7 — by noting on travel forms that the girls had been invited to attend or participate in events on the governor's schedule.
But some organizers of these events said they were surprised when the Palin children showed up uninvited, or said they agreed to a request by the governor to allow the children to attend.
Several other organizers said the children merely accompanied their mother and did not participate. The trips enabled Palin, whose main state office is in the capital of Juneau, to spend more time with her children.
"She said any event she can take her kids to is an event she tries to attend," said Jennifer McCarthy, who helped organize the June 2007 Family Day Celebration picnic in Ketchikan that Piper attended with her parents.
State Finance Director Kim Garnero told The Associated Press she has not reviewed the Palins' travel expense forms, so she could not say whether the daughters' travel with their mother would meet the definition of official business.
After Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain chose Palin his running mate and reporters asked for the records, Palin ordered changes to previously filed expense reports for her daughters' travel.
In the amended reports, Palin added phrases such as "First Family attending" and "First Family invited" to explain the girls' attendance.
"The governor said, 'I want the purpose and the reason for this travel to be clear,'" said Linda Perez, state director of administrative services.
When Palin released her family's tax records as part of her vice presidential campaign, some tax experts questioned why she did not report the children's state travel reimbursements as income.
The Palins released a review by a Washington attorney who said state law allows the children's travel expenses to be reimbursed and not taxed when they conduct official state business.
Taylor Griffin, a McCain-Palin campaign spokesman, said Palin followed state policy allowing governors to charge for their children's travel. He said the governor's office has invitations requesting the family to attend some events, but he said he did not have them to provide.
In October 2007, Palin brought daughter Bristol along on a trip to New York for a women's leadership conference. Plane tickets from Anchorage to La Guardia Airport for $1,385.11 were billed to the state, records show, and mother and daughter shared a room for four nights at the $707.29-per-night Essex House hotel, which overlooks Central Park.
The event's organizers said Palin asked if she could bring her daughter.
Alexis Gelber, who organized Newsweek's Third Annual Women & Leadership Conference, said she does not know how Bristol ended up attending. Gelber said invitees usually attend alone, but some ask if they can bring a relative or friend.
Griffin, the campaign spokesman, said he believes someone with the event personally sent an e-mail to Bristol inviting her, but he did not have it to provide. Records show Palin also met with Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Goldman Sachs representatives and visited the New York Stock Exchange.
In January, the governor, Willow and Piper showed up at the Alaska Symphony of Seafood Buffet, an Anchorage gala to announce winners of an earlier seafood competition.
"She was just there," said James Browning, executive director of Alaska Fisheries Development Foundation, which runs the event. Griffin said the governor's office received an invitation that was not specifically addressed to anyone.
When Palin amended her children's expense reports, she listed a role for the two girls at the function — "to draw two separate raffle tickets."
In the original travel form, Palin listed a number of events that her children attended and said they were there "in official capacity helping." She did not identify any specific roles for the girls.
In July, the governor charged the state $2,741.26 to take Bristol and Piper to Philadelphia for a meeting of the National Governors Association. The girls had their own room for five nights at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel for $215.46 a night, expense records show.
Expense forms describe the girls' official purpose as "NGA Governor's Youth Programs and family activities." But those programs were activities designed to keep children busy, a service provided by the NGA to accommodate governors and their families, NGA spokeswoman Jodi Omear said.
In addition to the commercial flights, the children have traveled dozens of times with Palin on a state plane. For these flights, the total cost of operating the plane, at $971 an hour, was about $55,000, according to state flight logs. The cost of operating the state plane does not increase when the children join their mother.
The organizer of an American Heart Association luncheon on Feb. 15 in Fairbanks said Palin asked to bring daughter Piper to the event, and the organizer said she was surprised when Palin showed up with daughter Willow and Bristol as well.
The three Palin daughters shared a room separate from their mother at the Princess Lodge in Fairbanks for two nights, at a cost to the state of $129 per night.
The luncheon took place before Palin's husband, Todd, finished fourth in the 2,000-mile Iron Dog snowmobile race, also in Fairbanks. The family greeted him at the finish line.
When Palin showed up at the luncheon with not just Piper but also Willow and Bristol, organizers had to scramble to make room at the main table, said Janet Bartels, who set up the event.
"When it's the governor, you just make it happen," she said.
The state is already reviewing nearly $17,000 in per diem payments to Palin for more than 300 nights she slept at her own home, 40 miles from her satellite office in Anchorage.
Tony Knowles, a Democratic former governor of Alaska who lost to Palin in a 2006 bid to reclaim the job, said he never charged the state for his three children's commercial flights or claimed their travel as official state business.
Knowles, who was governor from 1994 to 2002, is the only other recent Alaska governor who had school-age children while in office.
"There was no valid reason for the children to be along on state business," said Knowles, a supporter of Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama. "I cannot recall any instance during my eight years as governor where it would have been appropriate to claim they performed state business."
Knowles said he brought his children to one NGA event while in office but didn't charge the state for their trip.
In February 2007, the three girls flew from Juneau to Anchorage on Alaska Airlines. Palin charged the state for the $519.30 round-trip ticket for each girl, and noted on the expense form that the daughters accompanied her to "open the start of the Iron Dog race."
The children and their mother then watched as Todd Palin and other racers started the competition, which Todd won that year. Palin later had the relevant expense forms changed to describe the girls' business as "First Family official starter for the start of the Iron Dog race."
The Palins began charging the state for commercial flights after the governor kept a 2006 campaign promise to sell a jet bought by her predecessor.
Palin put the jet up for sale on eBay, a move she later trumpeted in her star-making speech at the Republican National Convention, and it was ultimately sold by the state at a loss.
That left only one high-performance aircraft deemed safe enough for her to use — a 1980 twin-engine King Air assigned to the public safety agency but, according to flight logs, out of service for maintenance and repairs about a third of the time Palin has been governor.
Fact check: Would Obama hike taxes on small businesses that employ 16 million?
The Statement: Speaking during a campaign stop Monday, Oct. 20 in Belton, Missouri, Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain criticized Democratic opponent Sen. Barack Obama's proposals on taxes. "The Obama tax increase would come at the worst possible time for America, and especially for small businesses like the one Joe dreams of owning," McCain said. "The small businesses Senator Obama would tax provide 16 million jobs in America."
Get the facts!
The Facts: McCain's criticism appears primarily aimed at Obama's personal income tax proposals — which he says would give tax cuts or leave taxes the same for individuals who make less than $200,000 or families that earn less than $250,000 — but increase them on people making more. Roughly 85 percent of small businesses are taxed at the owner's personal income tax rate, according to an editorial in the Wall Street Journal. Most of those businesses earn less than $250,000 a year.
The McCain campaign uses figures from a National Federation of Independent Business survey to back up its claim. The survey says 12 percent of business owners who employ between one and nine people earn more than $200,000 a year — as do 27 percent of those who employ 10-19 people and 50 percent of those who employ between 20 and 250 workers. Obama says $200,000 is the lowest income level at which an individual would see a tax increase under his plan.
But in assuming all of those business owners would see an increase, the McCain campaign appears to suppose that all of the business owners making between $200,000 and $250,000 would file their taxes individually, not jointly with a spouse or other family member. And roughly 15 percent of small businesses aren't taxed based on the owner's personal income rate, as the Journal notes. Based on those facts, it's impossible to know exactly how many of those business owners would see a tax hike — but it surely would not be 100 percent.
The McCain campaign uses census figures to estimate how many people work for the businesses it says would be impacted — an effort McCain spokesman Brian Rogers acknowledges is "admittedly a rough estimate." The NFIB says the number of jobs small businesses create is "impossible to calculate," in part because some people only work at small businesses part-time while holding down full time jobs with a bigger employer.
The Verdict: False. McCain uses an overly broad interpretation of the NFIB survey's figures — applying Obama's tax plan to those figures in a way that is highly unlikely to match reality.
Although the story about Michelle Obama's room service tab was a complete lie, CBS News reported this morning that the Republicans have spent about $150,000 buying new clothes for Sarah Palin and her family. The designer duds have been purchased at stores like Saks and Neiman Marcus. They plan to donate the clothes to charity afterwards.
So, I guess lots of "Joe Six Packs" and "Hockey Moms" with "small town values" can relate to spending $75,000 in one spree at Neiman.
Although the story about Michelle Obama's room service tab was a complete lie, CBS News reported this morning that the Republicans have spent about $150,000 buying new clothes for Sarah Palin and her family. The designer duds have been purchased at stores like Saks and Neiman Marcus. They plan to donate the clothes to charity afterwards.
So, I guess lots of "Joe Six Packs" and "Hockey Moms" with "small town values" can relate to spending $75,000 in one spree at Neiman.
I am not too bothered about this. Look at Obama's suits....they don't come off the rack at JC Penney's. These people are running for high office. They get private planes, motorcades, good places to stay ... and in the process they wear high end clothing. Comes with the territory.
I am not too bothered about this. Look at Obama's suits....they don't come off the rack at JC Penney's. These people are running for high office. They get private planes, motorcades, good places to stay ... and in the process they wear high end clothing. Comes with the territory.
You're 100% correct, but look at the hypocrisy of it. The other day, the NY Post and Rush Limbaugh were making a big deal out of a story that turns out to be 100% made up. The NY Post even printed a retraction. But even if the story had been true, it wasn't even nearly as 'bad' as Palin spending $150K on new clothes.
Although the story about Michelle Obama's room service tab was a complete lie, CBS News reported this morning that the Republicans have spent about $150,000 buying new clothes for Sarah Palin and her family. The designer duds have been purchased at stores like Saks and Neiman Marcus. They plan to donate the clothes to charity afterwards.
Maybe because on her own she wears stuff like this:
Apparently the GOP is not only just afraid of what she will say when she speaks to reporters, they are afraid she is too stupid to dress herself.
You're 100% correct, but look at the hypocrisy of it. The other day, the NY Post and Rush Limbaugh were making a big deal out of a story that turns out to be 100% made up. The NY Post even printed a retraction. But even if the story had been true, it wasn't even nearly as 'bad' as Palin spending $150K on new clothes.
If there's anything many Republicans are good at, it's looking past their own hypocrisy. This story is a non-issue in comparison to a fake story of some uppity woman eating lobster.
DT, I know what the truth is. Yes, I agree with your point.
However, if the Republicans are going to portray Sarah Palin as a hockey mom who woke up one day as Governor of Alaska, who put the state jet on EBay, who is just "plain folks" and hangs out with Joe Six Pack and Joe the Plumber, then blowing $150,000 on clothing, hair and makeup, while referring to Senator Obama as "elitist", then I have a problem.
DT, I know what the truth is. Yes, I agree with your point.
However, if the Republicans are going to portray Sarah Palin as a hockey mom who woke up one day as Governor of Alaska, who put the state jet on EBay, who is just "plain folks" and hangs out with Joe Six Pack and Joe the Plumber, then blowing $150,000 on clothing, hair and makeup, while referring to Senator Obama as "elitist", then I have a problem.
I agree with that point SB. But the truth is her net worth is about one million dollars. It's fair game for politicians to pretend they are "one of the people" when they are not. George W. Bush did it successfully, his father, an opera buff whose favorite food is gourmet chinese pretended (not to successfully) to favor country music and pork rinds. Jimmy Carter's "peanut farm" was a big time agribusiness venture worth millions, LBJ always cried poor mouth when hewas a rich man, and on it goes.
This "elitist" nonsense is typical Rovian abuse of the English language. Once, if you were among the Elite that was a good thing. Now, it connotes being somehow "foreign." Like when they said Kerry "looked French," or that Obama is "exotic." They did the same thing to the word "liberal" and they mangled the name of the Domocratic Party to the "Democrat Party." Hopefully this time around the people will not be buying such garbage.
Despite at least a 1/2 dozen other polls today showing Obama with a huge lead and growing, the AP now says the race is tied.
AP presidential poll: All even in the homestretch
By LIZ SIDOTI
WASHINGTON (AP) — The presidential race tightened after the final debate, with John McCain gaining among whites and people earning less than $50,000, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll that shows McCain and Barack Obama essentially running even among likely voters in the election homestretch.
The poll, which found Obama at 44 percent and McCain at 43 percent, supports what some Republicans and Democrats privately have said in recent days: that the race narrowed after the third debate as GOP-leaning voters drifted home to their party and McCain's "Joe the plumber" analogy struck a chord.
Three weeks ago, an AP-GfK survey found that Obama had surged to a seven-point lead over McCain, lifted by voters who thought the Democrat was better suited to lead the nation through its sudden economic crisis.
The contest is still volatile, and the split among voters is apparent less than two weeks before Election Day.
"I trust McCain more, and I do feel that he has more experience in government than Obama. I don't think Obama has been around long enough," said Angela Decker, 44, of La Porte, Ind.
But Karen Judd, 58, of Middleton, Wis., said, "Obama certainly has sufficient qualifications." She said any positive feelings about McCain evaporated with "the outright lying" in TV ads and his choice of running mate Sarah Palin, who "doesn't have the correct skills."
The new AP-GfK head-to-head result is a departure from some, but not all, recent national polls.
Obama and McCain were essentially tied among likely voters in the latest George Washington University Battleground Poll, conducted by Republican strategist Ed Goeas and Democratic pollster Celinda Lake. In other surveys focusing on likely voters, a Washington Post-ABC News poll showed Obama up by 9 percentage points, while a poll by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center had Obama leading by 14. A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, among the broader category of people registered to vote, found Obama ahead by 10 points.
Polls are snapshots of highly fluid campaigns. In this case, there is a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points; that means Obama could be ahead by as many as 8 points or down by as many as 6. There are many reasons why polls differ, including methods of estimating likely voters and the wording of questions.
Charles Franklin, a University of Wisconsin political science professor and polling authority, said variation between polls occurs, in part, because pollsters interview random samples of people.
"If they all agree, somebody would be doing something terribly wrong," he said of polls. But he also said that surveys generally fall within a few points of each other, adding, "When you get much beyond that, there's something to explain."
The AP-GfK survey included interviews with a large sample of adults including 800 deemed likely to vote. Among all 1,101 adults interviewed, the survey showed Obama ahead 47 percent to 37 percent. He was up by five points among registered voters.
A significant number of the interviews were conducted by dialing a randomly selected sample of cell phone numbers, and thus this poll had a chance to reach voters who were excluded from some other polls.
It was taken over five days from Thursday through Monday, starting the night after the candidates' final debate and ending the day after former Secretary of State Colin Powell broke with the Republican Party to endorse Obama.
McCain's strong showing is partly attributable to his strong debate performance; Thursday was his best night of the survey. Obama's best night was Sunday, hours after the Powell announcement, and the full impact of that endorsement may not have been captured in any surveys yet. Future polling could show whether either of those was merely a support "bounce" or something more lasting.
During their final debate, a feisty McCain repeatedly forced Obama to defend his record, comments and associations. He also used the story of a voter whom the Democrat had met in Ohio, "Joe the plumber," to argue that Obama's tax plan would be bad for working class voters.
"I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody," Obama told the man with the last name of Wurzelbacher, who had asked Obama whether his plan to increase taxes on those earning more than $250,000 a year would impede his ability to buy the plumbing company where he works.
On Wednesday, McCain's campaign unveiled a new TV ad that features that Obama quote, and shows different people saying: "I'm Joe the plumber." A man asks: "Obama wants my sweat to pay for his trillion dollars in new spending?"
Since McCain has seized on that line of argument, he has picked up support among white married people and non-college educated whites, the poll shows, while widening his advantage among white men. Black voters still overwhelmingly support Obama.
The Republican also has improved his rating for handling the economy and the financial crisis. Nearly half of likely voters think their taxes will rise under an Obama administration compared with a third who say McCain would raise their taxes.
Since the last AP-GfK survey in late September, McCain also has:
_Posted big gains among likely voters earning under $50,000 a year; he now trails Obama by just 4 percentage points compared with 26 earlier.
_Surged among rural voters; he has an 18-point advantage, up from 4.
_Doubled his advantage among whites who haven't finished college and now leads by 20 points. McCain and Obama are running about even among white college graduates, no change from earlier.
_Made modest gains among whites of both genders, now leading by 22 points among white men and by 7 among white women.
_Improved slightly among whites who are married, now with a 24-point lead.
_Narrowed a gap among unmarried whites, though he still trails by 8 points.
McCain has cut into Obama's advantage on the questions of whom voters trust to handle the economy and the financial crisis. On both, the Democrat now leads by just 6 points, compared with 15 in the previous survey.
Obama still has a larger advantage on other economic measures, with 44 percent saying they think the economy will have improved a year from now if he is elected compared with 34 percent for McCain.
Intensity has increased among McCain's supporters.
A month ago, Obama had more strong supporters than McCain did. Now, the number of excited supporters is about even.
Eight of 10 Democrats are supporting Obama, while nine in 10 Republicans are backing McCain. Independents are about evenly split.
Some 24 percent of likely voters were deemed still persuadable, meaning they were either undecided or said they might switch candidates. Those up-for-grabs voters came about equally from the three categories: undecideds, McCain supporters and Obama backers.
Said John Ormesher, 67, of Dandridge, Tenn.: "I've got respect for them but that's the extent of it. I don't have a whole lot of affinity toward either one of them. They're both part of the same political mess."
Despite at least a 1/2 dozen other polls today showing Obama with a huge lead and growing, the AP now says the race is tied.
AP presidential poll: All even in the homestretch
This AP poll is based on a likely voter model vs registered voter model. This only proves that when you adjust your models to assume that none of the newly registered Obama Voters will actually vote, sure enough, Obama's lead disappears..duh.
But, meh, I don't mind the error in this basic statistical concept is all spin, maybe it will offset complacency.
This doesn't jive:
Quote:
The AP-GfK survey included interviews with a large sample of adults including 800 deemed likely to vote. Among all 1,101 adults interviewed, the survey showed Obama ahead 47 percent to 37 percent. He was up by five points among registered voters.
"World's Most Popular Christian Evangelist" endorses Obama
Just off the press release wire:
HOUSTON, Oct. 22 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Dr. K.A. Paul, the man the New Republic magazine called the world's most popular Christian evangelist, today endorsed Senator Barack Obama for President of the U.S. ...
"Number one, speaking from an evangelical perspective, the current administration, I believe, has delayed the second coming of Jesus," he said.
This AP poll is based on a likely voter model vs registered voter model. This only proves that when you adjust your models to assume that none of the newly registered Obama Voters will actually vote, sure enough, Obama's lead disappears..duh.
But, meh, I don't mind the error in this basic statistical concept is all spin, maybe it will offset complacency.
FWIW, today Gallup has Obama up +8 among likely voters, and +9 with all registered voters.
I apologize ahead of time if this has already been brought up in this thread, but is race going to be an issue for voters when it comes to Obama or McCain? This clip was on Howard Stern's show where they interviewed black people in Harlem and switched Obama's policies with McCain's, even saying Palin was Obama's VP candidate, and people didn't know the difference. But they were all for Obama.
This AP poll is based on a likely voter model vs registered voter model. This only proves that when you adjust your models to assume that none of the newly registered Obama Voters will actually vote, sure enough, Obama's lead disappears..duh.
But, meh, I don't mind the error in this basic statistical concept is all spin, maybe it will offset complacency.
FWIW, today Gallup has Obama up +8 among likely voters, and +9 with all registered voters.
That is the Gallup Poll Expanded. The "traditional" (using past voting records in the statistic) Gallup Poll has Likely Voter +5. It all depends on the model the poll used, and they all use different methods.
And hell if I know which one is right. I just know that the AP poll indicates that Obama might squeak by McCain if the election were held today and only if people who voted in 2004 vote.
That was hilarious Blibble. The video did not play for me though the sound worked well. I could understand them not knowing Obama's policies on abortion and war, but the Sarah Palin one was pretty goofy.
Stern has a rich history in politics. When he helped Governor Pataki get elected, Pataki had Stern sitting in the front row of his inauguration. When he helped get that c*nt Christine Whitman elected, she named a rest stop after him.
The actual quote from the book is from page 261 and is as follows:
"Of course, not all my conversations in immigrant communities follow this easy pattern. In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific reassurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."
“In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific reassurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.” Barack Obama, “The Audacity of Hope”, page 261.
Above is the ENTIRE quote of what Obama said. I'm not an Obama supporter but I hate when quotes are twisted and turned out of context. He is not talking about Muslim Terrorists, all he was saying is that he would defend Arab and Pakistini AMERICAN'S rights if they were not being treated as Americans.
PB, PLEASE stop trying to fight rumor and innuendo with FACT. It's just plain silly.
Yeah, I don't know what I was thinking; to actually empathize with the possibility of upstanding Arab Americans being placed in internment camps, as my great uncle was during WW2.
Above is the ENTIRE quote of what Obama said. I'm not an Obama supporter but I hate when quotes are twisted and turned out of context. He is not talking about Muslim Terrorists, all he was saying is that he would defend Arab and Pakistini AMERICAN'S rights if they were not being treated as Americans.
You're NOT an Obama supporter? Oh, BoyToy, it's a good thing that you're pretty.
I'm a metrosexual, I take care of myself, I still have my boyish good looks, my charm, my wit, my superior intelligence, and of course the one thing I can't live without, my humility.
I always come in very late in the day and go over what you all have gathered on the political front.
First, as far as the clothing for Palin goes, athough I am not surprised and think it is kind of much ado about nothing. Did you read the story about Obama having his shoes resoled while on the campaign trail because they literally were getting holes in them from all the wear and tear? I have to ask then, "Who's the elitiist again?"
Regarding the poll that showed a neck and neck race, I've read more than one source saying it IS unreliable and Saladbar's post about it using "old" numbers is accurate.
Nice catch PB on the Obama quote. I assumed it was out of context, but thanks PB and DMC for supplying it correctly. I didn't read Obama's book, but want to.
I know a lot of people are hung up on Obama's middle name and for some reason like to use it as what a threat????. While, not a name any of us would choose, it is only a name. On one site, (can't remember which one) this middle name thing became a topic. Thus, everyone who posted would sign like this:
McCain is constantly mis-stating Obama's tax plan, constantly. His ol' "spread the wealth thing" is really kind of dumb and he his outright lying to the crowds saying everyone will get taxed. I guess he really has nothing else left. Every day though I see more and more what an out of touch candidate he really is.
Muslim and socialist are being used as though they are derogatory terms. Whether or not any of it is true, it is quite ridiculous to think of either labels as negative. Is it such a bad thing even if he really is a muslim?
Who has been the least religious of the American presidents? Not their personal faiths, but to the extent that their faith was of any concern to the public, either in terms of perception or their policies.
McCain's tax policy is better than Obama's. Raising anyone's taxes during a recession is stupid. "Spreading the wealth around" is absurd in a capitalistic society. "95% of Americans will get tax cuts", but 40% don't pay income taxes. This equates to welfare, where the rich will basically be writing a check to that 40%. Is that right? Is it true that this is "patriotic" as your veep "Joe the six term senator" claims?
Obama has zero foreign policy experience. Honestly, who do you think is more ready to deal with our enemies, Obama or McCain? In Obama's short time in the senate, he has been wrong on every war issue, whether it be the surge or suppling more money for our soliders. If it was up to him, we would've already conceded defeat in Iraq. Obama knows nothing about military strategy and I fear for all of our safety if he is the president.
You all might dismiss his radical associations, but I don't. He sat in the pews of Rev. Wright's church for 20 years. He knew Bill Ayers' past when he sat on committees and gave speeches with him. Both of those men hate America, and yet Obama gets a pass. Either he agreed with them or he was too stupid to realize what they were about, either way Obama showed extremely poor judgment.
What are Obama's creditential's to be president? 100 weeks in the senate? Being the most liberal senator (never crossing party lines)? Being a community organizer? When has he ever made a important decision? When has his character ever been tested? What does anyone really know about him? He is clearly not ready to hold the most powerful position in the world and I do not trust him at all.
Personally, I'd vote for a peace minded Muslim before I'd vote for an Atheist; any person of a true faith. But not another zealot.
A good Muslim would be a good Catholic, a good Catholic would be a good Jew, a good Jew would be a good Muslim, and on and on . . .
An atheist cannot be a good person? Isaac Asimov? Marie Curie? Thomas Edison? Carl Sagan? Jodie Foster? Bruce Lee? Dave Matthews? Juliana Moore? Christopher Reeve? Gene Roddenberry? Susan B Antony? Warren Buffet? Lance Armstrong? Charles Schultz? Bill Gates? Ernest Hemmingway? Pat Tillman (remember he gave up a lucrative contract to SERVE America)? Mark Twain? All not good, or at least, somewhat qualified people (at least over Palin)? Scandinavia is one among the safest, healthiest, most well-educated, prosperous, ethical, and successful societies on earth--and one of the least religious and not full of chaos and immorality.
Judge the person, evil is evil not because of a religion or the absence of one.
Ok liberals, it's time for a reality check... "Spreading the wealth around" is absurd in a capitalistic society.
Especially in a capitalist society, redistributionto a certain extent is a good thing and even extremely necessary, in order to somehow limit the excesses of the capitalist system. Proper Social Security (i.e. obliged SS for all citizens) is a good example of this necessary redistribution.
Let's put it this way, if she was running for office against George W. Bush, I'd vote for Bush.
I've never heard of her. What has she done that you hate her so?
First she decided to stop funding the "Public Employees Retirement System" despite the state's obligation to do so. It pays the retirement benefits for past and current state and public employees. Then when her spending when out of control, she decided to just steal the money already in the PERS to pay for her budget. It was illegal, but she got away with it and when she left office the money was never replaced. Then finally she came up with the brainstorm to try and fire thousands of state union employees under contract, and replace them with cheap, non-union labor. Fortunately, a judge put an end to that scheme before she could do it.
Obama lead on McCain grows to 12 points By Andrew Quinn Andrew Quinn 10/23/2008
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Democrat Barack Obama's lead over Republican rival John McCain has grown to 12 points in the U.S. presidential race, with crucial independent and women voters increasingly moving to his side, according to a Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll released on Thursday.
With less than two weeks before the November 4 election, Obama leads McCain 52 percent to 40 percent among likely voters in the latest three-day tracking poll, which had a margin of error of 2.9 points.
Obama has made steady gains over the last four days and has tripled his lead on McCain in the past week of polling.
"Obama's expansion is really across the board," pollster John Zogby said. "It seems to be among almost every demographic group."
The Illinois senator saw his lead among women -- who are expected to play a decisive role in this election -- increase to 18 points from 16 points on Wednesday.
And independent voters, who have been the target of intense campaign efforts by both sides, have now swung behind Obama by a 30-point margin, 59 percent to 29 percent.
Zogby said McCain, 72, appeared to have lost the traction he won after the third and final presidential debate last week.
"McCain can still try to turn it around, but he has to find focus," Zogby said, adding that economic issues, which dominated the campaign amid turmoil in the credit, housing and financial markets, still seem to be working in Obama's favor.
"At some point there are some issues that just overwhelm, and McCain has been particularly weak on the economy," Zogby said in a statement.
Other recent national polls have given Obama a narrower lead, but Zogby said he was confident in his sampling methods.
The latest poll showed a continued erosion of McCain's support even among his "base" voters.
While Obama wins the backing of 86 percent of Democrats, only 81 percent of Republicans back the Arizona senator -- down from figures in the low 90s immediately after the Republican national convention in early September.
Obama holds a 6-point lead among men, 48 percent to 42 percent, while white voters -- who had been among McCain's core support groups -- now only back McCain by a 2-point margin.
Independent Ralph Nader and Libertarian Bob Barr held relatively steady at 2 percent and 1 percent respectively. Three percent of voters said they remained undecided, unchanged from Wednesday.
The rolling tracking poll surveyed 1,208 likely voters in the presidential election. In a tracking poll, the most recent day's results are added while the oldest day's results are dropped to monitor changing momentum.
The U.S. president is determined by who wins the Electoral College, which has 538 members apportioned by population in each state and the District of Columbia. Electoral votes are allotted on a winner-take-all basis in all but two states, which divide them by congressional district.
Don't forget, JL, isn't she the one who said that the air around Ground Zero was fine in the days following the attack??
Yes, thanks for bringing that one up too. That was when Bush appointed her Administrator of the EPA. Here's the full story:
Whitman appeared twice in New York City after the September 11 attacks to inform New Yorkers that the toxins released by the attacks posed no threat to their health. On September 18, the EPA released a report in which Whitman said, "Given the scope of the tragedy from last week, I am glad to reassure the people of New York and Washington, D.C. that their air is safe to breathe and their water is safe to drink." She also said, "The concentrations are such that they don't pose a health hazard...We're going to make sure everybody is safe." Later, a 2003 report by the EPA's inspector general determined that such assurances were misleading, because the EPA "did not have sufficient data and analyses" to justify the assertions when they were made. A report in July 2003 from the EPA's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response gave extensive documentation supporting many of the inspector general's conclusions, and carried some of them still further. Further, the report found that the White House had "convinced EPA to add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones" by having the National Security Council control EPA communications after the September 11 attacks.
In February of 2006, U.S. District Court Judge Deborah A. Batts issued a ruling that rejected Whitman's request for immunity in a 2004 class action lawsuit brought by a group who claimed exposure to hazardous debris from the collapse of the World Trade Center. The judge stated that "No reasonable person would have thought that telling thousands of people that it was safe to return to lower Manhattan, while knowing that such return could pose long-term health risks and other dire consequences, was conduct sanctioned by our laws," and called Whitman's actions "conscience-shocking."
In June 2007, Whitman testified in front of Congress about the Agency's culpability in telling rescue workers that the air was safe. She was repeatedly booed by rescue workers and activists who attended the hearing. She defended herself by saying her statements about the air being safe were to people living or working near the area, not to rescue workers. She also said terrorists, not the EPA, were responsible for the tragedies that befell people after September 11. In December 2007, legal proceedings began in a case on the question of responsibility of government officials in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks. Whitman is among the defendants in the suit; plaintiffs in the suit allege that Whitman is at fault for saying that the downtown New York air was safe in the aftermath of the attacks.
In April 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit overruled the district court, holding that as EPA head Whitman could not be held liable for saying to World Trade Center area residents that the air was safe for breathing after the buildings collapse. The court said that Whitman had based her information on contradictory information and statements from President Bush. The U.S. Department of Justice had argued that holding the agency liable would establish a risky legal precedent because future public officials would be afraid to make public statements.
October 23, 2008 - Economy Buoys Obama In Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll Finds; McCain Gains Some Ground In Florida, But Fades In Ohio --- FLORIDA: Obama 49 - McCain 44; OHIO: Obama 52 - McCain 38; PENNSYLVANIA: Obama 53 - McCain 40
It's still the economy as Sen. Barack Obama rolls up support among groups who have not supported a Democrat for decades to lead Republican Sen. John McCain in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, according to simultaneous Quinnipiac University Swing State polls released today.
With 12 days to go, Sen. McCain is narrowing the gap in Florida, but fading in Ohio and barely denting Sen. Obama's double-digit lead in Pennsylvania.
No one has been elected President since 1960 without taking two of these three largest swing states in the Electoral College. Results from the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe- ack) University polls show:
* Florida: Obama up 49 - 44 percent, compared to 51 - 43 percent October 1; * Ohio: Obama up 52 - 38 percent, widening an October 1 lead of 50 - 42 percent; * Pennsylvania: Obama ahead 53 - 40 percent, compared to 54 - 39 percent last time.
By margins of eight to 19 points, voters in each state say they trust Obama more than McCain to handle the economy.
By smaller margins of two to six points, voters say they trust McCain more than Obama to handle foreign policy.
"As we enter the home stretch, Sen. Obama is winning voter groups that no Democrat has carried in more than four decades, and he holds very solid leads in the big swing states. If these numbers hold up, he could win the biggest Democratic landslide since Lyndon Johnson in 1964," said Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.
"Voters are scared about their economic futures and have decided that Sen. Obama is Mr. Fix-it," Brown added.
"Sen. Obama is no longer the candidate of the young, the well-educated and minorities. He is now virtually the candidate of the 'all.' He is winning among all age groups in all three states. He wins women by more than 20 points in Ohio and Pennsylvania and is competitive among men in all three states. Whether voters went to college or not, they are voting for him.
"Perhaps the most remarkable development is that Obama is doing significantly better among white, born again evangelicals in Ohio and Pennsylvania than did Democratic nominee John Kerry four years ago. He also is winning Roman Catholics in those states, historically the key swing voter group in the electorate and synonymous here with the blue-collar vote.
"In Florida, Obama's margin over McCain is due mostly from stronger support from Hispanics than Kerry received."
President George W. Bush's approval ratings are:
* 27 - 66 percent in Florida; * 22 - 72 percent in Ohio; * 21 - 73 percent in Pennsylvania.
Florida
Among those who say they already have voted in Florida, Obama gets 48 percent to McCain's 44 percent, a statistical tie in this smaller subgroup. .
Looking at all Florida likely voters, men split with 46 percent for Obama and 45 percent for McCain. Women back Obama 51 - 42 percent. The Republican leads 52 - 41 percent among white voters, 71 - 23 percent among evangelical Christians and 51 - 40 percent among Catholics. Obama leads 49 - 39 percent among Hispanics and 77 - 20 percent among Jews.
Independent voters back Obama 51 - 39 percent, similar to October 1.
By a 56 - 35 percent margin, Florida voters have a favorable opinion of Obama, compared to 52 - 40 percent for McCain.
Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican vice presidential nominee, gets a slightly negative 41 - 43 percent favorability.
Sen. Joe Biden, the Democratic running mate, gets a 51 - 28 percent favorability.
The economy is the most important election issue, 61 percent of Florida voters say, and voters trust Obama more than McCain to handle the economy, 51 - 43 percent, compared to 53 - 39 percent October 1.
Voters trust McCain more than Obama 50 - 44 percent to handle foreign policy, compared to 52 - 41 percent last time.
"One reason that Sen. Obama has pulled ahead in Florida is that the number of Sen. Hillary Clinton supporters who said they will defect to back Sen. McCain has dropped significantly," Brown said.
Ohio
Obama leads 71 - 20 percent among those who already have voted in Ohio. Among all Ohio likely voters, the Democrat leads 58 - 33 percent among women and gets 46 percent of men to McCain's 44 percent. White voters back Obama 47 - 43 percent, as do black voters, 94 - 3 percent. Independent voters go 50 - 37 percent for the Democrat.
Obama gets a 58 - 33 percent favorability in Ohio, with 48 - 42 percent for McCain.
Palin's favorability is a negative 37 - 41 percent, while Biden gets a 49 - 22 percent favorability.
For 61 percent of Ohio voters, the economy is the biggest issue, and voters trust Obama more than McCain 55 - 36 percent to handle this issue, compared to 50 - 39 percent last time.
Voters trust McCain more, 48 - 46 percent, to handle foreign policy, compared to 53 - 38 percent.
"To overcome Sen. Obama's lead in Ohio, Sen. McCain would have to get virtually every voter who remains undecided plus almost all of the Obama supporters who said they still might change their minds - a very small percentage possibility," Brown said. Pennsylvania
Obama leads 59 - 35 percent with women, while men split with 47 percent for Obama and 45 percent for McCain. White voters back Obama 49 - 44 percent, while black voters back him 92 - 3 percent. Independent voters back the Democrat 55 - 35 percent. Obama gets a 60 - 30 percent favorability, compared to McCain's 51 - 41 percent. Palin's favorability is a negative 38 - 43 percent, with Biden at 54 - 22 percent.
The economy is the most important issue, 55 percent of Pennsylvania voters say, and voters trust Obama more than McCain 54 - 36 percent to handle this issue, compared to 55 - 36 percent October 1.
By a 47 - 45 percent margin, voters trust McCain more to handle foreign policy, compared to 48 - 45 percent.
"Sen. Obama leads comfortably in Pennsylvania, mostly because he has pulled ahead in the four key suburban counties surrounding Philadelphia where Keystone State races are decided," said Clay F. Richards, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.
"Obama is leading among whites and blue collar workers, but white men and 15 percent of Sen. Hillary Clinton's primary supporters are clinging to Sen. McCain, probably not enough to change the tide in the closing days of the campaign," Richards added.
From October 16 - 21, Quinnipiac University surveyed:
* 1,433 Florida likely voters with a margin of error of +/- 2.6 percent; * 1,360 Ohio likely voters with a margin of error of +/- 2.7 percent; * 1,425 Pennsylvania likely voters with a margin of error of +/- 2.6 percent.
The Quinnipiac University Poll, directed by Douglas Schwartz, Ph.D., conducts public opinion surveys in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio and nationwide as a public service and for research. For more data and RSS feed - http://www.quinnipiac.edu/polling.xml, or call (203) 582-5201.
Personally, I'd vote for a peace minded Muslim before I'd vote for an Atheist; any person of a true faith. But not another zealot.
A good Muslim would be a good Catholic, a good Catholic would be a good Jew, a good Jew would be a good Muslim, and on and on . . .
An atheist cannot be a good person? Isaac Asimov? Marie Curie? Thomas Edison? Carl Sagan? Jodie Foster? Bruce Lee? Dave Matthews? Juliana Moore? Christopher Reeve? Gene Roddenberry? Susan B Antony? Warren Buffet? Lance Armstrong? Charles Schultz? Bill Gates? Ernest Hemmingway? Pat Tillman (remember he gave up a lucrative contract to SERVE America)? Mark Twain? All not good, or at least, somewhat qualified people (at least over Palin)? Scandinavia is one among the safest, healthiest, most well-educated, prosperous, ethical, and successful societies on earth--and one of the least religious and not full of chaos and immorality.
Judge the person, evil is evil not because of a religion or the absence of one.
I didn't say that an Atheist can't be a good person, I'd just prefer a person of faith. It shows me that they can believe in something. It's just a personal preference.
I didn't say that an Atheist can't be a good person, I'd just prefer a person of faith. It shows me that they can believe in something. It's just a personal preference.
Some people believe in 70 virgins, Pat Tillman believed in his country. They can still believe strongly about something, be it spiritual or something earthly or something else. It is how you live your life that counts.
The constitution says there should be no religious test for anyone to hold office. Personally I wish none of these candidates would continue to wear religion on their sleeves. It is offensive. Contrary to the right wing orthodoxy, many of our founding fathers were not Christians, but Deists who believed in a God that basically set everythig in motion and really didn't do much else.
Probably the most religious president was Carter, and look how that turned out.
I didn't say that an Atheist can't be a good person, I'd just prefer a person of faith. It shows me that they can believe in something. It's just a personal preference.
Some people believe in 70 virgins, Pat Tillman believed in his country. They can still believe strongly about something, be it spiritual or something earthly or something else. It is how you live your life that counts.
I agree with you; Pat Tillman's a hero. But if not for "friendly fire" from his fellow Americans, in a war that we have no business fighting, Pat Tillman would still be here. But that's for a different thread.
"I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."-Fiction! This is a corruption of a quote from Obama's book The Audacity of Hope. It is from a section that talks about the concerns of immigrants who are American citizens.
Here is the accurate and more complete quote: "Of course, not all my conversations in immigrant communities follow this easy pattern. In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific assurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."
This is the problem with Politics today...ask about Palin's clothes, bra size, McCain's houses, Obama's middle name, shoes etc.. and everyone knows.
What's Obama's economic plan? What's McCain's healthcare plan? no one has any idea whatsoever.
So true DMC, so true. If we want to, I'm sure that we can all come up with stories of wasteful spending that is and has taken place with EVERY politician and / or political party. Right now our country is in domestic turmoil, is trying to find a way to get out of a war, and at the same time keep both our allies and ourselves safe. Those are the issues that concern me.
Right now I really couldn't give a rats ass if the democratic party picked up the hotel / dinner tab for Senator Obama and his family or if the republican party paid for Governor Palin's shoes. The fucking media are just a bunch of opportunist whore pigs who report to the American people like they are an ignorant bunch of assholes. And unfortunatley there is a faction of people out there that will decide who they will vote for based on these type of irrelivant stories that are being put out by the whore rag media and will not place their vote based on the REAL issues and what the respective candidates tell us that they plan to do about those issues if elected.
So true DMC, so true. If we want to, I'm sure that we can all come up with stories of wasteful spending that is and has taken place with EVERY politician and / or political party. Right now our country is in domestic turmoil, is trying to find a way to get out of a war, and at the same time keep both our allies and ourselves safe. Those are the issues that concern me.
Right now I really couldn't give a rats ass if the democratic party picked up the hotel / dinner tab for Senator Obama and his family or if the republican party paid for Governor Palin's shoes. The fucking media are just a bunch of opportunist whore pigs who report to the American people like they are an ignorant bunch of assholes. And unfortunatley there is a faction of people out there that will decide who they will vote for based on these type of irrelivant stories that are being put out by the whore rag media and will not place their vote based on the REAL issues and what the respective candidates tell us that they plan to do about those issues if elected.
DC, stop beating around the bush and tell us what you REALLY think. Of course you are 100% correct. This clothing thing with Palin is a complete diversion. I want to know about her qualifications to step in if McCain dies, just like I want to know if Joe Biden will make some long winded gaffe as president if Obama dies. I want to know how Obama will lower taxes on the middle class AND fight two wars and have health care to boot. I want to know how McCain can lower taxes, fight two wars and balance the budget. I'd like to hear the candidates tell us foreign policy and economic experts they admire (and I mean current ones, not Winston Churchill and Adam Smith). To put the Palin clothing thing in perspective, she is one of four people who have a chance to be the next president or vice president of the United States. Last time I checked all four are getting big time secret service protection, they fly around in their own planes, they travel in motorcades with streets blocked off for them, they stay in the best hotels, and I highly doubt they are doing their own laundry, ironing and cooking. All of this costs lots of money. If the RNC wants their Vice president looking sharp, its their money to spend.
To all those calling for fairness in the presidential race - I say "Bullshit". I wanna see them sling the shit!! A no-holds barred steelcage match would be better!
Dig up all the dirt you can on your opponent, and if it ain't juicy enough add in some made-up stuff. When I turn on my tv I wanna be entertained. Bring on the crap!!
To all those calling for fairness in the presidential race - I say "Bullshit". I wanna see them sling the shit!! A no-holds barred steelcage match would be better!
I love the ellipsis in Apple's quote. Truly is classic ignorance.
Also, AppleOnYa, what is wrong with being a Muslim? Even if Barack HUSSEIN (again, so the fuck what?) Obama was a Muslim, what is so polarizing about that to you?
I love the ellipsis in Apple's quote. Truly is classic ignorance.
Also, AppleOnYa, what is wrong with being a Muslim? Even if Barack HUSSEIN (again, so the fuck what?) Obama was a Muslim, what is so polarizing about that to you?
Ummmmmmmm ALL, EVERY SINGLE MUSLIM attacked us on 9/11. Your next door neighbor, the one who takes his 2 kids to soccer practice and goes to his job in the city, yeah, he attacked us too.
To all those calling for fairness in the presidential race - I say "Bullshit". I wanna see them sling the shit!! A no-holds barred steelcage match would be better!
Dig up all the dirt you can on your opponent, and if it ain't juicy enough add in some made-up stuff. When I turn on my tv I wanna be entertained. Bring on the crap!!
Steel cage tag team match. Loser leaves the country.
To all those calling for fairness in the presidential race - I say "Bullshit". I wanna see them sling the shit!! A no-holds barred steelcage match would be better!
I wouldn't mind seeing Sarah covered in chocolate pudding.
Pig! Sure, here you have a woman who is being judged on her looks instead of her vast knowledge of the inner workings of government and foreign policy...
Oh, hell, even I can't say that about her with a straight face.
President Bush's former press secretary, who drew fire from the administration for his tell-all book, endorses Barack Obama
AP
Thursday, October 23, 2008
NEW YORK -- Scott McClellan, President Bush's former press secretary, says he is backing Barack Obama for president.
McClellan made the endorsement during a taping of Comedian D.L. Hughley's new show that is premiering on CNN this weekend. The former Bush administration official said he wanted to support the candidate that has the best chance for changing the way Washington works and getting things done.
He's the second former Bush administration figure this week to publicly back Obama, following former Secretary of State Colin Powell. McClellan caused bitterness among his former co-workers with a tell-all book that criticized Bush.
Obama Camp Plans Major Celebration in Chicago on Election Night.
With 12 days to go until Election Day, Barack Obama's got big plans for a Chicago Election Night celebration.
FOXNews.com
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Barack Obama waves after speaking at a rally in Indianapolis, Ind., Thursday. (AP Photo)
Barack Obama took a lot of ribbing for setting up Greek columns on the larger-than-life set of his nomination acceptance speech in Denver two months ago.
But at least he knew for certain then that when the ballgame was over -- he was going to be the Democratic candidate for president.
Now, with the Nov. 4 general election still 12 days away, the front-running Illinois senator is planning an Election Night celebration that could put his Invesco Field party to shame.
A huge stage is being constructed in Chicago's Grant Park, where Obama hopes to declare victory before a cheering throng that could dwarf the one at the Democratic convention. Back then, "only" 80,000 fans were in attendance that night. This time, it could be hundreds of thousands in the park and its surroundings -- closer to Berlin in July than Denver in August.
The Chicago Sun-Times reports the price tag of the fanfare has been pegged at $2 million, to be picked up by the Obama campaign. Mayor Richard Daley reportedly suggested Obama use a cheaper venue, but was turned down.
Obama is well on his way to winning the election, according to most polls and electoral vote projections. The campaign may be preparing to set the champagne on ice. But it may want to heed the usual reminder: As Yogi Berra famously said, it ain't over till it's over.
An Obama victory -- he would become the first African-American president -- would logically be cause for an historic celebration. So far, the campaign's staying mum on the expected crowd count.
Asked how many people the campaign was anticipating in Grant Park, Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor quipped, "At least 10."
"We have a lot of supporters who have given their time and effort to the campaign, and we want them to share in the election night with us," Vietor told FOXNews.com.
The excitement is palpable at Obama's rallies, a tone the candidate has reflected. "I feel like we got a righteous wind at our backs here," Obama told supporters in Leesburg, Va., Wednesday evening.
But John McCain -- and Obama himself -- are warning the Democrat's supporters not to get ahead of themselves.
McCain says he savors being the underdog so close to Election Day, and for weeks he has accused Obama of "measuring the drapes" and counting him out.
"My opponent's looking pretty confident ... these days," McCain said Wednesday in Goffstown, N.H. "He'll be addressing the nation soon. He's got another of those big stadium spectacles in the works. But acting like the election is over, it won't let him take away your chance to have the final say in this election."
Obama is making an effort to catch himself and couch his language when he talks about post-Election Day plans. He is warning supporters not to get lazy and "screw it up," as he says Democratic campaigns have been known to do.
"We're going to have to work, we're going to have to struggle, we're going to have to fight for every single one of those 12 days," Obama told the crowd at an Indianapolis rally Thursday. "It's not going to be easy, but I'm hopeful about the outcome ... but we cannot let up."
Vietor brushed aside McCain's criticism that Obama is being too presumptuous.
"That's ridiculous. We're working hard every day to talk to voters, to get out the vote and knocking on doors. This is a campaign that went through one of the longest primaries in history, and rest assured we take nothing for granted," he said.
He said the Grant Park event will be free and open to the public.
As for McCain, he's holding his election night festivities at the Biltmore in Phoenix, which customarily hosts weddings and business retreats. Compare that with Grant Park, which customarily hosts the rock mega-concert Lollapalooza.
Also by contrast, only a select group of reporters will be allowed to witness McCain's postelection remarks, which he is reportedly planning to give to supporters on the hotel lawn. Due to limited seating, the rest of the media on site will be watching on TV in a separate filing room.
With a theoretically limitless outdoor capacity, the press are invited to attend Obama's event. While there's no fee outright to cover it, news organizations have been asked to pay for prime seating and Internet and phone service.
Meanwhile, Obama is trying to downplay speculation about post-election plans. He spoke about foreign policy challenges Wednesday after meeting in Virginia with his "working group" on national security. He oscillated between jabs at McCain (he said his rival's latest tax policy charges were a sign "that they have run out of ideas"), and deference to the voters who will decide the election.
Asked whether he planned to attend the global economic summit scheduled for mid-November, Obama made sure to pay homage to President Bush.
"Even though the election will have taken place and we will have a new president-elect, we are still going to have one president at a time until January 20th, when the new president is sworn in," Obama said.
"So, you know, there is always a transition period. I don't want to get too much ahead of ourselves."
He noted that his economic team has been in regular contact with the "uppermost reaches of policy-making, Secretary Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke."
"But I don't want to make commitments at this point in terms of our participation ... before I've even won the election," he added.
Does the fact McCain plans on spending election night in a 700 room hotel "which customarily hosts weddings and business retreats" signal McCain knows it's over? In a related story, the AP writes: "Only a small press "pool" — mostly those who have traveled regularly with the candidate on his campaign plane, plus a few local Arizona reporters and other guests — will be physically present when McCain speaks." Apparently McCain doesn't even plan on attending his election night party at the hotel, but will instead address the crowd from the lawn outside.
NEW YORK – Republican John McCain is not going to make his election night remarks in the traditional style — at a podium standing in front of a sea of campaign workers jammed into a hotel ballroom. Oh, the throng of supporters will hold the usual election night party at the Biltmore Hotel in Phoenix on the evening of Nov. 4.
But the Republican presidential nominee plans to address another group of supporters and a small group of reporters on the hotel lawn; his remarks will be simultaneously piped electronically to the party inside and other reporters in a media filing center, aides said.
Aides said Thursday that the arrangement was the result of space limitations and that McCain might drop by the election watch party at some other point.
Only a small press "pool" — mostly those who have traveled regularly with the candidate on his campaign plane, plus a few local Arizona reporters and other guests — will be physically present when McCain speaks.
Thomas Patterson, a government professor at Harvard's Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy, called the arrangement "unusual" but said the campaign may simply be bowing to the reality that the candidate's remarks are geared toward the televised audience rather than those in the hall.
"Addressing your supporters election night is one of those traditions in politics, like where you choose to launch your campaign," Patterson said. "Why wouldn't you want the energy of the crowd? And if you're going to lose, you almost need it even more."
With just 12 days left in the presidential contest, most polls show the Arizona senator trailing Democrat Barack Obama nationally and in most battleground states, although a new AP-GfK poll showed the race tightening a bit in the last few days.
Obama, by contrast, plans to address a giant outdoor celebration election night in Chicago's Grant Park. The event is free and open to the public, but the campaign was charging media organizations a hefty fee for close-in spots on the camera risers and platforms and for cable and wireless Internet at those spots.
The Obama campaign was also charging news organizations $935 per person for a spot in its press filing center, as opposed to $695 per person at the McCain gathering. But as Obama spokesman Bill Burton pointed out, "Anyone credentialed for our filing center will also be able to watch the event live and in person, unlike the McCain event."
Does the fact McCain plans on spending election night in a 700 room hotel "which customarily hosts weddings and business retreats" signal McCain knows it's over? In a related story, the AP writes: "Only a small press "pool" — mostly those who have traveled regularly with the candidate on his campaign plane, plus a few local Arizona reporters and other guests — will be physically present when McCain speaks." Apparently McCain doesn't even plan on attending his election night party at the hotel, but will instead address the crowd from the lawn outside.
If I was a McCain supporter who paid money to be there, I would be PISSED.
And really, this is a dick move. Carter/Mondale/Dukakis in their disasterous landslide losses in the 1980s, they all still came out in the flesh to their supporters for the last hurrah. Same with Bush Sr. in 1992 and Dole in '96 and so forth.
Worse than anything, this news just re-enforces within the minds of McCain supporters that they can't win, or that the campaign itself doesn't think it can.
Apparently some Republican candidates know it's over and are trying to save their own asses:
GOP argument: Don't give President Obama a blank check
By Alexander Mooney CNN
(CNN) -- A new Republican ad appears to suggest that Barack Obama has all but won the presidential race, an argument several vulnerable Senate Republicans may have to reluctantly embrace with only days until Election Day, an expert in campaign advertising said.
Aimed at Kay Hagan, Sen. Elizabeth Dole's surprisingly strong Democratic challenger in North Carolina, the 30-second spot from the National Republican Senatorial Committee warns voters against Democrats holding the White House and Congress, and flatly states that if Hagan wins, the party will "get a blank check."
"These liberals want complete control of government in a time of crisis, all branches of government," the ad's narrator states. "No check and balances, no debate, no independence. That's the truth behind Kay Hagan. If she wins, they get a blank check."
Committee Online Communications Director John Randall denied that the ad is suggesting that GOP nominee John McCain will lose out on the White House.
"The NRSC is not conceding a Barack Obama presidency," he said. "Fiscally irresponsible liberals like Kay Hagan are not the answer in these tough economic times and would only make things worse. Our ad was intended to highlight Hagan's many failings in light of the Democrats' promise to close debate should they control the executive and legislative branches of the federal government."
But with polls warning of a GOP bloodbath November 4, vulnerable senators in red states may have no other option but to suggest that Obama will capture the White House and warn that the Illinois senator needs to be checked by Senate Republicans. VideoWatch more on the fight for battleground states »
"They are basically painting the picture that the presidential race is over," said Evan Tracey of Campaign Media Analysis Group, CNN's consultant on ad spending. "Overall, people prefer divided government. This is that divided government argument: 'Don't hand sole control over to one party.' "
The GOP isn't aiming to regain control of the evenly split Senate but to ensure that Democrats don't reach 60 seats in the chamber -- the "magic number" that seemed unthinkable only a few months ago.
Should Democrats reach that number, the party could prevent Republicans from filibustering bills they oppose, and the GOP would be unable to block legislation they are against from going through.
The last time either party held such an edge was in 1977, when Democrats held 61 Senate seats and Jimmy Carter was president. It seems increasingly likely this year, with the economy flailing, the Republican brand in tatters and a Democratic presidential nominee who is causing extraordinary voter enthusiasm.
Vulnerable Senate Republicans in red states are hoping the doomsday scenario will cause enough independent-leaning voters to stick with them, even if they largely blame the GOP for the country's current conditions. VideoWatch more on the GOP's troubles »
"You're going to see it in a lot of places these last 10 days, where you have vulnerable Republicans, because ultimately survival instincts are going to take over here," Tracey said. "It's going to be less about whoever else is running and more about, 'How do I save myself?' "
Dole, once among the most popular figures in the GOP and head of the National Republican Senatorial Committee in 2006, has become perhaps the most vulnerable of the red state Senate Republicans in what might be the clearest sign of the GOP's woes this election season.
But several other red state Republicans are under unexpected pressure as well, including Georgia Sen. Saxby Chambliss, Mississippi Sen. Roger Wicker, Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens and even Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.
But the divided government argument may only further highlight McCain as a candidate who has already lost, even as the Arizona senator and his running mate head to a string of red states to convince voters that the race isn't over.
"There's risk for the party in this argument," Tracey said, "but people have specific mandates above the party mandates, and survival instincts are going to take over at some point."
Every now & then, even the New York Times decides to get it right. (Bold/Italics added by me)
********************************
Donor Patrol: Obama’s Online Site Accepts More FakesBy Michael Luo
Erika Franzi...had been following recent news reports examining how people using obviously fake names had made thousands...in contributions to Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign without being detected.
So this afternoon ... while her 2yr-old was watching “Sesame Street,” Ms. Franzi got on her laptop to conduct an experiment. She used her debit card to make a $15 donation to Obama’s campaign.
Ms. Franzi, who described herself as conservative and preferring Sen. McCain over Obama, used the name “Della Ware” and entered an address of 12345 No Way in Far Far Away, DE 78954. Under employer, she listed: Americans Against Obama; for occupation, she typed in: Founder.
To her surprise, she said, her contribution went through in “fewer than three seconds.” Then, in order to be fair, she repeated the experiment on McCain’s Web site, entering the exact same information. 3 times, she said, she received the message: “We have found errors in the information that you submitted. Please review the information below and try again.”
Ms. Franzi’s experiment would not necessarily be notable, except it appears that many others are doing the same thing. Power Line, a conservative political blog, reported a reader had successfully made donations under the names Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and Bill Ayers. While those experiences could not be immediately verified, Ms. Franzi sent The Caucus a screenshot from her bank account that showed a contribution to Obama for America going through at 1:02 p.m.
To be fair to the Obama campaign, officials there have said much of their checking for fraud occurs after the transactions have already occurred. When they find something wrong, they then refund the amount.
But a New York Times analysis of campaign finance records looking for obvious anomalies in donor information quickly found more than a dozen contributors to Mr. Obama using obviously fictitious name. This was a tiny fraction of Obama’s donor pool, but it appeared from the analysis that McCain had far fewer apparent fake names among his donors.
Unlike Obama, McCain provides on his Web site a searchable database of all of his donors, including those who fall below the $200 threshold that the Federal Election Commission requires campaigns to itemize in their reports...
The Obama campaign pointed out that a search of the name “Anonymous, Anonymous” also turns up pages of contributions to the McCain campaign, including more than two dozen that exceed $200 but for some reason do not appear in FEC records. It should be pointed out that campaigns are permitted to accept donations of up to $50 in cash or anonymously. There are other odd donors that appear in searches of the McCain database but fall below the $200 threshold, including “The Gun Shop” from Hood River, Oregon., who contributed $100 and “Adorable Manabat” from Winnetka, Calif., who gave $200.
Other news reports have surfaced recently of people discovering credit card charges they had not made to the Obama campaign. The Washington Post reported this week the tale of Mary T. Biskup of Manchester, MO, who received a call recently from the Obama campaign asking if she had donated $174,800 to the campaign. Ms. Biskup said she had not and told the Post it appeared someone had used her name but not her credit card number, because nothing had showed up on her own bills.
The Obama campaign said it quickly spotted the donations ostensibly made by Ms. Biskup and began looking into it right away, contacting her and then charging back the money to the credit card.
The main problem, according to Ms. Franzi, seems to be that Obama’s Web site apparently does not require that the donor’s information match the information on the credit card making the contribution, while Mr. McCain’s seems to have stricter standards.
Ms. Franzi insisted her experiment had nothing to do with her being a McCain supporter. “Nothing that I did today would have turned out any different if I were an Obama supporter. I would be equally disgusted with my own candidate for doing the same thing.”
Nevertheless, a half hour after her “fake” contribution to Mr. Obama went through, Ms. Franzi, who had made no donations to either candidate, felt compelled to perform her ablutions. She contributed $15 to Mr. McCain.
Perhaps every now and then you could choose to directly face up to posting legitimate bullshit and addressing questions people have asked you; or, you know, simply addressing that you were wrong.
What is wrong with being a Muslim? Because even if your extremely false quote was even close to accurate...what would be wrong with that and what would be wrong if Barack Obama was a Muslim?
Oh Apple, why am I reminded of that scene in CASABLANCA?
Rick: How can you close me up? On what grounds? Captain Renault: I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here! [a croupier hands Renault a pile of money] Croupier: Your winnings, sir. Captain Renault: [sotto voce] Oh, thank you very much. [aloud] Captain Renault: Everybody out at once!
Anyway, when you gonna apologize for misquoting that quote from the book? Remember when I linked a Youtube tape of supposedly Sarah Palin calling someone at a radio show with cancer a "bitch"? Geoff slacked my ass in correcting me that she said no such thing. I apologized for that screw-up of mine afterwards.
My point is, we all make mistakes. I think you can do it, you can Woman Up!
Why do we need the entire text of news articles in this thread? We all have access to internet news, don't we? If at all there is something so important that it needs to be emphasized, just provide a link and copy+paste just those one or two lines that you want to discuss about.
Edit: RRA, I wasn't referring to your post above. It was just a coincidence. In fact, your post would be an example of helpful posting style that I was referring to.
Why do we need the entire text of news articles in this thread? We all have access to internet news, don't we? If at all there is something so important that it needs to be emphasized, just provide a link and copy+paste just those one or two lines that you want to discuss about.
Edit: RRA, I wasn't referring to your post above. It was just a coincidence. In fact, your post would be an example of helpful posting style that I was referring to.
The reason may be that back in the day, I would just post headline and link, but then a mod would complain that by the time that anyone may check out the report, the link is dead.
That perhaps is why full articles are posted here in general. BB.Net is the only board I know of who allows this. Everyone else doesn't either because of web space or fears of copyright infringement.
Barry Goldwater's Granddaughter Slams McCain, Endorses Obama October 23, 2008.
John McCain has long claimed conservative and one-time presidential candidate (he lost to LBJ in 1964) Barry Goldwater as one of his idols. Turns out that Goldwater's Arizona-dwelling grandchildren don't care much for McCain/Palin, or the current state of the GOP:
"Being Barry Goldwater's granddaughter and living in Arizona, one would assume that I would be voting for our state's senator, John McCain. I am still struck by certain 'dyed in the wool' Republicans who are on the fence this election, as it seems like a no-brainer to me.
Myself, along with my siblings and a few cousins, will not be supporting the Republican presidential candidates this year. We believe strongly in what our grandfather stood for: honesty, integrity, and personal freedom, free from political maneuvering and fear tactics. I learned a lot about my grandfather while producing the documentary, Mr. Conservative Goldwater on Goldwater. Our generation of Goldwaters expects government to provide for constitutional protections. We reject the constant intrusion into our personal lives, along with other crucial policy issues of the McCain/Palin ticket.
My grandfather (Paka) would never suggest denying a woman's right to choose. My grandmother co-founded Planned Parenthood in Arizona in the 1930's, a cause my grandfather supported. I'm not sure about how he would feel about marriage rights based on same-sex orientation. I think he would feel that love and respect for ones privacy is what matters most and not the intolerance and poor judgment displayed by McCain over the years. Paka respected our civil liberties and passed on the message that that we should conduct our lives standing up for the basic freedoms we hold so dear. "
Hey Lou... how do you feel about O&A hoping Obama wins just so everyone thinking he's "our savior" is utterly disappointed in the end when he can't live up to his promises?
Hey Lou... how do you feel about O&A hoping Obama wins just so everyone thinking he's "our savior" is utterly disappointed in the end when he can't live up to his promises?
It's mostly just talk for entertainment value, except for Anthony. Him and his arsenal of weapons are about as far to the Right as you can get. In reality though, Norton is an Obama supporter, and Opie has flip-flopped back and forth all year. Today, they all spent a fair amount of time making fun of McCain.
Why do we need the entire text of news articles in this thread? We all have access to internet news, don't we?
Originally Posted By: pizzaboy
You're right, it eats up way too much space.
Links to news stories aren't always permanent. Here, the articles remain intact, indefinitely.
Call me lazy, but most of the time if I see a story with a just a link, I just skip it. It's much easier to just read it here. But if you're going to post a story, you should always give credit to the author and include the source, if there is one.
Geoff, for some reason you being a Republican blows me away. Don't know why but it does. (not that there's anything wrong with that mind you) For some reason if I would have had to guess I would have said liberal. Anyway, I don't direct this at you but more generally speaking of this campaign cycle.
NOTE: Geoff I just noted that you were referring to a Q & A...Sorry, I misread. I thought you yourself were asking? Been a long day.
Savior is the word the Righties use, not any Obama supporter. Truth is, any President has his work cut out for him this term, digging us out of the mess our current President left. I for one don't expect major changes for the first term at least. God knows what horrible mess Obama (yes I'm hoping) will find when he takes office that could delay even further our nation's recovery.
At the very very least look how well organized Obama has been throughout this entire campaign....his entire strategy, the way he's deciding to use/spend his money. For God's sake, he's purchased a half hour before one of he World Series games (somebody let me know when that is cause I don't watch) which is somethin in itself I hear. The guy DOES have organization and sounds like he'd be good at handling money too. NOBODY who supported our current leader can criticzie much, at least at this point,as far as I'm concerned. They voted twice for Bush. Like one term wasn't enough misery I proudly did NOT vote for him TWICE. And, I'm suffering for it like everyone who did.
I think the right loves to use to their own spin and phrases, simply...well because it always DID work and well they are losing at the moment.
No my President doesn't have to be the savior and I don't have to want to have a beer with him. I don't even have to care for his personality at all. If he has a brain, is dedicated to running our country and shows he' doing his best, I'm good.
I had to keep looking at your reply. I thought you wrote Q&A twice. It took me a minute.
I did hear about Goldwater's grandaughter, and did we mention also Eisenhowers grandaugher (or was it daughter?).
Anyway I am hearing just now the 98 per cent of eligible voters in Michigan have registered (a record). Huge turnout predicted.
Oh, and Scott McClellan too? I always felt like poor Scott was somewhat of an innocent scapegoat. I am not surprised he "switched". Also, I don't know names, but several Republicans have said they will be voting for Obama. Gee, ya think even the Neocons will secretly swtich and give Obama a huge win?
Hey Lou... how do you feel about O&A hoping Obama wins just so everyone thinking he's "our savior" is utterly disappointed in the end when he can't live up to his promises?
But didn't you read that endorsement news from the world's most popular Televangelist? He said that Obama will be on the path to the return of Jesus.
Every now & then, even the New York Times decides to get it right. (Bold/Italics added by me)
********************************
Donor Patrol: Obama’s Online Site Accepts More FakesBy Michael Luo
If I wanted to skirt the campaign finance laws I would so pick names like “Fdsa Fdsa” and "Doodad Pro" to stand out like red flags. Seriously, the desperation is palpable!
For it to get into the campaign coffers, the actual name of the person must be given before a bank or financial institution will agree to release the money. So fictitious names cannot really donate online, though easily enough added to a DB if the AVS is turned off. In the event that they are unable to verify the identity of the giver, the donation is held in a separate account until it can be returned/erased.
Sloppy bookkeeping without AVS I will say though, but not fraudulent or scandalous.
Come one Apple, I know you are smart -- you are just too desperate right now to think critically.
Every now & then, even the New York Times decides to get it right. (Bold/Italics added by me)
********************************
Donor Patrol: Obama’s Online Site Accepts More FakesBy Michael Luo
If I wanted to skirt the campaign finance laws I would so pick names like “Fdsa Fdsa” and "Doodad Pro" to stand out like red flags. Seriously, the desperation is palpable!
For it to get into the campaign coffers, the actual name of the person must be given before a bank or financial institution will agree to release the money. So fictitious names cannot really donate online, though easily enough added to a DB if the AVS is turned off. In the event that they are unable to verify the identity of the giver, the donation is held in a separate account until it can be returned/erased.
Sloppy bookkeeping without AVS I will say though, but not fraudulent or scandalous.
Come one Apple, I know you are smart -- you are just too desperate right now to think critically.
Every now & then, even the New York Times decides to get it right. (Bold/Italics added by me)
********************************
Donor Patrol: Obama’s Online Site Accepts More FakesBy Michael Luo
If I wanted to skirt the campaign finance laws I would so pick names like “Fdsa Fdsa” and "Doodad Pro" to stand out like red flags. Seriously, the desperation is palpable!
For it to get into the campaign coffers, the actual name of the person must be given before a bank or financial institution will agree to release the money. So fictitious names cannot really donate online, though easily enough added to a DB if the AVS is turned off. In the event that they are unable to verify the identity of the giver, the donation is held in a separate account until it can be returned/erased.
Sloppy bookkeeping without AVS I will say though, but not fraudulent or scandalous.
Come one Apple, I know you are smart -- you are just too desperate right now to think critically.
Great post.
It is great. I always like it when Saladbar pops in on these threads. She knows her sh*t!! Info seems to be right at her fingertips.
Oh, and Scott McClellan too? I always felt like poor Scott was somewhat of an innocent scapegoat. I am not surprised he "switched". Also, I don't know names, but several Republicans have said they will be voting for Obama. Gee, ya think even the Neocons will secretly swtich and give Obama a huge win?
TIS
There was an ABC poll recently where Obama had 22% conservative support, which if it holds on Election Day would be the best conservative turn-out for a Democratic candidate since Jimmy Carter in 1976. Mind you, this is "Conservative" and not necessarily "Republican" (A recent WSJ poll gives it between 5-12%)
Really, I've asked repeatedly to the hard-skulled NeoCons within the GOP (when they aren't purging members for speaking out against Palin) why all these disgruntled social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, libertarians, moderate Republicans, and even a few NeoCons are jumping ship to become "Obamacons" (Republicans for Obama).
The quicker they understand the question to that answer, the quicker they may have a chance in the future to return to power.
Anyway TIS, for your viewing pleasure (or boredom), here are some of the Obamacons:
*Colin Powell - Fmr. Secretary of State, National Security Advisor, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. *Fmr. Minnesota Governor Arne Carlson (1991-99) *Fmr. Minnesota Senator David Durenberger (1978-1995) *Fmr. Connecticut Governor/Senator Lowell Weicker (1991-95/1971-1989) *Fmr. Virginia Governor Linwood Holton (1970-74) father-in-law of current Governor Tim Kaine. *Ken Adelman - Neo-Con activist/Pentagon adivsor for Ford/Reagan/Dubya administrations. *Fmr. Iowa Congressman Jim Leach (1977-2007) *Fmr. Rhode Island Senator Lincoln Chafee (1998-2007)- Only GOP Senator to vote against Iraq War. *Wick Allison - Fmr. publisher of National Review *Jack Antaramian - Florida real estate developer and Dubya fundraiser *Fmr. Mayor of Los Angeles Richard Riordan (1993-2001) *Julie Nixon Eisenhower - daughter of former President Richard Nixon, granddaughter-in law of Dwight D. Eisenhower *Lilibet Hagel - Wife of Senator Chuck Hagel *Rita E. Hauser - Fmr. Dubya White House intelligence advisor *Larry Hunter - Fmr. Reagan policy adivsor/Chief Economist for the Free Enterprise Fund *Dennis Hopper - Long-time Hollywood Republican, even appeared in the recent conservative comedy AN AMERICAN CAROL. *Paul O'Neill - United States Secretary of the Treasury from 2001-02 under Dubya *David Ruder - Chairman of the Securities & Exchange Commission under President Ronald Reagan [43] *Frank Schaeffer - pro-life advocate and the son of evangelist Francis Schaeffer. *Rear Admiral John Hutson, USN (ret.) - Fmr. Judge Advocate General (JAG) of the Navy. *Legal scholar Douglas Kmiec *Conservative columnist/novelist Christopher Buckley - Author of the libertarian novel THANK YOU FOR SMOKING (which became an awesome movie with Aaron "Two-Face" Eckhart). From the outrage at his endorsement, resigned as a regular writer for The National Review, the legendary conservative magazine founded by his father, William Buckley. *Pennsylvania talk-show host Michael Smerconish - Though someone here at BB.Net told me that he wasn't really conservative per say, but would ABC News lie? OK, maybe they would. *The Chicago Tribune - In its entire 161-year publishing history, Obama becomes their first Democratic presidential endorsement. *Fairbanks North Star Borough mayor Jim Whitaker - Delivered a speech on the second day of the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver, Colorado.
I've decided to vote for McCain because my vote is worthless in California and I will get pleasure out of knowing people will get pissed over something so stupid as to how I voted. Seriously, people here look at you like you are the devil if you say you support McCain. At first it bothered me, now I kind of like it. So I'm going to use their own evil guilt tactics against them. Democrats think they can change the world for good when really they are just as evil as anyone else with an agenda.
