The North Carolina GOP is a disillusioned mess.  NC Republicans and some faux Democrats are surely depressed about the waning prospect that North Carolina will remain in the GOP column in 2008.  And disregard that Rasmussen Poll nonsense showing John McCain with a two-point lead.  North Carolina voters prefer Barack Obama and the telltale signs are still in place.  And the signs are growing.  In rush hour traffic on Friday, I was shocked to see that the McCain/Palin bumper sticker on the truck in front of me...was minus the McCain.  The driver showed outright contempt for McCain by displaying only "Palin".  A sign of the times?  Maybe. McCain may be wise to spend less time running negative Obama ads and spend more time reining in fellow Republicans who are starting to abandon his sinking ship.

Jesse Helms wouldn't recognize this North Carolina.  While McCain slept, Obama quietly surrounded the fort.  It's been a long time since any Democratic presidential candidate has enjoyed the kind of widespread support that Obama now has in North Carolina. But don't expect any Obama premature victory lap, the Obama Campaign is not taking North Carolina for granted.  With the Obama Campaign "fight until the last vote is counted strategy", I predict that Obama will win North Carolina in a manner reminiscent of the way that Usain Bolt won his Olympic medals.  And the Obama victory will have coattails. 

Kay Hagan is almost certain to unseat the North Carolina Senator from Kansas, Libby Dole, and Bev Perdue will win a closely contested governor's race and defeat Pat McCrory who is giving her a run for her money. Give McCrory, the Charlotte mayor, credit for being smart enough not to alienate Obama supporters with whom he hopes to garner some measure of favor.  All in all, it's been a great year to follow North Carolina politics.  And the person most responsible is Barack Obama.  It is satisfying to witness that most Americans including North Carolinians see the value in having a leader that possesses the ability to inspire its people to transform a nation.

Hereabouts, the transtion from urban to agricultural and rural is abrupt.  Very abrupt.  As in, boom, it happens between two exits on I-40, so, especially as a lawyer, you get to circulate out of the city and out into the less citified areas, most of which bear very little resemblance to anything I ever saw on Andy Griffith. Living here, observing with an outsider's eye but raised among a different flavor of rural conservatives, was like having a ring-side seat for the parade of horribles that has been the last sixteen years. 

Two of the most memorable floats in that parade were the beliefs of the Angry North Carolina White Guys (especially the religious ones) as I've come to call them, a particular species of North Carolinian with whom I became all too familiar,  All of them seem to unconciously ape the dress, the mannerisms and the facial expression of their hero, Dale Earnhardt (who was, after all, one of them).  The farmer cap, the pencil thin mustache, the grizzled hair and tough stringy musculature.  And the hard eyes behind which a torrent of rage seemed just on the verge of breaking out. 

They seemed to me to be very much men of their times, guys who were getting the shit kicked out of them by life and the economy pretty much 24/7/365, whose state was changing around them with bewildering speed but who always seemed to get the short end of the stick as first the tobacco business collapsed, then the textile mills shipped out to China and then the furniture companies followed.

To a man, they were hardcore Republicans, and so were their wives.  They left the Bush/Cheney stickers on their cars til '07, listened to Rush incessently, got all their news from Fox. 

And here are those two floats on the Parade of Horribles I was talking about, both pulled by these Angry White Guys and their angry, angry wives. 

Throughout the 90s, to a man and to a woman, every last one of them was convinced beyond a doubt that Bill Clinton raised their taxes.  It was absolutely incredible.  Congress passed Clinton's budget that jacked the tax rate on the top bracket by three percent it went into effect and the Angry White Guys raged and frothed and stomped about their taxes going up, despite the fact that they hadn't.  The witholding on their paychecks didn't change a bit.  Their take-home pay did not go down one red cent and yet they knew, knew with absolute certanty, that Bill Clinton had raised their taxes. 

Then came Bush/Cheney and the Bush tax cuts and I witnessed the second float in the Parade of Horribles.  A lot of these guys lives got steadily worse under Bush.  The once thriving industrial sector melted away faster than the ice caps.  Factories shut down and the jobs were off-shored, one after another.  Textile companies folded, reorganized under Chapter 11 and came out of it as brand that got slapped onto cheap imports.  The federal government ended the tobacco quota program and the retail spaces in even Winston-Salem, home of R.J. Reynolds and one of the smokingest cities in America, had gone non-smoking.  The furniture manufacturing industry, once the pride of the Piedmont, evaporated in less than a decade. 

None of these folks were under any illusion that Bush had cut their taxes in any meaningful way.  They were now too close to the margin to nuture that kind of delusion.  All of them understood clearly that most of the benefit of the Bush tax cuts had gone to people making a lot more money than any of them would see in a decade. 

But, the final fruit of the thirty year Republican campaign to portray our long-held civic virtues as  positive evils, they believed that was a good thing.  Rushbo told them on the radio that the rich folk need that money to invest and create jobs, and all of these guys nodded approvingly.  They kept nodding for a decade while those rich guys took their extra lucre and invested it in ever more exciting new and innovative ways to make the the Angry White Guys poorer.  

This is where we are now.  Progressive taxation, a cornerstone of the civic values underlying the income tax since the 16th Amendement was passed, and one the rich used to actually take a certain grudging noblisse oglige pride in bearing, was now deemed a job-destroying scurge, a socialistic force of evil destruction that's probably just a big plot to take hardworking people's money away from them and give it to the blacks. 

And now, the guys at the the Republican Party's Minitrue have finally managed to take this innovative thinking to a new level.  Now, they've finally managed make a lot of these guys take the final step and proclaim progressive taxation to be a manifestation of Marxism.  That's what what we saw Joe Biden get hit with by that fruitcake anchor lady in Florida and you saw how incredulous he was. 

I wasn't.  That's been knocking around in the emails the Angry White Guys and their wives have been sending each other for a couple of years now.  Progressive taxation is Marxism.  Not just socialism, nope, its outright Communistic, precious-bodily-fluid-contaminating Marxism.  That's the received wisdom we have have to deal with now and that means we've got to go back to basics when if we're going to beat it back. 

Where did this radical notion of progressive taxation come from?  What economy destroying bleeding heart came up with it?  What no-good job destroying libtard perpetrated this great fraud on the United States of America?

Ladies and gentlemen (as Joe would say), I give you the genesis of the concept of progressive taxation:

 The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be anything very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion

What rotten commie pinko fag said this?  Was it Karl Marx?  Leon Trotsky?  Eugene Debs?  Julius and Ethel Rosenberg? 

Nope. That would be Adam Smith in "The Wealth of Nations."   

Sigh.  Why do Republicans hate capitalism? 

This is an announcement to all the well-meaning, but block-headed volunteers who have given so unselfishly of their time to knock on doors and browbeat the inhabitants therein with their agenda:  Kindly stop ringing the bell; it gives me a headache.

Furthermore, in the future, it would be wise to send out literate volunteers.  The ones who show up on the porch have had trouble reading the No Soliciting or Proselytizing placard.

It's punishment enough that the Baptists and Jehovah Witnesses ring the bell.  Must I be forced to listen to the earnest entreaties of campaign volunteers determined to save my soul from Republican damnation?  I know McCain is an idiot; there's no need to remind me.

 

 

 

More ugliness from the PA GOP:

PHILADELPHIA (AP) -- Pennsylvania Republicans are disavowing an e-mail sent to Jewish voters that likens a vote for Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama to events that led up to the Holocaust.

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

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

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

State GOP officials disavowed the e-mail and said the strategist who helped draft it had been fired.

Read the entire article here.

Yes, autism again.

ThinkProgress said this better than any of us in the lab: "Palin did not specify what fruit fly research earmark she was referring to (presumably a grant for olive fruit fly research), but she is apparently unaware that scientific research with fruit flies has led to valuable discoveries that have boosted autism research...."

More about that specific research here, if you're more curious than certain candidates.

Or, if you'd like to help us MODIFY THE BRUNDLE CHAMBER into something a little more LIKE A RAY, WE HAVE OPENINGS IN THE LAB!!!

Hi there, come on in.  Is it?  I hadn't noticed.  Then get in here, will you?  It's great to see you too, I always look forward to this time of the evening.  How wonderful, thank you!  New music is greatly appreciated - especially since I'm afraid my "collection" is getting a bit old.  Go ahead and throw it on, nothing playing at the moment.  Then grab a seat on the sofa and pull up a pillow.  I'll go get us something to take away the stress of the day and will be right back ... okay?

I could have sworn I had another bottle of Zin.  Oh, good, there it is.  If it'd been a snake it would have bitten me.  Whoa!  Now there's a phrase, an expression if you will, that describes exactly what it means.  You get too close and still don't see it, right?  Something like that.  Lots of those make sense; those word combinations that have come to be a staple of our language.  Some are known all over the country and we grow up reciting them, some are more regional and make other folks laugh while we just look puzzled as to why.  While some make sense: dumb as dirt, high as a kite, over the hill ... you've heard the like.  But it's the others that fascinate me.  

Hair of the dog that bit you.  Dog tired.  Cat got your tongue?  Let the cat out of the bag.  We seem to be somewhat obsessed with animals in general.  Happy as a clam.  Loose as a goose.  Madder than six wet hens.  Well, I'll be a monkey's uncle.  Huh???  Why would a cat have your tongue - unless you had it in a bag?  How happy is a clam?  What's so loose about a goose?  Does being wet piss off a hen with five friends?  Why are dogs the epitome of tired and what does their hair have to do with another drink?  And I have no idea if being a monkey's uncle is a good or bad thing, quite frankly. 

I told Michael the other day that something was dead as a doornail.  I've used that phrase / expression most of my life and never realized that I had no idea what a doornail was.  Was it doornail or door nail?  I've since looked it up out of curiosity because no one I asked knew, either.  Here's a teaser ... do you know?  Very funny.  I didn't ask if you cared.  Just enjoy your wine and be glad it wasn't a snake.

 

 

What separates "mad" scientists from the ordinary kind is an appreciation for irony:

CALEDONIA -- A campaign worker going door to door on behalf of Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama was allegedly assaulted Saturday afternoon by a resident of a home where a campaign call was made. In a telephone interview broadcast Saturday night, WISN-TV (Channel 12) identified the worker as Nancy Takehara, 58, of Chicago. Sgt. Toby Schey of the Caledonia Police Department said Saturday night that there was no medical assistance requested by Takehara, who said the suspect hit her in the face and pulled her hair.

The following day, the assailant admitted he "regrets his actions", which included pulling the 58-year-old woman's hair.

Anne Pressly

She seemed to be recovering, but Anne Pressly, 26, a news reporter for KATV, who was bludgeoned in her home, has died. Her father said that she fought her attacker, and that every bone in her face was broken.

Pressly played commentator Ann Coulter in W, Oliver Stone’s portrayal of George W Bush.

Police reported that her credit card was used at a nearby gas station soon after the attack.

 Already 5,000 voters in question?  I don't know why I expected better from leaders in my state.

I am prepared to wait however long it takes if we have to fight to get votes counted to win this election.

I think we should write, call, and otherwise request that networks/news programs give us a report on the total number of provisional or otherwise uncounted votes in each state long with the regular results on election day.  Some think Senator Obama will win by a landslide.  Is it possible that we will not know who won this election on election day?

"That's gratitude for you. Sometimes it's just the product."

 from a piece on palin. 

 

This is a great song that really depicts the failure of the last 8 years and what's truly at stake on Nov. 4. Check it out:

On its blog "Connecting the Dots" David Martin of Nielson Online posted that Obama's internet advertising has had a much stronger impact than McCain's. He writes, "Since July, Obama has placed 2.1 billion display impressions online, spread out over more than 200 unique ad creatives and 400 web properties. What's even more stunning is that he's out-gunned McCain with 23 times the impressions over that time period."

