2008 Election - Offseason

[Desperado]

McCain camp looking for way to win without Colorado (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/20/mccain-camp-looking-for-way-to-win-without-colorado/)
Posted: 06:40 PM ET

From CNN Chief National Correspondent John King (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/tag/cnn-chief-national-correspondent-john-king/)
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/10/20/art.johnking.gi.jpg Some McCain insiders believe Colorado is out of reach.

http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/2.0/mosaic/base_skins/baseplate/corner_wire_BL.gif

(CNN) — The McCain campaign is looking at an Electoral College strategy heading into the final two weeks that has virtually no room for error and depends heavily on a dramatic comeback in Pennsylvania, which hasn't backed a Republican for president in 20 years.
While Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado are still officially listed as McCain target states, two top strategists and advisers tell CNN that the situation in those states looks increasingly bleak. Iowa and New Mexico always have been viewed as difficult races, but the similar assessment of Colorado reflects a dramatic shift for a campaign that had long counted on the state.
"Gone," was the word one top McCain insider used to describe those three states.
This source said while the polls in Colorado remain close, he and most others in the operation were of the opinion that the Obama campaign and its allies have a far superior ground/turnout operation and "most of us have a hard time counting on Colorado."
Campaign manager Rick Davis is among the dissenters, believing the state remains within reach, several sources in and close to the McCain campaign say.

[Claibo]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3109/2778730749_fe03b410df_o.jpg

[Smokestack]

Only because Mccains on the top of the Ticket. You cant take a far left leaning republican, and try to balance the ticket with a standard conservative. It just looks fishy. I'd rather have a Romney-Palin ticket, or hell a Paul-Palin ticket. I'd rather have a Palin-Mccain ticket even.

Now, that's some fucked-up terminology we can believe in.

"Far left leaning Republican"? I knew there were some people out there that bought the whole maverick line of BS, but using that term takes the cake. Despite all of that branding, McCain actually votes along Republican lines the lion's share of the time. As a far left leaning Republican, McCain couldn't hold Lincoln Chafee's jockstrap.

"Standard conservative"? She is endemic of why there is a schism in the Republican party, as what once were "standard conservatives" are running for the hills. No, she's the standardbearer of the newer strain of conservatism (if you can even call it that) within the Republican party that fixates on religion, social issues and identity politics. Leaving all of that aside, she was selected not under the pretenses of her standard-ness but because she was supposedly the future of the Republican Party as, reputedly, a reformer.

[smahoo]

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i31/illinoisDemNet/mccain_soLate_round_300x300.png

[Desperado]

Things are getting better!~



Florida GOP: Red With Dismay

Tom Slade, a former Florida GOP chair, was getting about five calls a day last week from fellow Republicans saying the same thing: "Do something." The source of their alarm was the seemingly perilous condition of Sen. John McCain (http://www.newsweek.com/related.aspx?subject=John+McCain)'s campaign in the state. After leading for months in Florida (http://www.newsweek.com/related.aspx?subject=Florida), recent polls show him trailing Sen. Barack Obama by about five points. Much of the reversal, no doubt, stems from the economic crisis. But part of the blame lies with the McCain team itself, according to numerous Florida Republicans. Slade says he's hearing complaints that the campaign isn't coordinating volunteers well and its state director, Arlene DiBenigno, is ineffective. Others say its voter-turnout operation is lagging. (A Florida spokesman for McCain declined to respond to these assertions.) "The campaign is kind of on the ropes," says one GOP strategist who requested anonymity to give a candid assessment. McCain "could lose Florida now, and if he does, it's game over."
Tension has reportedly been mounting between the campaign and state Republicans. Several weeks ago, Florida GOP chair Jim Greer convened a private meeting with both camps to discuss the darkening outlook. News of the gathering, which apparently grew tense, leaked to media. Greer denies any discord, telling NEWSWEEK the point was to "make sure that the ship was on its right course." But a McCain loyalist who was present and also requested anonymity says Greer was just looking out for himself— either by appearing to save the day or "forewarning of a crisis so he couldn't be blamed."
Then there's Republican Gov. Charlie Crist, whose enthusiasm for McCain, some say, has waned since he was passed over as a veep pick. He recently told reporters that "his foremost responsibility" is governing his state and that he was eager to help the Arizona senator "when I have time." Then about a week ago, he went to Disney World instead of a McCain rally. Crist tells NEWSWEEK that worries about his commitment are unfounded. "I couldn't be more enthusiastic," he says. "I love John McCain, and I'm doing all I can" to help him. Last Friday, he joined the candidate at rallies in Miami and Melbourne. Unfortunately, another distraction emerged that day: one of McCain's top fundraisers in the state, Harry Sargeant III, was accused of overcharging the government for fuel deliveries in Iraq by his contracting company. (A lawyer for Sargeant has denied the allegations.)

http://www.newsweek.com/id/164509

[taters]

Here we go again.

It wasn't "pro-America" this time, though, ... (He even gave her a chance to correct herself.)

yzeGtPeQZbs

Those pesky darkies. I mean, those pesky "Democrats" moving down from DC.

The racist backtracking is fucking delicious. Seriously, fucking great.


"real virginia' like 'Real Americans" ie "white Americans".

[Nosebuckle]

The racist backtracking is fucking delicious. Seriously, fucking great.


"real virginia' like 'Real Americans" ie "white Americans".

Yep, must be racist to believe outside-the-beltway Virginia identifies more with the South. When you shut your eyes and squeeze them with your fingers, do you see burning crosses?

[taters]

Yep, must be racist to believe outside-the-beltway Virginia identifies more with the South. When you shut your eyes and squeeze them with your fingers, do you see burning crosses?


Of course, thats what she meant, she didnt mean the large well known older DC african american population that has been emmigrating from DC south to Virginia over recent years....of course she didnt mean that. What kind of southern virginia republican would ever say or mean something like that? Thats just crazy.

[BIG PIZZLE]

Lou Dobbs just called it for Obama.

[URFloorMatt]

The racist backtracking is fucking delicious. Seriously, fucking great.


"real virginia' like 'Real Americans" ie "white Americans".

As someone from Virginia, I can say that most people outside of NoVa do look at it that way and probably didn't think anything of her statement. (Though, question whether people in Richmond, which are overwhelmingly Democratic, or people in Newport News/Hampton Roads, which are significantly Democratic, think so ill of NoVa.)

If there wasn't a different between Real Virginia and Northern Virginia, then the phrase "Northern Virginia" wouldn't exist in the first place, and it's distinctly a creation of people who are from Northern Virginia. The "Northern" qualifier is, put simply, an outright manifestation of liberal/urban disgust with being perceived as from a rural, Southern state. So much for "Jewel of the South," I suppose.

That said, 20% of Virginians now live in Fairfax County alone, which is solidly NoVa and solidly Democratic. Personally, as Jon Stewart skewered all night last night on TDS, I'm just sick and tired of people trying to divide the country up into who is and who isn't pro-America enough to be "real." Virginia is going full-tilt blue this election because we've had just about enough of all the identity politics nonsense.

[Mustard]

Lou Dobbs just called it for Obama.
STOP THE PRESSES!!!

[dadaelus]

Speaking of Virginia...West Virginia that is...

http://wvgazette.com/News/200810180251

More W.Va. voters say machines are switching votes In six cases, Democratic votes flipped to GOP
WINFIELD, W.Va. -- Three Putnam County voters say electronic voting machines changed their votes from Democrats to Republicans when they cast early ballots last week. This is the second West Virginia county where voters have reported this problem. Last week, three voters in Jackson County told The Charleston Gazette their electronic vote for "Barack Obama" kept flipping to "John McCain".
By Paul J. Nyden (http://wvgazette.com/News/contact/cwalqra+jitnmrggr+pbz+return=/News/200810180251)
Staff writer

WINFIELD, W.Va. -- Three Putnam County voters say electronic voting machines changed their votes from Democrats to Republicans when they cast early ballots last week.
This is the second West Virginia county where voters have reported this problem. Last week, three voters in Jackson County told The Charleston Gazette their electronic vote for "Barack Obama" kept flipping to "John McCain".
In both counties, Republicans are responsible for overseeing elections. Both county clerks said the problem is isolated.
They also blamed voters for not being more careful.
"People make mistakes more than machines," said Jackson County Clerk Jeff Waybright.

[FarEastFornicator]

How the hell does a computer program or electric machine "flip" a vote. I want to see some video of this shit.

I can image in my head a disaster in voting machine failure in Florida and a McCain win declaration by the governor. I can image the news covering the story and yet I don't see any people forming mobs or starting riots.

[Axel]

How the hell does a computer program or electric machine "flip" a vote.Oh yes, that would be totally impossible.

What are you smoking, mxman?

[Archangel]

REAL AMERICANS.


http://memewatch.com/thelist/archives/pix/morans.jpg

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that they're voting for the GOP.

[kid_vidrio]

How the hell does a computer program or electric machine "flip" a vote. I want to see some video of this shit.


5WMG34cv0zM

[Smokestack]

As someone from Virginia, I can say that most people outside of NoVa do look at it that way and probably didn't think anything of her statement. (Though, question whether people in Richmond, which are overwhelmingly Democratic, or people in Newport News/Hampton Roads, which are significantly Democratic, think so ill of NoVa.)

If there wasn't a different between Real Virginia and Northern Virginia, then the phrase "Northern Virginia" wouldn't exist in the first place, and it's distinctly a creation of people who are from Northern Virginia. The "Northern" qualifier is, put simply, an outright manifestation of liberal/urban disgust with being perceived as from a rural, Southern state. So much for "Jewel of the South," I suppose.

That said, 20% of Virginians now live in Fairfax County alone, which is solidly NoVa and solidly Democratic. Personally, as Jon Stewart skewered all night last night on TDS, I'm just sick and tired of people trying to divide the country up into who is and who isn't pro-America enough to be "real." Virginia is going full-tilt blue this election because we've had just about enough of all the identity politics nonsense.

Totally in agreement on your last paragraph. At the end of the day, there really are no politically homogeneous states. Western Washington vs. Eastern Washington, metro New York vs. Upstate New York, Eastern Pennsylvania vs. Western Pennsylvania, Austin vs. the rest of Texas, etc. etc. These demographic make-ups have existed and evolved for quite some time now and the assertion that some are real Americans and some are America haters is stupid identity politics.

[Desperado]

Austin vs. the rest of Texas

QFT

[Limp]

QFT
Austin is pretty gay....

[Limp]

http://i406.photobucket.com/albums/pp147/mythingsonphotobucket/b0efa99f.gif

[freegood]

As for the media, they're giving McCain a free pass on Ayers and the robo calls. It's in their interest to report conflict and drama. They would win if the election were close.


CNN...the bastion of the elite liberal media agenda lobs Palin softballs.

Palin uses the Plumber to call Obama socialist on CNN (http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/zontv/2008/10/palin_uses_the_plumber_to_call.html)

Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin gave her first interview to CNN Tuesday, and it is hard to say which was the bigger disappointment: the fact that she was still trafficking in Joe-McCarthy-like smears against Barack Obama, or the fact that correspondent Drew Griffin mainly let her get away with it.

CNN called the interview “wide ranging,” but I would call it rambling, with Palin driving the bus while Griffin looked on, nodding and smiling for the most part.

Here was the money moment: “Is Barack Obama a socialist?” Griffin asked.

“I'm not going to call him a socialist,” Palin said. “But as Joe the plumber has suggested, in fact he came right out and said it, it sounds like socialism to him. And he speaks for so many Americans who are quite concerned now after hearing finally what Barack Obama's true intentions are with his tax and economic plan.”

CNN has done exemplary campaign reporting since December, better than any other news division on TV at times, but this interview was not one of its better moments. In some ways, in fact, it served as a reminder of how focused and forceful ABC’s Charles Gibson and CBS’s Katie Couric were in controlling their time with Palin and helping American voters get a measure of the candidate.

Palin was allowed to launch into a long talking point about how Obama’s statement about “redistributing the wealth” is the very definition of socialism. At least, it’s the definition according to Joe the Plumber, the plumber without a plumbing license who doesn’t pay taxes and has suddenly become an expert on socialism.

And the CNN correspondent did little to rein her in.

Typical of the kind of soft, take-it-run-with-it questions that Griffin served up was this one on experience: “You are the only person in the race with executive experience….”

“That’s a good point about experience,” Palin replied brightly. We don’t like to toot our own horns…but I do have more executive experience that Barack Obama does.” And off she was on all the great things she has done as mayor and governor.

She was also given plenty of room to bash her vice presidential opponent, Joe Biden, for comments he made that Obama might be tested internationally in the early days of his presidency. Although she did wind up using the rope to hang herself when she spun out a strange scenario in which she imagined Obama sitting down to talk with Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, and suddenly we are faced with an international crisis.

But she recovered well enough to use the moment to issue a challenge.

“Ask your bosses,” she commanded of Griffin, “Why does Joe Biden get such a pass? …. If I’d a said that (what he said about Obama possibly being tested), you guys would have clobbered me.”

“You’re right,” Griffin said, essentially agreeing with her complaint that the press was treating her unfairly.

To be fair, Griffin did ask her about comments she made saying some parts of the country are “more American” than others.

Her response: “I certainly don't want that interpreted as one area being more patriotic or more American than another. If that's the way it has come across, I apologize.”

The non-apology apology – apologizing for any misunderstanding not what she said.

Griffin also queried her on a recent ethics finding that went against her in Alaska. And he did try to very gently point out a contradiction or two in Palin’s comments.

After she got through pounding away at the evils of “big government” and urging “government to get out of the way and let the private sector do what it does best,” the CNN reporter did point out that McCain supports most of the government intervention in the marketplace now being pushed by the Bush administration.

But Palin, ignoring the contradiction in her comments, replied, “I beg to differ with that.” And then, she was given a wide open field to say that while McCain has supported the “crisis” infusion of cash, he is not for spending more money the way the “Democrats are.”

Unlike Couric or Gibson, Griffin did nothing to try and force her back to the points of contradiction. At one point, he asked her if she felt frustrated at the way some in the press “mocked” her and made it hard for her to get her message out.

“I’m getting my message out right now,” she said.

Indeed, she was -- allowed to simultaneously try to link Obama to socialism and then act like she was taking the high road with Joe the Plumber doing the dirty work for her while CNN’s correspondent looked on.

[Smokestack]

AqV3AXjqP0w

[Morfin]

Palin: God will do the right thing on election day

FINDLAY, Ohio (CNN) –- In an interview posted online Wednesday, Sarah Palin told Dr. James Dobson of “Focus on the Family” that she is confident God will do “the right thing for America” on Nov. 4.
Link (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/)

I guess the question, come November 5th, will be: Sarah, since your omnipotent God deemed the "right thing" to be Obama winning the election, how do you feel knowing that He believed you and McCain winning the election to be the "wrong thing"?

[Desperado]

This bitch is fucking crazy....


Palin: God will do the right thing on election day (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/22/palin-god-will-do-the-right-thing-on-election-day/)
Posted: 10:44 AM ET

From CNN Political Producer Peter Hamby (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/tag/cnn-political-producer-peter-hamby/)
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/10/22/art.palin.10.9.jpg Gov. Palin told James Dobson that God will do 'the right thing' on election day.

http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/2.0/mosaic/base_skins/baseplate/corner_wire_BL.gif

FINDLAY, Ohio (CNN) –- In an interview posted online (http://www.citizenlink.org/clspecialalert/A000008476.cfm) Wednesday, Sarah Palin told Dr. James Dobson of “Focus on the Family” that she is confident God will do “the right thing for America” on Nov. 4.
Dobson asked the vice presidential hopeful if she is concerned about John McCain’s sagging poll numbers, but Palin stressed that she was “not discouraged at all.”
“To me, it motivates us, makes us work that much harder,” she told the influential Christian leader, whose radio show reaches tens of millions of listeners daily. “And it also strengthens my faith because I know at the end of the day putting this in God’s hands, the right thing for America will be done, at the end of the day on Nov. 4.”
Dobson praised Palin's opposition to abortion rights, to which the governor affirmed that she is “hardcore pro-life.”
She said giving birth to her son Trig, who has Down syndrome, has given her the opportunity “to be walking the walk and not just talking the talk” in her long-standing opposition to abortion.
Dobson — who has never been warm to McCain — asked Palin if her “private conversations” with the Republican nominee had revealed a true commitment to the Republican party’s pro-life platform.
Palin assured Dobson: “John McCain is solidly there on those solid planks in our platform that build the right agenda for America.”
She also thanked her supporters — including Dobson, who said he and his wife were asking “for God’s intervention” on election day — for their prayers of support.
“It is that intercession that is so needed,” she said. “And so greatly appreciated. And I can feel it too, Dr. Dobson. I can feel the power of prayer, and that strength that is provided through our prayer warriors across this nation. And I so appreciate it.”
The interview was taped on Monday by phone while Palin was campaigning in Colorado Springs, where “Focus on the Family” is headquartered.

[jasonclark]

Those are the kinds of things that she says, that's killing the campaign. She speaks just like a lot of the women I'm around daily... w/out thinking.

I would love to see her response if someone asks her that after the election.

[jasonclark]

She is crazy, but I can't watch her w/out wanting to spray on her glasses!

[Archangel]

God hates hillbillies.


Especially those that keep abusing His name.

[BIG PIZZLE]

Here's a good article.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2008-10-13/why-iraq-hates-biden/


Salameh Nematt
Info RSS Salameh Nematt is the International Editor of The Daily Beast. He is the former Washington Bureau Chief for Al Hayat International Arab daily, where he reported on U.S. foreign policy, the war in Iraq, and the U.S. drive for democratization in the broader Middle East. He has also written extensively on regional and global energy issues and their political implications.

To counter a racist remark, McCain suggests that the opposite of “Arab” is “decent family man,” which only compounds the insult.“Billionaires, bombers and belly dancers,” is how television stereotypes Arabs, according to Jack Shaheen, author of several books about the negative stereotyping of Arabs and Arab-Americans. The professor emeritus of mass communication at Southern Illinois University surveyed more than 900 film appearances of Arab characters. Of those, only a dozen were positive and 50 could be considered balanced. Shaheen writes: “seen through Hollywood’s distorted lenses, Arabs look different and threatening.

”While John McCain was answering questions from voters at an event in Minnesota on Friday, Gayle Quinnell took the microphone and called Barack Obama an Arab, saying she could not trust him. McCain looked stricken and shook his head. He took the microphone from her and said, “No, ma’am. He’s a decent family man, [a] citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues.

”God forbid that Obama should be an Arab, McCain seemed to be saying. Sure, he’s a shady person with a funny name, palling around with terrorists like Bill Ayers, and his father’s name is Hussein. He may well be a covert Muslim. But to accuse him of being a covert Arab? No, ma’am, he’s a decent family man!

For about four million Arab-Americans, and 300 million Arabs—and I happen to be one—McCain’s response to a voter “accusing” Obama of being an Arab must have come as a complete shock. Instead of rejecting the notion that being an Arab is a pejorative term, the Arizona senator, by denying that Obama is an Arab, succeeded in insulting millions of Arabs and Arab-Americans.

As a Jordanian living and working in the US for the past six years, I have never felt discriminated against because of my ethnicity, or origin, though I did hear occasionally of “ethnic profiling” of Arab-Americans around the country.

Watching TV on Saturday, I felt personally insulted, for the first time. I would have probably brushed it off had it been a Rush Limbaugh type or some bigot on the fringes who delivered the insult. But it came from someone who could very well become president of the United States.

An interview with Quinnell conducted directly after the event and published on the website Donklephant shows that she still believes Obama is an Arab, and she has been actively communicating this to potential voters through fliers and phone calls while volunteering at a McCain campaign office.

Hisham Melhem, Washington bureau chief for the Arab satellite channel Al-Arabiya, and an Arab-American, said he was angry with some people “behaving as if being an Arab is an insult, and using negative stereotypes of Arabs in an attempt to undermine Obama’s campaign.” He told The Daily Beast that by talking about whether Obama may be a secret Muslim or an Arab, some people are raising doubts about him even as they deny the rumors. “It is like when Hillary said, ‘as far as I know, he’s not a Muslim,’ or when she said she was 'not going to question his patriotism,’ she is in effect, raising doubts by implication.

”Melhem argues that McCain is responsible for raising such doubts: “When McCain asks ‘who is the real Obama,’ he’s implying that what we see is a lie”—that there is a different Obama behind the veneer of the nice, sophisticated, decent person he comes across as to many Americans. McCain is “contributing to a dangerously negative atmosphere of divisions with not so subtle racist overtones.” And when Sarah Palin says Obama is “not like us, who believe America is good,” she’s accusing Obama of being a risk, of harboring a hidden anti-American agenda.

On Friday, Georgia Democrat Rep. John Lewis issued a statement condemning the "negative tone" of the McCain-Palin ticket for promoting the same “atmosphere of hate” as Alabama governor and arch-segregationist George Wallace did when he ran for president in 1972. “Senator McCain and Governor Palin are playing with fire, and if they are not careful that fire will consume us all."

An outraged McCain said the remarks, made by one of his campaign advisers, were "shocking, and beyond the pale."

Edmond Ghareeb, an academic who has written a book called Split Vision on the lopsided negative coverage of Arabs in the media, said McCain appeared to be trying to dissociate himself from some of the incendiary statements about Obama. However, “some of his attack ads appear to be making a subliminal link between Obama’s race and terrorism”—an equally dangerous implication.