I would probably vote for Obama if I lived in a Republican state surrounded by idiots on the conservative side.
... Michael understands that no matter how strong its military or how savvy its diplomats, the Corleone family will not succeed in the multipolar environment ahead unless it learns to take better care of its allies. Like America after the Iraq War, the mafia empire that Michael inherits after the hit on Sonny possesses a system of alliances on the brink of collapse. Having flocked to the Corleone colors when the war against Sollozzo broke out, the family’s allies—like America’s in the “New” Europe—have little to show for the risks they have undertaken on the family’s behalf. Exhausted by war and estranged by Sonny’s Rumsfeld-like bullying, they have begun to question whether it is still in their interests to backstop a declining superpower that is apparently not interested in retaining their loyalty. ...
It is reported that early voting is record breaking this election. I still suspect long lines will be historic. I just hope people don't decide not to vote because the lines are too long or, worse yet, I hope they are not turned away because the polls close. In other words, I hope these polling places are prepared.
TIS
Twenty-nine states were accepting early ballots as of Tuesday, and Oklahoma will begin accepting early ballots next week.
In North Carolina, which has developed into a battleground state, nearly 500,000 voters have cast absentee ballots, according to the State Board of Elections. Officials at the State Board of Elections expect to surpass numbers from the 2004 election, when 700,000 people voted early.
From CNN: John McCain's brother Joe calls 911 to complain about traffic, then tells the 911 operator "F*ck you" when he doesn't like the operator's response. Unbelievable:
Can I just say something about this whole "brother and family" type stories. I have a sister that I haven't talked to and wouldn't talk to if you paid me all the money in the world. You don't know what kind of relationship McCain and his brother have (at least I haven't heard anything). So whats stopping the Obama campaign from finding this out and making a little call to his brother? I just think stuff has to be limited to the candidate himself.
We do know what kind of relationship they have. Joe has actively campaigned for John, and recently got into trouble for calling Northern Virgina "Communist country".
It is great. I always like it when Saladbar pops in on these threads. She knows her sh*t!! Info seems to be right at her fingertips.
TIS
Well to be fair I have to admit I do a lot of programming for credit card entries. Obama had someone with some sloppy and careless oversight, but there are SO many checks along the process that no way they are going to get money from false names.
Funny, the only time I experienced credit fraud wasn't online, but those old carbon methods. The carbon was stolen and someone put $3K worth of clothes on my card.
If Obama is doing as well as the polls suggest (and I have no reason to trust the polls) we'll know early election night if he is the winner because if Virginia and N Carolina are called in his favor its over.
McCain campaign volunteer admits to making up story about being attacked by Obama supporter:
Developing ...
Police sources tell KDKA television in Pittsburgh that 20-year-old John McCain campaign volunteer Ashley Todd has admitted to lying to them about being mugged and attacked by a man who carved a "B" into her cheek after seeing a McCain bumper sticker on her car. Todd is expected to face charges for the false report, according to KDKA.
With all of the early voting occurring, when we actually get to election night, how early do you think the networks will call certain states? They are estimating that 30% of registered voters will vote before November 4th. I still believe that the networks do not want to avoid the embarrassment of 2000 by calling a state too early. If the race is close in any state, I think they will all play it safe.
The networks will do as they have done for decades. Based on exit polls, they will call the electoral vote state by state as early in the evening as they feel confident about their polling to do so. Yes, Virginia and N. Carolina will be called probably by 9/10PM CST and that will tell us alot.
With the first African American candidate involved, I really doubt they're going to rely too much on exit polls. Especially in the battleground states.
Can I just say something about this whole "brother and family" type stories. I have a sister that I haven't talked to and wouldn't talk to if you paid me all the money in the world. You don't know what kind of relationship McCain and his brother have (at least I haven't heard anything). So whats stopping the Obama campaign from finding this out and making a little call to his brother? I just think stuff has to be limited to the candidate himself.
Very true.
Hell, what President hasn't had a screwy brother/sister?
From Billy Carter to Roger Clinton to Neil Bush, in fact Richard Nixon's brother sought/failed to run a NixonBurger restaurant franchise.
I shit you not.
RANDOM FACT: No President has ever been an only child
I'm too lazy to look this up but how are people voting early? Are these all absentee ballots or whats going on? What about all the troops in Iraq have they voted yet?
I'm sure people here have brothers or sisters where people say "How can those 2 be related?" so I don't like the whole brother/sister argument for Presidential Elections, you can't pick your family.
With all of the early voting occurring, when we actually get to election night, how early do you think the networks will call certain states? They are estimating that 30% of registered voters will vote before November 4th. I still believe that the networks do not want to avoid the embarrassment of 2000 by calling a state too early. If the race is close in any state, I think they will all play it safe.
They do not count the early votes until the polls close on election day. I agree the networks will not call states to early, but if eastern states like Virginia and North Carolina report in at 99% and Obama has won either of them then it would bode well for him in the other battleground states.
I'm too lazy to look this up but how are people voting early? Are these all absentee ballots or whats going on? What about all the troops in Iraq have they voted yet?
You're joking, right? Voters in over 30 states have the option of voting a) at the polls before November 4th and b) by absentee ballot. Most states do not require a reason to vote absentee, rather it is offered as an option.
Perceptions of Palin Grow Increasingly Negative, Poll Says
By Jon Cohen and Jennifer Agiesta Washington Post Staff Writers Saturday, October 25, 2008; A03
While top-of-the-ticket rivals John McCain and Barack Obama both remain broadly popular heading into Election Day, public perceptions of Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin have fallen dramatically since she emerged on the national political scene at the GOP convention.
A majority of likely voters in a new Washington Post-ABC News national poll now have unfavorable views of the Alaska governor, most still doubt her presidential qualifications and there is an even split on whether she "gets it," a perception that had been a key component of her initial appeal.
Palin's addition to the GOP ticket initially helped McCain narrow the gap with Obama on the question of which presidential hopeful "better understands the problems of people like you," but at 18 percentage points, the Democrat's margin on that question is now as big as it has been all fall. Nor has Palin attracted female voters to McCain, as his campaign had hoped.
Obama is up by a large margin among women, 57 to 41 percent in the new Post-ABC tracking poll. The senator from Illinois just about ties McCain among white women -- 48 percent back Obama, 49 percent McCain -- a group that President Bush won by 11 points four years ago and one that had shifted significantly toward the GOP this year after the Palin pick.
In polling conducted Wednesday and Thursday evenings, after the disclosure that the Republican National Committee used political funds to help Palin assemble a wardrobe for the campaign, 51 percent said they have a negative impression of her. Fewer, 46 percent, said they have a favorable view. That marks a stark turnaround from early September, when 59 percent of likely voters held positive opinions.
The declines in Palin's ratings have been even more substantial among the very voters Republicans aimed to woo. The percentage of white women viewing her favorably dropped 21 points since early September; among independent women, it fell 24 points.
More broadly, the intensity of negative feelings about Palin is also notable: Forty percent of voters have "strongly unfavorable" views, more than double the post-convention number. Nearly half of independent women now see her in a very negative light, a nearly threefold increase.
The shift in Palin's ratings come with a pronounced spike in the percentage of voters who see her as lacking the experience it takes to be a good president. Voters were about evenly divided on that question a month and a half ago, but toward the end of September a clear majority said she was not qualified. In the new poll, 58 percent said she is insufficiently experienced.
Among a recent spate of conservative defections from McCain, one leading Republican was particularly pointed about the impact of Palin's professional background on his decision. Charles Fried, a professor at Harvard Law School and former solicitor general under Ronald Reagan, asked that the McCain-Palin campaign remove his name from several committees in large part because of "the choice of Sarah Palin at a time of deep national crisis."
A Post-ABC poll earlier this week reported that the Palin pick deeply damaged voters' confidence in the types of decisions McCain would make as president.
Perhaps more fundamentally for Palin's national political future, though, is that voters in the new poll are evenly divided about whether she understands their problems. Three weeks ago, 60 percent said she did; now it is 50 percent yes, 47 percent no.
Both Democratic and independent women are half as likely as they were in late September to see Palin as empathetic. Among independent women, the percentage who view Palin as in tune with people like themselves slipped from 73 to 50 percent.
Palin's struggle to connect deepens McCain's own deficit on the issue. On the question of who is more empathetic, 55 percent of voters said Obama, 37 percent McCain. And McCain picks up few of those who view Palin as disconnected.
But the gap is smaller on overall favorability, one of the factors that buoys the GOP ticket as Election Day approaches, despite generally negative poll numbers: 63 percent of likely voters have favorable impressions of Obama, 55 percent of McCain. Among the crucial segment of independent voters, the two rivals have identical 58 percent favorable ratings.
Taking the tickets together, 53 percent of likely voters express favorable views of both Obama and his running mate, Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr., 41 percent of both McCain and Palin. Those numbers are very close to current vote preferences in the latest Post-ABC tracking poll: Fifty-three percent said they would vote Democratic if the election were held today; 44 percent would opt for the GOP.
How sad about the girl who said she was attacked because she was a McCain supporter. I only read the full story now. I picked up bits and pieces at work and heard that Drudge and some Neocon sites were jumping right on it. Were the really blaming Obama?
Anyway, Obama is ruling again today in the polls and looks like he's still maintaining and growing, even in the swing states. Looking good. Keep your fingers crossed.
Let's see and if I'm not mistaken RR, I think a couple more Republicans can be added to your Rebublican Obama supporter list above.
Just heard David Gergen on Anderson Cooper who said that Obama's tv spot will be on Wednesday (don't know a time, but somebody post if they do. It's before the game I think) Anyway, Gergen was commenting on how well and strategic the Obama camp is planning every move trying not to pay attention to polls or get too over confident. He said that although Obama will speak during this half hour "special" that it is not going to be a speech, but more like a show. He referred to it as Obama giving his "closing arguments" (Kly and DT can relate)
Gergen also questioned why, with Obama off the campaign trail for two days, McCain didn't use the opening for more of a showcase (for lack of a better word) of his ideas/policies instead of using it say, the scare tactic campaign ad (aka George Bush administration M.O.)
From CNN: John McCain's brother Joe calls 911 to complain about traffic, then tells the 911 operator "F*ck you" when he doesn't like the operator's response. Unbelievable:
WASHINGTON (AP) — The brother of presidential candidate Sen. John McCain said Friday he'll withdraw from campaign activities after calling 911 to complain about traffic. Joe McCain also apologized for making the call.
The GOP candidate's brother, who lives in Alexandria, Va., told Washington radio station WTOP he was returning from a campaign event in Philadelphia around 2 a.m. on Oct. 18 when he got stuck in traffic on Interstate 495 at the Wilson Bridge.
Frustrated after 40 minutes, he called 911 to find out what was going on.
When the operator "properly chided" him for calling 911 to complain about traffic, McCain uttered an expletive and hung up the phone. McCain said he thought his cell phone had already clicked off.
"I did not mean to swear at the officers themselves," McCain said. If he were in their situation, "it would have really frosted me too and I absolutely understand their reaction."
After hanging up with 911, McCain said he called Alexandria Police to ask them about the traffic on the bridge and got a similar reaction.
McCain said he hasn't spoken to his brother about the incident.
"He's not going to be happy about it, I'm sure," he said.
"I feel terrible about having hurt the campaign over this incident," he said. "I won't be doing any more campaigning because of that."
McCain said he's going to write a note of apology to the 911 operator and to the Alexandria police.
The McCain campaign did not immediately respond to a call and e-mail seeking comment.
McCain's brother has been in the news on other occasions recently. Joe McCain, speaking at an event in early October in support of his brother, called two Democratic-leaning areas in Northern Virginia "communist country."
"I've lived here for at least 10 years and before that about every third duty I was in either Arlington or Alexandria, up in communist country," Joe McCain, a Navy veteran, said at an event in Loudoun County, Va. Joe McCain then apologized, but the remark reportedly drew laughter at the event.
About a week later, the candidate's brother sent an e-mail blasting the campaign's "counter-productive" strategy.
"Let John McCain be John McCain," Joe McCain wrote in the e-mail. "Make ads that show John not as crank and curmudgeon but as a great leader for his time."
McCain's younger brother was sharply critical of unnamed top campaign officials who "so tightly 'control the message'" that they are preventing reporters from speaking with those, like himself, who know the candidate best.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Democrat Barack Obama's lead over Republican rival John McCain fell slightly to 9 points, according to a Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll released Saturday, the second consecutive day the race has narrowed.
Obama leads McCain by 51 percent to 42 percent in the rolling three-day tracking poll, which has a margin of error of 2.9 points. Obama led by 10 points Friday and 12 points on Thursday.
Pollster John Zogby said McCain, who had seen his Democratic rival stake out a widening lead as economic issues dominated the campaign, appeared to be winning some converts with his own economic message.
"He scores points when he differentiates himself on the economy and when he lays off the negative. Negative campaigning is not working for anyone this year," Zogby said.
"What's important here is that this race is not over."
Obama, 47, has led many national opinion surveys in recent days as well as in polls in important battleground states where the November 4 election will be likely be decided.
But Zogby said the 72-year-old McCain over the past two days had been able to cut into the Illinois senator's main base of support among women and independent voters, a shift that coincided with his campaign's move to highlight differences between the two candidates' economic policies.
Women, who backed Obama by 20 points Friday, now give him a 16-point lead, and his lead among independents had fallen to 16 points from 26 Friday.
Zogby said that while the poll showed only 3 percent of voters remained totally undecided in the race, that number grew to about 16 percent if one included voters who were only leaning toward or moderately inclined to support a particular candidate.
"That means that more people have not completely made up their minds," Zogby said.
McCain's support was strongest among white voters, who backed the Arizona senator by 49 percent to 43 percent. Obama, who would be the first black president, won 92 percent support among black voters and 70 percent among Hispanics.
Independent Ralph Nader and Libertarian Bob Barr held relatively steady at 2 percent and 1 percent respectively.
The rolling tracking poll surveyed 1,203 likely voters in the presidential election. In a tracking poll, the most recent day's results are added, while the oldest day's results are dropped to monitor changing momentum.
The U.S. president is determined by who wins the Electoral College, which has 538 members apportioned by population in each state and the District of Columbia. Electoral votes are allotted on a winner-take-all basis in all but two states, which divide them by congressional district.
(Reporting by Andrew Quinn; Editing by Peter Cooney)
How sad about the girl who said she was attacked because she was a McCain supporter. I only read the full story now. I picked up bits and pieces at work and heard that Drudge and some Neocon sites were jumping right on it. Were the really blaming Obama?
To be fair I think most people look for "reality" that matches up with their biases. However a few of the more extreme right wing blogs were skeptical of the story from the beginning.
But those who are eager to see Obama (and perhaps any Black man) as a "street thug" or fear a possible Obama presidency as ushering in a "thugocracy" aren't going to change their hindbrain thinking anytime soon. Rationality goes out the window...
... Michael understands that no matter how strong its military or how savvy its diplomats, the Corleone family will not succeed in the multipolar environment ahead unless it learns to take better care of its allies. Like America after the Iraq War, the mafia empire that Michael inherits after the hit on Sonny possesses a system of alliances on the brink of collapse. Having flocked to the Corleone colors when the war against Sollozzo broke out, the family’s allies—like America’s in the “New” Europe—have little to show for the risks they have undertaken on the family’s behalf. Exhausted by war and estranged by Sonny’s Rumsfeld-like bullying, they have begun to question whether it is still in their interests to backstop a declining superpower that is apparently not interested in retaining their loyalty. ...
That was a really interesting analysis. It worked for me.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Democrat Barack Obama's lead over Republican rival John McCain fell slightly to 9 points, according to a Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll released Saturday, the second consecutive day the race has narrowed.
Obama leads McCain by 51 percent to 42 percent in the rolling three-day tracking poll, which has a margin of error of 2.9 points. Obama led by 10 points Friday and 12 points on Thursday.
Pollster John Zogby said McCain, who had seen his Democratic rival stake out a widening lead as economic issues dominated the campaign, appeared to be winning some converts with his own economic message.
"He scores points when he differentiates himself on the economy and when he lays off the negative. Negative campaigning is not working for anyone this year," Zogby said.
"What's important here is that this race is not over."
Obama, 47, has led many national opinion surveys in recent days as well as in polls in important battleground states where the November 4 election will be likely be decided.
But Zogby said the 72-year-old McCain over the past two days had been able to cut into the Illinois senator's main base of support among women and independent voters, a shift that coincided with his campaign's move to highlight differences between the two candidates' economic policies.
Women, who backed Obama by 20 points Friday, now give him a 16-point lead, and his lead among independents had fallen to 16 points from 26 Friday.
Zogby said that while the poll showed only 3 percent of voters remained totally undecided in the race, that number grew to about 16 percent if one included voters who were only leaning toward or moderately inclined to support a particular candidate.
"That means that more people have not completely made up their minds," Zogby said.
McCain's support was strongest among white voters, who backed the Arizona senator by 49 percent to 43 percent. Obama, who would be the first black president, won 92 percent support among black voters and 70 percent among Hispanics.
Independent Ralph Nader and Libertarian Bob Barr held relatively steady at 2 percent and 1 percent respectively.
The rolling tracking poll surveyed 1,203 likely voters in the presidential election. In a tracking poll, the most recent day's results are added, while the oldest day's results are dropped to monitor changing momentum.
The U.S. president is determined by who wins the Electoral College, which has 538 members apportioned by population in each state and the District of Columbia. Electoral votes are allotted on a winner-take-all basis in all but two states, which divide them by congressional district.
(Reporting by Andrew Quinn; Editing by Peter Cooney)
.
Not so fast there Mr. Man!!!
According to MSNBC, Newsweek poll it's Obama 53 and McCain 41. Why aren't all the pundits now asking (Scarborough comes to mind) "Why can't McCain close the deal???"
Not only that, according to MSNBC, the same Newsweek poll had Bush's job approval rating at 23 per cent. If I am not mistaken, he now holds the record for the lowest approval rating? Ok, I won't get started, but, I'm just saying.....
You do realize that the last time you pointed out that Obama dropped 2 points to +4 in this same exact poll, he shot up to about +12 a couple days later.
I'm just having a conversation with myself right now. JL, RR where are you guys?
Anyway, what I don't get is now, for instance, Obama has a double digit lead in PA right now. Why is it still considered a "toss up" state???
I'm here. I do have to sleep some time. As for PA being a toss-up, I have not seen any source calling it a "toss-up". I do see some sources still calling it "leaning Obama", but on average he has a 8-15 point lead.
Sleep??? You can't sleep during an election cycle.
Ok, I guess you're right, it is "leaning". On the CNN map it is still a "gray" state, not given to either candidate. Speaking of the electoral vote maps. If you check out the map, where you can "give" the remaining states to whomever you think will win them....by my calculations, McCain would have to win nearly all of them in order to win the electoral votes no??? While, granted anything can happen in the 11 days we have left, but at this point, can he win electorally???
I hear pundits recommend he campaigns in PA, but I wonder why he wouldn't go to a state where it's closer (even if PA has a lot of electoral votes).
He's gotta hope to win most of the closer states and somehow win PA. There are so many former red states leaning blue right now, his only chance is to win Ohio, Florida, and PA. If he loses one of the 3, he has virtually no chance.
...I just checked the CNN map, and they have PA blue.
My prediction, McCain will take FL, Obama Ohio & PA. For some reason I never paid much attention to Nevada, and would have guessed it to be a blue state, but I guess it is usually red. I think MCain will take that as well and Obama Colorado. Virginia is the "surprise" tossup I hear, don't know about that or the others. Plus, more and more I'm still sticking with my far fetched perdiction that this could be a landslide, based on what I am reading as far as the early voting turnout, Neos switching to Obama and the true desire for change. I'll be happy if O wins by a squeaker though.
My brother predicts that Obama will win a close popular vote and a landslide electoral one. We shall see. Like you TIS, I'd be happy with any Obama victory, no matter how narrow.
Right now, if McCain wins every toss-up state, Obama still wins in a squeaker. If they split the toss-ups, Obama wins in a landslide. McCain has to turn at least 1 current blue state red.
At this point, I don't know in what Obama state that McCain would have a shot....unless of course something "major" happens in the next 10 days or so....I suppose that could be a real game changer. Then again, with the millions voting early or by mail, maybe not a huge change. All I know is,I can't wait til it's over (even though this is kind of fun). I'm getting agita (sp)with all this exciting turmoil.
BTW, anyone know what the biggest electoral landslide was? Or biggest popular vote win????
How sad about the girl who said she was attacked because she was a McCain supporter. I only read the full story now. I picked up bits and pieces at work and heard that Drudge and some Neocon sites were jumping right on it. Were the really blaming Obama?
Reminds me of back in 2004 when CBS News ran that stupid report about Dubya skipping on his National Guard obligation, and the Lefties all jumped on it as legit, because they wanted something, ANYTHING, to nail Dubya's political coffin.
And like this race-baiting faux-attack, it blew up in their faces.
It's bad when the Vice-President of FOX NEWS said that if the report was found false, McCain's legacy won't be his bi-partisan bills or whatever, but of recent weeks, culminating in this scam.
Originally Posted By: The Italian Stallionette
Anyway, Obama is ruling again today in the polls and looks like he's still maintaining and growing, even in the swing states. Looking good. Keep your fingers crossed.
Let's see and if I'm not mistaken RR, I think a couple more Republicans can be added to your Rebublican Obama supporter list above.
The biggest one is William Weld, the former Governor of Massachusetts, who previously supported Romney in the GOP Primaries earlier this year.
Originally Posted By: The Italian Stallionette
Just heard David Gergen on Anderson Cooper who said that Obama's tv spot will be on Wednesday (don't know a time, but somebody post if they do. It's before the game I think) Anyway, Gergen was commenting on how well and strategic the Obama camp is planning every move trying not to pay attention to polls or get too over confident. He said that although Obama will speak during this half hour "special" that it is not going to be a speech, but more like a show. He referred to it as Obama giving his "closing arguments" (Kly and DT can relate)
Well I knew that special wasn't gonna be an epic speech. If he was, people would get bored and go channel surfing.
I would think it would be more of a glorified infomercial.
Originally Posted By: The Italian Stallionette
Gergen also questioned why, with Obama off the campaign trail for two days, McCain didn't use the opening for more of a showcase (for lack of a better word) of his ideas/policies instead of using it say, the scare tactic campaign ad (aka George Bush administration M.O.)
TIS
He could have had a shot on those days...if NOT for that scam race-baiting attack claim by that McCain staffer, or Palin's $150,000 shopping spree with RNC donor cash*, or Al Qaeda endorsing McCain(!) or Palin's flub on the constitutional duties of a VP, etc.
This shit snowballs.
*=You would be surprised with the # of GOPers who are pissed over that. They donated their money for their causes, to help candidates get elected, etc....NOT for a fucking make-over.
October 25, 2008 While McCain Looked Away, Florida Shifted By ADAM NAGOURNEY
MIAMI — For Senator John McCain, it was not supposed to be this way. From a commanding lead last spring, in a state where Senator Barack Obama did not campaign in the primaries and only hired a state director in June, Mr. McCain is now locked in a neck-and-neck race for a trove of electoral votes that is vital to his hopes of victory.
His once-close relationship with Gov. Charlie Crist is reportedly strained. And Mr. Obama has blanketed the state with advertising and built a huge get-out-the-vote operation — on vivid display this week in the long lines for early voting. The sight dispirited Republican leaders here.
Even as state Republicans sent up flares over the summer, warning that the Florida of 2008 is not what it was in 2004, Mr. McCain yielded the airwaves to Mr. Obama, focusing his attention, money and energy on other states. Mr. McCain’s campaign waited until Sept. 1 to begin a serious round of advertising.
Mr. McCain clearly could still win the state’s 27 electoral votes. But the battle in Florida is offering — on the widest stage of any of the contested primary states — an object lesson in the disparities in the resources, aggressiveness and political cunning that Mr. McCain and Mr. Obama are taking to contests across the country.
It is a case study of the troubles of the McCain campaign, the problems of its own making as well as those caused by forces beyond the campaign’s control, including a deeply troubled economy that is sharply driving up home foreclosures in many areas of the state. And it provides vivid evidence of the Obama campaign’s success in using its money and organizational skills to put Republicans on the defensive in once-safe states.
“He has the best political organization for a presidential campaign that I have ever seen here,” Tom Slade, a former state Republican chairman, said of Mr. Obama. “Bar none. He has run a phenomenally good campaign.”
Mr. Obama’s huge financial advantage has turned out to be more lopsided here than in any of the other contested states, displaying, in an outsized way, what Mr. McCain is facing in states like Colorado and Indiana.
For the week that ended Thursday, Mr. Obama spent $4.2 million on advertisements, compared with $1 million by Mr. McCain, according to Campaign Media Analysis Group, an independent group that monitors campaign advertising. It was almost impossible to turn on a television this week without seeing an Obama advertisement showing Mr. McCain saying he had voted with President Bush “90 percent of the time.”
Mr. Obama’s campaign moved to exploit this state’s increasingly popular, and relatively new, early voting program in a way Mr. McCain did not. He came here for two days this week — as did Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton — using high-profile appearances to hand out literature and urge supporters who turned out to vote, often right up the street from the rally. The result could be seen in long lines of people at early voting sites.
Mr. McCain’s advisers said they had put far less effort into the early voting program, instead sticking with what has worked for Florida Republicans for a decade: building up their margin with absentee ballots. But several Republicans said they were afraid that emphasis was missing the way voting behavior is changing here.
Mr. Obama has used sophisticated measures here to find and register new supporters. And Florida statistics this week, which sent a shiver of fear through Republicans, attest to his success: Democrats now have a 660,000 edge in voter registration over Republicans in the state, compared with a Democratic advantage of 280,000 voters in 2006.
Buzz Jacobs, the southeast regional manager of Mr. McCain’s campaign, suggested that Democrats would have trouble getting all those new voters to the polls. “They traditionally have a better voter registration system, and we have a better turnout operation,” he said.
But even several state Republicans said they saw evidence that Mr. Obama was bringing new and highly effective methods to the state to find voters and turn them out.
“I’ve gotten seven calls from live Obama volunteers — and the reason I’m getting calls is because I signed up on their Web site to get notifications from their campaign,” said Sally Bradshaw, a Republican who was a senior political adviser to Jeb Bush, the former governor.
Ms. Bradshaw, who supported Mitt Romney in the primary, had signed up for the list to keep informed about a rival. “I haven’t received any McCain calls,” she said.
Mr. McCain is in this spot today in part because of the conclusion by his campaign this summer that Florida, if competitive, was not as tough as it once was, and that there were more pressing states. Mr. Bush won here by five percentage points in 2004. The Democratic Party had earned months of bad publicity by pressuring its presidential candidates not to campaign in the state before its primary because Florida scheduled its vote earlier than party rules allowed.
Political history suggested that Mr. Obama, as an African-American, would have trouble winning support from two of the state’s key constituencies: Hispanics and Jews. And this is the state of one of Mr. McCain’s great primary triumphs: His decisive victory here in January effectively handed him his party’s nomination.
Mr. McCain’s advisers decided to focus on other states, limiting spending in a very expensive state. His chief strategist, Steve Schmidt, said he was not surprised to see things get tight, particularly as the housing market collapsed here, putting the economy front and center. “We always suspected that would happen,” he said.
The developments have forced Mr. McCain’s campaign to devote precious candidate time and dwindling resources here in the final days of the campaign, at a time when Mr. McCain is facing pressure to shore up his position in other states Mr. Bush won in 2004. He spent a day here on Thursday traveling the state, and will be back next week; Gov. Sarah Palin, his running mate, will be here Sunday.
“It was a strategic error on their part,” said Mr. Obama’s campaign manager, David Plouffe.
Here as in much of the country, there have been strains between the local Republican organization and the McCain campaign about how to run in the state. Until Thursday, Mr. Crist, a Republican whom Mr. McCain said he had considered for the vice-presidential slot on the ticket, kept what appeared to be a definite distance from the McCain campaign, and made remarks — including one disputing Mr. McCain’s contention that the voting process here was subject to fraud — that were clearly unhelpful to Mr. McCain.
In an interview, Mr. Crist disputed the notion that he was anything but whole-hearted in his support for Mr. McCain, and noted that he was accompanying him on a trip he was doing across Florida this week.
“I really don’t know what that’s derived from,” Mr. Crist said. “I’m doing everything I possibly can. I’m excited about his candidacy. I love the guy.”
Still, Mr. Crist’s associates said he had been irked that after everything he had done for Mr. McCain — many Republicans think he would not have won Florida, and thus the nomination, without the last-minute endorsement of Mr. Crist — the McCain campaign, at the last minute, had refused to broadcast a seven-minute video introduction he had prepared for the convention.
From a more pragmatic point of view, Mr. Crist’s associates said he was concerned about becoming too closely identified with Mr. McCain’s campaign, worried that he would hurt his own standing with what one aide described as “Crist-Obama voters.”
Some leaders said they had been stymied in their efforts to get help from the McCain campaign, though they said that was now beginning to change.
“I did have and do have a frustration about getting people here to keep South Florida in the thick of things,” said Chip LaMarca, the Republican chairman from Broward County. “We had numerous telephone conversations and conference calls. We look forward to having more support here.”
Libertarian candidate Bob Barr Predicts McCain Will Lose in Georgia
ATLANTA, GA – "Senator John McCain will not win Georgia," predicts Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party nominee for president. "His shrinking poll numbers are an indication that McCain is losing touch with the American public as we get closer to November 4th."
"Sen. McCain never connected with the fiscal conservatives in Georgia," says Barr. "His lack of a principled stand on issues such as reducing the size of government and cutting spending bothers Georgia voters. Sen. McCain can't say with a straight face he will not raise taxes or increase government spending, given his support for such extremely expensive federal government programs like the recent massive bailouts for Wall Street. Clearly, McCain has failed to attract the hearts and support of Georgia voters."
"Sen. Obama will not so much win Georgia, as Sen. McCain will lose the state," Barr adds.
"Georgia voters looking for a candidate who truly believes in limiting the size of government and reducing taxes should vote for Bob Barr and the Libertarian Party," says Barr.
Libertarian Party presidential candidate Bob Barr represented the 7th District of Georgia in the U. S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003. Barr's name will appear before 95 percent of Americans when the vote on Election Day – more than any other third-party or independent candidate.
I've heard today, Obama, who was in Nevada talking about how McCain is trying to distance himself from Bush, and refers to McCain's quote "I've voted with Bush 90 per cent of the time" (remember there is one ad in which Obama shows the clip). Anyway, Obama says, "yea, he really stuck it to Bush 10 per cent of the time." Great line.
Obama also made fun of McCain trying to compare him to Bush. On a side note, McCain's rally in Albuquerque today drew an announced attendance of 1,500 people, although MSNBC said it was less than 1,000. Obama is expected to draw 40,000 in Albuquerque tonight.
I saw this briefly on CNN yesterday and thought it was interesting. Here's a map of how the world would vote for our President, if they could. Blue, Obama, Red, McCain. If I'm reading this corrrectly, Obama 9,009 electoral votes; McCain 278. I haven't scrolled around the whole thing, but to the right of the map you can check individual countries. How they came up with their info I don't know.
I saw this briefly on CNN yesterday and thought it was interesting. Here's a map of how the world would vote for our President, if they could. Blue, Obama, Red, McCain. If I'm reading this corrrectly, Obama 9,009 electoral votes; McCain 278. I haven't scrolled around the whole thing, but to the right of the map you can check individual countries. How they came up with their info I don't know.
TIS
http://www.economist.com/Vote2008/
Maybe from the IP address of the voter perhaps?
Georgia makes sense, since McCain wants them in NATO, and I'm sure that Georgia would rather not get its ass invaded by Russia again.
But Cuba? I'm sure those who did vote for McCain will have Uncle Fidel and Uncle Raul knocking their door down at the dead of night.
The order and memorandum came down at approximately 6:15 p.m. on Friday. Philip Berg's [federal] lawsuit challenging Illinois Sen. Barack Obama's constitutional eligibility to serve as president of the United States had been dismissed by the Hon. R. Barclay Surrick on grounds that the Philadelphia attorney and former Deputy Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania lacked standing.
[Judge] Surrick, it seemed, was not satisfied with the nature of evidence provided by Berg to support his allegations
I didn't know the name, but forgot about that lawsuit. I would have been shocked had it gone any other way. Talk about last resort efforts. Not to mention a waste of court time.
The order and memorandum came down at approximately 6:15 p.m. on Friday. Philip Berg's [federal] lawsuit challenging Illinois Sen. Barack Obama's constitutional eligibility to serve as president of the United States had been dismissed by the Hon. R. Barclay Surrick on grounds that the Philadelphia attorney and former Deputy Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania lacked standing.
[Judge] Surrick, it seemed, was not satisfied with the nature of evidence provided by Berg to support his allegations
AP INVESTIGATION: Palin pipeline terms curbed bids
By JUSTIN PRITCHARD and GARANCE BURKE, Associated Press Writers Justin Pritchard And Garance Burke, Associated Press Writers 10/25/2008
ANCHORAGE, Alaska – Gov. Sarah Palin's signature accomplishment — a contract to build a 1,715-mile pipeline to bring natural gas from Alaska to the Lower 48 — emerged from a flawed bidding process that narrowed the field to a company with ties to her administration, an Associated Press investigation shows.
Beginning at the Republican National Convention in August, the McCain-Palin ticket has touted the pipeline as an example of how it would help America achieve energy independence.
"We're building a nearly $40 billion natural gas pipeline, which is North America's largest and most expensive infrastructure project ever, to flow those sources of energy into hungry markets," Palin said during the Oct. 2 vice presidential debate.
Despite Palin's boast of a smart and fair bidding process, the AP found that her team crafted terms that favored only a few independent pipeline companies and ultimately benefited the winner, TransCanada Corp.
And contrary to the ballyhoo, there's no guarantee the pipeline will ever be built; at a minimum, any project is years away, as TransCanada must first overcome major financial and regulatory hurdles.
In interviews and a review of records, the AP found:
_Instead of creating a process that would attract many potential builders, Palin slanted the terms away from an important group — the global energy giants that own the rights to the gas.
_Despite promises and legal guidance not to talk directly with potential bidders, Palin had meetings or phone calls with nearly every major candidate, including TransCanada.
_The leader of Palin's pipeline team had been a partner at a lobbying firm where she worked on behalf of a TransCanada subsidiary. Also, that woman's former business partner at the lobbying firm was TransCanada's lead private lobbyist on the pipeline deal, interacting with legislators in the weeks before the vote to grant TransCanada the contract. Plus, a former TransCanada executive served as an outside consultant to Palin's pipeline team.
_Under a different set of rules four years earlier, TransCanada had offered to build the pipeline without a state subsidy; under Palin, the company could receive a maximum $500 million.
"Governor Palin held firmly to her fundamental belief that Alaska could best serve Alaskans and the nation's interests by pursuing a competitive approach to building a natural gas pipeline," said McCain-Palin spokesman Taylor Griffin. "There was an open and transparent process that subjected the decision to extensive public scrutiny and due diligence."
___
ONLY ONE VIABLE BIDDER
There were never more than a few players that could execute such a complex undertaking — at least a million tons of steel stretching across some of Earth's most hostile and remote terrain.
TransCanada estimates it will cost $26 billion; Palin's consultants estimate nearly $40 billion.
The pipeline would run from Alaska's North Slope to Alberta in Canada; secondary supply lines would take the gas to various points in the United States and Canada. The pipeline would carry 4.5 billion cubic feet of natural gas daily, about 8 percent of the present U.S. market.
Building such a pipeline had been a dream for decades. The rising cost and demand for energy injected new urgency into the proposal.
So too did the depletion of Alaska's long-reliable reserves of oil, which are trapped in the same Arctic Circle reservoirs as clean-burning natural gas. Not only does that oil provide jobs, it pays for an annual dividend check to nearly every Alaska resident. This year's payment was $2,069, 25 percent higher than 2007 — plus a $1,200 bonus rebate to help offset higher energy costs.
Palin was elected as governor two years ago in part because of her populist appeal. Promising "New Energy for Alaska," she vowed to take on Exxon Mobil Corp., ConocoPhillips and BP, the multinational energy companies that long dominated the state's biggest industry.
Oil interests were particularly unpopular at that moment: Federal agents had recently raided the offices of six lawmakers in a Justice Department investigation into whether an Alaska oil services company paid bribes in exchange for promoting a new taxing formula that would ultimately further the multinationals' pipeline plans.
Palin ousted fellow Republican Gov. Frank Murkowski, who pushed a pipeline deal he negotiated in secret with the "Big Three" energy companies. That deal went nowhere.
With Alaskans eager for progress and sour on Big Oil, Palin tackled the pipeline issue with gusto, meeting with representatives from all sides and assembling her own team of experts to draw up terms.
Palin invited bidders to submit applications and offered the multimillion-dollar subsidy. Members of Palin's team say that without the incentive, it might not have received any bids for the risky undertaking.
___
TIES THAT BIND
Palin's team was led by Marty Rutherford, a widely respected energy specialist who entered the upper levels of state government nearly 20 years ago. Rutherford solidified her status when, in 2005, she joined an exodus of Department of Natural Resources staff who felt Murkowski was selling out to the oil giants.
What the Palin administration didn't tell legislators — and neglected to mention in its announcement of Rutherford's appointment — was that in 2003, Rutherford left public service and worked for 10 months at the Anchorage-based Jade North lobbying firm. There she did $40,200 worth of work for Foothills Pipe Lines Alaska, Inc., a subsidiary of TransCanada.
Foothills Pipe Lines Alaska Inc. paid Rutherford for expertise on topics including state legislation and funding related to gas commercialization, according to her 2003 lobbyist registration statement.
Palin has said she wasn't bothered by that past work because it had occurred several years before. But Rutherford wouldn't have passed her new boss' own standards: Under ethics reforms the governor pushed through, Rutherford would have had to wait a year to jump from government service to a lobbying firm.
Rutherford also has downplayed her work for Foothills.
"I did a couple of projects for them, small projects," she told a state Senate committee examining the TransCanada bid earlier this year. While a partner, Rutherford said, she "realized that my heart was not in the private sector, it was in the public sector, and I sold out for the same amount of money I bought in for."
At one point, Palin's pipeline team debated Rutherford's role, but concluded there was no problem.
"We were looking at it in terms of is this an actual conflict or is there the appearance of impropriety of Marty's participation," said Pat Galvin, the commissioner of the Revenue Department and another top team member. "It was determined that there was none, and so we moved forward."
Patricia Bielawski, Rutherford's former partner at Jade North, spent last summer in Juneau, the state capital, serving as TransCanada's lead private lobbyist on the pipeline deal. While the Legislature debated — and ultimately approved — the TransCanada deal, Bielawski met with lawmakers and sat in on the public proceedings, several legislators said.
Bielawski told AP earlier this month that Rutherford's employment at her firm was irrelevant. She said Rutherford never directly lobbied the Legislature for Foothills, and that Rutherford broke no rules based on 2003 state ethics guidelines.
"There's no statutory or regulatory prohibition that extends to things that many years ago," Bielawski said. "So there's no issue."
But others say it's a legitimate question.
"I'm not saying someone's getting paid off for a sweetheart contract, but it's very hard to ignore that this is your former partner and your former client standing there before you," said Republican Sen. Lyda Green, a Palin critic who in August was among the handful of lawmakers who voted against awarding TransCanada the license. "Every time it was mentioned to the governor or to the commission, it was like, 'How could you question such a wonderful person?'"
Tony Palmer, the TransCanada vice president who leads the company's Alaska gas pipeline effort, rejects the suggestion that his company benefited.
"We have gained clearly no advantage from anything that Ms. Rutherford did for Foothills some five years ago on a very much unrelated topic," he said.
Rutherford did not respond to interview requests made directly to her and through the governor's office. But Griffin, the spokesman for the McCain-Palin campaign, said Rutherford "had no decision-making role or authority," and contended that such matters were handled by others on the Palin pipeline team.
TransCanada also had a connection to the team hired by the Palin administration to analyze the bid. Patrick Anderson, a former TransCanada executive, served as an outside consultant and ultimately helped the state conclude that TransCanada's technical solution for shipping gas through freezing temperatures would work.
___
NARROW SET OF RULES
In January 2007, Palin spoke the first of at least two times to Vice President Dick Cheney, the Bush administration's point person on energy issues, according to calendars obtained by the AP through a public records request. Cheney's staff pressed the Palin administration to draw in the energy companies, said current and former state officials involved in those discussions.
As the governor's approach unfolded in the spring of 2007, there were signs it was skewed in a different direction.
Palin said she saw problems if the firms that own the gas also owned the pipeline. They could manipulate the market or charge prohibitive fees to smaller exploration firms, discouraging competition.
Several important requirements in the legislation were unpalatable to the big oil companies. In the talks under Murkowski, the firms asked that the rates for the gas production tax and royalties be fixed for 45 years; Palin refused to consider setting rates for that long.
Under the Palin process, the pipeline firms had an advantage because they simply pass along taxes paid by oil and gas producers.
Oil company officials warned lawmakers they wouldn't participate under those terms. Still, in a near unanimous vote, the Legislature passed the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act in May 2007, generally as written by Palin's pipeline team.
Once the state issued its request for proposals on July 2, 2007, the level of communication between the government and potential bidders was supposed to decrease drastically, so that no one would be accused of gaining unfair advantage. State lawyers advised public officials to keep their distance, and bidders were told to submit questions on a Web site where answers could be seen by all.
Several of the state's gas line team members interviewed by AP said they had no contact with possible bidders. But Palin had conversations with executives at most of the major potential bidders during that period, according to her calendars.
While the calendars don't detail what was discussed, the documents indicate that the pipeline was the subject of the discussions, or that the conversations occurred immediately after a briefing with Palin's pipeline team.
When she was in Michigan for a National Governors Association summit in late July 2007, Palin and her team met executives from Williams Co., a pipeline builder that ended up not bidding.
"The purpose of the meeting was to more fully understand the details of the project, which we were still evaluating at the time," company spokeswoman Julie Gentz said in a statement.
TransCanada's Palmer described communication with state officials as nonexistent.
According to the governor's official schedule, however, Palin called TransCanada President and CEO Hal Kvisle on Aug. 8, 2007. Asked about that call, Palmer said it was to clarify the bidding process.
Griffin said that in keeping with legal guidance, Palin never spoke in any of the meetings about the competitive bidding process.
By the Nov. 30 submission deadline, there were five applications. But the state disqualified four for failing to satisfy the bill's requirements.
That left TransCanada.
The Canadian giant had been pursuing an Alaska pipeline since at least 2004, when the company negotiated a deal with Rutherford that the state ended up shelving. While the details remain confidential, six people familiar with the terms told the AP that TransCanada was willing to do the work then without the large state subsidy.
In testimony this July before the state Senate, Rutherford herself confirmed such a willingness, but described the 2004 deal as presenting a different set of trade-offs. A state lawyer warned her not to say more, lest she violate a confidentiality agreement.
Others who reviewed the deal think much of the $500 million will be wasted money.
"Most definitely TransCanada got a sweetheart deal this time," said Republican Sen. Bert Stedman, who voted against the TransCanada license. "Where else could you get a $500 million reimbursement when you don't even have the financing to build the pipeline?"
The order and memorandum came down at approximately 6:15 p.m. on Friday. Philip Berg's [federal] lawsuit challenging Illinois Sen. Barack Obama's constitutional eligibility to serve as president of the United States had been dismissed by the Hon. R. Barclay Surrick on grounds that the Philadelphia attorney and former Deputy Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania lacked standing.
[Judge] Surrick, it seemed, was not satisfied with the nature of evidence provided by Berg to support his allegations
McCain's tax policy is better than Obama's. Raising anyone's taxes during a recession is stupid. "Spreading the wealth around" is absurd in a capitalistic society. "95% of Americans will get tax cuts", but 40% don't pay income taxes. This equates to welfare, where the rich will basically be writing a check to that 40%. Is that right? Is it true that this is "patriotic" as your veep "Joe the six term senator" claims?
Obama has zero foreign policy experience. Honestly, who do you think is more ready to deal with our enemies, Obama or McCain? In Obama's short time in the senate, he has been wrong on every war issue, whether it be the surge or suppling more money for our soliders. If it was up to him, we would've already conceded defeat in Iraq. Obama knows nothing about military strategy and I fear for all of our safety if he is the president.
You all might dismiss his radical associations, but I don't. He sat in the pews of Rev. Wright's church for 20 years. He knew Bill Ayers' past when he sat on committees and gave speeches with him. Both of those men hate America, and yet Obama gets a pass. Either he agreed with them or he was too stupid to realize what they were about, either way Obama showed extremely poor judgment.
What are Obama's creditential's to be president? 100 weeks in the senate? Being the most liberal senator (never crossing party lines)? Being a community organizer? When has he ever made a important decision? When has his character ever been tested? What does anyone really know about him? He is clearly not ready to hold the most powerful position in the world and I do not trust him at all.
Well said Freddie C. And so many people wish to attack palin and her lack of experience.
And so many people wish to attack palin and her lack of experience.
Umm...yeah. I wouldn't trust Sarah Palin to be the clerk at a gasoline station let alone step into the VP role...one she isn't even familiar with. (Agreeing with Dick Cheney all the way on what a VP's job is...very sad. It's seventh grade civics you stupid, dangerous bitch.)
DA, Don't bother. He pops in here to either agree or disagree with some post and then pops out again.
As for Governor Palin, it's NOT her inexperience alone that terrifies me. It's her complete and utter inability to answer even the simplest questions. She can't name a newspaper, and she can't name a Supreme Court case other than Roe v. Wade. But most of all, it's her role as a fear- and hate-mongerer than appalls me.
And while a VP hasn't needed to take office in decades (thankfully), this particular presidential candidate has age and health issues that make his choice of VP far more critical.
FWIW, the other polls don't agree with John Zogby, but....
Obama lead drops to 5 points Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:54am EDT
By Andrew Quinn
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrat Barack Obama's lead over Republican rival John McCain has dropped to 5 points, according to a Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll released on Sunday.
Obama leads McCain by 49 percent to 44 percent among likely U.S. voters in the daily tracking poll, which has a margin of error of 2.9 points. Obama's lead has dropped over the last three days after hitting a high of 12 points on Thursday.
"Things are trending back for McCain. His numbers are rising and Obama's are dropping on a daily basis. There seems to be a direct correlation between this and McCain talking about the economy," pollster John Zogby said.
Obama, 47, took the lead in most national polls in recent weeks as the financial crisis and plunging stock market seized center stage ahead of the November 4 election.
McCain, 72, appeared slow to respond to Obama's financial message but in recent days has ramped up the economic themes of his own campaign. On Saturday the Arizona Republican warned voters of the dangers of what he termed a Democratic take-over in both the White House and Congress.
Obama has countered by seeking to link McCain's proposals to the policies of outgoing Republican President George W. Bush, who fares very poorly in public approval surveys.
Obama's lead among voters making less than $35,000 per year remains substantial at a little over 70 percent. But McCain, who had previously scored well only with the highest income brackets, now holds slight leads among voters in all income groups starting at $35,000 and above.
"You've got to think that it is tax-and-spend that concerns them. Is McCain starting to connect with the middle class?" Zogby said.
Obama still had solid, if slightly diminished, leads among two important groups which could play pivotal roles in the November 4 election. Among independents he had a 14 point lead, down from a peak of 29 points. Women also still backed Obama by a 14-point margin, down from 20 points late last week.
McCain, who once had a 4-point deficit among male voters, now has a 4-point lead at 48-44 percent. And whites back McCain by a 12-point margin, up from 6 points on Friday.
Independent Ralph Nader and Libertarian Bob Barr both received support from 1 percent of those polled, a slight dip for Nader. Three percent of the people said they remained undecided in the race.
The rolling tracking poll surveyed 1,203 likely voters in the presidential election. In a tracking poll, the most recent day's results are added, while the oldest day's results are dropped to monitor changing momentum.
The president is determined by who wins the Electoral College, which has 538 members apportioned by population in each state and the District of Columbia. Electoral votes are allotted on a winner-take-all basis in all but two states, which divide them by congressional district.
This is really weird. My brother predicted this last week. He said that as Election Day got closer, so would the polls. However, he said that Obama would still win a narrow popular vote and a strong electoral one.
McCain hasn't gained anything in the Gallup and Rasmussen polls, so I don't know if it means anything. In fact, Obama has been at 52% the last 4 days in the Rasmussen Poll. That's the highest he's been at.
I agree about the final results. I think the popular vote will be around 5%, but it will be an Electoral Vote landslide.
I can understand why the candidates wouldn't want to look at these polls every day. Man, how nerve wrecking. I don't know really what to make of it. It "could" be since McCain is trying to actually talk about issues now, instead of ridiculous attacks. What state was it in the Primary (New Hampshire?) that the polls showed Obama won(maybe by exit polls) and they thought they won, only he DIDN'T?. Anyway, I don't quite have full faith in any polls, although usually they tend to be fairly accurate.....I think. Yet, this time, I just feel some big surprises in some form or another. This election is different IMHO.
DA, Don't bother. He pops in here to either agree or disagree with some post and then pops out again.
As for Governor Palin, it's NOT her inexperience alone that terrifies me. It's her complete and utter inability to answer even the simplest questions. She can't name a newspaper, and she can't name a Supreme Court case other than Roe v. Wade. But most of all, it's her role as a fear- and hate-mongerer than appalls me.
And while a VP hasn't needed to take office in decades (thankfully), this particular presidential candidate has age and health issues that make his choice of VP far more critical.
Well said. But here are a couple of others things to consider:
Both Presidential candidates were selected through an arduous and onerous primary process involving tens of millions of Americans. The VP candidates were chosen by one person.
While issues are subject to debate, the Constitutional powers of the Vice Presidency are not. They are explicitly stated in the Constitution. The Vice President is not in charge of the Senate; the Founding Fathers did not include language in the Constitution that provides the Vice President with flexibility and authority if he chooses to use it. Sarah Palin thinks it does. It's embarrassing.
I can understand why the candidates wouldn't want to look at these polls every day. Man, how nerve wrecking. I don't know really what to make of it. It "could" be since McCain is trying to actually talk about issues now, instead of ridiculous attacks. What state was it in the Primary (New Hampshire?) that the polls showed Obama won(maybe by exit polls) and they thought they won, only he DIDN'T?. Anyway, I don't quite have full faith in any polls, although usually they tend to be fairly accurate.....I think. Yet, this time, I just feel some big surprises in some form or another. This election is different IMHO.
TIS
TIS, if Obama loses, they're going to blame you, me and Lou for being overconfident.
McCain's tax policy is better than Obama's. Raising anyone's taxes during a recession is stupid. "Spreading the wealth around" is absurd in a capitalistic society. "95% of Americans will get tax cuts", but 40% don't pay income taxes. This equates to welfare, where the rich will basically be writing a check to that 40%. Is that right? Is it true that this is "patriotic" as your veep "Joe the six term senator" claims?
Obama has zero foreign policy experience. Honestly, who do you think is more ready to deal with our enemies, Obama or McCain? In Obama's short time in the senate, he has been wrong on every war issue, whether it be the surge or suppling more money for our soliders. If it was up to him, we would've already conceded defeat in Iraq. Obama knows nothing about military strategy and I fear for all of our safety if he is the president.
You all might dismiss his radical associations, but I don't. He sat in the pews of Rev. Wright's church for 20 years. He knew Bill Ayers' past when he sat on committees and gave speeches with him. Both of those men hate America, and yet Obama gets a pass. Either he agreed with them or he was too stupid to realize what they were about, either way Obama showed extremely poor judgment.
What are Obama's creditential's to be president? 100 weeks in the senate? Being the most liberal senator (never crossing party lines)? Being a community organizer? When has he ever made a important decision? When has his character ever been tested? What does anyone really know about him? He is clearly not ready to hold the most powerful position in the world and I do not trust him at all.
Well said Freddie C. And so many people wish to attack palin and her lack of experience.
Actually, I attacked her for acting like a flake in an interview with Katie friggin Couric.
Care to spin that one?
Also, you all have so far failed to explain or even bother to mention all those Republican moderates who have jumped ship. Denying reality doesn't make it go away.
I can understand why the candidates wouldn't want to look at these polls every day. Man, how nerve wrecking. I don't know really what to make of it. It "could" be since McCain is trying to actually talk about issues now, instead of ridiculous attacks. What state was it in the Primary (New Hampshire?) that the polls showed Obama won(maybe by exit polls) and they thought they won, only he DIDN'T?. Anyway, I don't quite have full faith in any polls, although usually they tend to be fairly accurate.....I think. Yet, this time, I just feel some big surprises in some form or another. This election is different IMHO.
TIS
TIS, if Obama loses, they're going to blame you, me and Lou for being overconfident.
I hear ya PB. I DON'T want to be over confident. It's hard not to be encouraged. Deep down, I KNOW that. Someone talk me down!!! Tell me again the downside for Obama.
Also, you all have so far failed to explain or even bother to mention all those Republican moderates who have jumped ship. Denying reality doesn't make it go away.
Your ship analogy is right. Those fringe Republicans are jumping off a sinking ship.
I'm not surprised that no one seems able to defend Obama's lack of experience and qualifications - he has none.
My neighbor who stays right below my apartment used to have a "McCain/Palin for 2008" message on a small greeting card sized poster on their door until recently. Since last week, they have decorated their entire door with Halloween stuff and creatively painted one half of the door with black and other with orange. The black part has all obama photos and says "trick" and the orange part has mccain photos and says "treat". If it is an original idea, I think it is really creative, irrespective of whether I agree with them or not.
Just what experience is required to be elected as President? Experience with what? What is the threshhold that one must obtain? There is none. One offers oneself to Americans and we accept or reject the offer. There's no experience required or useful for that matter. The Presidency is so unique that nothing prepares one for its slings and arrows. A President is surrounded by a staff of advisors and a Cabinet who provide options for the President's selection. There's no magic in that selection process. Experience doesn't affect the probability of an option's success or failure.
There is a series of books entitled the Making of the President by Theodore White that chronicles the road that successful presidential candidates travel on the way to the Presidency. Read them. There are also any number of bboks out there about Presidents. Read them also. You won't find in their pages apriori experience that was helpful to our Presidents except among those that had been Vice-Presidents. Even then it was residual.
No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States
Yes, like it or not anyone can grow-up and try a run for President.
The experience issue, while desirable, I agree with Olivant, where exactly do you look for it? Exactly, in what area would a future Prsident need experience? And, how many years???
Perhaps many people who are voting for Obama, are considering the fact that for the last 8 years we had a President who was Governor for (4 or 8, I'm not sure). He, was seen to many, as likeabe and folksy. This moron fucked us up like no other President in my lifetime (perhaps ever). So maybe, just maybe, America is encouraged by an smart, strategic, organized, non-warmongering type, who is willing to even talk to our enemies (gasp)before going Rambo on another nation. Yea, perhaps his inspiration isn't a bad thing. Perhaps it is time for a change. God knows we've had enough shit happen the last 8 years, change sounds pretty good to me.
Experience? What experience did Ronald Reagan have in foreign policy, and yet I remember him standing proudly and saying, "Tear down this wall." He stood up to the Russians and he made this nation proud again. He fired the air traffic controllers and he showed the world that he wasn't going to take any crap.
Was he a good President? It almost didn't matter. After years of drifting, after the embarrassment of Watergate and the Iranian hostages, the US regained its status in the world.
So, is Obama any more ready? Time will tell. But the same failed policies backed up by an unworldly woman who can't name the newspaper she reads in the morning, who gave her husband (who was NOT elected by the people of Alaska, btw) the power of the gubernatorial office, that's something I'm willing to walk right past. Actually, not walk. RUN.
I'm not surprised that no one seems able to defend Obama's lack of experience and qualifications - he has none.
The president with the most experience in national politics was James Buchanan, who until George W. Bush came along won most "worst President ever" contests. If you look at these, experience alone does not make a good public official.
Lincoln was considerd to have great judgment despite little traditional government experience -- two years in Congress and a few terms in the Illinois State house (sound familiar?). Obama is around the middle range for all over our presidents, having only 20 presidents with MORE experience than he does.
And you say "none"? Obama had eight years spent in the Illinois senate before his serving in the U.S. Senate. He serves on three of the four Senate Committees dealing with foreign policy issues including the Foreign Relations and Homeland Security. He is the Chair of the Subcommittee on European Relations and serves on the Subcommittees on African Affairs, East Asia and Pacific Affairs, and International Development and Foreign Assistance, Economic Affairs, and International Environmental Protection. He has traveled extensively visiting Russia, Ukraine, and Azerbaijan in Asia, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, and the Palestinian Territories in the Middle East; and Chad, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, and South Africa in Africa (unlike Palin who only got a passport last year).
I could go on but that should be enough to cover "none" for now.
I still cannot understand why so many people out there continue to compare a Vice Presidential candidate to a PRESIDENTIAL candidate.
In fairness to BOTH involved here, A Governor usually does NOT have much experience in foreign matters/ affairs.
Common sense would tell us that a Senator would and probably should have much more experience in foreign affairs.
Yet regardless, history has shown us that many more governors have gone on to become Presidents than Senators have.
Now in this case, in this election, I just do not understand the constant comaparisons that are being made between PRESIDENTIAL canididate Senator Obama and Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin. It's just mind boggling!
If one wants to compare, then they should be comparing BOTH PRESIDENTIAL candidate's respecitve credentials.
And in the case of comparing Foiriegn affairs experiences and services on Foreign relations, Homeland security and other foregin related committees, with all due respect....the record speaks for itself. Barack Obama doesn't even come close to Senator McCain in that category.
Truthfully I can't wait for this election to be over. I just cannot stand to listen to anymore of the media rhetoric, the constant accusations and the constant non-issue comparisons that are being made by BOTH parties.
People really need to focus on the REAL issues here... not the hair styles, the suits that are worn, the sex of the candidates, the hotels that they stay in, the foods that they eat, the religions or the color of their skin. That's all meaningless as far as I am concerned.
The fucking country is in financial turmoil. The world is one wrong decision away from a massive war.
Let's pay more attention to the plans that these respective candidates say that they have to put this country back on the right track, to handle foreign affairs, and vote accordingly on those issues and not on the meaningless bullshit that the fucking media keeps feeding us!
The qualifications for President (I mentioned above, but we all know I'm sure) and, as I understand it, the "only" (main) job of the VP is to take over for the President should it become necessary.
That "necessity" has only happened once in my lifetime (LBJ sworn in after JKF was assassinated). Although, one would think that in the normal course of life and our history generally, it would be very unlikely and a safe bet that the VP would never have to step up.
However, considering the fact that it has happened in recent history, (and of course knowing youth doesn't necessarily keep you "safe" in terms of finishing your term) let's face it, with McCain being up there in years, who knows? I read and maybe others can confirm, (AND this is just a "for instance") that Reagan's alzheimers started while he was in office. Say something like that happened to any President??? You'd want someone capable to take over right?
I guess what I'm saying is, that although qualifications for VP and President actually, are in written words, "short", BUT we should all consider the possibility of that person running on the VP ticket being President if necessary.
TIS
And DC, I can't wait til this election is over too. I hate to think of how bad it'd be (with ads) if I lived in a battleground state. Not too bad in that respect here.
Republican fears of historic Obama landslide unleash civil war for the future of the party
Senior Republicans believe that John McCain is doomed to a landslide defeat which will hand Barack Obama more political power than any president in a generation.
Aides to George W.Bush, former Reagan White House staff and friends of John McCain have all told The Sunday Telegraph that they not only expect to lose on November 4, but also believe that Mr Obama is poised to win a crushing mandate.
They believe he will be powerful enough to remake the American political landscape with even more ease than Ronald Reagan did in 1980.
The prospect of an electoral rout has unleashed a bitter bout of recriminations both within the McCain campaign and the wider conservative movement, over who is to blame and what should be done to salvage the party's future.
Mr McCain is now facing calls for him to sacrifice his own dwindling White House hopes and focus on saving vulnerable Republican Senate seats which are up for grabs on the same day.
Their fear is that Democrat candidates riding on Mr Obama's popularity may win the nine extra seats they need in the Senate to give them unfettered power in Congress.
If the Democrat majority in the Senate is big enough - at least 60 seats to 40 - the Republicans will be unable to block legislation by use of a traditional filibuster - talking until legislation runs out of time. No president has had the support of such a majority since Jimmy Carter won the 1976 election. President Reagan achieved his political transformation partly through the power of his personality.
David Frum, a former Bush speechwriter, told The Sunday Telegraph that Republicans should now concentrate all their fire on "the need for balanced government".
"It's hard to see a turnaround in the White House race," he said. "This could look like an ideological as well as a party victory if we're not careful. It could be 1980 in reverse.
"With this huge new role for federal government in the economy, the possibility for mischief making is very, very great. One man should not have a monopoly of political and financial power. That's very dangerous."
In North Carolina, where Senator Elizabeth Dole seems set to loose, Republicans are running adverts that appear to take an Obama victory for granted, warning that the Democrat will have a "blank cheque" if her rival Kay Hagen wins. "These liberals want complete control of government in a time of crisis," the narrator says. "All branches of Government. No checks and balances."
Democrats lead in eight of the 12 competitive Senate races and need just nine gains to reach their target of 60. Even Mitch McConnell, the leader of Senate Republicans, is at risk in Kentucky, normally a rock solid red state.
A private memo on the likely result of the congressional elections, leaked to Politico, has the Republicans losing 37 seats.
Ed Rollins, who masterminded Ronald Reagan's second victory in 1984, said the election is already over and predicted: "This is going to turn into a landslide."
A former White House official who still advises President Bush told The Sunday Telegraph: "McCain hasn't won independents, nor has he inspired the base. It's the worst of all worlds. He is dragging everyone else down with him. He needs to deploy people and money to salvage what we can in Congress."
The prospect of defeat has unleashed what insiders describe as an "every man for himself" culture within the McCain campaign, with aides in a "circular firing squad" as blame is assigned.
More profoundly, it sparked the first salvoes in a Republican civil war with echoes of Tory infighting during their years in the political wilderness.
One wing believes the party has to emulate David Cameron, by adapting the issues to fight on and the positions they hold, while the other believes that a back to basics approach will reconnect with heartland voters and ensure success. Modernisers fear that would leave Republicans marginalised, like the Tories were during the Iain Duncan Smith years, condemning them to opposition for a decade.
Mr Frum argues that just as America is changing, so the Republican Party must adapt its economic message and find more to say about healthcare and the environment if it is to survive.
He said: "I don't know that there's a lot of realism in the Republican Party. We have an economic message that is largely irrelevant to most people.
"Cutting personal tax rates is not the answer to everything. The Bush years were largely prosperous but while national income was up the numbers for most individuals were not. Republicans find that a hard fact to process."
Other Republicans have jumped ship completely. Ken Adelman, a Pentagon adviser on the Iraq war, Matthew Dowd, who was Mr Bush's chief re-election strategist, and Scott McClellan, Mr Bush's former press secretary, have all endorsed Mr Obama.
But the real bile has been saved for those conservatives who have balked at the selection of Sarah Palin.
In addition to Mr Frum, who thinks her not ready to be president, Peggy Noonan, Ronald Reagan's greatest speechwriter and a columnist with the Wall Street Journal, condemned Mr McCain's running mate as a "symptom and expression of a new vulgarisation of American politics." Conservative columnist David Brooks called her a "fatal cancer to the Republican Party".
The backlash that ensued last week revealed the fault lines of the coming civil war.
Rush Limbaugh, the doyen of right wing talk radio hosts, denounced Noonan, Brooks and Frum. Neconservative writer Charles Krauthammer condemned "the rush of wet-fingered conservatives leaping to Barack Obama", while fellow columnist Tony Blankley said that instead of collaborating in heralding Mr Obama's arrival they should be fighting "in a struggle to the political death for the soul of the country".
During the primaries the Democratic Party was bitterly divided between Barack Obama's "latte liberals" and Hillary Clinton's heartland supporters, but now the same cultural division threatens to tear the Republican Party apart.
Jim Nuzzo, a White House aide to the first President Bush, dismissed Mrs Palin's critics as "cocktail party conservatives" who "give aid and comfort to the enemy".
He told The Sunday Telegraph: "There's going to be a bloodbath. A lot of people are going to be excommunicated. David Brooks and David Frum and Peggy Noonan are dead people in the Republican Party. The litmus test will be: where did you stand on Palin?"
Mr Frum thinks that Mrs Palin's brand of cultural conservatism appeals only to a dwindling number of voters.
He said: "She emerges from this election as the probable frontrunner for the 2012 nomination. Her supporters vastly outnumber her critics. But it will be extremely difficult for her to win the presidency."
Mr Nuzzo, who believes this election is not a re-run of the 1980 Reagan revolution but of 1976, when an ageing Gerald Ford lost a close contest and then ceded the leadership of the Republican Party to Mr Reagan.
He said: "Win or lose, there is a ready made conservative candidate waiting in the wings. Sarah Palin is not the new Iain Duncan Smith, she is the new Ronald Reagan." On the accuracy of that judgment, perhaps, rests the future of the Republican Party.
DAMASCUS, Syria (AP) - Syria's state-run television and witnesses say U.S. military helicopters have attacked an area along the country's border with Iraq, causing casualties.
The report quoted unnamed Syrian officials and said the area is near the Syrian border town of Abu Kamal. It gave no other details on Sunday's attack.
Local residents told The Associated Press by telephone that two helicopters carrying U.S. soldiers raided the village of Hwijeh, 10 miles inside Syria's border, killing seven people and wounding five.
The U.S. military in Baghdad had no immediate comment
Having spent my career in Government and teaching Government now, I love this stuff. However, as I take it all in, I put it all in perspective. That's the key. All the information about candidates that is provided by the candidates or which is reported and discussed by the media are parts that, together, constitute the whole. There is a relevance hierarchy of information and it is up to each of us to design our own hierarchy. From that perspective we should be able to divine a cogent whole on which we can base an election decision.
PIT BULL TURNS ON MCMAVERICK NOW PALIN'S BUCKING HER OWN TICKET
Sarah Palin is the rogue elephant in the GOP war room.
The maverick mom is distancing herself from John McCain and blowing off the advice of senior Republican aides, convinced they're damaging her reputation and ruining the campaign.
Things have gotten so tense between Palin and her traveling staff, an insider said, that she's overruling their advice - which was evident last week when she ignored GOP aides piling into waiting cars at a Colorado event and strolled over to the press corps for an impromptu talk.
MORE: Palin Has Future Even If McCain Loses
In speeches, Palin has contradicted her running mate's positions on issues, telling a Christian news outlet last week that she would support a constitutional amendment against same-sex marriage, which McCain opposes.
Though McCain once said he considered Obama's relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright to be an old issue, this month Palin said, "I don't know why that association isn't discussed more."
Palin also publicly stated that she thought it was a mistake for the campaign to give up on Michigan, and that she thought voters were annoyed by robocalls - which McCain uses extensively.
The last straw for the vice-presidential candidate was the raft of criticism from the $150,000 worth of high-end clothes the Republican National Committee bought her, a campaign source said.
Palin showed how much that gaffe got under her skin yesterday at a rally in Sioux City, Iowa, telling the crowd she'd stepped off the plane and donned a warm, cream-colored jacket.
"And it's my own jacket," she said.
A McCain insider told The Post that relations between Palin and some of the campaign aides with her have soured. "She's lost faith with the staff. She knows the $150,000- wardrobe story damaged her," the insider said.
But the novice vice-presidential candidate is partly to blame, the campaign official sniped. "She's an adult. She didn't ask questions about where the clothes came from?" the source said.
"She's now positioning herself for her own future. Of course, this is bad for John. It looks like no one is in charge."
Palin is not likely to roll over and let herself be scapegoated if things don't go well on Nov. 4.
"She's a lot savvier, politically speaking, than people give her credit for," said a GOP strategist.
"Everyone is trying to distance themselves from responsibility for the campaign going south. Why wouldn't she do the same?"
I'm reading an awful lot of stories regarding Palin "turning" on or not "following" advice. While, I'm also hearing that this is common. It is??? Some are calling her a Diva. More likely, and the more I see of her, I agree that most likely she is trying to "make her mark" or "position hersel" for 2012. Ya think???????
I'm reading an awful lot of stories regarding Palin "turning" on or not "following" advice. While, I'm also hearing that this is common. It is??? Some are calling her a Diva. More likely, and the more I see of her, I agree that most likely she is trying to "make her mark" or "position hersel" for 2012. Ya think???????
TIS
Well yeah. She's trying to not go down with the sinking ship. Hell, Lieberman, the Democratic Senator who endorsed McCain, is now saying that Obama is "experienced" enough to be President.
As for 2012 GOP Nomination, Palin/Romney/Huckabee seem likely runners, but the one new face outsider for '12 or '16 that could excite up the party would be Bobby Jindal, the Indian-American Governor Louisiana, who Newt Gingrinch has been pimping heavily lately.
That's unbelieveable! However I get an error message "Can't find file 404" when open the link.
Anyway, I don't know what the highest number was, but didn't h attract over 100,000 when he was in Europe?
Still, win or lose I think this guy's appeal is amazing.
TIS
yeah sorry about the link. It's 404 for me as well.
I think that Denver report regards for a domestic audience for Senator Obama, though St. Louis weeks back also reported a 100,000 crowd that was later believed to be only 90,000.
But STILL, ninety thousand people out for a rally speech. I mean Jesus, that's still just insanely incredible.
The appeal you spoke of TIS, its a factor of many things:
(1) He's "It." - McCain has whined about Obama's celebrity, but in every election there is always "The Guy/Gal" and the "other one." The Guy/Gal enters a room, and sucks up all the oxygen and attention, and the opposition becomes more of an anti-movement than a proactive candidate campaign.
With the polls so far, Obama is probably going to be our next President of the United States, and the masses want to see their new King.
(2) Kennedy/Reagan - My conservative friends always get pissed when I say this, but Obama right now with these crowds, he is my generation's Ronald Reagan or JFK, someone who only comes once an epoch.
Not in terms of ideology or policy necessarily, but that in his rhetoric and charisma, those people see him as reassuring, a figure that always promises a better America in a better tomorrow. If Kennedy influenced a whole generation of liberals, and Reagan with a generation of conservatives, Obama could possibly move a whole generation himself.
(3) #1 - I read an interesting piece in the last TIME issue where a black writer penned about how if Obama wins, the most famous black man in America won't be an over-paid primadonna athlete (Kobe Bryant) or a gangsta rapper in/was in prison (50 Cent) or old loud demagogues (Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton) or a rich celebrity who with his expensive lawyers used race and not the evidence to be acquited (O.J. Simpson).
(4) The Base - Unlike McCain, the Democratic Party base is full-fledged for Obama, and you see that enthusiasm and numbers at these rallies.