Martin also points out that this advertising surge began when the stock market started to fail and voters flocked to Obama in large numbers. This indicates that, even though the issues have been favoring Obama in the past month, his campaign has used the media skillfully to maximize the impact of Obama's surge.

This comes back to the fact that Obama has so much more money than McCain. The O-Campaign has raised almost twice as much as McCain's ($600 Million to McCain's $360 Million) and they are showing it. Obama is able to make more of an impression on the internet because he can throw money wherever he wants to (even video games). Next week Obama will air a half hour long program on multiple news networks to get his message out. McCain simply would not be able to afford that.

The thing that really angers me is how Republicans are suddenly shocked by a candidate's overwhelming use of campaign funds. According to an article on NPR's website, "McCain, speaking to Fox News, warns that Obama's accumulation of such massive amounts of money can lead to fundraising abuses. Obama is 'completely breaking whatever idea we had after Watergate to keep the costs and spending on campaigns under control,' McCain says."

This from the party that has constantly said, in opposition to campaign finance reform, that campaign funding is equal to speech and therefore cannot be constrained. This is typical Republican hypocrisy. Government should reduce spending while fighting two seemingly endless wars. We need to reduce the size government but dictate who you are allowed to fall in love with. Campaign funding is equivalent to speech until the Democrats have the louder financial voices.

I should note that McCain has historically been a proponent of campaign finance reform. Also, the Republicans are not the only ones crying wolf about campaign finance. The Associated Press reported today that the Obama campaign has accused the McCain campaign of violating campaign finance regulations. To me, the evidence for this accusation seems as thin as the Republican's assertion that Obama's successful fund raising campaign is suspicious.

In short, the campaigns are both anxious to point out inconsistencies of the opposing campaign's finance decisions because the impact of the funds accumulated are so powerful. It seems clear that Obama's surge in the polls has been the result of the dwindling economy and a constant string of missteps from the McCain campaign. But his extensive and unprecedented media advertising campaign is dwarfing McCain's. And this fund raising advantage makes it impossible for McCain, falling further behind in the polls, to make his case to undecided voters.

We've seen and heard some pretty ugly stories recently from the Republican ranks, but just when you think the stories can't get any uglier, they get uglier. So it was Friday morning (Oct. 24) on radio station WLS in Chicago, when conservative drive-time host Don Wade imagined how Barack Obama's allegedly adoring press corps would react to a video record of the senator murdering his own grandmother. Sadly, Wade's comments coincided with Obama's actual visit to the bedside of his ailing grandmother in Hawaii, which Wade ghoulishly turned into a fantasy murder scene captured on video. "The video clearly shows Grandmother greeting Barack Obama coming through the door...," Wade described with obvious relish, "...Barack Obama comes over, sits down beside the grandmother, and places a pillow over her face and holds the pillow over her face until she struggles no more" (CBS-2). Wade's wife and co-host Roma (picture here with Wade) expressed shock at her husband's words even as they were coming out of his mouth; and listeners expressed even greater shock in e-mail complaints such as this one quoted by CBS-2 News in Chicago: "Don Wade of WLS talk radio crossed the line this morning describing an insensitive and coded hate scenario where Obama goes to Hawaii and murders his grandmother. It was appalling, disturbing, ugly and over the top."

The Obama campaign has declined to comment on Wade's remarks. Those who would like to comment on Wade's remarks may do so at the WLS contact page ("Don & Roma" or "Don & Roma Producer" on pull-down menu). Don & Roma broadcast from 5:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. local time Monday through Friday and take live callers at (312) 591-8900. Alternately, recorded messages for Don & Roma may be left at (312) 357-1489.

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

Have you seen this world popularity map at The Economist?

If the World could vote, according to the poll conducted online by The Economist, at the time of this posting, Barack Obama would lead John McCain by an eye-popping 9.009 to 228 in The Global Electoral College (GEC).

The GEC is a fictitious construct of the Economist created to show what would happen if the citizens of the world had a say in our U.S. election, based on similar rules as our Electoral College system.

Countries currently shown as strong, or leaning, McCain include: Iraq, Cuba, Sudan, Algeria, The Congo, Namibia, Greece, and Georgia; while Obama is the clear favorite of THE REST OF PLANET EARTH!

**** UPDATE: Obama now leads 9109 to 171, and the Sudan is now a toss-up.

All of this goes to reinforce my feeling that Obama is far more than just a "transformational" candidate, he is the centerpiece of a movement of global reach.

Our mantra of "PEACE" from the late sixties has been supplanted by the "YES WE CAN" of 2008. Where "Hands Across America" was a wonderful couple of weeks (even for people like me that got assigned way the heck out in the boonies), the Obama movement has the chance to really change the long term way we interact with the citizens of all nations and the very planet itself.

So Peace and Love to Gaia and to all my brothers and sisters. YES WE CAN!
(now, get out the VOTE!)

---------------------
VOTED? YES
---------------------

Saw this video on YouTube and it made me laugh out loud, even as I wondered how we are going to come together in this country. Somebody had fun doing this one, and obviously put a lot of time and effort into it. With leadership like this you can only laugh. 

"Another flaw in the human character is that everybody wants to build and nobody wants to do maintenance."
-- Kurt Vonnegut, Hocus Pocus

I don't want to be one to count the chickens, but if recent polls are any indication it seems very likely there will be a Democrat in the White House very soon.  It is also looking likely Democrats will expand their majorities in both houses of Congress.  Of course this is reason for celebration, but it will not be the end of adversity and opposition to the work we must do to bring the nation back from the brink 8 years of Republican rule have put it in.

The fact that we must do this is terribly important.  The earth is dying, the American middle class is on the ropes, and too many of our children have shed blood upon the sand in a war that should have never been waged.  Change must come and it must come soon.  This much is certain.

But just as important to what we must do is how we should do it.  Democratic control of the Legislative and Executive branches of the federal government is not carte blanche for Democrats to force an agenda on the American public.  It may give our side a mandate to govern, but it does not give Democrats a mandate to rule indefinitely and the sooner Democrats start acting like they have been endowed with the moral high ground to the nation, the sooner the Republicans will be able to make a push to take possession of that ground.

If history is to be our guide, we need look back just 14 short years.  In 1994 Newt Gingrich's so-called "Republican Revolution" swept the midterm elections to gain control of both the House and Senate.  Why?  We can't discount Gingrich and other party leaders as supreme strategists, but the finger can largely be pointed at a Democratic leadership that had lost touch with the people it represented and as a result, the conservative ideology was able to gain a foothold.

It is unlikely that the Republican party will simply fall back to lick their wounds in failure.  Almost immediately they will begin to look for weak spots, wedge issues, and corruptions in the Democrat forces to exploit.  It is always easier to be on the offensive than on the defensive, and after these elections Democrats will most likely have a great deal of territory to defend, taxing both the party's resolve and finances.

But if things are done responsibly, carefully, and with a defined purpose of service, the Republican offensive will be met with a defense so powerful, so complete, and so insurmountable they will simply dash themselves against it, instead of breaking through it.  If we are to guide this nation forward, we must take care not to alienate or tread upon the new relationships we have built during this election.  Relationships with independents, moderate Republicans, and even with the branches of our own party whom at times find it difficult to get along.  Just as these relationships have been a key to our success during this election year, they must be strengthened if they are to remain a key to our success in maintaining a progressive liberal leadership in this country.  The purpose of this election is not to simply propel one man to the highest office in the land, but to help each other move forward as one, to meet the future together, stronger and more resolute than we would seperately.

How do we do this, though?  So much will be working against us.  Not just the Republican war machine backed by the nearly unlimited cash of mega-corporations, not just the horrid state of our government and our nation Bush has left for us, but also the expectations of so many hoping for a better world.  We have set up the pins of hope, and if we do not follow through, the danger is very real that many will turn away in frustration if those expectations are not met.  We must have a plan to meet these obstacles head on.

1.  Meet victory with quiet humility.  There will be time to pat each other on the back and celebrate, but we must not act like Bush in 2004 and spend our political capital trying to further humiliate the opposition.  This will only further breed blowback and add to the bitter vitriol of the defeated.  Practice good sportsmanship, shake their hands, congratulate them on a game well played, and then move on to the work ahead of us.

2.  Do not under any circumstances attempt to force legislation on America.  Just as the Republican push to amend the Constitution to bar gay marriage contributed to their undoing, Democrats should not attempt to simply force the opposite on an unwilling populace.  We may know we are right about gay marriage, but forcing federal legislation on Utah or Alabama will only breed bitter backlash. 

The days of Governor Wallace and the national guard in Birmingham are thankfully behind us and there are better ways to change the minds of the nation.  This does not mean barring the use of federal power to push states to enact more liberal legislation, we must recognize that people in Kansas may be slower to accept it than people in Oregon.  We must be patient but we must be persistent.

However, this does not mean we must wait for 100% support to move forward, nor does it mean that opposition gets to drag its feet indefinitely.  To use the old cliche, both the carrot and the stick must be used.  If a state refuses to move forward, the full power of the federal government must be used in a reasonable and measured way to change peoples' minds in that state.  The same proactive use of incentives to convince states to accept progressive legislation must also be used in responsible and measured ways.

3.  Sunshine is the most effective disinfectant.  We are of course intolerant of corruption and the indiscretions of the Right.  But what about the corruptions of indiscretions of the Left?  We should not only be intolerant of this, we should be more intolerant of it.  To simply talk about change and restoration of the public trust and to not act on those ideals is a dead end road.  Republicans will watch dilligently for any trespass of these ideals and will not hesitate to pounce on these opportunities.  The utmost responsibility must be taken.  Ted Stevens' Bridge to Nowhere served to not only be his undoing, but largely contributed to his partys' undoing nationally.  To simply allow one of our own to fund a similar self serving project, no matter what it might be, is just as reprehensible.

If we forget these immense responsibilities, this will surely be the beginning of the end of all we have worked toward these past few years.  The Democratic Party cannot just be the party of change this year, they must continue to be the party of change well into the future and not succomb to the temptation of simply sitting back and accepting the mentatlity of the status quo.  Our work will not end on November 4th, it will only just be beginning.  We have the fantastic opportunity to meet this challenge together with hope and strength.

Yes we can!

Bush orders DOJ (on Friday after five) to begin investigation of "vote fraud" in Ohio.  Great idea, taking that impeachment thing off the table.

The scene following a Sarah Palin rally Oct. 21 outside Las Vegas turned ugly when departing McCain/Palin supporters confronted a small group of peaceful pro-Obama demonstrators. Video from the Las Vegas Sun shows McCain/Palin supporters in Henderson NV shouting, "Vote McCain, Not Hussein!" at Obama supporters in addition to more overtly race-based taunts including nonsensical charges that Obama either is an Arab or has dangerous ties to Arabs. One woman shouts: "This country needs to wake up! Obama is dangerous! This man is a tyrant to this country. I mean, he has connections to Arabs! His education was paid for by Arabs! He's an abomination!" A man says: "Yes, I am a racist.... Those Arabs are dirtbags. They're dirty people, they hate Americans, they hate my kids, they hate my grandkids." More video from the Henderson event at Youtube includes the usual shouts of "Terrorist!", "Communist!", and "Anti-American!" at the small group of Obama supporters in addition to two men shouting: "No Arabs in the White House!" while the Obama supporters sing "Why can't we be friends?" An additional video at Youtube includes one man shouting "Dope and loose change!" at Obama supporters and a woman shouting: "Barack Hussein Obama! Barack Hussein, he associates with terrorists...! He is anti-American, he is anti-military, he has done nothing for Chicago, his middle name is a terrorist name, he takes money from terrorists, he associates with terrorists!" These video records from Henderson NV are only the latest in a growing library of similar material from McCain/Palin events across the United States, illustrating a disturbing pattern of hate-based behavior at these events that seems to be intensifying as Election Day nears.