On the Obama “is an Arab” remark, Ghareeb said he hoped McCain would have explained that “there is nothing wrong with being an Arab. It should not be an issue. Arab-Americans are entitled to run for president just like every other American,” and then mentioned presidential candidate Ralph Nader, who’s an Arab-American, as well as many members of Congress and other prominent figures.

Clovis Maksoud, former Arab League ambassador to the UN, described the “Arab” comment at the election event as “despicable and dangerously provocative,” accusing McCain of becoming “a prisoner of his party’s most extreme elements.” Writing Monday in the leading Lebanese Arab daily Annahar, Maksoud pointed out that shouts of “kill him” and “treason” whenever Obama’s name is mentioned at recent McCain rallies are “expressions of entrenched racism and bigotry among a minority of conservatives.

”A nationwide poll by Zogby International released September 18 shows that among likely Arab-American voters in November’s election, Obama holds a 21-point lead (54-33) over McCain. The survey found that dissatisfaction with the domestic and foreign policy performance of the Bush administration is eroding the Republican Party base among a majority of Arab-American voters.

The title of Shaheen’s latest book, Guilty: Hollywood’s Verdict on Arabs After 9/11 (2008), says it all. And a bumper sticker I spotted in Virginia the other day says it more crudely: “President Barack Hussein Obama? Are you f***in’ kidding me?!”

[Archangel]

Yeah, I said that shit more than a week ago.

On the other, I find it interesting that "decent, upstanding family man" is the opposite of "Arab"

[BIG PIZZLE]

So did Colin Powel. Inside the longstanding feud between Colin Powell and Christian right leader James Dobson.

After Colin Powell endorsed Barack Obama on Meet the Press, Sarah Palin was interviewed by Christian right leader James Dobson on his Focus on the Family radio show. Though Palin did not mention Powell, she attacked Obama as a socialist by referencing his now famous encounter with Joe “The Plumber” Wurlzerbacher.“Joe The Plumber, you gotta hand it to him,” Palin told Dobson. “He's the one who got finally Barack Obama to say what he’d do with redistributing wealth and raising taxes. And Joe The Plumber said that certainly sounds like socialism to him, and I appreciate Joe having the boldness to get out there and ask the question.

”Powell’s endorsement and Palin’s appearance on Dobson’s show are not entirely unconnected. Dobson has long been one of the banes of Powell’s political life―and the right’s warm embrace of Palin is part of what drove Powell away from McCain.When Powell endorsed Obama, he offered a litany of factors, from Obama’s “transformational” potential to “steadiness.” But Powell, a military man and self-described “Rockefeller Republican,” also declared his disappointment with the “rightward shift” in the Republican Party.

There is a little understood, rancorous subplot behind this vague remark: Powell’s war with the religious right. That conflict began years before the current presidential campaign and, if Powell plays a role in an Obama administration, will almost certainly extend beyond it.

Over a decade ago, when General Powell, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, emerged as the Republican Party’s most popular figure, James Dobson targeted him, fearing his political ascendancy might spell doom for the party’s anti-abortion wing. Dobson’s tactics ranged from threatening conservative movement leaders who dared to praise Powell’s political potential, to devoting an entire broadcast of his top-rated radio show to attacking Powell’s advocacy of condom use. Dobson and his minions laid the groundwork for Powell’s castigation from the Republican Party. Yet by helping to force Powell into the wilderness, Dobson may have also provoked his momentous act of political vengeance.

While Dobson has not yet commented on Powell’s endorsement, his former Washington lobbyist and ally, Gary Bauer, dismissed it as an irrational act of racial solidarity. “Powell’s endorsement is nonsensical, and it leaves open the question of just how big a factor race was in his decision,” Bauer wrote in his daily email blast to supporters. Bauer, who now leads his own outfit, American Values, spent much of the 1990s building Dobson’s Family Research Council into the one of the most formidable Christian right groups inside the Beltway.

Back during the run-up to the 1996 presidential primaries, when some movement conservatives advanced the notion of Powell as the GOP’s most viable presidential nominee, Dobson moved to intimidate and silence the general’s boosters. Among Powell’s fans was the ardently anti-abortion Jack Kemp, who called him “Republican on almost every issue.” Neoconservative former Education Secretary William Bennett repeatedly praised Powell on the pages of the National Review, while Weekly Standard editor William Kristol argued in an editorial for his magazine that Powell was the only figure who could defeat the increasingly popular Bill Clinton. Already annoyed by the swell of movement support for the pro-choice Powell, Dobson was furious when Christian Coalition President Ralph Reed refused to condemn Powell’s possible candidacy during his appearance on This Week with David Brinkley.

Immediately, Dobson faxed a five-page letter to Reed accusing him of unholy motives. “Is power the motivator of the great crusade?” Dobson asked the fresh-faced operator. “If so, it will sour and turn to bile in your mouth… This posture may elevate your influence in Washington, but it is unfaithful to the principles we are duty-bound as Christians to defend.” Bauer copied the letter and blasted it out to other Powell-friendly conservatives, including Bennett, who Dobson baselessly accused of being “pro-abortion.” Shaken by Dobson’s jeremiad, Reed hastily composed a letter suggesting that attacks from the Christian right would only provoke Powell into running. The situation “required a delicate balancing act,” Reed insisted, according to Dobson’s official biography. Reed’s advice fell on deaf ears. When another moderate Republican, Sen. Bob Dole, won the GOP nomination, Dobson objected. Together with Bauer, Dobson summoned Dole to a private meeting where they harangued the Senate Majority Leader for three hours with their demands. Unaccustomed to being lectured and threatened, Dole stormed out. As soon as he learned that Dole had given Powell a prominent speaking role at the Republican National Convention―a signal that Powell would serve in his administration―Dobson transferred his support from Dole to his longtime friend, Howard Phillips, a far-right stalwart running under the banner of the so-called US Taxpayers Party. Dobson’s snub deprived Dole of crucial movement enthusiasm among evangelicals, contributing at least in small part to his defeat.

After Bauer terminated his hapless campaign for the presidency in 2000―a crusade that will be best remembered for an incident where the elfin candidate fell off a stage backwards flipping pancakes―Bauer inexplicably endorsed John McCain, a sworn enemy of the religious right. Dobson was so infuriated that he broke all contact with his former protégé, according to Dobson’s official biographer Dale Buss, who says the two men did not restore their working relationship until 2004.

In 2000, Dobson lined up behind George W. Bush, the beginning of a special relationship that afforded Dobson weekly conference calls with Karl Rove’s underlings. Dobson soon leveraged his White House influence against his old enemy, Colin Powell, now elevated as secretary of state. Powell had roused his ire during an appearance at an MTV forum in February 2002, where, before an international audience of young people, he emphasized the importance of condoms in combating the global AIDS epidemic. “Forget about taboos, forget about conservative ideas with respect to what you should tell young people about,” the secretary of state replied when asked about the Vatican’s opposition to condoms. “It's the lives of young people that are put at risk by unsafe sex, and therefore, protect yourself.

”The following day, the Focus on the Family chairman fired off an angry press release. “Colin Powell is the secretary of state, not the secretary of health. He is talking about a subject he doesn't understand,” Dobson said. Then, he spent much of an appearance on Larry King Live railing against Powell, calling his condom advocacy “most uninformed.” Finally, Dobson devoted an entire broadcast of his radio show to berating Powell, while Bauer took to the media to demand that Powell “be taken to the woodshed.” By this time, White House switchboards overflowed with indignant calls from Focus on the Family’s supporters.The day after Dobson’s broadcast, Bush delivered a speech directly contradicting Powell’s position on condoms. "When our children face a choice between self-restraint and self-destruction, government should not be neutral,” Bush declared, proposing a whopping $135 million budget for abstinence education while pointedly omitting any mention of condoms as an effective measure against sexually transmitted diseases. The Christian right celebrated Bush’s speech both as a victory for their movement and a defeat for Colin Powell.

Next, Focus on the Family demanded the ouster of an allegedly gay employee of USAID, the key foreign aid agency, which operates under the guidance of the secretary of state. “It was over the top, it was outrageous,” said former USAID director Andrew Natsios. Despite his objections, Natsios found himself authorizing a multi-million dollar grant in 2004 to an abstinence education group founded by two of Dobson’s top staffers, the Children’s AIDS Fund. In approving the funds, Natsios had to overrule a finding by USAID’s technical review panel that the Dobson-linked group was “not suitable for funding.” While USAID turned into a slush fund for Dobson, Powell remained the good soldier, loyal to White House orders. When the Republican primary began, Dobson initially vowed never to vote for McCain, tarring him during a 2007 radio broadcast as a closet liberal hostile to movement goals. But Bauer, who has become McCain’s top Christian right surrogate, lobbied Dobson to change his position. On his show this June, Dobson gave a little ground, announcing, “While I’m not endorsing John McCain, the possibility is there that I might.” He set only one condition: McCain must not nominate a “pro-abortion” politician as his running mate.

Powell might well have supported McCain’s bid for the presidency had things turned out differently. McCain yearned to select his friend, the turncoat Democrat, Sen. Joseph Lieberman, as his running mate. Lieberman, who shared Powell’s positions on domestic policy, would have made the Republican ticket the most moderate since the pre-Goldwater era. But opposition from the Christian right―especially from Dobson―threatened a fight on the floor of the Republican convention, rendering the Lieberman option impossible. And so McCain chose Sarah Palin.

One day after McCain’s announcement, on September 2, Dobson hosted his top aides, including Bauer, to discuss Palin. “This is electric for us,” Dobson exclaimed, revealing that he had sent the Alaska governor a letter months earlier congratulating her for not aborting “that little Down Syndrome baby.” Tony Perkins, who replaced Bauer as the FRC’s president, remarked that he had just returned from Alaska to assess Palin’s culture war credentials. “This was a tremendous strategic achievement by the McCain campaign,” Perkins said. “He has shown that he listens.”Dobson was finally ready to complete his 180-degree reversal. “I am moving closer and closer to being able to―I’ll say it now,” Dobson declared. “If I went into the polling booth today, I would pull the lever for John McCain.”

Powell cited it as a principal motivation for endorsing Obama. “It's not what the American people are looking for,” Powell said. “And the party has moved even further to the right, and Governor Palin has indicated a further rightward shift.”On the day of Powell’s cathartic endorsement, Palin gave an interview to one her most influential allies: James Dobson. During their interview, Dobson assured Palin that he and his closest prayer partners “were rather boldly asking for a miracle with regard to the election this year.” On Election Day, Dobson’s foot soldiers will be on the march for McCain mainly because of Palin. But if their miracle fails to materialize, and Colin Powell advises the new President Obama as he has said he would, then the culture war against Powell will enter a new phase.

[freegood]

God hates hillbillies.


Especially those that keep abusing His name.

And what, pray tell, would you cry out while boning your cousin?

[Limp]

And what, pray tell, would you cry out while boning your cousin?
DAAAD! YOU WERE RIGHT, SHE IS GUD!

[Desperado]

A very well written article regarding McCain's problems with financing, I apologize ahead of time for the length of the text. However this was a good read.


No cavalry coming for McCain

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/afp/20081022/capt.cps.nyy82.221008131623.photo01.photo.default-512x376.jpg?x=213&y=156&xc=1&yc=1&wc=410&hc=300&q=100&sig=ioj2qIdRCf9YjiTn3kANlw-- (http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Barack-Obama-nuclear-war-John-McCain/photo//081022/photos_ts_wl_afp/9216e06011bb3f5d52b72f9a77d6d5e2//s:/politico/20081022/pl_politico/14811)AFP/Getty Images – John McCain, seen here at a rally in Moon Township, Pennsylvania, has raised the specter of nuclear war …


For the GOP, the cavalry apparently isn’t coming.
Republicans attuned to conservative third-party efforts say that with less than two weeks to go until Election Day, the prospects for any 11th-hour, anti-Obama ad campaigns are highly unlikely.
Many in the party, including inside the McCain campaign, have held out hope that a deep-pocketed benefactor would emerge to bankroll ads in the campaign’s final days — spots that might, for example, resurrect the most incendiary clips from the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
But thanks largely to lack of passion for McCain within the conservative base, diminished hopes that he can win and a sharp decline in the stock market that has badly pinched donors’ pockets, veteran Republican operatives say it appears almost certain that what could be the most damaging line of attack against the Democratic nominee will be left on the shelf.
“It’s Oct. 21, and if you can’t say it by Oct. 21, then chances are you’re not going to say anything,” said Chris LaCivita, the strategist behind the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth in 2004. LaCivita has been working for a new conservative third-party group this year, the American Issues Project.
That group, known in the political community as AIP, was eyed by some in the GOP as a potential major player in taking on Obama. It spent nearly $3 million in key states in August on a tough ad tying the Illinois senator to '60s-era domestic terrorist William Ayers and promised additional spots in the fall campaign.
That never happened.
“Donors just weren’t willing to give the money,” explains LaCivita. “They were hurt badly in the market crash and they were always concerned about how McCain would react.”
The timing of the financial crisis couldn’t have been worse for Republicans. When Lehman Brothers went under on Sept. 15, McCain was tied or in the margin of error in national polls. But when his poll numbers fell along with the stock market, wealthy conservatives saw little reason to invest their shrunken holdings on what was far from a sure thing.
“Republican donors, at the end of day, aren’t stupid,” said another Republican familiar with third-party activities this cycle. “They’re not going to throw good money after bad.”
And it wasn’t just the economic bad news — McCain did little to help his own cause.
Two Republican sources involved in third-party groups said the Arizona senator’s second debate performance in early October, a pivotal moment in the campaign when he and running mate Sarah Palin had begun to ratchet up their attacks, was deflating to some donors.
These sources said that after McCain didn’t use the Nashville debate to aggressively go after Obama, one prominent conservative financier remarked: “I’m not going to bother investing anymore.”
And donors were always fearful they would be rebuked by their party’s notoriously unpredictable nominee if they underwrote a major effort.
“McCain never gave a real wink and said, ‘Go ahead, boys,’” explained one operative close to a third-party group this year.
Another GOP strategist lamented that McCain lacked a core group of rich friends who were willing to part with their money. Harold Simmons, a Dallas billionaire, underwrote the entire cost of the initial Ayers ad for AIP — but his investment wasn’t matched by other wealthy Republicans.
“In 2004, Bush had a cadre of donors who wanted to see him succeed,” said this source, citing “oil guys.”

“But McCain doesn’t have that, and this is where it really hurts.”

One of those oil guys was T. Boone Pickens. But Pickens, who played a major role in funding the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, sat out this race, preferring to spend his money promoting a massive clean energy campaign.
For most of the donor pool for a robust third-party effort, this cycle appears to have come down to dollars and cents. Many, like Las Vegas casino mogul Sheldon Adelson, saw their portfolios slide, reducing their interest greatly in practicing their political hobby on the side.
Adelson had been counted on as the chief benefactor of Freedom’s Watch, a group originally billed as the right-wing equivalent of MoveOn.org (http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/politico/pl_politico/storytext/14811/29586097/SIG=10jp1la59/*http://MoveOn.org).
But sources say Adelson has pulled the plug on the group, and that it will only wind up spending $25 million to $30 million this cycle — a far cry from their original vision.
Freedom’s Watch had to greatly scale back its ambitions, never aired a single ad in the presidential race and has an uncertain future after the election.
In another contrast with 2004 and the Swift Boat Veterans, there was never money lined up in advance to fund a serious effort against Obama.
“You’ve got to have a sustained campaign,” said Greg Mueller, a conservative GOP strategist who did the PR for the Swift Boat operation, noting that it went up in late-July and stayed on the air. “On either side that never really materialized. Everybody was sort of nibbling around edges.”
Another operative close to third-party groups said part of the problem was what didn’t happen after AIP broadcast its Ayers ad in August.
The media coverage of the spot, which begin airing during the Democratic convention, was far less pointed than had been expected, depriving conservatives of the sort of echo effect they enjoyed against John F. Kerry in 2004.
“It’s about spurring the mainstream media to do the right thing,” said this source, meaning to drive both free replays of the ads and subsequent stories about the underlying charges being made. “The media did cover the fact that, hey, maybe John Kerry wasn’t completely honest about his service in Vietnam.”
But the Ayers ad got little pickup, overwhelmed by Obama’s stadium acceptance speech, McCain’s shocking selection of Sarah Palin and then the Republican convention.
“It’s like an initial stock offering. If it doesn’t make somewhat of a run, people aren’t as quick to invest in the next one.”
There will be some additional anti-Obama spots aired before Election Day. Mueller promised another wave of ads for clients targeting the Democrat on judicial issues and abortion.
And there remains the remote possibility that a wealthy Republican will emerge to put down some cash in the final days.
“Some guy could wake up and call me and say, ‘Here is $20 million,’” LaCivita said. “But I don’t see it happening.”
And in a matter of days, that won’t be possible.
An operative working for a third-party group said they were told by Denver stations — where candidates and outside groups are airing ads in competitive presidential, senatorial and congressional races — a week ago to get in their buys because there were not going to be slots available much longer.
“They said, ‘Get in your orders through the election,’” said this source.
“Time is drying up but not gone,” said Evan Tracey, who heads the ad-monitoring Campaign Media Analysis Group. “For ads to work, they need repetition, so if anyone is going to get involved, they either need a very strong (and unique) message or some kind of national footprint to have any impact.”
By law, campaigns are not allowed to coordinate with outside entities. But McCain aides don’t seem hopeful that help is on the way or interested in sending any signals. “I have no idea what’s going on with third-party groups,” is all Rick Davis, McCain’s campaign manager, would say this week.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081022/pl_politico/14811

[Archangel]

Has Pax posted this already?

Because it's funny:

http://www.thepaincomics.com/Why%20Are%20You%20Voting.jpg

[Desperado]

McCain says Palin did great on our Couric interviews hahahahaha.... this old bastard doesnt even know where hes at anymore. Also the last time I checked, her popularity in Alaska had dropped like 30%


McCain ‘amazed’ by Palin treatment

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/afp/20081018/capt.cps.nxy75.181008130545.photo04.photo.default-512x359.jpg?x=213&y=149&xc=1&yc=1&wc=409&hc=286&q=100&sig=JbDdf8q2VIW1Z3x2kZRFcg-- (http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/October-17-Alaska-Governor-Sarah-Palin-West-Chester2C-Ohio-Saturday-Night-Live/photo//081018/photos_wl_afp/3b30a8687ae4d4c72af4f29202190958//s:/politico/20081022/pl_politico/14820)AFP/Getty Images – Republican vice presidential candidate Alaska Governor Sarah Palin speaks during a campaign rally October …




John McCain called out fellow Republicans who have questioned running mate Sarah Palin’s credentials Tuesday.
“What’s their problem?” McCain asked during an interview with radio host Don Imus.
“She is a governor, the most popular governor in America,” McCain said. “I think she is the most qualified of any that has run recently for vice president.”
“I’m amazed. I’m amazed. Which is better? Serve 35 years in the United States Senate and say you’ve got to divide Iraq into three different countries, or be governor of a state and a reformer and give people their tax dollars back and bring about reform in the way that your state does business? Which is better?”
Several leading conservatives, including columnists Kathleen Parker of National Review and David Brooks of the New York Times, have questioned McCain’s judgment in selecting Palin.
Parker called Palin “out of her league” in a September column urging the Alaska governor to drop out of the race. Brooks, meanwhile, called Palin “a fatal cancer to the Republican Party” during a forum hosted by The Atlantic magazine earlier this month.
McCain dismissed their criticisms and credited Palin for energizing the conservative base in a year in which the GOP faces “a stiff headwind.”
“She has ignited our crowds,” McCain said. “She has a wonderful family, a great husband, great values and she shares my worldview.”
“I’m entertained at the elitist attitude towards a person who is proven leader.”
Looking back on Palin’s early interviews with ABC’s Charles Gibson and CBS’s Katie Couric, McCain said Palin did well and derided the press for asking “gotcha” questions.
“She did a great job in those interviews. If you want to go with the gotcha questions that’s fine, that’s fine, I understand that. I get them all the time,” the Arizona senator said. “It’s easy to make fun of people and ask them gotcha questions. That’s fine. I understand how the game is played. But don’t think the American people buy that baloney.”

[smahoo]

and after the interview, McCain was quoted saying, "Fuck, I wish I didn't have to lie about her anymore."

http://harryallen.info/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/john-mccain2.jpg

[Pax Britannia]

Has this been posted yet? If so apologies but it really made me laugh.

jcrEmSse_o0

[Smokestack]

David Sedaris on undecided voters (http://www.newyorker.com/humor/2008/10/27/081027sh_shouts_sedaris):

I look at these people and can't quite believe that they exist. Are they professional actors? I wonder. Or are they simply laymen who want a lot of attention?
To put them in perspective, I think of being on an airplane. The flight attendant comes down the aisle with her food cart and, eventually, parks it beside my seat. "Can I interest you in the chicken?" she asks. "Or would you prefer the platter of shit with bits of broken glass in it?"
To be undecided in this election is to pause for a moment and then ask how the chicken is cooked.

[Yelram]

David Sedaris on undecided voters (http://www.newyorker.com/humor/2008/10/27/081027sh_shouts_sedaris): (http://www.newyorker.com/humor/2008/10/27/081027sh_shouts_sedaris%29:)
I look at these people and can't quite believe that they exist. Are they professional actors? I wonder. Or are they simply laymen who want a lot of attention?
To put them in perspective, I think of being on an airplane. The flight attendant comes down the aisle with her food cart and, eventually, parks it beside my seat. "Can I interest you in the chicken?" she asks. "Or would you prefer the platter of shit with bits of broken glass in it?"
To be undecided in this election is to pause for a moment and then ask how the chicken is cooked.