Thanks RR, I know I, for one, can surely relate to the comparisons you mention that's for sure.
Now, is it even possible that McCain could lose his home state??? The Dems evidently are not shy about circulating this artcle. According to this poll, McCain leads by only 4???
Democrats are circulating a poll showing Sen. John McCain losing ground in his home state of Arizona, an ominous sign for his beleaguered campaign as state after state turns blue.
Project New West, which aims to build the Democratic Party in the Intermountain West, says the Republican leads Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) in the Grand Canyon State, 48 percent to 44 percent.
The pollsters call that a “dramatic shift” from a survey they took in mid-September, which had McCain ahead by 14 points, 54 percent to 40 percent.
“Bad News for McCain: Presidential Contest in Arizona has Closed in Arizona And McCain Now Leads By Just 4 Points,” says a memo from pollsters Andrew Myers of Myers Research and Strategic Services and Lisa Grove of Grove Research.
The poll of 600 likely Arizona voters was taken Thursday and Friday, and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.
McCain has represented Arizona in the House or Senate since 1982.
In 2000, President Bush won Arizona by 6 percentage points. In 2004, he widened that to 11 percentage points.
Most polling has showed McCain winning his home state easily. The Real Clear Politics average of Arizona polls gives McCain an 11.3-point advantage over Obama.
The McCain campaign did not respond to requests for comment.
The Anchorage (Alaska) Daily News endorsed Obama on Oct. 25, 2008:
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.
Also, you all have so far failed to explain or even bother to mention all those Republican moderates who have jumped ship. Denying reality doesn't make it go away.
Your ship analogy is right. Those fringe Republicans are jumping off a sinking ship.
I'm not surprised that no one seems able to defend Obama's lack of experience and qualifications - he has none.
You know who also lacked foreign policy experience?
Ronald Reagan.
Yeah Governor for 8 years in California, but to say he had experience in foreign policy because his state borders Mexico, is as much of a stretch as Palin did because she bordered Canada.
Thanks RR, I know I, for one, can surely relate to the comparisons you mention that's for sure.
To add-on my JFK/Reagan/BHO analogy, someone told me that Obama has the highest polled-favorables ever for a presidential candidate. I don't know if that is accurate, and I haven't seen that alleged polling itself, BUT if its true...
Well JFK and Reagan both made some mistakes inbetween the good shit they did.
JFK had the Bay of Pigs fiasco in his first 100 days in office, ordered the coup de tats in South Vietnam that got its dictator assassinated, and a similar overthrow in Iraq that a young Saddam Hussein was involved as an enforcer for the new leader...his weakness at his Vienna summit with Kruschev in 1961 would lead onto the Cuban Missile Crisis (which his administration defused strongly without looking weak) and famously held off on any significant Civil Rights legislation until the Birmingham church bombing in 1963.
Reagan failed to decrease government (in fact, he increased it, with Department of Veterans' Affairs) and his supply-side economics provided for an economic boom, but a heavy deficit in the late 80s/90s that cost Bush Sr. his job. Reagan also had his nasty/insignificant involvements down in Central America (which could have snared us down like Vietnam) and maybe his administration should have been more assertive in publicly combating the AIDS epidemic, and oh yeah that whole Iran-Contra fuckup.
And yet both Presidents were liked by the American people in spite of all that. Despite Iran/Contra, Reagan left office with the then-highest approval ratings, and JFK's lowest mark was at 56%.
Look at Americans who refuse to let go of "Camelot," in spite of JFK's numerous affairs and (possibly) being connected in some way to Marylyn Monroe's death, and his outright bitchyness (like having the IRS audit Nixon yearly after the 1960 election.) When Reagan died, his state funeral was perhaps for Americans the most emotional since JFK's own in 1963.
Originally Posted By: The Italian Stallionette
Now, is it even possible that McCain could lose his home state??? The Dems evidently are not shy about circulating this artcle. According to this poll, McCain leads by only 4???[/]
Democrats are circulating a poll showing Sen. John McCain losing ground in his home state of Arizona, an ominous sign for his beleaguered campaign as state after state turns blue.
Project New West, which aims to build the Democratic Party in the Intermountain West, says the Republican leads Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) in the Grand Canyon State, 48 percent to 44 percent.
The pollsters call that a “dramatic shift” from a survey they took in mid-September, which had McCain ahead by 14 points, 54 percent to 40 percent.
“Bad News for McCain: Presidential Contest in Arizona has Closed in Arizona And McCain Now Leads By Just 4 Points,” says a memo from pollsters Andrew Myers of Myers Research and Strategic Services and Lisa Grove of Grove Research.
The poll of 600 likely Arizona voters was taken Thursday and Friday, and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.
McCain has represented Arizona in the House or Senate since 1982.
In 2000, President Bush won Arizona by 6 percentage points. In 2004, he widened that to 11 percentage points.
Most polling has showed McCain winning his home state easily. The Real Clear Politics average of Arizona polls gives McCain an 11.3-point advantage over Obama.
The McCain campaign did not respond to requests for comment.
Also, you all have so far failed to explain or even bother to mention all those Republican moderates who have jumped ship. Denying reality doesn't make it go away.
Your ship analogy is right. Those fringe Republicans are jumping off a sinking ship.
I'm not surprised that no one seems able to defend Obama's lack of experience and qualifications - he has none.
You know who also lacked foreign policy experience?
Ronald Reagan.
Yeah Governor for 8 years in California, but to say he had experience in foreign policy because his state borders Mexico, is as much of a stretch as Palin did because she bordered Canada.
Last I checked, Reagan did alright.
I didn't say anything about foreign policy experience, just experience in general. Is 100 weeks in the senate really enough time to qualify a junior senator to run for president? And besides his political career, what life experiences have helped shape his character/judgment? Being a failed community organizer?
You know who also lacked foreign policy experience?
Ronald Reagan.
..... Governor.....
How many Governors really have or did have extensive foreign experience?
Technically, you can argue that being Governor of a state that borders a foreign country requires knowledge/skills in dealing with said nation regarding certain issues.
Palin could have argued intelligently how as Governor of Alaska, she has to deal with fishing/oil/wildlife rights and concerns, since a great wilderness lays where the Alaskan/Canadian border is. Nevermind the usual shit like extradiction, etc.
But instead, she argued that because she could see Russia from her house, that was her experience.
[quote=ronnierocketAGO]Also, you all have so far failed to explain or even bother to mention all those Republican moderates who have jumped ship. Denying reality doesn't make it go away.
Your ship analogy is right. Those fringe Republicans are jumping off a sinking ship.
I'm not surprised that no one seems able to defend Obama's lack of experience and qualifications - he has none.
You know who also lacked foreign policy experience?
Ronald Reagan.
Yeah Governor for 8 years in California, but to say he had experience in foreign policy because his state borders Mexico, is as much of a stretch as Palin did because she bordered Canada.
Last I checked, Reagan did alright.
I didn't say anything about foreign policy experience, just experience in general. Is 100 weeks in the senate really enough time to qualify a junior senator to run for president? And besides his political career, what life experiences have helped shape his character/judgment? Being a failed community organizer?[/quote]
I'm with JL here...define "failed."
And just for the hell of it, throw in William Ayers too for the randomness of it.
He actually has been a US Senator for three years, not two (which is what you keep saying by repeating "100 weeks"). Before that, he was in the state senate for 8 years. And instead of grabbing a big money job when he finished law school, as the editor of the Harvard Law Review certainly could have, he decided to become a "community organizer" and devote his life to public service.
Obama announced his candidacy only 2 years after assuming office.
Just face it, Obama has done nothing. He is the epitome of an empty suit.
Freddie, on this I am on your side. All I keep hearing from the Obama camp is how he, a Presidential candidate, is sooo experienced as compared to Sarah palin, a VICE Presidential candidate.
All I keep hearing is how Senator Obama chose to "serve the public" instead of taking a good job somewhere in the private sector.
Well if we are going to compare apples with apples, then let's compare Presidential candidate experience with Presidential candidate experience.
Obama doesn't even come within a 1000 miles of Senator John McCain in not only his Public Service experiences, but his LIFE experiences in general!
I've basically sat back and listened, watched and read for most of this campaign and I've come to the conclusion that the Obama people know damn well that they cannot put his record or experiences, speaking Presidential candidate against Presidential candidate, up against John McCain's!
This is why they keep trying to compare Obama the Presidential candidate to Palin, the VICE presidential candidate.
McCain DESTROYS Obama in every aspect of political, personal and public service experience!
McCain DESTROYS Obama in every aspect of political, personal and public service experience!
I don't disagree.
Just tell me why, on God's green earth, wasn't Palin more closely vetted?
If Obama wins and it's even close, there will be a backlash from Republicans who would have preferred Romney in the VP spot. Even with all the Republican/Bush baggage, he could have won with a stronger VP candidate.
Just tell me why, on God's green earth, wasn't Palin more closely vetted?
If Obama wins and it's even close, there will be a backlash from Republicans who would have preferred Romney in the VP spot. Even with all the Republican/Bush baggage, he could have won with a stronger VP candidate.
That's what they'll say.
And you may be right. But that's not my point here. My point is that I am simply amazed at how the Obama people refuse to compare his record to his opponent's record and instead keep on comparing him to Sarah Palin. Obama is NOT running against Sarah Palin for the Presidency. Last time I looked Obama was running against McCain for that position.
So being that the Obama supporters keep talking about how he has served the public and chose to do so instead of going into the private sector, why don't we put Obama's record up against McCain's?
DC, Obviously I completely disagree with McCain as a candidate. I disagree with his stance on too many issues, and I truly believe that he would perpetuate the failed policies of the past administration. To me, that would be a disaster. That doesn't mean I think he's a bad man. If anything, I think he's a decent man. However, his campaign has been sloppy. His choice of running partner, the way he has gone so negative, to his use of "Joe the Plumber" (who turned out to be a tax-evading liar), just shows sloppiness and no true loyalty to his ideals.
As for WHY the comparison gets made is what I stated earlier, it's because the Democrats were criticized for having an inexperienced candidate and then the Republicans chose a woman who is a complete incompetent. Also, because, as I said earlier, John McCain is elderly and has had health issues, his choice of VP is up for closer scrutiny.
Secondly, as for Senator Obama, he is an intelligent and charismatic man who is well-educated and has dedicated over 20 years to public service. Is that such a bad thing.
why don't we put Obama's record up against McCain's?
McCain's record is the reason I'll be voting for Obama. To quote John McCain himself before he was forced to get desperate and attack Bush: "I voted with President Bush over 90% of the time, even higher than most of my Republican colleagues". That's his words, a fact, and not something the Obama campaign made up. If he gets in, nothing will change from the last 8 miserable years. Obama offers 2 things: "hope and change". Maybe it will be bad change. That's a possibility. But at least there's a possibility the next 4 years will be better than the last 8. With McCain, it's guaranteed things will be no different at best. I'm willing to take the chance things will be better, than guaranteeing things will stay the same as they were.
The "experience" thing is going to be read through everyone's biases.
If you are an Obama supporter you are probably going to spend more time talking about his values, his judgment, and what his future plans entail.
If you are a McCain supporter you are probably going to be talking about Obama's lack of time on the national stage, McCain's long experience in the Senate, his foreign policy expertise, etc.
Of course Obama graduated Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law School while McCain graduated 5th from the bottom of his class.
By all accounts Obama doesn't have an anger management problem while McCain does.
People may place different values on those facts as is their right but Obama has just as much relevant "experience" to be President as McCain does. Neither has been president before.
I don't think people vote for President based on resumes. If that were the case we wouldn't have the current one. I think people vote on their pocketbook, if they think they can trust the candidate and what the candidate's future plans are.
IMO, McCain has spent too much time pandering to the angry Republican base and not enough time reaching out to the center. He needs to talk more about how he plans to move the country forward.
Talk all you want about experience and or lack of, the fact remains that this nation is ready for and NEEDS change. I'm wondering if some here simply can't stand the thought that McCain could lose. Excuse me all to hell if I'm sick and fuckin' tired of a war mongering President who totally ruined our country.....and the guy running who I see as bringing more of the same.
Four years ago you all were having lovefests threads here for your boy W. There was no understanding or consideration of anyone else's viewpoint (for the most part)by many here. Well four years, two wars and a demolished economy later, by God, hell yea, I WANT change and I know I'm not alone. Obviously, if polls are to be believed, the majority of America feels that way as well. Just as Cardi is so shocked that people compare experience of a VP candidate to a Presidential candidate, I'm shocked that some people can't comprehend th change some of us want after a hellish 8 years.
BTW,
If this is the same Kellman that gave this speech at the 04 convention, it sounds as though he is describing a caring, helpful man that can reach across and bring people together, which is what our country needs right now.
How about blue drinks on November 5th, TIS. Since I don't want to jinx anything, I will just say that we will either be celebrating or drowning our sorrows together!
How about blue drinks on November 5th, TIS. Since I don't want to jinx anything, I will just say that we will either be celebrating or drowning our sorrows together!
SB,
You're on!! I'm buying. I actually took Nov. 5th off for that purpose...either a celebration or a drown my sorrows day. ha ha ha
Done. We'll meet halfway. Would that be Nebraska???
Oh no not Nebraska!! What the hell is there to do in Nebraska? (no offense to any Nebrskans) I'll meet ya in the chatroom and we can have an after election day party. Anyplace but Nebraska!!!
Just tell me why, on God's green earth, wasn't Palin more closely vetted?
If Obama wins and it's even close, there will be a backlash from Republicans who would have preferred Romney in the VP spot. Even with all the Republican/Bush baggage, he could have won with a stronger VP candidate.
That's what they'll say.
And you may be right. But that's not my point here. My point is that I am simply amazed at how the Obama people refuse to compare his record to his opponent's record and instead keep on comparing him to Sarah Palin. Obama is NOT running against Sarah Palin for the Presidency. Last time I looked Obama was running against McCain for that position.
So being that the Obama supporters keep talking about how he has served the public and chose to do so instead of going into the private sector, why don't we put Obama's record up against McCain's?
I thought you said that Obama doesn't have a record.
Former Sen. Larry Pressler (R-S.D.), who was the first Vietnam veteran to serve in the United States Senate, is the latest Republican to back Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign, Politico learned Sunday.
Pressler, who said that in addition to casting an absentee ballot for Obama he'd donated $500 to the Illinois senator's campaign, cited the Democrat's response to the financial crisis as the primary reason for his decision.
"I just got the feeling that Obama will be able to handle this financial crisis better, and I like his financial team of [former Treasury Secretary Robert] Rubin and [former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul] Volcker better," he said. By contrast, John McCain's "handling of the financial crisis made me feel nervous."
The former senator added that he hoped the next president would help place restraints on executive pay, and said: "I don't think [McCain] will take action in that area, or he's as likely to."
Pressler, who said that he had never voted for a Democrat for president before, added, "I feel really badly. I just hate to go against someone I served with in the Senate. I voted and I got it mailed and I dropped it in the mailbox, and it tore at me to do that."
Currently an adjunct professor at Baruch College in New York, Pressler served in the Senate from 1979 through 1997, and prior to that spent two terms in the House of Representatives.
During the 104th Congress, from 1995 to 1997, Pressler chaired the Senate Commerce Committee. When Pressler was defeated for reelection in 1996, McCain took over his chairmanship.
After leaving office, Pressler formed a legal and lobbying firm, The Pressler Group, and in 2002 unsuccessfully sought election to South Dakota's sole seat in the House of Representatives.
He joins a growing list of Republicans who have thrown their support to Obama in recent days. Last Sunday former Secretary of State Colin Powell endorsed Obama on NBC's "Meet the Press." On Thursday Obama picked up the support of former Minnesota Gov. Arne Carlson, who was joined on Friday by former Massachusetts Gov. William Weld.
Like some of Obama's other Republican supporters, Pressler said he had concerns about his party's fiscal policy, particularly the war in Iraq, that went beyond the presidential campaign.
"We have to be a moderate party. We can't be for all these foreign military adventures. We have to stop spending so much money. My God, the deficit is so high!" he said. "The Republican Party I knew in the 1970s is just all gone."
Despite his support for Obama, however, Pressler emphasized that he intended to stay in the GOP and described himself as a "moderate conservative."
"I'm not leaving the Republican Party. We're going to reform it," he said, but added: "In the general election, if you have disagreements, you should not vote the party line."
Do ya think it's because they really prefer Obama or is it because McCain is just not well liked (Or should I say he has never been the one that the Republican party wanted, nor were they ever real enthused with him). Anyway, it does take a lot of guts for these people to vote against your party, and then to announce it.
TIS
Btw, I hear these Republicans crossing over, and this goes thru my mind "....da da da....another one bites the dust...da da da...and another's one's gone, another one's gone..."
By Andrew Ward in Albuquerque and Daniel Dombey in,Washington
FT.COM
Published: October 27 2008 02:00 | Last updated: October 27 2008 02:00
Whatever the outcome of next week's election, nobody will be able to accuse Sarah Palin of failing to make an impact.
Less than two months after being thrust on to the national stage as John McCain's running mate, the Alaska governor has become arguably the most polarising figure in US politics.
A slew of opinion polls last week showed her approval rating plummeting among Democrats and independents, amid a hardening perception that she is ill-qualified to become commander-in-chief. Yet, on the campaign trail, she is drawing bigger crowds than Mr McCain and has become the main source of enthusiasm among grassroots conservatives.
Not all Republicans, however, are thrilled by Ms Palin. In Washington a fierce debate has erupted within the party elite between those who view her as a potential saviour of the conservative movement and others who blame her for Mr McCain's likely defeat.
The dispute burst into the open over the weekend as several press reports described tensions within the McCain campaign over Ms Palin's role and performance. Unnamed officials accused her of "going rogue" by making headline-grabbing statements that put her at odds with the rest of the campaign, and claimed she was focused on positioning herself for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. "She is a diva," one adviser reportedly told CNN. "She is playing for her own future and sees herself as the next leader of the party."
Allies of Ms Palin fired back, arguing that she was trying to "bust free" of the campaign's botched handling of her. Ms Palin has become noticeably more open to the press in recent days, in contrast to the tight control that previously surrounded her.
Responding to the reported tensions, Tracey Schmitt, Ms Palin's spokeswoman, told reporters on Saturday that "unnamed sources with their own agenda will say what they want, but from Governor Palin down we have one agenda, and that's to win on election day".
It is not unusual for conflict to flare between a vice-presidential candidate and the rest of the campaign, particularly when they are on the losing side.
In 2004 the alliance between John Kerry and John Edwards was rarely a happy one. But the infighting over Ms Palin appears to be particularly intense because of her unusually prominent role and the high stakes invested in her by Mr McCain.
The choice of the relatively unknown 44-year-old was intended to burnish Mr McCain's maverick reputation and recast the election as a contest between Ms Palin's small town values and Mr Obama's elite liberalism.
The strategy briefly worked as the Republicans surged ahead in the polls after the party conventions. But momentum reversed after the financial crisis refocused attention on the economy while Ms Palin's weak performance in a high-profile television interview increased doubts about her readiness.
Most damagingly for Mr McCain, his risky choice of running mate and uneven response to the financial crisis have raised doubts about his temperament, allowing Mr Obama to steal the mantle of steady leader. Colin Powell, the former secretary of state, last week cited Mr McCain's choice of Ms Palin among his reasons for endorsing Mr Obama.
An ABC/Washington Post survey last week found that 51 per cent of voters have a negative impression of Ms Palin. Only 46 per cent had a favourable view, down from 59 per cent in early September.
Her decline in popularity has been sharpest among two of the groups Mr McCain had hoped she would appeal to: women and independents. Speaking on NBC's Meet the Press yesterday, Mr McCain defended his running mate.
"Do Sarah Palin and I disagree on a specific issue? Yeah, because we are both mavericks but we share the goal of cleaning up Washington," he said.
Referring to the recent controversy over the Republican national committee's expenditure of $150,000 on clothes for Ms Palin, Mr McCain added: "She lives a frugal life. She and her family were thrust into this."
Do ya think it's because they really prefer Obama or is it because McCain is just not well liked (Or should I say he has never been the one that the Republican party wanted, nor were they ever real enthused with him). Anyway, it does take a lot of guts for these people to vote against your party, and then to announce it.
TIS
Well there is a trend to many of these endorsements. Notice that of those I've posted, two major reasons keep propping up:
(1) McCain's reactions after the stock market meltdown, including infamous flip-flop "suspension" of his campaign (when he didn't really) and saying that he wouldn't leave D.C. until the bailout was agreed to, including missing the debate if necessary.
Of course Obama didn't take the bait, firmly called McCain's bluff, saying he would be at Oxford, Mississippi that friday night, debate or no debate (including his statement: "A President has gotta do two things at once.") As you remember, the bailout talks blew up (no fault of either McCain/Obama) and McCain then had to tuck his tail between his legs and flew to the debate.
In other words, to some GOPers/conservatives, McCain looked flimsy and weak in response to that crisis, while they thought Obama was firm and didn't act panic-filled.
Plus, McCain voted for the bailout, which sorta pissed off many of the already-disgruntled economical small-government conservatives/libertarians.
(2) Sarah Palin.
Freddie C. and DC have cried about how the left refuse to use the same criticism against their candidate like they have with Palin, and I and some "Obamacons" would disagree.
Agree with him politically or not, Obama in interviews at least presents himself as an intelligent, disciplined candidate.
Palin though....I mean Katie friggin Couric comes off as more intelligent than Palin in that interview.
Then consider alot of Female GOPers that could have gotten the gig, and done a better job (i.e. Kay Hutchinson) and these Obamacons go: WHAT THE FUCK?
Now TIS, notice that some of these Obamacons are from New England, those moderate GOPers who are the remnants of the liberal wing of the old GOP, i.e. Nelson Rockefeller, where they may agree with the party's economics, but are pro-choice or tolerant of gays or whatever.
With the GOP increasingly pulling, to quote William Buckley, "Ideological Suicide", alienating moderates/small-government conservatives/fiscal conservatives/libertarians/etc....alot of those centrists, much like the "Reagan Democrats" in the 1980s, feel left out or that their party on the national level has gone too deep into the fringes, and decide that the candidate of the rival party suites their concerns or causes more.
Just what experience is required to be elected as President? Experience with what? What is the threshhold that one must obtain? There is none. There's no experience required or useful for that matter. The Presidency is so unique that nothing prepares one for its slings and arrows. A President is surrounded by a staff of advisors and a Cabinet who provide options for the President's selection. There's no magic in that selection process. Experience doesn't affect the probability of an option's success or failure. To be the Republican or Democratic nominee, one goes through an arduous and onerous primary campaign and election process. If there is experience achieved, that process is it. One offers oneself to Americans and we accept or reject the offer.
There is a series of books entitled the Making of the President by Theodore White that chronicles the road that successful presidential candidates travel on the way to the Presidency. Read them. There are also any number of bboks out there about Presidents. Read some of them also. You won't find in their pages apriori experience that was helpful to our Presidents except among those that had been Vice-Presidents. Even then it was only residual.
RR, all your points are well taken. From all I've been reading, the Republican party is in deep turmoil, as were the Dems four years ago, only this seems worse to me. Time to re-evaluate and make changes. And, change is NOT a bad thing.
We learn in school the 3 qualifications to become President, and that seems to stick with our memory. Yet, I guess when we think in terms of the "President" we tend to think with such a huge job, surely there must be some mandatory experience qualifications.
And Olivant mentions the "process" as experience in itself. I imagine, for the candidates it is quite the learning experience. Seriously, I can see how Obama, being the newcomer, has grown thru the process, can't you? Don't know if it's demeanor or a comfort level or what, but he is looking/seeming very Presidential.
Let me just weigh in on the experience factor. It's undeniable that McCain has much more than Obama. But for the office they are both seeking, neither has the actual experience for the decisions made in the position.
What matters is that the president surround him/herself with the best people to make decisions for our country. This is a judgment issue and this, IMO, is where Obama is abundantly ahead of McCain. Look at the so-called "experience" George Bush and his administration had. Experience did not do us any good with the poor decisions Rumsfeld and Cheney made about the Iraq War. In fact, they repeated past mistakes from when they were both in the Nixon administration and fighting the Vietnam War. I see McCain acting in the same way as Bush, if he were to be elected.
Fundamentally flawed judgment was also used by McCain in selecting Sarah Palin. Throwing her inexperience aside, listen to the majority of her non-rehearsed, unscripted answers. They are a train wreck. She clearly does not know the Constitution, foreign policy, or anything significant about the U.S. Supreme Court.
McCain has demonstrated that he is reactionist, rather than someone who thinks things through. This is where he is frighteningly similar to George Bush. How many poor decisions has Bush made based upon his "gut instinct?" Examples of the McCain reactionary weakness: 1) picking Sarah Palin as a means to rally his base rather than selecting the most qualified candidate for the country (Romney, Ridge, Gingrich). Once the initial Palin hoopla stopped, it was evident to nearly everyone that the figurative emperor had no clothes on.
2) the political stunt of "suspending" his campaign to "handle" the economic crisis. The economy is the #1 issue for the majority of Americans. Only weeks prior to suspending his campaign, McCain himself announced "the fundamentals of the economy were strong." THIS STATEMENT DEMONSTRATED, MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE, THAT DESPITE McCAIN'S EXPERIENCE, HE HAD LEARNED NEXT TO NOTHING ABOUT THE U.S. ECONOMY IN ALL OF HIS YEARS AS A SENATOR. Furthermore, this complete misanalysis of what was going on in our country, demonstrated how out of touch John McCain is regarding the basic understanding of our economic operations and economics policies.
Exactly Goombah. I think what bothers me most is the fact that McCain is a "reactionary" as you say. :oTemperment IS and should be a factor. While granted, McCain does have military experience, I have never brought or into the spin that being a POW gives you some kind of an edge. As a matter of fact, I worry what kind of emotional/mental damage surely must have been doen with 5 years of captivity. It had to have an affect. Of course we will never see those kinds of records.
I think what has turned me off to McCain most of all is how he didn't remain true to himself. He picked Sarah Palin, when I think his preference was one of the names that goombah cited. He went negative after promising he wouldn't. He turned his very pretty running mate into a hate- and fear-mongerer who would do the vast majority of the dirty work for him. His little "stunts" like seizing on Joe the Plumber and suspending his campaign have revealed a very sloppy and reactionist side. And I think that he turned off a lot of people who might have voted for him.
Obama has remained unruffled throughout. He's never lost his temper. He never took the bait. And he hammered his points home, day after day.
MSN is reporting that Colorado and Virginia moved from "toss-up" "lean" Obama. They said IF this is the case, that even if McCain took both Ohio and FLA he still wouldn't win, and that the electoral map will take a historic change. I have a feeling that this election will be historic in several ways, in the end.
So being that the Obama supporters keep talking about how he has served the public and chose to do so instead of going into the private sector, why don't we put Obama's record up against McCain's?
For the same reason McCain doesn't want to talk about the economy. In the final week of the campaign you don't talk about your weaknesses.
I have two questions about the elections: 1) Can the president dismiss the vice president? 2) If the newly elected president dies before January or before taking his oath, who becomes president?
I have two questions about the elections: 1) Can the president dismiss the vice president? 2) If the newly elected president dies before January or before taking his oath, who becomes president?
1. No. The vice-president, like the president, was elected into office, and can not be fired by the president.
2. The vice-president elect would be sworn into office in January if the president-elect dies after the election, but before inauguration.
What happens if one of the two candidates dies now (actually I was reading about a foiled skinhead plan to assassinate Obama, today)? Since the parties will most likely promote their VP candidates to be the presidential nominee, neither of them can beat the presidential candidate of the other party.
I was gonna ask that same question and may have already a while back. I think it was concluded that nobody knew, since it has never happened before.
Since there is no winner yet, if one (God forbid) of our two candidates died or even worse, was assassinated, wouldn't the logical step be to put the runner-up (so to speak) of that party, since he/she came in second??? Or, redo the whole primary. I don't want to find out the hard way, but it is a fair question really.
I did hear of this plot and it is very very scary regardless of the fact that from what I hear the plan was no where near being "planned". At least so far.
This guy is like 80 something I think. He is senator in Alaska and from what was just reported, he and the Democratic running against him are tied. Stevens says he isn't going to quit, keeping his senate seat. They reported unless he loses, or is booted by the party he keeps his seat. That's how I understand it.
But, will they really put an 80 something guy in jail for very long?
I heard that skinhead/Obama story on MSNBC & Fox a little bit ago. How scary is that? The man hasn't even been elected yet and someone wants him dead. Sad very sad.
I heard that skinhead/Obama story on MSNBC & Fox a little bit ago. How scary is that? The man hasn't even been elected yet and someone wants him dead. Sad very sad.
They're panicking now. They're about to have a black President and they just can't handle it. Their tiny little worlds are imploding.
Personally, I think there will be more lunatics out there prior to the election and inauguration, than there will be after.
Also, Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska was found guilty on several federal corruption charges.
I haven't really followed this story. What effect, if any, will it have on the Republicans (in the election)?
1) Republicans will probably lose another Senate seat.
2) Stevens "The Tubes Guy" is Palin's "mentor". Last summer Palin sat next to him at conference and went on and on about how much she respected him and how his voice needed to be heard across America and proudly touting his endorsement during her run for governor. I think these are up on youtube, check them out.
3) There is some scandal about Palin's hometown receiving $27 million in federal money (for a town of 6700!! She was the mayor at this time) to help fund a rail project to a resort Steven's has.
WASHINGTON – Law enforcement agents have broken up a plot by two neo-Nazi skinheads to assassinate Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and shoot or decapitate 88 black people, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and Explosives said Monday.
In court records unsealed Monday in U.S. District Court in Jackson, Tenn., federal agents said they disrupted plans to rob a gun store and target a predominantly African-American high school in a murder spree that was to begin in Tennessee. Agents said the skinheads did not identify the school by name.
Jim Cavanaugh, special agent in charge of ATF's Nashville field office, said the two men planned to kill 88 black people, including 14 by beheading. The numbers 88 and 14 are symbolic in the white supremacist community.
The men also sought to go on a national killing spree after the Tennessee murders, with Obama as its final target, Cavanaugh told The Associated Press.
"They said that would be their last, final act — that they would attempt to kill Sen. Obama," Cavanaugh said. "They didn't believe they would be able to do it, but that they would get killed trying."
An Obama spokeswoman traveling with the senator in Pennsylvania had no immediate comment.
The men, Daniel Cowart, 20, of Bells, Tenn., and Paul Schlesselman 18, of Helena-West Helena, Ark., are being held without bond. Agents seized a rifle, a sawed-off shotgun and three pistols from the men when they were arrested. Authorities alleged the two men were preparing to break into a gun shop to steal more.
The defendants were arrested Oct. 22 by the Crockett County, Tenn., Sheriffs Office. "Once we arrested the defendants and suspected they had violated federal law, we immediately contacted federal authorities," said Crockett County Sheriff Troy Klyce.
Attorney Joe Byrd, who has been hired to represent Cowart, did not immediately return a call seeking comment Monday.
Cowart and Schlesselman are charged with possessing an unregistered firearm, conspiring to steal firearms from a federally licensed gun dealer, and threatening a candidate for president.
The investigation is continuing, and more charges are possible, Cavanaugh said.
The court records say Cowart and Schlesselman also bought nylon rope and ski masks to use in a robbery or home invasion to fund their spree, during which they allegedly planned to go from state to state and kill people.
For the Obama plot, the legal documents show, Cowart and Schlesselman "planned to drive their vehicle as fast as they could toward Obama shooting at him from the windows."
"Both individuals stated they would dress in all white tuxedos and wear top hats during the assassination attempt," the court complaint states. "Both individuals further stated they knew they would and were willing to die during this attempt."
Cavanaugh said there's no evidence — so far — that others were willing to assist Cowart and Schlesselman with the plot.
He said authorities took the threats very seriously.
"They seemed determined to do it," Cavanaugh said. "Even if they were just to try it, it would be a trail of tears around the South."
___
Associated Press writer Erik Schelzig in Nashville, Tenn., contributed to this report.
I heard that skinhead/Obama story on MSNBC & Fox a little bit ago. How scary is that? The man hasn't even been elected yet and someone wants him dead. Sad very sad.
Saladbar, I believe they broke up other assassination plots before this. Wasn't there one around the time of the first debate or something?
Yes, now that you have prodded my memory ... Obama got secret service detail assigned to him WAY before any of the other candidates so there had to be much earlier credible death threats.
Stupid neo-Nazi skinheads/white supremacists -- why is it that those claiming to be of the "master race" always seem to be the worst possible examples of humanity and at the very bottom scrapings of the gene pool?
This guy is like 80 something I think. He is senator in Alaska and from what was just reported, he and the Democratic running against him are tied. Stevens says he isn't going to quit, keeping his senate seat. They reported unless he loses, or is booted by the party he keeps his seat. That's how I understand it.
But, will they really put an 80 something guy in jail for very long?
TIS
His jail sentences may run 5 years or less, or miniscule.
But the real importance is that this comes 8 days before Stevens' re-election against his Democratic rival, who was neck/neck with him in the polls.
I doubt Alaskans will keep a guy who's a 7-count convicted felon.
NEW YORK (AP) — A week from the presidential election, Republican John McCain is persisting in exaggerating and misrepresenting rival Barack Obama's tax and health-care plans.
In his latest campaign stump speech, McCain portrays himself as a time-tested warrior who will fight passionately for the middle class as president. "These are hard times," he proclaims, promising to enact policies that will create new jobs, help people stay in their homes, and protect their retirement accounts.
The well-crafted speech, with stirring references to McCain's five and a half years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam and his plans for the nation, goes off track when it comes to Obama's policies.
"I'm not going to spend $700 billion of your money just bailing out the Wall Street bankers and brokers who got us into this mess," McCain says. "I'm going to make sure we take care of the people who were devastated by the excesses of Wall Street and Washington. I'm going to spend a lot of that money to bring relief to you."
Both McCain and Obama voted for the sweeping financial rescue deal, passed 74-25 by the Senate, that directs the U.S. Treasury to spend $700 billion to buy up distressed mortgages and other bad debt from banks.
McCain has criticized elements of the plan but argued he had no choice but to support it, saying it was an emergency measure needed to help stabilize the stock market and loosen credit.
To make it more consumer friendly, McCain has proposed spending $300 billion of it on buying bad mortgages at full face value and renegotiating them to a lower rate. The plan has drawn mixed reviews; critics say it would force taxpayers to vastly overpay for mortgages. Obama has said profligate lenders must share the losses so the government shouldn't pay them full face value for failing mortgages.
In his stump speech, McCain says if elected "I won't spend nearly a trillion dollars more of your money ... as Sen. Obama proposes. Because he can't do that without raising your taxes or digging us further into debt. I'm going to make government live on a budget just like you do."
McCain is correct that Obama has proposed several costly new programs, including a 10-year, $150 billion clean energy fund and a plan for near-universal health coverage that would cost upwards of $50 billion a year.
Obama claims his spending plans are offset by spending cuts. He says he would pay for new programs with the savings from withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq and with new taxes on those earning over $250,000 a year. The 95 percent of workers who make less than that would get a tax cut, he says.
McCain has proposed making permanent all of President Bush's tax cuts and has called for a spending freeze on all programs except Defense, veterans' benefits and Social Security. He's a staunch defender of the Iraq war, even though it costs about $150 billion a year. He has resisted setting a time frame for withdrawing U.S. troops.
McCain is also standing by his pledge to balance the federal budget in four years with no tax increases — a pledge analysts say may be close to impossible given current economic conditions and the added cost of the $700 billion bailout.
In his stump speech, McCain says he "won't fine small businesses and families with children, as Sen. Obama proposes, to force them into a new huge government-run health-care program, while I keep the cost of the fine a secret until I hit you with it."
McCain's central claim — that people will be "forced" into a new government-run plan under an Obama presidency — is not true. In fact, Obama broke with many Democrats and others who advocate universal coverage when he announced his plan would be mandatory only for children, and voluntary for everyone else. Obama would allow those who want to keep their current employer-based health insurance to do so. Rather than requiring everyone to purchase coverage, Obama's plan is designed to bring down costs — make insurance more affordable so as many people as possible would choose to buy it.
In addition, under Obama's plan, employers would not be fined for not providing coverage. Instead, large employers — but not small businesses — would be required either to provide health insurance or contribute toward the cost of a public plan.
McCain also accuses Obama of aiming to raise taxes on small businesses, which he says would cause them to cut jobs. He has recently fleshed out that point by invoking "Joe the Plumber," who told Obama on a campaign stop in Ohio that he wants to buy the plumbing business where he works, but is afraid Obama's tax plan would make that impossible.
In fact, Obama would raise taxes on small businesses making more than $250,000, but only about two percent of small businesses in the country fall into that category. And Obama is also proposing targeted tax relief for small businesses, such as a tax credit for offering health care to employees and elimination of capital gains taxes on startup businesses.
I was gonna ask that same question and may have already a while back. I think it was concluded that nobody knew, since it has never happened before.
Since there is no winner yet, if one (God forbid) of our two candidates died or even worse, was assassinated, wouldn't the logical step be to put the runner-up (so to speak) of that party, since he/she came in second??? Or, redo the whole primary. I don't want to find out the hard way, but it is a fair question really.
I did hear of this plot and it is very very scary regardless of the fact that from what I hear the plan was no where near being "planned". At least so far.
TIS
Let me try again since you probably didn't read my post just above yours.
If a presidential candidate dies or withdraws before the election, the choice of another candidate is up to the party.
Also, Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska was found guilty on several federal corruption charges.
I haven't really followed this story. What effect, if any, will it have on the Republicans (in the election)?
Certainly, it is dispiriting. Given the scandals associated with Republicans Larry Craig and Mark Foley, Republicans must be wondering what the difference is between their party's candidates and Democrats. Now the Republicans have to anticipate that with Steven's conviction, his deomcratic opponent Mark Begich will win his seat. Thus, the probability of a 60 vote Democratic majority in the Senate becomes even more certain.
Disgruntled conservative Andrew Sullivan gives his
Top Ten Reasons Conservatives Should Vote For Obama
(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.
I actually got to watch the entire speech, since I was at home. As usual, it was great!!! I look forward to seeing his half hour "special" on Wednesday. If anyone knows the time, please post. I haven't heard yet.
I'm telling you RR. I wouldn't be surprised if many more Republicans will be voting Obama, but don't want to admit it. I'm guessing this election will be historical on many fronts that probably won't be noticed til after it's over.
I just saw on the Rachel Maddow show a video of McCain at one of his rallies and as he was talking about and/or introducing Palin, there was a woman right behind him obviously attempting to look like Palin. Her hair, glasses, etc. She even seemed to mouth the words "thank you" and wave after McCain spoke of Palin. I looked for a you-tube video but didn't see it. Ha ha ha...Boy, talk about needing a life ha??? The question was, who is she and how did she get to stand right behind Mcain. Anyway, what a crack-up.
He may be the best speaker I've ever heard or seen run for public office. Like SVSG says, it remains to be seen whether or not he can back it up, but God, can he work a room!
After being told for 8 years that if we don't vote Republican, the US will be blown apart by another terrorist attack, it is so wonderfully refreshing to hear a candidate speak about HOPE, about OPTIMISM. It's like a beacon of light.
Amen to that SB. Yet, personally, I really am not expecting any noticeable "results" (for lack of a better word) for a while. I sincerely believe Obama (or McCain for that matter) will find as he enters office, that there is so much to do, so much to clean up that he'll have to be prioritzed. Although I'm logically I'd say the economy would be number one, I'm talking things that you 'don't know til you get there'. I suspect there is a lot that the exiting President isn't going to publicly announce, that is left undone and perhaps stuff we'll never know.
However, all that being said, unlike Bush, I feel confident that Obama will be the type of President that will at least let us, the people, know what is happening and what his plans are (to the extent that he can anyway). Knowing we are going in a forward direction is like an emotional shot in the arm. And, although I would love to be wrong on my timeline, I think it'll take at least a full Presidential term before we see noticeable results no matter who wins this election.
Occidental College records - not released Columbia University records - not released Columbia thesis paper - "not available" Harvard University records - not released Selective Service Registration - not released medical records - not released law practice client list - not released certified copy of original birth certificate - not released
Now that Palin is "going rogue" on McCain, them two remind me of a WWE tag team right before one of them turns heel. I can almost picture Palin hitting McCain over the head with a steel chair when he gives his concession speech next week.
Now that Palin is "going rogue" on McCain, them two remind me of a WWE tag team right before one of them turns heel. I can almost picture Palin hitting McCain over the head with a steel chair when he gives his concession speech next week.
You and Andrew Sullivan would make very good friends.*
*=And I just don't mean that just because Sullivan is gay, but also because he's been hounding Palin/Biden/Obama/McCain to release their medical records.
Now that Palin is "going rogue" on McCain, them two remind me of a WWE tag team right before one of them turns heel. I can almost picture Palin hitting McCain over the head with a steel chair when he gives his concession speech next week.
Where's Vince Russo when you need him?
How great would it be if Palin came out in an nWo shirt Tuesday?
Now that Palin is "going rogue" on McCain, them two remind me of a WWE tag team right before one of them turns heel. I can almost picture Palin hitting McCain over the head with a steel chair when he gives his concession speech next week.
Where's Vince Russo when you need him?
How great would it be if Palin came out in an nWo shirt Tuesday?
Occidental College records - not released Columbia University records - not released Columbia thesis paper - "not available" Harvard University records - not released Selective Service Registration - not released medical records - not released law practice client list - not released certified copy of original birth certificate - not released
What is he hiding?
Good question, wonder why no one asked him personally in a TV interview...
OOh, as editor of the Law Review, I'm sure his Harvard grades are dismal. And I read that none of the candidates have released their medical records, although Obama did produce a doctor's letter certifying that he had been examined and is in good health.
Occidental College records - not released Columbia University records - not released Columbia thesis paper - "not available" Harvard University records - not released Selective Service Registration - not released medical records - not released law practice client list - not released certified copy of original birth certificate - not released
What is he hiding?
Good question, wonder why no one asked him personally in a TV interview...
Well that certainly convinces me he is a sleeper cell terrorist and that we'll all be forced to convert to Islam on January 21.
BTW Freddie, I trust you will stand up and salute your commander in chief on that date.
OOh, as editor of the Law Review, I'm sure his Harvard grades are dismal.
Yeah, after reading this 1990 article from the NY Times, it's obvious he wouldn't want his Harvard records released.
February 6, 1990 First Black Elected to Head Harvard's Law Review By FOX BUTTERFIELD, SPECIAL TO THE NEW YORK TIMES
LEAD: The Harvard Law Review, generally considered the most prestigious in the country, elected the first black president in its 104-year history today. The job is considered the highest student position at Harvard Law School.
The Harvard Law Review, generally considered the most prestigious in the country, elected the first black president in its 104-year history today. The job is considered the highest student position at Harvard Law School.
The new president of the Review is Barack Obama, a 28-year-old graduate of Columbia University who spent four years heading a community development program for poor blacks on Chicago's South Side before enrolling in law school. His late father, Barack Obama, was a finance minister in Kenya and his mother, Ann Dunham, is an American anthropologist now doing fieldwork in Indonesia. Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii.
''The fact that I've been elected shows a lot of progress,'' Mr. Obama said today in an interview. ''It's encouraging.
''But it's important that stories like mine aren't used to say that everything is O.K. for blacks. You have to remember that for every one of me, there are hundreds or thousands of black students with at least equal talent who don't get a chance,'' he said, alluding to poverty or growing up in a drug environment.
What a Law Review Does
Law reviews, which are edited by students, play a double role at law schools, providing a chance for students to improve their legal research and writing, and at the same time offering judges and scholars a forum for new legal arguments. The Harvard Law Review is generally considered the most widely cited of the student law reviews.
On his goals in his new post, Mr. Obama said: ''I personally am interested in pushing a strong minority perspective. I'm fairly opinionated about this. But as president of the law review, I have a limited role as only first among equals.''
Therefore, Mr. Obama said, he would concentrate on making the review a ''forum for debate,'' bringing in new writers and pushing for livelier, more accessible writing.
A President's Future
The president of the law review usually goes on to serve as a clerk for a judge on the Federal Court of Appeals for a year, and then as a clerk for an associate justice of the Supreme Court. Mr. Obama said he planned to spend two or three years in private law practice and then return to Chicago to re-enter community work, either in politics or in local organizing.
Professors and students at the law school reacted cautiously to Mr. Obama's selection. ''For better or for worse, people will view it as historically significant,'' said Prof. Randall Kennedy, who teaches contracts and race relations law. ''But I hope it won't overwhelm this individual student's achievement.''
Change in Selection System
Mr. Obama was elected after a meeting of the review's 80 editors that convened Sunday and lasted until early this morning, a participant said.
Until the 1970's the editors were picked on the basis of grades, and the president of the Law Review was the student with the highest academic rank. Among these were Elliot L. Richardson, the former Attorney General, and Irwin Griswold, a dean of the Harvard Law School and Solicitor General under Presidents Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard M. Nixon.
That system came under attack in the 1970's and was replaced by a program in which about half the editors are chosen for their grades and the other half are chosen by fellow students after a special writing competition. The new system, disputed when it began, was meant to help insure that minority students became editors of The Law Review.
Harvard, like a number of other top law schools, no longer ranks its law students for any purpose including a guide to recruiters.
Blacks at Harvard: New High
Black enrollment at Harvard Law School, after a dip in the mid-1980's, has reached a record high this year, said Joyce Curll, the director of admissions. Of the 1,620 students in the three-year school, 12.5 percent this year are blacks, she said, and 14 percent of the first-year class are black. Nationwide enrollment by blacks in undergraduate colleges has dropped in recent years.
Mr. Obama succeeds Peter Yu, a first-generation Chinese-American, as president of The Law Review. After graduation, Mr. Yu plans to serve as a clerk for Chief Judge Patricia Wald on the of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Mr. Yu said Mr. Obama's election ''was a choice on the merits, but others may read something into it.''
The first female editor of The Harvard Law Review was Susan Estrich, in 1977, who recently resigned as a professor at Harvard Law School to take a similar post at the University of Southern California. Ms. Estrich was campaign manager for Gov. Michael S. Dukakis of Massachusetts in his campaign for the Presidency in 1988.
CHESTER, PA - Dressed in blue jeans and a black jacket, Barack Obama braved the cold rain falling in Pennsylvania, and held his scheduled rally - outdoors. “A little bit of rain never hurt anybody,” he quipped to the 9,000 who showed up in ponchos and futilely holding umbrellas.
Just an hour away, the rival ticket cancelled their outdoor rally due to the same poor weather conditions that the Democrat embraced.
“I just want all of you to know if we see this kind of dedication on election day – there is no way that we’re not going to bring change to America,” he said as the soggy crowd cheered.
Obama delivered his “closing argument” speech in full - even though his teleprompter seemed to give out midway due to the rain. Glancing down at a hard copy of the speech on the podium, he accused John McCain of embracing George Bush’s policies. “John McCain has ridden shotgun as George Bush has driven our economy towards a cliff, and now he wants to take the wheel and step on the gas. And when it comes to the issue of taxes, saying that John McCain is running for a third Bush term isn’t being fair to George Bush,” he said, arguing that not even the unpopular president would support even more tax cuts for the wealthy that McCain is touting.
In what is likely to be his final campaign event in the Keystone State, Obama urged his supporters to be as resolute in the coming days as they were today, braving the elements.
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — Joe the Plumber endorsed Republican John McCain for president on Tuesday and agreed that a vote for Democratic candidate Barack Obama would be "a vote for the death of Israel."
Samuel J. Wurzelbacher gained national attention when Obama told him during a campaign stop that he wanted to "spread the wealth around." Their exchange about Obama's tax plan aired countless times on cable news programs, and McCain repeatedly cited Joe the Plumber in their third and final debate and again at campaign events.
McCain points to Wurzelbacher as an example of the middle-class worker who would be hurt economically by an Obama presidency, However, Wurzelbacher likely would fare better under Obama's tax plan because it calls for no tax increase for working couples earning more than $250,000 a year — Wurzelbacher earns far less — and provides for a middle-class tax cut.
In a McCain rally at a flag store, Wurzelbacher said he feared that Obama would turn the U.S. into a socialist nation.
When a McCain supporter asked him if he believed "a vote for Obama is a vote for the death of Israel," Wurzelbacher replied, "I'll go ahead and agree with you on that." He didn't elaborate on how Obama, who has said his commitment to Israeli security is "nonnegotiable," would be caustic for the Jewish state.
Fame brought media scrutiny to Wurzelbacher, who turned out to be an unlicensed plumber with unpaid back taxes.
I wonder who Bush will pardon before he leaves office?
I cannot think of too many big names. Ken Lay from Enron would have been pardoned had he not died. Scooter Libby was also already pardoned. There weren't too many others from this administration who were charged with anything.
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — Joe the Plumber endorsed Republican John McCain for president on Tuesday and agreed that a vote for Democratic candidate Barack Obama would be "a vote for the death of Israel."
Samuel J. Wurzelbacher gained national attention when Obama told him during a campaign stop that he wanted to "spread the wealth around." Their exchange about Obama's tax plan aired countless times on cable news programs, and McCain repeatedly cited Joe the Plumber in their third and final debate and again at campaign events.
McCain points to Wurzelbacher as an example of the middle-class worker who would be hurt economically by an Obama presidency, However, Wurzelbacher likely would fare better under Obama's tax plan because it calls for no tax increase for working couples earning more than $250,000 a year — Wurzelbacher earns far less — and provides for a middle-class tax cut.
In a McCain rally at a flag store, Wurzelbacher said he feared that Obama would turn the U.S. into a socialist nation.
When a McCain supporter asked him if he believed "a vote for Obama is a vote for the death of Israel," Wurzelbacher replied, "I'll go ahead and agree with you on that." He didn't elaborate on how Obama, who has said his commitment to Israeli security is "nonnegotiable," would be caustic for the Jewish state.
Fame brought media scrutiny to Wurzelbacher, who turned out to be an unlicensed plumber with unpaid back taxes.
For the life of me, I don't understand some of the comments people make about the results of someone being elected President. Don't those people read the Constitution. The President's Constitutional authority is actually quite liminted. To get the most accomplished, a President must work with and through the Congress which means he must engage in bargaining and compromise. Even the candidates do it themselves and that is frustrating to hear.
I wonder who Bush will pardon before he leaves office?
I cannot think of too many big names. Ken Lay from Enron would have been pardoned had he not died. Scooter Libby was also already pardoned. There weren't too many others from this administration who were charged with anything.
Actually, Scooter Libby was commuted, which means his conviction stands, but he served no jail time.
Every President pulls questionable pardons at the last hour, from Clinton with Marc Rich to Bush Sr. with the convicted Iran-Contra figures and so forth.
Dubya oddly, save for the Libby incident, hasn't gone as wild with pardons as his predecessors have.
What is it my concern if someone decides to burn a vacation/sick day for a campaign or to vote? That's their discretion. [/quote]
Well, call me daffy, but I am. Actually I'm taking the next day off. Yes, I am the only one I know that is but I put in for a vacation day several months ago. I was gonna take election day itself, but decided that the returns wouldn't be coming in til later and I'd be better off the next day either celebrating or crying.... One way or another it's a day off. So hell yea. I'm into this election. It's history and I wanna grab all I can of the moment.
McCain's final campaign slogan: "I'll fight for you ...unless it rains".
McCain and Palin were in Hershey this morning. Palin then went to State College, a conservative stronghold. Bill Clinton will be in Harrisburg tomorrow. My mother and father attended an event for Obama in the Scranton area a few weeks ago, and got to meet him afterward, courtesy of Bob Casey.
Both campaigns have hit PA hard, and McCain has been pulling closer in the polls. I think the gap though will provide Obama with a comfortable margin of victory.
Were you in the area of either Obama or McCain? Would you be interested in attending one? Boy, I wish I was in a battleground state. I'd love to go to an Obama event. And although for me, not near as exciting, I'd go to a McCain event as well.
If I wasn't working I would love to help out during the campaign too and on election day. I think it'd be fun working the polls. Heck, I'd even bring the donuts.
Speaking of the polls, I hear Florida Governonr (Crist) extended the early voting hours adding 4 more hours per day, due to huge turnout. I sure hope all states are prepared because I tend to agree the WILL be huge. There will be voting at my work in our school library. Usually it's very slow, I expect it to be a big headache that day as far as just traffic in and out of the school, even if the school employees are not involved in working the election. I'll get an idea though of turnout.
If I wasn't working I would love to help out during the campaign too and on election day. I think it'd be fun working the polls. Heck, I'd even bring the donuts.
My Mother-In-Law works in the election at the polls every election.
Speaking of the polls, I hear Florida Governonr (Crist) extended the early voting hours adding 4 more hours per day, due to huge turnout. I sure hope all states are prepared because I tend to agree the WILL be huge. There will be voting at my work in our school library. Usually it's very slow, I expect it to be a big headache that day as far as just traffic in and out of the school, even if the school employees are not involved in working the election. I'll get an idea though of turnout.
TIS
Crist also isn't campaigning for McCain. Probably because he figures McCain is a sinking ship, and also because McCain didn't pick him for running mate. Fuck him. Crist wants no strings attached for a possible 2012 run.
I think every state should be prepared for a whole lot of voters. Seeing the few early voting states now, there shouldn't be any reason to be unprepared.
Oh, and dont forget that tomorrow is Obama's half hour special. Now, someone correct me if I am wrong, but I believe it's CBS, NBC, MSNBC that will be airing it. It starts at 8:00 p.m. (5:00 my time I persume).
Oh, and dont forget that tomorrow is Obama's half hour special. Now, someone correct me if I am wrong, but I believe it's CBS, NBC, MSNBC that will be airing it. It starts at 8:00 p.m. (5:00 my time I persume).
I think every state should be prepared for a whole lot of voters. Seeing the few early voting states now, there shouldn't be any reason to be unprepared.
Nearly 10% of total American registered voters have already casted their ballots (and apparently, they're 59-41 in Obama's favor)
In Georgia, the early-vote encompasses 37% of the total Georgia votes in 2004!
Originally Posted By: The Italian Stallionette
Oh, and dont forget that tomorrow is Obama's half hour special. Now, someone correct me if I am wrong, but I believe it's CBS, NBC, MSNBC that will be airing it. It starts at 8:00 p.m. (5:00 my time I persume).
TIS
NBC MSNBC (Part of NBC Corporate Family) FOX CBS Univision BET* TV-One
*=Strange since the black Owner of BET was a Hillary supporter.
Oh, and I may have a "scoop" for you guys. I heard that there is a good chance the Obama will be on the Daily Show, I think tomorrow night. Anyone else hear this? I don't have a link. I hear a lot of this on the news or at work and can't remember who my source was.
The Democratic presidential candidate and senator from Illinois will appear Wednesday night on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, Comedy Central announced Tuesday.
It's Obama's fourth appearance on the influential late-night fake news program, which airs in Canada on CTV. Obama first appeared on The Daily Show in November, 2005, and again in August, 2007.
In his last appearance, on April 21, on the eve of the Pennsylvania primary and in the midst of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright controversy, Stewart jokingly asked the candidate, "The Rev. Wright controversy, the flag-pin controversy . . . Will you pull a bait-and-switch, sir, and enslave the white race? Is that your plan?"
"That is not our plan, Jon," Obama replied, without missing a beat. "But I think your paranoia might make you suitable as a debate moderator."
In that same show, Obama credited fellow Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton with doing him a favour with her tough campaigning, telling Stewart, "She has put me through the paces."
Stewart later mocked Obama's speaking style by having him read some ordinary phrases, to see if he could make them sound inspiring.
The Daily Show appearance comes the same night Obama bought an unprecedented half-hour of commercial time on three of the major U.S. broadcast networks.
Obama's Daily Show appearance comes 10 days after Alaska Gov. and Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin appeared on Saturday Night Live.
Obama Infomercial, a Closing Argument to the Everyman By JIM RUTENBERG
WASHINGTON — Senator Barack Obama will use his prime-time half-hour infomercial on Wednesday night to make what is effectively a closing argument to a national audience of millions. At times he will speak directly into the camera about his 20-month campaign, at others he will highlight everyday voters, their everyday troubles, and his plans to address them.
Mr. Obama’s campaign agreed to provide The New York Times with a minute-long trailer for the 30-minute program, which is to run on four broadcast networks at 8 p.m. It will be the first time in 16 years that a presidential candidate has bought network time, in prime time, for a prolonged campaign commercial.
The trailer is heavy in strings, flags, presidential imagery and some Americana filmed by Davis Guggenheim, whose father was the campaign documentarian of Robert F. Kennedy. As the screen flashes scenes of suburban lawns, a freight train and Mr. Obama seated at a kitchen table with a group of white, apparently working-class voters, Mr. Obama says: “We’ve seen over the last eight years how decisions by a president can have a profound effect on the course of history and on American lives; much that’s wrong with our country goes back even farther than that.”
Then, while standing before a stately desk and an American flag, Mr. Obama, in a suit, says: “We’ve been talking about the same problems for decades and nothing is ever done to solve them. For the past 20 months, I’ve traveled the length of this country, and Michelle and I have met so many Americans who are looking for real and lasting change that makes a difference in their lives.”
Jim Margolis, Mr. Obama’s senior advertising strategist, said the program would then go on to feature “the stories of four different Americans, or American families, and kind of what they’re confronting.”
He said the stories would highlight “the challenges people are facing and what we should do in terms of solutions.” He said Mr. Obama would also share the story of his mother, “who struggled through her bout with breast cancer and the difficulty she had with her insurance company, to help viewers understand why his health care reform program is what it is.”
It will also have a live component, featuring Mr. Obama at a rally in Florida. The infomercial has been under production for weeks in the Virginia office of Mark Putnam, whose firm, Murphy-Putnam, is part of the Obama advertising team.
The program is to be shown on NBC, CBS, Fox, Univision, MSNBC and two cable networks that cater to African-Americans, BET and TV One. Ross Perot, the last presidential candidate to run similar programming, broadcast eight long infomercials to an average of 13 million viewers, with one of them getting 16.5 million viewers.
Costing the campaign more than $3 million, the infomercial is the ultimate reflection of Mr. Obama’s spending flexibility. Mr. McCain, with far less money in the bank, has been unable to produce a similar commercial.
The McCain campaign has seized on the advertisement as excessive, with Mr. McCain pointing to reports that Mr. Obama’s infomercial would bump back the World Series on Fox by 15 minutes. “No one will delay the World Series with an infomercial when I’m president,” he said, in Hershey, Pa.
(Fox executives have said that they, and not the Obama campaign, had initially asked Major League Baseball to move the start of Wednesday’s game to 8:35 p.m. from 8:20, to make way for his infomercial. But as it turns out, such a delay was not necessary anyway; none of the World Series games has started before 8:30, and two started after 8:35.)
For its part, Mr. Obama’s campaign said it was not worried about turning off viewers.
“Many people have 150 channels; they’ve got plenty of other choices,” Mr. Margolis said. “Or they can drop into a video game.” Then again, Mr. Obama is advertising in video games, too.
I gotta tell you. This is election is fun, historic and has captivated me from the beginning. Yet, I can't wait for Tuesday to get here. What will be talk about once it's over??? I mean it seems of late especially, I'm just plain addicted. Good thing you guys discuss politics. My kids will listen but aren't into it and I have certain people at work that I talk politics to, but for the most part I'm on my own.
Also, do you think we won't have a winner til the wee hours on election day, or do you think it'll be called say before 11:00 P.M. (8:00 my time) after polls ar closed. I think it'll be called before say 11:00 p.m. Then again, who knows what snags might occur.
I think they are going to try not to call states too early because they don't want people not to bother to vote if they think there already is a winner.
From what the talking heads are saying, if they call Virgina early for Obama, then it will be an early night. If they don't, it could be a long night. After 2000, don't expect them to call any states that are close, too early.
Hopefully not politics. I say after the election we make this board a politic-free zone for a designated amount of time. Like six months or whatever...
I saw a segment yesterday showing the voting in Nevada. They can vote everywhere and anywhere....the mall, the health club, the grocery store. Everyone interviewed said they never had to wait in line. How convenient is that? Maybe Nevada is oe up on everyone else with technology and all their gaming machines and such hu? You can gamble in all those places too..go vote and then play the slots.
Were you in the area of either Obama or McCain? Would you be interested in attending one?
I was going to see Obama during the primary in Harrisburg, but his train was running late and the crowds were enormous. I was thinking about seeing Bill Clinton today, but you have to be inside and seated by 11:15 for a 12:30 appearance. I've heard him deliver full campaign speeches on the radio that were absolutely electric.
There have been at least a dozen campaign appearances among the pres and vp candidates within easy distance since the primaries, but I haven't made onne this year.
By the way, my neighborhood is decidedly in favor of McCain, but a few of us put up our Obama/Biden lawn signs. Somebody took them all last night. I have another though.
Klyd, what was it like to meet Senator Obama in person??
They met him with several other people. My dad was impressed that he knew some of the history of the coal regions of Pennsylvania. My mother was most impressed that he remembered everyone's name when he was leaving. They thought he had a sense of humor too. They said their conversation was probably less than 5 minutes. They were sorry they didn't have a camera.
I saw a segment yesterday showing the voting in Nevada. They can vote everywhere and anywhere....the mall, the health club, the grocery store. Everyone interviewed said they never had to wait in line. How convenient is that? Maybe Nevada is oe up on everyone else with technology and all their gaming machines and such hu? You can gamble in all those places too..go vote and then play the slots.
TIS
What time is the next flight? I'll meet you at the MGM!
Hopefully not politics. I say after the election we make this board a politic-free zone for a designated amount of time. Like six months or whatever...
This is exhausting.
Amen, Blibble! I wish there was a limit of 6-9 months that candidates could campaign for the presidency. There is so much wasted time and money in this process that could be used for actually trying to solve the issues.
Goombah, it is absolutely infuriating to think of how desperately people are trying to hold onto their homes, and yet millions and millions have been spent on this race.
In The States, Is it commonly known as rude to ask somebody who they are voting for?
Down here people get furious and go on rants about how it's a private matter etc.
As an outsider in US, I get the impression that people are very open about their political affiliation here. Everyday at my work some of my colleagues discuss politics. I work for a large corporation and I would have guessed that there would be some ethics/harassment policy that would prevent employees from talking politics at workplace. But apparently not. Also we have a TV at the break room, where people can set the channel. Most of the times it shows either CNN or Fox. It is not uncommon to hear people commenting on Obama or Palin or someone else very openly. Lot of people have bumper stickers proclaiming their support for a given candidate. As I mentioned in some other thread, my (republican) neighbor has a full blown Halloween decoration on her door with Obama(trick) or McCain(treat)! I guess that kind of open support comes from general tolerance for expressing one's affiliation without fear. That is a nice thing here. I don't know if it is true throughout the country, but if it works in Texas, I guess it should work everywhere
Goombah, it is absolutely infuriating to think of how desperately people are trying to hold onto their homes, and yet millions and millions have been spent on this race.
Sure, fill in the blanks of how much better use the wasted funds could be used toward: education, poverty, police protection, rebuilding New Orleans, research for cancer, AIDS, and other diseases.
In The States, Is it commonly known as rude to ask somebody who they are voting for?
Down here people get furious and go on rants about how it's a private matter etc.
svsg was pretty accurate. The election is commonly discussed. But at the same time it is considered rude and in bad taste to ask someone bluntly whom they are voting for. This is information one shouldn't solicit, especially in the work place. It is actually illegal for an employer to ask a prospective employee his or her party affiliation or voting record.
I've heard many political discussions over the past year, some thought provoking, some silly. Two parents at a youth sporting event engaged in a spirited discourse over the candidates a few weeks ago. It was entertaining for its comedic value.
The Democrat was trying to convince the Republican that McCain's military service and survival in a brutal POW camp for years had nothing to do with character.
The Republican was arguing that Obama was racist because he mentions in his autobiography that police and security guards had treated him suspiciously because of his race.
From what the talking heads are saying, if they call Virgina early for Obama, then it will be an early night. If they don't, it could be a long night. After 2000, don't expect them to call any states that are close, too early.
It's pretty clear what to look for.
East coast polls close at 7PM EST. Exit poll results should be available within two hours or so or by about 9PM EST. Depending on how comfortable the networks are with the quality of the exit polls, Electoral College projections should be available by then. If Obama takes Virginia, and/or Florida, and/or (maybe) N.Carolina, then you can go to bed figuring that Obama will reach the 270. If he doesn's accomplish the foregoing, then you may want to stay up at least until the CST exit polling data becomes available and is broadcast.
Interesting. Her views seem incoherent. She doesn't really lay out a reason to vote for McCain other than some supposed media sexism against Clinton or Palin. Obama's health plan is friendlier to private interests than Clinton's or Edwards would have been, as Paul Krugman pointed out over and over, and she's going to vote for McCain, who intends to tax health benefits? Obama's tax policies are not that different from Edward's or Clinton's.
There was a Supreme Court decision, Ledbetter vs. Goodyear, in which the Court held that employees only have 180 days to sue after the initial act of discrimination, even if the act continues to the current day and even if the worker just found out about it. The plaintiff in the case was a woman.
McCain's response? He opposed legislation to overturn the 180 day limit and said women just need more education and job training.
Needless to say Lily Ledbetter didn't really appreciate that comment.
It sounds as if Ms. Button has more personal reasons to vote against Obama but somehow doesn't fully explain them in her essay. To argue that we're going back to the era of huge government when Obama is only proposing restoring tax rates as existed under President Clinton is really reaching IMO.
As far as "Joe the Plumber" he sort of opened the door for questions into his finances when it turned out that he didn't own a business, was late on paying his taxes and earned nowhere near $250,000.
FC, I would have liked to read that, but the link doesn't work for me. Could you please post the article? Thanks.
I'll sum it up for you:
"The Democratic party left me because they didn't choose a woman to run for Prez or VP. I used to write speeches for democrats and once handed Obama a Grey Poupon packet. Obama will raise taxes and he's not a woman so I can't vote for him or his outdated party."
That prime-time special tonight was a well-produced infomercial of propaganda, but I have ONE problem with it.
Obama should have placed some Republican/Conservative supporters of his on the special, to highlight in visuals that he is the one to unite the nation for a new epoch or whatever.
Why not Chafee (only GOP senator to vote against the Iraq War) or former Massachusetts Governor William Weld or Goldwater's granddaughter or Chris Buckley or something?
Anyway, good special. Don't know what ultimately it'll accomplish for the Obama campaign, but at the least it STEALS another daily cycle that McCain needs as he is running out of them.
EDIT - Speaking of which, anyone see McCain's response campaign ad?
Am I the only one who thinks "Not Ready...Yet" as a slogan self-defeats the purpose?
Lilo, Whether it's here discussing the campaign, or talking about the Godfather films or the novel, you are quite knowledgeable. Your posts are always quite intelligent and well thought-out. I've been meaning to compliment you, and I apologize for not doing so before this.
That said, who watched Obama's prime time special?? I thought it was quite good. His use of people he's met on the campaign trail who are struggling with the every day stuff - kids, homes, healthcare, retirement - without demeaning them by giving them cute little nicknames, was an excellent concept.
Lilo, Whether it's here discussing the campaign, or talking about the Godfather films or the novel, you are quite knowledgeable. Your posts are always quite intelligent and well thought-out. I've been meaning to compliment you, and I apologize for not doing so before this.
That said, who watched Obama's prime time special?? I thought it was quite good. His use of people he's met on the campaign trail who are struggling with the every day stuff - kids, homes, healthcare, retirement - without demeaning them by giving them cute little nicknames, was an excellent concept.
What I noted was the terminology that Obama using. If he's elected, he'll probably be our most liberal President in over 40 years, and yet he repeatedly said "no payouts" and that people should be responsible economically and in raising their children.
Folks, those three points are usually associated with social conservatism. Notice the connection when the next possible First Lady talked about reading with the children those HARRY POTTER books, and then later they showed that Ford plant family, with the father reading to his kid.
I'll add to my analysis of the infomercial that it may have been also an attempt to reassure folks that Obama may be a liberal, but not a Ted Kennedy/Walter Mondale liberal of old.
THEN McCain campaign airs its response ad after the special on MSNBC, and notice the difference between the two approaches.
Obama's special was intended to be warm, colorful, optimistic, fuzzy-gooey, feel good, while McCain's ad-response was greay, bleak, depressing, arguing how things are awful now and things will get worse if Obama is elected.
Whoever decided on that specific ad in response to the special should BE FIRED.
I mean what the hell? Look at 1980 when Carter/Reagan had their own infomercials. Carter's was focused on how times are rough and so on, while REagan's was more upbeat and well, feel good with the babies, flag-waving, flying Bald Eagle, etc.
When the two choices are between feeling good and feeling bad, its like picking between a summer blockbuster where the heroes win, and a downbeat arthouse Oscar-bait where the villains win.
I really wasn't sure what this was going to be to tell you the truth. It was an infomercial for sure, but yet very well done.
I think many people sort of missed the first go-around regarding Obama's life, during the primary. They were supporting whomever their candidate was and Obama just was too new and to "ify". I thnk most thought he'd never make it this far.
It was good that he showed everyday people, and I still enjoy hearing about his life and upbringing, not to mention his family life, going back and forth showed how "alike" he as to these other people. Chris Mathews,who has really bugged the shit out of me lately, had it right tonight when he said (paraphrasing) referring to prejudices and rumors about him; "Whether you vote for him or not,Look at him; he did everything right. Went to college, has a good family, is a decent guy, etc." Anyway, it had a "feel-good" down home feeling for me.
As far as adding Republicans to the film, yea Coln Powell would have been a great asset.
Anyway, I did see McCain's ad right after..and again as Mathews pointed out, did you notice at the end of the ad McCain says "he's not ready to be President......YET!"
If you don't have the energy to read the whole thing...just scroll down to quote in the final paragraph. That pretty much says it all.
****************************** Expect the Worst From an Obama Administration October 29, 2008 By: John LeBoutillier
If Barack Obama wins this election, what will the next 4 years be like in this country?
Obama and the Dem supermajority in Congress, led by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, will certainly move to the extreme left. There will be no one to check their most liberal instincts, and that will be reflected in the types of new programs we will see.
They will try to move the nation to Western European-style socialism...This means heavier federal involvement in healthcare; perhaps the federal gov't will eventually take this over and nationalize it.
All aspects of our lives will be affected by federal programs — from schools to energy subsidies to doctors’ salaries to regulation of hospital costs to corporate governance to federal mandates on states and municipalities to a federal takeover of many pension funds.
Yes, these unrestrained liberals, drunk with power, will impose the incorrectly named Fairness Doctrine to nail Limbaugh and Hannity and Savage and their local acolytes. The left sees talk radio as the one bastion of the media they can’t penetrate, so they’ll simply neutralize it with this doctrine.
They will cut defense spending — perhaps by up to 25% — as a quick way to move money into social programs.