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

The nerve! Last week, we heard cries of "Terrorist!" and "Kill him!" when McCain or Palin rhetorically asked who Obama was, or what to do about him. It wasn't just that the crowd yelled these things, it was also that neither candidate repudiated, or even mildly corrected the crowd until three days later. Instead, McCain stood there with his stupid smile. And Palin? Her accusing a political opponent of "palling around with terrorists," not only crossed a line, it shows a tremendous lack of understanding and intellect. Then there are the McCain surrogates who feel free to slander and insult their opponent with the seemingly tacit approval of the principals.
Which makes the crocodile tears and false indignance of McCain over John Lewis's protest all the more galling.

John Lewis lived through the era he is comparing McCain's campaign with. I know that McCain's absence from the Freedom Rides  or Mississippi's Freedom Summer was excusable, but didn't the public schools of Wasilla, or the five colleges that Sarah Palin attended teach about those things?

The brutal reception by the Klan of the Freedom Riders at every stop was a  result of the atmosphere created by men like George Wallace, Orville Faubus and Lester Maddox. In the South, many politicians gave a wink and a nod to Klan activities. With the atmosphere that the McCain / Palin ticket is creating, such politicians may soon be returning.

McCain accuses Obama of having more negative  ads than him, but answer me this Johnny, did Barack ever associate McCain any characters of ill repute? No! Obama took the high road in his attacks, and did not engage in innuendo and character assasination!

And yet to listen to John McCain's whine over John Lewis's written words, you'd think that Lewis was some Democratic Sarah Palin  claiming that McCain was "palling around with Klansmen."

This Bill Ayers situation that's been going on for weeks became something of a central point of the campaign," Powell said. "But Mr. McCain says that he's a washed-out terrorist. Well, then, why do we keep talking about him?

Colin Powell just gave his endorsement of Barack Obama. The above quote illustrates that he considered the  behavior of his long-time friend McCain to be unconscionable.

What McCain & Co. have done is paint themselves into a corner, and now that they have run out of any talking points with any hint of verisimilitude, they have been reduced to a dog and pony show.

The loss of Powell for John McCain betrays  another weakness in him that we don't want in a President, an inability to adapt.

MR. MATTHEWS: If you have liberal views, does that mean you have anti-American views? What's the connection? I don't get the connection. What's the connection between liberal and leftist and anti-American?

REP. BACHMANN: Anti-American is the point, because --

MR. MATTHEWS: I mean, if you're liberal, are you anti-American?

REP. BACHMANN: Well, the liberals that are Jeremiah Wright and that are Bill Ayers, they're over-the-top anti-American. And that's the question that Americans have. Remember, it was Michelle Obama who said she's only recently proud of her country. And so these are very anti-American views.

MR. MATTHEWS: Okay.

REP. BACHMANN: That's not the way that most Americans feel about our country. Most Americans, Chris, are wild about America, and they're very concerned to have a president who doesn't share those values..

And now we have the latest episode of Republicans shooting themselves in the foot with their attempts at slander as '>Michelle Bachman gets her Joe McCarthy on.

This is the same person who blamed the Minnesota Democrats for failing to pass a bill that she herself voted  against - The Protect America Act.

She also has this fetish  for old-fashioned light bulbs, introducing a "Light Bulb Freedom of Choice Act" to combat the government intrusion of phasing out conventional light bulbs! Will the A.C.L.U. back her? Will the onslaught of incandescent bulbs lead to communism? Stay tuned!

Anyway, her jaunt into McCarthyism will cost her her job now that the RNC has pulled out of her campaign, and people incensed by her remarks have contributed enormously to her opponent's campaign.

Palin drops puck at Flyer's game.  She is booed vociferously and Flyers go on to lose 6 straight games.  To break the jinx, the Flyers apparently arranged to have her drop the puck in St. Louis last night.

What happens?  Blues goalie Manny Legace trips on carpet injures himself and Blues lose game.  Coincidentally, the Flyers win last night breaking their losing streak.

How long before Blues fan beg the Hockey (Mom) Jinx to drop the puck at some other arena to brake their losing streak?

Joe does his best when confronted by burning stupid rarely seen out of the wingnuttier nooks of the blogosphere.   Who's writing her questions, he asks?  This morning's posts at The Corner, maybe?     The network is in the Obama/Biden bad books now.

I also enjoy that this YouTube is posted by an obvious Obama-hater.  I kept waiting for Joe to "get angry."  Disappointed he didn't, Joe's awesome when he's angry. 

Alternate vid if that one gets removed.

Josh and others are focussing on the PA McCain campaign and their role pushing the Todd story without evidence. That is disgusting and damning. But the real villiam is far more insidious and evil.

From Huffington article yesterday: "...John Moody, executive vice president at Fox News, commented on his blog there that "this incident could become a watershed event in the 11 days before the election. If Ms. Todd's allegations are proven accurate, some voters may revisit their support for Senator Obama, not because they are racists (with due respect to Rep. John Murtha), but because they suddenly feel they do not know enough about the Democratic nominee."

There is no escaping or evading the irresponsibility and, lets call it what it is, bald racism, that drips from that statement. (And of course it would still be racist and indefensible even if Todd's story were true.) It is an outrage that Moody has not be fired or at least denounced by anyone pretending to be a journalist associated with FOX.  Will Chris Wallace, Mara Liaison or Juan Williams even mention this tomorrow on Fox Sunday. How can they not? Can anyone e-mail any of them to insist they bring it up?

Ben  

Actually, by uncovering I mean pushing that the MSM covers the BLATANT pushing of this story by the McCain campaign and it's allies to make this story front paged news. A blog that was posted recently just said that http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/astral66/2008/10/smoking-gun-b-hoax-photographe.php the only people that got those pictures were the police and the College Republicans. The Police DID NOT reveal those pictures, DRUDGE DID and obviously with the McCain campaigns attempt to drive the narrative, giving the most vile version of the story, it is a fact that they are hiding the truth. NOT THIS TIME, it's time for ALL OF US to ask the questions and to spread the word on other blogs that the truth needs to be told and it needs to be told NOW. We cannot allow these people to lie about something this vicious that could have really caused a national wave of hate and divisiveness. I will say it again,    it's time to get to work guys and girls, the truth needs to be told and we have to make sure that happens.

What the FUCK! I am SO SICK OF THIS BULLSHIT whereby someone cites Nazi analogies as being facile & gross overstatements, then uses the specter of the Nazi Holocaust to justify their facile comparison with the enemy of the moment.

Give me a fucking break. The Nazi regime systemically murdered 6 million Jewish people and millions of others, including homosexuals, Russian POWs and Gypsies.

The murdered millions of people. The innate need of some to cast their political opponents with that murderous regime belies an inability to express one's own feelings articulately, thus the lazy writer descends into overwrought Nazi comparison.

Six million Jews. Millions of others. Murdered. In cold blood. Comparisons of that with Bush or his supporters is weak and discredits the liberal cause which you claim to support. I am so fucking sick of it.

Millions of people, murdered in cold blood. Try to count to 6 million. Try to read 6 million names. How long would it take you? For each name, this is one life intentionally ended by the murderous Nazis. I can't stand it, and I'm embarrassed to see posts containing these sentiments recommended on a site I enjoy every day.

The Nazi regime murdered millions of people. Some mentally disturbed McCain supporter tried to perpetrate a hoax. Is there really any point of comparison.


Enough.

Here's an example of some of the weak analogies  put forth.

Comparisons with Nazis and other historical extremes are all too often facile and gross overstatements of one's case, and are usually best avoided. It is worth noting, however, that the rise of the Nazis in Germany and other examples of extreme demagoguery from history such as the Cultural Revolution in China under Mao Zedong and the Khmer Rouge genocide in Cambodia contained elements common to many such movements, if in less extreme forms. The Nazis, Mao's Red Guards, and the Khmer Rouge all made use of xenophobia and anti-cosmopolitanism, hatred of intellectuals, disdain for cities and the people who inhabit them, and other forms of divisive populism and "anti-elitism" to build working-class and peasant support and to fashion scapegoats at which popular anger might usefully be directed. Infamously in Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge, even possessing the soft hands of an educated urbanite was enough to get one executed; and at Chinese universities during the Cultural Revolution professors were thrown from their classroom windows to their deaths on the pavement below. Hitler's Nazis are known not only for the death camps they operated, but also for the persecution of artists and intellectuals as well as for festive book-burnings before cheering mobs of working-class Nazi supporters.

I am so eternally skeptical of Barack Obama's attainments and so insistent on the subject, that there are people that think I favor John McCain. This is not so.... I am just horrified by the choice. I really am. I felt and still feel that the only major American politician with the vision, bandwidth and experience necessary to bring the USA through the next eight years is and was that boring, old, Nobel Prize winner, Al Gore. In short, I haven't got a dog in this fight.

As to McCain. I think John McCain is a very good senator and should stay in the senate... I'm not sure that Obama is that good a senator because he hasn't been there (or anywhere else) long enough to really tell, so I think he should stay there as well... at least long enough to find out. And as someone who grew up in that state, I would have loved to have seen Barack Obama run for President after eight years as governor of Illinois. Lately most of the governors of Illinois go to jail... If Obama could have run a tight ship in Springfield without getting covered with dung, I would be sure that he could handle the viper's nest that is and always has been, the White House.

I do think it is unfair to say that McCain is Bush... I don't think anybody could equal Bush's insane and destructive incompetence. If Bush has become the measuring stick, probably Joe the plumber could do the job as well as anyone.

I remember once many years ago sitting on the terrace of a bar overlooking the rugged coast of Spain. I was nursing a drink and watching the tiny cars miles away as they zipped around the hairpin turns on the cliffhanging coastal highway... the others at the table were engrossed in conversation with their backs to the sea and I was the only one watching the distant road. My attention was drawn to a small Mini Cooper that was coming down the mountain way too fast... my friends were all looking in my direction and talking as the tiny car, miles away, crashed through a guard rail and hurtled some 500 feet into the Mediterranean... I was the only one who saw them die... all my friends suddenly were staring at me as I vomited all over the table. I feel a bit like that now.
http://seaton-newslinks.blogspot.com/

(BroNet) Republican presidential candidate John McCain today accused the "liberal media" of perpetuating the widespread belief that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is his running mate.

"My friends," he told a crowd of supporters in Des Moines, Iowa, "I never selected, nor did the Republican Party confirm ... that one," gesturing to Palin, who stood smiling at his side. Persistent press reports that she is the Republican vice-presidential candidate are widely seen as having injured McCain's presidential aspirations. 

"I don't know who started this lie," McCain said, "but it's clear that the liberal media is spreading it." A press package given to the media after the speech contained statistics purporting to show that 100% of media reports that mention his vice-presidential running mate refer to the candidate as 'Sarah Palin.'"

"Now, I'm sure Governor Palin is a fine American," he said, "but I've never met her, much less asked her to run as vice-president. Anyone who was at the Republican Convention knows that Joe Lieberman is my running mate."

McCain said that, despite a "partisan press that doesn't want real America to know the truth,"  the Connecticut senator has been on the McCain/Lieberman ticket since early September. The candidate insisted angrily that Lieberman was on stage with him at that very moment. "Who do you think this is, standing next to me?" he asked.