It doesnt matter who you vote for, because on about 85% of the issues, they are the same. Global warming, the bailout, even Iraq. Most of the debates consisted of the candidates trying not to agree on issues they agree on. The main difference, Obama looks good on stage, and can speak well.

[Smokestack]

It doesnt matter who you vote for, because on about 85% of the issues, they are the same. Global warming, the bailout, even Iraq. Most of the debates consisted of the candidates trying not to agree on issues they agree on. The main difference, Obama looks good on stage, and can speak well.

Whoa, you just blew my mind. Republicrats, right? Or was it Demopublicans? Anyway, if that's your logic, then quit arguing against Obama and pick the more statesmanly version of the same thing.

[Axel]

McCain/Palin's slogan should be: "Incontinent and Incompetent"

[Pax Britannia]

http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii85/Raptor08_2008/barrelrolljohnjd3.jpg

[Pharon]

Not sure if this has been posted yet, but McCain is kicking ass in Macedonia right now:

http://www.iftheworldcouldvote.com/results

[Limp]

Not sure if this has been posted yet, but McCain is kicking ass in Macedonia right now:

http://www.iftheworldcouldvote.com/results
I'm gonna assign myself a new IP Addy and vote from Iraq 1,000 times for McCain!

[Desperado]

Not sure if this has been posted yet, but McCain is kicking ass in Macedonia right now:

http://www.iftheworldcouldvote.com/results


Pffttt if Greece doesnt recognize them(Macedonia), they dont exist!!!

[Rover]

There have been several polls in the last few days that I think are interesting. I still think it's about a week too early to give polls serious consideration, but now is the time where polls will start to adjust so pollsters can claim, "Aha! I was right, look at my brilliant statistical methods."

The first poll, and I'm sure you'll laugh, is the Nickelodeon Poll that came out yesterday.

Nickelodeon
Obama: 51%
McCain: 49%

Yes, I know kids can't vote and their opinion doesn't matter, even when it comes down to what they want to eat for dinner, but kids are great at one thing: Regurgitating every idea their parents have, no matter how retarded the idea.
------------------------
Obama internal poll of PA:
Obama +2 within the MoE

This poll was leaked to the media and hasn't really picked up any press coverage. You can find it on blogs and the like. I think even DailyKos picked up on it. No link, google it, there isn't anything to the story other than a staffer accidentally released it.
-----------------------
AP (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081022/D93VPI9O0.html)
Obama: 44%
McCain: 43%

Statistically tied. Link just goes to a newstory
-----------------------
IBD/TIPP (http://www.ibdeditorials.com/Polls.aspx?id=309546869309178)
Obama: 45.7%
McCain: 42.0%

IBD was the closest poll in the 2004 election. I think they were off by 0.5%. The most interesting thing in the IBD poll is the age range. McCain was up 10% among 18-24 yr. That seems odd, but they don't mention it in their writeup. The link goes to a good breakdown among ages, religions, classes, regions.
----------------------
Really, I just wanted to discuss the Nickelodeon poll, but I included the others so i wouldn't seem fixated on a poll of kids. The Nickelodeon poll has been right in 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000. And they had Kerry 57% to 43% in 2004.

I think kids are likely to reflect their parents' viewpoint, and aren't really going to be swayed by arguments like: "Obama's tax cuts aren't really tax cuts, but tax credits. And that'll end up giving a welfare check to 45% of the people who don't pay income tax. So the richest 2% are going to be taxed at a higher rate just so Obama can redistribute wealth," or, conversely, whatever the argument is against McCain.

[Genius]

Kids really are idiots. A lot like adults are idiots.

Seriously, these polls really get me thinking about how corrupt our system must be. How is it that almost exactly half of 300 million people end up liking one candidate, and the other half like the other candidate? I know the system is set up that way, but it has to be close to a statistical impossibility that things would be this close, every time. It really starts leading my mind down the conspiracy road.

[ADD]

There have been several polls in the last few days that I think are interesting. I still think it's about a week too early to give polls serious consideration, but now is the time where polls will start to adjust so pollsters can claim, "Aha! I was right, look at my brilliant statistical methods."

The first poll, and I'm sure you'll laugh, is the Nickelodeon Poll that came out yesterday.

Nickelodeon
Obama: 51%
McCain: 49%

Yes, I know kids can't vote and their opinion doesn't matter, even when it comes down to what they want to eat for dinner, but kids are great at one thing: Regurgitating every idea their parents have, no matter how retarded the idea.
------------------------
Obama internal poll of PA:
Obama +2 within the MoE

This poll was leaked to the media and hasn't really picked up any press coverage. You can find it on blogs and the like. I think even DailyKos picked up on it. No link, google it, there isn't anything to the story other than a staffer accidentally released it.
-----------------------
AP (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081022/D93VPI9O0.html)
Obama: 44%
McCain: 43%

Statistically tied. Link just goes to a newstory
-----------------------
IBD/TIPP (http://www.ibdeditorials.com/Polls.aspx?id=309546869309178)
Obama: 45.7%
McCain: 42.0%

IBD was the closest poll in the 2004 election. I think they were off by 0.5%. The most interesting thing in the IBD poll is the age range. McCain was up 10% among 18-24 yr. That seems odd, but they don't mention it in their writeup. The link goes to a good breakdown among ages, religions, classes, regions.
----------------------
Really, I just wanted to discuss the Nickelodeon poll, but I included the others so i wouldn't seem fixated on a poll of kids. The Nickelodeon poll has been right in 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000. And they had Kerry 57% to 43% in 2004.

I think kids are likely to reflect their parents' viewpoint, and aren't really going to be swayed by arguments like: "Obama's tax cuts aren't really tax cuts, but tax credits. And that'll end up giving a welfare check to 45% of the people who don't pay income tax. So the richest 2% are going to be taxed at a higher rate just so Obama can redistribute wealth," or, conversely, whatever the argument is against McCain.


The only poll (http://www.7-election.com/)that matters

[Rover]

It's the 2 party system. The difference between Democrats and Republicans must seem laughable to countries with 20 different political parties. The 2 party system leads to moderation of viewpoints.

2 party government leads to an inability to change anything longterm and remarkable ability to adapt to any crisis.

We've been trying to change Social Security and Medicare for like 30 years. It took 1 year to launch wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Mustard]

Has this been posted yet? If so apologies but it really made me laugh.

jcrEmSse_o0
This was in response to John Murtha (who has since apologized, but still doesn't make up for the sheer ignorance of the statement) who said, "There is no question that western Pennsylvania is a racist area."

I can't believe McCain blew the punchline that badly...

[ADD]

Well he is 206. It probably slipped his mind.

[Mustard]

Maybe he DID get the punchline right, but it was just said in the wrong decade/century/millenium?

[URFloorMatt]

AP (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081022/D93VPI9O0.html)
Obama: 44%
McCain: 43%

Statistically tied. Link just goes to a newstory
-----------------------

As Marc Ambinder has pointed out, this poll massively over-samples evangelicals (http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/10/the_apgfk_poll_evangelical_sur.php). Despite this, Obama still leads--in other words, the election isn't close at all. But, I think that was pretty obvious since Obama's average lead in the daily trackers is up to 7.6% (http://www.electoral-vote.com/).

[BIG PIZZLE]

This may just be media hype to wake up complacent Obama voters. But at this point, I dont understand how Obama can lose. How many new voters turned up at the democratic primaries?

[marquis]

This may just be media hype to wake up complacent Obama voters. But at this point, I dont understand how Obama can lose. How many new voters turned up at the democratic primaries?

more than voted in all the republican primaries

[BIG PIZZLE]

http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/08-us-pres-ge-mvo.php

[heelsguy]

just wondering:

if obama loses by a little--but fairly--will blacks be rioting in the streets a' la the rodney king verdict?

[Muji]

i hope, i need a new tv

[Insomniac]

just wondering:

if obama loses by a little--but fairly--will blacks be rioting in the streets a' la the rodney king verdict?

People will assume it was unfair, and looking at the polling and political climate, it will be hard to call the assumption unjustified.

[Debo]

Debo, you're dodging and weaving, and it's making me impatient. You probably get that feeling too. It's nothing personal. My partisan biases spill into my logic too. It's not about right or wrong, just different.

I am not dodging and weaving from you. I answered everything that you asked me.

I consider Trickle-down the Golden shower upon the majority of taxpayers. The yacht industry might love it though...Those cute catchphrases are common and patronizing.

Demand side relief will help at a time when wage levels have stagnated and a consumer economy devastated from frozen and hard to obtain credit.What about supply-side economics do you disagree with? The top tax bracket dictates the economic activity of the country. When they have more money, they spend more. When they spend more, more goods are consumed. When more goods are consumed, more people are employed to manufacture those goods.

Ah yes, the yacht industry...because rich people buying yachts has zero impact on joe the boat maker. Right? Wrong (http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/kstrasselpw/?id=110010422).

Demand side is all about expected future increases in income. In theory, if I am expecting a $20,000 bonus in January I am going to spend some of my future bonus right now on my credit card. The same is true of a future tax cut.

What happens if you get a smaller raise than you were anticipating? Your spending goes down to pay off the debt that you accumulated in the past.

The only way to permanently change people's spending is to give them more money. You can do this by: A.) cutting their taxes, B.) lowering the rate of inflation, C.) lowering interest rates or D.) Taking from the haves and giving to the havenots.

The notion of trickle-up sounds good and I am sure that it makes people's heart all warm and fuzzy. But it doesn't work. If it did, China's economy wouldn't be showing signs of weakness because ours is in a funk. The same concept is true when you take purchasing power away from the upper income bracket and think that it won't have an effect on the rest of the economy.

And there will be other factors upon the future economy. You'd be hard pressed to find a candidate that can foretell the future. Let's just conveniently forget about all the promises Dubya made when we was candidate.

None of McCain's advisors strike confidence in me. Volker, Jeff Liebman, or Austan Goolsbee do. Does that mean they could predict the future as well? Likely not. Every politician makes promises that they either can't keep or that they have no intention of keeping. Should we talk about Obama's multiple positions on NAFTA? Or how about Clinton's promise to cut taxes for the middle class? (http://www.iht.com/articles/1993/01/15/cut1.php). Sounds familiar, right?

Good economic policy is not about predicting the future and that is my point. Nobody knows for sure what is going to be the new idea that changes the way that the economy works. So why should the government distort the market with tax credits that give certain companies a competitive advantage (e.g., solar, wind, ethanol or the Chevy Volt (http://techblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/10/700-billion-bailout-bill-appar.html))? We are better off letting the private sector try to solve the problem (and make a profit). The private sector has a much better track record at solving problems that the government does. Remember that in the 1980s everyone thought that robots were going to be the next invention to boost productivity. Whoops.

2. Pendulum shifted hard right from 2000-2006. You know it could suck for you in the coming years politically, but it sucked hard core for many Americans that didn't get wage increases and inflated their living standards through imaginary credit or abstract (to them) home equity who now have to pay the piper.

I don't know if Obama is going to be a centrist or whether he'll shift it back hard left. Maybe he'll have a "[This catastrophe] changed everything" moment. But he has shown the intellectual curiosity to weigh the issues and make an informed decision.

Compare this with McCain's gut rush to judgement ranging from Strong Fundamentals (of the American worker...) to his rush to help Congress pass TARP.Who did it suck for? The uneducated? The lazy? Where is the data to back up your claim about wage increases? If you financed a lifestyle that you cannot afford with debt, that is your fault and nobody elses. How the fuck are you going to blame shitty spending habits on the government?

Are good questions is: How are we doing? (http://www.american.com/archive/2008/july-august-magazine-contents/how-are-we-doing)

I love the TARP argument. Whether or not the government did something, we were all going to pay the price. We could either:

A.) Allow the banks to fail. As more and more failed, the further and further we would have come to the abyss. What would you do when the CP market implodes. When big banks (WB, WaMu, RF, STI, etc.) started to impode? What would all of the companies that had cash account there do when their payroll money disappeared? We would all foot this bill.

B.) Allow the banks to fail and society would pay the price through higher interest rates and restricted access to credit.

But I am sure that these factors would not have impacted Main Street, just Wall Street.

Right.

C.) Or we could socialize the cost (in a sense. As I have stated before this isn't socialism) by propping up the banks in an attempt to unfreeze the inter-banking market.

1. It doesn't take a genius to realize that you can't fund two wars that rack up in the trillions while giving away trillion dollar tax cuts.

2. You might get the feeling that I'm dodging the national debt issue, but I can't trust your party for reducing it when Bush has increased discretionary spending, both domestic and military (http://www.slate.com/id/2095237/) every year in office. You know it's not easy. Well, the first step is to police your own party! People have a general idea what they're getting into electing Democrats, especially with Fox News. Do you know what you're getting into?

Bush is the biggest spender since LBJ (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/20767.html)

How the fuck did that happen? It's like that 500lb. fat dude that's trapped in his own room. And Republicans have the gall to claim that Democrats will spend more... Have heart that the debt is at a crushing level where if they did spend more, it'd debase the dollar and leave us in the risk of defaulting on our obligations. I don't know why you are bringing this up. I have been very vocal about my feeling when it comes to Bush's spending record.

What are you going to say when Obama proposes a massive new health care entitlement program? We can't afford the ones that we have now. Are you going to side with The One? Or are you going to scream fiscal responsibility?

If you haven't noticed, the dollar has been on a massive rally lately. There was a bubble in the currency market, and the EUR could be headed back to parity with the USD soon. So much for the weak dollar.

3. Do you honestly think McCain can balance the budget by the end of his first term? Will McCain even run another one? This is crucial because no one will take a lame duck president seriously. No one will believe in a candidate who let his own party and advisors dictate the terms of what type of campaign to run or what Vice Presidential candidate to select.

The data Perotcharts is a very very real statistic. Neither candidate addresses it. Maybe Bob Barr. Bringing it up won't make people vote for McCain instead of Obama though....
As I have stated many times before, the only way that either party is going to balance the budget is to reform and phase out the entitlement programs. Are you in favor of that? The peace-time dividend and the military spending cuts that worked back in the 90s aren't an option right now.

Yeah...just how many people understand basic principles of econ?

I thought your party is about rational actors and people being smart enough to make these big and important decisions on their own. Ownership society and all that. Cramer sez, "Get in the stock market for that pension fund!" Rich dad poor dad dude sez, "Buy that house! It's price never falls!"

As Bush, Paulson, Bernanke, and Greenspan has shown us, the government can game the system hardcore. Nothing they have done recently has been consistent with any of their party dogma. Well they did let Lehman declare bankruptcy in order to draw that proverbial line in the sand. I would say that maybe 5% of society actually knows enough about economics to understand the implimications of what our politicians say. Most people are too busy trying to get their kids to do their homework, they don't give a shit about what Barney Frank said or what Newt Gingrich said.

I will take an ownership society any day of the week because people always act in their own best interest. On the flip side, the government consistantly fucks you because they only care about getting re-elected.

BTW - Cramer is a Democrat. Always has been and always will be.

Please do not try to lump Bush in with the fiscal conservative crowd. He isn't welcome here.

Bernanke, Paulson and Co. saved FRE and FNM because they had implied guarutees from the government. They saved BSC and AIG because they felt like their decline happened to fast and they worried about the systemic risk assocaited with a massive bankruptcy coming out of nowhere (I wish that they just let them fail). And they let LEH fail because everybody saw it coming and they didn't think that they needed to save them. I agree that their save him, don't save them approach was not the best move. But I am not in favor of saving anyone. Hell, I want to see FRE and FNM dissolved.

Everyone is a special interest group. True. But they can only buy favors if the politicians let them. So who is to blame the lobbyst for lobbying or the politician for acting?

When people lose jobs and traders win on abstractions of those lost jobs, sure you could say the "market wins". But those workers will become an "interest group". Those traders sure as hell are.

If you can't control your own party on aggy subsidies or steel tariffs or the Ted Stevens types, then it will be a political zero-sum-game for that pork barrel landgrab. It fuels the populist sentiment that traders and rich elites profitted from the Bush era, and now it's the "people's turn".

When you vote for Conservative politicians who say one thing about reducing spending but will include ridiculous amounts of pork, no liberal will have to justify their choice about "income redistribution". At least Obama is upfront about it. I don't disagree that the big tent strategy utilized by the GOP moved them away from their fiscal conservative platform. That is why I am hoping that a good ass kicking in this election will get them back in gear.

Populism has always been an easy sell. From the days of Ida Tarbull and the muckrackers to everyone blaming greed on Wall Street or de-regulation (yet nobody has told me what was de-regulated)!!!!

Do you know who McCain's econ advisors are, and what they generally represent?

Neither candidate is talking about the numbers perotcharts and the crippling debt we're facing.

Ron Paul could be your guy. If only he was openly friendly to the financial bank industry...I am not so much in favor of McCain, I am anti-Obama. Mostly because I want a split-governmet. The idea of a Dem supermajority doesn't sit well with me.

Doug Holtz-Eakin is his main policy advisor. Others are Kemp, Whitman, Fiorina, Peterson and Gramm (not an official advisor anymore).

Here (http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/014/751tryie.asp) is an article that talks about his economic team. And Here (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122471873203460579.html?mod=todays_us_opinion) is an op-ed from Michael J. Boskin, another adviser to McCain.

Did I dance around any of your questions this time?

[taters]

just wondering:

if obama loses by a little--but fairly--will blacks be rioting in the streets a' la the rodney king verdict?

No, we wont even act with much surprise. This is america, after all.

The question is, when he WINS, will whites go ballistic bombing churches and beat their wives?

[BIG PIZZLE]

If he loses it will be because america is racist.

[Debo]

If he loses it will be because america is racist.

Yes. This is the only possible explanation.

[Mustard]

Yes. This is the only possible explanation.
No it isn't.

People could say the GOP stole the election again.

[Debo]

No it isn't.

People could say the GOP stole the election again.

You mean that the GOP has found a way to win the dead vote?

[Stax]

FOX doesn't even pretend anymore. Their main headlines are:

-POW video of John McCain looking emotional and heroic. Supposedly "new", although at least from the cap and description I'VE freaking seen it several times and I don't exactly go looking for McCain footage.
-Study claiming coverage of McCain is "twice as negative" and lastly
-A big headline with several substories about the "crisis" question

[Limp]

The question is, when he WINS, will whites go ballistic bombing churches and beat their wives?
No... first we will build giant wooden crosses and stockpile fuel/lighters. THEN we will bomb churches and beat our wives.

[CarsyCarsten]

The thing is, media will always lean in some direction, but over all it will be pretty much in the middle.

But after 8 years of BS people, even the bigger part of the media is sceptical against the republicans, or McCain/Palin.

What really makes me laugh though, is that both, McCain and Palin (but especially Palin, no question) talked so much shit over the last months, that it is kind of obvious, that the media will bash them.

Obama always was more "interesting" since the pre-votes, because he is something new, whether this is good or bad. He knows how to look good in front of people, and he keeps the people in front of the screen.

If you wonder why they cover more Obama, you should wonder why Britneys new haircut is covered more than important world politics.

If you wonder why the media leans to Obama these days, you should recognize, that he has the bigger part of "the smart people" in your country behind him, and you don't need to be Einstein to see, that a Vice President Palin stands for all the idiocracy the dumb part of you country celebrate since many years.

(blabla, my english sucks, I know..)

[FarEastFornicator]

Well if Obama wins, Chris Rock can re-use his old material.


“Black people all over saying 'Yea! We won, We won, We won.’ What the fuck did we win? Every day I look in the mailbox for my Obama prize. Nothing.”

[FarEastFornicator]

If you wonder why the media leans to Obama these days, you should recognize, that he has the bigger part of "the smart people" in your country behind him, and you don't need to be Einstein to see, that a Vice President Palin stands for all the idiocracy the dumb part of you country celebrate since many years.)

Most of us here are hoping that the idiotic population you described doesn't win the majority come Nov. 4th.

The rest of the straight talking GMF folks or "real" GMF'ers are praying that we don't win the majority.

[CarsyCarsten]

Most of us here are hoping that the idiotic population doesn't win the majority come Nov. 4th.

The rest of the people or "real" GMF'ers are praying that we don't win the majority.

I have the same impression.

[Smokestack]

If he loses it will be because america is racist.

No it isn't.

People could say the GOP stole the election again.

Those two are the most plausible explanations. Or, as Jon Stewart puts it, Obama says something stupid along the lines of, "Where the white women at?"

[Claibo]

Can't Decide??? Let ABC do it for you using quotes from our two presidential puppets.

This is a great way in helping you decide who YOU want in office! It's a survey, it doesn't give you any idea of who said what, you click on the answer to the question that is being asked. In the end it will tell you who you are leaning towards!


http://abcnews.go.com/politics/MatchoMatic/fullpage?id=5542139


it

[kareyn01]

As Marc Ambinder has pointed out, this poll massively over-samples evangelicals (http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/10/the_apgfk_poll_evangelical_sur.php). Despite this, Obama still leads--in other words, the election isn't close at all. But, I think that was pretty obvious since Obama's average lead in the daily trackers is up to 7.6% (http://www.electoral-vote.com/).