They will create massive new gov't spending programs, supposedly to rebuild our “crumbling infrastructure,” but as a payoff to their labor pals...For the first year or two, the so-called mainstream media will remain totally in Obama's pocket, shilling for this leftist agenda. Some writer will coin a phrase, i.e. the "Square Deal," the "Real Deal," or the "Great Society," which will describe what Obama is trying to do.
The idea of sending U.S. troops to hot spots such as Darfur and Kenya will come up soon after the inauguration.
Michelle Obama will quickly become the most unpopular first lady ever. Some people will almost miss the days of Hillary. Stories will abound about how she is hurting her husband’s political standing. His staff will try to muzzle her, and stories will then surface that there is a war between the Obamas inside the White House.
Pakistan will deteriorate and almost fracture, and Obama will be more aggressive toward al-Qaida and the Taliban than Bush.
Obama will tilt pro-Palestinian, and his relations with Israel will deteriorate. No American president will have had such bad relations with our staunchest ally.
By the Fall of 2009, Obama’s approval rating will be down to 42 percent; his disapproval rating will be 45; the nation will — again — be divided.
Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson will not be frequent visitors to the Obama White House; the savvy Obama staff will try not to allow the Obama administration to be tainted by the two...
Iran will smell weakness in Obama and make a move of some sort, perhaps in Lebanon. Or, possibly, Tehran and Obama will make peace first and have a summit, and then Iran will take advantage of a weak Obama.
Leftists of all stripes will emerge as new "stars" in the Obama era...All sorts of crazy ideas will surface, from nationalizing certain companies and industries to God knows what.
Capitalism will be seen as an evil; the anti-capitalistic nonsense taught in our colleges and universities will rear its ugly head in statements, confirmation hearings, and interviews with new administration figures.
Congress will try to free hundreds of thousands of prison inmates who are serving time for drug and non-violent offenses; and then they’ll try to register them to vote for the Democrats in the 2010 mid-term elections.
Most of G.W. Bush’s executive orders regarding family planning, stem-cell research, and foreign aid, coupled with family planning, will be reversed.
Obama and the Democrats will grant amnesty to the 12 to 30 million illegals already here, and the border fence will never be completed. Millions of new illegals will continue to stream into our nation, and the Dems will try to register these new voters as Democrats, of course, and that will alter all our politics for years to come.
The Obama-Democratic congressional axis will nominate and confirm the most left-leaning federal judges in our history ... Watch out — some real whackos are coming onto the bench.
The Obama years will be the culmination of the last 40 years of horrendously biased education coupled with a climate of liberal guilt and political correctness.
Here's a quote from the Oct. 14 British Spectator that sums it up perfectly:
"You have to pinch yourself — a Marxist radical who all his life has been mentored by, sat at the feet of, worshiped with, befriended, endorsed the philosophy of, funded and been in turn funded, politically promoted and supported by a nexus comprising black power anti-white racists, Jew-haters, revolutionary Marxists, unrepentant former terrorists and Chicago mobsters, is on the verge of becoming President of the United States. And apparently it's considered impolite to say so."
Most of G.W. Bush’s executive orders regarding family planning, stem-cell research, and foreign aid, coupled with family planning, will be reversed.
Thanks for sharing that, Apple. That's GREAT news!!
What I liked most about Obama's special is that not one millisecond of it was "dumbed down". There were no Joe Six Packs or any other of the iconic "common folks" that the Republicans have embraced and run with in the past few months. There were hard-working Americans who were sick and tired of working so hard and having so little. I felt like I could identify with all of them.
If you don't have the energy to read the whole thing...just scroll down to quote in the final paragraph. That pretty much says it all.
******************************
Here's a quote from the Oct. 14 British Spectator that sums it up perfectly:
"You have to pinch yourself — a Marxist radical who all his life has been mentored by, sat at the feet of, worshiped with, befriended, endorsed the philosophy of, funded and been in turn funded, politically promoted and supported by a nexus comprising black power anti-white racists, Jew-haters, revolutionary Marxists, unrepentant former terrorists and Chicago mobsters, is on the verge of becoming President of the United States. And apparently it's considered impolite to say so."
Wow. You're now using gibberish from outside the U.S. to make a point?
A speechwriter for Obama, Edwards, and Clinton on why she’s voting McCain.
Good thing Obama recently racked up: Colin Powell, Ken Adelman, William Weld, Arne Carlson, Scott McClellan, C.C. Goldwater, Charles Fried, Julie Nixon Eisenhower, Susan Eisenhower, and Christopher Buckley, etc. Otherwise, losing 'Wendy Button' could have been fatal.
Wasn't Wendy one of the PUMA chicks???? Their woman (Hillary) lost and they can't handle it, so they went for McCain out of spite. What's funny is they thought they'd bring Obama down (especially since he didn't pick Hillary for his running mate). Win or lose, I think Obama has proven he does just fine without Hillary (disappointing the PUMAs of course)
Rev. Jeremiah A Wright - Senator Obama's pastor who baptised the Obama children. A radical man who repeatedly denounced the Untied States Of America from the pulpit while Senator Obama was a member of his congregation.
Tony Rezko - One of the people on Obama's U.S. Senate campaign finance committee who was found guilty of six counts of wire fraud, six counts of mail fraud, two counts of corrupt solicitation, and two counts of money laundering.
Rashid Khalidi - Invited Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak at Columbia University. His wife was president of a Chicago-based nonprofit organization where Barack Obama was a board member of for 3 years along with William C. Ayers, who was a member of a terrorist group which wanted to overthrow of the U.S. government and took responsibility for bombing the U.S. Capitol in 1971.
Allison S. Davis - A former boss of Senator Obama's who once approached the Woods fund looking for monies to develop and build housing for low-income familes in Chicago. Turns out that at the time Davis approached the Woods fund, he was partners in developing another apartment building with Obama friend and fundraiser....... convicted felon Tony Rezko!
It's all documented fact. And it scares me because the more I research and the more I learn about Senator Obama's background, the more I am having my doubts about him.
If you don't have the energy to read the whole thing...just scroll down to quote in the final paragraph. That pretty much says it all.
John LeBoutillier from NEWSMAX? I always suspected that you were a subscriber to their talking points.
In response, I could post something from HUFFINGTON POST or DAILY KOS, but I never learn anything substantial that makes me wiser in politics from those ideological fringe blogs.
There were many many women's libbers (50 plus women) who were devasted that Hillary lost the pimary. Now, I'm from the woman's lib era myself and am all for woman' rights.Yet these ladies wanted Hillary and Hillary only. I think, just because she was a woman. To me though, I figure we have come a long way and are far past he bra burning days. Now's not the time to be "libbers."
They absolutely hated that Obama won, all the bloggers and otherwise were talking about creating havoc at the Dem primary. Some went to McCain rallies and still insist they'll vote for McCain out of spite.(I'm sure some will too). Their idea was simply to make Obama lose. As far as PUMA.....remember when everyone was calling for party unity within the Dem Party. The Dems of course didn't want discourse. These ladies were so pissed off that they called themselves PUMAS (Party Unity My Ass).
They were genuinely disappointed without a doubt, but they also were bitter sore losers. Now that I think about it, thy sort of faded in the woodwork.
Rashid Khalidi - Invited Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak at Columbia University. His wife was president of a Chicago-based nonprofit organization where Barack Obama was a board member of for 3 years along with William C. Ayers, who was a member of a terrorist group which wanted to overthrow of the U.S. government and took responsibility for bombing the U.S. Capitol in 1971.
October 29, 2008
Fact check: Is Columbia professor Khalidi a 'political ally' of Barack Obama?
The Statement: Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, speaking on Oct. 29 in Bowling Green, Ohio, said Barack Obama "spent a lot of time with" Rashid Khalidi. "Rashid Khalidi, he, in addition to being a political ally of Barack Obama, he's a former spokesperson for the Palestinian Liberation Organization," she said.
Get the facts!
The Facts: Rashid Khalidi is a scholar at Columbia University in New York, where he is director of the Middle East Institute.
His university profile says he specializes in the "history of Syria, Palestine, Lebanon and Egypt; the growth of nation-state; nationalism in the Arab World; problems of modern Middle East historiography and and an expert on Palestinian issues."
He has authored scholarly works on Palestinian issues, has been an activist for Palestinian causes, and has been a critic of U.S. foreign policy toward Israel.
In a 2004 Washington Times story, he denied ever being a spokesman for the Palestine Liberation Organization.
Sen. Obama, on his Web site, described Khalidi as "a former neighbor and university colleague." But their relationship has sparked questions about Obama's stance on Israel and what Obama calls "ugly insinuations." Obama has said he has been a "clear and consistent" supporter of Israel and doesn't share Khalidi's views.
ABC News on May 22 aired comments Obama made at a Boca Raton, Florida, synagogue, where Obama faced questions from Jewish voters and addressed the issue. He said he knew Khalidi and had conversations with him in Chicago, where both men taught at the University of Chicago. And, he said, their children went to the same school.
"He is not one of my advisers; he's not one of my foreign policy people," Obama said. "He is a respected scholar, although he vehemently disagrees with a lot of Israel's policy."
"To pluck out one person who I know and who I've had a conversation with who has very different views than 900 of my friends and then to suggest that somehow that shows that maybe I'm not sufficiently pro-Israel, I think, is a very problematic stand to take," Obama said. "So we gotta be careful about guilt by association."
An April 10 Los Angeles Times story that explored the Khalidi-Obama relationship said Khalidi and his wife lived near the Obamas in Chicago and "the families became friends and dinner companions."
"In 2000, the Khalidis held a fund-raiser for Obama's unsuccessful congressional bid. The next year, a social service group whose board was headed by Mona Khalidi (Khalidi's wife), received a $40,000 grant from a local charity, the Woods Fund of Chicago, when Obama served on the fund's board of directors. At Khalidi's going-away party in 2003, the scholar lavished praise on Obama, telling the mostly Palestinian-American crowd that the state senator deserved their help in winning a U.S. Senate seat," the Times reported.
When asked about these details, the Obama campaign pointed to the May 22 comments aired by ABC News. Khalidi, asked by CNN to respond to Palin's assertions, declined to comment.
In a New York Daily News story published March 6, 2007, Khalidi said he hosted the fund-raiser because he had been friends with Obama in Chicago. "He never came to us and said he would do anything in terms of Palestinians," Khalidi is quoted as saying.
The Los Angeles Times report said, "though Khalidi has seen little of Sen. Obama in recent years, Michelle Obama attended a party several months ago celebrating the marriage of the Khalidis' daughter."
The Verdict: Misleading. While Khalidi eight years ago hosted a political fund-raiser for Obama, the two men strongly disagree over the Israeli-Palestinian issue and there's no evidence of a continuing political relationship.
I just read today that Rashid Khalidi recently funded the McCain camp (don't know if it's true nor do I know the details). It was on Huffington Post, so FWIW. I'm sure it could be spun by the left if need be.
But anyway, just like the Tony Reztko story. A spin that stuck with some people. I remember "Jeralyn" from "Talk Left" who was an avid Hillary supporter (and lawyer). She was at the Retzko trial everyday doing "liveblogging". She was itching for Obama's name to come up.Itching to implicate him. Well, it never did happen because there was nothing there. The way I understand it, when they purcashed their Chicago home they bought an adjoinin lot from either Retzko or his wife....anyway, nothing illegal.
Conservatives say Bush and McCain destroyed Republican Party
They are starting to eat their own.
Polls show that Democrat Barack Obama is leading in battleground states, including some -- such as Ohio -- carried by George W. Bush not once but twice.
But even before the election is over -- and despite the fact that some polls show a tightening race -- Republicans are piling on their own presidential candidate, John McCain, accusing him of deserting principle.
Some moderate Republicans think McCain has sold his soul to the right, abandoning the bipartisan record he built on immigration and other issues. "He has lost his brand as a maverick," said Rep. Chris Shays, the last Republican congressman in New England, in a tight race in Connecticut again this year.
But conservatives are also angry at McCain and Bush, for mucking up governance so much that a Barack Obama is even possible. Dave Gibson, a 41-year-old independent from Norfolk, Va., summed it up in one word: debt.
In a post on American Chronicle, he wrote:
Under Bush's leadership, the national debt went from $5 trillion in 2001 to $10.5 trillion today. The doubling of our debt has had a devastating effect on our economy and our currency is quickly becoming worthless. Always happy to spend more money, rather than raising taxes Bush simply goes to China or Japan and borrows more. That kind of irresponsible behavior has brought this nation to the brink of a depression and destroys any notion of fiscal conservatism, once a trademark of the Republican Party.
Ouch. As for McCain, Gibson notes his and the president's support for a comprehensive immigration bill that would grandfather in an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants. In an e-mail, he said he plans to vote for Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party. "Many of us have grown weary of the politics of appeasement practiced by both Bush and McCain," he said. "As a result, we've stopped caring about this election long ago, when it became [clear] that there would actually be two liberals running for president in 2008."
Gibson is an iconoclast, a blogger. But more famous Republicans have also weighed in.
David Frum, a former Bush speechwriter, wrote in the Washington Post recently that McCain's selection of Sarah Palin energized the base but turned off women and independents. In an article called "Sorry, Senator. Let's Salvage What We Can," he wrote that in picking Palin, McCain lost "the great national middle, which was the only place where the 2008 election could have been won."
Just my opinion of course, and I can't say I am even a fan of the guy's BUT, if a Republican were going to win this election, and with the economy the way it is; AND getting to know (and be disappointed in) McCain, I think Mitt Romney would have been a better candidate to run against Obama than McCain.
They are showing Obama and Clinton in FLA right now.
Oh, and JL, thanks for posting that Khalidi link. I had it a little backwards, but knew I read about a connection.
Just my opinion of course, and I can't say I am even a fan of the guy's BUT, if a Republican were going to win this election, and with the economy the way it is; AND getting to know (and be disappointed in) McCain, I think Mitt Romney would have been a better candidate to run against Obama than McCain.
I dunno, TIS, BUT if Romney was on the ticket instead of Palin, this thing would be a LOT closer. So thank God for small favors.
Just my opinion of course, and I can't say I am even a fan of the guy's BUT, if a Republican were going to win this election, and with the economy the way it is; AND getting to know (and be disappointed in) McCain, I think Mitt Romney would have been a better candidate to run against Obama than McCain.
I dunno, TIS, BUT if Romney was on the ticket instead of Palin, this thing would be a LOT closer. So thank God for small favors.
So true. So, let's see how it turns out, and like you say, thank God for small favors hu?
I gotta say Clinton is really "sounding" sincere building Obama up. With the election so close, I think the speech and this Clinton rally will cover at least tomorrow's news cycle. Gee, I'm even learning the political media lingo. What a geek I am!!!!
This was a very highly produced, technically incredibly competent half hour of television.
It was all designed to get voters comfortable with the idea of Barack Obama in the Oval Office, that he is embedded in the lives of average Americans, and knows exactly what they're going through.
Obama even appeared in a facsimile of the White House Oval Office during the infomercial. Every single line during that 30 minutes was something that the campaign knows works and appeals to those undecided voters.
There was one point during those 30 minutes where he talked about education. Over images of Obama in a classroom with children, they rolled a tape of Obama's Sept. 9, 2008 speech in Dayton, Ohio:
"Responsibility for our children's' success doesn't start in Washington," Obama said. "It starts in our homes. No education policy can replace a parent who's involved in their child's education from day one, who makes sure their children are in school on time, helps them with their homework, and attends those parent-teacher conferences. No government program can turn off the TV set, or put away the video games, or read to your children."
The campaign knows for a fact that when Obama said those lines during the debate, it had the highest response of the entire debate from voters hooked up to dial groups.
So they repeated it again tonight and that idea was reprised again and again over these 30 minutes.
Every idea that Obama talked about is something the campaign knows appeals to those undecided voters, especially those economically distressed voters in the nation right now.
What you saw here was a highly competent, professional, virtuoso performance. The fact that they could go 28 minutes in and hit live to a campaign rally in Florida and right down to the final Obama Biden logo even showed a rising sun. One of the things the campaign knows is that the most optimistic presidential candidate always wins.
Ross Perot had some money to do a similar type of infomercial back in 1992 but he had a very, very primitive production.
I spoke with a former presidential campaign strategist who said that anyone who has worked in a presidential campaign has to be jealous of the toys that the Obama campaign cash can buy.
Obama's Republican rival John McCain has argued the ad, which is estimated to have cost more than $3 million, was bought with Obama's broken campaign promise to take public financing which would have limited the amount of money he could raise.
Tonight McCain-Palin spokesman Tucker Bounds released this statement: "As anyone who has bought anything from an infomercial knows, the sales-job is always better than the product. Buyer beware."
That's an implicit admission that they know that the message worked, they just hope that the messenger won't be trusted.
Poll: Too much money spent on presidential campaign
By Susan Page, USA TODAY As the most expensive presidential election in history nears its close, Americans by 3-1 think too much money is being spent on the campaign. Most back limits on how much candidates are allowed to spend.
A USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds wide support for public financing of presidential campaigns, including a third who say the current voluntary system should be mandatory.
Even so, Barack Obama hasn't paid much of a political price for opting out of the public financing system this year, the first major-party nominee to do so since it was established after the Watergate scandal. Nearly two-thirds say they aren't sure whether Obama or John McCain are taking part in the system. McCain is.
Presidential candidates are increasingly likely to bypass public funding, says Anthony Corrado, a professor at Colby College in Waterville, Maine, who studies campaign finance. "Candidates are no longer going to look at the public funding option unless their backs are against the wall," he says.
Democrat Obama, who initially said he would join public financing if his opponent did, displayed his financial muscle Wednesday with a 30-minute infomercial airing on NBC, CBS, Fox, Univision and elsewhere. FIND MORE STORIES IN: Barack Obama | CBS Corp. | John McCain | Fox | Maine | Watergate | Center for Responsive Politics | Univision | Colby College | Waterville | Anthony Corrado
Republican McCain is generally limited to the $84 million his campaign accepted in public funds for the general election. Obama raised more than $150 million in September alone.
Forty percent of Americans say the nation should maintain the voluntary system, and 32% say candidates should be required to participate. Nineteen percent say the public financing system should be eliminated.
Fewer than 10% of taxpayers now mark the $3 tax check-off box on their tax returns to underwrite the system.
Among other findings:
• Americans by 70%-24% say too much — a record $2.4 billion, according to the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics — has been spent on presidential campaigns this year.
• Republicans are more than twice as likely as Democrats to support mandatory public financing. That could reflect GOP unhappiness with Obama's money edge this year.
• And all those campaign ads? Two-thirds say they "serve a useful purpose," while one in three say it would be better if there were no TV ads. The survey of 1,008 adults Tuesday has a margin of error of +/—3 percentage points.
By David Jackson, USA TODAY WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — John McCain criss-crossed Florida on Wednesday, trying to keep the state in the Republican column as some supporters worried about whether he can catch the better-funded Barack Obama.
"I wish I didn't feel like it was over," said Dawn Poole, a McCain backer who saw him speak at a lumberyard in Miami. "It looks that way, but it's not going to stop me from voting.
"Maybe we'll be surprised," she said.
'FLORIDIANS OF FAITH': Brownback on tour for McCain JOE POPULAR: 'Joe the Plumber' takes to stage, page
Greta Rodriguez, a retired administrative assistant from Miami, is "hoping and praying" for McCain to prevail. While Obama is "a little bit ahead in the poll," a "silent majority" could emerge and pull out Florida for McCain, she said. McCain needs to open the "Pandora's Box" of Obama's background to win, said John Piscola, a former New York school principal who lives in Miami Beach. FIND MORE STORIES IN: United States | George W. Bush | North Carolina | Barack Obama | al-Qaeda | Pennsylvania | Connecticut | New York | Osama bin Laden | Tampa | Cuban | Fidel Castro | Homeland Security | Miami Beach | Raul Castro | Larry King Live | Sen. Joe Lieberman | Democratic Congress | Tom Ridge | Sen. Mel Martinez | Plumber | Riviera Beach
A series of Florida polls released between Monday and Wednesday showed Obama with anywhere from a 2- to a 7-percentage-point lead.
"We've got to win the state of Florida, my friends, and we're going to win here," McCain said in Miami.
Republican Gov. Charlie Crist and Sen. Mel Martinez, who traveled with McCain on Wednesday, echoed his optimism about Florida.
McCain continued to hammer Obama on Wednesday on the economy and national security, saying the Democrat lacked the experience to handle either.
The question is whether Obama "has what it takes to protect America from Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda, and other grave threats in the world," McCain said in Tampa. "And he has given you no reason to answer in the affirmative."
Retired major general J. Scott Gration, an Obama campaign spokesman, criticized McCain for supporting a Bush foreign policy that has not captured bin Laden.
While Obama prepared a 30-minute commercial, which ran during prime time Wednesday, McCain taped an interview with CNN's Larry King Live in Tampa.
At events in Miami and Riviera Beach, McCain warned that Obama and a Democratic Congress would raise taxes, slowing down the economy even more. After a brief meeting with local business owners in Riviera Beach, McCain criticized Obama's half-hour "infomercial."
"As with other infomercials, he's got a few things he wants to sell you," McCain said, blasting his plans for "government-run" health care and redistribution of income. He said Obama broke his pledge to take public financing and voters should remember that the ad "was paid for with broken promises."
Obama, during a speech in North Carolina, said McCain is distorting the details of his economic plan. "If you make under $250,000, you will not see your taxes increase by a single dime," he said.
In Tampa, McCain conducted a national security roundtable featuring former military officials and supporters such as former Pennsylvania governor and Homeland Security secretary Tom Ridge and Sen. Joe Lieberman, a Connecticut independent.
McCain also criticized Obama for being soft on former Cuban dictator Fidel Castro. McCain said he would only meet with new ruler Raul Castro "after they empty the political prisons."
By BETH REINHARD AND LESLEY CLARK McClatchy Newspapers
MIAMI -- On the hunt for Florida's treasure trove of electoral votes, the nominees of both political parties traversed the state Wednesday, carrying a sense of urgency in the final days of a race already churning record-setting early voter turnout.
Democrat Barack Obama has been gaining ground in Ohio, Colorado, Virginia and Nevada - all states won by President Bush in 2004 - forcing Republican John McCain to increasingly pin his hopes on Florida.
"On Nov. 4, we've got to win the state of Florida, my friends, and we're going to win here," McCain said Wednesday morning at Everglades Lumber in West Miami, where about 1,000 people gathered.
Across the Broward County line in Sunrise, Obama addressed about 20,000 people at the BankAtlantic Center, many of whom never took their seats. "I got two words for you. Six days," Obama said, drawing a roar from the crowd.
Obama's rally was featured on national television at the tail end of his 30-minute commercial, and an interview on Comedy Central's The Daily Show was taped at a nearby hotel.
The fierce contest has spawned ads tailor-made for Florida voters, with former Sen. Bob Graham touting Obama's tax plan on the radio and Gov. Charlie Crist expected to appear in a television spot for McCain.
A CNN/TIME poll released Wednesday found Obama ahead by four percentage points in Florida, while a Quinnipiac University poll said the race was too close to call.
That survey showed the race tightening in the last week, with pollster Peter Brown noting that "time is running out."
The Democratic Party is heading into Election Day with a big cushion of early votes. Between ballots cast at the polls and by mail, Democrats are sitting on a 166,311-vote advantage.
In a state rife with unemployment and foreclosures, the nominees focused on their remedies for reviving the economy.
McCain told a cheering crowd at the Miami lumberyard that his Democratic opponent wants to "spread the wealth."
"Sen. Obama is running to be redistributionist-in-chief. I'm running to be commander-in-chief," McCain said.
Obama countered that what McCain calls "socialism" - his plan to cut taxes for people earning less than $250,000 - he calls "opportunity." Obama also sought to turn the tables on McCain's charges that he is inexperienced and risky.
"Sen. McCain says that we can't spend the next four years waiting for our luck to change, but let me tell you something: The biggest gamble we can take is embracing the same old Bush-McCain policies that have failed us for the last eight years," Obama said.
The nominees picked a mix of stops across Florida that they hoped would blend into a recipe for capturing the state's vast and diverse terrain.
For Obama, that meant revving up the Democratic faithful of South Florida and bringing former President Bill Clinton to Orlando to help him win independent voters.
On Thursday, he will seek to make inroads in Republican-leaning Sarasota.
McCain's formula included mobilizing voters in populous Miami-Dade, grabbing television time in Palm Beach County and standing with military brass in the Tampa Bay area, one of the most competitive regions of the state. Running mate Sarah Palin is scheduled to return to that area on Saturday.
The overlapping trips by the nominees reinforced the pivotal role that the Hispanic community will play in the 2008 election.
Obama courted the heavily Puerto-Rican community in Kissimmee, calling those votes "critical." Campaigning with Spanish-speaking former Gov. Jeb Bush, McCain sought to lock down politically influential Cuban-American voters in Miami, whom he said in a radio interview could "be vital to whether I win Florida or not."
On the radio and at the Miami lumberyard, he joked that Fidel Castro "really hurt my feelings" by expressing a "preference" for Obama. The Democratic nominee has said he would be willing to meet with hostile world leaders in the hope of sparking democratic reform.
"I'll sit down and talk with one of the Castro brothers," McCain said. "I'll sit down with them right after they empty the political prison, right after they have free elections, right after the human rights organizations are functioning." McCain tweaked his traditional stump speech remarks on oil drilling, reflecting the sensitivity of the issue in coastal Florida.
"We will drill offshore and we will drill now, with the agreement of the state of Florida," he said.
"If we're going to drill off the shore of Florida, then you deserve more of those revenues. They shouldn't be sent to Washington. They should be sent to Tallahassee."
In Tampa, McCain returned to foreign policy, questioning Obama's readiness for defending the United States and saying he wants to leave Iraq too quickly.
"Now he obstinately opposes the need to defend the young democracy of that country," McCain said. "The question is whether this is a man who has what it takes to protect America from Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda and other grave threats. He has given no reason to answer in the affirmative."
(EDITORS: END OPTIONAL TRIM)
Obama brushed off the criticism of his experience, concentrating on lofty themes of unity and hope that have inspired many voters.
"It's about a new politics," he said.
"A politics that calls on our better angels instead of encouraging our worst instincts, one that reminds us of the obligations we have to ourselves and one another."
(Miami Herald staff writers Adam H. Beasley, Evan S. Benn, Laura Figueroa, Jennifer Lebovich, Patricia Mazzei, Robert Samuels and Fred Tasker and pool reporter Janet Zink of the St. Petersburg Times contributed to this report.)
October 30, 2008 At Rallies of Faithful, Contrasts in Red and Blue By MARK LEIBOVICH
SHIPPENSBURG, Pa. — Supporters of Senators Barack Obama and Joseph R. Biden Jr. often look like Benetton-colored billboards, decked out for their candidates in Obama-Biden hats, T-shirts and buttons. Supporters of Senator John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin like logo merchandise, too, but tend more toward pompoms (yes, pompoms), homemade signs (“Pitbulls 4 Freedom”), flag pins and chest paint.
There is more dancing at Democratic rallies, more shouting out at Republican ones. They chant “Yes, we can” (or “Sí, se puede”) at Obama and Biden rallies, “U.S.A.” and “Drill, baby, drill” at McCain and Palin rallies; the D’s bounce to blaring folk-rock and Motown (Bruce Springsteen, Stevie Wonder) and the R’s counter with country-pop (including Dolly Parton’s “9 to 5”) and arena rock ( AC/DC).
Democratic rallygoers seem more worried about Ms. Palin than about Mr. McCain. They speak of feeling weary of “the politics of fear” and claim Mr. McCain and Ms. Palin are “irrelevant” — unless they win, as one supporter in Charleston, W.Va., said with a smile-cringe.
When you ask Republicans what they think of Mr. Obama, the word “socialist” comes up more often than not. They mention that he is a smooth talker, and not in a good way. A lot of them seem to have real problems with Michelle Obama, too, though they cannot pinpoint why. And they do not much care for that Joe Biden, either, or whatever his name is — many cannot immediately summon it.
What can we learn from a close-in view of Democratic and Republican events at the end of a bitter, exhilarating campaign? It has become a cliché to say that the country is “divided,” but the anthropologies displayed at 11 campaign stops in recent days offer glimpses of partisan America.
In these last shopping days before the political Christmas, the distinctions — and some similarities — were marked. Mr. Obama’s crowds were the biggest and loudest, followed by Ms. Palin’s (with Mr. McCain’s third, and Mr. Biden’s fourth).
In audience volume, age and enthusiasm, Ms. Palin’s rallies have more in common with Mr. Obama’s than with Mr. McCain’s. Fans often crush toward Mr. Obama and Ms. Palin after they are finished speaking, clicking cellphone cameras over their heads.
The rallygoers keep a more respectful distance from the tickets’ grayer eminences, Mr. McCain and Mr. Biden, whose crowds appear older, more traditional party-base types (a lot of veterans for Mr. McCain, labor guys for Mr. Biden).
You can tell that Mr. McCain and Ms. Palin are all about being “mavericks,” because they remind you about it until they are red in the face; just as you can tell Mr. Obama and Mr. Biden are all about “change,” because they do the same until they are blue in the face.
Ms. Palin is the best on the rope lines, working them with the gusto of someone who has been at this campaign racket for only two months, as opposed to two years.
Mr. Biden gets off the best one-liners, saying things like “John McCain criticizing George Bush is like Butch Cassidy going after the Sundance Kid.” He invokes his family a lot, too, including his 10-year-old granddaughter, Finnegan. (“Hull-o,” she says.)
Mr. McCain is most prone to ad-libbing, saying Tuesday in Harrisburg, Pa., that “no one will delay the World Series with an infomercial when I’m president.” (Mr. Obama bought half-hour advertisements before a World Series game Wednesday night.)
Mr. Obama has a knack for always coming off morning fresh, even at nighttime events. “Wow, look at this,” he has said, marveling at the size of his crowds.
Ms. Palin’s events could be Woodstocks, too, though Woodstocks that are attended by hollering home-schoolers, hockey moms and heavy-metal heads.
There are more children on parents’ shoulders at Democratic rallies, more large young families together at the Republican events, many wearing matching clothing (often with anti-abortion-themed messages).
There are more school groups at Democratic events, church groups at Republican gatherings; more Democratic protesters outside Republican events than vice versa, although Republicans tend to treat Democratic agitators with a greater contempt than vice versa. (“Communist, socialist, liberal, I hear that all a lot,” said Matthew Lengao, who was holding up an Obama sign outside a McCain rally in Mesilla, N.M., last weekend, which provoked several raised middle fingers by passing motorists.)
Obama and Biden rallies tend to be more transactional than those of their Republican counterparts. Warm-up speakers spend several minutes urging everyone to call or text-message a certain number in order to get into the “pipeline,” so the campaign can contact them to volunteer, or at least vote.
Republican speakers issue obligatory reminders for people to call their friends, make sure they get out and vote. Then they move on to the Pledge of Allegiance and the singing of patriotic songs (“The Star-Spangled Banner,” “God Bless America,” “America the Beautiful”).
Democrats can be defensive about patriotism, often protesting that they love the United States as much as their counterparts do. Can Republican rallies be heavy with implication to the contrary? You bet.
“Have you ever heard the word ‘victory’ pass Senator Obama’s lips?” Mr. McCain asked a crowd Tuesday in Hershey, Pa., drawing a chorus of “Nooo’s.” One of Ms. Palin’s biggest applause lines is that she is tired of all the apologizing for the United States of America.
After a group recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance at a Palin event in Salem, N.H., this month, someone in the crowd yelled out, “Say that, Obama!”
The candidates and audiences also recite the pledge and sing the national anthem at Obama and Biden gatherings, but the crowds tend to be less vigilant about removing caps and placing their hands on their hearts.
“I love you, Barack,” is probably the most familiar cry at Obama rallies, which the candidate often obliges with a reassuring “I love you back.”
The wealthy, though, get a little less love at Mr. Obama’s rallies. “How many people here make less than $250,000 a year?” Mr. Obama says, asking for a show of hands, wanting to recognize all of those whose taxes he says would not be raised in an Obama administration. Hands shoot up, followed by big cheers — people celebrating nonwealth.
People at McCain and Palin rallies often accuse Democrats of just wanting handouts. “A lot of people on the other side just want free money,” said Susan Emrich, at a McCain-Palin rally in Hershey on Tuesday. A real-estate agent, she wears a T-shirt that says, “I’m voting for Sarah Palin and that White Haired Dude.” Ms. Emrich would like to attend another rally later that day in nearby Shippensburg, but can’t. “I have to work,” she explains. “I’m a Republican.”
Every Republican cheering Mr. McCain and Ms. Palin and every Democrat cheering Mr. Obama and Mr. Biden claim to have dear friends in the other party, even family members. But the other people in the other party can seem to be in a whole other world, especially now.
The candidates say as much. “When I hear some of those Republican ads, I think, ‘What planet are they on?’ ” Mr. Biden said at a rally in Charleston, W.Va.
Likewise, it is inconceivable to Bill Howland, a McCain supporter in New Mexico, that Barack Obama could win on Tuesday. “When I think of the other side, I think of a giant troop of lemmings,” Mr. Howland said. “I see their eyes spinning while they’re walking over a cliff together.”
Mr. Howland has lucked out: he is a plumber, and won a backstage audience with the candidate in Albuquerque. “One of the great honors of my life,” said Mr. Howland, who postponed an ankle operation so he could don his “Plumbers for McCain” T-shirt, decorate himself with McCain-Palin buttons (and a Fox News lapel pin) and get his picture snapped with Mr. McCain.
But there is an edge to Mr. Howland (the idea that Mr. Obama might prevail elicits an emphatic “God forbid”) that many in the audiences at Republican events share these days. They complain that the Republican ticket has been shortchanged by the news media, that pollsters have ignored them and that “people have been very badly educated about Obama’s socialist beliefs,” as Carol Schorr, a retired teacher from Edgewood, N.M., put it.
There is an edge at Obama rallies, but it is less of frustration, more of fear. Those supporters worry that the election may be stolen from them, that race could skew against an African-American candidate, or that something unspeakable might befall Mr. Obama — but they will speak it nonetheless, in hushed tones.
Bipartisan consensus can exist, however. A lot of people at rallies for both camps say they are ready for this campaign to be over. But you kind of sense many of them don’t mean it.
To beat Election Day rush, throngs waiting to vote early
By Larry Copeland and Richard Wolf, USA TODAY ATLANTA — By 10 a.m. Wednesday, Margaret Jones and her sister, Ann Simmons, had waited 90 minutes to vote early at the Adamsville Recreation Center on Martin Luther King Jr. Drive. Sitting with hundreds of others in the center's gymnasium, they had perhaps another hour left — but they didn't mind.
"If it takes longer, it takes longer," said Jones, 63, planning to vote for Democratic nominee Barack Obama. "As long as it takes, I'll be here until I vote. This is a very historic moment in this country's history, and it's important to be part of what's going on."
Added Simmons, a retired high school teacher: "After 40 years, I can finally vote for an African American for president who has a legitimate chance of winning. I always told my students voting is a privilege for us. It's not a responsibility or a duty or a burden. It's a privilege, and never more so than this year."
Georgians are turning out by the hundreds of thousands to vote early, ahead of Tuesday's anticipated crush at the polls. In some counties, they waited four and five hours Monday — and up to nine hours in one Atlanta suburb. By Wednesday, waits averaged two to three hours.
About 25% of Georgia's 5.8 million registered voters — 1.5 million — had cast advance ballots by Wednesday, said Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel.
Nationally, early and absentee voting has increased dramatically since starting in late September. Early-voting hours have been extended in Florida, Indiana, New Mexico, Ohio and Tennessee. The heaviest such voting has been in Georgia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Florida, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico.
Early-bird voters have lined up even in states that saw little of Obama or Republican nominee John McCain, such as heavily Democratic Illinois and heavily Republican Texas.
Paul Gronke of the Early Voting Information Center at Reed College in Oregon predicts that up to one-third of voters will vote early, up from 20% in 2004.
Voters at two Atlanta precincts — one predominantly black, the other mostly white — talked Wednesday about braving the season's coldest temperatures. Many said they wanted to eliminate the risk of last-minute snags on Election Day.
For many at the recreation center in a mostly black community in southwest Atlanta, this election is a long-awaited moment that feels like a burden being lifted. "I'm just so happy and proud to be in this era, to see history being made like it's never been made before," said Lillian Wardley, 73. "Oh, I just thank the Lord for this opportunity."
Christopher Robinson, 19, waited 90 minutes to vote in his first presidential election. "It's a great feeling to know that my vote counts, because it's a very historic election," said the part-time student and security guard.
Across town at a precinct serving mostly white voters in downtown Decatur, people waited outside shivering. Debby Pollack, a pediatrician, stood in line about 50 minutes. "I work on Election Day, and my schedule doesn't allow me to wait in line," said Pollack, 39, who didn't say for whom she was voting.
Precinct manager Renata Fleming said she's never seen such enthusiasm for early voting. "People start lining up at 5:30 (a.m.)," she said. "At 7 p.m., when we close, we still have 200-300 people in line. People are on a mission."
I think there's a good chance McCain wins Florida, and he still has a shot at Ohio. But in the end, Obama is still going to hit at the least 300 electoral votes. McCain isn't going to win PA, and several former red states.
By Mark Memmott, USA TODAY "Joe the Plumber" is soon to become "Joe the Author" and perhaps — though he's skeptical — "Joe the Singer."
Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher, the "Joe the Plumber" who Republican presidential nominee John McCain says is a symbol of "real" America, now has a team of advisers that includes country singer Aaron Tippin.
BATTLEGROUND: McCain works to keep Florida red
Wurzelbacher said by phone Wednesday after an Ohio campaign event with Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin that he plans to "keep speaking for middle-class America."
He'll do that with a book he said will be published "in a couple of weeks." He's working with a writer and said it will be a "dignified" story of how his campaign-trail encounter with Democratic nominee Barack Obama brought Wurzelbacher national attention. He'll also expound on what he thinks about the world today.
Why should anyone listen? "I speak straight."
"There's something magnetic about Joe the Plumber," Tippin said by phone, also from Ohio. Tippin introduced Wurzelbacher to his manager and publicist, Bobby Roberts and Jim Della Croce. The three are now advising Wurzelbacher; for now at no charge. They've also suggested Wurzelbacher might want to get into the music business. "He actually can sing," said Della Croce.
Wurzelbacher isn't sure: "They talked about throwing me into the studio. I think we're going to have a good laugh, and that will be it."
Obama uses his TV time well It pays to buy airtime only if you know what to do with it — and Barack Obama clearly does.
Voters will make the final judgment on the content and effectiveness of last night's cross-network infomercial, a half-hour block purchased by the Obama campaign from CBS, NBC, Fox, MSNBC, Univision, BET and TV One. But as a piece of political theater, the program was a low-key triumph, a message perfectly attuned to the cool side of the medium.
Unusual but not unique, Obama's 30-minute ad was the first such presidential campaign pitch since Ross Perot's series of extended TV talks in 1992. But where Perot's were notoriously (at times humorously) low-tech — just Perot and some pie charts — Obama's was a more elaborate mix of live TV and tape that came across as well-produced without seeming slick and overproduced.
The show presented Obama as both candidate and host, making his points by introducing representative Americans and their stories. Each segment was bracketed by Obama speaking in a wood-paneled office, a flag prominent in the background, as he calmly laid out his plans.
In part, the show was designed to prove Obama understands us, that he can connect with the problems of workers and retirees. But it was also designed to help us understand him, to become comfortable with the idea of him as president. Reassurance was not just the point of the biographical tidbits and the recorded testimonials; it was the point of the entire broadcast.
There was talk about tough issues but no harsh attacks on the other side and no flashes of anger. It was if the campaign had adopted a new political mantra: Speak softly and carry a big ad.
The only break in tone came at the end, as the ad cut to Obama's live speech in Florida, and the candidate was forced to raise his voice above the recorded whisper. But even that shift was caused more by the venue than by any change in message.
Some parts, perhaps, were hokey: the soft piano music, the rapt faces of the adoring crowd. But if these are political film clichés, they're clichés because they work. They were well-used here to convey the ad's underlying message: "I am one of you."
Did it amount to Obama Overload? In the old three-network universe, it might have. But we live in a multimedia world where anyone who lost interest had hundreds of other available choices. At any rate, Obama's team chose his time slot well: Only someone who's ready to be offended could be sorely chafed at being denied Knight Rider, Gary Unmarried and a baseball pregame show.
You can, of course, complain about the money spent. But it's hard not to think it was well-spent.
And if the format catches on, doesn't it at least stand a chance of being more informative than the 60 30-second spots it replaced?
If Sen. John McCain pulls out a stunning upset next Tuesday, he'll have the country club, not Sam's Club, to thank for it. Conversely, if Sen. Barack Obama maintains his lead and coasts to victory, it will likely be because he was able to persuade wealthier voters to take a chance on his economic vision. That's because while wealthy states remain firmly in the blue column, wealthy voters run deep red.
In 2000, the poorest voters in Mississippi (50th in nation in per capita income), Ohio (middle of the pack) and Connecticut (first in per capita income) were equally likely to vote for George W. Bush. The richest residents of the same three states diverged sharply, with more than three-quarters of wealthy Mississippians voting Republican, 60 percent in Ohio and less than half in Connecticut. This pattern held in 2004.
It turns out the mythical lower-income "values voter," who puts "God, guns and gays" before economic concerns is just that. The Republican edge in poorer states has little to do with the cultural concerns of lower-income voters, and far more to do with the intensity of GOP support by the wealthy in these states.
In graphical terms, this is represented by a steep incline in the likelihood of voting GOP as you move up the income scale in the classic red states. Battleground states, such as Ohio, show a more moderate slope. The urbanized anchors of blue America approach a flat line.
Andrew Gelman, a statistician at Columbia University, and his colleagues have documented these trends in their book, "Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State: Why Americans Vote the Way They Do." Their findings answer several questions about the twists and turns of the 2008 presidential election. And the path to victory for McCain or Obama becomes clearer to imagine.
For starters, how has the seemingly hapless and relatively underfunded McCain campaign kept pace, at least until recently, with a man their own ads famously call "the biggest celebrity in the world"? And why is Obama now seemingly pulling away?
Because, until recently, the patterns that Gelman identified had held. For example, in early September, Pew Research had McCain leading Obama 53 to 39 among those Americans making $75,000 or more. Their latest poll has Obama up, 52 percent to 41 percent in this category - a 12-point swing in a matter of weeks. Pew's horse-race poll has Obama gaining six points overall during this period.
Another of Gelman's observations on recent voting patterns found that those who regularly attend church, regardless of what state they live in, are more likely to vote Republican - although the pattern is that much stronger in red states than blue. According to Pew, Obama has also gained 7 points in the last month with weekly churchgoing white mainline Protestants and 9 points with Catholics who attend weekly Mass, another likely cause for his recent surge.
Returning to a familiar campaign narrative, many ask whether Obama hasn't changed the map, particularly in poorer states with relatively large minority populations? There is little evidence that this is the case. In the 10 lowest-income states, McCain leads by an average of 16 points, trailing only in New Mexico, a classic battleground state. Similarly, nine of the 10 richest states look firmly Democratic in 2008. If you discount traditionally red Wyoming, which has catapulted from 28th in per capita income in 2000 to sixth today, based on natural gas revenues, it is a clean sweep. Among these, Obama has swung Colorado and Virginia into his column from the 2004 GOP column. So, in the 10 richest and 10 poorest states, only three look to be moving away from the party they favored in previous elections. Of these, two are simply falling into line with their fellow wealthier states, and one is continuing a pattern of vacillation between parties (although looking solidly Democratic at this point). Hardly a seismic shift between red and blue.
So, then, what should we look for in trying to figure out whether Obama's momentum will lead to a Reaganesque landslide or another electoral nail-biter? RealClearPolitics.com lists 85 electoral votes not solidly in the GOP or Democratic column - Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina and North Dakota. If Obama can smooth the curve in the poor toss-up states (Georgia and North Carolina), and steepen it in richer ones (as he has done in Colorado and Virginia), he may well get a landslide. On the other hand, if McCain can maintain President Bush's popularity with wealthy churchgoers, particularly in the low- to moderate-wealth states still up for grabs, we could be in for a long night.
Frank Micciche is the deputy director of the Next Social Contract Initiative of the New America Foundation, a nonprofit, nonpartisan public policy institute in Washington, D.C. To comment, e-mail him at micciche@newamerica.net.
October 30, 2008 The Decided Go in Droves to Vote Early By JENNIFER STEINHAUER
HENDERSON, Nev. — At grocery stores across Las Vegas, voters are casting their ballots, and then shopping for bananas or hitting the slot machines a few feet away.
About 100 people have voted from the windows of their cars, A.T.M. style, in Orange County, Calif. Several busloads of voters pulled up to the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections in Cleveland on Sunday, did what they came to do, and then repaired to a church across the street for some fried chicken.
In all its forms, early voting has been an election year hit. Enormous lines in Florida led Gov. Charlie Crist to issue an executive order extending early voting hours statewide from eight hours a day to 12, while in Georgia an elderly woman in Cobb County stood in the sun so long to vote that she collapsed.
For many, an early vote has been a stab at ending, at least in their own homes and hearts, the seemingly endless loop of campaign rhetoric, cascading polls and tension, according to interviews over the past several days with dozens of early voters in six states.
“I thought I might as well do this,” said Rhonda Woolcox, 83, who came to a community center here on Monday to cast her presidential vote for Senator John McCain of Arizona. “I wasn’t about to change my mind.”
Others seemed to view early voting as a leap of faith.
“I was afraid that if I voted early our votes wouldn’t be counted,” said Glynetter Prather, 44, who nonetheless cast her ballot in Florida for Senator Barack Obama of Illinois. “I mean, there’s enough time to lose these ballots. And I hate to say that, but that’s Florida’s signature.”
Among some of the 32 states that allow their residents to vote early without an excuse, either by mail or in person, the verdict is already in from a full quarter of registered voters — well into the millions. In some counties across the nation, the percentages are far higher. The early voting will continue for several days in most of the states, but in Louisiana it is already closed, and it will end on Friday or Saturday elsewhere to give time to update the books to prevent people from voting twice.
In 2004, 22 percent of voters cast an early presidential ballot, and the number is expected to climb to 30 percent to 35 percent this year. “We have predicted a third of the electorate; I expect that we will meet that,” said James Hicks, research director at the Early Voting Information Center at Reed College in Portland, Ore.
Although some states turn on their early voting tabulators before Election Day, none reveal the results until the polls close on Election Day itself and most do not begin counting a vote until then, said Doug Lewis, executive director of the Election Center in Houston, an association of elections officials.
No matter, one result is already known: Voters are drawn to the ballot boxes early.
In some places, like the three polling stations visited in the Las Vegas area on Monday, voters were rewarded with short waits and well-oiled systems designed to make them so. Several grocery stores offered electronic voting.
“We are the only state in the nation where you’ll hear, ‘Wet mop at Voting Booth 4,’ ” said Bob Walsh, a spokesman for the Nevada secretary of state.
In other states, lines snaked for hours and tested tempers. In New Orleans, for example, voters clocked six-hour waits this week.
In Jupiter, Fla., security guards have been hired to direct traffic and oversee the mild mayhem at a county library, where the parking lot has been jammed with the over-70 crowd competing for spots so they could cast a vote.
Early voting stations in Clayton County, Ga., which includes suburbs of Atlanta, stayed open until 1 a.m. one day last week to accommodate voters who had been delayed — some by as many as nine hours — by snags with the software that confirms voter registration.
Even with the problems and delays, voters in many states said they viewed the chance to vote early — without the constraint of the past of having to provide an excuse for not voting on Election Day — as a boon.
“In New Hampshire where we came from,” said Arthur Schuetz, 62, who voted Monday at the community center here in Henderson, “it is not socially acceptable to do anything but go to the polls on Election Day and stand in the snow talking with all your neighbors. But here you can vote in five minutes and go home. It’s super.”
Mr. Schuetz said he voted for Mr. McCain, a Republican, with enthusiasm. His wife, Linda, called the choice the “lesser of two evils.”
For those who work long hours and occasionally miss the chance to vote, early casting is helpful.
“Voting is always a problem for us nurses,” said Donna J. Simmons, 59, who cast a vote in Cleveland, anticipating a 12-hour shift on Election Day. “We’re always trying to work out ways to cover for each other so one of us can go and vote. I think this event is the most wonderful thing because voting is always such a challenge for people like me.”
So far, the early voting has attracted more Democrats than Republicans. For example, in North Carolina, according to state election officials, 58 percent of early voters have been registered Democrats compared with 25 percent registered Republicans. Democrats have also turned out in higher numbers in Florida, Iowa and New Mexico.
For the last few months, volunteers for Mr. Obama, a Democrat, in California, a state sure to go Democratic, have been making telephone calls to voters in neighboring Nevada, helping to perfect the lists of likely early vote-casters for get-out-the-vote canvassers. In Nevada, a Republican stronghold in past presidential elections, 52 percent of early electors in the population centers have been Democrats, 32 percent Republicans and 16 percent unaffiliated voters.
Some of them have cast their ballots at the Galleria at Sunset Mall in Henderson, where voters lined up to use three rows of machines sandwiched between two jewelry stores, a Mervyn’s department store and a stand selling face cream.
Volunteers waved citizens, some carrying shopping bags, to the open machines with little American flags festooned to sticks. Leah Darrington, 30, came with four couples to vote, and the adults took turns entertaining the five children who were brought along.
Dee Welch gave her son DeLano an admonishing tug as he tried to drag her from the rows of voting machines to a toy store. “I’m getting in line to vote for president,” Ms. Welch said firmly. “So you behave!”
There were elderly couples who shuffled carefully along the slick mall floor, scores of parents pushing strollers, couples holding hands as they affixed the “I voted” stickers to their shirts, and several first-time voters.
“It was fun,” said Christie Kaminska, 20, who picked Mr. Obama for her first presidential vote. “I have class on Tuesday, and I heard from someone at school I could vote here. Plus, I have some things I needed to return.”
In Pittsboro, N.C., Zaw Min Thu, 36, a refugee from Myanmar who came to the United States eight years ago, cast his first vote, for Mr. Obama, this week.
“I wanted to check it out because of my work schedule,” said Mr. Thu, who works as a housekeeper at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill. “Our government is a military government, and the government is not good,” he said. “That’s why I vote today.”
The Mount Olive Missionary Baptist Church, one of the largest black churches in Cleveland, has pulled nearly 200 churchgoers over the past few weeks to early voting polls.
“I look at this as a form of cholesterol removal from the clogged circulatory system of this nation’s election process,” said Larry Harris, the pastor there. “We know we’re looking at record-breaking turnout for this election. It’s going to be difficult to count all the votes that day. And if the weather is bad, some of these people will just stay home. So we need to get people out early, and make sure that every vote counts.”
BC-Obama-Ad, 1st World News Obama takes his message to prime time TV; McCain goes after Obama MIAMI - John McCain charged that Barack Obama lacks "what it takes to protect America from terrorists" Wednesday as he sought to shift attention away from the economy in the final week of the race for the White House. Obama cast his rival as a threat to the middle class, and readied a 30-minute prime-time commercial at a cost of millions.
Obama, who has led in the polls for weeks, toughened his rhetoric as Republicans and even some Democrats said the race to pick the next president was tightening somewhat nationally and in some battleground states.
Obama takes to the prime-time airwaves to make final pitch to voters Full Story
WASHINGTON - Barack Obama took to the prime-time airwaves on Wednesday night with a costly and slickly produced infomercial aimed at convincing voters to cast their ballots for him just days before the presidential election.
"We've seen over the last eight years how decisions by a president can have a profound effect on the course of history, and on American lives," the Democratic presidential nominee said during the half-hour ad, which aired at US$1 million a pop on a series of television networks.
Strong earthquake strikes southwestern Pakistan, killing at least 170 Full Story
WAM, Pakistan - Desperate villagers clawed through piles of mud and timber while others dug mass graves Wednesday after an earthquake collapsed thousands of homes in Pakistan, killing at least 170 people and injuring hundreds more.
Army transport planes ferried tents, medical supplies and blankets to the quake zone in the southwestern province of Baluchistan, where some 15,000 were made homeless by the shallow, 6.4-magnitude jolt that struck as most people slept.
Congolese rebels reach edge of Goma, then declare a ceasefire Full Story
GOMA, Congo - Congolese rebels said they reached the outskirts of Goma and declared a ceasefire Wednesday to prevent panic in the city, where retreating government soldiers were commandeering cars and firing wildly as people fled in torrents of human misery.
Gunfire crackled throughout the city with occasional booms from heavy artillery, apparently from fleeing army troops who residents said were out of control.
Syria tells United States to shut down cultural centre, school in Damascus WASHINGTON - The Syrian government has officially asked the United States to close the American Cultural Center in Damascus immediately and the American school in the capital by Nov. 6, the State Department said Wednesday.
The Syrian Foreign Ministry gave formal notice of the deadlines to Maura Connelly, the top U.S. diplomat in Damascus, after the government said Tuesday it would order both institutions closed in retaliation for a weekend American attack on alleged Iraqi militants inside Syrian territory, according to the department.
Number of new U.S. troops in Afghanistan could more than double Full Story
WASHINGTON - Military planners now think they may need to send more than double the number of extra troops initially believed needed to help fight the war in Afghanistan.
The buildup in the increasingly violent campaign could amount to more than 20,000 troops rather than the originally planned 10,000, two senior defence officials said Wednesday on condition of anonymity because no new figures have been approved.
Quartet of Mideast peacemakers to meet in Egypt next month for progress report Full Story
RAMALLAH, West Bank - A senior Palestinian official said Wednesday the Quartet of Middle East peacemakers will meet Nov. 6 at Sharm el-Sheik to assess progress in Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.
The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the meeting's date has not been announced, said the gathering in Egypt would include U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
McCain and Palin blast Los Angeles Times for not releasing Obama tape Full Story
BOWLING GREEN, Ohio - Republicans John McCain and Sarah Palin accused the Los Angeles Times on Wednesday of protecting Barack Obama by withholding a videotape of the Democrat attending a 2003 party with a Palestinian-American professor and critic of Israel.
McCain and Palin called Rashid Khalidi a former spokesman for the Palestinian Liberation Organization, a characterization that Khalidi has denied in the past, and McCain said 1960s radical Bill Ayers had attended the same party. Both candidates said guests at the event made critical comments about Israel.
Obama effigy found hanging from tree on University of Kentucky campus Full Story
LEXINGTON, Ky. - A life-sized likeness of Barack Obama was found hanging from a tree with a noose around its neck Wednesday at the University of Kentucky, the second time in about a month such an effigy of the Democratic presidential nominee was reported on a college campus.
University spokesman Carl Nathe said the effigy was found Wednesday morning in a high-traffic area between a classroom building and parking garage. Police immediately took it down but released no information about their investigation.
Peru mob torches police station as anti-government protests spread Full Story
LIMA, Peru - Angry villagers in Peru's northern jungle have torched a police station a day after 71 people were hurt in a clash between police and protesters in the south.
RPP radio says a 1,000-strong mob set fire to the station and took 25 officers captive in San Martin province. They reportedly were angered when police threw tear gas near a school and several children were affected.
UN General Assembly urges U.S. to lift 47-year-old embargo against Cuba Full Story
UNITED NATIONS - The UN General Assembly overwhelmingly approved a resolution on Wednesday urging the United States to repeal its 47-year-old trade embargo against Cuba, which the country's foreign minister vowed would never bring the Cuban people "to their knees."
It was the 17th straight year that the General Assembly called for the embargo to be repealed "as soon as possible."
Negative campaign damages McCain's legacy as respected politician Full Story
WASHINGTON - John McCain began his bid for the White House a well-liked and well-respected politician, considered honourable by Republicans and Democrats alike and hailed for his war hero history.
But even onetime McCain boosters have turned on the Arizona senator in the course of this election campaign, with a litany of prominent Republicans maligning him for his pick of the controversial Sarah Palin as his running mate and accusing him of making an unnecessarily nasty run for the top job.
Vermont school shooter sentenced to 3 life terms for 2006 rampage Full Story
BURLINGTON, Vt. - A man who killed two people in a 2006 shooting rampage in Vermont has been sentenced to three consecutive life terms.
Twenty-nine-year-old Christopher Williams was sentenced today on two counts of first-degree murder and two counts of attempted murder.
Fashion designer's sexual assault trial nears its end Full Story
LOS ANGELES - Fashion designer Anand Jon Alexander sexually assaulted aspiring models after luring them to Los Angeles with promises of glamorous photo shoots and stays in a luxury hotel, a prosecutor said Wednesday during closing arguments in his trial.
Deputy District Attorney Mara McIlvain told jurors that Alexander had a "common plan" that started with finding the women on the Internet and ended with him fondling or raping them in his apartment when they visited California seeking modelling opportunities.
Palin faces new ethics complaint over children's travel costs Full Story
ANCHORAGE, Alaska - A new ethics complaint against Sarah Palin accuses the Alaska governor of charging the state when her children travelled with her.
The complaint alleges that the Republican vice-presidential nominee used her official position as governor for personal gain. The Associated Press reported this month that Palin charged the state more than $21,000 for her three daughters' commercial flights since she became governor in December 2006.
Venezuelan satellite launched from China; carries TV, radio transmissions Full Story
EL SOMBRERO, Venezuela - Chinese and Venezuelan scientists hovered over radar screens, a Russian combat jet flew overhead and satellite dishes tilted toward the skies as Venezuela tracked the launch of its first satellite on Wednesday.
President Hugo Chavez has increasingly turned toward the East for help in technological development, and his latest endeavour - at a cost of some US$406 million - will help him spread his revolutionary message across Latin America.
Ukraine's parliament passes key economic bills to avoid meltdown Full Story
KYIV, Ukraine - Ukraine's parliament on Wednesday approved legislation that the International Monetary Fund set as a condition for an emergency loan, raising hopes that this ex-Soviet republic, hit hard by the global crisis, will avoid a meltdown.
But chances for a quick recovery were hit by a dramatic fall in the national currency and signs of a rapid economic slowdown, caused largely by falling global demand for steel, the country's main export.
Canadians, Taliban battle in information war for hearts, minds of Afghans Full Story
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan - It's a familiar routine for local Afghan journalists: within seconds of a roadside blast or bomb attack, they get a boasting text message or phone call from the local Taliban information officer.
"They call right in to the radio presenter on the air," says Khan Mohammed Khadim, manager of Kandahar's Killid group of stations. "Much faster than the ISAF (western) information."
Palin remains focused on November 4: report Wed Oct 29, 2008 10:28pm EDT
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican presidential candidate John McCain may be down in the polls, but running mate Sarah Palin remains focused on winning the White House, ABC News said on Wednesday after initially reporting the Alaska governor was looking beyond 2008.
Asked about 2012, whether she was discouraged by daily campaign attacks and whether she would return home to Alaska, the Republican vice presidential nominee said she was focused on defeating Democrat Barack Obama next week.
"I think that, if I were to give up and wave a white flag of surrender against some of the political shots that we've taken ... I'm not doing this for naught," Palin told ABC News in a taped interview airing on Thursday.
A campaign spokesperson said Palin was talking about being focused on winning the White House this year and is not going to quit despite her critics.
In its initial report on the interview, ABC said Palin was looking ahead to the 2012 election cycle, regardless of the outcome of the November 4 vote.
ABC issued a revised release after the McCain campaign clarified Palin's comment.
With less than a week before Election Day, Palin told ABC she believes in the current Republican presidential ticket and that she thinks "it's going to go our way on Tuesday, November 4."
"I truly believe that the wisdom of the people will be revealed on that day," she said.
Palin has energized the Republican base of supporters. But she has come under withering criticism on a variety of issues, including whether she is qualified to become vice president.
(Writing by Joanne Allen; Editing by Doina Chiacu)
Obama blankets TV with ad By Kathy Kiely, USA TODAY SUNRISE, Fla. — Barack Obama pulled out all the political and technological stops Wednesday, barnstorming across Republican territory and blanketing the airwaves.
As an unusual 30-minute commercial aired on several broadcast and cable networks, the Democratic presidential nominee appeared here at a packed basketball arena with his running mate, Joe Biden. In what Obama aide Linda Douglass described as "a bit of a high-wire act," the campaign cut from the pre-taped ad with a live feed from the rally.
Obama's ad ran simultaneously on several broadcast and cable networks at a cost of more than $3 million. It intertwined the stories of families facing financial and personal difficulties with segments in which the candidate discussed how he plans to help them and other Americans like them overcome their challenges.
"This election is a defining moment," Obama said during the beginning of the ad. "The chance for our leaders to meet the demands of these challenging times and keep faith with our people."
The ad included testimonials about Obama from leading politicians, including two former rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination, Biden and Gov. Bill Richardson. The ad didn't mention his current rival, Republican John McCain.
The airing of the ad highlighted the enormous financial advantage enjoyed by Obama, whose fundraising has been so successful that he opted out of the public campaign-finance system. McCain, who accepted public funding, is limited to $84 million for the general election campaign. Obama raised $153 million in September alone, and spent $106 million in the month of September.
After the rally, Obama was to head to his first joint campaign appearance with former president Bill Clinton, timed for the 11 p.m. ET news in central Florida, the state that gave President Bush the White House in 2000 and helped re-elect him in 2004. The pair's rally in Kissimmee, just outside Orlando, was scheduled to start at the same time that an interview Obama had with Jon Stewart aired on the comedian's Daily Show.
In the Stewart interview, Obama joked that his own children were appalled at his big television buy. He quoted his 10-year-old daughter, Malia, as saying " 'hold up a second. Are you saying that my programs are going to be interrupted?'
"I said, 'No, we didn't buy on Disney.' So she was relieved," Obama said.
In a sign of his confidence that his Democratic base is secure, Obama spent the day trolling for votes here and in North Carolina, two states where early voting is underway and where Republican presidential candidates usually win. The last Democratic presidential candidate to win North Carolina was Jimmy Carter in 1976. The last to win Florida was Clinton, who beat Bob Dole here 48%-42% in 1996.
The former president's willingness to share a stage with Obama also represents a sign of Obama's success in unifying the party after a bruising primary with the Clinton's wife, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y.
In Raleigh, Obama poked fun at attacks on his economic policies by McCain. "By the end of the week, he'll be accusing me of being a secret Communist because I shared my toys in kindergarten," he told a lunchtime crowd of 28,000 in Raleigh.
Geez, this Barack Obama guy is everywhere tonight--"Daily Show" too
Pretty hard to avoid you-know-who from Illinois tonight.
He was everywhere on the tube tonight. If the White Sox hadn't collapsed, he'd have probably been out in left field, so to speak.
Why doesn't he just buy his own channel with all that money people donated?
Barack Obama didn't just buy a half-hour of time on four national television networks tonight -- he also got a free ride on "The Daily Show." (Complete text of the campaign infomercial is available here.)
Illinois senator and Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on almost all TVs all the time tonight
Here's a preview of the "comedy" show, from the campaign pool report, so you don't have to stay up (because, frankly, it doesn't sound very comedic):
How is he holding up? host Jon Stewart asked Obama in the taping.
"We are now counting down every single vote," the Democratic presidential nominee replied. "And the crowds are terrific. And I think we've got a good shot at this thing."
Asking about former President Bill Clinton campaigning for Obama today in Florida, Stewart said: "I know Florida. ... Many of my people go there to retire. ... You might want to hold the rally early. They don't like to miss their shows at night or the early bird special at the diner."
"No comment on that Jon," Obama said, with an explanation for his reticence: "I'm trying to win Florida."
Asked about his "infomercial" airing on four television networks tonight, Obama called it a "story about what's happening to families all across America. We've got four families that we feature. All of them have great hopes, but all of them are struggling too, and we want to talk about what the next four years would mean to them...
"These four families that have been featured remind me either of myself or people that I know, and I think they'll have a better sense of exactly what I want to do as president."
Stewart asked: "If you do win, is that a mandate for socialism?"
"I think that there's a certain segment of hardcore Sean Hannity fans that probably wouldn't want to go have a beer with me," Obama conceded. "There's no doubt about that."
For a review of the rest of the program, check out the account here by our pal Mark Silva over at the Swamp.
* Story Highlights * NEW: Obama ad features stories of struggling families, high-profile endorsements * NEW: Obama discusses plans for economy, bringing end to Iraq war * NEW: On ad's timing,McCain says it used to take "act of God" to delay World Series * McCain launched an ad attacking Obama for his 30-minute special
By Richard Allen Greene CNN
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Sen. Barack Obama's 30-minute TV ad, which ran simultaneously on broadcast and cable networks at 8 p.m. ET Wednesday, is muscle-flexing that has little precedent, a campaign advertising expert said.
"It's evidence, if you needed any, that the Obama campaign has more money than there is ad time left to buy," said Evan Tracey, director of the Campaign Media Analysis Group. "This is flexing the muscles."
Tracey estimates that it will cost the campaign "in the $4 to 5 million range -- at a minimum, $3.5 million."
But, he said, spending the money is a "no-brainer" for the Democratic presidential hopeful.
"The strategic brilliance of this for Obama is that he is going to consume about 24 hours of the news cycle," Tracey said. "It boxes [John] McCain in, takes the oxygen out of the room."
In the carefully produced infomercial, Obama laid out his plans for the economy and for bringing an end to the war in Iraq.
It also featured stories of struggling families in swing states such as Ohio and Missouri and included testimonials from high-profile supporters, including Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson.
Obama's Republican opponent, Arizona Sen. John McCain, was not mentioned, nor was the GOP. The spot ended with a brief, live Obama address to a rally in Florida, another hotly contested state in this year's campaign.
"I'm reminded every single day that I am not a perfect man," he said. "I will not be a perfect president.
"But I can promise you this: I will always tell you what I think and where I stand. I will always be honest with you about the challenges we face. I will listen to you when we disagree. And, most importantly, I will open the doors of government and ask you to be involved in your own democracy again."
There was so much buzz surrounding the infomercial -- which was announced about two weeks ago -- that on Tuesday, Time magazine's Mark Halperin put the ad's two editors on his daily list of the "five most important people in American politics not running for president." VideoWatch more on the Obama campaign ad buy »
Those editors, Erik Smith and Mark Putnam, were "still in an edit room" cutting the 30-minute piece Tuesday when he published the list, according to Halperin, Time's editor-at-large and senior political analyst.
The ad ran at 8 p.m. ET on CBS, NBC, MSNBC, Fox, BET, TV One and Univision, the Spanish-language network, six days before Election Day.
CNN declined to run the spot, and talks between ABC and the Obama campaign fell apart.
"We were approached by the Obama campaign and declined their request," said Sal Petruzzi, senior vice president for public relations of Turner Broadcasting, CNN's parent company.
"We did not want to pre-empt our programming lineup with a 30-minute spot. We would rather use our air to continue to cover the campaign, candidates and issues like we always do, from all points of view with the best political team on television."
An ABC spokeswoman declined to comment about the network's talks with the Obama campaign.
"As a matter of policy we don't comment about clients with whom we are doing business," said Julie Hoover of ABC. The Obama campaign has bought advertising on ABC in the past, she said, "but they did not buy the half-hour."
Obama taped an interview Wednesday with ABC's Charles Gibson, which is to run Thursday, his campaign said.
A source familiar with ABC policy suggested the network had offered the Obama campaign a different time slot.
"Hypothetically, we would have offered them equivalent time," the source said. "We don't have to give them the exact slot they are asking for."
Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton said ABC had ultimately offered Obama the slot he wanted, but the campaign turned it down.
"By the time they agreed, we had already committed our resources," Burton said.
The Obama campaign reported last week that it had raised a record-shattering $150 million in September.
Obama has outspent McCain by a huge margin, according to CNN's consultant on ad spending.
Between the time the two candidates clinched their party's nominations in the spring and October 25, Obama spent more than $205 million on TV ads. McCain spent more than $119 million, according to TNS Media Intelligence/Campaign Media Analysis Group.
The McCain campaign launched an ad Wednesday attacking Obama for his 30-minute special.
"Behind the fancy speeches, grand promises and TV special lies the truth: With crises at home and abroad, Barack Obama lacks the experience America needs," the ad said.
The timing of Obama's informercial pushed back the start of a World Series game, provoking a jab from McCain during a Wednesday afternoon appearance in Florida.
"It used to be that only rain or some other act of God could delay the World Series," he said. "But I guess network executives figured an Obama infomercial was close enough."
The Obama campaign did not ask that the game be delayed, said a spokesman for Fox, which broadcasts the World Series.
"They asked Fox to buy the air time," the spokesman said. "Fox went to our partner, Major League Baseball, and asked if it would be OK to delay the game to take this important political advertisement. They agreed."
MLB's willingness to delay the fall classic for a political ad shows how very unusual the Obama TV spot is.
"Ross Perot did it in 1992, but it wasn't this close to Election Day, and now you have a very different media consumption environment. You didn't have the cable then," Tracey said. "There is no precedent for this sort of an ad this late in the race."
Obama rips Sarah Palin in new campaign ad By Jimmy Orr | 10.29.08
Up in every national poll, leading in most of the battleground states, and blanketing the networks with a 30 minute infomercial you may think that the Obama campaign would be somewhat confident.
Nope. They’re still worried. Worried enough to launch a new campaign ad that targets McCain’s decision to select running mate Sarah Palin. But in truth, it is a shot squarely at Sarah Palin’s intelligence.
The ad
The spot begins with soft music and a photo of McCain. Then quotes from McCain appear.
“I’m going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated.” Wall Street Journal 11/26/05
“The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should.” Boston Globe Political Intelligence 12/18/07
“I might have to rely on a Vice President that I select for expertise on economic issues.” GOP Debate 11/28/07
“His choice?” flashes up on the screen followed by slow moving video of Palin. Winking.
Questionable
Support her or not, it’s a harsh ad. And one that is questionable, simply because Obama had the opportunity to discuss his thoughts on Palin during the third debate.
Back then he was asked if he thought Palin was qualified.
“That’s going to be up to the American people,” Obama said. “I think that obviously she’s capable politician. She has, I think, excited the base in the Republican Party and I think it’s very commendable, the work she’s done on behalf of special needs.”
But today, a different answer from the Obama campaign.
Questionable or not, people from across the spectrum have voiced their discontent with the day-in, day-out mockery of Palin.
O’Reilly and Letterman
It’s no surprise that Bill O’Reilly stuck up for her last night while appearing on the David Letterman show. And he was applauded after his remarks.
“I think she’s a self-made woman,” he said to Letterman. “Reformed the state, went after her own party, put those people in jail, got the oil companies to give the folks some of these obscene profits they make. I admire her record in Alaska. I think the media is beating the hell out of the woman unfairly and I don’t like it.”
“If you don’t like her, don’t vote for her. But you don’t have to beat the living daylights out of her. If you don’t like her, don’t vote for her. But knock it off,” he added.