Governor Palin, who is campaigning in Iowa with McCain, could not be reached for comment.

The photographer who took the photos of Ashley Todd's self-inflicted injuries, only gave copies of the digital photos to the Pittsburgh police, and to her employers, the College Republicans.

This means there is no way the College Republicans and the McCain campaign was not involved in pushing this story, because Matt Drudge was up with the photo before the Pittsburgh Press even had access to them.

Here's the quote from today's Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (emphasis mine):

Mr. (Dan) Garcia took the widely published picture of Ms. Todd with her injuries. He said he took several photographs with a digital camera to document what had happened. He said he only gave copies of the photos to police and Ms. Todd's employer, the College Republicans. One photo appeared on The Drudge Report on Thursday, setting off a storm of media attention.

Here, then, is the direct link between the College Republicans working for the McCain campaign and the story that the McCain campaign was pushing through it's regional communications director, Peter Feldman, to the Pittsburgh media outlets.

As far as I know, no one had the Ashley Todd photos up before Matt Drudge, and no one would have had them if the College Republicans had been pushing them forward. I've seen no mention that Pittsburgh Police Department was releasing them, as we know that they hadn't released any of the information specific to the Obama and McCain aspects of the case.

The McCain campaign needs to be called on their lies concerning their actions pushing this race-bating hoax.

Here's an interesting comment from reader "journeyman" at Daily Kos:

I live in central NJ and I periodically listen to AM 1210, a station devoted mostly to right-wing nutcase talk shows, to see what the other side is up to.  The other day I got in my car and went for a short drive to a nearby park to get some downtime.  It was early afternoon.  I cannot be sure of the exact time, but I think it was about 3:30.  Sean Hannity was on and after playing a montage of Obama's speeches highlighting nothing but the word "change" over and over again in order to make him look vacuous, Hannity talked about "developments in campaign from the Pittsburgh area."  There was something unsettling and gleeful about his tone of voice and I remembered thinking "uh-oh.  What are they going to pull now?"

Next he went on to discuss a McCain-Palin rally at Beaver High School in Beaver, PA, and I thought "that's it?  That's all they have?"  Then I got to the park, turned Hannity off and went for a short walk, thinking no more about it until I heard about this story.

However, if both my memory and my hunch are accurate, Sean Hannity knew this was coming at about 3:30 on Thursday.  If there was no official report from the Pittsburgh police by that time, it is a pretty good indication that he had gotten this from a contact in the McCain camp.  I'm guessing he was not alone in getting this inside info.

 

There was a little girl

Jake Tapper over at ABC posted this link that John Stewart found. It mostly contradicts Mcforgetful's current stance against the rich paying more.

 

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/mccain-in-2000.html

 

Where has the old Jonny-boy gone?

Oh, Johnny, it's come to this. You've got your angry, confused little partisans in such a froth they've begun to imagine they're being carved up and robbed of money they didn't withdraw from an ATM they didn't visit by tall black robber who supports Obama, reads bumper stickers and writes backwards. Then when it's pointed out to them that they made the whole thing up, they blame it on the media. 

It's always interesting to observe which of the stories that seem to be major headlines in the blogosphere eventually make it through some mysterious editorial filter and onto the radar screens of the MSM, to become part of wider national narrative.

The Palin wardrobe fiasco was one that did. Another that should, and it will be interesting to watch if it does, is today's Politico piece by Ben Smith about the Palin insurgency roiling the McCain campaign. Smith's article arrives on the heels of or in tandem with Robert Draper's article in tomorrow's NYT Magazine.

The thread running between both articles raises grave questions about John McCain's leadership and executive abilities. For instance, where is John McCain as all the turmoil, finger pointing and ass-covering is going on? Why hasn't he exerted some of the vaunted leadership experience his campaign trumpets? If he can't control and manage a campaign staff and organization, what would his White House be like? Imagine how chaotic and dysfunctional it might be when the pressures are greater, when there are many more competing centers of gravity, and the stakes much higher.

Will the MSM see those questions the same way? And if it does, will it pose them in such a way that the answers scare the dickens out everyone? And will those answers become one of the final shovels of dirt on the McCain campaign? Stay tuned.

Big surprise, huh? McCain has gotten a little more fired up on the campaign trail, especially in Colorado this weekend, which seems to be due in part to the loss of discipline among his own staff. There's a good article up in the UK press today, and the interesting part is below. From the UK's Telegraph: "John McCain loses temper with defeatist aides as he vows to fight to the last":

A friend told The Sunday Telegraph that the message of defiance was one he had already delivered in private to his senior staff. There have even been reports that more than one of his aides last week began making inquiries about private sector jobs after the election, a clear signal that they expect to lose and a dramatic breach of etiquette in the dying days of a campaign.

The friend, who often travels with Mr McCain, said the candidate lost his temper: "There were raised voices. John's whole life has been about the fight. He won't tolerate those who won't fight. He showed his irritation at some of the pessimism in typical John style."

It was a measure of Mr McCain's weakness that a week before the election he was campaigning in Colorado, what was once a Republican state but now shows Mr Obama with a firm lead. On Saturday he was heading to New Mexico, another Western state that is slipping away.

I already diaried the story about senior staff sending out resumes here:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/astral66/2008/10/senior-mccain-advisors-sending.php

Enjoy your steaming hot cup of Saturday morning schadenfreude!

Wassup 2008

San Diego Wild Animal Park
October 25th, 2008
Reuders

In a move that's sure to send shockwaves through the Republican Party, Swazi, the leader of the seven-member African Elephant herd at the San Diego Wild Animal Park, has thrown her considerable weight behind the campaign of Senator Obama.

Read more »

This is chilling and needs to be headline news! Make sure you vote!   Bush Orders DOJ to Probe Ohio Voter Registrations

Published in : Nation/World

President George W. Bush late Friday asked Attorney General Michael Mukasey to investigate whether hundreds of thousands of newly registered voters in the battleground state of Ohio would have to verify the information on their voter registration forms or be given provisional ballots, an issue the U.S. Supreme Court weighed in on last week.

The unprecedented intervention by the White House less than two weeks before the presidential election may result in at least 200,000 voters in Ohio not being able to vote on Election Day if they are forced to provide additional identification when they head to the polls.

House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, sent a letter to Bush Friday asking that he order the Department of Justice to probe the matter.

"I strongly urge you to direct Attorney General Mukasey and the Department of Justice to act." Boehner said in his letter "Unless action is taken by the Department immediately, thousands, if not tens or hundreds of thousands of names whose information has not been verified through the [Help America Vote Act] procedures mandated by Congress will remain on the voter rolls during the November 4 election; and there is a significant risk if not a certainty, that unlawful votes will be cast and counted. Given the Election Day is less than two weeks away, immediate action by the Department is not only warranted, but also crucial."

Independent studies have shown that phony registrations rarely result in illegally cast ballots because there are so many other safeguards built into the system.

For instance, from October 2002 to September 2005, a total of 70 people were convicted for federal election related crimes, according to figures compiled by the New York Times last year. Only 18 of those were for ineligible voting.

In recent years, federal prosecutors reached similar conclusions despite pressure from the Bush administration to lodge "election fraud" charges against voter registration groups seen as bringing more Democratic voters into the democratic process.

Some of the Bush administration prosecutors who refused to seek these indictments were then fired in 2006 as part of a purge of nine U.S. Attorneys deemed not "loyal Bushies."

This "prosecutor-gate" scandal led to the resignations of several senior White House and Justice Department officials, including Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. President Bush then asserted broad executive privilege to block testimony by Karl Rove and other top White House officials.

In a statement on his website, Boehner said starting today, "Ohio elections officials will begin removing ballots cast during the state's early voting period from their identifying envelopes, eliminating any possibility of catching fraudulently cast ballots."

"Franklin County officials yesterday tossed out a dozen fraudulently cast absentee ballots, and the Hamilton County prosecutor has appointed an independent counsel to investigate more than 200 ballots on which the name or address does not match to state records," Boehner said. "Prosecutor Joe Deters has asked that at least the questionable ballots remain in their identifying envelopes until voter registration information can be confirmed."

President Bush contacted Mukasey late Friday and told him to investigate Boehner's complaints. A report released earlier this month by the Justice Department's inspector general said Bush "spoke with Attorney General Gonzales in October 2006 about their concerns over voter fraud."

Federal investigative guidelines strongly discourage election-related probes before ballots are cast because of the likelihood that the inquiries will become politicized and might influence the election outcomes.

"In most cases, voters should not be interviewed, or other voter-related investigation done, until after the election is over," according to the Justice Department's guidelines for election offenses as revised in May 2007 during Gonzales's tenure as Attorney General.

Even though those May 2007 guidelines watered down even stricter language in previous editions, the Gonzales-era rules still cautioned:

"Overt investigative steps may chill legitimate voting activities. They are also likely to be perceived by voters and candidates as an intrusion into the election. Indeed, the fact of a federal criminal investigation may itself become an issue in the election."

In 2004, Ohio was the state where tens of thousands of votes cast on electronic voting machines intended for Sen. John Kerry, the 2004 Democratic presidential candidate, were handed to Bush. Additionally, tens of thousands of voters were purged from voter registration rolls. Exit polls on election night 2004 showed Kerry leading Bush in many Ohio counties. Bush carried Ohio by 119,000 votes.

The Nov. 4 presidential election may very well boil down to Ohio if Mukasey's DOJ gets involved.

At issue is a federal law that requires states to verify the eligibility of voters.

A federal appeals court recently upheld a lower court ruling and ordered Ohio election officials to help counties set up a computer system to ensure the veracity of voter registrations.  

That would have required a total overhaul of the computer system just weeks before election and would have jeopardized as many as 200,000 voters, forcing them to cast provisional ballots that may go uncounted, Brunner said.

She said it was impossible to set up a new system or reprogram the existing one before the Nov. 4 election.

The appeals court ruling was in response to a lawsuit filed last month against Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Bruner, a Democrat, by the Ohio Republican Party. The lawsuit claimed voter registration information for hundreds of thousands of new voters did not match up with official government data, such as social security records and driver's licenses, and was evidence of voter registration fraud. More than 600,000 people registered to vote in the state in this election cycle.

But in court filings, GOP officials did not provide documentary evidence to back up their claims.

The Ohio Republican Party argued that the 2002 Help America Vote Act (HAVA), a law that grew out of the disastrous 2000 election between Bush and Al Gore, required Brunner to share any voter registration discrepancies with county election boards so they can identify voter fraud prior to vote counts.

Republicans faulted Brunner for her "steadfast refusal to provide the HAVA "mismatch" data to the county boards of elections in a meaningful way."

The Ohio GOP wanted Brunner to provide the lists of the newly registered voters whose voter registration information on did not match government records with 88 Ohio counties in an attempt to weed out voter registration fraud.

Republicans accused Brunner of violating federal election laws and that she was "actively working to conceal fraudulent activity."

Brunner said the lawsuit was "politically motivated." She said "misstated technical information or glitches in databases" was the explanation for some mismatched information on voter registration forms.

"Many of those discrepancies bear no relationship whatsoever to a voter's eligibility to vote a regular, as opposed to a provisional, ballot,'' Brunner said last week in a court filing. The mismatches "may well be used at the county level unnecessarily to challenge fully qualified voters and severely disrupt the voting process."

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court took up the case and, in a two-page unanimous opinion, dismissed the lower court's ruling on a technicality. The justices said lawsuits "brought by a private litigant" could not be used to enforce states to abide by federal laws.
"We express no opinion on the question whether HAVA is being properly implemented," the unsigned opinion said.  