Yeah, that poll is complete bullshit. Evangelicals represented 45% of the registered voters, and 44% of the likely voters, which is roughly twice what their representation in elections usually is. So take out that extra 22% and replace it with a more realistic representation of American electoral demographics, and you probably have Obama up 7-8 points like every other poll.

[Archangel]

Can't Decide??? Let ABC do it for you using quotes from our two presidential puppets.

This is a great way in helping you decide who YOU want in office! It's a survey, it doesn't give you any idea of who said what, you click on the answer to the question that is being asked. In the end it will tell you who you are leaning towards!


http://abcnews.go.com/politics/MatchoMatic/fullpage?id=5542139


it


Stop spamming.

[Limp]

Stop spamming.
MAKE HIM FAGGOT!

Cliabo, got any good deals on some iPods?

EDIT** BTW I picked two Obama and the rest McCain on that link.

[dadaelus]

Can't Decide??? Let ABC do it for you using quotes from our two presidential puppets.

This is a great way in helping you decide who YOU want in office! It's a survey, it doesn't give you any idea of who said what, you click on the answer to the question that is being asked. In the end it will tell you who you are leaning towards!


http://abcnews.go.com/politics/MatchoMatic/fullpage?id=5542139


it

Guess that I'm a 'lefty'

http://i38.tinypic.com/b7zaxf.jpg

[Desperado]

Quick everyone jump ship!!!!


GOP's argument: Don't give President Obama a blank check (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/23/gops-argument-dont-give-president-obama-a-blank-check/)
Posted: 04:38 PM ET

From CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/tag/cnn-ticker-producer-alexander-mooney/)
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/10/23/art.nrsc.cnn.jpg Republicans have launched a new ad the seems to suggest Obama will win.

http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/2.0/mosaic/base_skins/baseplate/corner_wire_BL.gif

(CNN) — A new Republican ad appears to suggest 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 Senatorial Campaign Committee warns voters against Democrats holding the White House and Congress, and flatly states that if Hagan wins, the party with "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."
NRSC Online Communications Director John Randall denied the ad is suggesting John McCain will lose 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 suggesting a possible GOP bloodbath November 4, vulnerable senators in Red States may have no other option but to suggest Obama will capture the White House and warn the Illinois senator needs to be checked by Senate Republicans.
"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 said. "Overall people prefer divided government. This is that divided government argument: 'don't hand sole control over to one party.'"

[Smokestack]

Fucking idiots:

Fake America located (http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1008/Fake_America_located.html?showall)

In tonight's NBC News interview with Brian Williams, McCain explains that the "elites" are located in D.C. and New York City: WILLIAMS: Who is a member of the elite?
PALIN: Oh, I guess just people who think that they're better than anyone else. And-- John McCain and I are so committed to serving every American. Hard-working, middle-class Americans who are so desiring of this economy getting put back on the right track. And winning these wars. And America's starting to reach her potential. And that is opportunity and hope provided everyone equally. So anyone who thinks that they are-- I guess-- better than anyone else, that's-- that's my definition of elitism.

WILLIAMS: So it's not education? It's not income-based? It's--
PALIN: Anyone who thinks that they're better than someone else.
WILLIAMS: --a state of mind? It's not geography?
PALIN: 'Course not.
WILLIAMS: Senator?
MCCAIN: I-- I know where a lot of 'em live. (LAUGH)
WILLIAMS: Where's that?
MCCAIN: Well, in our nation's capital and New York City. I've seen it. I've lived there. I know the town. I know-- I know what a lot of these elitists are. The ones that she never went to a cocktail party with in Georgetown. I'll be very frank with you. Who think that they can dictate what they believe to America rather than let Americans decide for themselves.
UPDATE: Numerous readers in those cities note that they were the targets on 9/11.

[Claibo]

Guess that I'm a 'lefty'

http://i38.tinypic.com/b7zaxf.jpg


Looks like the results may be skewed... damn Demo's

[Mustard]

http://i38.tinypic.com/bikqye.png

One of these things is not like the other...

Seriously, with polling like this, who needs facts? Moreover, if this statistical anomaly is actually correct, and McCain is still down 1 point.... yeesh, that can't be a good thing.

[Rover]

I'm not surprised that when McCain and Palin discuss elitism Brian Williams is clueless. I think Louis XVI was among the last to know where the elites were, too. Chances are, if you don't understand what McCain means when he discusses elitism, you fall into that category.

McCain doesn't explain it well, but he's right about their location.

[Stax]

That's not the only important fact about that single outlier poll.

http://www.americablog.com/2008/10/new-flawed-ap-poll-claims-mccain-and.html
http://www.ap-gfkpoll.com/pdf/AP-GfK_Poll_3_Topline_FINAL.pdf

(yes America Blog is hugely biased, but the crosstabs they link to are the real thing)

http://i38.tinypic.com/qzg70g.png

The problem? In 2004, evangelicals/born-again Christians made up 23% of voters. But that same group makes up 44% of likely voters in AP's poll released today. That's almost double the number - it's totally implausible.

In 2000 and 2004, there was a very aggressive push for the evangelical vote. In 2000, when the question was asked "Do you consider yourself part of the conservative Christian political movement," 14% of voters said "yes" in exit polls. In 2004, when the question was changed to "Would you describe yourself as a born-again or evangelical Christian?" - the very category AP uses in its current poll - 23% of voters said yes in exit polls.

Did you get that? The percentage of evangelicals/born-agains voting in 2004 was 23%. The percentage of evangelicals/born-agains that AP included in their likely voters scenario is 44%. That's almost twice as many. Consider that 79% of evangelicals voted Republican in the 2004 presidential elections, and we can assume that anyone calling themselves "born-again" might be more prone to voter Republican. This means AP disproportionately skewed its polling towards the GOP base. So it's no surprise that the AP poll shows McCain doing better than in other polls.

With such an outlier, one wonders why the brain trust at AP decided to move ahead releasing this poll. But, the AP brain trust loves McCain. It's not just Sidoti. Remember, AP's Washington bureau chief almost went to work for McCain. He's in that donut video, too.

As Nate Silver so clearly explains, the likely voter models being used by some pollsters, including AP's partner, GfK, aren't making sense. In fact, Nate has issued a challenge to the pollsters who have a wide gap in their models:

I would like to issue a challenge to those pollsters like Franklin & Marshall and GfK which in spite of all the facts above, are showing a substantial shift toward the Republicans when they apply their likely voter models. E-mail me -- my contact information is at the top of the page -- and tell me why you think what you're doing is good science.

[Stax]

I'm not surprised that when McCain and Palin discuss elitism Brian Williams is clueless. I think Louis XVI was among the last to know where the elites were, too. Chances are, if you don't understand what McCain means when he discusses elitism, you fall into that category.

McCain doesn't explain it well, but he's right about their location.

You're a fucking jackass sometimes Rover. You bitch about party lines but then you play into the freaking "elitism" argument? Sarah Palin's suggestion that there is basically a 'good' America (which presupposes a 'bad' America) is just offensive. And, BTW, follows quite in step with the past 8 years of "with us or against us", a vote for the Democrats is a vote for terrorists style politics.

[URFloorMatt]

I'm not surprised that when McCain and Palin discuss elitism Brian Williams is clueless. I think Louis XVI was among the last to know where the elites were, too. Chances are, if you don't understand what McCain means when he discusses elitism, you fall into that category.

McCain doesn't explain it well, but he's right about their location.

I just thank God everyday that Al Qaeda chose to attack fake America rather than real America on Sept. 11. Those terrorists are suckers!

[Mustard]

_9OhVMHIuO4

Beat that John McCain...

[Pox]

Wow, thanks John. I mean, you may owe your entire career to nepotism and connections, but at least you know how to pander.

[TheImpossibleMan]

As Dawkins put it, of COURSE I'm elitist, and what's wrong with that? I'm encouraging everyone to JOIN the elite, rather than exclude.

[Rover]

You're a fucking jackass sometimes Rover. You bitch about party lines but then you play into the freaking "elitism" argument? Sarah Palin's suggestion that there is basically a 'good' America (which presupposes a 'bad' America) is just offensive. And, BTW, follows quite in step with the past 8 years of "with us or against us", a vote for the Democrats is a vote for terrorists style politics.What defines an elitist?

Someone who prejudges other people and their ideas based on superficial qualities. A lot of the attacks on Palin are based on:
1. How she speaks.
2. Where she's from.
3. Where she went to school.
4. What she looks like.
5. How much money she has.

That is what elitism is and how it should be defined. However, neither Palin or McCain can talk about it because it would be perceived as "whining" and since she's a female "bitching." But that is what elitism is. McCain gives a general location description because that's all he can do without "whining."

Look at how people complain that she drops her G's. And that's considered a legitimate line of attack. She fuckin' drops her G's when she's talkin'.

It's attacks like that, that are the basis for complaints of elitism. Anyone who doesn't look like me, doesn't talk like me, doesn't have the same education as me, doesn't live by me, doesn't drive a Bentley like me isn't worthy of having their ideas heard or discussed.

I just thank God everyday that Al Qaeda chose to attack fake America rather than real America on Sept. 11. Those terrorists are suckers!I didn't see anything about a fake America or a real America. And McCain and Palin weren't discussing 9/11. Those were idiot commentators, who are driven by insanity to comment on Politico stories.

Just because NYC and DC were attacked doesn't mean there isn't an elitist mindset that is prevalent among opinion makers who live there.

[Stax]

What defines an elitist?

Someone who prejudges other people and their ideas based on superficial qualities. A lot of the attacks on Palin are based on:
1. How she speaks.
2. Where she's from.
3. Where she went to school.
4. What she looks like.
5. How much money she has.

No, they aren't, and suggesting they are is foolish. Other than speech and Alaska from Tina Fey and what she looks like (which she herself fucking plays up) I've never even heard about that shit. People dislike Palin because she will be one very old heartbeat from the presidency and has put out no good reason why she should be there. Or, failing that (in a Dick Cheney model) what useful advice she could provide to a President McCain.

[Pox]

It's attacks like that, that are the basis for complaints of elitism. Anyone who doesn't look like me, doesn't talk like me, doesn't have the same education as me, doesn't live by me, doesn't drive a Bentley like me isn't worthy of having their ideas heard or discussed.

Ha. Wow.

[smahoo]

Rover, people criticize Palin because she's not capable of fulfilling the responsibilities of the office for which she seeks. There's no other reason. Forget troopergate, the kid travel issue and all the other stuff. She's just not capable. End of story.

McCain should bear much of that criticism because he chose her as his running mate. Everytime he says she's the most qualified VP candidate in recent history you can see that even he doesn't believe it.

I trully believe McCain will write in his last book that the selection of Sarah Palin was the primary reason he lost this election.

[vasili denisov]

Someone who prejudges other people and their ideas based on superficial qualities. A lot of the attacks on Palin are based on:

Most of the attacks are based on her mind being as dull as a Mennonite's knife.

[Pax Britannia]

As an impartial foreigner let me get this straight: So to you guys Obama's lack of experience is seen as fresh and modern and Palin's lack of experience is seen as dangerous?

[Stax]

I trully believe McCain will write in his last book that the selection of Sarah Palin was the primary reason he lost this election.

Unless Obama wins a truly massive victory where one factor will likely not be enough to explain things away, I imagine that will be near the top of explanations, but it must always be remembered that some of Obama's largest leads came in the summer prior to the Palin selection and the tightest period was immediately after. Palin certainly doesn't help outside the party, but she does her job in getting The Base out to vote.

[Stax]

As an impartial foreigner let me get this straight: So to you guys Obama's lack of experience is seen as fresh and modern and Palin's lack of experience is seen as dangerous?

Obama has been nationally tested for 2 years (heavily) and really ever since entering the Senate. Neither of the candidates for either Prez or V-Prez have any applicable executive experience governmentally to being President of the United States. Obama has put forth policies and ideals that people believe in, so they will vote for him. Palin has put forth terrible interviews, a view on abortion, a couple scandals, and some funny SNL satire material.

[Pax Britannia]

Obama has been nationally tested for 2 years (heavily) and really ever since entering the Senate. Neither of the candidates for either Prez or V-Prez have any applicable executive experience governmentally to being President of the United States. Obama has put forth policies and ideals that people believe in, so they will vote for him. Palin has put forth terrible interviews, a view on abortion, a couple scandals, and some funny SNL satire material.

Does she remind you too much of Bush?

[Stax]

Does she remind you too much of Bush?

She reminds me of the base voter for Bush. Say what you will about Bush (and I've said plenty) but he at least surrounded himself with a lot of smart people (though his stubbornness built in terrible bias vs. similarly intelligent but more ideologically diverse administrations like Lincoln, FDR, JFK, or Clinton).

[Debo]

Obama has been nationally tested for 2 years (heavily) and really ever since entering the Senate. Neither of the candidates for either Prez or V-Prez have any applicable executive experience governmentally to being President of the United States. Obama has put forth policies and ideals that people believe in, so they will vote for him. Palin has put forth terrible interviews, a view on abortion, a couple scandals, and some funny SNL satire material.

Heavily tested by who? I will give him credit for defeating the Clinton machine. But outside of that, he hasn't done much of anything.

Don't you think that it is a bit early to claim that he is putting forward politics that people believe in? He hasn't even won the election yet.

[Pax Britannia]

She reminds me of the base voter for Bush. Say what you will about Bush (and I've said plenty) but he at least surrounded himself with a lot of smart people (though his stubbornness built in terrible bias vs. similarly intelligent but more ideologically diverse administrations like Lincoln, FDR, JFK, or Clinton).

Interesting. So has McCain scored a spectacular own goal by picking her as VP? Would you have been more inclined to vote for him if someone else had taken her spot? (like Romney, Guliani)

[URFloorMatt]

I didn't see anything about a fake America or a real America. And McCain and Palin weren't discussing 9/11. Those were idiot commentators, who are driven by insanity to comment on Politico stories.

Just because NYC and DC were attacked doesn't mean there isn't an elitist mindset that is prevalent among opinion makers who live there.

You don't see any hypocrisy in constantly using the 9/11 attacks as a political ploy to rally the troops while at the same time routinely bashing the people who actually live in those cities and were personally attacked as elitist, anti-American, or outright fake Americans? The notion that we can divorce two fundamental platforms of the Republican smear machine over the last six years (that only they can defend us from a second 9/11 and that everyone who disagrees is elitist and anti-American) is ridiculous.

But this opinion you've expressed is not surprising to me. John McCain has been running his entire campaign based on the absurd theory that "If I didn't personally say it, it's not representative of my campaign." Sarah Palin's been talking about Real vs. Fake America/Pro- vs. Anti-America Supporters for weeks, and Nancy Pfotenhauer, a senior campaign advisor, has endorsed it and defended it in multiple appearances on cable news. Even McCain himself went to Pennsylvania to call his local supporters the most patriotic Americans in the country.

Personally, I'm just glad that so-called Fake America is starting to get pissed off at being called unpatriotic and unrepresentative by Republicans just to score political points with ignorant voters in the "heartland."

[Debo]

FOX doesn't even pretend anymore. Their main headlines are:

-POW video of John McCain looking emotional and heroic. Supposedly "new", although at least from the cap and description I'VE freaking seen it several times and I don't exactly go looking for McCain footage.
-Study claiming coverage of McCain is "twice as negative" and lastly
-A big headline with several substories about the "crisis" question

Is the WaPo getting desperate too?
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/10/22/study_coverage_of_mccain_much.html

What about all of these news outlets?
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&tab=wn&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&ncl=1261586686

[Stax]

Is the WaPo getting desperate too?
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/10/22/study_coverage_of_mccain_much.html

What about all of these news outlets?
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&tab=wn&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&ncl=1261586686

I very specifically didn't cite that story in isolation because in isolation it is just a story. But a front page of McCain friendly headlines, some of them quite unabashed, is not in isolation.

Interesting. So has McCain scored a spectacular own goal by picking her as VP? Would you have been more inclined to vote for him if someone else had taken her spot? (like Romney, Guliani)

McCain 2000 running against a mediocre Democrat? Maybe. But both the quality of Obama and a candidate and the changes McCain underwent to win the nomination between 2000 and 2008 made it unlikely I would ever vote for him from the outset (regardless of VP picks).

[Rover]

Rover, people criticize Palin because she's not capable of fulfilling the responsibilities of the office for which she seeks. There's no other reason. Forget troopergate, the kid travel issue and all the other stuff. She's just not capable. End of story.Not capable!?!

Based on what? She's the fucking governor of a state. I'd say that all the other 49 governors are at least somewhat qualified to be vice president. But Palin is the one that is magically unqualified to fulfill the office of vice president.

Obama has been nationally tested for 2 years (heavily) and really ever since entering the Senate. Neither of the candidates for either Prez or V-Prez have any applicable executive experience governmentally to being President of the United States. Obama has put forth policies and ideals that people believe in, so they will vote for him. Palin has put forth terrible interviews, a view on abortion, a couple scandals, and some funny SNL satire material.Nationally tested? Haha.

Again, you've managed to completely dismiss Palin's executive experience as not 'applicable.' So I guess only the governor's of some states have qualifying 'executive' experience?

[Axel]

Someone who prejudges other people and their ideas based on superficial qualities. A lot of the attacks on Palin are based on:
1. How she speaks.
2. Where she's from.
3. Where she went to school.
4. What she looks like.
5. How much money she has.
It seems that you missed prevalent part of arguments against her.

[Mustard]

As an impartial foreigner let me get this straight: So to you guys Obama's lack of experience is seen as fresh and modern and Palin's lack of experience is seen as dangerous?
The best way I can describe this is to use one of those SAT word associations.

With regards to experience:

McCain : Obama :: Obama : Palin

This is probably the fairest way I can assess the situation for all parties concerned. With history in mind, remeber that Democrats in elected JFK in 1960, and JFK had approximately 14 years of political experience prior to his election, starting off as a Congressman in 1946. Barack Obama has had 12 years of political experience, starting of as an Illinios state Senator in 1996. 14 years vs. 12 years, Democrats in history and now seem to concur that this amount of experience is enough.

[Rover]

It seems that you missed prevalent part of arguments against her.You're right. I completely forgot to add the attacks on her supposed Religious Fanaticism.

[Stax]

Again, you've managed to completely dismiss Palin's executive experience as not 'applicable.' So I guess only the governor's of some states have qualifying 'executive' experience?

A. Not really.
B. Sort of.

Not really because the decisions the governor of a state makes are not the same as the President. A governor has the entire federal government above them, they are limited in the decisions they make (beyond the same legislative/judicial separations of power the president will face). And, obviously, governors rarely meet with foreign leaders or deal with foreign affairs or trade and the national economy (all rather pressing issues currently).

And sort of, yes, some states governors have applicable experience, but only slightly. If you show the ability to manage a large, diverse population with complex and varied issues that reflect something of the national level of diversity, that means something. Lets say... California, New York, Texas, Pennsylvania, and Florida as a start?

Seriously, tell me what the governor of Alaska does that has anything to do with being president?

[Limp]

Seriously, tell me what the governor of Alaska does that has anything to do with being president?
What about a short term Senator?

Running a state is more like running a country than being a Senator.

[Stax]

What about a short term Senator?

Running a state is more like running a country than being a Senator.

How?

I'll take familiarity with issues over the vocabulary similarity of them both being "executive" positions 10 times out of 10. Her position as mayor of Wasilla was "executive" too, but does she bring that up as experience worthy of being president?

Seriously, all "executive" actions do not prepare you to be president in a meaningful way. Tell me one thing the governor of Alaska does that would provide useful experience for a would-be President.

[Rover]

You don't see any hypocrisy in constantly using the 9/11 attacks as a political ploy to rally the troops while at the same time routinely bashing the people who actually live in those cities and were personally attacked as elitist, anti-American, or outright fake Americans? The notion that we can divorce two fundamental platforms of the Republican smear machine over the last six years (that only they can defend us from a second 9/11 and that everyone who disagrees is elitist and anti-American) is ridiculous.He isn't saying that everyone who lives in NYC is an elitist. He is saying that NYC is where elitists live.

But this opinion you've expressed is not surprising to me. John McCain has been running his entire campaign based on the absurd theory that "If I didn't personally say it, it's not representative of my campaign." Sarah Palin's been talking about Real vs. Fake America/Pro- vs. Anti-America Supporters for weeks, and Nancy Pfotenhauer, a senior campaign advisor, has endorsed it and defended it in multiple appearances on cable news. Even McCain himself went to Pennsylvania to call his local supporters the most patriotic Americans in the country.

Personally, I'm just glad that so-called Fake America is starting to get pissed off at being called unpatriotic and unrepresentative by Republicans just to score political points with ignorant voters in the "heartland."When trying to make a point about baseless and factless attacks made by Republicans, it isn't helpful to include an equally baseless and factless attack.

If you did this on purpose, you get points for making me laugh.

[Stax]

When trying to make a point about baseless and factless attacks made by Republicans, it isn't helpful to include an equally baseless and factless attack.

If you did this on purpose, you get points for making me laugh.

Are you really suggesting that a petty attack on elitists will have a meaningful effect on 'intelligent voters' (I'm not saying this as a latte-drinking, college going, hippy liberal elitist but merely as the opposite to his 'ignorant voters' statement)?

[URFloorMatt]

Did you watch the debates? Does it sound like Obama is clueless as to how to be president?