“Women are the real losers”
The director of Women’s Watch Inc., a nonprofit women’s advocacy group in New Jersey, wrote an op-ed two days ago in the Philadelphia Inquirer entitled, “Palin deserves our respect.”
It’s a difficult column to read. What she discusses is ugly. Really ugly.
“I cannot predict who will win the presidential campaign, but I already know who will lose big: all women,” she writes.
After describing a disgusting encounter with a Palin hater, she writes:
“All this is at a time when women are regularly being raped as they try to cross the border into the United States; bloody, broken women haunt the emergency rooms of hospitals; and abuse and disrespect for women and girls is rising faster than bank bailouts. That is the atmosphere in which people, including women, choose to attempt to destroy a woman who is a legitimate political leader.
“Agreement on issues is not required, but Palin merits respect.
“Mockery and vilification of women such as Palin should become just as taboo as race-based slams. Until then, women are the real losers.”
Hollywood
Even some Democrats in Hollywood say enough is enough.
At a political forum sponsored by the Caucus for Producers, Writers and Directors, Variety reports that television producer Linda Bloodworth-Thomason spoke up for Palin.
Bloodworth-Thomason said that even though she disagrees with Palin politically, she is dismayed by personal attacks. “It’s made me angry, and it’s made me angry on behalf of women,” she said.
McCain can still win, if things break his way By Steven Thomma, McClatchy Newspapers Steven Thomma, Mcclatchy Newspapers Wed Oct 29, 5:43 pm ET
WASHINGTON — John McCain still could win.
It would take what one analyst calls a "perfect storm" of events breaking his way in the campaign's final days, but he could come from behind, overtake Barack Obama and pull off the greatest upset in 60 years.
He'd have to squeeze out more support from independents, score higher with his "Joe the Plumber" warning about Obama's tax and economic polices, and hope that enough undecided voters swing his way to help him sweep almost all the states that now are considered tossups.
Difficult? Yes. Impossible? No.
While he's still trailing, polls show McCain within reach and gaining, even if only slightly, both nationally and in some key battleground states.
"Sure, McCain can win," veteran conservative strategist Greg Mueller said. "It's not going to be easy. But it can be done."
A new Ipsos /McClatchy Poll this week found McCain trailing nationally by 6 percentage points, 2 points closer than the week before. The poll also found 8 percent of likely voters still undecided, enough to deliver the election to the Arizona senator if they moved to him as a bloc.
McCain also has closed the gap in several key battleground states, according to new polls released Wednesday by Quinnipiac University . In Florida , he trailed by 2 points, narrowing the gap from 5 points the week before. In Ohio , he went from 14 points back to 9 points behind.
For McCain to win, he must hold all the states that went for President Bush four years ago, which would be enough to give him 286 Electoral College votes and victory. He could even lose one midsized Bush state, such as Virginia , which has 13 electoral votes, and still have more than the 270 Electoral College votes needed to win.
To be sure, that won't be easy. Obama leads in many of those states, including Florida and Ohio narrowly. And McCain doesn't have any good prospects right now for offsetting the loss of a "red" state; he doesn't lead in a single state that went Democratic in 2004.
"It would take a perfect storm. Everything has to break his way," said Dennis Goldford , a political scientist at Drake University in Iowa , a Bush state in 2004 where McCain now trails. "All of a sudden, all of those states that are close or within the margin of error would have to tip back to McCain."
One way to win independent voters, analysts said, is to stay on the economic message that McCain's adopted in recent days, raising doubts about whether Obama's tax increases on the wealthy would hurt the economy while simultaneously convincing voters that McCain's plan is better for growth.
Already, McCain has gained on the issue of the economy, by far the top concern on voters' minds. The Ipsos /McClatchy Poll found likely voters preferring Obama to handle the economy by a margin of 7 points, a much narrower edge than his 16-point advantage the week before.
"He's made up some ground the last several days by concentrating almost completely on economic issues," said Dan Schnur , a former aide to McCain who's now the director of the Unruh Institute of Politics at the University of Southern California . "That's probably the right thing to keep doing."
McCain also could score if he raises doubts in the minds of independents and undecided voters about electing a liberal Democrat as president to work with a Congress that's sure to remain in Democratic control.
"If there is a realization among voters that they're giving away all the keys to the house without any checks and balances, there might be a pullback from that," said William B. Lacy , the director of the Dole Institute of Politics at the University of Kansas .
Another way that McCain could win is if the polls are wrong, particularly if there's a so-called "Bradley effect," in which white people are overstating their support for Obama to pollsters, and their votes for him drop on Election Day . Several recent studies conclude, however, that the phenomenon first suspected in the 1982 California gubernatorial campaign of black Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley either was never true or has faded with time.
Finally, McCain would have to match or surpass Obama at turning out his voters on Election Day . Obama's counting on a surge of support from first-time voters, particularly African-Americans and young people. McCain hopes to counter that with the Republicans' proven get-out-the-vote machinery, plus a conservative base in small towns energized by running mate Sarah Palin .
"They're not arguing against the possibility of increased Democratic turnout," Schnur said. "They believe they can increase turnout by just as much among Republican voters. If they can, they have a shot."
Best, worst finance decisions of the election Jeanne Cummings Jeanne Cummings Wed Oct 29, 4:09 pm ET
Barack Obama’s decision not to accept taxpayer financing for his general election campaign turned money into a central issue of the 2008 presidential race.
When all is said and done, the two champions of campaign finance reform, Obama and John McCain, will go down in history as the first two major party nominees to spend a combined $1 billion.
That figure, which doesn’t include the money shelled out by their national parties, was widely predicted at the start of the 2008 election cycle. The surprise is that it was reached with one candidate playing inside the limits imposed by the presidential financing system and the other staying outside of them.
But having money and spending it wisely are often two different things.
So here is Politico’s take on the best and worst financial decisions of the 2008 presidential campaign.
Best Decisions
1. Obama’s gamble to stay out of the presidential financing system. The decision allowed the Illinois Democrat to fully implement a campaign strategy that simply was too expensive for the system’s $85 million allotment. It also allowed him to continue building a broad grass-roots base and play in both red and blue states, on offense and defense.
2. McCain’s decision last winter to leverage a suggestion that he would enter the primary race’s public financing system into securing bank loans that helped him stay outside of it. Once he wrapped up his party’s nomination, the Arizona Republican declared he never really intended to enter the public financing program, even though he filled out the paperwork to do so. He then aggressively began raising money to build the national operation he needed to compete in the fall. He also had the resources to defend himself and go on the attack on television in the notoriously risky weeks leading up to the GOP and Democratic party conventions.
3. Obama’s embrace of Internet fundraising, which twins with the campaign’s best hire: Facebook founder Chris Hughes, 24, and other members of his young Internet squad. They built one of the most vibrant and interactive Internet fundraising operations in history. The computer wizards also came up with the idea of buying Internet ad space on billboards embedded inside online games. Talk about real world meeting the virtual one.
4. Adoption of the “If you can’t beat them, bankrupt them" strategy. That must have been the cry of Obama’s Pennsylvania primary campaign against Hillary Rodham Clinton. Clinton had to win the Keystone State to stay in the race. Obama, down in the polls, sunk about $15 million into television advertising there anyway, forcing Clinton to try to keep pace. She won the primary, but emerged broke. Meanwhile, Obama leaped ahead of her to the next primary states, flush with cash and dominating the airwaves. Clinton never caught up.
5. The toughest decision of all sometimes is to do nothing, but that’s what Ron Paul did when a group of true believers set up their own fundraising drive on his behalf. Actually, Paul did do one thing: He welcomed them. Drawn by his anti-war, libertarian philosophy, they poured $35 million into the little-known Texan congressman’s campaign.
Worst Decisions
1. The Republican National Committee’s impulse to spend $150,000 on designer clothing for vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin and her family. The outlay undercut Palin’s hockey mom image, caused a tsunami of bad publicity, and outraged RNC donors who gave money for voter turnout operations, not Valentino alterations.
2. The front-loaded spending of McCain’s primary campaign, which spent more money than it raised during the early months of the primary battle and wound up bankrupt by August. The early money woes erased McCain’s front-runner status and left his campaign hobbled until his comeback in New Hampshire. Even then, McCain lacked the resources to put his competitors away. He faced lingering and sometimes embarrassing challenges from former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Paul, whose candidacies were used by social conservatives and libertarians to register their discomfort with McCain.
3. Obama’s squishy promise to confer with his Republican opponent before making a decision to opt out of the presidential financing system in the general election. Although the “pledge” had a Swiss cheese quality to it, Obama might have had at least one conversation with McCain before declaring his intention to opt out of the system. The decision probably was inevitable, but that was all the more reason for some finesse.
4. McCain’s decision in the final days of the race to continue airing advertisements in Iowa and New Mexico and a host of other apparent lost causes. This goes into the category of throwing good money after bad. If defeated, McCain is likely to face questions about whether those resources should have been shifted into such critical and perhaps more winnable states as Florida and Ohio.
5. Republican Mitt Romney’s investment of $45 million in a presidential primary campaign that yielded 249 delegates. That’s about $181,000 per delegate, paid by a candidate whose major argument for elevation to the Oval Office was his financial and business expertise.
Obama promises rescue plan for middle class in ad By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer Jim Kuhnhenn, Associated Press Writer 11 mins ago
WASHINGTON – He was the family man, the solutions-driven politician, the gifted orator. But for those who still harbor doubts about his candidacy, Barack Obama sought to present a special image — a man ready to sit in the Oval Office.
Amid a pastiche of American stories, the Democratic presidential nominee spent 30-minutes and more than $4 million of prepaid television time Wednesday delivering his final introduction to the public.
He capped the prime-time commercial with a live address from Sunrise, Fla., with a full-throated appeal for help and for votes.
"If you'll stand with me, and fight by my side, and cast your ballot for me, then I promise you, we will not just win Florida, we will win this election. And together we will change this country and change the world," he said to a roaring crowd.
The commercial and his live remarks from one of the main battlegrounds in the presidential contest represented a return to the unifying themes of his speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention that launched him into national politics.
"In six days, we can choose hope over fear and unity over division, the promise of change over the power of the status quo," he said. "In six days, we can come together as one nation, and one people, and once more choose our better history."
The ad was a dashing display of Obama's fundraising prowess. He bought his way into millions of American homes just six days before the end of an exhausting, 21-month quest for the presidency.
As a message, the ad was equal parts Americana, stump speech and quasi-presidential address. The most formal scenes — Obama describing his government agenda — were filmed in a distinguished looking office with a flag and a backdrop not unlike that of the Oval Office.
The spot was a mix of prerecorded Obama and voters, plus a live appearance from the campaign trail by the candidate. He offered prescriptions for an ailing economy and a rescue plan for a middle class caught in tough times.
"I will not be a perfect president," Obama said. "But I can promise you this — I will always tell you what I think and where I stand."
Aides described the unusual ad as a final summation of Obama's campaign. They put the total cost at roughly $4 million, enough to show it simultaneously on CBS, NBC and Fox. It also ran on BET, Univision, MSNBC and TV One.
Besides the Oval Office setting, the commercial included views of Obama speaking at the 2004 and 2008 Democratic conventions and elsewhere, as well as scenes of Americans discussing their economic and health care troubles, and testimonials to him by politicians and business executives.
The ad showed his wife, Michelle, and his two daughters as well as photos of his black father from Kenya and white mother from Kansas.
Without the money to match the commercial, Republican rival John McCain sniped at the man and the moment.
"He's got a few things he wants to sell you: He's offering government-run health care ... an energy plan guaranteed to work without drilling ... and an automatic wealth spreader that folds neatly and fits under any bed," McCain said during a campaign stop in Florida.
McCain also criticized Obama for having signed a pledge to accept federal funds for the fall campaign and then breaking his word.
By opting out of the public financing, Obama was free to raise unheard of millions for the final weeks of the race, and afford costly events such as the television commercial.
After months of campaigning, Obama offered no new proposals in the ad. Instead, he stressed his plan to offer tax cuts to the middle class, "restore the long-term health of our economy and our middle class."
Obama said the nation's neglected problems predate President Bush, but that the economic crisis was a "final verdict on eight years of failed policies."
The video featured footage shot by Davis Guggenheim, the director and executive producer of former Vice President Al Gore's global warming documentary "An Inconvenient Truth." Guggenheim also produced and directed the HBO series "Deadwood." In the commercial, his scenes play out against a soaring score.
The ad did not appear on ABC because by the time the network decided to offer the time slot to Obama, his campaign had already finalized the ad buy, according to people familiar with the discussions who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly.
Earlier, taping an appearance on Comedy Central's "The Daily Show" for broadcast Wednesday night, Obama said he had to reassure one of his daughters that the commercial would not pre-empt all programming.
"I was describing this to Michelle and my daughters, and Malia, who's 10, said, 'Hold up a second. Are you saying that my programs are going to be interrupted?' I said, 'No, we didn't buy on Disney.' So she was relieved."
Analysis: Obama on his way toward election win By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer Liz Sidoti, Associated Press Writer Wed Oct 29, 7:49 pm ET
WASHINGTON – Barack Obama has pulled ahead in enough states to win the 270 electoral votes he needs to gain the White House — and with states to spare — according to an Associated Press analysis that shows he is now moving beyond typical Democratic territory to challenge John McCain on historically GOP turf.
Even if McCain sweeps the six states that are too close to call, he still seemingly won't have enough votes to prevail, according to the analysis, which is based on polls, the candidates' TV spending patterns and interviews with Democratic and Republican strategists. McCain does have a path to victory but it's a steep climb: He needs a sudden shift in voter sentiment that gives him all six toss-up states plus one or two others that now lean toward Obama.
Obama has 23 states and the District of Columbia, offering 286 votes, in his column or leaning his way, while Republican McCain has 21 states with 163 votes. A half dozen offering 89 votes — Florida, Indiana, Missouri, North Carolina, Nevada and Ohio — remain up for grabs. President Bush won all six in 2004, and they are where the race is primarily being contested in the homestretch.
Though sounding confident, Obama is still campaigning hard. "Don't believe for a second this election is over," he tells backers. "We have to work like our future depends on it in this last week, because it does."
The underdog McCain is pressing supporters to fight on: "Nothing is inevitable here. We never give up. And we never quit."
Less than a week before Election Day, the AP analysis isn't meant to be predictive but rather provides a late snapshot of a race that's been volatile all year.
It's still possible McCain can pull off an upset. Some public and private polling shows the race tightening nationally. And, roughly one fourth of voters in a recent AP-GfK poll were undecided or said they still could change their minds. It's also still unclear how racial feelings will affect the results in voting that could give the country its first black president.
Last month, in a similar analysis, Obama had an edge over McCain but hadn't laid claim to enough states to cross the 270-vote threshold.
Since then, the economic crisis has reshaped the race, and the public's call for change has grown louder. Obama has strengthened his grip in the contest by using his significant financial advantage to lock up most states that Democrat John Kerry won four years ago, even as he makes inroads into traditionally GOP turf that McCain cannot afford to lose.
Obama now has several possible routes to victory, while McCain is scrambling to defend states where he shouldn't even have to campaign in the final days.
In new AP-GfK battleground polling, Obama has a solid lead in typically Republican Colorado, Nevada, Ohio and Virginia. He and McCain are even in two other usually GOP states: Florida and North Carolina. Obama also is comfortably ahead in New Hampshire and Pennsylvania. The series of polls showed Obama is winning among early voters, is favored on most issues, benefits from the country's sour mood and is widely viewed as the likely victor by voters in these states.
McCain's senior advisers acknowledge his steep hurdles and no-room-for-error strategy. However, they insist that internal polling shows the race getting closer. They hope the gains trickle down to competitive Bush-won states in the coming days and help the Arizona senator eke out a victory in Kerry-won Pennsylvania. McCain is keeping up his attacks against Obama as a tax-and-spend liberal; his strategists contend that's moving poll numbers.
"This campaign is functionally tied across the battleground states with our numbers improving sharply," said Bill McInturff, McCain's lead pollster in a strategy memo. "All signs say we are headed to an election that may easily be too close to call by next Tuesday."
Democrats privately acknowledge the race is narrowing, though they say they aren't concerned. Obama's top aides hope not just for a win but a sweeping victory that would reshapes the political landscape.
"Strategically we tried to have as wide of a map as possible," to have many routes to reaching the magic number of 270 on Election Day, David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager, told reporters this week. "We think we've been able to create that dynamic and have a lot of competitive states in play."
Indeed, Obama has used his financial heft and organizational prowess, a remnant of the long Democratic primary that was fought out in every corner of the nation, to compete in states the party has ignored in previous elections because of their histories of voting Republican. McCain has lagged in both money and manpower.
As a result, the GOP's hold on states usually considered safe has shrunk, and the election's final week is being played out largely in states that Bush won and that are toss-ups in a political climate that greatly favors Democrats.
They include the traditional GOP bastions of Indiana and North Carolina, as well as perennial battlegrounds of Missouri and Nevada. Also on the list are the crown jewels of Florida and Ohio, which were crucial in deciding the last two presidential elections. McCain could sweep all six and still lose the White House.
Obama has every state that Kerry won four years ago seemingly in the bag or leaning his way, including Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan and New Hampshire — four states with 41 votes that McCain and his allies aggressively fought for before pulling back this month when they became out of reach. McCain still hopes to win one of Maine's electoral votes, which are allotted by congressional district.
Among Kerry's states from 2004, only Pennsylvania, which hasn't voted for a Republican since 1988, remains realistically in McCain's sights. Public polls show Obama leading by double-digits, though McCain aides say it's much closer. McCain hopes that working-class white voters who haven't fully warmed to Obama will vote Republican. Some aides say a Pennsylvania victory, with 21 votes, could be what allows McCain to win the White House, provided he can thwart Obama in Bush-held states.
Over the past month, Obama has strengthened his standing in four of those offering a combined 34 votes.
He has comfortable leads in Iowa and New Mexico polls. Long considered toss-ups, Colorado and Virginia have started tilting more toward Obama. McCain is still advertising heavily in the four and has visited all in recent days. His advisers say their polling shows the race tighter than it seems.
West Virginia and Montana both emerged as GOP trouble spots after Obama started advertising in them; the Republican National Committee was forced to go on the air this week to defend them.
Earlier in the year, Obama had put millions of dollars into Georgia and North Dakota only to pull out when McCain ended up maintaining an edge. But, as the race closes, there are indications Obama could win them, too. Obama also could pick up a single vote in Nebraska, which awards votes based on congressional districts.
There are even signs that the race in McCain's home state of Arizona — which would be a battleground if he didn't live there — is narrowing. Public polls show McCain with a single-digit lead, even though Obama hasn't targeted the state.
Joe the Plumber pursued for record deal Jeffrey Ressner Jeffrey Ressner Wed Oct 29, 4:59 pm ET
Move over, Sanjaya, and tell William Hung the news: Joe the Plumber is being pursued for a major record deal and could come out with a country album as early as Inauguration Day.
“Joe” — aka Samuel Wurzelbacher, a Holland, Ohio, pipe-and-toilet man — just signed with a Nashville public relations and management firm to handle interview requests and media appearances, as well as create new career opportunities, including a shift out of the plumbing trade into stage and studio performances.
On Tuesday, Wurzelbacher joined country music artist and producer Aaron Tippin to form a new partnership that includes booking-management firm Bobby Roberts and publicity-management concern The Press Office to field the multiple media offers he’s received over the past few weeks.
Among the requests: a possible record deal with a major label, personal appearances and corporate sponsorships. A longtime country music fan, Wurzelbacher can sing and “knocks around on guitar” but is not an accomplished musician or songwriter, according to The Press Office’s Jim Della Croce.
“He’s a complicated guy with a very dynamic personality,” Della Croce told Politico. “He can sing and obviously has a strong political point of view.”
The Press Office, a PR firm based in Nashville, Tenn., represents an eclectic array of other clients including country stars John Anderson and the Gatlin Brothers, quirky folk singer Leon Redbone, NASCAR driver Chase Mattioli and animal repellent firm Liquid Fence. The Bobby Roberts Company reps several of the same acts, in addition to Juice Newton, Merle Haggard and Jon Secada.
Wurzelbacher made his auspicious debut earlier this month when Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama appeared in “Joe’s” neighborhood and was buttonholed on his tax plan. The media blitz went into high gear after John McCain talked about Wurzelbacher during the last televised presidential debate.
He has since made an appearance on Fox’s weekend variety show starring former presidential aspirant Mike Huckabee, and this week was showcased by McCain in a series of “Joe the Plumber” events.
The new partnership originated on the set of the “Huckabee” show, where Tippin appeared with his band during the same program.
Bill Clinton hails Obama as America's future By BEN FELLER, Associated Press Writer Ben Feller, Associated Press Writer 7 mins ago
KISSIMMEE, Fla. – Portraying harmony like never before, Bill Clinton hailed Barack Obama on Wednesday, a power pairing designed to inspire Democrats already smelling victory.
"Barack Obama represents America's future, and you've got to be there for him next Tuesday," Clinton, with Obama at his side, said to the cheers of a partisan crowd.
Heaping praise on President Bush's predecessor, Obama said of Clinton: "In case all of you forgot, this is what it's like to have a great president."
Obama even prodded the crowd to cheer more, saying "Bill Clinton. Give it up!" And there was Clinton, laughing with gusto every time Obama jokingly mocked rival John McCain.
The appearance of the former and would-be president marked the first time they shared a stage in the campaign. It capped one of the most ambitious days of Obama's White House run, including a 30-minute prime-time infomercial in which he tried to seal the deal with voters.
It wasn't so long ago that Clinton, still a giant of his party, was publicly criticizing Obama as untested and unready for the job of president. His wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, engaged in a grueling and ultimately losing battle with Obama for the party's nomination.
The two men later smoothed over matters. And lately, Hillary Clinton has been out campaigning for Obama. Wednesday it was Bill Clinton's time, in his element.
He clasped Obama's hand and held it high when the men came on stage. Clinton made a methodical case for Obama, describing him as a strong thinker with smart policies.
In one of his testimonials, he praised Obama for seeking the advice of experts — including him and his wife — on how to handle the country's financial crisis before acting.
"Folks, we can't fool with this," Clinton said. "Our country is hanging in the balance. And we have so much promise and so much peril. This man should be our president."
Obama said of the two Clintons: "I am proud to call them my friends."
Through the day, in two states, Obama unleashed a bleak portrayal of a McCain presidency and told a national TV audience that "the time for change has come."
Ahead in the polls, flush with cash and blanketing himself all over television, Obama said he is counting down the days but not letting up. The election looms on Tuesday.
Obama's rare, prime-time infomercial cut live to him appearing at a rally in Sunrise, Fla., where 20,000 packed a hockey arena all the way to the nosebleed seats.
"In six days, we can come together as one nation, and one people," Obama said.
During the primary race, Bill Clinton said Obama's opposition to the Iraq war was a "fairy tale" and raised questions about whether the first-term Illinois senator had enough experience.
His remarks angered some black leaders who felt Clinton was dismissing Obama's historic bid, as when he compared Obama's win in South Carolina to victories by civil rights activist Jesse Jackson there in the 1980s. Clinton fumed in response that Obama's campaign "played the race card on me."
Bill Clinton played such an aggressive role in his wife's campaign that during one debate, Obama snapped at Hillary Clinton, "I can't tell who I'm running against sometimes."
Back on the trail Wednesday, in rallies in North Carolina and Florida, Obama sharpened his tone in responding to McCain's charges of socialism.
He accused his Republican rival of resorting to desperate tactics.
"I don't know what's next," Obama said. "By the end of the week, he'll be accusing me of being a secret communist because I shared my toys in kindergarten."
Obama warned voters that if McCain is elected "100 million Americans will not get a tax cut. ... At least 20 million Americans risk losing their employer health insurance. ... We'll have another president who wants to privatize part of your Social Security."
The day was signature Obama, riding momentum.
He led three rousing rallies. He reached out to huge numbers of television viewers with the informercial and taped a segment on "The Daily Show," Comedy Central's popular late-night show.
An analysis by The Associated Press indicated he had pulled ahead in enough states to win the 270 electoral votes he needs to gain the White House — with states to spare.
All the while, McCain campaigned aggressively in Florida. He welcomed the fight and vowed to win it, defying odds that seem huge.
Obama turned to ridicule to rebut McCain's daily references to Obama's encounter with Joe the Plumber. Obama had told the Ohio plumber that he wanted to "spread the wealth around" by boosting taxes on wealthier people to finance a middle class tax cut.
McCain said that amounts to socialism. Obama said McCain was down to empty name-calling.
"Whether you are Suzy the student, or Nancy the nurse, or Tina the teacher, or Carl the construction worker, if my opponent is elected, you will be worse off four years from now than you are today," Obama said. "Let's cut through the negative ads and the phony attacks."
Noosed Palin mannequin removed from front yard 5 mins ago
WEST HOLLYWOOD, Calif. – Amid a growing frenzy of protesters and media surrounding his home, Chad Morrisette decided his noosed Sarah Palin mannequin should be cut loose.
He and his partner had created the effigy of the GOP vice presidential hopeful three weeks ago and vowed to keep it outside their home until Halloween, despite widespread criticism from neighbors and local officials. On Wednesday the mayor convinced Morrisette the mannequin should come down.
"I explained to them that this could be dangerous to you and your neighbors," said Mayor Jeff Prang, noting that he received hundreds of venomous e-mails from people offended by the display. "They were totally unprepared for this kind of international attention, for the amount of impact on their home and their neighborhood."
Besides a constant flow of angry callers, the homeowners had received a visit from the Secret Service and criticism from a Los Angeles County supervisor who ordered an investigation into whether the effigy constitutes a hate crime.
Then, on Wednesday, neighbors covered up the Palin mannequin with sheets, and more protesters showed up later in the day accompanied by a man driving a vehicle adorned with an effigy labeled "Chad," with a noose around its neck, said sheriff's spokesman Steve Whitmore.
"This evening, it wasn't as friendly," he said.
Prang said he drove by after work and saw protesters and media around the home with helicopters overhead. Morrisette saw the mayor and waved him inside for a talk.
Afterward, the mannequin came down, but Morrisette kept the rest of his Halloween decor intact, including a display of Palin's running mate, John McCain, popping out of a flaming chimney.
Palin faces new ethics complaint over kids' travel By RACHEL D'ORO, Associated Press Writer Rachel D'oro, Associated Press Writer
ANCHORAGE, Alaska – A new ethics complaint has been filed against Sarah Palin, accusing the Alaska governor of abusing her power by charging the state when her children traveled with her.
The complaint alleges that the Republican vice presidential nominee used her official position as governor for personal gain, violating a statute of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act. It follows a report by The Associated Press last week that Palin charged the state more than $21,000 for her three daughters' commercial flights, including events where they weren't invited, and later ordered their expense forms amended to specify official state business.
In some cases, Palin also has charged the state for hotel rooms for the girls.
The complaint released Wednesday says Palin charged the travel costs for events her children were not invited to and where they served in no legitimate state purpose or business. Administration officials have said Alaska law allows governors to charge the state for their family's travel if they conduct state business.
"Governor Palin intentionally secured unwarranted benefits for family members, improperly used state property to benefit her personal and financial interests, and illegally altered documents that were the subject of a Public Records request," the complaint states.
Earlier this month, a legislative report found Palin violated state ethics laws when she fired her public safety commissioner. The state's Personnel Board also has hired an independent counsel for a similar investigation.
Any ethics complaints against a governor, lieutenant governor or attorney general go to the Alaska Personnel Board to determine whether state law was violated. The three-member panel is appointed by the governor.
Dave Jones, an assistant attorney general, said ethics complaints are confidential unless their targets waive confidentiality or allegations are found to have merit. Jones said he could not discuss any particular case, but added that in general possible penalties could include fines of up to $5,000. In a case where an official has been found to have benefited, the official could be ordered to pay up to twice the amount of the personal gain.
The latest complaint was filed by Frank Gwartney, an Anchorage Democrat who supports Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama. Gwartney, 60, said he is fed up with "all the corruption" among Alaska's elected officials, including Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, who was convicted this week on federal corruption charges.
"Sarah ran on this very self-righteous campaign on ethics and anti-corruption," Gwartney told the AP. "She is no different from the others."
Palin's attorney, Thomas Van Flein, said he was not aware of the complaint and could not comment.
Palin spokeswoman Sharon Leighow said she can't comment specifically on the complaint because it is confidential. But she said generally the first family is expected to participate in community activities across Alaska and represents the state on travels.
"We receive hundreds of invitations for the governor each month, and a majority of them request the first family participate," Leighow said. "The Palin children can only participate in a fraction of the events."
Responding to the travel issue, Palin told Fox News last week that every Alaska governor has traveled with family when it's a first family function. "And it's always been charged to the state," she said. "That's part of the job."
The state already is reviewing nearly $17,000 in per diem payments to Palin for 312 nights she slept at her home in Wasilla, about an hour's drive from her satellite office in Anchorage.
The ethics travel grievance was first reported by CBS News.
Palin hints she's in politics for good, eyeing 2012 Wed Oct 29, 9:46 pm ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) – Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin hinted in an interview with ABC News to be broadcast Thursday that she will remain a key player in US politics regardless of who gets elected president next week, and may even run in the 2012 election.
A transcript of the interview was made public late Wednesday.
"I'm not doing this for naught," Palin said, when asked if all the mudslinging in the current campaign made her long for a return to the politics of Alaska, where she is governor.
"I think that, if I were to give up and wave a white flag of surrender against some of the political shots that we've taken, that would bring this whole" endeavor to nothing, she said.
Palin's comments followed reports that she was breaking free of campaign restrictions and doing more self-promotion, as she sees her White House chances dwindle along with those of her running mate John McCain.
Nevertheless the 44-year-old mother of five told ABC News she was confident the McCain-Palin ticket would defeat Democrats Barack Obama and Joseph Biden in the November 4 vote.
I'm "thinking that it's going to go our way on Tuesday," Palin said. "I truly believe that the wisdom of the people will be revealed on that day."
Regarding charges by her and the campaign that Obama was unpatriotic, especially in view of his contacts with 1960s radical Bill Ayers, Palin did some backtracking.
"(I'm) not calling him un-American," Palin said.
"There is nothing wrong, though, with calling someone out on their record, their associations and the association issue here. It's not mean spirited. It's not negative campaigning. It's important and fair to the electorate," she said.
Obama effigy found on U. of Kentucky campus By JEFFREY McMURRAY, Associated Press Writer Jeffrey Mcmurray, Associated Press Writer Wed Oct 29, 9:25 pm ET
LEXINGTON, Ky. – A life-sized likeness of Barack Obama was found hanging from a tree with a noose around its neck Wednesday at the University of Kentucky, the second time in about a month such an effigy of the Democratic presidential nominee was reported on a college campus.
UK spokesman Carl Nathe said the effigy was found Wednesday morning in a high-traffic area between a classroom building and parking garage. Police immediately took it down but released no information about their investigation.
University President Lee Todd said he planned to apologize to the Obama family on behalf of the school and that he is "personally offended and deeply embarrassed by this disgusting episode."
Federal authorities have been notified, Todd said. He said the effigy violates the university's code of ethics and won't be tolerated.
"I am outraged because we work very hard, every day, to build bridges across the divides," Todd said. "Diversity and inclusion are among our most precious core values. Episodes like this serve only to erode our confidence in and respect for one another."
Mike Lynch, a faculty member who works in a building near where the effigy was found, said he saw it around 8:40 a.m. He described it as life-sized with a Barack Obama Halloween mask, a suit jacket and sweat pants.
"This, as far as I'm concerned, says nothing — absolutely nothing — representative of this university or this community," he said.
Obama's Kentucky campaign director, Kenya McGruder, had no immediate comment.
Secret Service spokesman Ed Donovan declined to comment specifically on the situation, but said an effigy can suggest a threatening tone or be an attempt to intimidate. He said the agency is "very proactive about addressing these matters."
It's the second time an effigy has been found on a college campus recently. George Fox University in Oregon, a small Christian college, punished four students who confessed to hanging a likeness of Obama from a tree.
That effigy was found in September with a message taped to it — "Act Six reject." The message was targeted at participants of a scholarship program geared toward increasing the number of minority and low-income students and several Christian colleges, mostly in the Northwest.
In West Hollywood, Calif., authorities on Wednesday were looking into a Halloween display depicting a mannequin of GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin hanging from a noose. The display also displayed her running mate, John McCain, surrounded by fake flames.
And in Clarksville, Ind., a man had hanged an inflatable doll made to look like Obama from a tree. He took it down Wednesday, and authorities said it didn't appear to violate any state laws.
At the University of Kentucky, Martin Luther King Jr. Cultural Center interim director Chester Grundy said he was outraged by the incident. A rally was held Wednesday night, where staff and student leaders condemned the act.
Gov. Steve Beshear called the incident "embarrassing" and "deeply offensive."
Raoul Cunningham, president of the Louisville chapter of the NAACP, said he is still trying to sort out his feelings "because there may be a double-meaning because Barack Obama is black, that he would be hung from a tree — that goes back to lynching."
John Johnson, executive director of the Kentucky Commission on Human Rights, called the action unacceptable even if it was a prank.
"It's astonishing that somebody would do that at this day and time," he said. "You would hope that our country has progressed further than that."
___
Associated Press writers Joe Biesk and Roger Alford in Frankfort and Malcolm C. Knox in Louisville contributed to this report.
Obama says would include Republicans in cabinet Wed Oct 29, 9:03 pm ET
SUNRISE, Florida (Reuters) – U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama said on Wednesday he would include Republicans in his Cabinet if he wins the election.
Obama, a Democratic senator from Illinois, also said he had "some pretty good ideas" about people he might tap for senior government jobs, though he emphasized he is focused for now on the final days of the campaign and takes nothing for granted.
"There is a transition process -- that I'm not paying attention to on a day-to-day basis -- but that has been set up," Obama told ABC News in an interview.
Obama said he "absolutely" considered it important to have Republicans in the Cabinet but he sidestepped a question on whether he would ask Defense Secretary Robert Gates to remain in his job. There has been speculation that either Obama or his Republican rival, John McCain, might ask Gates to stay on.
"I'm not going to get into details," Obama said, but he added that national security policy, in particular, should be nonpartisan.
Other people mentioned as possible defense secretary picks in an Obama administration include former Navy Secretary Richard Danzig and Sen. Chuck Hagel, a Republican senator from Nebraska.
Some analysts have speculated that during the transition period between November 4 and January 20, when a successor to President George W. Bush will take office, the new president-elect would move quickly to fill key jobs such as Treasury Secretary, Defense Secretary and Secretary of State.
Some public policy experts see a need for early announcements on such appointments in light of the global financial crisis and the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
"I am not going to jump the gun on this," Obama said but he gave credit to the Bush administration for its offer to make government resources available to both candidates to begin the vetting process early.
(Reporting by Caren Bohan; editing by Todd Eastham)
Obama frets about his 'white half' voting wrongly Wed Oct 29, 7:59 pm ET
SUNRISE, Florida (AFP) – Running as the first mixed-race candidate with a serious shot at the White House could pose a psychological test for Barack Obama come election day next week.
Satirical TV host Jon Stewart, on his "Daily Show" program, asked the Democrat Wednesday if he was worried that his "white half" might balk at voting for a black candidate next Tuesday.
"It's a problem," quipped Obama, whose father was a black African from Kenyan and his mother a white American from Kansas. "I've been going through therapy to make sure I vote properly on (November) the 4th."
Obama dismissed the so-called "Bradley effect," when white voters are supposed to tell pollsters of their support for a black politician only to vote the other way in the privacy of the ballot booth.
"They've been saying that for a while, but we're still here. I don't think white voters have gotten this memo about the Bradley effect," he said, interviewed by satellite ahead of a rally in this Florida city.
"We are now counting down every single vote. And the crowds are terrific. And I think we've got a good shot at this thing," the Illinois senator added.
Asked by Stewart if he was daunted at the prospect of becoming president at a time of crisis at home and abroad, Obama said: "I actually think that this is the time to want to be president.
"If you went into public service thinking you could have an impact, now is the time when you can have an impact," he said.
Obama says white voters won't bail on him By BEN FELLER, Associated Press Writer Ben Feller, Associated Press Writer Wed Oct 29, 7:19 pm ET
SUNRISE, Fla. – Barack Obama, bidding to be the first black president, says he doesn't believe that white voters will bail on him in the privacy of the voting booth.
"They've been saying that for a while. But we're still here," Obama told host Jon Stewart of "The Daily Show" during the taping of a segment to air Wednesday evening.
In Stewart's satirical show, which pokes fun at politics and media, he also puts newsmakers like Obama on the spot about serious topics. Stewart quizzed Obama about whether white voters who keep telling pollsters they back him will do otherwise on Election Day.
That potential of prejudice, known as the "Bradley Effect," has hung over the election. "I don't think white voters have gotten this memo about the Bradley Effect," Obama said.
Then, making light of the race topic, Stewart asked whether Obama is going to be confused about whether he should even vote for himself as the son of a white mom and black father.
Obama played along.
"I won't know what to do," the smiling Democratic presidential nominee said. "It's a problem."
Stewart also suggested that Obama made a tactical mistake by planning a Wednesday rally with former President Clinton in Florida at the late hour of 11 p.m. By that time, Stewart said, many of Florida's older people will already be asleep.
"No comment on that, Jon," Obama said. "I'm trying to win Florida.
Obama, an Illinois senator, is leading most polls in his race against Republican Sen. John McCain. The election is Tuesday.
The presidential contender laughed when Stewart said the nation has changed since Obama first launched his bid, like a once new car that has since been kicked around too much.
Obama said he had no second thoughts about running.
"I actually think this is the time to want to be president," Obama said. "If you went into public service thinking that could have an impact, now is the time you can have an impact."
Obama taped the segment via satellite ahead of two campaign rallies in Florida. It was scheduled to air at 11 p.m. Wednesday on Comedy Central.
Obama has 5-point lead on McCain By John Whitesides, Political Correspondent John Whitesides, Political Correspondent Wed Oct 29, 6:59 pm ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Democrat Barack Obama has a steady 5-point national lead over Republican John McCain with six days left in the grueling race for the White House, according to a Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll released on Wednesday.
Obama leads McCain by 49 percent to 44 percent among likely voters in the three-day national tracking poll, inching up from his 4-point advantage on Tuesday. The telephone poll has a margin of error of 2.9 percentage points.
"The daily numbers were essentially unchanged from yesterday, with just a slight improvement for Obama," pollster John Zogby said. "The race is frozen in place for now."
The Illinois senator still holds a solid lead with several crucial blocs of swing voters -- he is ahead by 15 points among independents, 10 points among women, 8 points among Catholics and 5 points among voters above the age 65.
The race is essentially tied among men and McCain moved into a slight 2-point lead among self-described blue-collar workers as the two candidates push toward next week's vote.
"Obama is holding steady," Zogby said.
Obama has held a lead of between two and 12 points every day since the tracking poll began three weeks ago. McCain, an Arizona senator, has not been able to push his support above 45 percent in that time, while Obama reached a high mark of 52 percent a week ago before drifting back.
About two percent of voters remain undecided in the race, which still has time for some last-minute shifts.
BUSH LED BY 5
The 5-point margin for Obama is the same lead then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush held in the tracking poll over Democrat Al Gore with six days left in the 2000 race. Gore closed fast and narrowly won the popular vote, but Bush won the Electoral College and the presidency after a disputed Florida recount.
With six days to go in the 2004 race, Bush led Democratic challenger John Kerry by one point before winning re-election by 3
points.
McCain and Obama campaigned in Pennsylvania on Tuesday as they turn their attention to about a dozen battleground states that will decide the race. All except Pennsylvania are states won by Bush in 2004.
Independent Ralph Nader received 2 percent in the national survey, and Libertarian Bob Barr was at 1 percent.
The rolling tracking poll, taken Sunday through Tuesday, surveyed 1,179 likely voters in the presidential election. In a tracking poll, the most recent day's results are added, while the oldest day's results are dropped to monitor changing momentum.
The U.S. president is determined by who wins the Electoral College, which has 538 members apportioned by population in each state and the District of Columbia. Electoral votes are allotted on a winner-take-all basis in all but two states, which divide them by congressional district.
Rashid Khalidi - Invited Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak at Columbia University. His wife was president of a Chicago-based nonprofit organization where Barack Obama was a board member of for 3 years along with William C. Ayers, who was a member of a terrorist group which wanted to overthrow of the U.S. government and took responsibility for bombing the U.S. Capitol in 1971.
I still don't get the point about this. Obama and Ayers were at the same time board members of an NGO which was sponsored by the Republican Party too. And that's all?? If you do political work, you can't always choose the people you're working with. Ayers is still working at the University of Illinois. Does that make all the rest of the professors at that university suspects? 11 years ago I was working for an NGO who had hired a rather unpleasant guy as a teacher. In 2001 I recognised him as one of the 9/11 pilots. Does that make me someone who's "palling around with terrorists"?
DA, Don't bother. He pops in here to either agree or disagree with some post and then pops out again.
Well please forgive me I have more important things to do than spend 99.9% of my time posting in this thread.
Obviously you have the time to post sarcasm and disrespect.
Yeah I'll admit there was some sarcasm in that post, but disrespect give me a break.
Perhaps I should have stated that I have better things to do with my time then to post my views in this thread and get attacked for them. I learned a long time ago never get into an argument over politics as it never solves anything, perhaps you never learned that.
Unless I missed it, this is one story that our BB Obama supporter, SVSG missed:
Obama considering late surge to Arizona Raising Arizona Richard Wolffe
Running against any other GOP candidate, the state of Arizona would be a natural battleground for Barack Obama, alongside other Western states that lean toward him, like New Mexico, Colorado and Nevada. But with John McCain as the Republican nominee, a serious push to win Arizona was off the table.
Until now.
Obama’s senior aides are intrigued by several late polls that show a narrowing of the presidential contest in Arizona. Most recently, on Tuesday a Cronkite-Eight poll (named for Arizona State University's journalism school and the local PBS channel) showed the state a statistical tie, with the Arizona senator just 2 points ahead of Obama. That poll suggests Arizona is too close to call, with Obama making significant gains among women and independents.
The campaign is now seriously examining a late surge into the state. That may include ramping up TV advertising, on-the-ground staff or even deploying the candidate to stop there. Obama is scheduled to make a Western swing late this week, making an Arizona visit possible.
According to Pollster.com’s averages, Arizona is a 6 point race in McCain’s favor, compared to Pennsylvania--McCain’s best hope of picking up a blue state--which is an 11-point race in Obama’s favor. That means Obama has more reason to travel to Arizona than McCain does to Pennsylvania, no matter how far-fetched it once seemed to try to win McCain’s home state.
Rashid Khalidi - Invited Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak at Columbia University. His wife was president of a Chicago-based nonprofit organization where Barack Obama was a board member of for 3 years along with William C. Ayers, who was a member of a terrorist group which wanted to overthrow of the U.S. government and took responsibility for bombing the U.S. Capitol in 1971.
I still don't get the point about this. Obama and Ayers were at the same time board members of an NGO which was sponsored by the Republican Party too. And that's all?? If you do political work, you can't always choose the people you're working with. Ayers is still working at the University of Illinois. Does that make all the rest of the professors at that university suspects? 11 years ago I was working for an NGO who had hired a rather unpleasant guy as a teacher. In 2001 I recognised him as one of the 9/11 pilots. Does that make me someone who's "palling around with terrorists"?
Iceman, I believe that your attitude leads more to these supposed "attacks" than your views. If you don't discuss ideas, if you don't exchange thoughts, then how would anyone ever learn anything new or different?
As for Senator Obama's "associations", the insinuations are insulting and demeaning. I notice that the only "stories" that are publicized are those that have him with "terrorists" or "shady" non-profit organizations that work with minorities. To me, that plays on the internal racist in all of us. He looks different. He has a "funny name". Therefore, he must be a suspicious character.
If you disagree with his stance on energy, on abortion, on the economy, with his healthcare plan, then fine. Tell us WHAT you object to and, more importantly, WHY you object to it and why you think that Senator McCain has a better plan. But posting articles that call him a "Jew-hater" or accuse him of associating with terrorists just smacks of the lowest and most baseless biases.
I still don't get the point about this. Obama and Ayers were at the same time board members of an NGO which was sponsored by the Republican Party too. And that's all?? If you do political work, you can't always choose the people you're working with. Ayers is still working at the University of Illinois. Does that make all the rest of the professors at that university suspects? 11 years ago I was working for an NGO who had hired a rather unpleasant guy as a teacher. In 2001 I recognised him as one of the 9/11 pilots. Does that make me someone who's "palling around with terrorists"?
To the supporters of George W. Bush (possibly the worst president this country has ever seen) like Apple and Don Cardi, yes. It just naturally follows that McCain supporters would feel the same way.
I still don't get the point about this. Obama and Ayers were at the same time board members of an NGO which was sponsored by the Republican Party too. And that's all?? If you do political work, you can't always choose the people you're working with. Ayers is still working at the University of Illinois. Does that make all the rest of the professors at that university suspects? 11 years ago I was working for an NGO who had hired a rather unpleasant guy as a teacher. In 2001 I recognised him as one of the 9/11 pilots. Does that make me someone who's "palling around with terrorists"?
To the supporters of George W. Bush (possibly the worst president this country has ever seen) like Apple and Don Cardi, yes. It just naturally follows that McCain supporters would feel the same way.
It's guilt by association, albeit quite distant.
I thought guilt by association went out with McCarthyism.
Iceman, I believe that your attitude leads more to these supposed "attacks" than your views. If you don't discuss ideas, if you don't exchange thoughts, then how would anyone ever learn anything new or different?
Yeah I mean at least Freddie C. has the courtesy to debate us, and not simply launch a missile and then go MIA for several days.
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
As for Senator Obama's "associations", the insinuations are insulting and demeaning. I notice that the only "stories" that are publicized are those that have him with "terrorists" or "shady" non-profit organizations that work with minorities. To me, that plays on the internal racist in all of us. He looks different. He has a "funny name". Therefore, he must be a suspicious character.
What I think is ironic is that in 2012 or 2016, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal will probably run for the GOP Presidential nomination, and I think he and NOT Sarah Palin will be the future of the party.
Get a good luck at him Iceman/Appleonya/DoubleJ:
If Obama has had problems because of his skin and funny Arab-sounding name, Jindal is gonna have to rough it out because of his face. Just imagine those same Palin supporters, and probably Huckabee stumpers as well, saying in coded subtle language, how Jindal is a terrorist too, or pals around with them.
You know, in spite of the fact that he's Indian-American and Roman Catholic (though he apparently was involved in a mean exorcism once. No really.)
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
If you disagree with his stance on energy, on abortion, on the economy, with his healthcare plan, then fine. Tell us WHAT you object to and, more importantly, WHY you object to it and why you think that Senator McCain has a better plan. But posting articles that call him a "Jew-hater" or accuse him of associating with terrorists just smacks of the lowest and most baseless biases.
EXACTLY. You can be rather intelligent in picking either candidate, but don't vote because one is old or the other has a funny name or whatever nonsense.
Hell, Freddie C. had the courtesy to debate Obama's taxplan...which I think is a legit concern.
I still don't get the point about this. Obama and Ayers were at the same time board members of an NGO which was sponsored by the Republican Party too. And that's all?? If you do political work, you can't always choose the people you're working with. Ayers is still working at the University of Illinois. Does that make all the rest of the professors at that university suspects? 11 years ago I was working for an NGO who had hired a rather unpleasant guy as a teacher. In 2001 I recognised him as one of the 9/11 pilots. Does that make me someone who's "palling around with terrorists"?
To the supporters of George W. Bush (possibly the worst president this country has ever seen) like Apple and Don Cardi, yes. It just naturally follows that McCain supporters would feel the same way.
It's guilt by association, albeit quite distant.
Using their logic.....how about that Vietnamese POW guard who endorsed McCain?
You know, the same one that beat the shit out of him and other American prisoners for years?
svsg - just wondering, given your recent and quite avid interest in the election, if you are allowed to vote in this country?
No SB, I am not a US citizen. I don't have voting rights.
Then I welcome your observations even more. As an "outsider" (for want of a better word), your views of the campaign and election process may be quite different than mine, and I am truly interested in hearing them.
If Barack Obama fails to win the election, perhaps the networks should hire him to entertain viewers on Wednesday nights.
On average, Obama's 30-minute primetime infomercial managed to outperform the usual broadcast programming in the 8 p.m. time period.
The Obama special was seen by 26.3 million viewers across broadcasters CBS, NBC and Fox, according to preliminary Nielsen ratings.
The tricky question is: What do you compare Obama's ad to? After all, such a national pre-election special hasn't been attempted in 16 years.
The entertainment programming that usually runs in the slot on those three networks has averaged a cumulative 23.1 million viewers each week since the start of the season -- 12% lower than the Obama ad total. Put another way, the time period averages about 7.7 million viewers and a 2.4 adults 18-49 rating per network. In the preliminary ratings, the ad pulled an average of 9.2 million viewers and a 2.7 average rating per network -- boosting the advertiser-friendly adult demo by 13%.
But the usual shows are comedies and dramas. Can one realistically compare "Knight Rider" to a political ad? That would normally seem unfair -- to the politician. Obama improved NBC's rating by 43% and CBS by 10% compared with last week. And keep in mind Obama was competing against himself.
The lowest-rated of the three presidential debates received a 52.4 million viewers -- but that was carried by more networks and was, after all, a debate.
The Ross Perot specials in 1992 averaged 11.6 million viewers, but those were 15 separate specials that ran on different nights.
NBC was the most-viewed and highest-rated network for its presentation of Obama's ad, pulling 9.8 million viewers and a 3.0 rating. CBS had 8.6 million (2.3) and Fox had 7.9 million (2.8).
And keep in mind, the Obama ad aired on more networks than just those three broadcasters. MSNBC, Univision, BET and TV One also carried the ad. Nielsen will release a total viewership number that includes other telecasts later today. The measurement company has released a cume metered market household rating for the ad -- 21.7.
The race for the White House has tightened significantly -- with Barack Obama now ahead of John McCain by three percentage points -- according to a FOX News poll released Thursday.
Dana Blanton
FOXNews.com
Thursday, October 30, 2008
As the candidates make their closing arguments before the election, the race has tightened with Barack Obama now leading John McCain by 47 percent to 44 percent among likely voters, according to a FOX News poll released Thursday. Last week Obama led by 49-40 percent among likely voters.
Obama has a bit more strength of support going into the final week. Among his backers, 88 percent say they support him "strongly" and 12 percent "only somewhat." For McCain, 78 percent of his voters support him "strongly" and 22 percent "only somewhat."
In addition, 66 percent of Obama's supporters say it is "extremely important" to them that their candidate wins compared to 59 percent of McCain supporters.
The race has tightened in part because of changes in a couple of important swing voting groups. Independents back Obama by 5 percentage points today, down from a 9-point edge last week. Similarly, among white Catholics, Obama held an 11-point edge over McCain last week and today they split 46-46.
"Independent voters have long been regarded as one of the keys to this race and these results may foreshadow a tightening in the battleground states where independents carry disproportionate weight," says Ernie Paicopolos, a principal of Opinion Dynamics Corporation.
Another reason the numbers have tightened is that McCain has also improved his position among his party faithful, and the number of voters identifying themselves as Republicans has seen an up-tick as well. Fully 88 percent of Republicans back McCain, up from 83 percent last week. For Obama, 89 percent of Democrats support him, up slightly from 88 percent.
New voters, those 11 percent who have registered in the last two years, support Obama by 54-38 percent.
Obama also has a 52-43 percent edge over McCain among the more than one of five voters who say they have taken advantage of early voting in their state and already voted.
Opinion Dynamics Corp. conducted the national telephone poll of 900 likely voters for FOX News from October 28 to October 29. The poll has a 3-point error margin. "Likely voters" are registered voters who are considered more likely to vote in the November presidential election.
Top Issues
The economy continues to far outdistance all other issues as the top priority for voters this year, and while Obama maintains an advantage on the economy, McCain has chipped away at those numbers. By an 8-point margin Obama is seen as the candidate who voters trust to handle the economy, down from a 15-point edge.
The Democrat also has the lead on handling health care (+ 11 points) and energy independence (+9 points).
McCain is preferred on handling the war on terrorism (+14 points) and Iraq (+7 points).
More voters trust Obama to handle the issue of taxes (+6 points) even though nearly three times as many think their taxes will go up under an Obama administration (20 percent) as think the same about a McCain administration (7 percent). A 55 percent majority thinks their taxes will go up no matter which candidate wins.
Recently Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden said the next president would be "tested" by an international crisis in the first six months of his presidency. Who do voters think would better respond to that test? McCain has a 52-39 percent advantage over Obama on this measure. Among those important independent voters, McCain holds a similar edge: 53-37 percent.
Candidate Qualities
The candidate quality cited by voters as most important in their vote is "can bring needed change" (32 percent), followed closely by "shares my values" (26 percent). Some 19 percent say having the right experience is the most important quality -- about half the number citing change.
Change voters are more likely to back Obama by 79-13 percent, while values voters back McCain by 63-28 percent. Among those citing experience as most important, they support McCain by 85-9 percent.
By 73-19 percent Obama bests McCain among the 10 percent who say "cares about people like me" is their top quality.
Almost all voters -- 78 percent -- think McCain has the right experience to be president. That includes a 64 percent majority of Democrats. Significantly fewer voters -- 49 percent -- think Obama has the right experience for the Oval Office (48 percent say he doesn't).
A 53 percent majority thinks Obama can bring the "right kind of change to Washington" while a 52 percent majority says McCain can't.
While 43 percent of voters think Obama's positions on the issues are "too liberal," half say his positions are "about right." The numbers are similar for McCain -- 38 percent say he's "too conservative" and 46 percent "about right."
Vice Presidential Candidates
Voters are fairly split on whether they would be comfortable with Joe Biden as vice president -- 45 percent would be "extremely" or "very" comfortable and 52 percent would not be comfortable.
For Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, 34 percent would be either "extremely" or "very" comfortable with her as vice president and 64 percent would not.
One of five (20 percent) Democrats would be uncomfortable with Biden as vice president and one of three (33 percent) Republicans would be uncomfortable with Palin.
By an 18-point margin more voters have a positive view of Biden than a negative view (55 percent favorable and 37 percent unfavorable).
Views of Palin are much more mixed: 49 percent favorable and 46 percent unfavorable.
Joe the Plumber was supposed to show up at a McCain rally this morning but did not because he said no one called him to confirm.
It gets better than that. McCain didn't even know he wasn't there.
McCAIN (after the rally) "You just can't trust these trades people any more. Back in my day when the plumber aid he'd be there on time, by God, he was there. But nowadays no one cares about a damn thing. HEY...tell those kids to get off my lawn. This is private property."
The race for the White House has tightened significantly -- with Barack Obama now ahead of John McCain by three percentage points -- according to a FOX News poll released Thursday.
I read that. FWIW, Obama has gone up 2 points in each of the last two days in Zogby's poll (+7), and he's also up today in the Rasmussen and Gallup polls. None of these polls reflect any impact that Clinton and the infomercial from yesterday might have had.
It gets better than that. McCain didn't even know he wasn't there.
McCAIN (after the rally) "You just can't trust these trades people any more. Back in my day when the plumber aid he'd be there on time, by God, he was there. But nowadays no one cares about a damn thing. HEY...tell those kids to get off my lawn. This is private property."
Listen to the groans, and then 'crickets' after McCain says: "Joe is with us today". It sucked all the life out of the rally.
I still don't get the point about this. Obama and Ayers were at the same time board members of an NGO which was sponsored by the Republican Party too. And that's all?? If you do political work, you can't always choose the people you're working with. Ayers is still working at the University of Illinois. Does that make all the rest of the professors at that university suspects? 11 years ago I was working for an NGO who had hired a rather unpleasant guy as a teacher. In 2001 I recognised him as one of the 9/11 pilots. Does that make me someone who's "palling around with terrorists"?
To the supporters of George W. Bush (possibly the worst president this country has ever seen) like Apple and Don Cardi, yes. It just naturally follows that McCain supporters would feel the same way.
It's guilt by association, albeit quite distant.
Danito, if the fact of the matter is that you just happened to be working for NGO at the same time that one of the 9/11 murders did, that in no way means that you are guilty of anything.
As for what I posted about Obama's asociation with the names that I listed, well please put it in the context that it was menat to be in when reading it. Notice the "coinicidental" little cirlce there and how one person intertwined and/ or was involved with another in some capacity. It just so happens that the convicted felon from that "little circle" happened to also be a member of Obama's campaign finance committee who just happened to approach the board of directors of the Woods fund that this Columbia Professor's wife was President of while Obama just happened to be serving on the board of directors along with someone else on that same board who was a member of a terrorist group who had bombed the US capitol in 1971.
Perhaps you and your friend SC, yes, should do a bit more research and look into into how Senator Obama just happened to get involved in a land deal with the convicted felon who was once a key member of Obama's campaign finance committee. A deal that took place at a time when it was widely known that he was under investigation.
It has nothing to do with my being a George Bush supporter whatsoever. As far as I am concerned this Presidential election is about the TWO candidates who are running for President right now, what they stand for, what THEIR backgrounds are, what they've done, and what they say they plan to do for the people of this country. That is what concerns me.
What do we really know about Senator Barack Obama as far as his background goes? What experience does he really have that qualifies him to take on the most responsible and burdensome job of running an entire country and leading it as the Commander In Chief?
McCain's resume is much larger than Obama's. McCain has a background that is a solid one that can be and has been varified, with maybe a minimal amount of unanswered questions.
If both these men were applying for a job in a company that I owned and I went over both of their resumes and did a background check on both of them, it would be irresponsible of me not to hire someone like John McCain over Barack Obama, to work for my company.
Then I welcome your observations even more. As an "outsider" (for want of a better word), your views of the campaign and election process may be quite different than mine, and I am truly interested in hearing them.
Since you are truly interested in hearing my view, you have to bear with me on this long reply
On two-party system:
I understand that there can be independent candidates, but for all practical purposes they have no chance of winning. I think this is a good system in a way. In places where multiple (strong) parties are present, nobody gets the majority and they always tend to form coalitions after the election to reach majority. That process is so full of corruption inherently.
On polarized views
The down side to the above mentioned point is that people are ridiculously one sided and polarized. Why can’t people say (example, not literally) “I like the health plan and tax rates of Obama and I like McCain’s views on abortion and war, but currently I am more worried about health, so I’ll vote for Obama” or something like that. Why do people have to find all the bogus stories about the other candidate they don’t support and claim victories for the candidate they support in all the debates and stuff?
On the type of issues
This election is now concentrating on economic issues and taxes etc primarily because of the recession, collapse of financial/mortgage industry and oil prices. That is very good. They should also be talking about education and health. I never understood the stuff like pro/anti life, guns and gay marriage being election issues. I know it affects some, but is everyone happy with all the other basic stuff like jobs and health before they jump into all those big pro/anti life questions?
On the debates
Maybe because I come from a place where the politicians are illiterate and corrupt mobsters, I find the idea of debates very fascinating. Politicians waiting for their turn to answer questions and not interrupting each other and shouting some non-sense in itself is great. But in addition, the candidates are very knowledgeable on a variety of topics. I may or may not agree with their views, but they certainly have an answer to everyone’s questions (mostly).
On this election being historic
As I have seen minority and women presidents/prime-ministers before not only in my country, but also in several other Asian countries, I firmly believe that nothing historic or great is going to happen. They all do the same things, the system is such, no one person can do anything. I am actually sorry for people who are unreasonably optimistic about the outcome of this election.
On race being an issue
People cannot be changed overnight. Race will play a big role, no matter what people claim. But after one black president, no one will care about it so much.
My personal views on issues
Economy: I don’t think either of them can do anything. It is so complex that I doubt if anyone has a sure shot cure. Both have endorsed the bailout, but whoever loses the election is going to blame the guy in power for the bad economy.
Taxes: All tax is not income tax. Everything from toilet-paper to a haircut is taxed. All industries are affected by taxation. So finally how the businesses will pass on the cost to the customers and how much income tax gets reduced is very complex to compute. Both candidates are making tall claims. I have wait and watch how this will work out finally. But I guess Obama’s policies will be good for someone on a small income (I hope).
Health: Hillary was big on this, but not these two.
Education: haha, what happened to this one? Is everyone happy with the system?
War: No way I can support McCain on this. It is ridiculous on every point. I support Obama on this. Diplomacy is the way to go, not bombing.
Immigration: Actually I am not so interested in immigration , but I am very concerned about what they have got for non-immigrant visa holders like me. I am not immigrating and I am working here legally after obtaining higher education in a US university. Right now the policies are kind of bad. People are talking about giving citizenship for illegal immigrants who have crossed border and stuff, but the rules for legal foreign workers are extremely convoluted. That is, even for just working here or becoming a permanent resident (not talking about citizenship).McCain has policies favorable to me. I support him on this. Obama will most likely screw me with this.
Pro-life/Choice/gay-marriage: Frankly I don’t give a damn, but if it were the deciding issue, I go with the more liberal view always. So I favor Obama with this (BTW, he doesn’t believe in gay marriage, right?–what kind of liberal is he).
Don’t know if I covered all the key points. Ask me if you are interested
McCain's resume is much larger than Obama's. McCain has a background that is a solid one that can be and has been varified, with maybe a minimal amount of unanswered questions.
If both these men were applying for a job in a company that I owned and I went over both of their resumes and did a background check on both of them, it would be irresponsible of me not to hire someone like John McCain over Barack Obama, to work for my company.
Hey DC, since you and I seem to connect best when I bring it down to a sports analogy, this is how I look at it.
McCain is the 10 year journeyman nearing the end. Never been a star and never will be. Won't put up any big numbers. Should be able to fill in.
Obama is the high 1st round draft pick. Raw but talented. Unlimited upside. Could/should be a star. Needs the right team around him to grow.
McCain's resume is much larger than Obama's. McCain has a background that is a solid one that can be and has been varified, with maybe a minimal amount of unanswered questions.
If both these men were applying for a job in a company that I owned and I went over both of their resumes and did a background check on both of them, it would be irresponsible of me not to hire someone like John McCain over Barack Obama, to work for my company.
Hey DC, since you and I seem to connect best when I bring it down to a sports analogy, this is how I look at it.
McCain is the 10 year journeyman nearing the end. Never been a star and never will be. Won't put up any big numbers. Should be able to fill in.
Obama is the high 1st round draft pick. Raw but talented. Unlimited upside. Could/should be a star. Needs the right team around him to grow.
I like your analogy Lou.
But here's how I look at it : The game is all tied up, it's down to the final shootout with each team having one shot left. The team that scores the next goal can get into the playoffs. As the coach do you put a Rookie in, who you just brought up from the juniors and who hasn't proven anything in his career, to hopefully bring you into the playoffs or do you put the experienced 10 year journeyman out there to take the shot that can get you to the next level?
Danito, if the fact of the matter is that you just happened to be working for NGO at the same time that one of the 9/11 murders did, that in no way means that you are guilty of anything.
As for what I posted about Obama's asociation with the names that I listed, well please put it in the context that it was menat to be in when reading it. Notice the "coinicidental" little cirlce there and how one person intertwined and/ or was involved with another in some capacity. It just so happens that the convicted felon from that "little circle" happened to also be a member of Obama's campaign finance committee who just happened to approach the board of directors of the Woods fund that this Columbia Professor's wife was President of while Obama just happened to be serving on the board of directors along with someone else on that same board who was a member of a terrorist group who had bombed the US capitol in 1971.
Perhaps you and your friend SC, yes, should do a bit more research and look into into how Senator Obama just happened to get involved in a land deal with the convicted felon who was once a key member of Obama's campaign finance committee. A deal that took place at a time when it was widely known that he was under investigation.
It has nothing to do with my being a George Bush supporter whatsoever. As far as I am concerned this Presidential election is about the TWO candidates who are running for President right now, what they stand for, what THEIR backgrounds are, what they've done, and what they say they plan to do for the people of this country. That is what concerns me.
What do we really know about Senator Barack Obama as far as his background goes? What experience does he really have that qualifies him to take on the most responsible and burdensome job of running an entire country and leading it as the Commander In Chief?
McCain's resume is much larger than Obama's. McCain has a background that is a solid one that can be and has been varified, with maybe a minimal amount of unanswered questions.
If both these men were applying for a job in a company that I owned and I went over both of their resumes and did a background check on both of them, it would be irresponsible of me not to hire someone like John McCain over Barack Obama, to work for my company.
With all due respect, DC, I do not share your concerns. I agree it was sleazy of Obama to throw his weight around to get his house, but no worse than McCain's palling around with Charles Keating, which IMHO is far more troublesome. Obama is a graduate of Columbia University and it is not surprising that he has associations with. As I understand it McCain has some kind of connection to the Palestinian professor as well. There is NOTHING wrong with talking to people on different sides of an issue even when they happen to disagree with the Zionist (as distinguished from the Israeli)agenda. As for Ayers and his wife, it is more troubling to me that he said what he said after 9/11 than what he did back in 1971, when things were pretty crazy in this country (don't forget a year earlier U.S. troops fired on and killed innocent demonstrators at Kent State...this does not justify bombing the pentagon, but it is indicative of the divisiveness of those times). In any case the Ayers thing is a non starter. He and Obama served on some board, and apparently Ayers threw a fund raiser for his failed run for congress.
Personally I think the next president should listen to all kinds of points of view on all kinds of issues. We have had enough of this "You are either with us or agaist us" nonsense, and McCain offers more of the same.
You say we should not be focusing on Bush but on the people running now. I do not agree that the GOP should not be held accountable for his disastrous administration, but for the sake of this posting I will concede the point, and take your example of "who would you hire." When examining this you have to look not only at the presidential picks, but the vice presidents as well. Quite bluntly Sarah Palin is not qualified to be the president of the United States. Period. McCain's picking her demonstrates the kind of irrational and impetuous thinking that has made him a colorful and sometimes great senator, but it (among many other things) also shows he lacks the temperament to be president. No question that we would al like to have seen Obama serve another term in the senate or a term or two as governor of Illinois, but bottom line I am bot buying into this smear campaign of rumors and innuendo that has been circulating this past week...and I am mindful that McCain has put this race within 5 points in lss than a week since he started with this "socialist" "terrorist" and guilt by association business. Even though Biden is a one man gaffe machine who "talks when he should listen," as Vito might say, he is head and shoulders more qualified to help Obama and to step in if need be. Our greatest challenge is going to be economic, not military. If we continue to bleed money and lose our industral base while China continues an economic and military build up, all this Muslim business is going to look like a day at the beach in another decade. We need to move forward, not backward, and we need someone wth the vision to get us moving again. This makes Obama-Biden an easy choice.
I agree 100%. I've run the gamut. I've gone from cautiously optimistic to over confident, and now I'm back to worrying again.
You need to relax. It is unheard of for the polls not to tighten somewhat near the end of an election.
Here's the latest "Karl Rove's State of the Race":
Election 2008: State of the Race National polls have started to show the presidential race tightening, but 66 state polls released so far this week haven’t captured any significant movement toward John McCain. In fact, since Sunday, Nevada (5 EV) has flipped from toss-up to Obama, giving him 311 electoral votes to McCain’s 157, with 70 as a toss-up. McCain still needs to pick up all of the current toss-up states—which all went for Bush in both 2000 and 2004—and peel off several large states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia from Obama.
I know, Lou. I keep thinking back to '80, which was actually the first Presidential race ever I voted in. I voted for Reagan, but I remember Carter doing well in the polls right up until late October.
And after 2000 and 2004, well, need I even say it?
For those that have ever watched Columbo. Columbo still scratching his head.
Ah . Sorry to bother you Mr. Obama, Sir.
Excuse me Mr. Obama, I mean Senator Obama, sir.
Um . . know you are busy and important and stuff. I mean running for president is very important and . . . ah . . . I hate to bother you. I will only take a minute ok, sir?
See, I have these missing pieces that are holding me up, and I was wondering sir, if you could take time out of your busy schedule and help me out. You know, no big deal, just some loose ends and things.
Hey, you have a nice place here! The wife sees houses like this on TV all the time and says boy she wishes she had digs like this you know? Is that painting real? Really? Wow. I saw something like that in a museum once!
Oh, sorry sir. I didn't mean to get off the track. So if you could just help me out a minute and give me some details, I will get right out of your way. I want to close this case and maybe take the wife to Coney Island or something. Ever been to Coney Island ? No, I didn't think so. .
Well, listen, anyways, I can't seem to get some information I need to wrap this up. These things seem to either be "locked" or "not available'. I'm sure it's just some oversight or glitch or something, so if you could you tell me where these things are . . . I . . . I . . have them written down here somewhere . . . oh wait. Sorry about the smears. It was raining out. I'll just read it to you.
Could you help me please find these things, sir?
1. Occidental College records -- Not released
2. Columbia College records -- Not released
3. Columbia Thesis paper -- "not available"
4. Harvard College records -- Not released
5. Selective Service Registration -- Not released
6. Medical records -- Not released
7. Illinois State Senate schedule -- "not available"
8. Law practice client list -- Not released
9. Certified Copy of original Birth certificate -- Not released
10. Embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth -- Not release
11. Harvard Law Review articles published -- None
12. University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None
13. Your Record of baptism-- Not released or "not available"
14. Your Illinois State Senate records--"not available"
15. How were your college tuitions paid for ... grandparents, student loans, minority grants based on race, not academic acheivements ?
Oh hey listen! I know you are busy! Is this too much for you now? I mean tell you what. I will come back tomorrow. Give you some time to get these things together, you know? I mean, I know you are busy, so I will just let myself out. I will be back tomorrow.
"Who wants to know these things?" asked Senator Obama.
What's so bad about Bill Clinton? I was too young to follow American politics during his presidency, and I still don't know a lot about his policies; but for some strange reason I remember him being a rather good president.
Originally Posted By: svsg
On two-party system:
I understand that there can be independent candidates, but for all practical purposes they have no chance of winning. I think this is a good system in a way. In places where multiple (strong) parties are present, nobody gets the majority and they always tend to form coalitions after the election to reach majority. That process is so full of corruption inherently.
In the country I live in we have a multiple party system (right now there are 7 major parties: 23 %, 18 %, 15%, 15%, 10%, 7%, 6%) and this works pretty fine normally. Or at least, the multiple party system on itself isn't the cause of government problems. The parties that either are the biggest or the winners of the election usually form a coalition in a system like this. The upside is that there are seldom extremes, the downside is that a party can never really have it's way all the way.
Originally Posted By: svsg
On race being an issue
People cannot be changed overnight. Race will play a big role, no matter what people claim. But after one black president, no one will care about it so much.
I believe in something like a natural rate of racism. In the long-run, a certain number of people will continue to be extreme-right, racist and intolerant. All other racism can be explained by historic and cultural factors, like the racism in the US South. Over a certain period of time, race won't be such an issue anymore as it still is today in my opinion.