In a statement, Boehner said he wants Mukasey to intervene and enforce Brunner to comply with HAVA and verify votes.  

"The Court ruled that the a private entity did not have the legal standing to enforce federal laws, leading Boehner to ask Attorney General Mukasey to compel Brunner to comply, which would mean providing access to a computerized statewide database, as required under HAVA," Boehner's statement says.   

Rick Davis, Sen. John McCain's campaign manager, said Brunner is seeking to ``minimize the level of fairness and transparency in this election.''

Various polling data show McCain's opponent, Sen. Barack Obama, leading in Ohio by five to seven percentage points.

But Republicans, perhaps fearing a Democratic victory, have called into question the integrity of hundreds of thousands new voter registrations.

One of the most notable targets is the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), a grassroots group that has registered hundreds of thousands of new voters this year. ACORN is reportedly under federal investigation for engaging in what Republicans believe is a nationwide voter registration fraud scheme.

Trying to salvage his campaign, John McCain has jumped into the ACORN case, too, citing it at the third presidential debate. He declared ACORN "is now on the verge of maybe perpetrating one of the greatest frauds in voter history in this country, maybe destroying the fabric of democracy."

However, the investigations launched against ACORN - now including the reported involvement of the FBI - have raised other concerns, especially that Republicans are flogging this issue in an effort to stir up anger, to revive McCain's campaign, and to intimidate new voters.

For its part, ACORN has insisted that its own quality control flagged many of the suspicious registration forms before they were submitted to state officials and that state laws often require outside registration groups to submit all forms regardless of obvious problems.

Boehner also wrote Bush on Wednesday asking him to block federal funding to ACORN.

 

The so-called scandal regarding the fact that the RNC spent 150K to clothe Palin is one of the biggest non-issues of the campaign. Please: how much do you think both parties spent on their convention backdrops? The pillars at Invesco Field likely totalled as much. Spending money on Palin's appearance is legitimate campaign money spent. Don't get me wrong; I am a fervent Obama supporter. But this is pure media BS. Taking my cue from Bob Somerby, does anyone think the media won't turn this sort of crapola reporting on our side again? Remember Edward's $400 haircuts and other matters of vital import to who we elect as president? We liberals need to call it at both ends.

Robert

Must say, that's one terrific picture of McCain leading off AEI's David Frum's WaPo piece  Sorry, Senator. Let's Salvage What We Can.  And, oh, it feels good to read the numbers, that the Republican's haven't been this bad since Watergate. It tells me to put my feet up, relax. All the things Obama warns us about in his two little word speech: New Hampshire.

Don't listen to polls, Obama warned. Keep coming. Just keep coming.

I'm also thinking back a few weeks to Rove saying Obama had the election bagged. If that doesn't make you smell something rotten, you don't know Rove. And then we have Bobby Kennedy's Block the Vote in Rolling Stone, and reach for the antacid.

These dark times, this loss, these last eight years...

And now, Palin  and the talk of the  Republican bubble becoming so inflated it bursts the party in two. Well. At least the Fundi End-timers will be a hobbled minority. So it comes as almost a relief to think of the GOP being led by plain old cloth coat conservatives.

Except that they stood by and let the Paul Weyrich's and Falwells in. That they stood by and embraced Newt's take-no-prisoners Contact On America. (Newt, fond of psychohistory... and Palin a sort of Frankenstein monster of following that logic out. Self-Fulfilling Prophecy yields Self-Fulfilling Prophet.) That they stood back and said little or nothing as Tom Delay simply refused to bring matters to floor and table as he wholesale bullied us out of the Constitution.

So. Today we have Mr. Frum in that same Sorry Senator (McCain) piece projecting the sickness onto the Democrats. He says   

First, with the financial meltdown, the federal government is now acquiring a huge ownership stake in the nation's financial system. It will be immensely tempting to officeholders in Washington to use that stake for political ends -- to reward friends and punish enemies. One-party government, of course, will intensify those temptations. And as the federal government succumbs, officeholders will become more and more comfortable holding that stake. The current urgency to liquidate the government's position will subside. The United States needs Republicans and conservatives to monitor the way Democrats wield this extraordinary and dangerous new power -- and to pressure them to surrender it as rapidly as feasible.
Second, the political culture of the Democratic Party has changed over the past decade. There's a fierce new anger among many liberal Democrats, a more militant style and an angry intolerance of dissent and criticism. This is the culture of the left-wing blogosphere and MSNBC's evening line-up -- and soon, it will be the culture of important political institutions in Washington.
Unchecked, this angry new wing of the Democratic Party will seek to stifle opposition by changing the rules of the political game. Some will want to silence conservative talk radio by tightening regulation of the airwaves via the misleadingly named "fairness doctrine"; others may seek to police the activities of right-leaning think tanks by a stricter interpretation of what is tax-deductible and what is not.

and so forth.

I take a deep breath. And see it's all ready begun. Even as your party prepares to lose, it's the same old projection and doublespeak. The same old promise of opposition.

Let's be fair and balanced, Mr Frum. Let's be really honest. Really focused. Let's remember, and take a good look back at what got us here: Your willingness to use a means to an end.  Open mind and read
THE MISERY OF BEING A HOUSE DEMOCRAT.

A "fierce new anger" among Democrats is not simply your vile old Democrats.  It's the rational anger of a  whole nation that has been hijacked.  Are you and your fellow think tank conservatives going to continue to be part of the problem? Or will you roll up your sleeves? 

Please.

This is the first time I've ever written anything to TPM (as you might be able to guess from my verbage there).  At any rate, I just want somebody to know I agree with CW's appeal to elevate the discourse.  I've read TPM since 2004, and what I always appreciated most was its in-depth coverage of political stories that don't get covered by the MSM as thoroughly.  The DOJ scandal was one of the best examples of this, I think. 

It's been a tough election, it's hard to avoid the mud when the McCain campaign seems to wallow in it, and I do think the blog format can lend itself too easily to the quick and sexy links and posts about stories like Ms. Todd.  But I think here is an example in which it would be interesting to use this story as a window into the power of race-baiting or the cult of victimhood on the right throughout the campaign, rather than get into the tawdry details of this pathetic story. 

Some of the first Palin stories tended to do the same, not just on TPM, but all around the blogosphere.  It seemed to me that TPM best addressed that issue by taking a step back and addressing the larger issues surrounding Palin, particularly the history of small-time cronyism that undermined her rhetoric of being a reformer.  Since then, it seems to me it's not so important that she doesn't know where certain countries are (or other particular gaffes), as it is that she doesn't seem to have developed an interest in learning about the world around her. 

The best TPM posts have always seemed to take a step back and tried to get at what the real story was underneath the surface.  That's where the most powerful arguments lie.  Keep that up, TPM.

Each week I've been taking polling data from Votemaster Andrew Tanenbaum's www.electtoral-vote.com and running Monte Carlo simulations of the general election. I do two different runs, one using the 4% margin of error that is common to most state polls, and another using a higher margin of error that I derived from a linear regression of state polling data in 2004 compared to the final election results.

This is the first week's results:
4% margin of error:
Obama wins 100.0%, averages 368.8 EV (low 317, median 375, high 396)
McCain wins 0.0%, averages 169.2 EV (low 142, median 163, high 221)
No electoral ties

10.2% margin of error:
Obama wins 100.0%, averages 357.1 EV (low 277, median 358, high 435)
McCain wins 0.0%, averages 180.9 EV (low 103, median 180, high 261)
No electoral ties

Last week, McCain won just one of the 20,000 simulations, but this week Obama won all of them, and he increased his average and median electoral vote totals. Obviously this is the most favorable the state polling has been to Obama all year, and it comes at a good time. Most of the new state polls have been favorable to Obama. Indiana's two new polls gave Obama leads of 5 an 10(!) points, where previously the state had been tied or had McCain leading. It is likely an outlier, but one of two new Georgia polls actually showed Obama ahead by 1, with the other giving McCain a 5 point lead, still a tighter race than we had seen before. Georgia now looks like North Carolina did in August. Speaking of the North Carolina, it had 8 new polls released this week, with McCain leading by 2 in one, another tied, and Obama ahead in the other six with margins ranging from 1-4 points. The Tar Heel state is still quite close, but Obama appears to have the upper hand. Neighboring Virginia looks more likely to vote for Obama, as he leads in all 5 new polls, with two different surveys showing a 10 point lead, but another has the lead at just 1.

Florida is still close, but leaning Obama, with McCain having a 1 point lead in 2 new polls this week, but Obama leading by 1, 5, and 7 in the other three polls.

Obama got strong polling in the midwest. McCain led in 2 of 7 new Ohio polls, by 1 and 2 points, but Obama led the other 5 by wider margins, including the first two polls giving Obama leads of more than 10 points in the Buckeye state. Indiana
Perhaps Pennsylvania is tightening a bit, but Obama's lead in the 5 new polls this week were still all at least 10 points. The two new Indiana polls both have Obama ahead, by 4 and by 10 points.

Montana joined North Dakota as a formerly solid red western state that might turn blue, as two new polls split, with each candidate getting a 4 point lead in one. Even Alaska may be tightening some. While Obama won't win, McCain's lead has shrunk from a high 29 points just after the GOP convention to just 11 points in a new poll this week.

Maine, where McCain was hoping to make a play for one of the congressional districts, now looks solidly Obama, with three new polls giving him leads of at least 15. One of the few relative bits of good news for McCain was in New Hampshire, where Obama's leads in the two new polls are just 4 and 7 points, closer than the double-digit leads seen in early October. Missouri is still tight, with the two new polls differing on the leader, but the Obama lead is 5, while the McCain lead is just 1, suggesting Obama may be slightly favored there, also.

Pennsylvania looks solidly blue, with the closest of 5 new polls showing an 8 point Obama lead. West Virginia looks like it will stay with the GOP, as McCain had leads of between 4 and 9 points in the 4 new polls, and Wyoming looks safe.

Barring some entirely unexpected news to shake up the race, Barack Obama will be elected as our forty third president.

If you look at Trick or Treat's post about turning the DJIA chart the date stamp indicates it was posted on Oct. 31 at 4:45AM.

So this post will remain at the top of the Recent Reader Post list until displaced on Oct. 31?

Dear fellow TPM readers,

Cross-Posted from: The End of the American Century   

For most of the 20th Century, the U.S. was the world leader in science, technology, and innovation, with the best scientists, the best universities and the most advanced research and development programs. But all of that has begun to change as other countries and regions have become more advanced and more competitive and increasingly challenge U.S. dominance.

A recent article in the New York Times addressed the U.S. technological decline, and the ways Senators Obama and McCain have approached the issue. This story includes some eye-opening statistics about the loss of U.S. primacy in technology, innovation and R&D. At the top of the story, the Times points out the importance of this sector for America's economy and role in the world:

For decades the United States dominated the technological revolution sweeping the globe. The nation's science and engineering skills produced vast gains in productivity and wealth, powered its military and made it the de facto world leader. Today, the dominance is eroding.

One sees this in multiple indicators, but perhaps the most important is the country's high-technology balance of trade. Until 2002, the U.S. always exported more high-tech products than it imported. In that year, the trend reversed, and the technology trade balance has steadily declined, with the annual gap exceeding $50 billion in 2007.

The U.S. has also fallen behind in spending on research and development, which drives high-tech innovation and development. As a percent of GDP, total R&D expenditures have remained flat since the 1960s, while federal government spending on R&D has declined steadily. The U.S. has fallen to 8th place worldwide on R&D spending as a share of GDP, behind Israel, Sweden, Finland, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland and Iceland (Popular Science 11/08).