Conversely, in the last six weeks we've learned that Palin doesn't understand:

1) What the responsibilities of the Vice President are
2) What the relationship between the Vice President and the Senate is
3) What the Bush doctrine is
4) What preconditions are
5) Why the economy collapsed
6) Why certain Muslims have initiated a holy war against America
7) How Russia/Putin is a threat to America
8) What constitutes reasonable foreign policy experience
9) What caused the economic crisis and what steps should be taken to fix it

She has also:

1) Refused to hold a press conference
2) Refused to release her medical records unlike every other candidate this election
3) Outright refused to answer questions in the VP debate
4) Effectively embezzled state money while governor
5) Unethically fired a state official because of a personal spat involving a state trooper and her sister
6) Lied to voters about her reputation as a reformer (with respect to reducing spending and fiscal responsibility) in a host of cases

And this all off the top of my head. Now, please commence dismissing all of these concerns as elitist and out-of-bounds.

He isn't saying that everyone who lives in NYC is an elitist. He is saying that NYC is where elitists live.True, but how would you describe the people who generally worked at the World Trade Center? Aren't a majority of the people who worked at the WTC and died in that attack precisely the people who McCain and Palin would describe as anti-American elites?

When trying to make a point about baseless and factless attacks made by Republicans, it isn't helpful to include an equally baseless and factless attack.

If you did this on purpose, you get points for making me laugh.What's really funny is that you can point out that non-elites might live in New York without being able to discern that "ignorant voters in the heartland" does not mean all voters in the heartland are ignorant. I merely said "ignorant voters in the heartland" because ignorant voters generally are unlikely to respond positively to the notion that New York is not America (particularly if said ignorant voter lives in New York, for instance).

[Debo]

The best way I can describe this is to use one of those SAT word associations.

With regards to experience:

McCain : Obama :: Obama : Palin

This is probably the fairest way I can assess the situation for all parties concerned. With history in mind, remeber that Democrats in elected JFK in 1960, and JFK had approximately 14 years of political experience prior to his election, starting off as a Congressman in 1946. Barack Obama has had 12 years of political experience, starting of as an Illinios state Senator in 1996. 14 years vs. 12 years, Democrats in history and now seem to concur that this amount of experience is enough.

I think that you hit on an important point. The left does not want to compare Obama' level of experience to McCain's level of experience because he can't win that discussion. Instead, they are trying to take down the one part of McCain's campaign that energizes the GOP base, Palin.

And more importantly, nobody gives a shit about Joe Biden. Joe the plumber has received more press in this campaign than he has. Talk about a lame ass VP pick...

[Rover]

A. Not really.
B. Sort of.

Not really because the decisions the governor of a state makes are not the same as the President. A governor has the entire federal government above them, they are limited in the decisions they make (beyond the same legislative/judicial separations of power the president will face). And, obviously, governors rarely meet with foreign leaders or deal with foreign affairs or trade and the national economy (all rather pressing issues currently).

And sort of, yes, some states governors have applicable experience, but only slightly. If you show the ability to manage a large, diverse population with complex and varied issues that reflect something of the national level of diversity, that means something. Lets say... California, New York, Texas, Pennsylvania, and Florida as a start?

Seriously, tell me what the governor of Alaska does that has anything to do with being president?She manages a budget of about $3 billion and has about 20,000 employees. She oversees departments and agencies that are completely analogous to departments and agencies that the federal government has. She has appointed a Cabinet to run departments.

But I guess these don't count, because it's only in Alaska, and Alaska isn't a real state. I'm sure that picking a Transportation Secretary in Alaska is way easier than picking a Transportation Secretary in DC.

Who has Obama hired? What has Obama had oversight of? (Well, he does have that subcommittee that has oversight of Afghanistan, but he hasn't chaired a meeting in over 3 years.) What has Obama ever done that is remotely close to being President?

Running for President doesn't make you qualified.

[Stax]

I think that you hit on an important point. The left does not want to compare Obama' level of experience to McCain's level of experience because he can't win that discussion. Instead, they are trying to take down the one part of McCain's campaign that energizes the GOP base, Palin.

Because, as I said from the day of the Palin pick, experience is not the Democratic argument. Obama's argument is JUDGEMENT, both Hillary and McCain have tried to use experience against him but he spanked both proving that the country cares more about (at least right now) decision making progress than simply a history of making decisions.

And more importantly, nobody gives a shit about Joe Biden. Joe the plumber has received more press in this campaign than he has. Talk about a lame ass VP pick...

I disagree, Biden did exactly what was needed (which is why he was a sensible, if safe, choice). He maintained the status quo which was an Obama lead (no reason to roll the dice like McCain if you're leading), strengthened foreign policy (a percieved weakness), and is an old white guy to balance out a young black guy for those voters for whom that matters.

[Mustard]

What about a short term Senator?
Barack Obama isn't solely just a short term Senator. Your question lacks fairness.
Running a state is more like running a country than being a Senator.
I agree with you. However, I would like to point out that Alaska's population is approximately 685,000 and Alaska's state budget FY2009 is approximately $9 billion, with $11 billion in revenue.

To compare, the population of the United States is approximately 301 million, roughly 440 times larger than the state of Alaska, and the federal budget of the United States FY2007 is approximately $2,730 billion, roughly 300 times larger than the state of Alaska.

Take from that what you will, but the argument really sells itself in my personal opinion.

[Stax]

She manages a budget of about $3 billion and has about 20,000 employees. She oversees departments and agencies that are completely analogous to departments and agencies that the federal government has. She has appointed a Cabinet to run departments.

But I guess these don't count, because it's only in Alaska, and Alaska isn't a real state. I'm sure that picking a Transportation Secretary in Alaska is way easier than picking a Transportation Secretary in DC.

That's totally what I'm saying and you should continue to argue against that position which is totally not a strawman. Oh wait...

Who has Obama hired? What has Obama had oversight of? (Well, he does have that subcommittee that has oversight of Afghanistan, but he hasn't chaired a meeting in over 3 years.) What has Obama ever done that is remotely close to being President?

Running for President doesn't make you qualified.

Very little does. Being a high level general maybe prepares you for one big aspect, and a couple executive positions (Secretary of the Treasury, Defense, State) maybe prepare you for others, but largely it is a unique position. What Obama has is a cohesive and clear position on issues which people vote on (something Palin does not have).

[Stax]

I just thought of an analogy to a sport I love and a man I hate.

The suggestion that being governor of a small state (or really any state) significantly prepares you for being president is like the suggestion that because Joe Morgan was good at baseball he makes a good baseball commentator. Both job titles have baseball in them, but that doesn't make them the same.

[Mustard]

I think that you hit on an important point. The left does not want to compare Obama' level of experience to McCain's level of experience because he can't win that discussion. Instead, they are trying to take down the one part of McCain's campaign that energizes the GOP base, Palin.

And more importantly, nobody gives a shit about Joe Biden. Joe the plumber has received more press in this campaign than he has. Talk about a lame ass VP pick...
Yep, it all goes back to the old "pick your battles wisely" strategy. The Obama campaign would be foolish to pick a battle with McCain on that front. Waterloo anyone? Thats why they pick battles they can win, which is a smart and savvy way of politics that is a proven way to win.

As for Joe Biden, I personally like the man, and I'm pretty confident the reason he hasn't spoken very much is because he is the human gaffe machine, which doesn't help very much in elections obviously. But, at least Joe Biden isn't Sarah Palin... ;)

[Gary_Busey]

I don't think Obama's camp has to do much in terms of 'taking down' Palin. She's an idiot. She's brought most of the negative press on herself by talking.

[Axel]

It seems that you missed prevalent part of arguments against her.You're right. I completely forgot to add the attacks on her supposed Religious Fanaticism.Call me elitist but I'd expect that VP candidate would be a bit brighter than a dodo bird.

NrzXLYA_e6E

[Debo]

Yep, it all goes back to the old "pick your battles wisely" strategy. The Obama campaign would be foolish to pick a battle with McCain on that front. Waterloo anyone? Thats why they pick battles they can win, which is a smart and savvy way of politics that is a proven way to win.

As for Joe Biden, I personally like the man, and I'm pretty confident the reason he hasn't spoken very much is because he is the human gaffe machine, which doesn't help very much in elections obviously. But, at least Joe Biden isn't Sarah Palin... ;)

You are assuming that he has won the battle. Personally, I have been sour on McCain's chances of winning for a while. But there is still time on the clock, Obama hasn't won yet. To give him credit for winning, at this point, seems a bit premature.

If, as you say, Biden is a gaffe machine, why is he qualified to be VP? Do we really want him saying something inappropriate, as he is know to do, to a foreign diplomat? And why haven't I heard anything about his plagiarism in the past (See links below)? Instead, I get stories about how much Sarah Palin's fucking clothes cost. No wonder everyone says that the media is in the bag for Obama.

Here (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE3DB143FF93BA2575AC0A9619482 60)
and
Here (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/frenzy/biden.htm)

[Stax]

If, as you say, Biden is a gaffe machine, why is he qualified to be VP? Do we really want him saying something inappropriate, as he is know to do, to a foreign diplomat? And why haven't I heard anything about his plagiarism in the past (See links below)? Instead, I get stories about how much Sarah Palin's fucking clothes cost. No wonder everyone says that the media is in the bag for Obama.

The clothing thing is a BRAND NEW story, so surprise surprise it's a big thing. Michelle Obama's "terrorist fist bump" got a day of news cycle control and has nothing to do with the presidency either.

Here (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE3DB143FF93BA2575AC0A9619482 60)
and
Here (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/frenzy/biden.htm)

1987/88 stories about papers in college, awesome. Totally has to do with being president.

[Debo]

The clothing thing is a BRAND NEW story, so surprise surprise it's a big thing. Michelle Obama's "terrorist fist bump" got a day of news cycle control and has nothing to do with the presidency either.

Holy shit! It is brand new!! Where can I pick it up???

It is a bullshit story and you know it. Maybe Palin would own more expensive clothes if she made the kind of money that Obama does. Have you looked at their tax returns yet? Did you notice that Obama makes a shit load more money than she does?

She is running for VP, of course the GOP is going to hook her up with some designer clothes.

1987/88 stories about papers in college, awesome. Totally has to do with being president.What is the statute of limitations when running for office? Did you bitch about Bush's DUI when he ran? That happened well before 1988. and one of them is about him using a British politicians speech and he stole from other Dem politicians. The other one is about him plagiarizing someone's paper. Get your Biden plagiarism stories straight.

And he lied about his academic achievements. That probably isn't a big deal either.


Democratic presidential candidate Joseph R. Biden Jr., a U.S. senator from Delaware, was driven from the nomination battle after delivering, without attribution, passages from a speech by British Labor party leader Neil Kinnock. A barrage of subsidiary revelations by the press also contributed to Biden's withdrawal: a serious plagiarism incident involving Biden during his law school years; the senator's boastful exaggerations of his academic record at a New Hampshire campaign event; and the discovery of other quotations in Biden's speeches pilfered from past Democratic politicians. I just hope that, in the future, he steals his material from Churchill. He was a fucking bad ass.

[Stax]

Holy shit! It is brand new!! Where can I pick it up???

It is a bullshit story and you know it.

Yes. It's bullshit. Which is why I compared it to another bullshit story that drew news attention. I'm not saying it's worthwhile, I'm saying this is an example of the media being STUPID, not BIASED.

Maybe Palin would own more expensive clothes if she made the kind of money that Obama does. Have you looked at their tax returns yet? Did you notice that Obama makes a shit load more money than she does?

Yes. Very easy to make money when you have two bestselling books.

She is running for VP, of course the GOP is going to hook her up with some designer clothes.

I don't care at all about the story, I'm just saying it is not a suggestion of media bias.

What is the statute of limitations when running for office? Did you bitch about Bush's DUI when he ran? That happened well before 1988. and one of them is about him using a British politicians speech. The other one is about him plagiarizing someone's paper. Get your Biden plagiarism stories straight.

My problem is not really with the age of the story but with the hilarious dichotomy of "Let's talk about real issues and not Sarah Palin's wardrobe" to "Let's talk about Joe Biden plagiarizing a bit of some papers!"

[Debo]

My problem is not really with the age of the story but with the hilarious dichotomy of "Let's talk about real issues and not Sarah Palin's wardrobe" to "Let's talk about Joe Biden plagiarizing a bit of some papers!"

It sounds like you don't want to address the issue because it puts Biden in a negative light. Instead, you want to "focus on the issues". What if my issue is integrity? Can we start focusing on Biden's lack of it?

I also added some more examples of Biden fudging his way through life.

[Pox]

Whats the difference between this story and the one about John Edward's expensive haircut?

[Stax]

It sounds like you don't want to address the issue because it puts Biden in a negative light. Instead, you want to "focus on the issues". What if my issue is integrity? Can we start focusing on Biden's lack of it?

I also added some more examples of Biden fudging his way through life.

Talk about it all you want. But if you don't see the similarity between stories about a wardrobe or a DUI and drug addiction (if you're talking about 'integrity') and stories about college papers in terms of their importance towards being (Vice) President of the United States, *shrug*.

[Debo]

Whats the difference between this story and the one about John Edward's expensive haircut?

Nothing really. Both are bullshit. But I will say that Edwards ran around talking about how he is a common man and how we need to help the poor. Then he goes and gets a $400 haircut and charges $10,000(I think this is right) for speeches talking about poverty.

I don't give a shit. But it does cast him in a poor light.

[Stax]

Nothing really. Both are bullshit. But I will say that Edwards ran around talking about how he is a common man and how we need to help the poor. Then he goes and gets a $400 haircut and charges $10,000(I think this is right) for speeches talking about poverty.

I don't give a shit. But it does cast him in a poor light.

And McCain/Palin aren't running around spouting off Joe the Plumber every twelve seconds talking about how they will help the common man and their opponent is an elitist?

[Pox]

Nothing really. Both are bullshit. But I will say that Edwards ran around talking about how he is a common man and how we need to help the poor.


This is baisically what Palin is doing now, i.e. Joe Sixpack...


other than that, I agree.

[Debo]

Talk about it all you want. But if you don't see the similarity between stories about a wardrobe or a DUI and drug addiction (if you're talking about 'integrity') and stories about college papers in terms of their importance towards being (Vice) President of the United States, *shrug*.

Ha. So you have no problem with Biden cheating in college and stealing other people's ideas?

Can we talk about Obama's admitted cocaine use? Or should we focus on the issues?

How did Palin lose her integrity by upgrading her wardrobe on the GOP's dime?

[Debo]

This is baisically what Palin is doing now, i.e. Joe Sixpack...


other than that, I agree.

Look at her tax returns, she is the poorest of the four people on the ticket. She is closer to the common man than Biden has been in 30 years. That doesn't stop him from talking about Scranton, PA every 15 minutes.

As I said before, there is no way that they were going to let her go out there in mid-range clothing. She needs to play the part. And part of looking Presidential is wearing the proper attire.

[Stax]

Ha. So you have no problem with Biden cheating in college and stealing other people's ideas?

Sure I do. But I think it will have very little to do with his ability to discharge the duties of the office of Vice President of the United States. The same goes for Palin's wardrobe. Which is why they're both dumb stories. Which is my point.

Can we talk about Obama's admitted cocaine use? Or should we focus on the issues?

Sure, talk about it. But, to use your own example, I hardly think the party who proudly nominated, elected, renominated, and reelected a sustained drug and alcohol abuser really want to go down the alley of yelling about someone who tried a drug.

How did Palin lose her integrity by upgrading her wardrobe on the GOP's dime?

She didn't. The parenthetical referred to the Bush example you brought up of a DUI/Drug abuse.

[Stax]

Look at her tax returns, she is the poorest of the four people on the ticket. She is closer to the common man than Biden has been in 30 years. That doesn't stop him from talking about Scranton, PA every 15 minutes.

As I said before, there is no way that they were going to let her go out there in mid-range clothing. She needs to play the part. And part of looking Presidential is wearing the proper attire.

If you can't see your own bias at this point, it's just kind of sad.

John Edwards talks about the common man but gets an expensive haircut to look presidential: Somewhat reasonable story
Sarah Palin talks about the common man but gets an expensive wardrobe to look presidential: Completely rediculous liberal media story

[Debo]

Sure I do. But I think it will have very little to do with his ability to discharge the duties of the office of Vice President of the United States. The same goes for Palin's wardrobe. Which is why they're both dumb stories. Which is my point.

Sure, talk about it. But, to use your own example, I hardly think the party who proudly nominated, elected, renominated, and reelected a sustained drug and alcohol abuser really want to go down the alley of yelling about someone who tried a drug.

She didn't. The parenthetical referred to the Bush example you brought up of a DUI/Drug abuse.

I think that there is a big difference between buying new clothes and breaking the law. But that is just me. I am old school like that.

Fair enough. But I can say the same thing about the party that loves Ted Kennedy.

If you can't see your own bias at this point, it's just kind of sad.

John Edwards talks about the common man but gets an expensive haircut to look presidential: Somewhat reasonable story
Sarah Palin talks about the common man but gets an expensive wardrobe to look presidential: Completely rediculous liberal media story

Didn't I say that it was a BS story? I was simply answering his question.

But, Palin's wardrobe upgrade was a one-time thing. Edwards lived the life of a millionaire on a daily basis. Don't you see the difference?

[Stax]

I think that there is a big difference between buying new clothes and breaking the law. But that is just me. I am old school like that.

Fair enough. But I can say the same thing about the party that loves Ted Kennedy.

Keep it coming, Debo. Just continues to undercut your original distaste for silly stories that don't have to do with the issues and are biased for Obama.

[Debo]

Keep it coming, Debo. Just continues to undercut your original distaste for silly stories that don't have to do with the issues and are biased for Obama.

Compelling rebuttal. I don't even know why I bother.

I am outta here.

[Stax]

Compelling rebuttal. I don't even know why I bother.

I am outta here.


John Edwards talks about the common man but gets an expensive haircut to look presidential: Somewhat reasonable story
Sarah Palin talks about the common man but gets an expensive wardrobe to look presidential: Completely rediculous liberal media story

That was my rebuttal. And you left it there without reply. *shrug*

[Mustard]

You are assuming that he has won the battle. Personally, I have been sour on McCain's chances of winning for a while. But there is still time on the clock, Obama hasn't won yet. To give him credit for winning, at this point, seems a bit premature.

If, as you say, Biden is a gaffe machine, why is he qualified to be VP? Do we really want him saying something inappropriate, as he is know to do, to a foreign diplomat? And why haven't I heard anything about his plagiarism in the past (See links below)? Instead, I get stories about how much Sarah Palin's fucking clothes cost. No wonder everyone says that the media is in the bag for Obama.

Here (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE3DB143FF93BA2575AC0A9619482 60)
and
Here (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/frenzy/biden.htm)
Now hold on just a minute... I've been one of the biggest proponents here on GMF to not call it before the fat lady sings. But its pretty hard to deny the feeling that the fat lady is on in five... However, the things I'm giving credit to Obama for winning are the battles their campaign is deciding to fight aggressively. Battles, not the war itself.

This is just my personal opinion of Joe Biden, but I think he is qualified to be Vice President because he is a highly intelligent, highly knowledgable person with great leadership qualities. Everybody has their flaws because no person is perfect, and his biggest politically are his unmistakeable gaffes. However, I am not worried about Joe Biden making an ass of himself in front of foreign dignataries... call me an optimist.

I think the plagiarism thing has been adequately discussed to my satisfaction, and the reason the Sarah Palin $150,000 clothing shopping spree is news is because supposedly she is not an elitist and rails against elitism, yet this story provides hypocritical evidence contrary to that stance. With that said, I really don't give a fuck about that story, but that doesn't mean we aren't gonna see it on the teevee for another 12 days...

[mongo]

i have yet to see anyone post in this thread that is even close to unbiased.

[Pax Britannia]

This is all peripheral stuff anyway. I hope most intelligent republicans realise they didnt lose this election because the 'liberal media' was mean about Palins clothes and accent. They lost it because they lost the war of ideas.

Crying about media bias does nothing. You have to take a good long look at yourselves in the mirror after this upcomming defeat and figure out how best to put your argument to the American people. Like the Conservative party in Britain has done after 2005.

[Mustard]

i have yet to see anyone post in this thread that is even close to unbiased.
It is a political thread genius... we aren't discussing mathematics.

[freegood]

Go Maverick!

http://www.nationaljournal.com/njonline/print_friendly.php?ID=ot_20081021_3912

In Endgame, Metrics Are Adding Up For Obama

It Ain't Over Till It's Over, But Several Key Factors Don't Look Good For McCain

Tuesday, Oct. 21, 2008
by Charlie Cook (cookreport@nationaljournal.com)
One of the most unsettling aspects of this campaign is that for an election cycle so turbulent, with so many surprising twists and turns, over the last few days it suddenly has had the feel of concrete setting. Just seven or eight weeks ago, Sen. Barack Obama (http://www.nationaljournal.com/almanac/2008/people/il/ils2.php) had a lead over Sen. John McCain (http://www.nationaljournal.com/almanac/2008/people/az/azs1.php), but it hardly seemed sure; we wondered, is this lead real, is it durable?

But today it seems very unlikely that the focal point of this election is going to shift away from the economy. And as long as the economy is the focal point, it's difficult to see how this gets any better for Republicans up or down the ballot. It's sobering to think of the magnitude an event would have to have to pull voters' minds off the economy, the credit markets that have seized up, the stock market that has been pummeled, the values of their 401(k) and other retirement plans that have plummeted. How can an election that was so volatile now suddenly seem to be so inevitable?