Originally Posted By: svsg
Health: Hillary was big on this, but not these two.
A fucking shame.
I really liked Hillary's pov on Social Security, and I hoped Obama would eventually have taken it in his program.
Originally Posted By: svsg
War: No way I can support McCain on this. It is ridiculous on every point. I support Obama on this. Diplomacy is the way to go, not bombing.
Ditto. Thank god more and more people in the center and from the right are beginning to realize this.
Originally Posted By: svsg
Pro-life/Choice/gay-marriage: Frankly I don’t give a damn, but if it were the deciding issue, I go with the more liberal view always. So I favor Obama with this (BTW, he doesn’t believe in gay marriage, right?–what kind of liberal is he).
I agree. My opinion on this is the following: Am I gay? No. So should I fucking care what gays can do and can't do? No! They should decide for themselves what they want to do in life. I have no right to judge over another one's rights. It is a complete idiocracy to deny gays matters that only affect themselves (eg: marriage, ...) Obama disapoints me in this one, although from a political point of view it is understandable.
For those that have ever watched Columbo. Columbo still scratching his head.
Ah . Sorry to bother you Mr. Obama, Sir.
Excuse me Mr. Obama, I mean Senator Obama, sir.
Um . . know you are busy and important and stuff. I mean running for president is very important and . . . ah . . . I hate to bother you. I will only take a minute ok, sir?
See, I have these missing pieces that are holding me up, and I was wondering sir, if you could take time out of your busy schedule and help me out. You know, no big deal, just some loose ends and things.
Hey, you have a nice place here! The wife sees houses like this on TV all the time and says boy she wishes she had digs like this you know? Is that painting real? Really? Wow. I saw something like that in a museum once!
Oh, sorry sir. I didn't mean to get off the track. So if you could just help me out a minute and give me some details, I will get right out of your way. I want to close this case and maybe take the wife to Coney Island or something. Ever been to Coney Island ? No, I didn't think so. .
Well, listen, anyways, I can't seem to get some information I need to wrap this up. These things seem to either be "locked" or "not available'. I'm sure it's just some oversight or glitch or something, so if you could you tell me where these things are . . . I . . . I . . have them written down here somewhere . . . oh wait. Sorry about the smears. It was raining out. I'll just read it to you.
Could you help me please find these things, sir?
1. Occidental College records -- Not released
2. Columbia College records -- Not released
3. Columbia Thesis paper -- "not available"
4. Harvard College records -- Not released
5. Selective Service Registration -- Not released
6. Medical records -- Not released
7. Illinois State Senate schedule -- "not available"
8. Law practice client list -- Not released
9. Certified Copy of original Birth certificate -- Not released
10. Embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth -- Not release
11. Harvard Law Review articles published -- None
12. University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None
13. Your Record of baptism-- Not released or "not available"
14. Your Illinois State Senate records--"not available"
15. How were your college tuitions paid for ... grandparents, student loans, minority grants based on race, not academic acheivements ?
This is just silly. Or do you really think Bin Laden paid for his school clothes? Obama graduates Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law, serves as the editor of Harvard Law Review, and is a professor of Constitutional law at the most prestigious law school in the country, and you want to review his transcripts to fully discern if the man is intelligent and has excelled in his pursuits?
Just a few I can get quickly -
3.Columbia thesis? He wrote that in 1983. I highly doubt that he ever had an electronic copy of it and that is easy to lose 25 years ago. A former professor remembers though.
6. He did release concise document with all the information you need to determine his health. Detailed medical records relate to him personally, and are irrelevant to him being a president, provided he has a current clean bill of health (which he does according to his GP). If he was holding back documents that are in the public interest then you might have a point.
9/10. Someone already posted snopes or something similar on this above I believe.
11. Harvard Law Review articles published -- none, is false. (I'm sure we're going to see all those scholarly articles published by John McCain soon).
12. He never published any scholarly articles at UC by his own admission, so it really can not be released.
For those that have ever watched Columbo. Columbo still scratching his head.
Ah . Sorry to bother you Mr. Obama, Sir.
Excuse me Mr. Obama, I mean Senator Obama, sir.
Um . . know you are busy and important and stuff. I mean running for president is very important and . . . ah . . . I hate to bother you. I will only take a minute ok, sir?
See, I have these missing pieces that are holding me up, and I was wondering sir, if you could take time out of your busy schedule and help me out. You know, no big deal, just some loose ends and things.
Hey, you have a nice place here! The wife sees houses like this on TV all the time and says boy she wishes she had digs like this you know? Is that painting real? Really? Wow. I saw something like that in a museum once!
Oh, sorry sir. I didn't mean to get off the track. So if you could just help me out a minute and give me some details, I will get right out of your way. I want to close this case and maybe take the wife to Coney Island or something. Ever been to Coney Island ? No, I didn't think so. .
Well, listen, anyways, I can't seem to get some information I need to wrap this up. These things seem to either be "locked" or "not available'. I'm sure it's just some oversight or glitch or something, so if you could you tell me where these things are . . . I . . . I . . have them written down here somewhere . . . oh wait. Sorry about the smears. It was raining out. I'll just read it to you.
Could you help me please find these things, sir?
1. Occidental College records -- Not released
2. Columbia College records -- Not released
3. Columbia Thesis paper -- "not available"
4. Harvard College records -- Not released
5. Selective Service Registration -- Not released
6. Medical records -- Not released
7. Illinois State Senate schedule -- "not available"
8. Law practice client list -- Not released
9. Certified Copy of original Birth certificate -- Not released
10. Embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth -- Not release
11. Harvard Law Review articles published -- None
12. University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None
13. Your Record of baptism-- Not released or "not available"
14. Your Illinois State Senate records--"not available"
15. How were your college tuitions paid for ... grandparents, student loans, minority grants based on race, not academic acheivements ?
This is just silly. Or do you really think Bin Laden paid for his school clothes? Obama graduates Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law, serves as the editor of Harvard Law Review, and is a professor of Constitutional law at the most prestigious law school in the country, and you want to review his transcripts to fully discern if the man is intelligent and has excelled in his pursuits?
Just a few I can get quickly -
3.Columbia thesis? He wrote that in 1983. I highly doubt that he ever had an electronic copy of it and that is easy to lose 25 years ago. A former professor remembers though.
6. He did release concise document with all the information you need to determine his health. Detailed medical records relate to him personally, and are irrelevant to him being a president, provided he has a current clean bill of health (which he does according to his GP). If he was holding back documents that are in the public interest then you might have a point.
9/10. Someone already posted snopes or something similar on this above I believe.
11. Harvard Law Review articles published -- none, is false. (I'm sure we're going to see all those scholarly articles published by John McCain soon).
12. He never published any scholarly articles at UC by his own admission, so it really can not be released.
I did post above in this thread about the fake birth certificate issue. As has been pointed out over and over, in Hawaii at the time of Obama's birth the seal is on the back side of the certificate, not the front.
As Michelle and Barack have pointed out over and over and over they just recently paid off Barack's student loan debt from his book royalties. That is how he paid for Harvard.
As far as affirmative action I am not familiar with nor do I particularly care about the AA policies of Harvard Law School during Obama's time there. Supposedly Obama did not mention his race on his application. What I do know is that he graduated Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law School and was elected president of the Harvard Law Review.
So that means that not only did he compete against some of the finest minds in the world and win, he also had the respect of his peers.
It's incredible to me that someone with that pedigree is thought to be somehow unqualified.
There are reasons to vote against Obama, but his educational background is definitely not one of them. He really is that smart.
This is what I mean by misdirection. Focus on the issues. Focus on the war, the economy, healthcare, whatever is important. But seeing a candidate's baptismal certificate?? I have photographs of me being baptized, but damn if I know where my certificate is. Does that mean my parents posed me at that church with those people and just "said" that they were my godparents??
svsg, thank you for taking the time to post your thoughts. I would like to read them over more carefully and then see if I have questions.
How can anyone trust Obama on any military issue? He knows nothing about military strategy. Does anyone (besides Colin Powell) actually think Obama is better prepared than McCain to win the two wars we are in right now? He doesn't have the experience nor the judgment.
Remember how he was so adamantly opposed to the surge?
How can anyone trust Obama on any military issue? He knows nothing about military strategy. Does anyone (besides Colin Powell) actually think Obama is better prepared than McCain to win the two wars we are in right now? He doesn't have the experience nor the judgment.
Remember how he was so adamantly opposed to the surge?
Veterans give McCain a D to Obama's B grade rating, I consider that somewhat an endorsement.
I've seen no really compelling evidence SURGE is or has done what was promised; The country is seething with violence and political fissures that are very deep. I think the surge was applied very strategically and that it worked in a very small geographic area and that some people, especially Bush/McCain, saw its marginal success as reason enough to say, "See, I told you so." And I question the idea of paying Sunni soldiers (though I guess better than ours) -- does anyone really believe that the Sunnis would behave themselves and serve in a Shiite dominated government after we start arming Sunni militias in a stupid attempt to put down the insurgency? (Which seques to a study of the surge -- [or simply explained here] that suggests that ethnic violence — not the Bush administration’s surge — was the primary factor in reducing violence in Iraq. I could go on, but dammit I'm sick of Iraq, why do we continue pumping unbelievable amounts of money into that money sucking black hole when we are experiencing unheard of numbers of people losing their homes, jobs, hope, and self-esteem right here at home?)
And no, I'm not happy that Obama at the debate just went with the status quo of the surge. Meh, he isn't perfect.
I don't think anyone can win the two wars we are in right now. General Patton or fucking Napoleon or Augustus Caesar wouldn't know what the hell to do. It's been said over and over again, but it's hard to win a war against an idea. Terrorism will be around forever, cuz human nature sez so.
I'd still like the answer to this, and I'd assume more than a few people would like to hear it as well.
Originally Posted By: Don Andrew
What is wrong with being a Muslim? Because even if your extremely false quote was even close to accurate...what would be wrong with that and what would be wrong if Barack Obama was a Muslim?
Over 33 Million Watched Obama's Half-Hour Ad By REBECCA DANA
More than 33.5 million people watched Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's half-hour prime-time political ad Wednesday night, according to Nielsen Media Research.
That number includes viewers who watched the ad, which aired at 8 p.m., on CBS, Fox, NBC, Univision, BET, MSNBC and TV One. The Obama special out-rated those networks' regularly scheduled programs, which have drawn a combined average audience of 30.3 million in the 8 p.m. Wednesday time slot this fall. By comparison, the first -- and lowest-rated -- debate between Sen. Obama and Republican presidential nominee John McCain attracted 52.4 million viewers.
The special wove together stories of struggling families with Sen. Obama's policy proposals and personal history, and included a live appearance by the candidate at a rally in Florida. The audience was ethnically diverse, comprising around 23.97 million white viewers, 5.65 million black viewers and 4.91 million Hispanic viewers.
Of all the networks, NBC drew the largest audience, with 9.78 million viewers tuning in. That is 43% higher than NBC's typical rating in that time period, where it airs episodes of "Knight Rider," a remake of the 1980s hit. CBS, which broadcasts the sitcom "The New Adventures of Old Christine" in that time period, improved 10% over a typical week.
In 1992, third-party candidate Ross Perot purchased 15 separate blocks of television air time. In 1996, he bought different time periods on the top three broadcast networks on the night before the presidential election, drawing a combined audience of 22.68 million people.
I saw something on TV the other day. A teacher asked the class why there was war in the Middle East. And one of the students raised her hand and said that it was an ages-old religious conflict over land, etc., etc. The teacher said, "No, it's because it's terribly hot and they have no water." In other words, it's not something that can ever be solved.
It was not our place to be there. It wasn't our job. We were lied to, as was the President, as was the Senate, as was Congress. Osama Bin Laden, 7 years later, is dancing around in a cave right now instead of facing war crimes. It needs to end. Our soldiers need to come home.
End our dependence on foreign oil, and you take all the wind out of their sails.
That's what Senator Obama has pledged to do within 10 years.
McCain just released what has to be the weakest ad I've ever seen. In fact, IMO it helps Obama more than McCain. The ad shows some file footage of Obama praising John McCain and Joe Lieberman on their "Lieberman-McCain Climate Stewardship Act" which was a bill to lower greenhouse emissions. If anything, the ad shows Obama reaching across the aisle to support McCain's bill. McCain has spent the entire election painting himself as the one to reach across the aisle and work with the other party, and now he releases an ad showing Obama doing it? Very strange.
Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) Askes Networks Not To Call Election Until 10pm EST
According to Cynthia Cynopsis, Variety reported the following today:
"Rep. John Dingell (D-MI), sent a letter yesterday to the heads of seven television networks, asking them to not name the new president-elect next Tuesday until all voting polls have closed at 10p ET for the benefit of West Coast voters, reports Variety."
"Dingell's letter went to Jeff Zucker, President/CEO, NBC Universal; Leslie Moonves, President, CBS Corporation; Anne Sweeney, Co-Chair, Disney Media Networks and President,Disney-ABC Television Group; Peter Chernin, President, News Corp.; Jim Walton, President, CNN Worldwide; Roger Ailes, Chairman/CEO, Fox News; and Phil Griffin, President, MSNBC."
Dingell is one of the most powerful members of Congress and his committe has oversight of the television networks. In 2001, the committee held high profile hearings interrogating network heads on why the election was called for Al Gore before all of the polls were closed.
When it comes to one-liners in this campaign, John McCain has taken the cake. The problem for him is that he’s eaten it too.
While the Republican has arguably delivered the best lines of the last few months, he's inarguably stumbled upon the worst. Though rival Barack Obama has been more disciplined and deliberate in his public rhetoric, the Democrat has mustered his share of tongue trips and rips, as well.
So as the campaign winds down, Politico goes back through its notebooks in search of the best lines and worst gaffes of the general election.
BEST LINES
Barack Obama:
The line: “John McCain likes to say that he'll follow bin Laden to the Gates of Hell — but he won't even go to the cave where he lives.” The occasion: Aug. 28 Democratic National Convention speech The significance: After weeks of enduring McCain campaign ridicule for his position on hunting down terrorists in Pakistan’s tribal area, Obama countered with the sharpest barb of his nomination speech, staking a claim on McCain’s war-on-terror turf.
The line: “The old boys' network? In the McCain campaign, that’s called a staff meeting.” The occasion: Sep. 17 campaign rally in Elko, Nev. The significance: Team Obama didn’t have to work particularly hard to think up a rejoinder when McCain, a 72-year-old, three-term senator, tried to draw a nexus between “the old-boy network and the corruption in Washington.” This was kind of a gimmie. Still, Obama struck just the right note with this crowd-pleasing yet cool-headed stump salvo.
The line: “The record’s clear: John McCain has voted with President Bush 90 percent of the time. I don’t know about you, but I’m not willing to take a 10 percent chance on change.” The occasion: Democratic National Convention speech The significance: The “90 percent” line has bestrided the campaign conversation ever since, and this topper mixed in both the c-word and a little snark.
The line: “I think it's a pretty clear that Sen. McCain is a little panicked right now. At this point, he seems to be willing to say anything or do anything or change any position or violate any principle to try and win this election, and I've got to say it's kind of sad to see. That's not the politics we need.” The occasion: Sep. 19 campaign rally in Coral Gables, Fla. The significance: Obama framed the race: Subsequent polls and news stories suggested voters and the media concurred with his assessment.
The line: “I sure wish he felt the same outrage about CEO pay when his top economic adviser — who he calls a ‘role model’ — walked away with a $42 million package after being fired from Hewlett-Packard.” The occasion: Sep. 24 rally in Dunedin, Fla. The significance: Obama squeezed the last bit of juice out of McCain’s off-message economic adviser, Carly Fiorina, who nine days prior had told a St. Louis radio station that Sarah Palin wouldn't be up to the job of running the company.
John McCain:
The line: "Sen. Obama, I'm not President Bush. ... If you wanted to run against President Bush, you should have run four years ago." The occasion: Oct. 15 presidential debate at Hofstra University The significance: Hands down, the most memorable line from the final presidential debate. Republican operatives could barely contain their excitement afterward — or their wish that this had been said in the first debate and not the final one.
The line: "We had a good debate this week, and I thought I did pretty well, but let's have some straight talk: The real winner this week was Joe the Plumber. Joe won, because he's the only person to get a real answer out of Sen. Obama about his plans for our country.” The occasion: Oct. 18 campaign rally in Concord, N.C. The significance: With this, McCain began to make up some ground in the tracking polls, and Joe Wurzelbacher became a potential 2010 congressional candidate.
The line: “I’m not running for president because I think I’m blessed with such personal greatness that history has anointed me to save our country in its hour of need. My country saved me. My country saved me, and I cannot forget it. And I will fight for her for as long as I draw breath, so help me God.” The occasion: Sep. 4 Republican National Convention speech The significance: Struggling at times through the first half of his remarks, McCain caught stride in the autobiographical summation. This was one of the defter (and subtler) ways he invoked his prisoner of war story and enhanced his campaign’s “Country First” sloganeering.
The line: “I don’t need lessons about telling the truth to American people. And were I ever to need any improvement in that regard, I probably wouldn’t seek advice from a Chicago politician.” The occasion: Oct. 6 Campaign rally in Albuquerque, N.M. The significance: Beating up on the Windy City political machine is always good for scoring a political point or two. In the coming weeks, McCain would get much more specific about what (and who) he found so unsavory about Chicago.
WORST GAFFES
Barack Obama:
The gaffe: Obama introduces Sen. Joe Biden as “the next president of the United States.” The occasion: Aug. 23 rally in Springfield, Ill. The significance: With inexperience the salient knock against Obama, some deemed this slip Freudian, and the McCain campaign made quick work of it. “Barack Obama sounded as though he turned over the top spot on the ticket today to his new mentor,” mocked McCain spokesman Ben Porritt.
The gaffe: Obama refers to “my Muslim faith.” The occasion: Sept. 7 interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos The significance: For the voters dead set on believing that Obama is a secret practitioner of Islam, this miscue probably was enough to confirm suspicions. Elsewhere, nobody thought much of it.
The gaffe: Obama says “lipstick on a pig.” The occasion: Sep. 9 rally in Lebanon, Va. The significance: The phrase stole a couple of news cycles, with McCain campaign decrying it as a sexist jab at Gov. Sarah Palin. Obama pushed back, explaining that it was a common expression he'd used in reference to the McCain campaign’s stab at the "change" mantle.
The gaffe: Obama says he wants to “spread the wealth around.” The occasion: Oct. 13 conversation with Wurzelbacher at a campaign stop in Ohio The significance: If Obama had simply omitted these four words in explaining his economic philosophy, we might never have heard of Joe the Plumber, and McCain would have had a far more difficult time lambasting Obama as a “socialist.”
The gaffe: Obama says he’s “showing some love” for the Tampa Bay Devil Rays. The occasion: Oct. 20 campaign rally in Tampa, Fla. The significance: Nine days earlier, Obama had told supporters in Philadelphia that he was backing the Phillies. McCain, noting that he was not “dumb enough to get mixed up in a World Series between swing states,” lampooned Obama for this clear act of sports pandering.
John McCain:
The gaffe: McCain sets the bar for “rich” at $5 million. The occasion: Aug. 16 Saddleback Church Presidential Forum The significance: Although he said it jokingly, McCain seemed instantly aware that he had just gift-wrapped a present for Obama’s opposition ad-makers. And indeed he had: The "out of touch" narrative was afoot.
The gaffe: McCain can’t remember how many homes he owns. The occasion: Aug. 21 interview with Politico reporters Mike Allen and Jonathan Martin in Las Cruces, N.M. The significance: Just a week after the $5 million goof, McCain further undermined his entire line of attack on Obama’s “elitism.”
The gaffe: McCain says “the fundamentals of our economy are strong.” The occasion: Sept. 15 campaign rally in Jacksonville, Fla. The significance: McCain had made this same statement on numerous occasions in the months leading up the Wall Street collapse, so there was a good chance these words would come back to bite him one way or another. But to offer them up once more, mid-bank meltdown, was one time too many.
The gaffe: McCain talks about imaginary Iraq-Pakistan border. The occasion: July 21 interview on "Good Morning America" The significance: The junior senator from Illinois was supposed to be the at-risk candidate when he ventured across the pond. But the first gaffe of Obama’s Middle East/European bender came from the senior senator from Arizona, who got mixed up on his Middle East geography. Suddenly, McCain’s strongest suit, his foreign policy bona fides, didn’t seem so bona.
The gaffe: McCain calls crowd “my fellow prisoners” The occasion: Oct. 8 speech in Strongsville, Ohio The significance: As the age question was now being addressed in the press without equivocation, this slip-up only hiked the public brow higher. Then again, for the sake of elegant variation, it was a nice change of pace from his time-worn “my friends” honorific.
The gaffe: McCain “couldn’t agree more” with Rep. John P. Murtha’s “racists” comment. The occasion: Oct. 21 rally in Moon, Pa. The significance: Combined with several other verbal miscues around the same time, this gaffe lent the impression that exhaustion had overtaken McCain in the waning weeks of the election.
YOUNGSTOWN, Ohio (CNN) — Mandatory stops on the GOP campaign trail this year: Pennsylvania. Florida. Saturday Night Live.
Two weeks after running mate Sarah Palin made an appearance on the late-night comedy show, a McCain campaign aide tells CNN that the Republican presidential nominee will appear on the NBC program tomorrow night.
The Arizona senator has appeared on the show several times over the years.
McCain's most memorable appearance on the long running show was in October 2002, when he hosted the program for a night: In a spoof commercial hawking an album called "McCain Sings Streisand," sang several of the Democratic loyalist's songs.
McCain Set to End Campaign With Biggest Hurdles in Modern Era
By Indira A.R. Lakshmanan
Oct. 31 (Bloomberg) -- Republican presidential candidate John McCain goes into the campaign's final weekend a bigger underdog than any victorious candidate in a modern election.
With four days until Election Day, national polls show his Democratic rival Barack Obama leading by an average of 6 percentage points, and battleground polls show Obama ahead in more than enough states to win the decisive 270 Electoral College votes.
``This election is cooked and done, it's in the warming tray,'' said Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville.
McCain ``is as desperate as a candidate can be,'' said Stu Rothenberg, editor of the nonpartisan Rothenberg Political Report in Washington. ``Less than five days to go and McCain's trailing in half a dozen states of which he can't afford to lose any: Nevada, Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Virginia and North Carolina.''
Illinois Senator Obama yesterday highlighted new government figures showing the sharpest contraction of the economy since 2001, a harbinger of what could be the worst recession since 1981-82. Arizona Senator McCain, meanwhile, was mum on the latest economic news showing the gross domestic product shrank at a 0.3 percent pace from July to September.
`Final Nail'
Those latest figures, Sabato said, are ``the final nail in McCain's coffin.''
To be sure, surprise events in the final days of the last two elections swayed those races. In 2000, a drunk-driving report on Republican George W. Bush, who had been leading in polls by a few points, may have cost him the popular vote. A taped message from al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden four years later -- when Democrat John Kerry and Bush were running about even -- likely cinched Bush's re-election.
Yet in both cases, the spread in the polls wasn't as wide as it is between McCain, 72, and Obama, 47, who also has enjoyed a threefold cash advantage.
Since the Wall Street crisis erupted in September, surveys show public anger about the $700 billion government bailout, the credit crunch, mortgage meltdown and high gas prices has pushed voters toward the Democrat. Obama seized on the latest figures yesterday before a crowd estimated at 13,000 in Sarasota, Florida, long a Republican stronghold.
`Into a Ditch'
``Our failing GDP is a direct result of a failed economic theory, of eight years of the trickle-down, Wall-Street-first, Main-Street-last policies that have driven our economy into a ditch,'' he said. ``If you want to know where Senator McCain will drive this economy, just look in the rearview mirror.''
McCain's campaign issued a statement that with the economy shrinking, ``Obama's ideologically driven plans to redistribute income will impose higher taxes on families, small businesses, and investors.''
The candidate himself didn't refer to the economic data at four rallies in Ohio, including one in Defiance, where a few thousand people braved sub-freezing temperatures.
The contenders' travel plans for the final days tell a lot about the state of the race. Obama spent yesterday in Florida, Virginia and Missouri, three states that have gone Republican in the last two elections.
Battleground States
Today and tomorrow, he is scheduled to visit four more states that voted Republican last time, and where he is polling either ahead or even: Iowa, Indiana, Nevada and Colorado. On Nov. 2 and 3, he is expected to hit two battleground states, Ohio and Florida.
McCain's advisers said he would likely travel from Ohio to Virginia, Florida and Pennsylvania before Election Day, and possibly a Rocky Mountain state -- all of which, save Pennsylvania, voted for Bush in 2004.
A vivid illustration of McCain's troubles is Indiana, historically the first state to go ``red'' on network maps on Election Night, because its polls are among the first to close. Indiana hasn't voted for a Democratic presidential candidate since 1964, yet the latest polls from the Indianapolis Star and a local television station show Obama either tied or slightly ahead.
Indiana is the most manufacturing-dependent state in the nation, and ``the Bush economy has not been kind to Indiana,'' said state Democratic Party chairman Dan Parker. The state lost 110,000 manufacturing jobs under Bush, and that has hurt the Republican brand, he said.
Indiana Offices
The Obama campaign has 44 field offices and more than 200 paid organizers in Indiana. The McCain campaign is working out of the state Republican Party's county offices, and is relying heavily on dedicated volunteers, said Republican state party chairman Murray Clark, citing nearly 150,000 calls made by volunteers this week.
``It's quite competitive,'' Clark said. Obama ``has been here since March, he's developed an independent campaign structure, and he has unlimited resources. Comparing their visits is a legitimate way to look at it.''
By today, Obama will have visited Indiana nine times in the general election, and 48 times this year, including the primary. McCain, who didn't have a contested primary in the state, visited twice before the general election, and hasn't returned since July. His campaign sent his running mate, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, to Indiana three times in the last two weeks.
Obama's `Energy'
In Florida, the Republican Party chairman, Jim Greer, said ``Obama has really focused on a lot of things that typically in the past Democrats haven't focused on: the amount of energy, the amount of time, the places they've campaigned.''
Still, Greer predicted McCain would squeak out a win in the state, despite polls showing Obama 3.5 percentage points up on average.
``At McCain events, although smaller -- there's no doubt about it -- there seems to be a stronger commitment,'' he said.
That won't be enough, Rothenberg said. For all the talk ``in Republican circles about McCain on the march, McCain making a comeback, there's precious little evidence he can get to 270 electoral votes,'' he said.
Rothenberg said a McCain upset would be akin to the 1948 election, where President Harry S Truman was elected after trailing in polls to New York Governor Thomas Dewey. Unlike now, polls that year ended more than a week before voting, failing to catch a final surge for Truman.
``If John McCain were to win, it would be a stunning, dramatic reversal comparable to Dewey and Truman, but that would take a historic, dramatic turnaround,'' he said.
Wow. This is a must hear interview. Former Secretary of State, and McCain Advisor L. Eagleburger is asked a question about Sarah Palin being ready to be President in case of an emergency. He tries to defend her, but it goes horribly wrong.
John McCain cuts his "Get Out The Vote"(GOTV) budget; Redirects to more TV Ads
Sen. John McCain and the Republican National Committee will unleash a barrage of spending on television advertising that will allow him to keep pace with Sen. Barack Obama's ad blitz during the campaign's final days, but the expenditures will impact McCain's get-out-the-vote efforts, according to Republican strategists.
McCain has faced a severe spending imbalance during most of the fall, but the Republican nominee squirreled away enough funds to pay for a raft of television ads in critical battleground states over the next four days, said Evan Tracey, a political analyst who monitors television spending.
The decision to finance a final advertising push is forcing McCain to curtail spending on Election Day ground forces to help usher his supporters to the polls, according to Republican consultants familiar with McCain's strategy.
The vaunted, 72-hour plan that President Bush used to mobilize voters in 2000 and 2004 has been scaled back for McCain. He has spent half as much as Obama on staffing and has opened far fewer field offices. This week, a number of veteran GOP operatives who orchestrate door-to-door efforts to get voters to the polls were told they should not expect to receive plane tickets, rental cars or hotel rooms from the campaign.
"The desire for parity on television comes at the expense of investment in paid boots on the ground," said one top Republican strategist who has been privy to McCain's plans. "The folks who will oversee the volunteer operation have been told to get out into the field on their own nickel."
Obama has maintained a substantial financial advantage during the general election campaign, forcing McCain to make tough decisions when locking down a final spending plan about two weeks ago.
Scott Reed, an informal McCain adviser who in 1996 ran then-Sen. Robert J. Dole's presidential bid, said the campaign made the right call by dedicating more money to its media effort. Ads are the most efficient way to persuade undecided voters, and possibly convince some who are only tepidly backing Obama, he said.
"Obama still has not closed the deal," Reed said. "He's still polling under 50 [percent] in most of these battleground states. Don't forget, a lot of people make these decisions late."
Tracey said everything McCain and the RNC are doing is "basically aimed squarely at 'undecideds' and 'lean Obamas.' They've got to bring 'soft Obamas' over their way. TV is the best place to do that."
McCain also is being aided in the campaign's final weekend by several conservative groups, which are airing ads supporting him in key media markets.
Left-leaning groups are also on the air. MoveOn.org announced yesterday it has begun airing ads backing Obama in Arizona.
RNC officials said the party would be picking up the slack for a portion of the Election Day field effort, but it would not be running the entire operation as it did in 2004. The RNC will pay per diems and travel costs for 750 volunteers who fanned out to battleground states yesterday.
McCain just released what has to be the weakest ad I've ever seen. In fact, IMO it helps Obama more than McCain. The ad shows some file footage of Obama praising John McCain and Joe Lieberman on their "Lieberman-McCain Climate Stewardship Act" which was a bill to lower greenhouse emissions. If anything, the ad shows Obama reaching across the aisle to support McCain's bill. McCain has spent the entire election painting himself as the one to reach across the aisle and work with the other party, and now he releases an ad showing Obama doing it? Very strange.
Obama is now talking about this ad during his stump speech. He said: "I don't know what they were thinking. Is there something wrong with agreeing with fighting global warming"?
An 'Idiot Wind' John McCain's latest attempt to link Barack Obama to extremism
Friday, October 31, 2008
WITH THE presidential campaign clock ticking down, Sen. John McCain has suddenly discovered a new boogeyman to link to Sen. Barack Obama: a sometimes controversial but widely respected Middle East scholar named Rashid Khalidi. In the past couple of days, Mr. McCain and his running mate, Gov. Sarah Palin, have likened Mr. Khalidi, the director of a Middle East institute at Columbia University, to neo-Nazis; called him "a PLO spokesman"; and suggested that the Los Angeles Times is hiding something sinister by refusing to release a videotape of a 2003 dinner in honor of Mr. Khalidi at which Mr. Obama spoke. Mr. McCain even threw former Weatherman Bill Ayers into the mix, suggesting that the tape might reveal that Mr. Ayers -- a terrorist-turned-professor who also has been an Obama acquaintance -- was at the dinner.
For the record, Mr. Khalidi is an American born in New York who graduated from Yale a couple of years after George W. Bush. For much of his long academic career, he taught at the University of Chicago, where he and his wife became friends with Barack and Michelle Obama. In the early 1990s, he worked as an adviser to the Palestinian delegation at peace talks in Madrid and Washington sponsored by the first Bush administration. We don't agree with a lot of what Mr. Khalidi has had to say about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict over the years, and Mr. Obama has made clear that he doesn't, either. But to compare the professor to neo-Nazis -- or even to Mr. Ayers -- is a vile smear.
Perhaps unsurprising for a member of academia, Mr. Khalidi holds complex views. In an article published this year in the Nation magazine, he scathingly denounced Israeli practices in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and U.S. Middle East policy but also condemned Palestinians for failing to embrace a nonviolent strategy. He said that the two-state solution favored by the Bush administration (and Mr. Obama) was "deeply flawed" but conceded there were also "flaws in the alternatives." Listening to Mr. Khalidi can be challenging -- as Mr. Obama put it in the dinner toast recorded on the 2003 tape and reported by the Times in a detailed account of the event last April, he "offers constant reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases."
It's fair to question why Mr. Obama felt as comfortable as he apparently did during his Chicago days in the company of men whose views diverge sharply from what the presidential candidate espouses. Our sense is that Mr. Obama is a man of considerable intellectual curiosity who can hear out a smart, if militant, advocate for the Palestinians without compromising his own position. To suggest, as Mr. McCain has, that there is something reprehensible about associating with Mr. Khalidi is itself condemnable -- especially during a campaign in which Arab ancestry has been the subject of insults. To further argue that the Times, which obtained the tape from a source in exchange for a promise not to publicly release it, is trying to hide something is simply ludicrous, as Mr. McCain surely knows.
Which reminds us: We did ask Mr. Khalidi whether he wanted to respond to the campaign charges against him. He answered, via e-mail, that "I will stick to my policy of letting this idiot wind blow over." That's good advice for anyone still listening to the McCain campaign's increasingly reckless ad hominem attacks. Sadly, that wind is likely to keep blowing for four more days.
In answer to the question someone asked above, the polls tighten as the campaign approaches its climax because many formerlly undecided voters make up their minds.
In regard to campaign gaffes, I still think that Palin's malaproprism that the vice-president is in charge of the Senate is the most profound gaffe of the entire campaign including the primaries.
I'd still like the answer to this, and I'd assume more than a few people would like to hear it as well.
Originally Posted By: Don Andrew
What is wrong with being a Muslim? Because even if your extremely false quote was even close to accurate...what would be wrong with that and what would be wrong if Barack Obama was a Muslim?
Being Italian, I wish I had a nickel for every time I was called a Dago or a Wop (even guinea though I'm not Sicilian). Some people just called me that because they were mad at me; others did it because they were prejudiced against Italians. Racism and ethnic prejudice seem to be a component of some peoples make-up. Of course, their companion is gender or religious prejudice. I guess it's all a product of socialization with some genetics thrown in.
As Gazzo said of his driver in Rocky, "Some people just hate." Who knows why. I don't know what's wrong with being a Muslim. As a non-believer, I view religion as a rock in believers life foundation. If it helps you be a good person, cool. otherwise, I don't see its value.
As a non-believer, I view religion as a rock in believers life foundation. If it helps you be a good person, cool. otherwise, I don't see its value.
Well put.
While some people do need religion to keep them on the straight and narrow, if you're a non-believer, who happens to be an inherently better human being and a more qualified candidate than your opponent, it shouldn't matter.
In answer to the question someone asked above, the polls tighten as the campaign approaches its climax because many formerlly undecided voters make up their minds.
In regard to campaign gaffes, I still think that Palin's malaproprism that the vice-president is in charge of the Senate is the most profound gaffe of the entire campaign including the primaries.
If they included Biden's and Palin's gaffes, the story would be 15 pages long.
Being Italian, I wish I had a nickel for every time I was called a Dago or a Wop (even guinea though I'm not Sicilian). Some people just called me that because they were mad at me; others did it because they were prejudiced against Italians. Racism and ethnic prejudice seem to be a component of some peoples make-up. Of course, their companion is gender or religious prejudice. I guess it's all a product of socialization with some genetics thrown in.
As Gazzo said of his driver in Rocky, "Some people just hate." Who knows why. I don't know what's wrong with being a Muslim. As a non-believer, I view religion as a rock in believers life foundation. If it helps you be a good person, cool. otherwise, I don't see its value.
I could have written this (maybe not as well) except take all the Italian references and put in "Latina" then "sp*c" and "go home" (even though I was born here, all worse after 9/11).
I had saved his one from last April, when the candidates met with a few foreign leaders. I don't remember who he is with here though? Like the above picture, I just thought it looked Presidential.
Wow. This is a must hear interview. Former Secretary of State, and McCain Advisor L. Eagleburger is asked a question about Sarah Palin being ready to be President in case of an emergency. He tries to defend her, but it goes horribly wrong.
Eagleburger went on Foxnews and said "he put his foot in his mouth", and it was "plain stupid".
Very cute SC. Me, I had NO trick or treaters in my area.
Anyway, here's an example the tension this election. A McCain supporter at an Obama rally. Some people I guess simply believe what they want to believe.
Interesting article on the future of women as Presidential candidates.
MADAM PRESIDENT: Will She Ever Get There?
By Anne E. Kornblut, The Washington Post
As the presidential campaign draws to a close, it's commonplace to hear 2008 heralded as an excellent year for women. But has it been?
First Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton ran the most serious presidential campaign of any woman in U.S. history. Then Gov. Sarah Palin, the first woman on a Republican ticket, sparked an initial rush of excitement. Never before have women played such a prominent role in national politics, the reasoning goes, and that has laid the groundwork for even greater advancement the next time a woman runs.
But both women's campaigns devolved into such strife, their candidacies provoking such frenzied passions and mocking caricatures along the way, that it's only fair to ask whether the first woman's path to the White House was eased this year -- or whether Clinton and Palin simply unearthed the land mines without defusing any of them. If Democrat Barack Obama wins on Tuesday, he will have broken a huge barrier. But another one still awaits.
On Tuesday, Palin will emerge, win or lose, as the figure most transformed by her brief time in the public eye. After bursting onto the national scene as a moose-hunting mother of five who could rescue John McCain's campaign, the Alaska governor wound up sinking in the polls and getting entangled in a classic "girl story" about her now famous Republican National Committee-financed shopping spree. Her campaign handlers promptly threw her overboard and anonymously declared her a "whack job" and a "diva" -- hardly a moment of profound advancement. In the end, Palin seems to represent less "an explosion of a brand-new style of muscular American feminism" (in the words of the contrarian feminist Camille Paglia) than the stereotypical former-beauty-queen-made-good who seeks affirmation about her abilities while people just titter about her clothes.
Clinton moved along a different trajectory, from the lofty status of former first lady and commanding front-runner to the scrappy underdog in the Democratic primaries, fighting her way to the end of the contests and winning a sweeping 18 million votes in the process. But the New York senator's uncharacteristically tearful moment on the eve of the New Hampshire primary will forever be linked to her victory there, deservedly or not. And after her campaign ended, some of her supporters threatened to revolt if Obama picked a woman other than Clinton as his running mate. "That's feminism?" one senior Obama adviser asked me pointedly at the time.
More than just groundbreaking candidates, Clinton and Palin became cultural flashpoints. That Clinton would be ridiculed and mimicked and scrutinized came as no surprise to her team -- many of them had seen her go through a similar wringer in the White House and upon her arrival in the Senate -- but some of her advisers chalked the rough treatment up as much to her being a Clinton as to her being a woman. As the 2008 primary campaign went on, however, they increasingly spoke of a genuine double standard rooted in gender; by the end, they openly complained of sexist treatment in the media, which goes some way toward explaining why Clinton declined to criticize Palin once McCain chose the Alaska governor as his running mate.
Palin lost her luster soon after the Republican convention, stumbling on basic substance in interviews, hiding from most of the media and making claims about her record (such as having opposed the so-called bridge to nowhere) that were debunked. But rather than move to confront her weaknesses, her campaign swiftly seized on sexism as a reason Palin was being grilled in the first place. Most notably, the Republican campaign arranged a conference call to denounce Obama for using the phrase "lipstick on a pig" because just days earlier, Palin herself had made a reference to lipstick ("Disgusting comments, comparing our vice presidential nominee, Sarah Palin, to a pig," said former Massachusetts governor Jane Swift, a McCain surrogate). Professionals will argue about the political wisdom of that tactic -- it did, after all, distract attention from more serious issues that were failing to boost McCain's standing -- but few would cite it as a trailblazing moment in the history of gender politics.
More recently, another Palin subplot, in addition to the $150,000 boutique wardrobe, had emerged -- her attractiveness, and whether McCain had picked her on that basis. A recent New Yorker article by Jane Mayer noted the swoon among several neoconservatives when they met Palin in Alaska in 2007. ("Exceptionally pretty," said Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard.) In a focus group conducted by the Democratic pollster Peter Hart last Sunday in Ohio, undecided voters were asked which of the four candidates they would most like to sit next to on an airplane. One initially picked Palin, saying, "Geez, I'm a 29-year-old male." (He then changed his answer, saying he'd rather sit with Obama.) Obama views Palin as such a liability that he ran an ad last week featuring her winking. And Palin allies are blaming her McCain handlers for her fall, starting with top communications adviser Nicolle Wallace, who helped arrange the CBS interview with Katie Couric that began Palin's downward slide. The complaints have ballooned into an ugly cat fight. Progress? Really?
Prominent women in politics have been largely focused on the good news -- that Clinton and Palin were there at all. And regardless of which ticket wins on Tuesday, a woman will have a rightful claim to being head of the opposition party. Meanwhile, many Democrats, still scared of picking the scabs from the primary wounds, have embraced Obama's ascent as a positive harbinger of its own.
"Every time we break down one barrier, the other quickly comes down as well," said Donna Brazile, the onetime campaign manager for Al Gore. "Throughout the year, most observers have tried to put race versus gender -- like, what is the greatest disadvantage? As if some of us don't represent both."
Brazile urged people to look beyond the presidential tickets for signs of advancement. "It took us 88 years to get here," she noted. "We have a speaker of the House, a secretary of state, a phenomenal woman who ran for the Democratic ticket and a woman competing to be a heartbeat away from the presidency. It has elevated the process."
Many women in the feminist movement's dominant, largely Democratic wing seem to feel that Clinton's campaign, however flawed, was a step forward -- while Palin's was a step back. "If Hillary cracked the glass ceiling, I think Sarah Palin slipped on some of the pieces of glass," said Ellen Malcolm, the founder of EMILY's List, which supports female candidates who favor abortion rights.
Except, of course, that Clinton didn't actually crack that glass ceiling. Rather, she dented it (18 million times, as she famously pointed out in her final speech in June). And along the way, her candidacy fractured the traditional women's movement: The abortion-rights group NARAL endorsed Obama (deeply angering the Clinton campaign and wounding the candidate personally), while EMILY's List and other groups stood by her, even after it appeared that she wouldn't have enough delegates to win the nomination.
That has left today's feminist movement struggling to define its mission or wondering whether it even has one. Is the goal to promote and elect women everywhere, or is it to support the candidate viewed as the best for the job, whether male or female? Wouldn't the latter be the more progressive course? Is the common purpose to back candidates who back abortion rights and liberal policies? The questions became unexpectedly urgent when McCain picked Palin in August, but they were already bubbling up by the early spring.
Then, in a strikingly similar fashion, conservative women broke into two angry camps as they struggled with whether they were obliged to stand by Palin. McCain's high command had hoped that Palin would peel away resentful Clinton supporters; in fact, she has driven away some GOP stalwarts. The conservative writer Kathleen Parker led the Republican defections, followed by former Ronald Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan, who disgustedly waved Palin off in one of her Wall Street Journal columns as an unqualified empty vessel who "doesn't seem to understand the implications of her own thoughts." The exodus was rooted in disdain for Palin's intellect, but in a way, the Republican departures have been even more disloyal than the feminists who chose Obama over Clinton: Parker, Noonan and others were not abandoning Palin for another partisan of stature, as the Democrats had in their primaries. They were just abandoning her.
Along the way, there have been rogues with their own takes on gender politics. Ann Coulter, a conservative provocateur who openly loathes McCain, declared herself a Clinton supporter. Paglia praised Palin's "frontier grit and audacity" (even though she has said she still intends to vote for Obama), and Ellen Lafferty, a former editor of Ms. magazine and a Clinton supporter, showed up onstage recently at a Palin rally.
But the massive wave of Clinton supporters that Republicans predicted would sweep toward McCain has never materialized, at least not according to the late-October polls. Palin's selection has turned out to be the one example in recent history of a vice presidential pick having a measurable effect on the direction of the race -- a negative one.
In the months and years before she announced her candidacy, Clinton was often asked whether the country was ready to elect a woman president of the United States. "Well, we won't know until we try," she always said.
Having tried, heading into 2009, the question is still out there.
kornbluta@washpost.com
Anne E. Kornblut covers politics for The Washington Post.
I think Clinton (Hillary) opened the door thus making a "Palin" seem plausible (yea even Palin). However, by the next election I think there will be other serious female contenders in the running. It won't be just a Hillary and a Sarah. Palin came out of nowhere, and I think females from both parties are gonna pop up and give both these ladies a lot of compeition, that neither will have it in the bag. I think the nation IS ready for both it's first Afrian American AND first female President...and it's about time in both cases.
MONTREAL — A Quebec comedy duo notorious for prank calls to celebrities and heads of state has reached Sarah Palin, convincing the Republican vice-presidential nominee she was speaking with French President Nicolas Sarkozy.
In the interview, which lasts about six minutes, Palin and the pranksters discuss politics, pundits, and the dangers of hunting with current vice-president Dick Cheney.
The Masked Avengers, who have a regular show on Montreal radio station CKOI, intend to air the full interview on the eve of the U.S. elections.
The well-known duo of Sebastien Trudel and Marc-Antoine Audette have also tricked Rolling Stones singer Mick Jagger, Microsoft founder Bill Gates and French president Jacques Chirac.
With President Bush "intentionally lying low this week," according to the New York Times, the Obama campaign wasted no time sending out a video of Vice President Dick Cheney's endorsement of Sen. John McCain for president.
DICK CHENEY: And in three days we'll choose a new steward for the presidency and begin a new chapter in our history. It's the biggest decision that we make together as Americans. A lot turns on the outcome. I believe the right leader for this moment in history is Senator John McCain. John is a man who understands the danger facing America. He's a man who has looked into the face of evil and not flinched. He's a man who's comfortable with responsibility and has been since he joined the armed forces at the age of 17. He's earned our support and confidence, and the time is now to make him commander-in-chief. I'm delighted to support John McCain and I'm pleased that he's chosen a running mate with executive talent, toughness and common sense, our next vice president in Sarah Palin."
Update: Obama responded by saying, "I'd like to congratulate Senator McCain on this endorsement because he really earned it."
I'd still like the answer to this, and I'd assume more than a few people would like to hear it as well.
Originally Posted By: Don Andrew
What is wrong with being a Muslim? Because even if your extremely false quote was even close to accurate...what would be wrong with that and what would be wrong if Barack Obama was a Muslim?
Being Italian, I wish I had a nickel for every time I was called a Dago or a Wop (even guinea though I'm not Sicilian). Some people just called me that because they were mad at me; others did it because they were prejudiced against Italians. Racism and ethnic prejudice seem to be a component of some peoples make-up. Of course, their companion is gender or religious prejudice. I guess it's all a product of socialization with some genetics thrown in.
As Gazzo said of his driver in Rocky, "Some people just hate." Who knows why. I don't know what's wrong with being a Muslim. As a non-believer, I view religion as a rock in believers life foundation. If it helps you be a good person, cool. otherwise, I don't see its value.
However, I just read this:
MOGADISHU, Somalia - A 13-year-old girl who said she had been raped was stoned to death in Somalia after being accused of adultery by Islamic militants, a human rights group said.
Dozens of men stoned Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow to death Oct. 27 in a stadium packed with 1,000 spectators in the southern port city of Kismayo, Amnesty International and Somali media reported, citing witnesses. The Islamic militia in charge of Kismayo had accused her of adultery after she reported that three men had raped her, the rights group said.
Grosse Pointe Farms woman denies Halloween candy to Obama supporters
ASSOCIATED PRESS
A Grosse Pointe Farms woman has doled out political tricks by refusing Halloween treats to children whose parents support Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.
Shirley Nagel passed out candy Friday — but only to those who shared her support for Republican presidential candidate John McCain and running mate Sarah Palin.
Fox 2 News says a sign posted outside Nagel's house, about 12 miles west of Detroit, served notice to all trick-or-treaters. It read: "No handouts for Obama supporters, liars, tricksters or kids of supporters."
Nagel tells WJBK-TV that "Obama's scary." When asked about children who'd been turned away empty-handed and crying, she said: "Oh well. Everybody has a choice."
Fax and phone messages were left today at numbers listed in Nagel's name
Grosse Pointe Farms woman denies Halloween candy to Obama supporters
ASSOCIATED PRESS
A Grosse Pointe Farms woman has doled out political tricks by refusing Halloween treats to children whose parents support Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.
Shirley Nagel passed out candy Friday — but only to those who shared her support for Republican presidential candidate John McCain and running mate Sarah Palin.
Fox 2 News says a sign posted outside Nagel's house, about 12 miles west of Detroit, served notice to all trick-or-treaters. It read: "No handouts for Obama supporters, liars, tricksters or kids of supporters."
Nagel tells WJBK-TV that "Obama's scary." When asked about children who'd been turned away empty-handed and crying, she said: "Oh well. Everybody has a choice."
Fax and phone messages were left today at numbers listed in Nagel's name
What a bitch.
I'm sorry, but that's just fucking mean to kids. Kids!
While I was out doing some Christmas shopping today I seen several yard signs that said "Democrats for McCain"
BTW Have any of you Obama supporters heard or read anything about how he wants to make it harder for people to buy guns and ammo? For example someone told the Col. that he wants to raise taxes on guns and ammo 500%. Is there any truth to this?
One of our Social Studies teacher held a mock election for students only (middle school). Our demographics roughly: Income: Middle/lower class families; White 48% Hispanic and black are the majority with a small per centage of Middle Eastern (this is my rough estimate). We have approximately 1400 students enrolled. (For some reason, I couldn't copy/paste the document, so I roughly typed it.
While obviously these kids won't vote, I'm assuming it may reflect their parents preferences. We will have voting at my school site Tuesday. I'll be extremely curious on turnout.
MOCK ELECTION VHMS
CANDIDATE VOTES %
Barack Obama 858 76% John McCain 240 21.26 % Cynthia McKinney 12 1.06% Ralph Nader 6 .53% Bob Barr 6 .27% Alan Keyes 3 .35%
Now here are the statistics nationwide when given to Middle School students: I wasn't aware they did this
Barack Obama 60.8% John McCain 35.52% Ralph Nader 1.06% Bob Barr .90% Cynthia McKinney .32% Alan Keyes .02%
I agree with something a Republican strategist said on one of the cable networks earlier. Obama would be better off spending the final days in Ohio, PA, and Florida, instead of spending time and money out west trying to "run up the score".
November 1, 2008 McCain's name nowhere to be seen at Palin rally
From CNN Political Producer Peter Hamby
Palin signs made an appearance at a Florida rally – McCain signs did not.
POLK CITY, Florida (CNN) — At a boisterous Sarah Palin rally in Polk City, Florida on Saturday afternoon, one name was surprisingly absent from the campaign décor — John McCain’s.
Looking around the Fantasy of Flight aircraft hangar where the rally took place, one could see all the usual reminders that it was a pro-McCain event. There were two large “Country First” banners hung on the walls along with four enormous American flags meant to conjure the campaign’s underlying patriotic theme. Many of the men and women in the audience wore McCain hats and t-shirts.
But on closer inspection, the GOP nominee’s name was literally nowhere to be found on any of the official campaign signage distributed to supporters at the event.
Members of the audience proudly waved “Country First” placards as Palin delivered her stump speech. Those signs were paid for by the Republican National Committee.
The other sign handed out to supporters read “Florida is Palin Country,” but those signs were neither paid for by the Republican National Committee nor the McCain campaign. In small print, the signs were stamped with the line “Paid for and authorized by Putnam for Congress" — as in, the re-election campaign of Florida congressman Adam Putnam, whose district skirts Polk City.
In fact, Putnam’s name was considerably more prominent than was McCain’s — his campaign had placed a number of large “Putnam for Congress” banners around the event site.
I only skimmed this last page to see if there was a post on Palin getting scammed by the Candadian comedian who called her and claimed to be the French President, Zarcosee' (I know I butchered the spelling) . They just played it on MSN. In spite of how naive and dumb it made Palin sound, I think it was a cruel joke, don't you? I couldn't believe how long they strung her along. (7 minutes I hear)
I haven't bothered to listen to the whole thing, but I heard parts of it on the various cable channels. I don't think it was cruel. From the parts I heard, I can't believe she is actually that stupid, and that she hung in there for almost 7 minutes.
Yea, that' it. I kind of felt embarrassed for her.
Btw, McCain will be on SNL tonight. Don't know if it's true, but I heard rumor that Palin may be as well. I know I won't be able to stay awake for it. I'll see the highlights tomorrow.
3 days. I can't believe it. I can't wait.
TIS
EDIT: I'm watching MSN, David Shuster, who's playing the SNL clips with Sara Palin. They are playing the rap song in which the Moose shows up. I'm just understanding the rap lyrics..."Hey you plumbers pull your pants up!"
I don't feel bad for Palin. I mean when this President Sarkozy brings up that "documentary" NAILYN PALYN (Hustler's new Palin-theme Porno Movie), she clearly laughs and says "yeah it was great!"
According to Chuck Todd on MSNBC, tomorrow the WSJ (Wall Street Journal) will be releasing it' "final" poll. (I still have a gut feeling that these polls will be way off, but we'll see)
He also noted that even IF McCain took all of the toss up states, he still wouldn't win. Music to my ears.
As far as the Az poll, that's not enouraging to be barely ahead in your home state.
I am just waiting to see what turns this topic of conversation will take on Tuesday and Wednesday. You know, will there be any surprises, or will it be over more quickly than we think? Will it be nail biter?
Here's a sad thing. I don't think John McCain will survive the next 4 years. Did you notice how much physical power he had to mobilize in the three debates. OK, in the third debate, obviously the chairs weren't really comfortable, so he had to move all the time. In the second debate, when Obam spoke, he was wandering around aimlessly, as if he coulnd't focus. And in the first debate, after 20 minutes or so he had to force himself to smile:
Joe The Plumber Ambushed In Ohio Opposing Plumbers Shout At Republican Darling
POSTED: 8:35 pm EST November 2, 2008
WLWT in Cincinnati reported that Joe Wurzelbacher made a campaign appearance with U.S. Rep. Steve Chabot, R - Ohio, and a group of plumbers who support Chabot's opponent approached Wurzelbacher.
Video shows how one plumber lost his cool and started taunting Wurzelbacher.
"Hey, Joe, get a license. Joe, get a license! Joe, get a license! Pay your taxes. Pay your taxes," the man yelled as a couple dozen people looked on.
A Chabot supporter ended up shoving the yelling protester out of the way and the two had to be separated by others, WLWT reported.
No one was hurt or arrested.
Court documents show Wurzelbacher owes nearly $1,200 in back taxes. Wurzelbacher, who questioned Obama during a campaign stop on Sunday, acknowledged he doesn't have a plumber's license, saying he doesn't need one because he works for someone else. But a city building inspection official says Wurzelbacher still would need to be a licensed apprentice or journeyman to work in Toledo, and he's not.
Joe the Skinhead 11.02.08 -- 4:56PM By Josh Marshall
When he was just the topic du jour because of his question to Barack Obama back in the neighborhood in Ohio, that was one thing. But "Joe the Plumber" is now actively campaigning with and for John McCain, appearing on stage with him at multiple events, etc. He has become a part of McCain's campaign, like any other surrogate.
So here "Joe" is on TV just about an hour ago saying that people shouldn't vote for Obama because he doubts Obama's "loyalty to America".
I guess saying Obama reminded him of Sammy Davis, Jr. wasn't bad enough. But isn't it time someone ask McCain whether he's really willing to associate with this extremist?
Watching Joe the Plumber reminds me of Mike Judge's IDIOCRACY. You know, that comedy where the idiots overbreed and a thousand years later, a lazy-ass mediocre-intelligent librarian (Luke Wilson) from 2000s is the smartest man in 3000s America (who've elected a pro wrestler as President.)
That future, where speaking clear proper English is seen as "faggish" and "pompous," is a fantastical hyperbole pisser by Judge on the Anti-Intellectualism in America.
What is wrong with being intelligent? That is what I want to ask DoubleJ and Freddie C. and Appleonya.
Hell, it took an intellectual like William Buckley to help clear out the American Conservatism of the 1940s, stocked mostly of John Birch Society nutjobs and Anti-Semites, and make it respectable and legitimate.
It took an intellectual like Buckley, NOT Sarah Palin NOT Dubya NOT Joe the fucking Plumber, but a smart guy to allow someone like Reagan and Dubya to be elected President decades later.
I mean, the Republicans are asking to get FUCKED when they call George Will a R.I.N.O. (Republican In Name Only). I mean how fucking retarded has that movement become?
A campaign schedule is brutal. You are in a number of cities in a day, getting there mostly by plane. You have little or no sleep and you are constantly "on".
And if you think that a campaign schedule and four years in the White House will age Senator Obama, imagine what it will do to a 72 year old cancer survivor.
Actually, I don't think so far, Obama's aged that much, but I agree that every President after four years seem to age considerably. They show a few clips of Bush from before his last election and he looks really young compared to how he looks now. Man, if that's the case, I've decided not to run.
Can you imagine tomorrow evening what not only the U.S., but the World will be talking about? It's amazing what an interest all countries have in this U.S. election. Absolutely everyone is thrilled to finally get rid of Bush.
Oh, and let me add:
"Na na na na, na na na na...hey hey hey...goodbye!"
In the barrage of literature I received over the weekend was a flyer, designed for newly registered voters, from the Obama campaign. It's one thing to register record numbers of voters, it's another thing to get them to the polls.
The flyer advises:
1. If you are in line to vote when the polls close, stay in line because you have the right to vote. (Believe it or not, there have been instances where new voters - particularly young voters- were told to go home at 8 pm although they had been in line).
2. Bring ID. This should be observed by all voters although many of us know the voting officials at our local polls.
3. You have the right to vote even if you owe taxes, have unpaid bills, parking tickets and overdue taxes. They can't hassle you at the polls for this. (Apparently, uninformed people of meager financialk means are told that they can be arrested at the polls if they try to vote).
I am scheduled to volunteer 4 hours at my local poll, the Fighting 27th Precinct of the township at the east Shore Baptist Church. It's funny that while we demand separation of church and state, the most fundamental act of government participation frequently takes place on church property.
Also, as always,bars and pubs are closed during election hours in Pennsylvania. Ant other states do this?
The bars are closed?? I don't think we do that in NY, although I never tried to buy a drink after voting.
Klyd, I just read in the paper this morning that there have been misleading flyers dropped on people's doorsteps in the middle of the night. In poorer neighborhoods, they threaten arrest if you try to vote and have unpaid parking tickets or taxes. In predominantly Jewish neighborhoods, there have been flyers that claim Obama's leanings towards Palestine and then warn Jewish voters not to be fooled like they were in the 1930s. And there was also one claiming that because of the expected voter turnout, Republicans are to vote on Tuesday and Democrats on Wednesday!
I heard this one on the radio earlier today. The commedian who did it was good. I think there were enough warning signs that Palin should have gotten the hint earlier.
As a follow up, I just heard that there have been postings falsely claiming that anyone with a criminal record will be subject to police interrogation. Also, there have been phone calls to new voters saying they can save time and vote over the phone Press 1 for Obama and 2 for McCain, and my personal favorite, "Please be advised that due to the large number of voters, Republicans will vote on Tuesday and Democrats on Wednesday."
Karl Rove would be proud.
Of course, some Democrats have pulled their share of fraud too. But they now update the obituaries to the voter logs, making it hard for the dead to vote anymore.
Nostradamus has apperantly predicted a victory for McCain/Palin, according to some historian from the following quatrain:
At the war's end: The Feeble Kept One will strike down the Night And his Imbecile Queen will rise from the snow Bedecked in finery and the pelt of a wolf.
And again, most importantly, vote for McCain. Who doesn't want to see Palin on TV for the next four years? (The question was directed towards the men )
I know that I am in the minority, but I don't think Palin is "all that." Compared to other female politicans, she's attractive, but she's not "hot" or even "beautiful" IMO. I personally think McCain's wife is much better looking than Palin. And McCain's wife is a good decade older than Palin. One thing that ruins it for me about Palin is that voice. It is like nails on a chalkboard for me. That's not even considering what comes out of it, which I fundamentally disagree with anyway.
"I think people passing a law against people wearing sagging pants is a waste of time. We should be focused on creating jobs, improving our schools, health care, dealing with the war in Iraq, and anybody, any public official, that is worrying about sagging pants probably needs to spend some time focusing on real problems out there. Having said that, brothers should pull up their pants. You are walking by your mother, your grandmother, your underwear is showing. What's wrong with that? Come on. There are some issues that we face, that you don't have to pass a law, but that doesn't mean folks can't have some sense and some respect for other people and, you know, some people might not want to see your underwear — I'm one of them." - Obama
The bars are closed?? I don't think we do that in NY, although I never tried to buy a drink after voting.
Klyd, I just read in the paper this morning that there have been misleading flyers dropped on people's doorsteps in the middle of the night. In poorer neighborhoods, they threaten arrest if you try to vote and have unpaid parking tickets or taxes. In predominantly Jewish neighborhoods, there have been flyers that claim Obama's leanings towards Palestine and then warn Jewish voters not to be fooled like they were in the 1930s. And there was also one claiming that because of the expected voter turnout, Republicans are to vote on Tuesday and Democrats on Wednesday!
Sorry that I repeated your post. I didn't see it earlier.
And again, most importantly, vote for McCain. Who doesn't want to see Palin on TV for the next four years? (The question was directed towards the men )
Hey, are you an alien who ate svsg? What did you do with him? Talk! Talk!
I know that I am in the minority, but I don't think Palin is "all that." Compared to other female politicans, she's attractive, but she's not "hot" or even "beautiful" IMO. I personally think McCain's wife is much better looking than Palin. And McCain's wife is a good decade older than Palin. One thing that ruins it for me about Palin is that voice. It is like nails on a chalkboard for me. That's not even considering what comes out of it, which I fundamentally disagree with anyway.
I have to go with Sarah over Cindy. It's like picking Mary Ann over Ginger (which I also go with). I agree she's not glamorous, but she is a wholesome-looking, pretty lady with a nice natural smile. While I'm voting for Obama and like Biden, I always get a strange feeling when Biden's smiling, he's trying to sell me life insurance.
Here they are. The final polls. We'll find out tomorrow if they're correct. The one poll that stands out is the Minnesota poll. All the other polls last week have Obama up +11 to +19 in Minnesota. This poll released today says Obama +3.
I think the Ohio polls with an Obama lead are off. I predict Obama will not win Ohio, but has enough wins "in the bank" in states like Colorado, PA, and with a likely win in Virginia.
Joe Wurzelbacher plans to use his newfound fame for the greater good, he says, opening up a charitable group that is built on "American values."
FOXNews.com
Monday, November 03, 2008
Joe the Plumber is short on cash and unemployed but that's not stopping him from opening a new charitable foundation and penning a book on American values.
"I got no financial offers. I am broke," Joe Wurzelbacher said Monday, explaining that he's got a few ideas on how to spread the wealth to himself and others following bogus reports of a professional management deal and potential country music career.
"I am starting a charity up, it's called 'Secure Our Dream.' It's just about people, neighbors in the community," Wurzelbacher told FOXNews.com.
The plumber-turned-media-fixture got a taste for charity work last week at an event in Philadelphia that aimed to help out family members of police officers killed in the line of duty.
He said he hasn't figured out how he's going to finance the charity, but knows how he wants the money to be spent.
"You know there's a lady on my street that is going to lose her house because of disability. You know ... that's something this charity that I am starting would help, help people directly," he said.
Wurzelbacher made national headlines in late September when he asked Barack Obama a question about tax policy that elicited the Democratic candidate's response that he wants to "spread the wealth" around by raising taxes on individuals earning more than $250,000 a year.
Immediately becoming a media sensation, Wurzelbacher hasn't been doing any plumbing work these days. He said while he is looking forward to the notoriety of being Joe the Plumber dying down somewhat, he doesn't want the newfound fame to disappear altogether.
"Obviously I gotta keep out there to a degree. That way this can take off and some real help can happen," he said. "The federal government is really not going to be able to affect, really, people on a community level, whereas the Joe the Plumber persona, which is hard to even relate to that because I don't know it doesn't feel like me, but if (it) can bring money to people and you know help out" then it will have been useful.
Wurzelbacher said he doesn't want Obama, or anyone else, at the federal level dictating how to spend his money, especially when that dictation comes from people whom Wurzelbacher sees as less than generous.
"Americans have always been great at giving to charities. We give more than any other country in the world. Let's direct it here more at home. Obama at the federal level, he is going to dictate and take more out of my pocket and tell me who to give it to? You know I am a pretty nice guy, you know I give to charities, I give to my church. You know, Joe the Biden, what he gave -- $3,000 last year -- and this guy makes millions? Come on, you know, that's just ridiculous."
Wurzelbacher said he knows he is "not speaking for all Americans" but does feel that he has some cause to use his recent publicity to maximum effect.
"The reason why I feel somewhat able to do it is because the letters and phone calls I get, and I get a ton of them. ... Democrat or Republican I am getting incredible feedback. So, authorized by the American people to speak for them? No. But a lot of people coming up to me and saying keep doing it, keep doing it. Civic duty is not a punch line with me. That's how I was raised and that's why I keep doing it."
But charity isn't Wurzelbacher's sole goal. Sharing the wealth also means helping himself. To that end, he's working with writer Tom Tabback on a book about American values.
"Everyone came at me to write a book. They had dollar signs in their eyes. '101 Things Joe the Plumber Knows' or some stupid s--- like that. Excuse me, I am sorry," he said. "You know I will get behind something solid, but I won't get behind fluff. I won't cash in, and when people do read the book they will figure out that I didn't cash in. At least I hope they figure that out."
The book, called "Joe the Plumber -- Fighting for the American Dream," is to be released by a group called PearlGate Publishing and other small publishing houses.
"I am not going to a conglomerate that way we actually can get the economy jump started. Like there is five publishing companies in Michigan. There's a couple down in Texas. They are small ones that can handle like 10 or 15,000 copies. I can go to a big one that could handle a million or two. But they don't need the help. They are already rich. So that's spreading the wealth to me," he said.
I've finally finished my research on the candidates running for office in my area. I only have 5 positions up for election, including president. Besides Obama, I'll be voting for 2 Republicans, and 2 Democrats.
I think the Ohio polls with an Obama lead are off. I predict Obama will not win Ohio, but has enough wins "in the bank" in states like Colorado, PA, and with a likely win in Virginia.
I think that SurveyUSA poll on Minnesota is an outlinier(i.e. Off). Obama will win the state of Walter Mondale.
What are everyone's viewing plans for tomorrow? Thankfully, I have to work until 7:00 EST, so I get to miss some of the coverage. I am seriously considering not watching b/c I fear that we may not know until the wee hours/the next day(s).
I probably will watch, but it will be between CNN and Comedy Central's coverage. The latter is hosting a special with Stephen Colbert & Jon Stewart. Olbermann & Hannity cannot hold a candle to those two!
"You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred. You cannot build character and courage by taking away men's initiative and independence. You cannot heal men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves." ... Abraham Lincoln
"We need to spread the wealth." ... Barack Hussein Obama
"You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred. You cannot build character and courage by taking away men's initiative and independence. You cannot heal men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves." ... Abraham Lincoln
"We need to spread the wealth." ... Barack Hussein Obama
PASS IT ALONG....AND VOTE CAREFULLY !!
Hey apple, what the fuck you think TAXES do and already have since we ratified that Income Tax Amendement at the turn of the 20th Century?
Hell, Adam Smith...you know, the author of WEALTH OF NATIONS, argued that taxes("spreading the wealth") isn't an evil.
If anything, why aren't you using Obama's "Coal" quotes instead?
"You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred. You cannot build character and courage by taking away men's initiative and independence. You cannot heal men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves." ... Abraham Lincoln
"We need to spread the wealth." ... Barack Hussein Obama
PASS IT ALONG....AND VOTE CAREFULLY !!
Hey apple, what the fuck you think TAXES do and already have since we ratified that Income Tax Amendement at the turn of the 20th Century?
Hell, Adam Smith...you know, the author of WEALTH OF NATIONS, argued that taxes("spreading the wealth") isn't an evil.
If anything, why aren't you using Obama's "Coal" quotes instead?
1) Adam Smith, in “The Wealth of Nations” (1776), his seminal treatise on capitalism, Smith wrote: The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. . . . The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. . . . It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
2) I don't see McCain denouncing the progressive tax system that has been used in this country for the past 90+ years. McCain's tax plan does nothing to reverse this trend. Obama's tax plan simply shifts the numbers around slightly.
3) I can't trust anyone that keeps a terrible lie/misquote in their signature.
"You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred. You cannot build character and courage by taking away men's initiative and independence. You cannot heal men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves." ... Abraham Lincoln
"We need to spread the wealth." ... Barack Hussein Obama
PASS IT ALONG....AND VOTE CAREFULLY !!
You've convinced me. I'm totally voting McCain now. I vote on Wednesday, right?
Another question about US constitutional law: Is the following scenario possible? McCain/Palin get elected. McCain dies. Palin becomes president and picks George W. Bush as vice president.
I just heard that McCain plans on traveling to New Mexico and Colorado after he votes, to campaign. I can't ever remember a candidate campaigning on Election Day.
I just heard that McCain plans on traveling to New Mexico and Colorado after he votes, to campaign. I can't ever remember a candidate campaigning on Election Day.
I remember CNN reporting back in 2000 of Gore calling in radio stations for short-interviews in the last opening hours for New Mexico and Nevada.
McCAIN CAMPAIGN MEMO: READING THE EXIT POLLS Mon Nov 03 2008 16:53:14 ET
As we have seen in previous election cycles, the exit poll results do leak early and that ends up influencing the coverage of the race before even the first state polls close at 6:00 PM Eastern.
However, we want to remind the campaign that the medias own post-election study of the exit polls in 2004 showed that the exit polls overstate the Democratic candidates support. Therefore, we would discourage a rush to judgment based on the exit polls and wait until there has been a representative sampling of actual tabulated results from a variety of counties and precincts in a state.
Here are the key points to keep in mind when the exit poll data starts being leaked:
1. Historically, exit polls have tended to overstate the Democratic vote.
2. The exit polls are likely to overstate the Obama vote because Obama voters are more likely to participate in the exit poll.
3. The exit polls have tended to skew most Democratic in years where there is high turnout and high vote interest like in 1992 and 2004.
4. It is not just the national exit poll that skews Democratic, but each of the state exit polls also suffers from the same Democratic leanings.
5. The results of the exit polls are also influenced by the demographics of the voters who conduct the exit polls.
After the 2004 election, the National Election Pool completed a study investigating why the exit polls that year showed John Kerry over performing 5.5 net points better than the actual results showed him to have done. Their conclusion was that the primary reason the exit polls was that Kerry voters and Democrats were more likely to participate in the exit polls.
Our investigation of the differences between the exit poll estimates and the actual vote count point to one primary reason: in a number of precincts a higher than average Within Precinct Error most likely due to Kerry voters participating in the exit polls at a higher rate than Bush voters. There has been partisan overstatements in previous elections, more often overstating the Democrat, but occasionally overstating the Republican.
We believe that this will hold true this year. The recent Fox News survey showed that 46% of Obama voters said they were very likely to participate in the exit polls, while just 35% of McCain supporters are.