China is not yet on that top-ten list, but may not be far behind. The country is ramping up support for high tech innovation and R&D, and President Hu Jintao this year called on Chinese scientists to challenge other countries in this area: "We are ready for a fight," he said, "to control the scientific high ground and earn a seat on the world's high technology board." (China's Industrial Ambition).

The U.S. is also slipping, relative to other countries, in the creation of patents, scientific inventions, the publication of science and engineering articles, and the number of students focusing on science, math and engineering. In international comparisons of scientific and mathematical literacy, and in international competitions in those fields, American students fare poorly, often ranking near the bottom of the group of wealthy countries. Increasingly the top science and engineering students in this country are citizens of other countries, who then return home. Science magazine (7/11/08) recently reported that the most likely undergraduate alma maters for those who earned a U.S. Ph.D. were--get this--Tsinghua University and Peking University--both in Beijing.

These worrisome developments prompted a major study recently, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm," from the National Academies, the nation's most eminent scientific and engineering organization, calling for the U.S. to strengthen its international competitiveness. The authors of the report were "deeply concerned that the scientific and technological building blocks critical to our economic leadership are eroding at a time when many other nations are gathering strength" and were "worried about the future prosperity of the United States. A review of high tech by the magazine Popular Science (11/08) puts it a but more bluntly:

The technological dominance of the United States may soon go the way of the dollar.

Fortunately, the man who will probably take over as President next January, Barack Obama, is on top of these issues, often speaks about them, and has aggressively promoted efforts to remedy them. In his book The Audacity of Hope, he called for a doubling of federal funding for basic research and the training of 100,000 more engineers and scientists over the next four years. He co-sponsored a bill in Congress based on the recommendations of "The Gathering Storm" and called for increased federal support of science education, especially for women and minorities. The Senate passed the bill 88 to 8 ( Senator McCain abstained), but has not yet funded the programs. It will be an expensive proposition--about $43 billion for the first three years--which will be all that much more difficult to manage in this time of economic crisis. But these long-term investments are critical to recovering America's economic dynamism

It seems the CIA favors Obama over McCain.

 

This is not surprising in light of the horrific damage the Bush Administration has done to the Agency (outing Valerie Plame, making sure the Phase II report on intelligence failures leading up to the Iraq war was delayed long enough for the public imagination to associate the notorious 16 words more with CIA failure than with the fantasies of Feith and co., and then foisting the grossly unpopular Porter Goss on the Agency for a year and a half, which resulted in the resignations of some of the most seasoned operatives, and an infamous scandal.)

 

"Normally, at least a while back, and certainly in the 1990s, during the Clinton administration, people around the CIA would tend to vote Republican," says a recent covert agency retiree, asking not to be identified because he still consults with the spy agency.

"But I think that's changed, probably because of Iraq and Afghanistan," he said.

After years of derision and insults from neoconservatives who coalesced in the Bush administration, old hands say, they're getting their revenge.

 

 

This part just kills me.  Any thought of a miracle McCain comeback at this point just seems delusional:

"However, while the overall levels of support have remained stable, voters have become more certain of their intent. Today, the percentage who say they could still change their mind is down to single digits. Forty-eight percent (48%) are now certain they will vote for Obama while 40% say the same about McCain. Nine percent (9%) lean one way or the other but could change their mind. The remaining three percent (3%) are either committed to a third party candidate or remain undecided.

Thirty days ago, while Obama enjoyed a five-point lead overall, just 41% of voters were certain they would vote for him. At that time, 39% said the same about McCain."

After the 2004 election some of us tree stand analysts were still puzzled as to why so many of our culture here in WV could have voted for Bush over Kerry. After some after examination through the scopes on our guns, we figured it was due to the last week blitz of NRA ads and mail flyers and all the preachers during the last church services before Election day commanding their flocks to vote for the GOP (abortion issue-we don't care about no tax exempt status here-some Catholic priests even got into the act ).

 

Well the NRA is at it again.  The TVs are ablaze with orange warning our voters that a vote for Obama means a loss of gun rights. I can' t wait to get to church next Sunday!!!

 

I hope my fellow WVians don't fall for it again........   

Here is a great site that compiles data on early voting:  http://elections.gmu.edu/early_vote_2008.html

There is a ton of information there and most of it makes me happy.  The scoop is that election day is going to be crazy, turnout is already massive, Obama's campaign is going get him states Democrats haven't previously been able to win (possibly including Georgia), and Barack Obama will be the next President. 

As we all know, every state has a procedure for absentee voting:  Voters who aren't in their district on election day can vote a paper ballot, often by mail, and have it counted in the election.  In the past few years, there have been more and more expansions of absentee balloting to the point that many states are now running elections for several weeks before the actual election day. 

Virginia, for example, has "in person absentee" voting.  Besides being a great oxymoron, in person absentee voting is available to anyone who cannot be in their precinct on election day, including anyone who will simply be traveling on Nov. 4.  Ohio has made a similar move and opened up it's absentee balloting to anyone who wants to use it for any reason.  Many other states have done the same thing.  This has been dubbed "no fault" or "no excuse" absentee voting, reflecting the fact that the voter doesn't need to have a reason for voting absentee--they can simply choose to vote absentee for whatever reason.

North Carolina has probably one of the best early voting schemes in the country.  I know that might not be expected since it has often been a deeply red state, but unlike other conservative dominated states like Georgia and Indiana, North Carolina has in recent years actually taken steps to make voting easier.  The deadline to register to vote in NC is October 10, but the state has enacted what they call "one stop voting" which runs for nearly three weeks before Election Day.  At a one stop site, anyone can register and vote at the same time.  Even people who couldn't make the Oct. 10 deadline have the opportunity to cast a ballot in the election.  It is a really great program.

So, what are we seeing in the data on the website linked above?

In Georgia in 2004, 3.3 million people cast ballots in the election.  Already this year, at least 1 million have cast a ballot.  With a week of early voting left to go, a full third of 2004's vote total has already been cast.

In North Carolina, the numbers are similar:  3.5 million people cast ballots in 2004, and over a million have already cast a ballot this year--again with more than a week of early voting left to go.  North Carolina makes it more interesting by breaking their data down by some telling demographics.  Specifically, of the 1,000,000+ ballots already cast in NC, 55% have come from Democrats while only 27% have come from Republicans.

In terms of turnout, that means John McCain is getting absolutely pasted in NC.  The reports of the death of his ground game have not been exaggerated. If you put that together with the fact that Democrats have a registration advantage of 2.8 million to 1.9 million in NC, it is difficult to imagine a scenario where McCain is actually able to carry the state.  The best case for McCain is that the 1.3 million voters without a party affiliation will somehow put him over the top on Election Day.  But that possibility will decline as more and more independents cast a ballot during one stop voting. 

Georgia doesn't break down their early votes in the same way, but let's imagine for a moment that something similar is happening in the Peach State.  That would mean that those polls we have seen showing Obama narrowly ahead are not outliers.  He could very easily win the state.  This scenario isn't implausible given how well run his canvassing and GOTV operations have been. 

Let that sink in for a moment. 

Now consider this:  Given the political preferences of different states, there is no reasonable scenario in which we have a Electoral College tie IF Virginia goes for Obama.  Every scenario with a tie has Virginia going for McCain.  So, if Virginia goes for Obama, then we are going to be in for a very short night on Nov. 4.   Here's why:  In 2004, Kerry racked up 252 electoral votes.  Virginia has 13 EVs.  If Obama wins all of Kerry's states plus VA, he'll have 265--five votes short of the necessary 270. 

So, Obama will only need to win one of the following:  Florida, Ohio, Indiana, North Carolina, Missouri, Iowa, Colorado, New Mexico, or Nevada.  The first four, of course, are located in the Eastern time zone.  McCain is not leading in any of these states. 

If Obama wins Virginia and North Carolina, we can all go to bed.  Short night.

I hope you have fun with the early voting data.

 

Share the John.  Send  "The McCain Trilogy" to someone you love. Or hate...

 

"JOHN McCAIN: LOVE MACHINE"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8ceYtl2j38

 

"FINANACIAL CRISIS: THE MUSICAL"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=henMX35nkJg

 

"HOT HEADED"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_Dhxu-6l98

 

Send now and get this FREE Bonus link!!! Sarah Palin, starring in

"WHO ARE YOU? (VP MIX)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdRrqkgTGNk

OK, I never post stuff like this, but this one's just too funny (and too amazing):


Unbelievable McCain Vs. Obama Dance-Off - Watch more free videos

Yesterday Andrew Sullivan took the rightwing Riehl blog to task for its execrable comments about Obama's visit to his grandmother. However,  another deep problem for the RW with that stream shows up in todays reply. We expect this type of behavior from the lunatic fringe and if honest, one must admit that there's been some similarly slimy stuff thrown from the extreme left too.

But the realpolitik problem with Riehl and other neo-Roves' despicable screeds is that they are in no small part responsible for the the flight of moderate Conservatives from the Republican party.

Being incredibly biased and detestable in one's opinions is (sadly) an American right. Being dishonest in your reporting of facts is not. Your cred becomes zero.

Both are reasons the Rep. party is imploding.

They will be a small tribe wandering in the political wilderness for a very long time unless they realize that the dynamic has shifted away from this type of behavior.

This close, and people still want to argue over idealogy.  People still want Ron Paul or Bob Barr or Dennis Kucinich, and -- Dammit! -- if their leader is not there, they will not vote.  

I don't blame them.  If I wasn't for Obama, I'd be feeling rather disappointed and upset too, and I'd probably sit this one out, in protest. 

I did it in 2004.  I just dropped out and stopped caring.  Didn't fight, didn't invest any interest or money, didn't care a rat's ass who won.

All that bought me was another four years of Bush.  Another four years in Iraq.  Another four years of frustration.

So I've learned my lesson.  This year, it's not worth it to give up and take the easy way out.  This year, we have only two choices, not several.

It's yes we can, or it's no we won't.

Nothing in between fits or works, so get in line with what you want and stay there.

 

I'm very tired of hearing about what the present day Nostradamus prophets are hyping, but aren't we all?
For eight long years we've heard of nothing but gloom and doom prophecies by the republican administration, which by the way, have pretty much come true under the skillful manipulation policies of the present Whitehouse administration's occupants.
I can still remember, though it seems so long ago, the price of a gallon of gasoline being just under a dollar. WAIT!! That's right! It was under a dollar!
Has anybody been paying attention to equivocate the difference in the profits from the high costs of the oil companies, and the amount that the world governments are having to spend repairing these nation's economies?
Hmmm?....... The amount of profit that the oil companies has made, versus the amount of money being spent to repair our nation's economy?
Does this strike a resonant chord with anybody?    
Things were moving right along  until the gas prices started to increase, but when they did, people started getting into trouble with their mortgages.
Hmmm?....... The price of gas goes up in direct correlation to people falling behind in their mortgages?
WHAT DID YOU THINK WOULD HAPPEN?      SHEESH!!!

Read more »

Not that I'm missing 'em, but I was just wonderin' . . .

And did anyone read that the polling website FiveThirtyEight.com has pronounced the PUMA movement DOA?

Leave your thoughts, if you have any.

~OGD~

** Infrequent Cafe contributor since June 2005 **

Indeed, FOX's mastery of 20th century technology has more than doubled my best-ever stats number on my blog! I'm really happy about that. A few days ago I had been wondering why it was a relatively low-traffic site, but then this happen, and, WHAM!, they love me! Sure, half the stuff has been debunked, but that's not the point. It's great to have the traffic. And the piece on beatings happening at Palin rallies was posted over a week ago, but better late than never, right?