With Obama now outspending McCain routinely by margins of 3- and 4-to-1 in advertising in so many states, it's hard to see how the Arizonan's campaign can drive a message.

At this point it would be difficult to see Republican losses in the Senate and House to be fewer than seven and 20 respectively. A very challenging situation going into September turned into a meltdown last month, the most dire predictions for the GOP early on became the most likely outcome.

The metrics of this election argue strongly that this campaign is over, it's only the memory of many an election that seemed over but wasn't that is keeping us from closing the book mentally on this one. First, no candidate behind this far in the national polls, this late in the campaign has come back to win. Sure, we have seen come-from-behind victories, but they didn't come back this far this late.

Second, early voting has made comebacks harder and would tend to diminish the impact of the kind of late-breaking development that might save McCain's candidacy. With as many as one-third of voters likely to cast their ballot before Election Day, every day more are cast and the campaign is effectively over for them. The longer Obama has this kind of lead and the more votes are cast early, the more voters are out of the pool for McCain.

Third, considering that 89 percent of all voters who identified themselves as Democrats voted for John Kerry four years ago and 93 percent of Republicans cast their ballots for George W. Bush, the switch from parity between the parties to a 10-point Democratic advantage would seem to almost seal this outcome irrespective of the candidates fielded on each side. The unprecedented surges seen in Democratic party registrations in those states that require party affiliations confirm that.

Fourth, just look at the money and spending. With Obama now outspending McCain routinely by margins of 3- and 4-to-1 in advertising in so many states, it's hard to see how the Arizonan's campaign can drive a message. For a time, Obama was matching McCain one for one in negative advertising, then spending double or triple on top of that in positive advertising. Now Obama seems primarily doing positive ads, probably the right move given his lead going into this final stretch. Organizationally, it's hard to find any state where McCain is organized as well as President Bush was four years ago or Obama is today, a product of both money and enthusiasm.
Fifth, while many are talking about the so-called "Bradley effect," voters telling pollsters that they will vote for an African-American candidate when they won't, putting aside the question of whether it ever existed, it hasn't been seen in at least 15 years and the likely surge in turnout among African-American and young people seems sufficient to offset it anyway.

Finally there are the states. Obama is now leading in every state that Al Gore and John Kerry both won, including Michigan, Pennsylvania, Minnesota and Wisconsin, and he is ahead in Iowa, New Hampshire and New Mexico, the three states that went once but not twice for Democrats in 2000 and 2004. He is also ahead in Florida, Colorado and Virginia. If that weren't enough (and it is), he's running basically even in Indiana, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina and Ohio, and even threatening in Montana, North Dakota and West Virginia.
As things are going now, this election would appear to be on a track to match Bill Clinton's 1992 5.6 percent margin over President George H.W. Bush, the question is whether it gets to Bush's 1988 7.7 percent win over Michael Dukakis or Clinton's 8.5 percent win over Robert Dole in 1996.

Maybe some cataclysmic event occurs in the next two weeks that changes the trajectory of this election, but to override these factors, it would have to be very, very big.

[Mustard]

hUbfCVFL7XM

http://i38.tinypic.com/2eakpit.jpg

[heelsguy]

A. Not really.
B. Sort of.

Seriously, tell me what the governor of Alaska does that has anything to do with being president?

what about bill clinton? he was just the governor of the backwater state of arkansas. I mean seriously, how fucking hypocritical can you be? everyone knows sam walton was the real governor of arkansas anyway

[Debo]

If you can't see your own bias at this point, it's just kind of sad.

John Edwards talks about the common man but gets an expensive haircut to look presidential: Somewhat reasonable story
Sarah Palin talks about the common man but gets an expensive wardrobe to look presidential: Completely rediculous liberal media story

Did Edwards donate his $55,000 (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=14&entry_id=16809) speaking fees to charity?

A spokeswoman for Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin says the campaign will donate to charity some $150,000 in clothing and accessories the Republican National Committee has purchased for the Alaska governor.http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-10-22-palin-clothing-donate_N.htm?csp=34

[heelsguy]

Did Edwards donate his $55,000 (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=14&entry_id=16809) speaking fees to charity?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-10-22-palin-clothing-donate_N.htm?csp=34


no comparison.John Edwards founded the Poverty Center at UNC-CH to raise money, and visibility for his campaign bid.....and then 50 miles southwest of that city had this:

http://michaelscomments.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/edwardshome.jpg?w=425

[BIG PIZZLE]

That's awesome but no pool?

[BIG PIZZLE]

what about bill clinton? he was just the governor of the backwater state of arkansas. I mean seriously, how fucking hypocritical can you be? everyone knows sam walton was the real governor of arkansas anyway

How many people live is arkensas?

[dadaelus]

That's awesome but no pool?



In the basement, filled with the tears of local orphans.

[BIG PIZZLE]

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=188638&title=Understanding-Real-America-in-Wasilla

[Stax]

Did Edwards donate his $55,000 (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=14&entry_id=16809) speaking fees to charity?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-10-22-palin-clothing-donate_N.htm?csp=34

Yeah, that's totally not an attempt to nip this story in the bud. And, as heelsguy said, I'd say Edwards did a fair bit more for the poor than some knee-jerk donations.

what about bill clinton? he was just the governor of the backwater state of arkansas. I mean seriously, how fucking hypocritical can you be? everyone knows sam walton was the real governor of arkansas anyway

I don't know when I said Clinton was 'experienced' at being president when he entered office, so I don't know why I'm hypocritical. In fact Clinton's first period in office speaks to the value of legislative experience as he found mismanagement of his health care policy proposal almost immediately undercut his first term's goals.

And I want to repeat, I think the experience argument is dumb because the presidency is a unique position. Anyone who can succeed at a national election has whatever raw managerial abilities are needed, and outside of maximum issue familiarity and mastery there's not really much else you can do (outside of specific issue-based positions like an executive cabinet position or a high-level general) to be 'experienced' at the job of leading the free world.

[BIG PIZZLE]

http://rackjite.com/archives/2156-Daily-Show-Jason-Jones-does-Small-Town-Wasilla-IN.html

It gets good at about 2 mins.

[Smokestack]

I'm not surprised that when McCain and Palin discuss elitism Brian Williams is clueless. I think Louis XVI was among the last to know where the elites were, too. Chances are, if you don't understand what McCain means when he discusses elitism, you fall into that category.

McCain doesn't explain it well, but he's right about their location.

Your takeaway from this exchange is that Brian Williams is the clueless one? Unreal.

[Debo]

Yeah, that's totally not an attempt to nip this story in the bud. And, as heelsguy said, I'd say Edwards did a fair bit more for the poor than some knee-jerk donations.

Seriously, why do you do this to yourself? Did you even look up anything about his charity?

John Edwards (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/e/john_edwards/index.html?inline=nyt-per) ended 2004 with a problem: how to keep alive his public profile without the benefit of a presidential campaign that could finance his travels and pay for his political staff.

Mr. Edwards, who reported this year that he had assets of nearly $30 million, came up with a novel solution, creating a nonprofit organization with the stated mission of fighting poverty. The organization, the Center for Promise and Opportunity, raised $1.3 million in 2005, and — unlike a sister charity he created to raise scholarship money for poor students — the main beneficiary of the center’s fund-raising was Mr. Edwards himself, tax filings show.


A spokesman for Mr. Edwards defended the center yesterday as a legitimate tool against poverty. The organization became a big part of a shadow political apparatus for Mr. Edwards after his defeat as the Democratic vice presidential nominee in 2004 and before the start of his presidential bid this time around. Its officers were members of his political staff, and it helped pay for his nearly constant travel, including to early primary states.


While Mr. Edwards said the organization’s purpose was “making the eradication of poverty the cause of this generation,” its federal filings say it financed “retreats and seminars” with foreign policy experts on Iraq and national security issues. Unlike the scholarship charity, donations to it were not tax deductible, and, significantly, it did not have to disclose its donors — as political action committees and other political fund-raising vehicles do — and there were no limits on the size of individual donations.


Mr. Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, set out to keep his political options open by promoting issues he cared about, like poverty. “He wanted to learn, travel and be in a position to be a viable candidate,” said J. Edwin Turlington, a Raleigh lawyer who was the manager of Mr. Edward’s 2003 presidential exploratory committee. “He had the ability to raise money to fund his activities. He had a vision, and he knew it would take money.”


“He was not a U.S. senator; he had no office,” said Ferrel Guillory, a political program director at the Center for the Study of the American South at the University of North Carolina (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/u/university_of_north_carolina/index.html?inline=nyt-org). “So he set up a series of entities to finance his travel, to finance a political shop and to finance an issue shop. It all adds up to a remarkable feat of keeping a presidential candidacy alive without any of the traditional bases for it.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/22/us/politics/22edwards.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

[Deadhead Derek]

on the edwards stuff, who fucking cares? really. 'this gop guy did this' 'well that dem did this' WHO FUCKING CARES!!! edwards is not the candidate. there are two main party candidates. Each camp is populated with fucking retards whose only goal is political self preservation. Reagan was not a god, but an actor. Clinton ran around with his dick hanging out. during each presidency, some things went right, which are remembered by fellow partisans, and forgotten by the opposition, and the with every switch is the same fucking horseshit.
There is no real America, or false America. We (yellling at the Americans for a moment, ignoring the rest of the ferrign posters) are all Americans, with the right to speak out for christ sake. Get past this bullshit partisan squabbling or we are all, as a nation, doomed.

[Archangel]

There is no real America, or false America.

Funny, because it's only the evil coastal liberal élites who think that.

We (yellling at the Americans for a moment, ignoring the rest of the ferrign posters) are all Americans, with the right to speak out for christ sake.


As long as it isn't critical. Then, you're a terr'st.

Get past this bullshit partisan squabbling


Do you really see that happening?


or we are all, as a nation, doomed.

*gleefully rubs his hands in anticipation*

[Axel]

I'd say those comments, made by conservatives are pretty non-partisan:

Wbjg9Hh17lI

[Titus_Pullo]

Orson Scott Card is a democrat...

Would the Last Honest Reporter Please Turn On the Lights?

by Orson Scott Card

October 20, 2008
An open letter to the local daily paper -- almost every local daily paper in America:

I remember reading All the President's Men and thinking: That's journalism. You do what it takes to get the truth and you lay it before the public, because the public has a right to know.

This housing crisis didn't come out of nowhere. It was not a vague emanation of the evil Bush administration.

It was a direct result of the political decision, back in the late 1990s, to loosen the rules of lending so that home loans would be more accessible to poor people. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were authorized to approve risky loans.

What is a risky loan? It's a loan that the recipient is likely not to be able to repay.

The goal of this rule change was to help the poor -- which especially would help members of minority groups. But how does it help these people to give them a loan that they can't repay? They get into a house, yes, but when they can't make the payments, they lose the house -- along with their credit rating.

They end up worse off than before.

This was completely foreseeable and in fact many people did foresee it. One political party, in Congress and in the executive branch, tried repeatedly to tighten up the rules. The other party blocked every such attempt and tried to loosen them.

Furthermore, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were making political contributions to the very members of Congress who were allowing them to make irresponsible loans. (Though why quasi-federal agencies were allowed to do so baffles me. It's as if the Pentagon were allowed to contribute to the political campaigns of congressmen who support increasing their budget.)

Isn't there a story here? Doesn't journalism require that you who produce our daily paper tell the truth about who brought us to a position where the only way to keep confidence in our economy was a $700 billion bailout? Aren't you supposed to follow the money and see which politicians were benefiting personally from the deregulation of mortgage lending?

I have no doubt that if these facts had pointed to the Republican Party or to John McCain as the guilty parties, you would be treating it as a vast scandal. "Housing-gate," no doubt. Or "Fannie-gate."

Instead, it was Sen. Christopher Dodd and Congressman Barney Frank, both Democrats, who denied that there were any problems, who refused Bush administration requests to set up a regulatory agency to watch over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and who were still pushing for these agencies to go even further in promoting subprime mortgage loans almost up to the minute they failed.

As Thomas Sowell points out in a TownHall.com essay entitled "Do Facts Matter?" (http://snipurl.com/457to): (http://snipurl.com/457to%29:) "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."

These are facts. This financial crisis was completely preventable. The party that blocked any attempt to prevent it was ... the Democratic Party. The party that tried to prevent it was ... the Republican Party.

Yet when Nancy Pelosi accused the Bush administration and Republican deregulation of causing the crisis, you in the press did not hold her to account for her lie. Instead, you criticized Republicans who took offense at this lie and refused to vote for the bailout!

What? It's not the liar, but the victims of the lie who are to blame?

Now let's follow the money ... right to the presidential candidate who is the number two recipient of campaign contributions from Fannie Mae.

And after Fred Raines, the CEO of Fannie Mae who made $90 million while running it into the ground, was fired for his incompetence, one presidential candidate's campaign actually consulted him for advice on housing.

If that presidential candidate had been John McCain, you would have called it a major scandal and we would be getting stories in your paper every day about how incompetent and corrupt he was.

But instead, that candidate was Barack Obama, and so you have buried this story, and when the McCain campaign dared to call Raines an "adviser" to the Obama campaign -- because that campaign had sought his advice -- you actually let Obama's people get away with accusing McCain of lying, merely because Raines wasn't listed as an official adviser to the Obama campaign.

You would never tolerate such weasely nit-picking from a Republican.

If you who produce our local daily paper actually had any principles, you would be pounding this story, because the prosperity of all Americans was put at risk by the foolish, short-sighted, politically selfish and possibly corrupt actions of leading Democrats, including Obama.

If you who produce our local daily paper had any personal honor, you would find it unbearable to let the American people believe that somehow Republicans were to blame for this crisis.

There are precedents. Even though President Bush and his administration never said that Iraq sponsored or was linked to 9/11, you could not stand the fact that Americans had that misapprehension -- so you pounded us with the fact that there was no such link. (Along the way, you created the false impression that Bush had lied to them and said that there was a connection.)

If you had any principles, then surely right now, when the American people are set to blame President Bush and John McCain for a crisis they tried to prevent, and are actually shifting to approve of Barack Obama because of a crisis he helped cause, you would be laboring at least as hard to correct that false impression.

Your job, as journalists, is to tell the truth. That's what you claim you do, when you accept people's money to buy or subscribe to your paper.

But right now, you are consenting to or actively promoting a big fat lie -- that the housing crisis should somehow be blamed on Bush, McCain and the Republicans. You have trained the American people to blame everything bad -- even bad weather -- on Bush, and they are responding as you have taught them to.

If you had any personal honor, each reporter and editor would be insisting on telling the truth -- even if it hurts the election chances of your favorite candidate.

Because that's what honorable people do. Honest people tell the truth even when they don't like the probable consequences. That's what honesty means. That's how trust is earned.

Barack Obama is just another politician, and not a very wise one. He has revealed his ignorance and naivete time after time -- and you have swept it under the rug, treated it as nothing.

Meanwhile, you have participated in the borking of Sarah Palin, reporting savage attacks on her for the pregnancy of her unmarried daughter -- while you ignored the story of John Edwards' own adultery for many months.

So I ask you now: Do you have any standards at all? Do you even know what honesty means?

Is getting people to vote for Barack Obama so important that you will throw away everything that journalism is supposed to stand for?

You might want to remember the way the National Organization of Women (NOW) threw away their integrity by supporting Bill Clinton despite his well-known pattern of sexual exploitation of powerless women. Who listens to NOW anymore? We know they stand for nothing; they have no principles.

That's where you are right now.

It's not too late. You know that if the situation were reversed, and the truth would damage McCain and help Obama, you would be moving heaven and earth to get the true story out there.

If you want to redeem your honor, you will swallow hard and make a list of all the stories you would print if it were McCain who had been getting money from Fannie Mae, McCain whose campaign had consulted with its discredited former CEO, McCain who had voted against tightening its lending practices.

Then you will print them, even though every one of those true stories will point the finger of blame at the reckless Democratic Party, which put our nation's prosperity at risk so they could feel good about helping the poor, and lay a fair share of the blame at Obama's door.

You will also tell the truth about John McCain: that he tried, as a senator, to do what it took to prevent this crisis. You will tell the truth about President Bush: that his administration tried more than once to get Congress to regulate lending in a responsible way.

This was a Congress-caused crisis, beginning during the Clinton administration, with Democrats leading the way into the crisis and blocking every effort to get out of it in a timely fashion.

If you at our local daily newspaper continue to let Americans believe -- and vote as if -- President Bush and the Republicans caused the crisis, then you are joining in that lie.

If you do not tell the truth about the Democrats -- including Barack Obama -- and do so with the same energy you would use if the miscreants were Republicans -- then you are not journalists by any standard.

You're just the public relations machine of the Democratic Party, and it's time you were all fired and real journalists brought in, so that we can actually have a daily newspaper in our city.

[vasili denisov]

<br>This housing crisis didn't come out of nowhere. It was not a vague emanation of the evil Bush administration.<br><br>It was a direct result of the political decision, back in the late 1990s, to loosen the rules of lending so that home loans would be more accessible to poor people. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were authorized to approve risky loans.I believe that piece was written two weeks ago. Yesterday, Alan Greenspan and Christopher Cox stated that it was not the cause, though it was a major factor (I disagree about it even being a major factor).

XjYDzyQNqX8

Orson Scott Card is a democrat..He is a democrat, but he did argue in support of the republicans in the last congressional election, and he is for laws against homosexual behaviour on the basis that such laws discourage such behaviour. What's expressed in his piece is independent of these ideas, but I believe we can speak of a particular temperament that may not be reacting to the intellectual value alone of the idea of Fannie-Freddie as the root cause. I think this becomes obvious when you read the piece, where the overall tone is very emotional, rather than the cold rigor of a man persuading by logic.

[Archangel]

Maybe, if more Republicans could read and write, they could print their own newspapers. Now Bush never said that there was a link between Iraq and 9/11? Does the guy think we're all as retarded as Palin fanboys?

[kid_vidrio]

Truth: if you print it in the newspaper and say it on tv and a few sheeple repeat it on the Internet, it becomes fact.

[Desperado]

Orson Scott Card is a democrat...

.

Oh look Scott McClellan was a republican...?


Former Bush aide voting for Obama (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/24/former-bush-aide-voting-for-obama-2/)
Posted: 05:50 AM ET

From CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/tag/cnn-ticker-producer-alexander-mooney/)
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/10/23/art.mc.cnn.jpg (http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2008/10/23/sot.dl.mcclellan.endorse.cnn)
Watch McCllellan on D.L. Hughley Breaks the News.

http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/2.0/mosaic/base_skins/baseplate/corner_wire_BL.gif

(CNN) — Scott McClellan, the former White House press secretary who sharply criticized President Bush in his memoir last spring, told CNN Thursday he's voting for Barack Obama.
"From the very beginning I have said I am going to support the candidate that has the best chance for changing the way Washington works and getting things done and I will be voting for Barack Obama and clapping," McClellan told new CNN Host D.L. Hughley
McClellan, a onetime Bush loyalist whose scathing critique of the president sent shock waves across Washington last spring, has long hinted he was leaning toward the Illinois senator.
"It's a message that is very similar to the one that Gov. Bush ran on in 2000," McClellan said in May about Obama's campaign.
McClellan isn't the first member of Bush's inner circle to express support for Obama. In 2007, former Bush strategist Matt Dowd also said he had become disillusioned with the president and said Obama was the only candidate that appealed to him.

[Morfin]

I've been thinkin'....

While Obama and Hillary were battling it out, basically for 8 months, Hillary's campaign operation seemed to lurch around with no consistent theme or message, with internal fighting, basically dyfunctional. And, the post-mortem analysis has seemed to be that she went into the campaign with a sense of inevitability, lost badly in Iowa and then was continually in catch-up mode the rest of the time. But the problem was the message: Sometimes it was her experience and readiness, sometimes it was how tough she was, sometimes it was that the media was sexist, sometimes it was her "common roots" (i.e. "shot and a beer" gal). But different themes.

McCain's campaign in the past 6 months can not by any stretch of the imagination be called calm or well-planned. His message has been inconsistent, he seems to have impulsively chosed Sarah Palin, the "suspension" of the campaign ploy, his actions with the banking crisis, Palin saying things contradictory to McCain, etc.

Yet, through what has now been one year of campaigning against tough opponents, Obama has never seemed to get ruffled, has had basically no rumors of internal campaign problems, has always had a consistent message.

Putting my lawyer cap on, I know that trials are won and lost on appearance and how the evidence is presented. You may not have the better case, but if you seem confident and can put a good story together, you will beat a boring, disorganized, ill-prepared lawyer more often that most.

Assuming for the momemt that Obama wins the election, I am wondering how much of his support (or how many of the votes for him) come because his campaign seems to have been so well-run -- he hasn't made any real campaigning mistakes?

[hatepoppy]

I've been thinkin'....

While Obama and Hillary were battling it out, basically for 8 months, Hillary's campaign operation seemed to lurch around with no consistent theme or message, with internal fighting, basically dyfunctional. And, the post-mortem analysis has seemed to be that she went into the campaign with a sense of inevitability, lost badly in Iowa and then was continually in catch-up mode the rest of the time. But the problem was the message: Sometimes it was her experience and readiness, sometimes it was how tough she was, sometimes it was that the media was sexist, sometimes it was her "common roots" (i.e. "shot and a beer" gal). But different themes.