In fact, even the 2004 exit poll report noted that higher turnout nationally and higher levels of voter interest in both 1992 and 2004 correlated with greater Within Precinct Error.
The overstating of the Democratic vote did not only occur in the national exit polls, but also occurred in the state exit polls. The 2004 exit poll report cited that the Kerry vote was overstated by more than one standard error in 26 states, while the Bush vote was overstated in just four states. So we should also expect the individual state exit polls on Tuesday to be more Democratic as well.
So given that turnout is expected to be even higher than 2004 and that Democrats are more likely to participate in the exit polls, this means we should expect greater fluctuation and variation in the exit polls from the actual election results.
The 2004 exit poll report also showed that the greatest error in the exit poll came in precincts where the interviewer was younger. The completion rates were lower and the refusal rates and Within Precinct Error was higher when the interviewers were under the age of 35.[6] Complicating this is that nearly half the interviewers were under the age of 35, including 35% who were 18-24 and another 15% were 25-34.
Conclusions
Based on the previous exit poll results, we should expect once again that Tuesdays exit poll data could overstate the Obama vote and under represent the McCain vote.
It is important that the campaign make sure the media realizes this, so that when the exit polls do leak, people do not overreact to the early exit poll data. Rather than looking at the exit polls, we should wait until we start seeing actual election results from key precincts and counties to gauge who won the election.
Another question about US constitutional law: Is the following scenario possible? McCain/Palin get elected. McCain dies. Palin becomes president and picks George W. Bush as vice president.
Another question about US constitutional law: Is the following scenario possible? McCain/Palin get elected. McCain dies. Palin becomes president and picks George W. Bush as vice president.
No.
The constitutional explicitely remarks that a President at most can serve two 4-year terms, or 10 years if one succeeded to the office with less than two years left on that term left unfulfilled by the predecessor. Also, the Vice-President has the same qualification-limits as the President.
On January 20, Dubya will have served 8 full years. He's ineligible for anymore terms or even as VP.
"You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred. You cannot build character and courage by taking away men's initiative and independence. You cannot heal men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves." ... Abraham Lincoln
"We need to spread the wealth." ... Barack Hussein Obama
PASS IT ALONG....AND VOTE CAREFULLY !!
Originally Posted By: Don Andrew
I'd still like the answer to this, and I'd assume more than a few people would like to hear it as well.
Originally Posted By: Don Andrew
What is wrong with being a Muslim? Because even if your extremely false quote was even close to accurate...what would be wrong with that and what would be wrong if Barack Obama was a Muslim?
McCAIN CAMPAIGN MEMO: READING THE EXIT POLLS Mon Nov 03 2008 16:53:14 ET
As we have seen in previous election cycles, the exit poll results do leak early and that ends up influencing the coverage of the race before even the first state polls close at 6:00 PM Eastern.
However, we want to remind the campaign that the medias own post-election study of the exit polls in 2004 showed that the exit polls overstate the Democratic candidates support. Therefore, we would discourage a rush to judgment based on the exit polls and wait until there has been a representative sampling of actual tabulated results from a variety of counties and precincts in a state.
Here are the key points to keep in mind when the exit poll data starts being leaked:
1. Historically, exit polls have tended to overstate the Democratic vote.
2. The exit polls are likely to overstate the Obama vote because Obama voters are more likely to participate in the exit poll.
3. The exit polls have tended to skew most Democratic in years where there is high turnout and high vote interest like in 1992 and 2004.
4. It is not just the national exit poll that skews Democratic, but each of the state exit polls also suffers from the same Democratic leanings.
5. The results of the exit polls are also influenced by the demographics of the voters who conduct the exit polls.
After the 2004 election, the National Election Pool completed a study investigating why the exit polls that year showed John Kerry over performing 5.5 net points better than the actual results showed him to have done. Their conclusion was that the primary reason the exit polls was that Kerry voters and Democrats were more likely to participate in the exit polls.
Our investigation of the differences between the exit poll estimates and the actual vote count point to one primary reason: in a number of precincts a higher than average Within Precinct Error most likely due to Kerry voters participating in the exit polls at a higher rate than Bush voters. There has been partisan overstatements in previous elections, more often overstating the Democrat, but occasionally overstating the Republican.
We believe that this will hold true this year. The recent Fox News survey showed that 46% of Obama voters said they were very likely to participate in the exit polls, while just 35% of McCain supporters are.
In fact, even the 2004 exit poll report noted that higher turnout nationally and higher levels of voter interest in both 1992 and 2004 correlated with greater Within Precinct Error.
The overstating of the Democratic vote did not only occur in the national exit polls, but also occurred in the state exit polls. The 2004 exit poll report cited that the Kerry vote was overstated by more than one standard error in 26 states, while the Bush vote was overstated in just four states. So we should also expect the individual state exit polls on Tuesday to be more Democratic as well.
So given that turnout is expected to be even higher than 2004 and that Democrats are more likely to participate in the exit polls, this means we should expect greater fluctuation and variation in the exit polls from the actual election results.
The 2004 exit poll report also showed that the greatest error in the exit poll came in precincts where the interviewer was younger. The completion rates were lower and the refusal rates and Within Precinct Error was higher when the interviewers were under the age of 35.[6] Complicating this is that nearly half the interviewers were under the age of 35, including 35% who were 18-24 and another 15% were 25-34.
Conclusions
Based on the previous exit poll results, we should expect once again that Tuesdays exit poll data could overstate the Obama vote and under represent the McCain vote.
It is important that the campaign make sure the media realizes this, so that when the exit polls do leak, people do not overreact to the early exit poll data. Rather than looking at the exit polls, we should wait until we start seeing actual election results from key precincts and counties to gauge who won the election.
And why is it that this reminds me of Karl Rove two years ago said that "his math" showed the GOP retaining Congress, despite everybody else's pollings saying otherwise?
I have to agree with the McCain Campaign somewhat. I remember very early in the evening on the 2004 Election Day, many of the talking heads were projecting a Kerry win based on exit polling.
Another question about US constitutional law: Is the following scenario possible? McCain/Palin get elected. McCain dies. Palin becomes president and picks George W. Bush as vice president.
No.
The constitutional explicitely remarks that a President at most can serve two 4-year terms, or 10 years if one succeeded to the office with less than two years left on that term left unfulfilled by the predecessor. Also, the Vice-President has the same qualification-limits as the President.
On January 20, Dubya will have served 8 full years. He's ineligible for anymore terms or even as VP.
Even if he was eligible, and Palin picked him (even if she's now trying to distance herself from the Bush White House), he'd have to be approved by Congress.
The Democrat would do a better job of reining in the budget deficit than his GOP competitor, says First Global.
First Global
ON THE EVE OF THE U.S. presidential election, we thought it instructive to look at how the US budget has looked under a Democratic versus a Republican White House. With the caveats that economic cycles bring their own head and tailwinds and 'past performance may not be indicative of the future', the analysis of the last two decades is certainly interesting.
When Republican candidate, George W. Bush took over as president in January 2001, he inherited a budget surplus of $236.2 billion in the fiscal year 2000. In fact, the federal budget was in surplus for four consecutive years, 1998-2001, following 30 years of running budget deficits. In contrast, when Democratic candidate, Bill Clinton took over as President on January 20, 1993, he inherited a budget deficit of $290.3 billion in 1992, built up under the regime of the then Republican President, George H.W. Bush - the father of the current president.
The legacy of the current Bush presidency means that the incoming president will need to work hard to reduce the federal budget deficit. No matter which way you cut the data, the Democratic regime wins hands down, primarily due to the huge difference in expenditures on military defense and receipts from individual taxes, based on policy differences between the candidates.
The US national debt (which represents an accumulation of yearly budget deficits) has touched $10 trillion, on the budget year ending September 2008, with a cumulative growth of 72.6% during the Bush regime, as against a cumulative growth of merely 28.6% at the time of the Clinton's regime.
The continuously declining budget deficit during the Clinton regime reflects the impact of various major legislations signed by him, such as the "Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993" raising the income tax rates, the "Minimum Wage" Increase Act of 1996, etc.
On the other hand, the sharp decline in the budget deficit during the Bush period can be attributed to two reasons -- declining tax rates and the Iraq war.
The high U.S. budget deficit is not popular due to a number of reasons. Firstly, the higher the government expenditure, the lesser the available resources for private investment, which is popularly known as the "crowding-out" effect in Keynesian language.
Secondly, though expansionary government policies become an inevitable tool to boost the domestic economy amidst tough times, investors punish the largest deficit running government in the longer term, as the deficit adversely impacts credibility and increases the risk of default by that government, since it is consuming resources faster than other governments.
Thirdly, if a government is spending more than it has, then it will finance the over-expenditure in two ways -- (i) borrowing and; (ii) printing money. Both of these moves could prove dangerous, as borrowing by issuing government securities will reduce money supply in the market and seigniorage will increase money supply. An excess of either could prove disastrous for the economy (in fact, the entire world is facing a liquidity crunch in the market currently).
Despite governments across the world committing trillions of dollars to save their banking systems, there are some limits as to how far they continue doing so, since in the longer term, investors may punish those nations with higher deficits on their government budgets. The problem for the U.S. is that it started on an already high base of budget deficits and national debt and these would only push it higher. As the situation stands, the incoming Presidents will have an uphill task to reduce the federal budget deficit (let us forget the balanced budget for now).
Republican candidate, John McCain, has a big disadvantage here, as he has backed Bush's tax cuts for the rich and now wants to provide them with bigger tax cuts. Moreover, John McCain was gungho on the Iraq war from the start, while on the other hand, Barack Obama is opposed to both these policies. Hence, our vote goes to Barack Obama, a Democratic candidate, at least in terms of fiscal discipline.
Another question about US constitutional law: Is the following scenario possible? McCain/Palin get elected. McCain dies. Palin becomes president and picks George W. Bush as vice president.
Yes becuase the 22nd amendment only applies to election as President. However, the President's nomination of a Vice-President must be approved by the Congress and I think that a Congress would be unlikely to approve.
Some people don't know when their 15 minutes are up.
I wish Joe the tax-evader, not-really-a-plumber, not-buying-a-business, would-benefit-under-obama-tax-plan, and not-even-named-Joe would go away already. It just doesn't seem conceivable that a unknown "plumber" can become some kind of authority on foreign policy and politics over night just because he asked a question based on false premises to Obama? Anything he says should automatically be dismissed as shit that goes in a toilet he isn't even licensed to unplug.
"We need to spread the wealth." ... Barack Hussein Obama
Below is Obama's statement:
"My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody. I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
It's quite obvious that he was referring to a good economy for everyone.
"We need to spread the wealth." ... Barack Hussein Obama
Below is Obama's statement:
"My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody. I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
It's quite obvious that he was referring to a good economy for everyone.
WASHINGTON (AP) — Americans will elect not only a president on Tuesday, but also his huge team of aides, advisers and bureaucrats who will help the winner run the federal government for the next four years.
Clearly a John McCain presidency would be more conservative than a Barack Obama presidency. Beyond the ideological and partisan divides, however, are differences in style, tone and pedigree that would distinguish one administration from the other.
Obama, if he wins, appears likely to draw several of his top aides, including some Cabinet secretaries, from three key sources: Democratic governors midway through their second and final terms in office; former top appointees of Bill Clinton's administration; and political pros from Obama's hometown of Chicago.
McCain, a former Navy officer whose father and grandfather were admirals, is likely to rely more heavily on current and retired military officials. He probably would draw more people from the corporate world, and somewhat fewer people from think tanks and academia, than would Obama, according to people close to the candidates.
Numerous lists of potential appointees are circulating in Washington, Chicago and Arizona. But Democratic and GOP officials warn that both nominees are fully focused on Tuesday's finish line and probably have made no firm personnel decisions about the administration they hope to run.
People close to Obama believe he would offer jobs to some or all of a quartet of Democratic governors who campaigned hard for him, even if a couple of them opposed him initially.
Two, who have thrived in Republican-leaning states — Gov. Janet Napolitano of Arizona and Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas — backed Obama from the start. Napolitano is seen as a possible attorney general. Sebelius is mentioned as a possible secretary of Education, Commerce, Energy or Health and Human Services.
Gov. Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania is seen as a possible pick for the top Energy or Transportation posts. Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, who sought the presidential nomination himself, is thought to be on a short list for secretary of state.
The four would have to give up the last two years of their eight-year terms as governor, something that might give them pause.
Former Democratic governors who might become Obama appointees include Tom Vilsack of Iowa, mentioned as a possible Agriculture secretary.
Obama already has turned to a former Clinton aide, John Podesta, to head his transition planning. Other former Clinton appointees said to be in the running for prominent jobs in an Obama administration include Susan Rice, who was assistant secretary of state for African Affairs; James Steinberg, who was deputy national security adviser; Gregory Craig, who was one of Clinton's top lawyers; economic advisers Gene Sperling and Laura Tyson; and former treasury secretaries Larry Summers and Robert Rubin.
Top Obama campaign aides David Axelrod and David Plouffe of Chicago would be probable picks for senior adviser or political posts. Officials say Obama already has approached Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Chicago, who got his political start with Clinton, as a possible White House chief of staff. Campaign aide Robert Gibbs has the inside track to be press secretary.
Other Chicago associates likely to land posts in an Obama administration include lawyer and fundraiser Penny Pritzker, and business executive and family friend Valerie Jarrett. Former Senate Majority leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota is certain to have a prominent role if he wants one, and some Obama supporters prefer him over Emanuel as chief of staff.
McCain, in picking his transition chief, set a tone that he would carry into the White House if elected, associates say. He tapped former Navy secretary John Lehman, one of several prominent military officials close to him.
Lehman might serve as Defense secretary or senior adviser in a McCain administration, sources say. McCain, who says U.S. troops should not leave Iraq until victory is secured, might ask current Defense Secretary Robert Gates to stay, at least a while.
Should neither Gates nor Lehman head the Pentagon, McCain might turn to retired Marine Gen. James Jones or Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a lawyer in the Air Force Reserve.
Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, an "independent Democrat" who campaigned exhaustively for McCain, would almost surely get a top post, possibly secretary of state. World Bank president Robert Zoellick is another possibility for that slot, or another prominent job.
Two prominent women from the corporate world — former eBay chief Meg Whitman, and former Hewlett-Packard chairman Carly Fiorina — would be strong contenders for roles as official or unofficial advisers to McCain.
At least two of McCain's vanquished GOP rivals could land administration jobs if he wins. Former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani has been mentioned as a possible attorney general. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney could contend for several other posts.
Retiring Rep. Heather Wilson of New Mexico could receive a top appointment in Energy or national security, two areas in which she has expertise.
Like Obama, McCain would be almost certain to give top jobs to his chief campaign advisers. Longtime aides Mark Salter and Rick Davis would likely be on the White House staff. Top economics adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin would be offered a post involving domestic policy.
Yea, I'm guessing he'd would have stood a chance. Boy, who would have thought hu?
However, speaking of Attorney General, I really think that Patrick Fitzgerald (of Valerie Plame fame) would be great. He's unpolitical, supposedly has a reputation of being honest and gives his all. Actually he is from Chicago too, so who knows.
Anyway, don't want to jump the gun just yet. Perhaps tomorrow at this time we can choose Obama's cabinet for him.
I saw that on Countdown today. I missed the very beginning and had no idea it was Ben Affleck until Keith said so. He is right on isn't he?
Btw, may I suggest we post here if anyone has any problems, good or bad experiences or just comments when they cast their vote tomorrow? Or just let us know the turn-out at your polling place.
I had an absentee/mail in vote, so can't comment on personal experience. However, the school I work at is a polling place so I expect I'll see a lot of activity. Usually it's not very busy at all but I expect it to be tomorrow.
Starbucks is giving away free coffee??? I don't go to Starbucks, but my daughter goes all the time. What's the deal? You prove you voted and you get coffee?? How about a donut to go with it???
Starbucks is giving away free coffee??? I don't go to Starbucks, but my daughter goes all the time. What's the deal? You prove you voted and you get coffee?? How about a donut to go with it???
TIS
Tis, I know you're a latte liberal and all, but THIS IS RIDICULOUS!
Obama wins the first reporting district of the election in historic fashion!
Obama wins Dixville Notch in New Hampshire...16-5, the first time that a Democrat has won there since 1964. Dubya had won there in 2004, but lost New Hampshire and its 4 electoral votes.
The registration for this microscopic community, according to CNN? 5 Democrats, 4 Republicans, and 11 Independents. You know what that means?
Obama had won all the independent swing-voters at that spot.
Starbucks is giving away free coffee??? I don't go to Starbucks, but my daughter goes all the time. What's the deal? You prove you voted and you get coffee?? How about a donut to go with it???
TIS
Krispy Kreme is giving away the free doughnuts.
My voting place is usually stocked with free homemade cakes, pies, etc.
With the Steelers beating the redskins tonight, Obama is assured a victory tomorrow. Whenever the Redskins win their game before Election Day, the incumbent party retains the White House. When they lose, a new party wins.
With the Steelers beating the redskins tonight, Obama is assured a victory tomorrow. Whenever the Redskins win their game before Election Day, the incumbent party retains the White House. When they lose, a new party wins.
EXCEPT in 2004.
You wouldn't believe that after that Redskins lost in '04, I assumed Kerry's election was assured.
Starbucks is giving away free coffee??? I don't go to Starbucks, but my daughter goes all the time. What's the deal? You prove you voted and you get coffee?? How about a donut to go with it???
TIS
Krispy Kreme is giving away the free doughnuts.
My voting place is usually stocked with free homemade cakes, pies, etc.
Ok, here it is 4:21 a.m. here in California and I'm awake. What am I? Nuts?? I am normally up around five and perhaps it's partially the time change, BUT I am so anxious for this election, I admit it.
I am watching Morning Joe (off and on). Man that guy is the biggest baby. Yet, I laugh my ass off because he's obviously soooooo disappointed at what "looks" like an Obama win. His panel, I conclude, know to let him rant, or I'm guessing there'd be hell to pay. He's so transparent. LMAO
Anyway, They have shown polling places in Virginia so far. I'll keep tabs from work today. I can't get to the BB, but at least I can check CNN and MSNBC.
Oh, also, how sad that Obama's grandmother died so very close to the election. Gee, just one more day would have been nice hu?
Ok, so VA is where I live, and Prince William County (one of the swing counties in this thing) is also where I live. I got up to get to the 6AM poll openings, and the line stretched AROUND the building. SO I had to get to work. I'm planning to leave early though. It's going to be a long day. BUT I'M FIRED UP & READY TO GO SUCKERRRRRRRRRRSSSSSSSSs!!!! whoo!
My polling place is always fairly empty - maybe 2 people ahead of me. I went around 9:45 (I had to film at my old high school again this morning, and gotta go back at 2pm). No major "local issues" to vote on - I think everyone votes "Yes" on those anyway without even reading them...
Just got back from voting at the high school. My district had quite the line, but the others had no more than two or three people.
There's a state senate seat and assembly seat up for grabs. The incumbents weren't even challenged.
My daughter, who turned 18 in the spring, registered to vote at an Obama booth back in September. They called her last night (a real person!) to make sure that she got all her documents, see if she had any questions, and to make sure that she didn't wear any hats, buttons or TShirts that had the names/faces of any of the candidates on them, or they wouldn't allow her to vote.
They called her last night (a real person!) to make sure that she got all her documents, see if she had any questions, and to make sure that she didn't wear any hats, buttons or TShirts that had the names/faces of any of the candidates on them, or they wouldn't allow her to vote.
That's true. You have to cover up the shirts and buttons once you step inside the polling place if they tell you to.
My wife and I took our daughter to vote. She wanted to press the Obama button on the computer board.
Today is also parent/teacher conference day at her school. Each grade had a mock election and the results were posted. McCain won among the first and second graders while he eeked out a win in the third grade. Fourth graders had Obama by a modest margin and the fifth graders voted Obama by a larger spread. Obama won by a bigger margin in the middle school and an even bigger margin in the high schools. It was pretty obvious that the younger kids reflected their parents while the older they got, the more likely they were to differ from their parents. Iguess the more things change, the more they stay the same.
The Republicans put a lot of time and energy in PA the past ten days and they are optimistic they are going to steal the state. I think they closed the gap, but I don't think they'll win.
McCain was good with Chris Berman on Monday Night Football. I'm sure that both he and Obama will take vacations soon after today. Sadly, Obama will have to be making funeral plans. It's too bad that his grandmother didn't get the opportunity to see this day, win or lose.
and to make sure that she didn't wear any hats, buttons or TShirts that had the names/faces of any of the candidates on them, or they wouldn't allow her to vote.
and to make sure that she didn't wear any hats, buttons or TShirts that had the names/faces of any of the candidates on them, or they wouldn't allow her to vote.
surprising.
This is loosely enforced, but there is a steadfast rule of no campaigning inside the voting location. This includes signs, speeches, passing out pamphlets. Buttons, shirts and hats are expressions of support and should be covered up inside. Outside the door, it is customary to hand out stickers and leaflets although that practice is dying down where I am.
When I was younger, I'd hand things out at the local polls. In 1991, a friend (and boss) was the Chief Public Defender running for judge against a DA, who was known as a tough drug prosecutor. The DA had an employee working the polls too and approached an old man comiong to the door, asking for his support.
He grumbled, "Is he gonna be a tough judge?"
She smiled politely and said, "He'll be fair."
He looked annoyed, handed her back the leaflet and said, "I want a tough judge, not a fair one."
I waited for him to make his way through the sea of volunteers and handed him my flyer and said, "I'd appreciate your vote for Scott E_____. He'll nail the bastards to the wall."
He laughed and said, "Now that's the judge I want."
Has anyone noticed that Wayne Allyn Root is the VP candidate for the Libertarian Party? He's a Las Vegas sports handicapper! That seems like a strange choice for government. Not that it matters of course.
Has anyone noticed that Wayne Allyn Root is the VP candidate for the Libertarian Party? He's a Las Vegas sports handicapper! That seems like a strange choice for government. Not that it matters of course.
Me too. I used to watch ABC because of David Brinkley. I watched the NBC election coverage because of Russert. I don't know what network I'll watch tonight. I will flip around to hear the view from the extremes on MSNBC and FOX News.
John McCain's campaign spokesman Tucker Bounds is in full "Baghdad Bob" mode today. On CNN he proclaimed: "Our polling shows that John McCain is leading or within the margin of error in all the battleground states".
Me too. I used to watch ABC because of David Brinkley. I watched the NBC election coverage because of Russert. I don't know what network I'll watch tonight. I will flip around to hear the view from the extremes on MSNBC and FOX News.
AMC is airing Rocky and Rocky 2........."I shoulda broke your thumb".
I voted and then went to Starbucks for a free coffee.
I was surprised to fill out a paper ballot, then put it into this machine thingy that reads the votes but kind of looks like a paper shredder. I didn't have to wait in line at all.
Just a note about the free Starbucks coffee. Even if you didn't vote, they have to give you the free coffee. By law, they are not allowed to offer anything for voting.
Just a note about the free Starbucks coffee. Even if you didn't vote, they have to give you the free coffee. By law, they are not allowed to offer anything for voting.
I just saw this, they had to modify it because of the law. Ben and Jerry's is giving out ice cream and Krispy Kreme is giving out donuts.
Why do so many of you wait to vote and not take advantage of early voting? I voted two weeks ago. Don't hey have it in Va. and Calif?
Early voting is not permitted in PA. Absentee ballots are available by mail if you are unable to vote at the polls. I used absentee ballots when I was in law school.
Why do so many of you wait to vote and not take advantage of early voting? I voted two weeks ago. Don't hey have it in Va. and Calif?
Early voting is not permitted in PA. Absentee ballots are available by mail if you are unable to vote at the polls. I used absentee ballots when I was in law school.
Why can't the candidates vote by absentee ballot? It seems like a tremendous waste of time and energy to fly all the way up to Alaska only to vote and then fly all the way back to Arizona, (or wherever she and McCain are gonna watch the returns).
BTW - The same goes for the Democratic Party candidates.
Why do so many of you wait to vote and not take advantage of early voting? I voted two weeks ago. Don't hey have it in Va. and Calif?
Early voting is not permitted in PA. Absentee ballots are available by mail if you are unable to vote at the polls. I used absentee ballots when I was in law school.
Why can't the candidates vote by absentee ballot? It seems like a tremendous waste of time and energy to fly all the way up to Alaska only to vote and then fly all the way back to Arizona, (or wherever she and McCain are gonna watch the returns).
BTW - The same goes for the Democratic Party candidates.
Why can't the candidates vote by absentee ballot? It seems like a tremendous waste of time and energy to fly all the way up to Alaska only to vote and then fly all the way back to Arizona, (or wherever she and McCain are gonna watch the returns).
BTW - The same goes for the Democratic Party candidates.
It's a PR type thing.
That's an awful lot of money wasted on a photo-op.
I found out that my Father-in-law through his vote away by not voting for either canidate. He's a life long Dem but he didn't like Obama and refuses to vote for a Rep.
It's campaign money. What else are they going to do with it now that the campaign's over??
Thanks for pointing that out. In a post about a week or so ago I complimented my fellow Board members on their political acument exprerssed here. However, there still is an appreciable amount of misinformation posted. I would advise all Board members to start by reading (or rereading) the Nation's Constitution. Remember, we are going to go through this all again in four years and it's unlikely that the Constitution will have changed in the interim.
No offense, but I see now why the RNC spent money on new clothes for Sarah Palin. I just saw a video of her casting her vote in Alaska. She was dressed in baggy jeans and did NOT look like her usual, well-put-together self. I mean, did she not know that there would be TV cameras there??
Edit: On the other hand, I saw video of Cindy McCain in the most stunning black and white coat. I bet she would be a well-dressed First Lady.
No offense, but I see now why the RNC spent money on new clothes for Sarah Palin. I just saw a video of her casting her vote in Alaska. She was dressed in baggy jeans and did NOT look like her usual, well-put-together self. I mean, did she not know that there would be TV cameras there??
So what? I wore jeans and a tshirt with a jean jacket.
I don't sweat the small stuff. If Obama wanted to wear jeans to cast his vote would you be upset? I could care less if he or the other canidates showed up in sweat pants and a sweat shirt.
And YOU are not the vice-presidential candidate, nor were there news crews lined up to take photos and video of YOU voting.
I was disappointed nobody took my picture when I voted. I wore a Boston College sweatshirt and jeans. They handed out soft drinks and candy bars wrapped in authentic looking replicas of million dollar bills with Rutherford B. Hayes on the note. The back had some passages from the Gospels. Gotta love the Baptists.
A "well placed" conservative operative passes along the following exit polls, every warning you've read on our partner site Pollster.com should be taken while reading:
State Obama/McCAin ------------------------------------ FL 52-49 GA 47-51 LA 44-54 MI 60-39 NH 57-43 MN 60-39 PA 57-42 VA 55-45 OH 54-45 NC 52-48 IN 52-48 MO 52-48 NM 55-45 WV 44-55
At first it was 3 - 16 for McCain, right now CNN says 77 - 34 for Obama. Popular vote 52% - 47%. Looking good, although until now only 'logical' victories have been made (Illinois, SC, ...)
I worked today. I am taking tomorrow off. Glad I am cause I'll probably be up late.
Looking good for Obama. So far it seems like both are winning expected states. Well, some think PA was ify but I kind of thought it would be Obama. I'm really not seeing how McCain can win unless "maybe" he gets every single "toss-up" state and that's not gonna happen.
I wish I could be in Chicago right now....but then again I'd freeze my arse off wouldn't I?
I'm switching between MSN & CNN. I swear the pundits don't want to be so grim on McCain's progress. They are talking how Obama hasn't managed to flip a red state yet. While granted it'd b great, I think McLame needs a little more help.
On Fox News, as McCain is going down in flames, his senior campaign advisor is talking about how Sarah Palin was a "homerun" for the GOP ticket despite tonight's results.
On Fox News, as McCain is going down in flames, his senior campaign advisor is talking about how Sarah Palin was a "homerun" for the GOP ticket despite tonight's results.
Although I know it's he electoral votes, do you know where te popular vote totals are (all states combined). Or does that come later? I'm curious because I predicted O would win by around 10 points or so.
Oh, and don't forget we most assuredly will be able to add Californias electoral votes too. Ou rpolls are open for another hour and a half.
Although I know it's he electoral votes, do you know where te popular vote totals are (all states combined). Or does that come later? I'm curious because I predicted O would win by around 10 points or so.
On Foxnews.com, there's a popular vote counter in the front page. I'm not sure it's accurate though. It has Obama up by only 0.5%.
Although I know it's he electoral votes, do you know where te popular vote totals are (all states combined). Or does that come later? I'm curious because I predicted O would win by around 10 points or so.
On Foxnews.com, there's a popular vote counter in the front page. I'm not sure it's accurate though. It has Obama up by only 0.5%.
Ha ha ha....man, it that holds true, I was wrong big time. I don't care if he wins by 1 vote as long as he wins. Although, a big popular vote win woul be nice.
I had to stop by & admit that now that it's 'practically' over, I feel a strange sense of relief. I had never wanted McCain as the nominee and felt he was completely selfish to run this last time. He was a lousy campaigner from the word GO and although I voted for him, the way ran he deserved to lose. Never overestimate the intelligence of the Republican primary voters.
It's been a nerve-wracking couple of weeks and predictably, the Democrats led by Barack Obama have managed to benefit from an economic downturn for which they are responsible. Never overestimate the intelligence of the American people. If they're worried about the economy now...I can't wait to see how they feel in a year or two.
For the record, I do NOT believe that Sarah Palin brought the McCain campaign down. In reality, it was McCain and his handlers who brought Palin down. She deserves better treatment than she got from them AND the mainstream media, and I think she 'went rogue' a bit too late in the game. But she's a star...she'll be back. And without that albatross around her neck.
That said, I do appreciate the significance of this man becoming not only the first Black nominee, but incredibly is about to be elected the first Black President of the United States. Some people are simply born to hold a place in History and Barack Obama is obviously one of them. I'm happy for his daughters. I'm happy for Oprah. I wish him well, because he will be 'my' President. And let's hope he remains healthy because the only thing worse than a President Obama would be a President Biden.
Congrats to all by BB buddies who are on the winning side.
If that stays the same, we won't know who won Indiana tonight. Luckily it won't matter.
I heard on the radio today that when the calculate Indiana to take note that if they have not counted/included the county where "Gary, Ind." is to be advised that that area is a large area, heavily African American and Democrat. So, if that's holding up the count, it still could be a win for our guy. Although like JL says it won't really matter, thankfully.
I heard on the radio today that when the calculate Indiana to take note that if they have not counted/included the county where "Gary, Ind." is to be advised that that area is a large area, heavily African American and Democrat. So, if that's holding up the count, it still could be a win for our guy. Although like JL says it won't really matter, thankfully.
Just read that overseas markets are surging now that the election is over.
HONG KONG (AP) — Asian stocks rose sharply in early trade Wednesday, with Japan's benchmark advancing almost 3 percent, as sentiment turned upbeat after U.S. markets soared on Election Day.
Japan's Nikkei 225 stock average climbed 2.9 percent to 9,377.53, and South Korea's Kospi advanced 3.2 percent to 1,190.03. Markets in Singapore, Australia, Shanghai and New Zealand also traded higher.
The upswing followed Wall Street, where investors brushed off more signs of a slumping U.S. economy and piled into stocks.
Global investors also were looking forward to the end of political uncertainty created by the U.S. election and hopeful that Sen. Barack Obama would focus on boosting the American economy — a vital Asian export market — should he win the presidency.
"We are definitely upbeat now about the market direction. I think investors and funds will be coming in and buying aggressively until the end of year," said Alex Tang, head of research at Core Pacific-Yamaichi in Hong Kong.
"I think investors also are hoping that Obama can make a number of changes to help the economy," he added.
Even with the market aside, I think most of the world (who is watching this election very closely) will literally cheer "when" Obama wins. Call it the "W-Affect". It destroys everything. They want change almost as much as we do.
Ha ha... I'm here LN. I thought I'd give someone else a chance to talk. The polls hereclose in about ten minutes but my state isn't going to be a surprise.
I am just feeling happy being a part of this historic moment.
On a rattlesnake speedway in the Utah desert I pick up my money and head back into town Driving cross the Waynesboro county line I got the radio on and I'm just killing time Working all day in my daddy's garage Driving all night chasing some mirage Pretty soon little girl I'm gonna take charge
The dogs on Main Street howl 'cause they understand If I could take one moment into my hands Mister I ain't a boy, no I'm a man And I believe in a promised land
I've done my best to live the right way I get up every morning and go to work each day But your eyes go blind and your blood runs cold Sometimes I feel so weak I just want to explode Explode and tear this whole town apart Take a knife and cut this pain from my heart Find somebody itching for something to start
The dogs on Main Street howl 'cause they understand If I could take one moment into my hands Mister I ain't a boy, no I'm a man And I believe in a promised land
There's a dark cloud rising from the desert floor I packed my bags and I'm heading straight into the storm Gonna be a twister to blow everything down That ain't got the faith to stand its ground Blow away the dreams that tear you apart Blow away the dreams that break your heart Blow away the lies that leave you nothing but lost and brokenhearted
The dogs on Main Street howl 'cause they understand If I could take one moment into my hands Mister I ain't a boy, no I'm a man And I believe in a promised land
To Bush to all the crooks who took part in ruining our country. ....... To the end of 8 hellish years....All I can say is.........Yippie Kiya mutha fuckas!!!!! It's over!!! The torch is passed.
Wow. Karl Rove was pretty gracious on Fox News. He even said: "the entire U.S. should be celebrating tonight". (In regards that an African American was elected president)
McCain just called Senator Obama to concede. He will be coming to the podium any moment.
I gotta admit, this probably is the best concession speech I've heard yet....and I wonder if many in that McCain crowd were baffled by McCain marking of how despite losing, tonight is a great moment in American history.
Then he swung them around with: "The fault is me, not you."
McCain just called Senator Obama to concede. He will be coming to the podium any moment.
I gotta admit, this probably is the best concession speech I've heard yet....and I wonder if many in that McCain crowd were baffled by McCain marking of how despite losing, tonight is a great moment in American history.
Then he swung them around with: "The fault is me, not you."
Good words Senator, good words.
I agree that his speech was good, I didn't like the crowd booing though.
Now what will happen to Biden's seat that he won tonight?
CNN said the governor will take it over.
Really? Governors traditionally appoint the replacements (as will happen in Illinois on Obama's seat)...though I guess technically a Governor could appont him/herself.
Thatwas probably the nicest I've ever seen McCain. He did say all he right things. I agree about the crowd booing. At least this time McCain appeared to try to calm them down.
Anyway for McCain, I'm guessing he's ready for a nice long rest. Maybe he's even a little relieved. Look at all the work there is to do as President. I sure as hell wouldn't volunteer to be President into my seventies.
McCain was a true gentleman at the end, and gave a gracious and eloquent speech. As LN said, what a shame that the crowd couldn't follow his example.
That McCain is who I supported in 2000, and I wonder what if he had run as that instead of Dubya 2.0?
But let me quote conservative Andrew Sullivan:
"It was very classy, very moving, and finally worthy of the man we once thought we knew. Alas, his crowd was as ugly as he was gracious. I fear what will now become of the GOP."
If that crowd is the immediate future for the GOP....Oh fuck.
At the time of FOX NEWS giving the election to Obama, Juan Williams....a black conservative-friendly pundit who's been accused by Democratic blacks of being an "Uncle Tom" more than once, gave an eloquent and thoughtful statement on how when Obama is inagurated in January 2009, it would be on the centenial of the creation of the NAACP, how that group was founded after a violent fatal racial riot in Springfield, Illinois...where Obama announced his run for President back in 2007.
He also talked of how its remarkable how for a minority group within a western nation that's been so maligned for centuries traditionally, now have elected one of their own by the country's majority.
I tell ya, he stepped up to the plate for the occassion, and I may even listen to him more now.
Before they called it, one of the pundits said wouldn't it be something if it was Hawaii that put him over the top, sort of in honor of his grandmother. Yea, I can't imagine how he must feel. And just the irony of her dying literally a day before he was to become President. What can that possibley mean? Why shouldn't that have been "ment to be?" Life is hard to understand sometimes.
I too am looking forward to seeing Obama. He's and Michelle and their whole family must be absolutely thrilled.
Tonight, we are celebrating an historic victory for the American people. This was a long and hard fought campaign but the result was well worth the wait. Together, under the leadership of President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and a Democratic Congress, we will chart a better course to build a new economy and rebuild our leadership in the world. And I look forward to doing all that I can to support President Obama and Vice President Biden in the difficult work that lies ahead. For too long, middle class families in this country have felt invisible, struggling alone as wages stagnate, jobs disappear, and the costs of daily life climb upward. In quiet, solitary acts of citizenship, American voters gave voice to their hopes and their values, voted for change, and refused to be invisible any longer.
I'm so with you on that. I try to explain that feelng to my kids. But yea, that hope and "feel good" feeling is wonderful. It gives me the chills.
I know you remember it well, of how we all felt as young people that the gaunlet was passed to a new generation, and of all the possibilities that came with that when JFK won. I am reminded of that now.
Remember:
Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans—born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritage—and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this Nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home and around the world. Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
and
All this will not be finished in the first 100 days. Nor will it be finished in the first 1,000 days, nor in the life of this Administration, nor even perhaps in our lifetime on this planet. But let us begin.
Those great words were spoken by JFK at his inauguration. I am reminded of them by listening to Obama tonight.
Before they called it, one of the pundits said wouldn't it be something if it was Hawaii that put him over the top, sort of in honor of his grandmother. Yea, I can't imagine how he must feel. And just the irony of her dying literally a day before he was to become President. What can that possibley mean? Why shouldn't that have been "ment to be?" Life is hard to understand sometimes.
I too am looking forward to seeing Obama. He's and Michelle and their whole family must be absolutely thrilled.
TIS
You realize that the White House will have small kids for the first time since JFK?
By Shailagh Murray Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, November 4, 2008; 11:38 PM
Barack Obama will take office in 76 days, but the moves he begins making tomorrow will immediately begin to define his presidency.
He is expected to name a White House chief of staff in the next day or two, and the clear front-runner is Rep. Rahm Emanuel, his longtime friend and ally from Chicago. He will officially begin a transition operation under the direction of another Clinton administration official, former White House chief of staff John D. Podesta. Those and other prominent Democrats, many of them veterans of his two-year quest for the presidency, will be charged with assembling an administration that draws from the innovations of Obama's campaign and sets in motion a system to deliver on the promises that got him elected.
One Obama source familiar with the transition process said the goal is to move "quickly, but not hastily." The approach to appointments and other senior hires will be comprehensive, as opposed to ad hoc, which may mean that Obama will not name, say, a Treasury secretary right away but will continue to rely in the short term on his current economic advisory team. A game plan for moving forward will become clear by Friday, Obama sources said, and Cabinet announcements may start to trickle out next week.
Obama is expected to continue operating out of Chicago for most of the transition. The process of vetting and assembling a Cabinet began well before today's election, with staff members hinting at the potential for several "outside the box" picks for top jobs. Aides will move quickly to begin monitoring the government's various departments and agencies, obtain the necessary security clearances, and keep a close eye on any last-minute attempts by current administration officials to leave a mark on policy after President Bush's term ends.
But Obama's effort to create a smooth transition that puts his stamp on government will face major tests almost immediately. Congress will convene for a lame-duck session on Nov. 17, and the junior senator from Illinois will have to decide whether to become immersed in its proceedings or keep his distance, as some allies are advising.
The White House will hold an economic summit on Nov. 15 that 20 world leaders will attend; Obama, who called for such a meeting in September, has been invited to participate. His advisers are also debating whether to ask Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates to stay on, to allow planning for a withdrawal from Iraq to begin as soon as possible. A U.N. conference on global warming will be held in Poland in December, an ideal stage for Obama, or a high-profile surrogate such as former vice president Al Gore, to declare that the era of Bush energy policies are over.
Obama remains largely a stranger to the vast federal bureaucracy and will be besieged by Washington insiders he barely knows -- and whose loyalties are untested -- seeking positions of influence.
"He was extremely good at running for office, but there's no way to predict what comes next," said Stephen Hess, a presidential scholar with the Brookings Institution. "There's no school for presidents. A lot of this is on-the-job training, and we take a lot on faith."
Obama's aides hope his transition operation will be a sharp contrast with the chaotic operation that President-elect Bill Clinton ran in 1992. Clinton did not pick anyone, either for a Cabinet or White House position, until the sixth week of his transition, and he named much of his top White House staff on Jan. 15, just five days before his inauguration -- far too late for them to learn the contours of the jobs they were about to undertake.
Avoiding the same mistakes is one reason Obama is eager to have the hard-nosed Emanuel become the White House gatekeeper. (Podesta, former Senate majority leader Thomas A. Daschle and ex-commerce secretary William M. Daley remain other possibilities if Emanuel unexpectedly says no.) The Chicago lawmaker, elected in 2002, moved rapidly up the House leadership ladder and aspires to become speaker. Obama would be asking Emanuel to give up that ambition because he believes that his tenure in the Clinton White House, combined with his Capitol Hill experience, make him uniquely qualified for the job, sources close to Obama said. Emanuel has wrestled in recent days over whether to take the job, sources close to him said.
The transition process started quietly about 10 weeks ago, when Obama asked Podesta to begin a full-scale review of the federal government and to compile lists of potential hires. Podesta, who now runs the Center for American Progress (CAP), a progressive think tank, created a transition board that included Clinton administration alumni, CAP colleagues and several of Obama's outside advisers. Obama has participated little in this exercise beyond urging aides to look at all sorts of candidates, including Republicans (retiring Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska is most often mentioned) and individuals from the business community.
Among those under consideration who would mark a departure from the tradition of rewarding loyalists and party leaders include New York City Schools Chancellor Joel I. Klein for education secretary and retired Marine Corps commandant Jim Jones for national security adviser. Both are viewed as non-ideological and have the potential to rankle liberal Democrats. Obama officials said they would look at innovative firms such as Google for potential applicants. One prospect for a top administration job, possibly at the Office of Management and Budget, who would test the Washington establishment is Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.), a crusader for government reform who annually publishes a dire alternative report on the federal budget.
The Obama shortlist includes plenty of traditional names: former Treasury secretaries Lawrence H. Summers or Robert E. Rubin could be tapped for that post again. Timothy F. Geithner, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, is another possibility. Alternatives to Jones include Susan Rice and James B. Steinberg, Obama advisers who also served under Clinton. Eric H. Holder Jr., another Clinton veteran and Obama friend, is a candidate for attorney general, as is Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano. Other prominent women likely to be approached for Cabinet posts include Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius and Michigan Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm.
Obama will also have to decide what roles many of his top political aides might play in the White House, such as campaign manager David Plouffe, chief strategist David Axelrod, and Robert Gibbs and Dan Pfeiffer, who led his communications team. Plouffe, for one, has announced internally that he will return to private life, at least for the time being.
While Obama contemplates how to fill the top jobs, Podesta and his team will size up the bureaucracies these individuals would inherit.
One group, led by Donald Gips, former domestic policy adviser to Gore, and Melody Barnes, a CAP senior executive, is overseeing an agency-by-agency review that will be conducted on-site by small teams. Their aim is to identify budget issues, administrative problems and policy priorities, and their findings will be presented in written reports to every Obama Cabinet secretary and administrator.
Separate policy working groups are evaluating Obama campaign promises in the context of current budget realities. One team, chaired by Steinberg and including Rice and Harvard University professor Sarah Sewall, is evaluating international scenarios that Obama may confront.
Former Treasury official Michael Froman and CAP senior executive Cassandra Q. Butts, both Obama friends from Harvard Law School, are examining personnel issues related to sub-Cabinet positions, including diversity, something Obama and his team are determined to provide. Butts, who is a lawyer, is also vetting potential candidates for ethical conflicts.
Now that the transition is an official government operation, the structure is expected to shift to a three-member board consisting of Podesta, who would oversee the ongoing agency-review process; Pete Rouse, Obama's Senate chief of staff and senior campaign adviser, who would help the new chief of staff to organize the White House; and Valerie Jarrett, a Chicago friend who was also on the campaign team, who will act as conduit to Obama, among other tasks.
While that process unfolds, Obama will rely on advisory groups that have guided him through the campaign. Former Treasury secretaries Rubin and Summers, billionaire investor Warren Buffett, former Federal Reserve chairman Paul A. Volcker and others are helping Obama navigate the nation's economic crisis and coordinate with Bush officials on further government interventions. A similar group will guide him on foreign policy. Obama gathered some of its members in Richmond shortly before the election to discuss the national security implications of the economic situation.
The transition team is exploring new approaches to communications that could undercut West Wing traditions such as the daily briefings to reporters, including making more announcements over the Internet to ensure that information reaches not only journalists but also the millions of individuals who enlisted in Obama's campaign and consider themselves invested in his presidency.
Obama is also expected to follow through on his pledge to restrict the role of lobbyists in his administration. Campaign lawyer Robert F. Bauer, a potential White House counsel, has been at work on a code of conduct. Said one senior Obama adviser: "People are going to be surprised at how strict we are."
Wow! Congratulations to all fellow liberals. I can't believe I've tears in my eyes. I hope we follow the same route and send Ahmadnutjob packing in July. Then we might experience a period of peace and prosperity. Stock market is rising in many markets following this great news...
Before they called it, one of the pundits said wouldn't it be something if it was Hawaii that put him over the top, sort of in honor of his grandmother. Yea, I can't imagine how he must feel. And just the irony of her dying literally a day before he was to become President. What can that possibley mean? Why shouldn't that have been "ment to be?" Life is hard to understand sometimes.
I too am looking forward to seeing Obama. He's and Michelle and their whole family must be absolutely thrilled.
TIS
You realize that the White House will have small kids for the first time since JFK?
Watching the UK news this morning,it was good to see such joyous scenes. Good to see all the people on the streets celebrating. Good to see that it actually really means something to people.
Watching the UK news this morning,it was good to see such joyous scenes. Good to see all the people on the streets celebrating. Good to see that it actually really means something to people.
This was my reaction too Yogi. It's good to see people getting excited about the democratic process and realising that there is power in the casting of a vote. Compare that to the growing cynicism and apathy about the electoral process in GB. A good day for democracy whatever the result!
Watching the UK news this morning,it was good to see such joyous scenes. Good to see all the people on the streets celebrating. Good to see that it actually really means something to people.
This was my reaction too Yogi. It's good to see people getting excited about the democratic process and realising that there is power in the casting of a vote. Compare that to the growing cynicism and apathy about the electoral process in GB. A good day for democracy whatever the result!
Amy Carter was only 9, so this is the first time there are small kids in the White House since then.
On the front page of The Star Ledger, the headline reads "Obama reaches the mountaintop", echoing the "I have a dream" speech. It is incredibly moving.
Nearly every other nation is thrilled that Obama won. We are not the only ones ready for this change.
Looking back at all the media BS..remember how "they" said Hillary was the shoe-in? Remember how they thought Hillary "had" to be his running mate or Obama couldn't win? And, it would appear that this "Bradley Affect" that the media was pushing, for the most part, didn't affect this election.
Watching Joe Scarborough (well as much as I can take of him) now and what a whiney ass baby. Anyone who knows him, knows exactly what I mean.
Anyway, notice too, even though Hillary made a statement, both her and Bill are basically silent. I do agree with the media in the respect that "THIS" is new generation; a new time. Obama is the beginning of this political (and maybe otherwise) change.
It looks like the Dems probably won't hit 60 in the Senate, which I'm happy about.
I agree. I do not want one party decisively in charge of the executive and legislative branches of government. It has not worked in the past and will not work in the future.
I was feeling lousy last night fighting a cold. I went to bed after they called Ohio. I personally thought it was called too early, considering that the margin at the time was so large and the final margin was much closer.
This is an historic moment not only in our country, but in the world. Obama has a ton of work to do. I want to see the health care plan and tax breaks as his top domestic goals.
I want to correct some misinformation I posted yesterday.
Actually, while I had said that you could be asked to remove buttons or cover attire that express support for a candidate, the PA Commonwealth Court passed a ruling late last week, allowing voters to wear these items inside the polling location, but active displays of support or campaigning are still not allowed inside. This pertained only to PA, and other states have their own procedures.
Actually I missed that post, but since you bring it up, are you saying in other words, you can bring your sign, wear your button inside, but can't try to "sell" your candidate???
My school was a polling place yesterday, and somebody (not affliated with the school) put tons of signs regarding a CA proposition all up and down the grass by the street. One of our teachers collected them all and brought them inside saying it was not allowed. I actually thought since they were by the street and not really on school grounds (technically) that it wasn't illegal. Then again, I know the school itself doesn't want to be seen as being one way or the other.
Yesterday, I happened to walk into the teacher's lounge and what do I walk into? Two teachers, from opposite sides verbally duking it out. Boy,I would have loved to join in, but refrained.
Just astounding, isn't it??? I can't believe how exciting this is! It's almost like a new lease on life.
TIS, whatever people say about this man, he is truly self-made and embodies the American dream. Like him or not, I understand that there is not one person who has not been beyond impressed with him when they meet.
One of the best quotes I heard (and I wish I could remember who said it) - We are all drinking from the same water fountain now! I also liked this sign that they showed on the news-
Rosa Parks sat so that Martin Luther King could march so that Barack Obama could run so that Our children can fly
You know I just went out to the store (s) to pick up a paper. Any paper with the Obama Wins headline. They are all out. I was just approaching the news stands and a guy tells me that they're empty, and that inside there were none as well. Keep in mind it is (was) before 7:00 a.m. here in CA.
I wanted to have a keepsake to give to my grandkids. I'm gonna try a couple more places.
Watching Joe Scarborough (well as much as I can take of him) now and what a whiney ass baby. Anyone who knows him, knows exactly what I mean.
TIS
He's a total jerk. Obviously before he goes on he gets his GOP talking points and just goes on and on. Today he is bitching about Rahm Emmanuel being floated as Obama's chief of staff.
One of the best quotes I heard (and I wish I could remember who said it) - We are all drinking from the same water fountain now! I also liked this sign that they showed on the news-
Rosa Parks sat so that Martin Luther King could march so that Barack Obama could run so that Our children can fly
HOLD ON THERE!
There seems to be one thing that is slipping in more and more, and to tell the truth it is really going to starting a fire in this country.
What is all this race crap!
No man can lead ALL the people if SOME seem to think that a certain race is now on top for a change. This is not new found freedom for the Black or the Hispanic or for any other social group.
This is NOT the way to start a new chapter for this country. And I for one, am sad to see it raise it's ugly head so quickly.
1. Yes, at work and being a productive member of society. 2. No, not working in a department store this year (which means I can sleep in on Black Friday).
I posted last night re the Obama win; even before it became 'official'. My feelings are the same today, and if it's possible I'm even MORE relieved that it's over.
I look forward to the transition, Inauguration Day and honeymoon period that is enjoyed by every new President.
Condoleezza Rice just gave a statement on Obama's win, and she looked like she was about to cry.
Yes, Ive never seen her so "real" before. She probably voted for Obama. I wouldn't be surprised that a lot of bigwig Repos voted for Obama, but won't admit it.
Karl, I am confused by your remarks. This is a celebration for ALL people. In this country, when "separate but equal" (which was anything BUT) was the norm, when seats were doled out by race, when housing was denied based on gender or race, when all of this was only too recent, to see a man that is half African succeed to the highest office in the land, it certainly reason to celebrate, because it shows how far we as a nation have come.
Nobody is "on top". If this election proves anything, it proves that barriers have been destroyed.
Karl, I am confused by your remarks. This is a celebration for ALL people. In this country, when "separate but equal" (which was anything BUT) was the norm, when seats were doled out by race, when housing was denied based on gender or race, when all of this was only too recent, to see a man that is half African succeed to the highest office in the land, it certainly reason to celebrate, because it shows how far we as a nation have come.
Nobody is "on top". If this election proves anything, it proves that barriers have been destroyed.
This is not what I feel is coming to light here. And after reading several comments by other board members, in this very thread, I think race is a sore spot to many.
Enough already, we all know where he came from. It seems like everybody has to keep saying it over and over again. No wonder some people feel like it is being stuffed down their throat. He is a person, a man, skin color shouldn't be the most important point here.
The news media has done nothing but show as many times as they can blacks celebrating, like they just got there freedom or something. There is an old saying, if you don't want to be singled out, then don't single yourself out.
He is the President Elect Obama. NOT President Elect BLACK Obama!
...The news media has done nothing but show as many times as they can blacks celebrating, like they just got there freedom or something. There is an old saying, if you don't want to be singled out, then don't single yourself out.
He is the President Elect Obama. NOT President Elect BLACK Obama!
Karl is right. While (rightfully) going out of their way to avoid the race factor (which Obama brought up more than anyone)...the media is now emphasizing almost nothing but.
Obama's race is the ONLY thing that makes this election historic, and to a degree it certainly should be celebrated.
That point aside, after rejecting left-wing lib presidential candidates for 30+ years, we have just placed one in the White House, and while congratulating him on this we can only hope he does less damage to the country than the more intelligent of us expect.
and while congratulating him on this we can only hope he does less damage to the country than the more intelligent of us expect.
That's exactly how I felt eight years ago. My fears were realized.
But hope is a good thing. I have more hope of it getting better with Obama in office than I would have if McCain won.
And if he doesn't do better, there are about, what was it 47% of the voters who will be watching and waiting to say something about it! Just like every losing side does.
Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage has passed.
That is, until some liberal judge overturns the decision of the people.
Apple
It cannot be a California State Judge because a state court judge cannot overrule a state constitutional amendment. That's why they made it an amendment. Also because of the abstention doctrine a FederalJudge would not overturn a state constitutional amendment. The only two ways this can and will be overturned would either be an Act of Congress stating that no state can interfere with the rights of people regardless of sexual orientation to marry (this would be much like the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which obliterated state constituional Jim Crow provisions, or an amendment to the United States Constitution overturning the state constitutional amendments.
But you knew this all along, Apple because you are a self-proclaimed intelligent person,
Thanks for the civics lesson. My point is that the libs and the gay rights movement will most likely not stand for this and will fight it, whatever avenue they have to take to do it.
"We pick ourselves up and trudge on," said Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights. "There has been enormous movement in favor of full equality in eight short years. That is the direction this is heading, and if it's not today or it's not tomorrow, it will be soon."
FWIW Huffington Post has a story suggesting that "President" Obama might pick RFK, Jr. as EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) head. RFK is really big on the environment, good choice no???? But as one of the comments suggest, what about Al Gore? Don't know if he'd want it but yea. What do you think?
I heard that John Kerry might be considered for Secretary of Defense, and Jon Corzine to head the Treasury. Corzine is an asshole. I hope he doesn't get it.
Thanks for the civics lesson. My point is that the libs and the gay rights movement will most likely not stand for this and will fight it, whatever avenue they have to take to do it.
I just don't understand what the big deal is. Gays have every right to be as miserable as the rest of us. I say let them marry.
FWIW Huffington Post has a story suggesting that "President" Obama might pick RFK, Jr. as EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) head. RFK is really big on the environment, good choice no???? TIS
I guess you now know what the Kennedy family is getting for showing their support. Politics, isn't it a wonderful thing
I'm with PB. Why is this even an issue? If two people are in a monogamous relationship, why can't they have a piece of paper that recognizes it? They deserve the legal recognition that is given to a spouse when it comes to making medical decisions, sharing insurance benefits, etc.
Btw, the polls which on an average showed an Obama lead of approximately 6 points, turns out to be accurate. (I was way off when I guessed 10). Anyway, unless there are tons of votes yet to be counted, which I doubt.
But isn't the electoral vote considered somewhat of a landslide at 349 to 173? And, if I'm not mistaken there is still one or two more states too close to call (Indiana is one think.)
Thanks LN. As of recently? Which states are still counting? I thought there were at least two that were too close even now, but maybe it's been tallied.
Condoleezza Rice just gave a statement on Obama's win, and she looked like she was about to cry.
Yes, Ive never seen her so "real" before. She probably voted for Obama. I wouldn't be surprised that a lot of bigwig Repos voted for Obama, but won't admit it.
Rice congratulates Obama
By MATTHEW LEE – 2 hours ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — An emotional Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice reveled Wednesday in Barack Obama's election, calling it an "extraordinary step forward" for the nation.
A child of the segregated deep South who became the highest-ranking African-American woman ever in American government and was once considered a potential Republican presidential nominee, Rice called the Democratic president-elect "inspirational" and said his victory was proof of America's promise.
"This was an exercise in American democracy of which Americans across the political spectrum are justifiably proud," she said.
"As an African-American, I'm especially proud," said Rice, her eyes glistening with emotion, "because this is a country that's been through a long journey, in terms of overcoming wounds and making race" less of a factor in life. "That work is not done, but yesterday was obviously an extraordinary step forward."
"One of the great things about representing this country is that it continues to surprise," she told reporters at the State Department at a hastily arranged briefing just hours before leaving Washington for the Middle East on a peacemaking trip. "It continues to renew itself. It continues to beat all odds and expectations."
Born and raised in Birmingham, Ala., at the height of the civil rights struggle, Rice herself overcame numerous obstacles and stereotypical low expectations. She speaks frequently about how improbable her rise to the corridors of power may seem. But she also notes that she succeeded the first black secretary of state, Colin Powell, and the first female to hold the job, Madeleine Albright.
"You just know that Americans are not going to be satisfied until they really do form that perfect union," she said, referring to the preamble of the Constitution, which begins: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union ..."
"And while the perfect union may never be in sight, we just keep working at it and trying," Rice said.
Aides said Rice would likely call Obama, as well as vanquished Republican presidential nominee John McCain, later Wednesday.
She said McCain had been "gracious" in defeat and called him "a great patriot."
"I want to note that President-elect Obama was inspirational and I'm certain he will continue to be," Rice said.
She never said who she planned to vote for, but had hinted broadly that she would support McCain by repeatedly stressing that she is a Republican.
AUSTIN -- State Board of Education member Cynthia Dunbar isn't backing down from her claim that Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama is plotting with terrorists to attack the U.S.
The Texas Freedom Network, a watchdog group that monitors the board, released a public statement Monday asking Dunbar to retract the statement.
"I don't have anything in there that would be retractable," said Dunbar, R-Richmond. "Those are my personal opinions and I don't think the language is questionable."
In a column posted on the Christian Worldview Network Web site, Dunbar wrote that a terrorist attack on America during the first six months of an Obama administration "will be a planned effort by those with whom Obama truly sympathizes to take down the America that is threat to tyranny."
She also suggests Obama would seek to expand his power by declaring martial law throughout the country.
"No matter who you support for president, we should all be able to agree that Ms. Dunbar's disgusting attack is a shocking example of the extremism that has infected the state board," TFN President Kathy Miller said.
"It's stunning that a board member who helps decide what Texas children learn in their public schools would say something so disgusting and reprehensible. She should be taking refresher courses in civics and good citizenship, not deciding what Texas kids learn."
The State Board of Education will begin revising public school social studies curriculum standards after adopting standards for science next year. Those standards will determine the content in new public school textbooks.
"Right now, we're still in America and we still have freedom of speech," Dunbar said. "And unless that's changed, I'm not aware of it."
I got use to you posting the daily poll numbers Whatever do we do now?
I did receive an e-mail I requested for tickets to various Inaguaration events. Geez, just the swearing in ceremony is like $650. There's several Balls though that will vary in price. Of course to be at "THE" Ball is like $2,000 per ticket (or some outrageous price not in my budget. I wouldn't mind going to something though.
The last few months, the election killed a lot of free time for me while I'm 'working'. Now I'm sitting here in front of my computer, and I don't know what to do. Maybe I'll go look at some porn.
Thanks for the civics lesson. My point is that the libs and the gay rights movement will most likely not stand for this and will fight it, whatever avenue they have to take to do it.
"We pick ourselves up and trudge on," said Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights. "There has been enormous movement in favor of full equality in eight short years. That is the direction this is heading, and if it's not today or it's not tomorrow, it will be soon."
Apple (aka SPIP)
And why would any of that bother you?
Its such nonsense like this is why the GOP is fractured right now, what when the GOP base only gets out of bed if it involves only abortion and gays. Otherwise, they won't do shit.
A pity, because gays are probably the new Blacks....that is, a minority that is shit on by every other group, used stereotypically as a ruler-stick of sub-human activities or a social scapegoat.
I heard that John Kerry might be considered for Secretary of Defense, and Jon Corzine to head the Treasury. Corzine is an asshole. I hope he doesn't get it.
No way on #1. Kerry, if reports are to be believed, would rather be Secretary of State.
BUT I think that gig will go to Bill Richardson.
As for Corzine...fuck no he won't head Treasury. IF anything, whoever Obama appoints for that posting will be his first Presidential act...months before he's sworn in officially.
AUSTIN -- State Board of Education member Cynthia Dunbar isn't backing down from her claim that Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama is plotting with terrorists to attack the U.S.
The Texas Freedom Network, a watchdog group that monitors the board, released a public statement Monday asking Dunbar to retract the statement.
"I don't have anything in there that would be retractable," said Dunbar, R-Richmond. "Those are my personal opinions and I don't think the language is questionable."
In a column posted on the Christian Worldview Network Web site, Dunbar wrote that a terrorist attack on America during the first six months of an Obama administration "will be a planned effort by those with whom Obama truly sympathizes to take down the America that is threat to tyranny."
She also suggests Obama would seek to expand his power by declaring martial law throughout the country.
"No matter who you support for president, we should all be able to agree that Ms. Dunbar's disgusting attack is a shocking example of the extremism that has infected the state board," TFN President Kathy Miller said.
"It's stunning that a board member who helps decide what Texas children learn in their public schools would say something so disgusting and reprehensible. She should be taking refresher courses in civics and good citizenship, not deciding what Texas kids learn."
The State Board of Education will begin revising public school social studies curriculum standards after adopting standards for science next year. Those standards will determine the content in new public school textbooks.
"Right now, we're still in America and we still have freedom of speech," Dunbar said. "And unless that's changed, I'm not aware of it."
Ya'll need to go to that site and read some of the columns posted there (Apple, you would feel at home). Some of the language is bizarre.
Btw, the polls which on an average showed an Obama lead of approximately 6 points, turns out to be accurate. (I was way off when I guessed 10). Anyway, unless there are tons of votes yet to be counted, which I doubt.
But isn't the electoral vote considered somewhat of a landslide at 349 to 173? And, if I'm not mistaken there is still one or two more states too close to call (Indiana is one think.)
I would call it a landslide. Not Reagan Landslide, but its a landslide, and a great victory in how for the first time in 44 years, a Democratic President won Indiana and Virginia, and North Carolina since 1976.
I heard that John Kerry might be considered for Secretary of Defense, and Jon Corzine to head the Treasury. Corzine is an asshole. I hope he doesn't get it.
No way on #1. Kerry, if reports are to be believed, would rather be Secretary of State.
I just read that he wants Secretary of State, which probably makes more sense. One of the talking heads mentioned Defense Secretary.
I heard that John Kerry might be considered for Secretary of Defense, and Jon Corzine to head the Treasury. Corzine is an asshole. I hope he doesn't get it.
No way on #1. Kerry, if reports are to be believed, would rather be Secretary of State.
I just read that he wants Secretary of State, which probably makes more sense. One of the talking heads mentioned Defense Secretary.
This reminds me of AwardsDAily, a nice website that spends 98% of its time speculating who's in contention for an Oscar nomination, and every possible contender is brought up, and then brought down. Nothing is clear until the nominations are announced, and then later awarded.
Karl, I am confused by your remarks. This is a celebration for ALL people. In this country, when "separate but equal" (which was anything BUT) was the norm, when seats were doled out by race, when housing was denied based on gender or race, when all of this was only too recent, to see a man that is half African succeed to the highest office in the land, it certainly reason to celebrate, because it shows how far we as a nation have come.
Nobody is "on top". If this election proves anything, it proves that barriers have been destroyed.
This is not what I feel is coming to light here. And after reading several comments by other board members, in this very thread, I think race is a sore spot to many.
Enough already, we all know where he came from. It seems like everybody has to keep saying it over and over again. No wonder some people feel like it is being stuffed down their throat. He is a person, a man, skin color shouldn't be the most important point here.
The news media has done nothing but show as many times as they can blacks celebrating, like they just got there freedom or something. There is an old saying, if you don't want to be singled out, then don't single yourself out.
He is the President Elect Obama. NOT President Elect BLACK Obama!
That is my point.
Obama's been clear from day one (perhaps to a fault) that he intends to be President of all Americans. If anyone is concerned that Obama wouldn't be I would just ask them if they thought that all the previous Caucasian Presidents were only representing white people.
In any event it was a historic event. Considering the history of the country it is certainly should not come as a surprise that many Black people were especially happy and overwhelmed to see Obama win. There are still quite a few people alive who grew up under segregation after all. There are even a few very rare Black people living who are children of former slaves.
The writer Steve Barnes gives a particularly poignant explanation of the feelings of pride, acceptance and the validation of his belief in America as he watched the election results.
This blogger also gives credence to the historic nature of the event even as he cautions us that ultimately Obama is a politician and true change comes from the individual.
So I don't think that anyone should feel threatened or put off by people, Black people celebrating. As far as getting "singled out", if you're Black that happens a wee bit more than you might like anyway...
Thanks for the civics lesson. My point is that the libs and the gay rights movement will most likely not stand for this and will fight it, whatever avenue they have to take to do it.
"We pick ourselves up and trudge on," said Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights. "There has been enormous movement in favor of full equality in eight short years. That is the direction this is heading, and if it's not today or it's not tomorrow, it will be soon."
Apple (aka SPIP)
Civil rights are civil rights are civil rights, baby.
Circa 1960:
My point is that the blacks and the civil rights movement will most likely not stand for this and will fight it, whatever avenue they have to take to do it.
...and why shouldn't they fight it? They should fight it all the way, all the FUCKING way. I'm rooting for them.
"President" Obama might pick RFK, Jr. as EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) head.
I think that he'd be an excellent pick.
Originally Posted By: Just Lou
I heard that John Kerry might be considered for Secretary of Defense,
Originally Posted By: SC
I have more hope of it getting better with Obama in office than I would have if McCain won.
Not if he makes that kind of a pick for Secretary Of Defense!
I'd really like to see Presdient Obama pick someone like Senator John McCain as a member of his cabinet.
All joking aside, as an American I only hope that in 6 months, a year, 4 years from now, I can say that I was wrong and that President Obama actually turned out to be a good President. As an American I only hope that he does the right thing for us and proves all of us who voted for McCain and doubted Obama going into this election as being wrong.
I've always said, no matter who won, it'll take at least one term to realize any real change. However, once we begin to see hope that change is coming, I'm good.
Hey Cardi, where were you? I had a celebratory little blue drink saved for you but you didn't show up.....so I drank it for you.
... As an American I only hope that he does the right thing for us and proves all of us who voted for McCain and doubted Obama going into this election as being wrong...
I guess we'll find out soon enough, when he is 'tested' as per Joe Biden's prediction.
I'm with you, Don Cardi...let's hope we're BOTH wrong. Especially with regard to his 'spread the wealth' type of policies.
... once we begin to see hope that change is coming, I'm good...
That's great. Because the only 'change' coming is the change that's left in your wallet once he starts raising taxes on those making $250,000...or $200,000....wait, $150,000...oh, right $100,000...NO $50,000 per year!!!
Not only change you can believe in...change you can count in the palm of your hand.
... once we begin to see hope that change is coming, I'm good...
That's great. Because the only 'change' coming is the change that's left in your wallet once he starts raising taxes on those making $250,000...or $200,000....wait, $150,000...oh, right $100,000...NO $50,000 per year!!!
Not only change you can believe in...change you can count in the palm of your hand.
Turn the clock back to the summer/fall of 2000. Did George Bush do all the things he promised? He was handed a bag of shit from Slick Willie and now B.O. has a bag 'o shit from GWB. What will he do with it?
Iceman, I believe that your attitude leads more to these supposed "attacks" than your views. If you don't discuss ideas, if you don't exchange thoughts, then how would anyone ever learn anything new or different?
As for Senator Obama's "associations", the insinuations are insulting and demeaning. I notice that the only "stories" that are publicized are those that have him with "terrorists" or "shady" non-profit organizations that work with minorities. To me, that plays on the internal racist in all of us. He looks different. He has a "funny name". Therefore, he must be a suspicious character.
If you disagree with his stance on energy, on abortion, on the economy, with his healthcare plan, then fine. Tell us WHAT you object to and, more importantly, WHY you object to it and why you think that Senator McCain has a better plan. But posting articles that call him a "Jew-hater" or accuse him of associating with terrorists just smacks of the lowest and most baseless biases.
Whoa lets put this 18 wheeler in reverse. When have I ever posted an article calling Obama a jew hater? and when have I ever said he associates with terrorists?
[quote=Karl9905The news media has done nothing but show as many times as they can blacks celebrating, like they just got there freedom or something. There is an old saying, if you don't want to be singled out, then don't single yourself out.
[/quote]
First, I saw Black and White, Young and Old celebrating.
Secondly, most Blacks are particularly overjoyed not because of freedom, but because of something more important and fundamental in a democracy. They attained a measure of equality that they (and much of White America) thought did not exist two years ago. The point of their celebration of Obama's victory is not that they singularly control the Executive Branch, but that they are no longer barred from achieving this dream.
It cannot be a California State Judge because a state court judge cannot overrule a state constitutional amendment. That's why they made it an amendment. Also because of the abstention doctrine a Federal Judge would not overturn a state constitutional amendment. The only two ways this can and will be overturned would either be an Act of Congress stating that no state can interfere with the rights of people regardless of sexual orientation to marry (this would be much like the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which obliterated state constituional Jim Crow provisions, or an amendment to the United States Constitution overturning the state constitutional amendments.
There were some VERY shady practices employed to get this vote through. Some of the ads were financed by Erik Prince's own mother. (He's the owner of Blackwater). Deceptive ads (some banners I saw here on GBB) with Obama's picture appearing although he did not endorse Prop 8. And a huge amount of financing paid for by members of the Mormon Church (of all people, were lecturing others about what is a normal marriage, and what isn't).
It's weird that so many people claim to want smaller government, but they're okay with this sort of thing. Apparently, the government can dictate people's personal lives, as long as you're okay with that dictation.
This election has proven both how far we've come regarding civil rights in this country, and how far we still have to go.
He was on "Hannity and Colmes" tonight. Usually Colmes is useless, but he put Joe in his place. Joe stated that "he doesn't want someone taking his money and giving it to someone else". Colmes pointed out the fact that Mr. Plumber was on welfare (something I didn't know), and had no problem taking other people's money. Joe really didn't have a good answer to that.