If you feel so inclined, I would appreciate it if we had some folks on our side commenting and helping to beat back some of the Obama-haters in the audience.

Update - The picture that is emerging: After Ashley Todd called her friend at 8:56pm and then called 911 a half-hour later on Wednesday evening to report her story to the police, the story then made its way through her personal connections to the College Republicans. By Thursday morning or mid-day the McCain campaign was notified.

The crucial bit of information centers around the campaign pushing the story to the Pittsburgh media. Those initial Pittsburgh reports included the lines about McCain and Palin having already called Todd and expressing their concern for her well-being. This indicates that a McCain strategy had been formed, that the lines about "B is for Barack" and the attacker saying the things about the McCain sticker and that Todd would "be a Barack supporter now" are all part of a formed statement that was being pushed to the Pittsburgh television and print media by 4pm on Thursday.

The other crucial bit of chronology here is that once the Pittsburgh press was convinced to run with the story line that the McCain campaign was pushing, the McCain camp could then point to the Pittsburgh TV and news website reports as substantiated material that they could then present to the Drudge Report, Fox News, and perhaps the other mainstream media outlets like CNN, ABC, etc. Its the classic "plant a story in the press, then point to the press as giving legitimacy to the story" tactic.

Is the picture becoming clearer yet?

Brian Williams covered this somewhat last night. Video up on the Jed Report:

Now, thanks to Brian Williams, we know that once it was off the ground, McCain-land continued spreading the hoax to reporters, fueling the attention it got by publicizing phone calls from both McCain and Palin to the so-called victim.

updated 1:37pm, Saturday

*******

Interesting. Tonight on Keith Olbermann's Countdown on MSNBC, Keith made the following statement:

Tonight McCain spokesman Brian Rogers denied the campaign gave out those quotes, telling Countdown, "They came from the police and were attributed to the McCain camp because of sloppy reporting." An account that does not explain why two television stations both quoted the McCain campaign, or the fact that one of them, KDKA Pittsburgh, specifically followed the McCain quotes with the line, quote, "Police, however, have not confirmed that." And tonight Countdown asked the reporter from the other station, WPXI, to check his notes. He says he got those quotes first, 4:08 pm yesterday, from McCain's Pennsylvania communications director.

So before the police released any information, the McCain campaign was pushing this story to the Pittsburgh press. The story also appeared on Drudge Report around this time, and we all know that Drudge has his own source inside the McCain campaign.

Wasn't there also mention of McCain and Palin calling the "victim" late that afternoon? Wouldn't this, too, be before the story was pushed to the press? The details, this statement is from the Pittsburgh Tribune, are vague:

A McCain campaign spokesman initially said the senator called Todd and her family when the incident was first reported. And the Obama campaign released a comment Thursday sending "our thoughts and prayers."

The Obama-Biden campaign declined to comment yesterday. Calls to McCain-Palin spokesman Peter Feldman were not immediately returned.

This statement is from the WTAE-TV Pittsburgh report, that was originally posted to their website at 4:03pm on Thursday the 23rd, and has since been updated:

"The McCain campaign is aware of the incident involving one of its volunteers. Out of respect, the campaign won't be commenting. The campaign also confirms that Senator McCain and Governor Palin have both spoken to the woman," the McCain-Palin statement said.

So was this story relayed by Ashley Todd to her College Republicans friends and supervisors, who then sent the story up to the regional campaign manager, Peter Feldman? He appears to be the point man for then pushing the "details" of the story to the press, and possibly to Drudge Report and Fox, who then ran with it all night into this morning?

Police have no evidence Todd's friends were in on the Bloomfield attack story.

"I don't trust anything she told me," Garcia said.

Garcia said he met Todd among Republican circles in College Station. They were not close friends but had been virtual friends on the Internet site Facebook. Traveling around New York and Pennsylvania to campaign for the McCain-Palin ticket, she had spent the previous Friday and Saturday nights at his house, but Garcia said he had not seen her since then.

Todd called Garcia's cell phone at 8:56 p.m. Wednesday and asked if she could come over. When she arrived, Garcia thought the etched "B" looked like it could have come from the pin of a campaign button.

Garcia said he accepted her story, partly because Todd told him that she was a student at Texas A&M, where he had graduated in May. It was important, he said, to get out the message to other alumni and Republicans.

A Texas A&M official said Todd has never been a student at the school.

From the Pittsburgh Tribune story, Todd doesn't sound like a very reliable source:

Todd has a history of making up stories, said Dustan Costine, chairman of the Robertson County, Texas, Republican Party. He and Todd volunteered together on the failed presidential campaign of Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, a Green Tree native. Costine said Todd told supporters there that her car was vandalized because it had the candidate's stickers on it. He provided an e-mail from Todd in which she said her car tires had been slashed.

Costine said Todd had talked of running for Texas governor in 2006 as a write-in candidate. She said she had been undergoing treatment for cancer, had lost her hair and often wore a wig. Still, he said, she constantly smoked.

Todd, of course, is not the main issue anymore. Lots of questions remain, but central to all of this is the contradiction of the Pittsburgh reporters who claim they heard it first from the McCain people. If that's the case, the McCain camp is guilty of pushing this false, race-baiting story.

 A PDF copy of the police report can be read here:

http://www.wpxi.com/download/2008/1024/17795915.pdf 

The revelation that McCain/Palin campaign volunteer Ashley Todd mutilated herself in an apparent race-baiting attempt to draw white voters away from Barack Obama again raises troubling questions about the McCain/Palin campaign and many of its most zealous supporters. By her own admission to Pittsburgh police, the 20-year-old Texan chose to submit a fictional report that she was attacked and robbed at an ATM the night of Oct. 22 by a tall black man who became enraged, beat her, and carved a "B" into her cheek after seeing a McCain-Palin bumper sticker on her car. Todd said the man told her that he was going to teach her a lesson for supporting McCain, and that now she was going to be a "Barack supporter." To support her claim she apparently blackened her own eye and carved a backward "B" on her own face in a mirror (see AP, KDKA, Huffington Post).

Unfortunately, I am not the least bit surprised by Ms. Todd's actions. I would never suggest that all McCain/Palin supporters are crazy, but a significant number particularly of Sarah Palin's most zealous supporters have exhibited behavior sufficiently extreme to suggest that some form of social pathology is indeed taking root in the grotesque traveling circus the McCain/Palin campaign has become. McCain/Palin rallies, and particularly Palin rallies, have turned into festivals of hate as attendees shout "Terrorist!" and "Kill Him!" at each mention of Obama's name and vent their rage at the media by attacking reporters. Numerous written accounts and video clips now circulating online attest to the rabidly hateful behavior of many supporters at McCain/Palin rallies, as well as to their insistence on believing that Obama is a secret Muslim, a terrorist, and perhaps even the Antichrist, even though such rumors have been denounced as lies by Republicans as well as Democrats. Presented with the facts of Obama's American roots and Christian faith, these zealots prefer to hide behind paranoid theories of an unholy, foreign Obama no rational person would take seriously.

Comparisons with Nazis and other historical extremes are all too often facile and gross overstatements of one's case, and are usually best avoided. It is worth noting, however, that the rise of the Nazis in Germany and other examples of extreme demagoguery from history such as the Cultural Revolution in China under Mao Zedong and the Khmer Rouge genocide in Cambodia contained elements common to many such movements, if in less extreme forms. The Nazis, Mao's Red Guards, and the Khmer Rouge all made use of xenophobia and anti-cosmopolitanism, hatred of intellectuals, disdain for cities and the people who inhabit them, and other forms of divisive populism and "anti-elitism" to build working-class and peasant support and to fashion scapegoats at which popular anger might usefully be directed. Infamously in Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge, even possessing the soft hands of an educated urbanite was enough to get one executed; and at Chinese universities during the Cultural Revolution professors were thrown from their classroom windows to their deaths on the pavement below. Hitler's Nazis are known not only for the death camps they operated, but also for the persecution of artists and intellectuals as well as for festive book-burnings before cheering mobs of working-class Nazi supporters.

John McCain, Sarah Palin, and other Republicans today are cynically making use of these same forms of demagoguery in their attempt to frighten voters away from Barack Obama and the Democrats. Cultural buttons are pushed in ads and speeches inflaming fear and hatred of the "Other." Attendees at McCain/Palin rallies are told that they are the only "real Americans," and that liberals and other enemies are out to subvert their values and destroy their way of life. They are invited to spew hate at Democratic politicians and news reporters. They are whipped into a frenzy and then sent out to spread the McCain/Palin message of irrational fear and hatred among their fellow Americans. Just as these methods produced extreme results in Nazi Germany, Mao's China, and Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge, so they are producing extreme results today across Sarah Palin's America, if not so very extreme.

American writer Sinclair Lewis wrote, "When fascism comes to America, it'll be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross." A McCain/Palin rally today is not quite the same as those at Nuremberg in the 1930s or on Tiananmen Square in the 1960s, and most McCain/Palin supporters aren't exactly Brownshirts or Red Guards. A significant number particularly of Sarah Palin's most zealous supporters do, however, seem to have drifted into comparable forms of thinking and behavior, convinced that as the last bastion of "the real America" they are surrounded not only by foreign enemies but by domestic enemies as well: liberals, big-city news editors, university professors and their brainwashed students, arugula-eaters, latte-drinkers, immigrants, "uppity" blacks, socialists, gays, secret Muslims. Sarah Palin seems to have awakened something in certain members of the Republican base that John McCain has not, and this is something far darker than mere "enthusiasm." Palin has lit a xenophobic fuse among her most ardent fans, has drawn out all the ugliest hatreds and fears that can take root among people in hard times, and has convinced them that even among their fellow citizens walk mortal enemies.

Ergo, Ashley Todd: An obviously disturbed young woman, willing to use racist tactics in a sick attempt to make white voters nervous about Obama, Ashley Todd is precisely the type of personality I would expect to be drawn to Sarah Palin. Indeed it isn't hard to imagine the 20-year-old Todd as a younger, less fortunate mirror image of Palin herself, and I wouldn't be surprised if Todd identified personally with Palin in ways a psychoanalyst would find fascinating. Her willingnes to mutilate herself suggests anything but good mental health, and the pathological feelings about African Americans her actions reveal put her in good company with others we have seen turning up at Palin events. Sarah Palin's own behavioral history - in particular an apparent fixation on power, delusions of grandeur, and obsessive vindictiveness that as mayor of Wasilla and governor of Alaska has led her to committ impeachable ethics violations - suggests an outlook on life scarcely healthier than Ms. Todd's.

It seems likely that Ms. Todd had emotional problems long before Sarah Palin came along and illuminated her reason for living. It is obvious also, however, that there is a political and racial element in her recent actions that can only be fully understood, if at all, within the context of the McCain/Palin campaign, its alarmingly negative cultural messaging, and the behavior of many of Ms. Todd's fellow McCain/Palin supporters, particularly those who identify most intensely with Sarah Palin. John McCain's campaign might have been in ill health even before Palin's arrival, but her coming has since brought something truly sick to the campaign, truly pathological. Of this, Ashley Todd is but a poster child.

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

Let me start by saying I have no interest in provoking a historical debate.  I realize that it is fasionable in certain circles to dis Abraham Lincoln, either as a war-mongering aggressor (among creepy neo-Confederate wingnuts) or as a violent racist who doesn't deserve the adulation he recieves.  If you're among either circle, go write your own damn post and talk about it there.  Because here and now, I want to say that across the century and a half between us, I am captivated by Abraham Lincoln and, indeed, love him like he was family. 