McCain's campaign in the past 6 months can not by any stretch of the imagination be called calm or well-planned. His message has been inconsistent, he seems to have impulsively chosed Sarah Palin, the "suspension" of the campaign ploy, his actions with the banking crisis, Palin saying things contradictory to McCain, etc.

Yet, through what has now been one year of campaigning against tough opponents, Obama has never seemed to get ruffled, has had basically no rumors of internal campaign problems, has always had a consistent message.

Putting my lawyer cap on, I know that trials are won and lost on appearance and how the evidence is presented. You may not have the better case, but if you seem confident and can put a good story together, you will beat a boring, disorganized, ill-prepared lawyer more often that most.



could it be that mccain and clinton's handlers wanted obama to win?

noone in the media has come down on biden the way they have palin. obama's campaign is but a carbon copy of matthew santos' in the west wing. they had a fucking trial run to see how the populace would receive a young, charismatic minority candidate - before obama was even a senator, the west wing writers modeled santos after him, specifically.
see: video (http://blog.indecision2008.com/2008/02/27/the-west-wing-obama-and-plagiarism/)
mccain decided to bumblefuck his campaign as mentioned by choosing palin and suspending his campaign in a vain attempt to look like a 75yr old savior. the points have been made on clinton's incompetence as well.

by making his opponents seem so incompetent during their respective campaigns, it makes Obama seem like the obvious choice to alot of people. at the very least, should the people vote for mccain and the powers that be want obama, they can lie about the election and the people will accept the obama victory. even if you dont like obama, theres no denying the following he has, and it's not beyond any thinking man's ability to imagine he has enough followers to be elected, regardless of whether or not he is.

Assuming for the momemt that Obama wins the election, I am wondering how much of his support (or how many of the votes for him) come because his campaign seems to have been so well-run -- he hasn't made any real campaigning mistakes?

the perception of victory is all that is necessary. regardless of votes, his victory will be based on the perceived likelihood of victory.

[kareyn01]

But I guess these don't count, because it's only in Alaska, and Alaska isn't a real state. I'm sure that picking a Transportation Secretary in Alaska is way easier than picking a Transportation Secretary in DC.


She hired a friend of hers from high school to be Secretary of Agriculture, who listed as her ONLY qualification for the position her "love of cows". I don't think that's an argument you want to make.

[Morfin]

Go Maverick!

http://www.nationaljournal.com/njonline/print_friendly.php?ID=ot_20081021_3912

In Endgame, Metrics Are Adding Up For Obama

It Ain't Over Till It's Over, But Several Key Factors Don't Look Good For McCain

Second, early voting has made comebacks harder and would tend to diminish the impact of the kind of late-breaking development that might save McCain's candidacy. With as many as one-third of voters likely to cast their ballot before Election Day, every day more are cast and the campaign is effectively over for them. The longer Obama has this kind of lead and the more votes are cast early, the more voters are out of the pool for McCain.


This is an interesting point, one that is developing in this election as one of the first major elections with this many precincts allowing early voting: As every day passes, the potential effect of a major Obama gaffe decreases as more people have already voted. McCain may be running out of time, but as to the early voters, the race has already been run.

[freegood]

Rove once said that early voting saved them votes that would've been lost to news of Dubya's DUI.

Every vote counts.

[Mr. Brown]

has anyone heard anything new about that McCain volunteer mugging?

[Desperado]

has anyone heard anything new about that McCain volunteer mugging?


Only thing I could find...


McCain Volunteer Attack -- More Questions (http://www.tmz.com/2008/10/24/mccain-volunteer-attack-more-questions/)

Posted Oct 24th 2008 4:00AM by TMZ Staff (http://www.tmz.com/bloggers/tmz-staff/)
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.tmz.com/media/2008/10/picture-144.pngWe told you yesterday Pittsburgh PD has some serious questions about the alleged attack and mutilation of Ashley Todd, the McCain campaign volunteer who says a black man carved a B into her cheek in a politically-motivated assault.

Today, there's more things that cops are wondering about: a police source tells the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08298/922489-470.stm) Ashley didn't make any reference to the whole McCain-Palin bumper-sticker thing during her initial report, and she didn't go to the hospital until almost four hours after the allegedly brutal attack.

She also went to a friend's house and didn't call the cops until 45 minutes after the attack.

[hatepoppy]

im bettin he got tired of hearing her cry and quit before he could carve 'Bitch" into her face.

[Mr. Brown]

then why would it be backwards, like if done in front of a mirror?

[Limp]

then why would it be backwards, like if done in front of a mirror?
Upside down?

[hatepoppy]

then why would it be backwards, like if done in front of a mirror?
duh. it said it was a black guy, who said he knew the right way to face the B? *kisses*

[freegood]

WHYYY SOOOO SERIOUSSSS???

[Mr. Brown]

Upside down?
The woman also told police her attacker "called her a lot of names and stated that 'You are going to be a Barack supporter,' at which time she states he sat on her chest, pinning both her hands down with his knees, and scratched into her face a backward letter 'B' on the right side of her face using what she believed to be a very dull knife."

I mean we all joke and shit on this site, but I really hope to god that this is real.

Very interesting is that Oct 25 1994 was the Susan Smith (http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history.do?action=Article&id=1168) case

At least it wasn't just "some Puerto Rican guy"

[Limp]

Maybe he is dyslexsic....

[hatepoppy]

I mean we all joke and shit on this site, but I really hope to god that this is real.

Very interesting is that Oct 25 1994 was the Susan Smith (http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history.do?action=Article&id=1168) case

At least it wasn't just "some Puerto Rican guy"of course not. puerto ricans carry sharp knives.

[Limp]

I cut joo fakin face

[Mr. Brown]

Maybe he is dyslexsic....
blacks aren't dyslexic they just can't read.

[Smokestack]

LIFE OF REILLY

I needed to know: can Obama pick a fantasy team? So I asked him.

by Rick Reilly http://assets.espn.go.com/i/mag/2008issues/110308/lifeofreilly.jpgEmmanuel Dunand/AFP/Getty Images


I have the absolute worst fantasy league football partner. Just try to get the guy to return a call. Or a text. You need a damn court order.
He's Barack Obama. And, yeah, I guess he's busy, but why was I the one who had to fly to Dayton, get frisked and have bomb dogs drool on my bags just so I could meet him getting off his tricked-out, chartered 757? He can't meet a guy halfway?
I asked each candidate to be my running mate for one week in a fantasy league, just to see what kind of president he'd make—how he'd handle decisions under pressure and balance a budget. (On ESPN.com's Gridiron Challenge, you get a mystical $50M to spend on a team.) Only Obama bit. We settled on the Week 6 games.
"YOU THINK WE'RE JUST MESSING AROUND?"
Still, you talk about bossy. I thought he'd let the professional sportswriter do most of the picking while the wonk occasionally looked up from some Pakistan brief and nodded. Yeah, not exactly. When I got on his campaign bus, all three flat screens were tuned to ESPN. Obama was sitting in a black leather swivel chair, reading the paper. "Hey, man, I'll be with you in a second," he said. "I'm poring over the latest economic news." It was the USA Today NFL stats page.
He is taller, grayer and quicker to laugh than I expected. Moves sort of like an athlete—cool and smooth. "Now, you're the expert," he began. "And I'll gladly be the junior partner in this, but I really think we should take Drew Brees. He could have a big week. Oakland's secondary is a wreck."
Ohhhh, so that's how it's going to be. "Well, I like Carson Palmer," I said. "He's due for a big week, plus he plays in Ohio and I figure that's a state you need, so …"
He looked at me like I'd stuck my elbow in his soup. "Man, this is more important than politics!" he insisted. "This is football!"
This is a man who could potentially audit me forever. We paid $7.3M for Brees.
He wanted Clinton Portis. I wanted Adrian Peterson. We took Portis ($6.6M). He wanted Brandon Marshall. I wanted Bernard Berrian. We took Marshall ($5.7M).
Doesn't work well with others. Check.
Have to admit, though, he knows his stuff. Turns out, he played a little. He was a tight end in ninth grade until a coach told him to "trample" an opponent's back. He gave up football for hoops. In 2004, when Mike Ditka considered running against him for Senate, Obama—remembering how Ditka let William Perry score a Super Bowl TD instead of Walter Payton—said that "anybody who would give the ball to Refrigerator Perry instead of Sweetness doesn't have very good judgment." Ditka didn't run. "Too bad," Obama says. "We were hoping he would."
Likes to bait Hall of Famers. Check.
It took us 30 minutes to pick nine slots. The man was into it. I said I'd need to talk to him the following week about how we did.
"Cool," he said. "How's Tuesday?"
"Sorry," I said. "Getting married Tuesday."
He looked stunned. "Who'd marry you?"
Wise guy. Check.
We wound up in a dark tunnel under Fifth Third Field in Dayton for a campaign event. He was telling me a story about throwing out a first pitch when suddenly I heard over the PA system, "… the next president of the United States, Barack Obama!" He looked at me, said "Gotta go!" and sprinted up some steps to a thunderclap of a roar.
Afterward, while signing books, he asked if I thought we'd win. "Win?" I said. "There's like a gazillion teams in this thing!"
He glared a hole in me. "You think we're just messing around?"
Then Sunday came. Man, did he get lucky. The guys he made us choose—Brees and Portis—went nuts. The guys I wanted, not so much. We finished 32,190th for the week. But wait! That put us in the 81.2 percentile, which means we beat four out of five teams!
Of course, he already knew. Because, like so many Americans, he was checking the fantasy stats all day, even while he was supposed to be prepping for his final debate. He e-mailed to say he wished he had followed my advice on Berrian (who smoked Marshall), but he was "pumped up" about our numbers. And he congratulated the newlyweds.
I e-mailed back and said that if he wins this election, the ambassadorship to Tahiti would make a nice wedding present.

[Mr. Brown]

What the hell is this?

[Axel]

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/election/s_594939.html

Police planned to administer a polygraph test to Ashley Todd, 20, because her statements about the attack conflict with evidence from the Citizens Bank ATM where she claims the incident occurred, police said It would be quite an achievement to hold down a struggling victim and carve a perfect backwards “B” without breaking her skin.

[hatepoppy]

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/election/s_594939.html

It would be quite an achievement to hold down a struggling victim and carve a perfect backwards “B” without breaking her skin.
youre not suggesting dishonesty is used incitefully in an elective democratic campaign?

that's like saying corporate interests control The Politics Show.

[Morfin]

I heard the "B" was for Brawley. Tawana Brawley.

[hatepoppy]

I heard the "B" was for Brawley. Tawana Brawley.
but who'd be the white/republican sharpton to defend her?

[freegood]

Fox News?

[dadaelus]

then why would it be backwards, like if done in front of a mirror?

Maybe some tard just flipped the image...

http://i37.tinypic.com/2z8airc.jpg

[Mr. Brown]

I'm waiting for McCain to say Obama needs to repudiate the attack.

[smahoo]

Right after Palin's claim that it was done by a domestic terrorist associate of Obama's

[Mr. Brown]

rape is domestic terrorism? I know a few terrorists.

[BIG PIZZLE]

Here's a mean article.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2008-10-24/the-rightwing-primal-scream/1/

A Republican who's mad as hell at John McCain's apostasies.

John McCain's failure to inspire the Republican Party is not a surprise. He has spent the last eight years boasting how he opposed the party on fertile issues such as campaign finance reform and offshore-drilling. He has devoted more time in his campaign to making up with the Democrats who mock his appeasement—that facile &quot;reach across the aisle&quot; bromide—than he has to making up with the GOP, who want to believe him despite his boastful indiscipline called the Gang of 14 and his loony immigration apostasy with his Republican-bashing pal Ted Kennedy. What is a surprise is that after one year of listening to the hoarse, pedantic voice of the oldest man ever to run for the first time for president repeat tiresomely how qualified he is, how traveled and tested, what a world historical figure he will be staring down Comrade KGB, it is unclear why he wants to be president, why he thinks he is a Republican, and what in creation he could be?

Why does John McCain want to be president? It's not good that, with hours to go until the vote, the answer is uncertain. A McCain-friendly radio host told me that the candidate's recent reply to the question was something pompous, patriotic, and vague about &quot;service.&quot; How about a translation for the 98 million voters who have never worn a uniform, please, Mr. McCain? An electrician on a Coast Guard ship, or a volunteer school crossing guard, believes in service, but doesn't aim to be POTUS. John McCain has claimed elsewhere that he runs to balance the budget, keep America secure, find Osama Bin Laden, hold faith with the veterans, reform entitlements, and get rid of those pesky earmarks, none of which are a reason to be more than a cranky senator. How about a vision, a plan? How about a destination? How about stating that you are going to find out who wrecked Fannie Mae and Lehman Brothers and AIG and make them answer to you, to the law, and to us?

The frustration at Mr. McCain's random inarticulateness is so commonplace in the party that a Republican columnist joked with me by paraphrasing a witticism told by Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona. &quot;The good news is that John McCain believes in country, duty, service. The bad news is that that's all he believes in.&quot;

Why does John McCain think he is a Republican? Again, the party is perplexed. On campaign finance reform, he is dead against the party and for the Democrats, and no one I know has forgiven him an inch for the inert McCain-Feingold in 2002, which has now been trashed by the gargantuan unfettered fundraising by the Obama-Biden campaign. &quot;It was his vanity,&quot; an always charitable conservative columnist told me. &quot;There are people who have been hurt by that law,&quot; a young Republican legislator seethed. &quot;It's why we hate him.&quot;

It is the same with ANWR, wherein Mr. McCain spent years siding with the holy thinkers at The New York Times and The Washington Post and their progressive protégés. The result is that the newspapers disdain him anyway, and when the polls this summer showed the public overwhelmingly siding with the Republicans on drilling, the Democrats switched sides, leaving John McCain unloved and uninformed. Even when his running mate is Governor Drill, Drill, Drill, Mr. McCain does not awaken to his own knuckleheaded pride and say, I'm wrong. Instead, he talks about cap-and-trade as if he is Al Gore's acolyte and Barack Obama's fellow student.

As a founding member of the Munich-inspired Gang of 14, John McCain's record with the court fights in the Bush administration is so treacherous that no one speaks of it without scoffing. &quot;He pledges he won't compromise,&quot; a major conservative editor told me of recent McCain promises about his presidency. &quot;He says he'll stick to his guns.&quot; There is no confidence that John McCain means what he says. The charge John McCain heaves at Barack Obama, that he'll say anything to get elected, is a charge the Republicans aim at Mr. McCain. &quot;He's running a campaign divorced from the Republican Party,&quot; is the verdict.

The darkest hour of John McCain's presidential candidacy he saved until the close, when he double-crossed the party, his congressional allies, and his own chances for election during the fiasco of the uncooked Hank Paulson bailout stew. No one needed or wanted John McCain to suspend his aimless campaign and rush to Washington like Jimmy Stewart's Mr. Smith. He didn't go for principle or even for campaign tactics against the surprised Obama campaign; he went to Washington to make himself look good and to back the status quo ante—like a good member of Nancy Pelosi's caucus. To the GOP House members who fought against the bill and won the first vote, McCain looked like toothless busybody or worse, a sellout. &quot;He took no personal responsibility,&quot; a Republican House member who still regards the bailout as a blank check for half-cocked socialism. &quot;His attitude was, who cares what's in the bill? How do you bitch about earmarks like John McCain and then throw $150 billion of pork on top of a $700 billion blank check that didn't work?&quot;

John McCain is not much of a Republican, and he is too unbridled to be a Democrat, so what in creation is he? &quot;An incompetent populist,&quot; was the most sheathed answer I heard. &quot;An ego seeking high office,&quot; and &quot;a party of one,&quot; were harsher verdicts. The truth might be rougher. John McCain is the same aviator he always was, fly all day, drink all night, chase the girls and let the Navy think for you. Yes, he will get tens of millions of votes, and yes he may close in the polls, but no, there is no future for him in the Republican Party except as a respectable, harmless old sailor—always a hero, never a leader. The party he abused for a decade will no longer love him or fear him. It is strange solace to say that the GOP will enjoy luck at the end, because the only thing worse for the party than a Democrat in the White House would be the charming, whimsical, intractable, purposeless John McCain.

[Axel]

Campaign worker changes attack story (http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/breaking/s_595049.html)

...
Detectives retrieved photos from the cameras but none depict Todd standing in front of the ATM machine, Richard said.

Todd was questioned by detectives for nearly five hours last night. She initially told police she was standing at the ATM when a man approached her from behind, put a knife to her neck and demanded money. She said she gave him the $60 she had in her pocket and stepped away.

Todd initially said the robber noticed a John McCain bumper sticker on her car and became enraged. She told police he punched the back of her head, knocked her to the ground and continued punching and kicking her before scratching a backward letter "B" in her right cheek with the knife.

She now is telling investigators she was attacked on nearby Pearl Street after walking away from her car. She also told police she isn't sure if it was her bumper sticker or a campaign button on her jacket that angered her attacker.

She has also changed her story to say she doesn't remember giving the attacker any money; she assumes he must have taken the cash she had on her, police said.
...LULZ

[Desperado]

Here's a mean article.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2008-10-24/the-rightwing-primal-scream/1/

Wow that was some harsh stuff... but right on.

[Desperado]

I posted a part of this article in the palin thread... but it looks like McCains temper is starting to show!!!


McCain also said that Barack Obama's money advantage is probably why one Florida poll shows the Democrat doing well in the state. A Quinnipiac University poll released Thursday showed Obama up 5 percentage points overall in Florida, which went Republican in the last two presidential elections.
They spent more, that's the element," McCain said. "If it's true — organization. But we've energized volunteers, we'll get our vote out."

At one point in the interview, McCain grew frustrated with a Tampa television reporter during her questions on immigration issues. McCain twice said illegal immigrants who have committed crimes would be rounded up. Katie Coronado of WFLA-TV asked if that meant using raids to round up immigrants.
"What did I just say that had any connotation of raids?" McCain said, raising his voice with impatience. "Let me try one more time."
He again explained the idea of forcing illegal immigrants out of the country by issuing ID cards and fining employers who hire illegals. He then softened his tone. "I apologize," he said to Coronado. "I understand how important an issue it is. I didn't mean to be flip."


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/palin_clothing

[URFloorMatt]

Your takeaway from this exchange is that Brian Williams is the clueless one? Unreal.Here's another gem from that interview.Palin resisted the suggestion that if Ayers was a "domestic terrorist" — a standard line in her campaign addresses — then so were conservative religious activists who bombed abortion clinics.

"I don’t know if you’re going to use the word ‘terrorist’ there," she said.

[kid_vidrio]

Was this posted?
Another one where BO was the only one to get back and agree.
http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2008/10/14/obama-runs-ad-in-video-game/
Obama Runs Ads in 'Madden' (http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2008/10/14/obama-runs-ad-in-video-game/)

@ 2:40 pm by Walter Alarkon (http://briefingroom.thehill.com/author/walter-alarkon/)
Barack Obama's ads are now appearing in several sports video games, including the granddaddy of them all, Madden football.
The Obama campaign has purchased space in the popular Xbox 360 game "Madden NFL 09″ and nine other titles by video game maker Electronic Arts, said Holly Rockwood, the company's director of corporate communications.
Only gamers playing online in 10 states can see the ads, which appear as stadium signage or billboards, Rockwood said. (The ads are downloaded when gamers log on to the Xbox Internet service.) Unsurprisingly, all 10 states are swing states: Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Indiana, Montana, North Carolina, New Mexico, Nevada, Ohio and Wisconsin. President Bush won all of those states in 2004 except for Wisconsin.
--snip--
She added that one advertising agency that works with Electronic Arts had contacted the McCain campaign about advertising, but that the Republican's camp passed.

[kareyn01]

A breakdown of Sarah Palin, Dr. Seuss style:

03fcGelz8Hw

[kareyn01]

Apparently, the McCain campaign worker who claimed she was mugged and had a "B" carved into the side of her face was making it up, and has now admitted as much:

http://kdka.com/local/attack.McCain.Bloomfield.2.847628.html

PITTSBURGH (KDKA) ― Police sources tell KDKA that a campaign worker has now confessed to making up a story that a mugger attacked her and cut the letter "B" in her face after seeing her McCain bumper sticker.

Ashley Todd, 20, of Texas, initially told police that she was robbed at an ATM in Bloomfield and that the suspect became enraged and started beating her after seeing her GOP sticker on her car.

Police investigating the alleged attack, however, began to notice some inconsistencies in her story and administered a polygraph test.

Authorities, however, declined to release the results of that test.

Investigators did say that they received photos from the ATM machine and "the photographs were verified as not being the victim making the transaction."

This afternoon, a Pittsburgh police commander told KDKA Investigator Marty Griffin that Todd confessed to making up the story.

The commander added that Todd will face charges; but police have not commented on what those charges will be.

According to police, investigators working on the interview process detected several inconsistencies in Todd's story that differed from statements made in the original police report.

Pittsburgh Police Public Information Officer Diane Richard released a statement earlier today, saying: "Because of the inconsistencies in her statements, Ms. Todd was asked to submit to a polygraph examination which she agreed to do."

No photos of Todd are being released by Pittsburgh Police at this time.

The investigation is continuing as officials determine what charges will be filed.

You stay classy.

[smahoo]

Does this mean it wasn't a domestic terrorist attack by an Obama associate? Damn, what will Sarah Palin have to talk about now??

[kareyn01]

Does this mean it wasn't a domestic terrorist attack by an Obama associate? Damn, what will Sarah Palin have to talk about now??

I don't know if terrorist is the word we would use there...