He was on "Hannity and Colmes" tonight. Usually Colmes is useless, but he put Joe in his place. Joe stated that "he doesn't want someone taking his money and giving it to someone else". Colmes pointed out the fact that Mr. Plumber was on welfare (something I didn't know), and had no problem taking other people's money. Joe really didn't have a good answer to that.
So maybe we should stop calling him "Joe the Plumber" but "Joe the WELFARE QUEEN".
He was on "Hannity and Colmes" tonight. Usually Colmes is useless, but he put Joe in his place. Joe stated that "he doesn't want someone taking his money and giving it to someone else". Colmes pointed out the fact that Mr. Plumber was on welfare (something I didn't know), and had no problem taking other people's money. Joe really didn't have a good answer to that.
So maybe we should stop calling him "Joe the Plumber" but "Joe the WELFARE QUEEN".
I loved the fact he went into that interview probably thinking it was safe being on Fox News, and then he gets owned by Alan Colmes.
Strains Between McCain and Palin Aides Go Public Report: Palin's Wardrobe Is to Be Audited by GOP By KATE SNOW
Nov. 6, 2008 —
Now that the defeated team of Sen. John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin have gone their separate ways, the knives are out and Palin is the one who is getting filleted.
Revelations from anonymous critics from within the McCain-Palin campaign suggest a number of complaints about the Alaskan governor:
Fox News reports that Palin didn't know Africa was a continent and did not know the member nations of the North American Free Trade Agreement -- the United States, Mexico and Canada -- when she was picked for vice president.
The New York Times reports that McCain aides were outraged when Palin staffers scheduled her to speak with French President Nicholas Sarkozy, a conversation that turned out to be a radio station prank.
Newsweek reports that Palin spent far more than the previously reported $150,000 on clothes for herself and her family.
Several publications say she irked the McCain campaign by asking to make her own concession speech on election night.
The tension is likely to continue or get worse. Lawyers for the Republican National Committee are heading to Alaska to try to account for all the money that was spent on clothing, jewelry and luggage, according to The New York Times.
Reports of agitation between the two camps bubbled up in the final weeks of the campaign as Barack Obama began pulling away and the GOP duo was unable to regain the momentum.
But those reports are no longer in the rumor stage as McCain loyalists are now blasting away at the Alaska governor, who was a favorite of the Republican right during the campaign, but was cited in numerous polls as a reason why many Americans wouldn't vote for the Arizona Republican.
Perhaps the most dangerous allegation for Palin are reports in The New York Times and Newsweek that when she was urged by McCain adviser Nicole Wallace to buy three suits for the Republican convention and three suits for the campaign trail, she went on the now-infamous shopping spree at swank stores like Saks Fifth Avenue and Neiman Marcus.
A Republican donor who agreed to foot a majority of the expenses was stunned when he received the bill, Newsweek reported. Both the Times and Newsweek report that the budget for the clothing was expected to be between $20,000 and $25,000. Instead, the amount reported by the Republican National Committee was $150,000.
That wasn't the whole tab, however, according to Newsweek. The magazine claims that Palin leaned on some low-level staffers to put thousands of dollars of additional purchases on their credit cards. The national committee and McCain became aware of the extra expenditures, including clothes for husband Todd Palin, when the staffers sought reimbursement, Newsweek reported.
McCain Aide Calls Palin Family 'Wasilla Hillbillies'
There is one comment in particular from a McCain aide that guaranteed to heighten friction between the two camps. The angry aide described the Palin family shopping spree to Newsweek as "Wasilla hillbillies looting Neiman Marcus from coast to coast."
It's unclear how much McCain knew about the clothing debacle. Reports suggest that he was kept out of the loop for fear that he would not approve.
Both Newsweek and The New York Times say McCain and Palin had little contact with each other.
"I think it was a difficult relationship," one top McCain official confided to The New York Times. But a high level McCain adviser told ABC News that the two had a good working relationship.
"He likes her," this senior McCain adviser said last week. "He's had no problem with her. He's very appreciative of what she's done."
The adviser said McCain and Palin talked at least once a day. He also said McCain frequently joked about how large Palin's crowds were compared to his.
However, press accounts today suggest that Palin rubbed many of the McCain aides the wrong way. On election night when it was clear that McCain would be giving a concession speech instead of an acceptance speech, Palin approached McCain with a speech in hand hoping to make her own concession speech, according to published reports.
Vice presidential candidates traditionally leave the spotlight to the top of the ticket on election night and McCain aides made it clear to Palin that she would be a spectator that night, not a speaker, The New York Times reported.
And when McCain and Palin split up in Arizona Wednesday, the personal differences were stark.
McCain drove himself home in a Toyota sport utility vehicle. Palin's departure was a grander event. She left with an entourage of 18 family members and friends and a Secret Service detail, heading to the airport in a motorcade stretching more than a dozen vehicles, flanked by a dozen more cops on motorcycles.
Interview Prep Lacking, McCain Staffers Say
McCain aides had numerous complaints about Palin. She was unwilling or unable to find the time and energy to prep for her disastrous interview with Couric. And when she did study, she astonished her handlers by her unsophisticated views.
She didn't know Africa was a continent, according to Newsweek. Fox News revealed that during her cramming, she couldn't name the three countries that belong to the North American Free Trade Agreement: the United States, Canada and Mexico.
Questions followed Palin home to Alaska. She was asked about some of the accusations from anonymous sources when she landed there late Wednesday.
Asked about the Fox report that she did not know the NAFTA members or that Africa was a continent, Palin said, "If they're an unnamed source, that says it all. I won't comment on anyone's gossip based on anonymous sources. That's kind of a small of a bitter type of person who anonymously would charge that I didn't know an answer to a question. So until I know who's talking about it, I won't have a comment on a false allegation."
Palin Insists She's No Diva
When pressed on what went wrong with the campaign, she said, "I certainly am not one to ever waste time looking backwards."
She defended herself against the notion that she is to blame for the failure of the McCain-Palin ticket.
"I don't think anybody should give Sarah Palin that much credit, that I would trump an economic, woeful time in this nation that occurred about two months ago, that my presence on the ticket would trump the economic crisis that America found itself in a couple of months ago and attribute John McCain's loss to me," Palin told reporters in Arizona Wednesday.
"Now, having said that, if I cost John McCain even one vote, I'm sorry about that because John McCain I believe is the American hero. I had believed that it was his time. & He being so full of courage and wisdom and experience, that valor he just embodies, I believe he would've been the best pick, but that is not the Americans' choice at this time."
She also rejected the characterization that she was a "diva" on the campaign trail, as one anonymous McCain adviser told CNN.
"If only people, y'know, come on up and travel with us to Alaska and see this 'diva' lifestyle that I supposedly live or would demand, because it's just false," she said.
Asked about her national political ambitions, she said, "I have not given it any thought in the context of making any kind of decisions at all, so no, just happy to be back here."
In one of her favorite coffee shops in Wasilla Tuesday morning, Palin summed it up this way: "Forever, I'm going to be Sarah from Alaska."
He was on "Hannity and Colmes" tonight. Usually Colmes is useless, but he put Joe in his place. Joe stated that "he doesn't want someone taking his money and giving it to someone else". Colmes pointed out the fact that Mr. Plumber was on welfare (something I didn't know), and had no problem taking other people's money. Joe really didn't have a good answer to that.
So maybe we should stop calling him "Joe the Plumber" but "Joe the WELFARE QUEEN".
Joe The Bare Faced Liar??...or what about simply "Joe The Republican"
Sarah Palin 'did not know Africa was a continent', say aides
By, Anne Barrowclough
Sarah Palin spent "tens of thousands" more than the quoted $150,000 on clothes for the Republican campaign, met McCain aides in her hotel room dressed in nothing but a towel, and did not know Africa was a continent, according to new reports.
Fox news has reported that Mrs Palin did not understand that Africa was a continent, not a country, and did not know what countries were in the North American Free Trade Agreement.
In separate claims made in the latest issue of Newsweek magazine, the Republican vice presidential nominee was reported to have been told to buy three suits for the Republican convention, and to hire a stylist. Instead, she went on a spending spree in upmarket stores such as Saks Fifth Avenue and Neiman Marcus.
Quoting unnamed sources within the McCain camp, the magazine alleges that most of the clothes were bought by a wealthy donor, who "was shocked when he got the bill."
An angry aide described the shopping spree as "Wasilla hillbillies looting Neiman Marcus from coast to coast", and predicted that the truth would eventually come out when the Republican Party audits its books.
The magazine also claimed that Mrs Palin used low ranking staffers to buy some of the clothes on their credit cards, and that up to $40,000 was spent on clothes for her husband Todd.
A number of articles of clothing have been lost, the magazine states.
The disclosures are made in "How He Did It, 2008", in Newsweek's Special Election Project, a behind-the-scenes account of the presidential election produced the day after the polls closed.
The magazine also claims that at the GOP convention in St. Paul, when aides Steve Schmidt and Mark Salter went to her hotel room to brief her, Ms Palin walked into the room wearing only a towel, with another on her wet hair. She told them to chat to Todd, adding: "I'll be just a minute."
Other election revelations include that on the night Hillary Clinton officially lost the Democratic nomination, she enjoyed a long and friendly phone conversation with McCain.
"Clinton was actually on better terms with McCain than she was with Obama," reports the magazine. "Clinton and McCain had downed shots together on Senate junkets; they regarded each other as grizzled veterans of the political wars and shared a certain disdain for Obama as flashy and callow. "
Sure, we saw lots of cat fights in the last few weeks. There were these two hoggettes named Kate Snow and Anne Barrowclough who always got upset when ever the Gov. was around. Seems like all the guys wouldn't give either of them the time of day. They were often upset with the littlest things and very unhappy when neither of them could get any one on one time with the Gov. or her husband, the "First Dude".
One unnamed source went on to say that they saw both women drinking openly together and one also hinted that some light touching between the two women took place. When asked about the Gov. new clothes, Snow was quick to say that SHE didn't take the missing items. When a McCain worker asked her what she was talking about, Snow just turned and walked away.
1. All she did was add enthusiasm. Time and again, enthusiasm was the only thing that McCain himself mentioned when defending his terrible choice. She made people who were going to vote against Obama enthusaistic about voting for McCain. That's it.
2. She cost McCain the "experience" card. The No. 1 misgiving people had (and still have) about Obama is his lack of experience. The campaign simply could not make that case when it was willing to put someone with no record a 72-year-old heartbeat away from the presidency.
3. She was a laughingstock. Even I did not know how much of a punchline she would become. Forget the notion that any press is good press. She was defined by SNL as a nutty, inexperienced, naive Barbie doll.
4. There was some truth to the parody. It was funny because it was true. She does believe the world is only 4,000 years old. She did shoot moose from a helicopter. And when Tina Fey got laughs for re-enacting, verbatim, Palin's answers in an interview, it was funny because it was true! We were not laughing with Sarah. We were laughing at her.
5. In accepting the attack dog role, she let others (including the McCain camp) define her and her role. She should have done so many interviews that we got tired of her. She should have stuck to what she knew best (energy -- her policy speech on that issues was a major high point, but it came too late). She was all image, no substance. She seemed perpetually perched behind a podium shouting to those enthusiastic crowds, when she should have been doing press conferences (not a one!) and interviews so that moderates could warm up to her.
Someone said Palin was like a good AAA player being brought up to the big leagues too fast.
As a liberal democrat I sort of felt badly for her. Sure she was a train wreck, but the real problem lies with McCain and his staff. Obviously she was not properly vetted, not properly rolled out. She is obviously a talented politician, but she was not ready for prime time. This is not her fault, it is McCain and his staff's fault for putting her in a position she should have never been in. Frankly I was terrified McCain would pick Tom Ridge. If he had I think this would have tourned out much closer if not differently.
I predict that Palin will flame out and that she will not be a factor in the future Republican Party.
It certainly appears that way right now. The Good Ole Boys network is already leaking bad reports about her and she is apparently becoming a scapegoat for them.
Dunno how much of anything is true but she'll be soon forgotten by party leaders (as a future candidate).
I predict that Palin will flame out and that she will not be a factor in the future Republican Party.
It certainly appears that way right now. The Good Ole Boys network is already leaking bad reports about her and she is apparently becoming a scapegoat for them.
Dunno how much of anything is true but she'll be soon forgotten by party leaders (as a future candidate).
I agree with both of you guys. Fair or not, the Good Ole Boys will scapegoat her.
1. All she did was add enthusiasm. Time and again, enthusiasm was the only thing that McCain himself mentioned when defending his terrible choice. She made people who were going to vote against Obama enthusaistic about voting for McCain. That's it.
2. She cost McCain the "experience" card. The No. 1 misgiving people had (and still have) about Obama is his lack of experience. The campaign simply could not make that case when it was willing to put someone with no record a 72-year-old heartbeat away from the presidency.
3. She was a laughingstock. Even I did not know how much of a punchline she would become. Forget the notion that any press is good press. She was defined by SNL as a nutty, inexperienced, naive Barbie doll.
4. There was some truth to the parody. It was funny because it was true. She does believe the world is only 4,000 years old. She did shoot moose from a helicopter. And when Tina Fey got laughs for re-enacting, verbatim, Palin's answers in an interview, it was funny because it was true! We were not laughing with Sarah. We were laughing at her.
5. In accepting the attack dog role, she let others (including the McCain camp) define her and her role. She should have done so many interviews that we got tired of her. She should have stuck to what she knew best (energy -- her policy speech on that issues was a major high point, but it came too late). She was all image, no substance. She seemed perpetually perched behind a podium shouting to those enthusiastic crowds, when she should have been doing press conferences (not a one!) and interviews so that moderates could warm up to her.
And yet, why is everyone NOW saying that it was a bad pick?
I mean remember months back when Kathleen Parker at National Review got thousands of hate-emails because she dared to say the obvious?
Frankly I was terrified McCain would pick Tom Ridge. If he had I think this would have tourned out much closer if not differently.
I thought he was going to go with Ridge, and this would almost certainly have won him PA, but part of McCain's problem was the association with George Bush. While I am an Obama supporter, I thought that his campaign's portrayal of McCain as an extension of Bush was misplaced, but it seemed to work with the electorate.
Anyway, McCain would have had a harder time distancing himself from Bush with a Bush appointee as a running mate. Then again, he could have pounded away on Obama with greater force on the experience issue.
And an often-unheard celebrity is apparently happy:
Bob Dylan: "Things are going to change now"
No one was expecting Bob Dylan to say a thing during his two-plus hour concert last night at Northrop Auditorium. For years, Dylan has been known to keep to himself during shows, often only speaking between songs once in order to introduce his band members. But last night, after a lengthy break between his regular set and his encore which I can only imagine was spent discovering that Barack Obama had won the election, Dylan returned to the stage to play "Like a Rolling Stone" and then turned to the audience and spoke.
"I was born in 1941," he said, a wavering sentimentality in his scratchy voice. "That was the year they bombed Pearl Harbor. I've been living in darkness ever since. It looks like things are going to change now."
He turned back to his keyboard and led the band in an almost unrecognizable rendition of "Blowin' in the Wind." Throughout most of the set, Dylan opted to keep his voice low and sparse as he half-sang, half-coughed the words into the microphone, but at the end of "Blowin' in the Wind" he strained his voice to hit the high register of the original melody and held onto the words in the chorus as long as he could. When his voice couldn't bear any more, he picked up his harmonica and practically skipped to the center of the stage. Even from my seat in the balcony it was obvious that Dylan was excited, and it only served to further ignite the fired-up crowd.
As the entire sold-out room rose to its feet with praise, Dylan and his bandmates lined up at the front of the stage to take a bow. In his tight tuxedo pants and white wide-brimmed hat, Dylan danced around like a marionette doll, waving his pointer fingers in the air like guns. It was surprisingly charismatic and endearing moment, and it had the whole room roaring with cheers and applause.
The house lights went up, and our attention turned quickly to the other main man of the night. The crowd started cheering "O-ba-ma, O-ba-ma" in unison as we made our way out of the auditorium. Walking toward the lobby, a swell of loud cheers suddenly rose from the foyer and we rushed to the stairwell to see what had happened. A screen in the lobby projected the results of the election: Obama had already received a projected 297 electoral votes.
As each new throng of concertgoers entered the lobby, a new wave of cheering -- no, screaming -- would erupt. The woman next to me broke down in sobbing tears. My dad turned to me and said, "We won. We finally won." We made our way out into the night, and a huge crowd of concertgoers were already partying in front of the auditorium, dancing to the beat of an impromptu bongo beat. Car horns were honking, people were screaming, and the whole world felt like it had let out one giant, simultaneous sigh of relief.
Yeah, along with the copy of the New York Post announcing that Obama won. I bought a copy yesterday and later found out they were selling for $100 on EBay.
I got mine about 2 weeks ago. One was free and I ordered 3 for small donation. I was surprised how tiny they were. Hang on to it. It may be worth something someday or just for historic value.
I searched all over for a newspaper for the headline yesterday. Every place was out. A friend of mine husband drove to the Press Enterprise and bought a couple papers. I need to figure out how to store it. I figure my grand daughters or their kids could bring it for a History Day show and tell...who knows hu?
I was disappointed at the size of the button (it's about the size of a quarter), but it was free.
I've saved many newspapers from historical times. I bought a large plastic container (you can get one in WalMart) and put in those moisture fighting packets that come with shoes or some other products. Keep the container in a dry, dark place.
Not that I'll be able to see it, but does anyone know what time "President" Obama's press conference is?
Also, for anyone who is interested, Move On is giving away free "Yes We Did" stickers. I'm sure they are not huge, but great to hang on to for history purposes. It'll take 5 - 7 weeks to get them :o, but hey, they're free.
On a much much smaller scale, at my school we had our first (and hopefully only)political fight between two (middle school) boys, one who was disappointed at an Obama win and said so, causing the other to start a physical fight. How often do political views affect middle school kids?
On a much much smaller scale, at my school we had our first (and hopefully only)political fight between two (middle school) boys, one who was disappointed at an Obama win and said so, causing the other to start a physical fight. How often do political views affect middle school kids?
TIS
Sounds like the next 4-8 years.
BTW Tis, that Obama press conference is around 1:30 today or so.
On a much much smaller scale, at my school we had our first (and hopefully only)political fight between two (middle school) boys, one who was disappointed at an Obama win and said so, causing the other to start a physical fight. How often do political views affect middle school kids?
It makes sense TIS, especially here in CA. People were so out their minds crazy for Obama that anyone who didn't support him was viewed on similar grounds as Hitler. They wouldn't say that, but it's how they act. I ranted about this before.
It would make sense that kids would share the same views as their parents, and just as passionately, to the point of fighting at school over it. People take on a sports mentality when it comes to elections so that they can't appreciate the democratic process once it's over, whether your candidate won or lost.
Nothing is going to change. One man can't do anything in 4-8 years because there is always someone there to fight. This is why I'm not upset by Obama winning. The only good thing to come out of this is our first Black/White president.
And yet, why is everyone NOW saying that it was a bad pick?
I mean remember months back when Kathleen Parker at National Review got thousands of hate-emails because she dared to say the obvious?
But utter lack of experience & knowledge of Africa and NAFTA are beside the point. McCain's campaign picked her, who rode the bubble of her (brief) popular support, who turned loose this lady - an unknown quantity - on the campaign trail to create fear and hate AND NOW are the ones criticizing HER in order to save their own careers by leaking these little tidbits to the conservative FOX newS?
The initial reaction here is "bullshit", but it is still under investigation.
Fair Enough.
The alleged attack occurred in a black neighborhood. Definitely not an area where a "white gang" would be cruising around. It also occurred around 10PM, but now he says 11PM. Obama wasn't declared the winner until after 11PM. Perhaps it is true, but most believe it's a hoax. Nothing new in the news yet today.
The initial reaction here is "bullshit", but it is still under investigation.
Fair Enough.
The alleged attack occurred in a black neighborhood. Definitely not an area where a "white gang" would be cruising around. It also occurred around 10PM, but now he says 11PM. Obama wasn't declared the winner until after 11PM. Perhaps it is true, but most believe it's a hoax. Nothing new in the news yet today.[/quote]
Alright well do let us know if any updates come your way.
And yet, why is everyone NOW saying that it was a bad pick?
I mean remember months back when Kathleen Parker at National Review got thousands of hate-emails because she dared to say the obvious?
But utter lack of experience & knowledge of Africa and NAFTA are beside the point. McCain's campaign picked her, who rode the bubble of her (brief) popular support, who turned loose this lady - an unknown quantity - on the campaign trail to create fear and hate AND NOW are the ones criticizing HER in order to save their own careers by leaking these little tidbits to the conservative FOX newS?
Nobody wants to be the scapegoat, that's why.
And its been known for months that Palin was a compromise pick. McCain wanted his buddy Joe Lieberman or Tom Ridge, while McCain's campaign chief Schmidt (a Rove protege) wanted Mitt Romney.
That said, Palin was still a poor pick, and the GOP of the immediate future is fucked if they think seriously that she's the future of the party.
That Press Conference didn't reveal as much as some had hoped, and revealed more than others figured.
The way I see it, considering how Dubya has been a lame duck, invivisible suit in the Oval Office in this year, Obama had to give a press conference based around roughly the Economy, so to stop the Stock Market drops this week, but also reassure folks in general.
Because that is what a LEADER does. Obama's not President yet, but he's now the Nation's Daddy, so to speak.
Notice too how on the Iran question, he deflected it and tried to assure Americans like Joe the Plumber that his "No Preconditions" line is in the past and dead/buried like WCW, though left a small hole to which diplomatic negotiations could be made in the future. (Another reason why the Emanuel pick was good, for it reassured those 25% Jews who voted for McCain that Obama won't go all nuts or abandon Israel or whatever).
It won't happen, but imagine if Warren Bufffett was Secretary of the Treasury.
Speaking of which, word is out that upon taking office, Obama WON'T RAISE Taxes for the first two years, especially on the upper-class...which I think was smart.
The question is, will the liberals in Congress go along with him, who only want to punish rich people?
Alright well do let us know if any updates come your way.
FBI probing apparent Obama-related assault on Staten Island by Staten Island Advance
Friday November 07, 2008, 5:44 PM
The FBI has joined the investigation into an alleged racially-motivated beating that took place on Staten Island election night, where a black teenager says he was attacked by a group of white men with bats who yelled "Obama."
The U.S. District Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York announced today that it and the FBI are investigating the assault of 17-year-old Ali Kamara, a black Muslim who reported he was beaten in apparent retaliation to Tuesday's historic election.
Kamara says he was jumped on Pine Place in the borough's Stapleton community at about 11 p.m., the time Barack Obama was declared winner of the presidential election, by a car-load of white men wielding baseball bats who shouted, "Obama!"
Robert Nardoza, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office, called the feds' involvement in such a case "normal" and said it would be working jointly with the county district attorney and NYPD's Hate Crimes Task Force.
A police spokesman said that the attack on Kamara has not been officially classified as a hate crime. The beating is so far the only assault alleged to be connected to the presidential election reported in the city.
On a much much smaller scale, at my school we had our first (and hopefully only)political fight between two (middle school) boys, one who was disappointed at an Obama win and said so, causing the other to start a physical fight. How often do political views affect middle school kids?
It makes sense TIS, especially here in CA. People were so out their minds crazy for Obama that anyone who didn't support him was viewed on similar grounds as Hitler. They wouldn't say that, but it's how they act. I ranted about this before.
It would make sense that kids would share the same views as their parents, and just as passionately, to the point of fighting at school over it. People take on a sports mentality when it comes to elections so that they can't appreciate the democratic process once it's over, whether your candidate won or lost.
Nothing is going to change. One man can't do anything in 4-8 years because there is always someone there to fight. This is why I'm not upset by Obama winning. The only good thing to come out of this is our first Black/White president.
I acknowledge that CA is definitely a "Blue" state, but disagree with the accusations you make on the Obama supporters(for the most part) Even at my workplace, we try NOT to discuss politics, but I find the opposite. The McCain supporters that I've come in contact with and/or heard during discussions I tend to avoid at certain places like work,are very very resentful, mean spirited and full of hate. I don't say there are NO Obama supporters that are that way, but in my encounters anyway, I think the right has come across as such haters and poor losers.
Everyone at work received two/three e-mails from a few of our obviously avid McCain supporters accusing Obama of the usual Neo spin of being a terrorist and if you don't want end of days type thing, vote for McCain. Finally, the administration had to step in and notify via mass e-mail that he could not do that. Yet, I received nothing at work which was accusatory about McCain.
I have to give one person credit for getting it right. Jack Cafferty said it was "game over" for McCain as soon as he picked her.
So did Peggy Noonan. By the way, I wonder if she got any shit from her party over her remarks?
She got called a R.I.N.O. (Republican In Name Only) by the NeoCon bastion at the National Review, which as a paper has just gone down the fucking tubes in terms of intelligence.
To put it another way, those same jerks called George Will a RINO too because he hated the Palin pick too, and he's more traditional true Conservative than any of those bozos will ever hope be.
As I've said before, and hell William Buckley warned about this as Ideological Suicide, but this circular firing squad occuring right now in the GOP that demand Palin to be a litmus on Republicanism, and some morons like Limbaugh and Gingrich who insist that the GOP lost in 2006 and 2008 because those campaigns weren't conservative enough.
And yet that party's problem is that for 2008, they were still using the same stump speech used in 1980. That party needs to lose a few election cycles before they finally get their shit together and re-define what "Conservatism" means.
Btw, what happened with the Al Franken votes? Last I heard, there was about 150 votes they "found" that went to Franken. I mean it is really close.
TIS
If I'm Senator Coleman, and Franken ends up winning, I would be incredibly depressed that a fucking comedian with NO political experience has beaten me.
For the first time ever, a blue circle will appear in Nebraska on national electoral maps.
Democrat Barack Obama won the Omaha-based 2nd Congressional District on Friday, scooping up one of the state's five electoral votes.
In the process, he made history and shone the spotlight on Nebraska's unusual electoral college system.
Obama won 8,434 of 15,039 mail-in ballots counted Friday by Douglas County election officials. These early ballots arrived in the election commissioner's office too late to be included in Tuesday's election results.
The additional votes gave Obama a 1,260-vote lead over Republican John McCain in unofficial returns. McCain won the popular vote statewide and four electoral votes.
About 5,000 provisional ballots in Douglas County remain to be counted next week, but they are unlikely to change the 2nd District outcome. About half of such ballots typically are disqualified.
"We always knew we could do it, but it would be an uphill climb. It's great to see a little corner of Nebraska turn blue," said John Berge, state director for the Obama campaign.
Berge said the victory was a tribute to all the work done by staffers and the hundreds of Obama volunteers who manned telephones and walked neighborhoods in the Omaha metropolitan area.
Republican Hal Daub, McCain's state director, congratulated Obama on his win. He praised the candidate for coming to Omaha in February, saying it made for a "fun election."
The Nebraska results give Obama his 365th electoral vote. McCain's tally stands at 162. Only Missouri's 11 electoral votes remain undecided.
Obama's win will assuredly spark interest in the split electoral system, which only Nebraska and Maine use. All other states are winner-take-all on electoral votes.
It was the first time since 1964 that Nebraska has awarded an electoral vote to a Democrat. The state has been reliably Republican since it voted for Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson that year.
Obama ignored Nebraska's history this year, sending 16 paid staffers into the 2nd District and opening three offices in Omaha.
A 1991 state law allowed Obama to concentrate his efforts on the Omaha area, where Democrats outnumber Republicans.
Nebraska is the first state in the modern era to have a split electoral decision.
Nebraska and Maine are not, however, the first states to try a split-electoral system, said Randy Adkins, a political scientist at the University of Nebraska at Omaha.
Several states flirted with similar systems in the early 1800s, including Kentucky, Maryland and North Carolina.
One of the last to use it was Michigan, which split its electoral votes in the 1892 presidential election between Benjamin Harrison and Grover Cleveland.
States began abandoning the split system in the late 19th century. Political parties, especially those dominating in particular states, led the effort for a winner-take-all system.
"It's political greed," said George Edwards, chairman of presidential studies at Texas A&M University's Bush School of Government and Public Service and editor of Presidential Studies Quarterly. "The dominant political parties want all of the votes."
He hopes that Obama's win in Nebraska will spark national interest in the split system, which he said does a better job of representing the will of the people. "I think it would be very healthy if this sparked some discussion . . . and I suspect that it will," he said.
I kind of like Noonan. If nothing else, she's VERY bright. A fantastic journalist, even if I don't agree with her politics.
Well mate, remember how when off-air on MSNBC, Noonan was recorded as dissing the Palin pick?
She also said something I agree with: Why didn't McCain, if he demanded a female GOPer as his running mate, pick Senator Kay Hutchinson of Texas?
Unfortunately, despite her 10+ years of Senate experience and discplined as a partisan fighter (which Palin isn't), Hutchinson wasn't picked because simply she's PRO-CHOICE.
And yet, those same GOP Palin nerds who argued that Palin would win the female vote forgot a little problem: Most American women have traditionally been Pro-Choice. Last I checked, it was 55% according to Gallup, but either way thats a majority.
It's hard to figure with Palin. Today I hear something like 80 percent of the public want her to run in 2012. Yet, I also hear that the Republicans (including many in the McCain camp) DON'T want her to run. I hear so many leaks (since the election) that reportedly come rom the GOP (ie. Palin answering the door to two McCain aids in a towel; and how an unnamed source referred to her and her family as "Alaskan Hillbillies that rip off Neiman Marcus's from coast to coast." Ha ha....
On the other hand, I think it was Paul Begala who when asked if she should run n 2012, referred to it as "the gift that keeps on giving" indicating it'd be a dream for the Dems. I think the public (Republicans) like her but the D.C. Republicans don't.
It's hard to figure with Palin. Today I hear something like 80 percent of the public want her to run in 2012. Yet, I also hear that the Republicans (including many in the McCain camp) DON'T want her to run. I hear so many leaks (since the election) that reportedly come rom the GOP (ie. Palin answering the door to two McCain aids in a towel; and how an unnamed source referred to her and her family as "Alaskan Hillbillies that rip off Neiman Marcus's from coast to coast." Ha ha....
On the other hand, I think it was Paul Begala who when asked if she should run n 2012, referred to it as "the gift that keeps on giving" indicating it'd be a dream for the Dems. I think the public (Republicans) like her but the D.C. Republicans don't.
TIS
Heard a story back on sunday how an alleged centre of many of these leaks was Mitt Romney, who wants her eliminated as a possible serious rival for the 2012 nomination.
But man, Palin....I won't say that she CAN'T win in 2012, for that is a very long time from now, but wow she's got alot of work to do in terms of disipline in intelligence and knowledge.
To put it another way, Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, an Indian-American, appeared on HANNITY & COLMES (sadly, Hannity's head didn't explode after the election) and despite sharing most of her ideological stances, Jindal came off as smart and capable.
WASHINGTON DC (CNN) -- On the day that President-elect Barack Obama is visiting the White House, a new national poll suggests that the current occupant at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is the most unpopular president since approval ratings were first sought more than six decades ago.
Seventy-six percent of those questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Monday disapprove of how President Bush is handling his job.
That's an all-time high in CNN polling and in Gallup polling dating back to World War II.
"No other president's disapproval rating has gone higher than 70 percent. Bush has managed to do that three times so far this year," says CNN polling director Keating Holland. "That means that Bush is now more unpopular than Richard Nixon was when he resigned from office during Watergate with a 66 percent disapproval rating."
Before Bush, the record holder for presidential disapproval was Harry Truman, with a 67 percent disapproval rating in January of 1952, his last full year in office.
As Obama visits the White House to start the transition from the Bush administration to an Obama administration, 57 percent of those questioned think the transfer of power will be relatively easy and free from tension, with 39 percent saying the transition will be difficult.
"A majority say that the transition from Bush to Obama will go smoothly, although nearly one in four predict a lot of tension between Bush aides and Obama aides in the next few weeks. That sentiment is highest among Democrats, but even among them, a majority believes that the transition will be relatively easy," Holland said. VideoWatch Obama's ambitious agenda »
The CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll was conducted Thursday through Sunday with 1,246 adult Americans questioned by telephone. The survey's sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.
I'll tell ya, though; if I'm Dubya, I can't get out of there fast enough.
I get the feeling he'll leave without ruffling Obama's feathers. I expect him to be gracious, if not classy about it.
No doubt. At the same time I expect Obama will end the anti-Bush rhetoric. The election's over, and while Bush deserved the low approval rating, nobody is looking for finger pointing now.
I'll tell ya, though; if I'm Dubya, I can't get out of there fast enough.
I get the feeling he'll leave without ruffling Obama's feathers. I expect him to be gracious, if not classy about it.
No doubt. At the same time I expect Obama will end the anti-Bush rhetoric. The election's over, and while Bush deserved the low approval rating, nobody is looking for finger pointing now.
Such finger-pointing helps nobody, and if Dubya loves his country as I'm sure he thinks he does, he gave and will continue to give whatever advice to the President-Elect regarding national security or terrorism that he can give.
You know me, I've shat on Dubya frequently, but we must admit that his administration for better or for worse was the first Executive to fight international terrorism as a serious domestic/foreign threat since the days of Thomas Jefferson and the Barbary Pirates, much like Harry Truman (successes and failures) did with the Cold War.
Hopefully Obama's administration will see what worked, and what didn't, with the Bush years...and hopefully improve upon it for our sake.
WASHINGTON DC (CNN) -- On the day that President-elect Barack Obama is visiting the White House, a new national poll suggests that the current occupant at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is the most unpopular president since approval ratings were first sought more than six decades ago.
Seventy-six percent of those questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Monday disapprove of how President Bush is handling his job.
That's an all-time high in CNN polling and in Gallup polling dating back to World War II.
"No other president's disapproval rating has gone higher than 70 percent. Bush has managed to do that three times so far this year," says CNN polling director Keating Holland. "That means that Bush is now more unpopular than Richard Nixon was when he resigned from office during Watergate with a 66 percent disapproval rating."
Before Bush, the record holder for presidential disapproval was Harry Truman, with a 67 percent disapproval rating in January of 1952, his last full year in office.
As Obama visits the White House to start the transition from the Bush administration to an Obama administration, 57 percent of those questioned think the transfer of power will be relatively easy and free from tension, with 39 percent saying the transition will be difficult.
"A majority say that the transition from Bush to Obama will go smoothly, although nearly one in four predict a lot of tension between Bush aides and Obama aides in the next few weeks. That sentiment is highest among Democrats, but even among them, a majority believes that the transition will be relatively easy," Holland said. VideoWatch Obama's ambitious agenda »
The CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll was conducted Thursday through Sunday with 1,246 adult Americans questioned by telephone. The survey's sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.
Wow, that's BAD.
Then again, off topic, but I still stand to my opinion that Nixon in his first 4 years was a much better President than Dubya has been in his 8 years.
I'd like to know who in the hell the 24 percent are that think he's doing a good job. Wait, the Bushs's are a large family right? There ya go
Counting the days!!
TIS
Maybe that includes Anne Coulter.
By the way, where's Coulter been this election season? Someone mentioned that she's been recovering from the operation she had to significantly reduce the size of her gigantic adam's apple down to a more feminine size.
I'd like to know who in the hell the 24 percent are that think he's doing a good job. Wait, the Bushs's are a large family right? There ya go
Counting the days!!
TIS
Maybe that includes Anne Coulter.
By the way, where's Coulter been this election season? Someone mentioned that she's been recovering from the operation she had to significantly reduce the size of her gigantic adam's apple down to a more feminine size.
Haha.
Thing is, I remembered her saying how if it came down to Hillary/McCain, she would endorse Hillary because McCain was a weakling on gun rights.
Today I read a little scary article in a German newspaper. The German correspondent wrote about how difficult it was for her to contact anybody from the campaign. Volunteers were not entitled to say anything. They told her to contact the headquarter which she did several times. However, they never answered. When she attended a rally in South Carolina she and other people from the press couldn't go to the press gallery because it was reserved for TV crews (who didn't come). In the election night she was allowed to interview the crowd after the speech in Chicago, but no longer than 20 minutes, she had a guard at her side all the time. Felt like in China. For those of you who know some German: http://www.taz.de/1/debatte/kolumnen/artikel/1/vorsicht-sympathischer-strahlemann/
Today I read a little scary article in a German newspaper. The German correspondent wrote about how difficult it was for her to contact anybody from the campaign. Volunteers were not entitled to say anything. They told her to contact the headquarter which she did several times. However, they never answered. When she attended a rally in South Carolina she and other people from the press couldn't go to the press gallery because it was reserved for TV crews (who didn't come). In the election night she was allowed to interview the crowd after the speech in Chicago, but no longer than 20 minutes, she had a guard at her side all the time. Felt like in China. For those of you who know some German: http://www.taz.de/1/debatte/kolumnen/artikel/1/vorsicht-sympathischer-strahlemann/
Can't wait then for all of us to be shipped to farming communes.
I totally agree with this editorial. The way Bush has been vilified is a joke. And for the record, I'm part of that 24%.
Bush is an easy target because he is a bad public speaker. He has faced more in his presidency than most and I think as time goes on more people will realize that.
If you like Bush, and voted for Obama, then they should be doing scientific experiments on your brain.
Oh you're just mad because I've beaten you two years in a row in fantasy football...
Keep reaching. I'm still ahead of you this year, and was in the semifinals last year. I don't remember your team even making the playoffs last year.
We have the same lousy record and you've scored a whopping 52 more points than me. How's Larry Johnson working out for you? Reggie Bush is back this week too...
We have the same lousy record and you've scored a whopping 52 more points than me. How's Larry Johnson working out for you? Reggie Bush is back this week too...
All the shitty players I have, and I'm still 52 points ahead of you.
I totally agree with this editorial. The way Bush has been vilified is a joke. And for the record, I'm part of that 24%.
I am not one of the 24%, and while the editorial makes a good point that some over the top vilification does us no good, it is intellectually dishonest for even the Wall Street Journal to claim this man has tried to be bipartisan. He has broken the Geneva accords, sanctioned torture and other war crimes, bypassed the US Constitution and is responsible for all the acts of Dick Cheney and Scooter Libby as well as the swiftboating of Kerry, and the appointment of justices to the upreme court who are way out of the mainstream. He has been a disgrace.
We have the same lousy record and you've scored a whopping 52 more points than me. How's Larry Johnson working out for you? Reggie Bush is back this week too...
All the shitty players I have, and I'm still 52 points ahead of you.
While W may have been handed some very tough reins to handle, he also didn't rise to the occasion. Just think of the legacy he leaves behind - a ruined economy, a destroyed housing market, a war built on false intelligence, inability to provide even basic care for the injured returning from that war (remember the mold, the rodents, the faulty plumbing?), the inability to take care of a city ruined by storm, record high energy prices, and an enormous deficit to replace the surplus he inherited from the prior administration.
Yes, he had an awful lot placed on his shoulders, but he didn't handle any of it very well, did he??
I agree, Babe. And for the record, I really don't view Dubya as a "bad" guy. I know I might be in the minority, but I really don't.
He's certainly a "true believer" in both God and country, and he appears to have some very likeable qualities. But as a President, in my opinion, he was a disaster.
Nor do I view Omaba as any kind of "savior." I was on board with his candidacy early on, but that doesn't necessarily mean I'll vote for him in four years if he doesn't get the job done.
Would you believe that the Alaska race between Stevens (R and Begich (D) is still being counted? Now, Begich is up by only 3 votes. The Minnesota race is still being recounted too with Al Franken behin by approximately 200 votes. Why so many close elections this year?
Would you believe that the Alaska race between Stevens (R and Begich (D) is still being counted? Now, Begich is up by only 3 votes. The Minnesota race is still being recounted too with Al Franken behin by approximately 200 votes. Why so many close elections this year?
.....the surplus he inherited from the prior administration.
Yeah, the huge surplus that was left over from the Clinton years which was created by the dot-com boom that arose during the 90's.
A dot-com boom which created a false surplus in both the economy, NASDQ and the dow jones industrial average. A financial "paper tiger."
A huge surplus during 90's that was created by "cooked books" from what was artificially pumped into the economy from what later turned out to be falsly profitable companies like ENRON.
Oh, and let's not forget another one from the Clinton era named Worldcom.
This all took place under the Clinton administration watch.
While I am not defending President Bush here when it comes to the economic practices that we've seen in this country over the last several years, please, let's not paint such a rosey and colorful picture that implies that President Clinton and his years in office produced such a real influx of economical value for us Americans. Try painting that rosey picture to all of those hard working people who lost not only their jobs, but their pensions and everything else that they worked so hard for while working for those dot-coms, Enrons and Worldcoms.
The financial and economical benefits of the 90's, during the Clinton years, only appeared to be so wonderful. The mid to late 90's appeared to be so wonderful financially because the dot-com boom appeared to be making billions and billions of $$$ along with the Enron and Worldcom type companies. The dot-coms turned out to be bullshit while at the same time the Enrons and the Worldcoms were cooking their books. And this all took place during the Clinton years, under his watch, and wound up collapsing as we started a new millinium. The dot-com dominated NASDAQ market spiraled downward in what turned out to be close to something like a $3 trillion loss. Workers saw their money dissappear and found out that they had worked all of those years only to wind up without either a pension or a health plan!
A false "surplus" that was "left over from the Clinton years" for the next administration to 'inherit" and clean up!
.....the surplus he inherited from the prior administration.
Yeah, the huge surplus that was left over from the Clinton years which was created by the dot-com boom that arose during the 90's.
A dot-com boom which created a false surplus in both the economy, NASDQ and the dow jones industrial average. A financial "paper tiger."
A huge surplus during 90's that was created by "cooked books" from what was artificially pumped into the economy from what later turned out to be falsly profitable companies like ENRON.
Oh, and let's not forget another one from the Clinton era named Worldcom.
This all took place under the Clinton administration watch.
While I am not defending President Bush here when it comes to the economic practices that we've seen in this country over the last several years, please, let's not paint such a rosey and colorful picture that implies that President Clinton and his years in office produced such a real influx of economical value for us Americans. Try painting that rosey picture to all of those hard working people who lost not only their jobs, but their pensions and everything else that they worked so hard for while working for those dot-coms, Enrons and Worldcoms.
The financial and economical benefits of the 90's, during the Clinton years, only appeared to be so wonderful. The mid to late 90's appeared to be so wonderful financially because the dot-com boom appeared to be making billions and billions of $$$ along with the Enron and Worldcom type companies. The dot-coms turned out to be bullshit while at the same time the Enrons and the Worldcoms were cooking their books. And this all took place during the Clinton years, under his watch, and wound up collapsing as we started a new millinium. The dot-com dominated NASDAQ market spiraled downward in what turned out to be close to something like a $3 trillion loss. Workers saw their money dissappear and found out that they had worked all of those years only to wind up without either a pension or a health plan!
A false "surplus" that was "left over from the Clinton years" for the next administration to 'inherit" and clean up!
Oh, puh-leeze, DC. How can you take those eight words from my entire post out of context and comment on them? Why didn't you bother to respond to the rest of the post which spoke to the horror that the past eight years has been, and the completely and totally incompetent manner in which the Bush administration handled everything? Instead, you took eight words and spun quite the little fantasy about them.
Plenty of people made fortunes on those dot coms. And how would Enron impact the federal budget?
Perhaps you can explain to me how the federal budget had a "fake" surplus. It was either there, or it wasn't. And according to this chart from www.factcheck.org, it was definitely there.
They Haven't came up with a way to make fun of him yet, they said it in the paper
Also, he's boring. Not Al Gore ridiculously dull boring, but Obama has just not been successfully defined by comics, outside of "just another politician."
"I know what his campaign slogan in 2012 will be, "Don't Change!"" - Jay Leno
The initial reaction here is "bullshit", but it is still under investigation.
Looks like most people, including myself, are wrong:
Staten Island teens' night of hatred targeted others, prosecutors say.
It was pure hatred that prompted two 18-year-olds from Staten Island's East Shore to allegedly jump in their car and cruise to Stapleton to seek out an African American, any African American, to pummel bloody, on the night Barack Obama became the country's president elect.
Those were the charges leveled by the District Attorney's office at Ralph Nicoletti of Wadsworth Avenue, Fort Wadsworth, and Bryan Garaventa of the 100 block of Maryland Avenue in Rosebank -- both 18 -- during their arraignment this morning at Stapleton Criminal Court. (Click here for a photo gallery.)
The defendants, looking pale and exhausted, were both charged with assault in the second degree as a hate crime and criminal possession of a weapon, in connection with the election night incident, in which they are accused of jumping out of their slow-moving vehicle on Vanderbelt Avenue, and setting upon 17-year-old Ali Kamara, beating the teen bloody with a pipe and an asp baton, while yelling "Obama."
"This is a despicable crime," said Assistant District Attorney Mario Mattei, as the defendants stood wearing jeans in front of Judge Desmond Green. "They were out to target black people."
About a dozen of the suspects' family members looked on from the back of the court room.
As the young defendants' mothers stood by their sides -- Nicoletti's mother bald from treatments from what his attorney called a terminal illness -- the judge set bail at $10,000 cash or $25,000 collateral. The two are set to return to court Thursday.
Two additional suspects are also being sought according to police. The men, according to court papers, got riled up for their night by saying "let's get some n----" and beat Kamara with a pipe and an asp baton, calling the weapon a "n---- beater."
The victim needed staples to close the lacerations in his head, and the impact of the attack badly bruised his legs, arms and torso.
Before sneaking up from behind Kamara in their car with their headlights turned off and then jumping him, the defendants committed a number of other crimes of hatred, according to the District Attorney's office, which is continuing to gather evidence.
They yelled racial slurs from their car at a crowd gathered outside a Stapleton barber shop, where people had gathered to celebrate the historic victory of President-elect Obama.
The FBI and the United States Department of Justice are also investigating the crime, according to the District's Attorney's office.
Attorneys for the defendants would not comment on the incident, but said their clients would make bail.
Family and friends shunned questions from the press, as they ducked out of the courtroom
Garaventa and Nicoletti could face 15 years if convicted.
The funny thing to do with Obama would be to make him more of a hip-hop, gangsta type black guy. Have him talk like characters on his favorite show, The Wire. But they won't because that would be "racist".
The funny thing to do with Obama would be to make him more of a hip-hop, gangsta type black guy. Have him talk like characters on his favorite show, The Wire. But they won't because that would be "racist".
Gen. Petraeus 2012
yeah, because that IS racist, and not based on what he was/is doing. Now for Palin, she is unconsciously a comical figure, I didn't even have to watch SNL.
I heard some comedian talk about this a while back. They have the SNL comedian (don't know his name) do Obama. He's good, and sounds a lot like Obama, has his expressions and manner of speaking down. Yet, so far, there really isn't something they can "jab" with constant jokes.
President Ford only needed to trip and that started a blizzard of jokes. Remember Chevy Chase? Reagan they got with his age and caught his mannerisms perfectly and they were funny. I remember way way back them mocking JFK exaggerating his Boston accent. There was even a comedy album by Vaughn Meter making fun. Oh, and Bush is such a fuck-up, he is a comedans dream. It's impossible to compete with that
If, as time goes on, and we get to know Obama more, and he "trips" or does/says something that would be great material, you can bet the comedians will jump on it. Right now though, I think he's boring material for a comedian anyway.
The guy who does Obama on SNL doesn't have him "nailed" quite yet. He is going to be hard to impersonate. They did make a move in the right direction last week, however by having a guy impersonate Joe Biden. Although the impression needs work, Biden with all his grins, gaffes, and talking too long is a great source for comedians.
Fred Armisen does Obama and he's doing the best with it that one can. Jason Sudeihes does Biden and it too is the best one can do with it. Neither offers salient personal characteristics to impersonate.
However, Palin's high pitch intonation, her dropping of "Gs" at the end of words, her "oh shucks" expressions, and her glaring lack of knowledge about the Constitution all p[rovided a rich pool of imitatable behavior and mannerisms.
However, Palin's high pitch intonation, her dropping of "Gs" at the end of words, her "oh shucks" expressions, and her glaring lack of knowledge about the Constitution all p[rovided a rich pool of imitatable behavior and mannerisms.
McCain-backer Lieberman keeps Senate chairmanship Tue Nov 18, 2008 12:54pm EST
By Thomas Ferraro and Richard Cowan
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senate Democrats on Tuesday yielded to the wishes of President-elect Barack Obama and allowed Joe Lieberman to keep his committee chairmanship despite having backed Republican John McCain for the White House.
At a closed-door meeting, Senate Democrats meted out lesser punishment, passing a resolution of disapproval and stripping Lieberman of the chairmanship of an environment subcommittee.
There were fears that Lieberman, a former Democrat turned independent, might become a Republican if he lost the chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee.
"This is not a time for retribution," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, adding that "we need to be unified" as the Democratic-led Congress wrestles with a host of problems, including the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.
"This is all about going forward," Lieberman, flanked by a number of Senate Democrats, told reporters.
Democratic aides said Obama, shortly after winning the November 4 election for the presidency over McCain, urged Democrats to do what it takes to keep Lieberman, who represents Connecticut, in their Senate conference where he routinely votes with them.
Lieberman allowed Democrats to retain control of the Senate, 51-49, the past two years by caucusing with them. Democrats enlarged their Senate majority in the November 4 election, but many believe they could still use Lieberman's vote on a number of issues.
With newly elected Senate Democrats voting, the Democratic conference agreed on a 42-13 tally to allow Lieberman to keep the chairmanship of homeland security as well as a Senate armed services subcommittee, but lose the chairmanship of an environment subcommittee.
Lieberman backed McCain for president largely because McCain, unlike Obama, supported the unpopular Iraq war. In campaigning for McCain, Lieberman routinely ripped into Obama as misguided on what to do about the war, now in its sixth year.
The resolution approved by the Senate Democrats said their caucus "disapproves and rejects statements made by Senator Lieberman against Senator Obama during the campaign for the presidency."
Said Reid, "I defy anyone to be more angry than I was" with Lieberman's words, calling it "a period of time in Joe Lieberman's political career I will never understand or approve."
But Reid then talked about Lieberman's contributions to Senate Democrats and to the country, recounting that as a young man Lieberman traveled to the South to work in the civil rights movement. In 2000, Lieberman, a moderate, was Democratic presidential nominee Al Gore's vice presidential running mate.
Lieberman won re-election to a fourth term in the Senate as an independent in 2006 after losing the Democratic primary due mostly to his support for the Iraq war.
Lieberman then served in the Senate with both presidential candidates -- McCain representing Arizona and Obama serving Illinois until he resigned on Sunday.
Obama Staff Vetting Bill Clinton's Foreign Dealings By JAKE TAPPER
Nov. 18, 2008 —
President-elect Barack Obama is inching closer to naming former rival Sen. Hillary Clinton as his secretary of state, ABC News has learned.
Serious progress has been made in the talks between the two, leaving both Obama and Clinton increasingly optimistic that the assignment will happen, sources say.
Putting Clinton in charge of foreign policy would make for a remarkable partnership, considering the long and bitter primary battles between the two senators for the presidential nomination, and their intense tangles over foreign policy.
Clinton would give the Obama administration someone who is already a familiar face to many foreign heads of state, as well as to foreign populations around the world, who know her and her husband from the Clinton presidency.
Her appointment, however, would also come with complications stemming from Bill Clinton's constant world travels and fundraising among foreigners for his presidential library and William J. Clinton Foundation.
Bill Clinton's ventures are being vetted by Obama attorney Christine Varney, as well as by Obama transition officials, who are known and trusted by the Clintons, as well as by some officials at Clinton's philanthropic foundation to make sure there is nothing that could complicate or compromise an Obama foreign policy.
For instance, the most widely reported example of potential presidential embarrassment or policy complications are reports that Bill Clinton traveled to Kazakhstan in 2005 with mining investor Frank Giustra, despite criticism from U.S. officials, including Hillary Clinton, of the country's human rights record.
Within days of the trip, Giustra's company landed a multimillion dollar deal to buy into uranium projects with Kazakhstan. Months later, Giustra donated $31.3 million to the Clinton foundation, with a pledge of more to come.
Nevertheless, sources familiar with the negotiations believe Clinton's appointment as secretary of state could perhaps happen as early as next week.
Obama has made a point of mending fences with his former rivals. He met with Hillary Clinton at his Chicago transition headquarters last week and sat down Monday with Sen. John McCain, the Republican he defeated on Election Day.
The president-elect also met with New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, another one-time presidential contender who later endorsed Obama.
Michael Corleone would have never stood for this Lieberman thing. It would have gone like this:
Michael - You have to answer for what you did Joe.
Lieberman- I swear to God Barack I didn't do anything.
Michael- McCain lost. Palin is back in Alaska. We may have sixty senators without you. We have complete control in the House.
Lieberman - I swear on the kids, Mikey.
Michael - Ahhh that little farce you played with Harry Reid. You think that could fool a Corleone?
Lieberman - I'm innocent.
Michael - Give him a drink. Now tell me who contacted you to attack me on the campaing trail was it McCain or Rove?
Lieberman You've got it all wrong.
Michael - Go ahead take your drink but don't tell me you're innocent because it insults my intelligence and it makes me very angry. Now tell me who approached you?
I don't think so. Last I heard I think they were 2 short, but I'm not sure. There's still the Al Franken race that isn't counted but even IF he wins, I think it'll end up very close but not 60. JL or RR probably know the exacts.
Perhaps you can explain to me how the federal budget had a "fake" surplus. It was either there, or it wasn't.
I think that you actually answered your own question a few sentences down when you went on to say :
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
Plenty of people made fortunes on those dot coms. And how would Enron impact the federal budget?
Taxes paid to the federal government from these fortunes made from these FAKE dot-coms helped to create a financial surplus in the federal budget which in turn created what seemed like a booming economy. These fortunes that were being made also helped stimulate the economy by the spending that took place from the "cooked" profits that were being made which in turn allows the federal government to curtail federal spending and helps to allow, to what seemed to be, a surplus in the budget to grow.
Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe
Why didn't you bother to respond to the rest of the post which spoke to the horror that the past eight years has been, and the completely and totally incompetent manner in which the Bush administration handled everything?
As I said in that original reply :
Originally Posted By: Don Cardi
While I am not defending President Bush here when it comes to the economic practices that we've seen in this country over the last several years,
Once again, I am in no way defending what took place financially under President Bush and this administartion's watch, but by the same token I refuse to sit back and allow someone to paint a rosey picture for President Clinton and his administration and what was allowed to take place under his watch which made our economy look as though it was booming. What was allowed to take place under his watch caught up to us a few years later and had a big affect on our federal budget and our economy overall.
Both of these administrations are guilty of turning their heads or not being responsible for what has taken place in regards to this country's current negative financial situation. Both contributed in some way to what has now amounted to the financial disaster that we are facing.
Hopefully our President-Elect will live up to his campaign slogan and provide the "change" that he has continually promised us. He himself has said that it's time for "CHANGE" over what we've seen in the last 16 years.
While I do not absolve Clinton for everything he did, the 2003 legislation which pretty much deregulated everything was really the fina nail in the coffin, and this was under Bush's watch.
Personally I put a great deal of blame on Alan Greenspan. Basically he went along with the false assumption that we could continue to print money, lower interest rates, and give credit to anyone who asked for it. THAT was the fake prosperity of the Clinton and Bush years. I know many people who would max out their credit cards, buy new luxury cars, refinance their house, and then do the same thing over and over. These same people are now bitching that they should be bailed out. As along as people are borrowing money and spending it freely on everything, the economy appears to be far stronger than it is. In the mean time these geniuses on Wall Street were chopping up these bad loans and pawning them off on people betting they would get a return on these "secured" investments, assuming the value of real estate would always be rising. The geniuses, of course then paid themselve huge bonuses, and held all the realy bad paper, overvaluing it enormously.
IMHO Greenspan saw this coming and bailed his sorry ass out and dumped the mess on Bernake and Poulson (I believe Bush is literally running out the clock and is pretty much disengaged at this point).
I am hoping Obama picks Paul Volker for Sec of Treasury, if only for one year. Volker is 81, so all the administrative and daily briefings etc should be handled by some under secretary to allow Volker and as many brains as he and Obama want to collect go to work on this mess.
I like Volker, but I was holding out hope that Obama would take either Michael Blomberg or Warren Buffet on in some capacity; at least as an advisor.
I believe he speaks to Buffet almost every day, and also has a cordial relationship with Bloomberg (although not as close as Buffet), I am certain he will continue to listen to those two.
DC, you're twisting the truth. There was a surplus. There was money in the bank. It may have come from false hopes and dreams, but the dollars were real enough. Quite frankly, the people who invested in dot coms were incredibly stupid. If some grungy kids set up a business in a Soho loft and added .com to the name of it, the money poured in. It didn't matter if they didn't make anything or provide a real service. It didn't matter if they lost money. People still gave them money. They deserved to be fleeced.
However, the taxes that were paid on that money were real enough to cause quite a surplus. And I find it difficult to believe that Enron alone caused a "fake" booming economy. All I know is that unemployment was half of what it is today, there was plenty of money to loan, and the housing market was brisk. And it was far enough back in history NOT to be blamed for the current housing mess.
As for my comments about your taking my words out of context, I had written a rather lengthy post and you took eight words from it to comment on rather than comment on the whole thing.
And you're right. I hope and pray for change, too. This country is in a mess and I fear that it's going to get a hell of a lot worse before it gets better.
Your point is well taken. However I must point out to you that it's not about all dollars and cents when profits are taken, taxes are paid and surpluses are created on paper. A LARGE percentage, probably a majority of the time, of loans being given, money being spent and surpluses being created are through LINES OF CREDIT....aka paper money, because companies like ENRON COOKED their books to show profits and therefore were extended HUGE amounts of credits by banks and lenders. Huge corporations do not deal in "real" dollars, but instead deal in letters of credit, loans, etc.
And as far as the dot-com businesses that were created by these "kids," yes, many of your averqage people did invest in those companies, but many big money investement firms poured money into them, bought their stocks on MARGIN, and when the truth came out that the dot-com company that they invested in were not really making the monies that they claimed that they were on their books, those big investment firms who poured "paper money" into buying stocks in those companies now had to come up with some REAL money to meet their margin calls! So they sold what they had in stocks, driving the price of those stocks into nowhereland, which in turn caused the average working Joe to lose any little money that he or she may have put into buying stocks for their portfolios and their retirements, which in turn has a ripple affect because now the average Joe cannot afford to go out, go on vacation, etc. And the big investment firms who dumped those stocks because they had to come up with real money for their margin calls wound up getting loans and letters of credit to meet those margin requirements.
You see, it just doesn't happen in a week, or a month. It takes time for these type of ripple effects to develop and over the course of time it eventually affects employment numbers and our federal budget.
Basically it's like the family that gets a credit card and keeps on charging on that card but makes the minimum payments. It's not real money. It's money given on credit. Eventually they are going to fall deeper and deeper into debt to where it gets to a point that it has a trickle down effect and winds up affecting everything and everyone else in that household.
Our economic woes are a combination of what took place with the last TWO administrations and not just because of what took place during the term of one of the administrations.
REAL MONEY??? Are there Americans who actually use real money any more? We are a country built on credit, credit, credit. We have created a generation that has no respect for money or patience to actually save before they buy something.
As investors, we are the same way. Years ago people bought stocks because the company actually made money. Now, they just hop onto the latest trend, whether it's internet or energy or whatever comes next.
. We have created a generation that has no respect for money or patience to actually save before they buy something.
I agree 100%!!! You're absolutely right about that!!!!
Absolutely. It is all about instant gratification and not understanding the value of saving up for things instead of pretenting a credit card limit is tantamont to cash. In some societies it is considered shameful to be in debt, but not in ours. It is amazing the crap people acumulate, and the false "needs" the marketplace has made. Look at music. First it was Vinyl. Then more and more expensive stereo systems with huge speakers, etc. Then came tapes. Then CD's (which were never supposed to break or skip or stop working) now I Pods. As soon as this stuff comes out people stampede like out of control cattle to buy this crap on credit.
Last week I bought my first flat screen television after my old Sharp color set finally died. I paid $549 for 32 inch set. The same set was about 2 grand a couple of years ago, and I actually had people making fun of me back then for not having an "up to date" television. With that mentality its no wonder we are in this mess. And, Yes, I am saying we can point fingers at Clinton, Bush, Greedy Corporations, Banks, and all the rest, but we also beed to do a gut check and take a look in the mirror.
"Ann Coulter, the outspoken conservative writer, has been forced to keep her mouth shut after she took a fall last month and sustained injuries that have required that her jaw be wired shut."
That may be the reason she wasn't involved in the campaign.
Awwwwwwwww come on now. Honestly, after King George snuck into and went all gangsta in the White House in 2000...whatever. Let's not even talk about how some have been elected.
"Ann Coulter, the outspoken conservative writer, has been forced to keep her mouth shut after she took a fall last month and sustained injuries that have required that her jaw be wired shut."
That may be the reason she wasn't involved in the campaign.
Hil stuck in campaign mode: Secretary of state-designate can't stop raising money
By Michael Goodwin, NY Daily News
Sunday, December 7th 2008
The invitations arrive almost daily now, their tone and content so audacious that the first instinct is to suspect they are scripts from "Saturday Night Live" or a piece of clever satire from The Onion. Then they would be funny.
The first e-mail is from Bill Clinton, who begins, "I am sure you have heard the exciting news: Hillary Clinton is nominated to be our next Secretary of State!"
Yes, I had heard the news, but I play along with Bubba anyway, clicking the link he provided to send his wife "a message of congratulations." Alas, the link also gave me the option of contributing money to our next secretary of state.
The pitch is a disappointment, but not a total surprise. In this time of great need in America, who needs your money more than Hillary? It's Christmas, and she's got $7 million in campaign debts she'd rather not pay herself.
Apparently nothing tugs on the holiday heartstrings like being nominated to be America's top diplomat. If that doesn't get you to give till it hurts, nothing will.
Before long, another invitation arrives, this one from Hillary's mother, Dorothy Rodham. She's gushing how "I'm so proud of everything my daughter has accomplished and excited about what her future holds."
After more happy talk about how Hillary has "inspired millions of people, especially young girls," Mom gets to the point. She wants money, too.
She provides a link so I can help Hillary "pay down the debt from her campaign." For $50, I get a copy of "Dreams Taking Flight," a "young readers" hagiographic book about her daughter.
If I cough up $250 or more, Mom says I get "a book that's personally signed by Hillary." The mailing was paid for by "Hillary Clinton for President."
But isn't the campaign over? Didn't the other guy win? Only temporarily, it seems. For as I read a blurb from the book, I learn that Hillary didn't win her party's nomination "this time."
Wait, there's more. My Daily News colleague Michael McAuliff got a copy of a third invitation, this one to a "conversation" with Hillary in a Manhattan ballroom Dec. 15. "President Bill Clinton" is the special guest and the host is America Ferrera, of TV's "Ugly Betty" fame. The evening is in "support of Hillary Clinton for President Debt Relief."
For $50, you get a seat. For $1,000, you get a "VIP seat & backstage photo with Hillary."
No word yet on whether lobbyists or others who want to curry favor with the State Department will be banned. They probably won't be. After all, you can't fully monetize a cabinet position if you're too picky about the source of contributions.
Somehow, I can't imagine Henry Kissinger or Madeleine Albright or Colin Powell selling seats on their shuttle diplomacy trips. As for Hillary, I'm not sure, thanks to her uncanny ability to create fresh doubts about her judgment.
The flurry of solicitations begins to answer the question of whether she will be able to set aside her political ambitions to become the consummate statesman her new job requires.
As always, the issue is not her ability or dedication to a serious task. I'm among those who think she has the potential to be an excellent Madame Secretary, especially since President-elect Obama forced Bubba to disclose who is bankrolling his globe-trotting adventures. Disclosing his conflicts was a necessary cleansing and a prophylactic against his bad habit of freelancing foreign policy.
Yet Hillary's continued fund-raising, pegged to her nomination, is a worrisome sign she hasn't fully bought in to the meaning of Obama's deal. America's top diplomat can't also be an independent political force, and shouldn't even suggest she will be again.
If she can't accept that minimum standard, Obama has made a grave mistake. And so has she.
PATERSON COOL ON CAROLINE KENNEDY SHE'S A 20-1 SHOT
New York Post
December 8, 2008
THE odds of Gov. Paterson choosing Caroline Kennedy to replace soon-to-be Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton in the US Senate are no better than 20-1, a source close to the governor said yesterday.
The source was responding to news that Sen. Ted Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and other family members have been pushing hard for Caroline to replace Clinton.
"It looks to me like [Caroline's cousin] Bobby Kennedy may be trying to push Caroline more than Caroline is pushing herself," a Paterson administration source told The Post.
Paterson, who confirmed Friday that he had discussed the Senate job with Caroline, was described as "liking and respecting" the last remaining child of former President John F. Kennedy, as well as seeing her as an "enormous potential drawer" of contributions to his own planned campaign for governor in 2010.
But the governor, who has the sole authority to name a new senator, was also said to be concerned that Kennedy, whom friends call "quiet and non-assertive," doesn't have the personality to be an aggressive fighter in the Senate on behalf of the state's increasingly desperate need for federal financial help.
"The bottom-line question is: Can Caroline Kennedy be the tough, hard, calculating, aggressive, articulate and, yes, obnoxious type of senator New York needs and expects?" said a second administration insider.
Among other candidates said more likely to be chosen by the governor are Attorney General Andrew Cuomo or either US Rep. Carolyn Maloney of Manhattan or Kirsten Gillibrand of Hudson, a favorite of the state's senior senator, Charles Schumer.
Time Warner Chairman Richard Parsons, once an aide to former Gov. Nelson Rockefeller and whose on-again off-again political ambitions have led him to be mentioned in recent years as a possible candidate for mayor, was also mentioned as a possible "long shot."
Administration insiders insist that Paterson is many weeks away from making a decision, since Sen. Clinton says she won't resign until confirmed to the new office, which can't happen until President-elect Barack Obama is sworn in Jan. 20.
A Democratic source said Clinton would be dead-set against seeing Caroline take her seat.
"Why would she want to see that seat go to someone who essentially double-crossed her?" the source said, noting the Kennedy family's endorsement of Obama in the primary. "It's a nightmare scenario for her."
SC, I was making a valid point. McCain lost, but the supporters still hang onto him, like I said, kinda like those old Japs on the Pacific islands fighting a war that ended and was lost years ago.
SC, I was making a valid point. McCain lost, but the supporters still hang onto him, like I said, kinda like those old Japs on the Pacific islands fighting a war that ended and was lost years ago.
"Japs?" Come on Lompac, do you have some secret death wish to be banned from these boards forever?
SC, I was making a valid point. McCain lost, but the supporters still hang onto him, like I said, kinda like those old Japs on the Pacific islands fighting a war that ended and was lost years ago.
"Japs?" Come on Lompac, do you have some secret death wish to be banned from these boards forever?
Sounds like he's been watching too many old WWII movies.
Jap is an English abbreviation of the word "Japanese." Today it is regarded as an ethnic slur, though English-speaking countries differ in the degree they consider the term offensive. In the United States, Japanese Americans have come to find the term controversial or offensive, even when used as an abbreviation. In the past, Jap was not considered primarily offensive; however, after the events of World War II, the term became derogatory.
Report: Joe the Plumber Says McCain 'Appalled' Him
Joe Wurzelbacher says he felt "dirty" after "seeing some of the things that take place" on the campaign trail.
FOXNews.com
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
Joe Wurzelbacher said he was specifically put off by McCain when it came to talk of the $700 billion bailout.
"When I was on the bus with him, I asked him a lot of questions about the bailout because most Americans did not want that to happen," Wurzelbacher told Beck. "I asked him some pretty direct questions. Some of the answers you guys are gonna receive they appalled me, absolutely. I was angry. In fact, I wanted to get off the bus after I talked to him."
Wurzelbacher said he stayed on the trail with McCain "honestly, because the thought of Barack Obama as president scares me even more."
Wurzelbacher, however, offered kind words to McCain running mate Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.
"Sarah Palin is absolutely the real deal," he said.
The mother of the guy that got Sarah Palin's daughter pregnant (and is supposed to marry her?) was arrested by Alaska authorities on drug manufacture and distribution charges. The baby is due tomorrow.
Alaska: Future Palin In-Law Is Arrested By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
State troopers have arrested the mother of Bristol Palin’s boyfriend on drug charges. The woman, Sherry L. Johnston, was arrested after troopers served a search warrant on a Wasilla home. Ms. Johnston, 42, has been charged with six felony drug counts. A trooper spokeswoman said in a news release that the charges were in connection to the prescription painkiller OxyContin. Ms. Johnston is the mother of Levi Johnston, 18. Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican nominee for vice president, announced in September that her daughter Bristol, 18, was pregnant and that Mr. Johnston was the father. She is due to give birth this weekend.
You betcha!! She was paling around with druggies. Guilt by association you know.
Btw, I didn't see it, but heard that Sean Hannity is all pissed off over a picture of Obama (from college I believe)because in the picture he's wearing a hat and smoking a cigaret. Did you ever hear of such a thing? Now isn't that a punishable offense? Sean's wondering why the picture wasn't released before the election. Anyone hear of this? I'll try to find the picture. I'm sure it's on-line somewhere. Some people just can't stand the thought that they lost.
....heard that Sean Hannity is all pissed off over a picture of Obama (from college I believe)because in the picture he's wearing a hat and smoking a cigaret. Did you ever hear of such a thing? Now isn't that a punishable offense? Sean's wondering why the picture wasn't released before the election. Anyone hear of this? I'll try to find the picture. I'm sure it's on-line somewhere. Some people just can't stand the thought that they lost.TIS
TIS, I have to agree with you here in regards to Sean Hannity. While I've always liked him and respected most of the positions that he has taken in politics over the years, he has acted like a sore losing cry baby bitch since this election! And I myself, who especially enjoyed his commentaries over the years on fighting Terrorism, can no longer watch him or listen to him in regards to President Elect Obama.
The election is over. It's time to put the gloves away, at least for a while, and give this President Elect a chance. Give him some time in the White House. See if he does live up to his promises. Then if Sean Hannity or anyone else for that matter does not agree with what Obama has done, or with the policies that he has implemented, they will have every right to voice their opinions and concerns about the President Elect.
But for God's sake, let's all give our President Elect a chance to be sworn in BEFORE passing judgement on what he has or will do as Commander In Chief of our great nation!
Originally Posted By: olivant
So, Sarah, you're paling around with druggies?
Originally Posted By: svsg
Sarah palin' with the druggies, yes.
What a totally ridiculous statement to make. And especially quite surprising from you svsg, implying that someone is guilty just because they are associated with someone who has done wrong.
What a totally ridiculous statement to make. And especially quite surprising from you svsg, implying that someone is guilty just because they are associated with someone who has done wrong.
Relax Cardi, I was just trying to make a light-hearted rhyme/pun with the word Palin(g). I don't even have an opinion on this, as I didn't even read Olivant's post fully or follow the news on this. As soon as I saw the word paling, its spelling struck me.