[hatepoppy]

I don't know if terrorist is the word we would use there...seems appropriate to me.

someone attempted to use a falsified attack on her person to make the opposing candidate's supporters look like violent, ignorant brown people coming to rape the white women. she's inciting fear in her sympathizers, and using contrived misinformation to attempt to rally those not originally behind her candidate to his cause.

[Desperado]

seems appropriate to me.

someone attempted to use a falsified attack on her person to make the opposing candidate's supporters look like violent, ignorant brown people coming to rape the white women. she's inciting fear in her sympathizers, and using contrived misinformation to attempt to rally those not originally behind her candidate to his cause.


Good old fear mongering, when your down and out... blame the black man!

[Desperado]

Man... I wonder if McCain is saying "Dammit!" when he reads this.


Bush and Cheney cast ballots for McCain (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/24/bush-and-cheney-cast-ballots-for-mccain/)
Posted: 03:00 PM ET

From CNN's Kathleen Koch (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/tag/cnns-kathleen-koch/)
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/10/24/art.bushcheney.gi.jpg Bush and Cheney have officially cast their vote for McCain.

http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/2.0/mosaic/base_skins/baseplate/corner_wire_BL.gif

WASHINGTON (CNN) — President Bush has cast his ballot in the 2008 election, spokeswoman Dana Perino said Friday.
He voted for John McCain, "of course," she said.
Laura Bush, who also cast her ballot Friday, also voted for McCain, her spokeswoman suggested.
"I think Mrs. Bush has been pretty clear that John McCain and Sarah Palin have her vote," said press secretary Sally McDonough.
Vice-President Dick Cheney also voted for McCain, his press secretary said Friday. Cheney mailed his absentee ballot to his home state of Wyoming on October 8.

[vasili denisov]

The Making (and Remaking) of McCain (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/26/magazine/26mccain-t.html?_r=1&ref=magazine&pagewanted=print&oref=login)

About the campaign suspension.

Discussion carried on into the afternoon at the Morgan Library and Museum as McCain prepared for the first presidential debate. Schmidt pushed for going all in: suspending the campaign, recommending that the first debate be postponed, parachuting into Washington and forging a legislative solution to the financial crisis for which McCain could then claim credit. Exactly how McCain could convincingly play a sober bipartisan problem-solver after spending the previous few weeks garbed as a populist truth teller was anything but clear. But Schmidt and others convinced McCain that it was worth the gamble.Deciding on Palin.

One tape in particular struck Davis as arresting: an interview with Palin and Gov. Janet Napolitano, the Arizona Democrat, on “The Charlie Rose Show” that was shown in October 2007. Reviewing the tape, it didn’t concern Davis that Palin seemed out of her depth on health-care issues or that, when asked to name her favorite candidate among the Republican field, she said, “I’m undecided.” What he liked was how she stuck to her pet issues — energy independence and ethics reform — and thereby refused to let Rose manage the interview. This was the case throughout all of the Palin footage. Consistency. Confidence. And . . . well, look at her. A friend had said to Davis: “The way you pick a vice president is, you get a frame of Time magazine, and you put the pictures of the people in that frame. You look at who fits that frame best — that’s your V. P.”

[kareyn01]

seems appropriate to me.

someone attempted to use a falsified attack on her person to make the opposing candidate's supporters look like violent, ignorant brown people coming to rape the white women. she's inciting fear in her sympathizers, and using contrived misinformation to attempt to rally those not originally behind her candidate to his cause.

My answer was a play on Sarah Palin saying "I don't know if terrorist is the word we would use there" when Brian Williams asked her if she would consider an abortion clinic bomber a terrorist. Probably should have referenced that.

[Stax]

On Desperado: Lulz, that's about as quiet a "We support him" story as can be. "Of course" and "I think Mrs. Bush has been pretty clear that John McCain and Sarah Palin have her vote."

[Desperado]

Wow man this person fucked up....


McCain Communications Director Gave Reporters Incendiary Version Of "Carved B" Story Before Facts Were Known

By Greg Sargent (http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/sargent) - October 24, 2008, 5:12PM
John McCain's Pennsylvania communications director told reporters in the state an incendiary version of the hoax story about the attack on a McCain volunteer well before the facts of the case were known or established -- and even told reporters outright that the "B" carved into the victim's cheek stood for "Barack," according to multiple sources familiar with the discussions.
John Verrilli, the news director for KDKA in Pittsburgh, told TPM Election Central that McCain's Pennsylvania campaign communications director gave one of his reporters a detailed version of the attack that included a claim that the alleged attacker said, "You're with the McCain campaign? I'm going to teach you a lesson."
Verrilli also told TPM that the McCain spokesperson had claimed that the "B" stood for Barack. According to Verrilli, the spokesperson also told KDKA that Sarah Palin had called the victim of the alleged attack, who has since admitted the story was a hoax.
The KDKA reporter had called McCain's campaign office for details after seeing the story -- sans details -- teased on Drudge.
The McCain spokesperson's claims -- which came in the midst of extraordinary and heated conversations late yesterday between the McCain campaign, local TV stations, and the Obama camp, as the early version of the story rocketed around the political world -- is significant because it reveals a McCain official pushing a version of the story that was far more explosive than the available or confirmed facts permitted at the time.
The claims to KDKA from the McCain campaign were included in an early story that ran late yesterday on KDKA's Web site. The paragraphs containing these assertions were quickly removed from the story after the Obama campaign privately complained that KDKA was letting the McCain campaign spin a racially-charged version of the story before the facts had been established, according to two sources familiar with the discussions.
The story with the removed grafs is still right here (http://kdka.com/politics/McCain.Campaign.Worker.2.847449.html). We preserved the three missing grafs from yesterday:


http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/images/KDKA-450w.jpg
A source familiar with what happened yesterday confirmed that the unnamed spokesperson was communications director Peter Feldman. Feldman was also quoted yesterday making virtually identical assertions on the Web site of another local TV station, WPXI. But those quotes, which we also preserved here (http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/statepages/missing-grafs-from-wpxi-story.php), are also no longer available on WPXI's site, for reasons that are unclear.
This is problematic because the McCain campaign doesn't want to have been perceived as pushing an incendiary story that not only turned out to be a hoax but which police officials said today (http://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/33219369.html) risked blowing up into a "national incident" and has local police preparing to file charges against the hoaxster.
There's no evidence that anyone from McCain national headquarters put out a version of events like this.
After the story appeared on KDKA's site and this and other pieces in the local press started flying around the political world, an Obama spokesperson in the state angrily insisted to KDKA that it was irresponsible for the station to air the McCain spokesperson's incendiary version of events before the facts were fully known, according to two sources familiar with the discussions.
After that, KDKA went back to McCain's Pennsylvania spokesperson, Feldman, and asked if he stood by the story as he'd earlier told it, but he started backing off the story, a source familiar with the talks says. That prompted KDKA to remove the grafs.
Feldman couldn't immediately be reached, and a McCain HQ spokesperson declined to comment.

[Desperado]

Ouch put another one on the board for Obama...

Reagan Appointee and (Recent) McCain Adviser Charles Fried Supports Obama

Charles Fried, a professor at Harvard Law School, has long been one of the most important conservative thinkers in the United States. Under President Reagan, he served, with great distinction, as Solicitor General of the United States. Since then, he has been prominently associated with several Republican leaders and candidates, most recently John McCain, for whom he expressed his enthusiastic support in January.
This week, Fried announced that he has voted for Obama-Biden by absentee ballot. In his letter to Trevor Potter, the General Counsel to the McCain-Palin campaign, he asked that his name be removed from the several campaign-related committees on which he serves. In that letter, he said that chief among the reasons for his decision "is the choice of Sarah Palin at a time of deep national crisis."
Fried is exceptionally thoughtful and principled; his vote for Obama is especially noteworthy.
--Cass. R. Sunstein
UPDATE:Fried writes to TNR: I admire Senator McCain and was glad to help in his campaign, and to be listed as doing so; but when I concluded that I must vote for Obama for the reason stated in my letter, I felt it wrong to appear to be recommending to others a vote that I was not prepared to cast myself. So it was more of an erasure than a public affirmation--although obviously my vote meant that I thought that Obama was preferable to McCain-Palin. I do not consider abstention a proper option.

[Insomniac]

This is what McCain supporters actually believe.

vagD-4AH4Vc

[kid_vidrio]

(Cue music)
If tomorrow all the things were gone,
I’d worked for all my life.
And I had to start again,
with just my children and my wife.
I’d thank my lucky stars,
to be livin here today.
‘ Cause the flag still stands for freedom,
and they can’t take that away.
And I’m proud to be an American,
where at least I know I’m free.
And I wont forget the men who died,
who gave that right to me.
And I gladly stand up,
next to you and defend her still today.
‘ Cause there ain’t no doubt I love this land,
God bless the USA.
From the lakes of Minnesota,
to the hills of Tennessee.
Across the plains of Texas,
From sea to shining sea.
From Detroit down to Houston,
and New York to L.A.
Well there's pride in every American heart,
and its time we stand and say.
"obama is a terrorist" and president of the USA.

[Smokestack]

This asshole already has the lying thing down, so why the fuck not?:

'Joe the Plumber' Mulling Run for Congress (http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2008/10/24/joe-the-plumber-says-hes-mulling-run-for-congress/)

@ 1:29 pm by Hill Staff (http://briefingroom.thehill.com/author/hillstaff/)
Joe Wurzelbacher, a.k.a. "Joe the Plumber," said Friday he may consider running for Congress in 2010, challenging longtime Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D) in the Toledo-area district.
"I'll tell you what, we'd definitely be in one heck of a fight," Wurzelbacher said during an appearance on the Laura Ingraham show (http://www.lauraingraham.com/) Friday, "but, you know, I'd be up for it."
"There is a movement afoot to draft you to run for Congress," Ingraham said. "Joe, let me tell you something: you decide to run for Congress, and I'll help you with your PR, I'll help you do your ads, I mean, I'll volunteer to help you."
Ingraham's producer, Brad Feldman, said that during the break after the segment, Wurzelbacher told Ingraham that his statements today represent the first time he has acknowledged considering a bid for Congress in public.
Wurzelbacher said he did agree with Kaptur's vote against the bailout, and touted his support for a flat tax on income.
A Springfield, Ohio native, Wurzelbacher became a target of fame and scrutiny after Republican candidate John Mccain referenced the plumber during his third presidential debate against Barack Obama. Wurzelbacher confronted Obama during a campaign spot in northwest Ohio preceding the debate to ask Obama about his tax plan.
Supporters launched a website (http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2008/10/17/joe-for-congress/) following Wurzelbacher's rise to prominence encouraging him to run for the seat.
Kaptur (http://www.marcykaptur.com/) has represented Ohio's 9th congressional district since being elected in 1982, and has easily secured reelection in years since. She is expected to easily defeat Republican opponent Bradley Leavitt (http://leavittforcongress.com/default.aspx) next month.
Listen to a clip of Wurzelbacher's appearance in which he discusses a potential bid below.


Edit: It really is amazing how some people think the solution to all of this is to get stupider.

[vasili denisov]

From overthinkingit.com

http://i38.tinypic.com/f227vq.jpg

http://i37.tinypic.com/2ywgv4g.jpg

[vasili denisov]

Joe McCain runs into heavy traffic, calls 911 to complain about it.

_Y6_s3O5Bj0

[kid_vidrio]

He seems impetuous, angry, even a little indignant. Kind of like a spoiled child.
It's odd. How could two brothers be so different?

[Feng]

This is what McCain supporters actually believe.

vagD-4AH4Vc

Yeah, it sure seems like McCain supporters are nothing but America's finest lot of bigots, red-necks, ignorant scum - Palin's "real" America I guess...

By the way, I recently noticed McCain pronounces Washington - "War-shington"

Kind of telling that the first three letters or first syllable of how he pronounces this country's capitol is WAR...

[taters]

Yeah, it sure seems like McCain supporters are nothing but America's finest lot of bigots, red-necks, ignorant scum - Palin's "real" America I guess...

By the way, I recently noticed McCain pronounces Washington - "War-shington"

Kind of telling that the first three letters or first syllable of how he pronounces this country's capitol is WAR...


I wonder were these guys who did this interview white? Because I could not even Get McCain supporters to even say anything to me, let alone look in my direction during the RNC (not at the convention, at the bars and on the streets afterward).

It was weird. I would see them harass or say something to people or Obama supporters up the street, then when they would come near us, I would say the most tame chants like "Go Obama", and they would not even fucking look at me, or anyone in my group. One guy in the bar even left a (had to be) 11 dollar martini at the bar when I stood next to him and started talking to the bartender about Obama. Never came back. Are white republicans that scared of black people? Seriously, could one of the repubs here tell me?

[Kerjack]

Well black people do have the AIDS you know.

[Pharon]

Are white republicans that scared of black people?
Everyone's afraid of black people. Not just Republicans.

[BIG PIZZLE]

Not scary.
http://i35.tinypic.com/2d1wgep.jpg

Scary.
http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t310/TruSlide50/FatBlackAssponcho.jpg

[VoxAngelikus]

Well, that's it. Call it. Why even have an election?

McCain guarantees victory. (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14951.html)

[dadaelus]

Well, that's it. Call it. Why even have an election?

McCain guarantees victory. (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14951.html)

Must have seen the Diebold voting machine programming.

[Kerjack]

Well, that's it. Call it. Why even have an election?

McCain guarantees victory. (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14951.html)


He said he guarantees a close election and that he THINKS he will win it. Its right there in the top of the article. The editor is trying to nab readers with a false headline.

[Soup Nazi]

He said he guarantees a close election and that he THINKS he will win it. Its right there in the top of the article. The editor is trying to nab readers with a false headline.

And then the next line..............

“We're going to do well in this campaign, my friend. We're going to win it, and it's going to be tight, and we're going to be up late.”

I guess that isn't technically a guarantee, but for all intents and purposes, it is. But honestly, this is what he is supposed to be doing. What else should he be doing?

[Kerjack]

I guess that isn't technically a guarantee, but for all intents and purposes, it is. But honestly, this is what he is supposed to be doing. What else should he be doing?

No, no it is not. But you are right it is what he is suppose to be doing.

[Hobnail_Boot]

Alaska's largest newspaper endorses Barack Obama (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081026/ap_on_el_pr/alaska_endorsement)

Alaska's largest newspaper endorses Barack Obama
35 mins ago

ANCHORAGE, Alaska – The Anchorage Daily News, Alaska's largest newspaper, has endorsed Sen. Barack Obama for president.

The newspaper said Sunday the Democrat "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 Daily News said since the economic crisis has emerged, Republican presidential candidate John McCain has "stumbled and fumbled badly" in dealing with it.

"Of the two candidates, Sen. Obama better understands the mortgage meltdown's root causes and has the judgment and intelligence to shape a solution, as well as the leadership to rally the country behind it," the paper said.

The Daily News said Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has shown the country why she is a success as governor. But the paper said few would argue that Palin is truly ready to step into the job of being president despite her passion, charisma and strong work ethic.

"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," the paper said.

"Like picking Sen. McCain for president, putting her one 72-year-old heartbeat from the leadership of the free world is just too risky at this time," the paper concluded.

[dadaelus]

Given her reputation for vengeance, her to-do list of people to deal with back home just gets longer and longer.

[Feng]

Given her reputation for vengeance, her to-do list of people to deal with back home just gets longer and longer.

LOL!

Note to self: If you are an Anchorage Daily News reporter, beware of helicopters/planes flying low and overhead...

[Claydon]

Hmmm, perhaps there is something to barry wanting to redistribute wealth...

iivL4c_3pck

[Archangel]

This is what McCain supporters actually believe.

vagD-4AH4Vc

So much for the notion that it's only a handful of people who are like this...


Seriously, how the fuck are animals like this allowed to breed, let alone vote? I have more respect for radical Muslim peasants than for these fucks. At least the former have the excuse that they have no access to information; but these mouth-breathers? They're given every benefit of Western society, and choose to be subhumanly ignorant. That's fucking unforgivable.

[Archangel]

And yeah, I'm an élitist. Fucking proud of it, too.

[hatepoppy]

So much for the notion that it's only a handful of people who are like this...


Seriously, how the fuck are animals like this allowed to breed, let alone vote? I have more respect for radical Muslim peasants than for these fucks. At least the former have the excuse that they have no access to information; but these mouth-breathers? They're given every benefit of Western society, and choose to be subhumanly ignorant. That's fucking unforgivable.

they should just be cleansed.

hey yous guys already have the setup, can we use auschwitz?

[Archangel]

I think the Russians took the plumbing.

[hatepoppy]

nm we've got DUMBs here anyway, the chattel cars are just being fitted with shackles. we'll get everyone in a few years.

[Mustard]

they should just be cleansed.

hey yous guys already have the setup, can we use auschwitz?
I think we still have some old WWII Japanese internment camps here in Oregon...

[hatepoppy]

I think we still have some old WWII Japanese internment camps here in Oregon...thats hot.

[Mustard]

thats hot.
Quite literally...

[Yelram]

I wonder were these guys who did this interview white? Because I could not even Get McCain supporters to even say anything to me, let alone look in my direction during the RNC (not at the convention, at the bars and on the streets afterward).

It was weird. I would see them harass or say something to people or Obama supporters up the street, then when they would come near us, I would say the most tame chants like "Go Obama", and they would not even fucking look at me, or anyone in my group. One guy in the bar even left a (had to be) 11 dollar martini at the bar when I stood next to him and started talking to the bartender about Obama. Never came back. Are white republicans that scared of black people? Seriously, could one of the repubs here tell me?

They just know better than to get into a political conversation with any black person who's voting for Obama. They wouldnt want to get arrested for hate speech...

[hatepoppy]

anyone else feel like general tso'z?

[Mustard]

anyone else feel like general tso'z?
Oh for serious! Just about my favorite food of all time!

[DjAg]

I can go for some cat

[Axel]

Monstrous Liberal Black African Welfare Beast Carves Up Pumpkin’s Face! (http://wonkette.com/403829/monstrous-liberal-black-african-welfare-beast-carves-up-pumpkins-face)

http://wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/ashleytoddpumpkin.jpg

.. a disturbing photo of what Obama and the blacks have done to an innocent pumpkin who wandered into their ghetto. We have a feeling this is happening to thousands of pumpkins across the nation. Oh but of course the liberal MSM gotcha media would never criticize “The One” for this, heaven forbid.

[Desperado]

So I guess hes not running for reelection

Stevens verdict likely to inch Dems closer to 60 (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/27/stevens-verdict-more-bad-news-for-republicans/)
Posted: 06:14 PM ET

From CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/tag/cnn-ticker-producer-alexander-mooney/)
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/10/27/art.stevens.gi.jpg The Stevens verdict is another setback for the GOP.

http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/2.0/mosaic/base_skins/baseplate/corner_wire_BL.gif

(CNN) – Ted Steven's guilty verdict Monday afternoon could mean the end of the Alaska lawmaker's 40-year tenure in the Senate, recent polls of his reelelction race suggest.
In an Ivan Moore Research poll of the Alaska Senate race conducted earlier this month, entirely before the verdict was handed down, Stevens and Democratic challenger Mark Begich were statistically tied.
The prospect of Stevens, first elected to the Senate in 1968, facing a tough reelection race was unthinkable only a few months ago.
After all, the last Democrat elected to the U.S. Senate from Alaska is former presidential candidate Mike Gravel. Gravel served two terms, from 1969 to 1981, before embarking on unsuccessful presidential bid 26 years later.
But Steven's chances no appear increasingly slim in what is a boost to Democrats seeking to reach the filibuster-proof 60 seat majority.
“This race was a dead heat before Stevens was convicted,” said CNN Senior Political Researcher Alan Silverleib. "The Democrats are now most likely one step closer to a filibuster-proof majority of 60 Senate seats next January.”
Meanwhile, asked if there is likely to be any national political impact of the Stevens verdict, a prominent Republican strategist close to the McCain campaign said, "Just one more seat."
"It can't really impact a national environment where 12 percent say things going well," the strategist told CNN's John King.

[Pharon]

It gives me an erection to see guys like this going down.



See what I did there.

[Mustard]

You like 84 year old felons to fellate you?

I'm not sure I get the joke.

[Archangel]

More like fellon?


I got nothing.

[Hanover Fist]

I'm tickled pink that Stevens was convicted, he deserves everything bad that happens to him. I'm only disappointed that he's so old so he won't have very long to live with the humiliation.
I will be happier when they get rid of the rest of the pieces of shit in Congress like Sen. Murtha and Rep. William Jefferson.

Btw, Stevens said he will still run and serve if elected and that he has no intention of resigning whatsoever. There is currently no law that bars convicted felons from serving in Congress. I would be sorely disappointed though if he was not expelled from the Senate.

[Mustard]

I'm tickled pink that Stevens was convicted, he deserves everything bad that happens to him. I'm only disappointed that he's so old so he won't have very long to live with the humiliation.
I will be happier when they get rid of the rest of the pieces of shit in Congress like Sen. Murtha and Rep. William Jefferson.

Btw, Stevens said he will still run and serve if elected and that he has no intention of resigning whatsoever. There is currently no law that bars convicted felons from serving in Congress. I would be sorely disappointed though if he was not expelled from the Senate.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but can't the Ethics committee or something like that kick out a sitting senator if they get a 2/3rds "super-majority" vote to do so. Were Stevens to win (unlikely now) I wonder if a Dem led Senate would do that?