Funny thing about Lincoln.  You start out reading a little Civil War history.  Then you buy a biography of him.  Then you buy another.  And another.  And another and another.  Then you buy a short collection of his writings, then you buy a large collection, then you're buying biographies about particular speeches or groups of speeches like the Cooper Union address or the Lincoln-Douglas debate.  Next thing you know, you're downloading the seven volume compilation of his writings with the foreword by Teddy Roosevelt (only on my Kindle, thank you very much.  Cost next to nothing for all seven volumes.)  And suddenly people who look at your bookshelves come to the conclusion that you're some sort of expert on the guy when you know that, compared to the real obsessives, you're a mere dabbler, an amatuer, a tyro. 

 There's always something new about him.  Historians and biographers cannot stay away from him, even though they know that if this much had been written about anyone else, publishers and dissertation committees alike would simply roll their eyes. 

And if you're a lawyer it can become even harder to stay away.  I began this little Lincoln thing of mine well before law school but once the Socratic brain snatchers remold your mush into a brain that, alas, will forever after "think like a lawyer," you at least get the side benefit of having a deeper connection to Lincoln and the way he thought and wrote.  The Emancipation Proclamation becomes far more interesting as you suddenly can retrace the thought processes that led this this brilliant orator and writer to draft this important document in such dry, legalistic, terms .  The Cooper Union speech suddenly jumps out at you as an astonishing piece of legal research for the time, given the resources availible to a lawyer in Sprinfield, Illinois in 1859. 

And once you've endured a legal eduction, you suddenly get a real insight into how a man with less than two years of formal education developed that kind of rhetorical power.  Lincoln's sentences are inaffable and unmistakable.  He would write these long sentences that would hover perilously upon the brink of collapse under the weight of ungrammatical prarie idiom before suddenly resolving into eloquence.

Let us re-adopt the Declaration of Independence, and with it, the practices, and policy, which harmonize with it. Let north and south -- let all Americans -- let all lovers of liberty everywhere -- join in the great and good work. If we do this, we shall not only have saved the Union; but we shall have so saved it, as to make, and to keep it, forever worthy of the saving. We shall have so saved it, that the succeeding millions of free happy people, the world over, shall rise up, and call us blessed, to the latest generations.
Peoria --October 16, 1854.

That is the real issue. That is the issue that will continue in this country when these poor tongues of Judge Douglas and myself shall be silent. It is the eternal struggle between these two principles -- right and wrong -- throughout the world. They are the two principles that have stood face to face from the beginning of time, and will ever continue to struggle. The one is the common right of humanity and the other the divine right of kings. It is the same principle in whatever shape it develops itself. It is the same spirit that says, 'You work and toil and earn bread, and I'll eat it.' No matter in what shape it comes, whether from the mouth of a king who seeks to bestride the people of his own nation and live by the fruit of their labor, or from one race of men as an apology for enslaving another race, it is the same tyrannical principle.
October 15, 1858, Debate at Alton.

And then there's the Second Inaugural.  Just a few paragraphs long.  It starts so dryly and, by the end, sweeps you along in an emotional riptide:

If we shall suppose that American Slavery is one of those offences which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South, this terrible war, as the woe due to those by whom the offence came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a Living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope---fervently do we pray---that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue, until all the wealth piled by the bond-man's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three  thousand years ago, so still it must be said ``the judgments of the Lord, are true and righteous altogether.''

Where did he learn to write and think like this?  It helped that he was undeniably a man of vast intellect.  With no more than a year of formal education, he taught himself law and even, as what I assume was merely an intellectual lark, Euclidian geometry during the two years  he was in Congress.  Still, where could a man with less than a year of formal education--"picked up by littles," as he said--learn to write this way, to think this way?  And this is where being a lawyer helps.  Besides those few months of formal education you see, Lincoln had two teachers of whom he was particularly fond: Shakespere and Blackstone.  You can see the influence of both in every sentence he wrote. 

When you start reading about Lincoln, you necessarily learn a great deal about the early days of the Republican Party.  You learn who founded and why, where it drew its strenght from.  You learn of Lincoln's early leeryness of it and yet how quckly he rose to become a dominant figure over vastly more senior and well regarded, and more distinguished, personages such as Seward and Chase.  Make no mistake.  Some things about Lincoln's party are still  distinguishable today.  It was always very frankly pro-big business and so was Lincoln, though with a regard for the rights of labor what would have branded him a dangerous radical twenty years later.  And yet, above all, that first generation of Republicans was first, foremost and above all, dedicated to the destruction of slavery.  Some wanted to do it slowly, others immediately.  Some wanted to have the government simply buy all the slaves and manumit them, while at the other end, the radical abolitionists gleefully contemplated the prospect of slaveowners' entire net worth vanishing in a puff of smoke due to uncompensated abolition.  Some, like Thaddeus Stevens, possessed startingly and gratifyingly modern views on race (though they were demonized for it until the 60s--the 1960s).  Others were basically racists who nonetheless belived that, although blacks were inferior, it did not follow that they should be enslaved. 

Lincoln is widely considered to have evolved from one end of this spectrum to the other over the course of the last two decades of his life.  Perhaps.  Reading his earlier speeches and his letters to Joshua Speed during the 1840s and 50s carefully, it is difficult not to discern a canny politician carefully avoiding and evading the disclosure of racial views well in advance of the voters of his state. 

I cannot stand the Republican Party as it has been for decades, but, regardless, never let myself forget what they used to be, that they were once a party of strong principles, of Lincoln's principles, while the Democrats were the party of racism. 

 

And that's the background for why it literally makes me want to weep when I see shit  this.  And this.  At long last, this is the Republican Party looks like in 2008 when the chips are down, the internal censors are offline and the likelihood of defeat looms. 

We're sorry, Abe. 

Nouriel Roubini is now seen as the expert on the current economic state of emergency in the US and the world. His analysis is alarming, mostly right, and extremely dangerous for progressives. It's easy to drift into despair and hopelessness, and that is what Roubini has done. His analysis and predictions for the future could not be bleaker. If you truly took him at his word you might as well go hang yourself right now, because the earth is on fire and hopelessness rules.

Progressives must stand up, take charge, show leadership qualities, be warriors against cynicism and despair, and fight for a better future. Roubini thinks in terms of GDP, LIPOR, TARP, deleveraging, etc, etc. None of it adds up for him, we are doomed, and there is nothing we can do.

Beware. He's got an axe to grind.

This daily post is a clearinghouse for links to posts that either flew by too fast, didn't get the attention they deserved, or are so good they need to be up even longer...

ANYONE can link a post here. If you do, please describe it briefly and tell us why it deserves another look.

The quality of posting around here seems to be getting very good, and some of the better ones are coming from new faces! This is a good place to highlight them, but they are moving fast again and the archives are still messed up, so get them linked here!

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE take the time to rec this post, even if you don't read any of the links or add anything. It only works if it makes it to READER REC everyday. If it barely makes it, it gets bounced off and good links are lost.

Hi there, come on in.  Can you believe it?  Raining again.  Yes, I do - but even I can feel like I'm drowning now and then.  Give me your jacket, sure, I'll take that, too. 

So good to see you ... long day?  You know I understand.  Find a seat and make yourself comfy, I'll get your usual.  Oh, hush.  I can say comfy if I want to.  While I overlook your rudeness, pick out some music.  Upbeat, okay?  I've got some dishes to wash and feel like grooving while I play with the suds.  What?  No, I absolutely did not say grooving.  You're getting old and your hearing is going ... so crank up the stereo and finish the job.  Watch it, if you keep picking on me your umbrella may be mysteriously inside-out when you're ready to leave.  Of course I'm laughing at you!  Your arms aren't long enough to read the CD title!  Man, you really are getting old.  No, sorry, I can't help.  Wait!  Yes, I can.  There's a pair of those cheap grocery store glasses on my desk - they're only good for the close-up stuff and they're really ugly but we'll only laugh a little.  Shut up.  I only keep them around for folks like you ... I'm far too perfect for that kind of thing.

Ouch!  Who threw that?  I'm full of what?  No, I didn't hear you, the music is too loud.  Oh.  You turned it down.  Well, stop whispering when you talk to me.  Fine, then.  I'm off to fetch your drink and then tackle the dishes.  Sure!  You can dry ...

   

Senator John McCain you have run pretty much your whole campaign claiming to have put your country first since you were 17 years old. Well Senator, it's time for you to do so once again.

Our economy is in its worst shape since the great depression. Thousands are losing their jobs and thousands more seem likely to do so soon. Our energy prices are way out of whack and our environment is getting worse.

Americans are angry Senator. Violence and hateful words are spreading each day.

Senator McCain, barring any huge October surprise, from all appearances, you are going to lose on November 4th the presidential race to Senator Barack Obama.

Senator, you have led your whole political life as a Maverick. You've gone up against your own party many times. Perhaps it's time to do that one more time - by standing 'with'President Obama in getting things done. Get the House and Senate to work together to solve problems.

President Obama, VP Biden, you and even Senator Hillary Clinton will each be coming back to Washington with a certain amount of 'mandate'by your constituents. Those mandates can be used to get your comrades to work with you and the new President.

Comparing your ideas with Obama's they really aren't that much different except with respects to tax cuts and foreign policy. But even with those two issues, you aren't that far apart.

Back in 2003 you fought against an unfair taxcuts being given to the wealthy, leaving the middle class out. You also said you'd have combat troops home by 2012. Obama says he will have them home by mid 2011.

You both want new energy sources. You both want to fix Medicare and possibly Social Security. You both want to provide health care for all.

Specifics in how you go about getting those things are the only things that differ. American's want 'change'sir. You saw that yourself.

Senator, why don't you finish out your term(s) in the Senate as the man that helped the American people solve their problems - by getting his comrades to work with the new administration?

In fact sir, your first words on November 5th could be - "I am standing by "that man" (smile!)  and we're going to get things back on track - That my friends, is a promise!"

Send the old McCain back to Congress - Country First.

http://coonsey.wordpress.com/

The world's first virtual murder:

The woman used login information she got from the 33-year-old office worker when their characters were happily married, and killed the character.  The man complained to police when he discovered that his beloved online avatar was dead.

But when asked by The Advocate if Palin is ready to be president from day one, Lieberman said "thank God she's not going to have to be president from day one. McCain's going to be alive and well."

Clearly he is not convinced that Palin is ready to be Commander in Chief.

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/ci_10806832

I'm in Pasco County, a NJ transplant.  This ballot has SIX costitutional amendments, a bunch of local eletion and five judicial elections (they don't elect judges in NJ).  Except for the local elections, they are non-partisan.

 

My net search has been an exercise in futility.  I planned to vote early, so if I have a problem I can fix it, but  at the rate I'm going, I won't be ready by Nov. 4! 

 

I don't feel bad asking here, because I hope any sugestions might help others with similar quanrdies.

 

Thanks,

Marianne

I took advantage of Georgia's early voting today (although I don't know much of an advantage it was to stand on line for three hours), and if the early turnout in Dekalb County is in any way indicative of what turnout is going to be like on Election Day, I think it bodes well for Obama. At least, I hope it bodes well for Obama.

Full story here of my voting adventure here:

http://elliotblake.blogspot.com/2008/10/live-blogging-early-vote-in-georgia.html

-EB

Idle thoughts...............especially since McCain trashed Bush in the Washington Times yesterday.

Much as I love Josh and Al and Andrew, et. al., I am having a hell of a time tonight trying to find updated posts and comments here at TPM.  I say we should give these kind folks a rest, and talk in real time, on the side.  If you care to join me, I'll be plumping up pillows, cleaning out ashtrays, and stocking the bar at:

http://www.lingr.com/room/TPM-aholics

Hope to see you there.

There is a lot of talk about what kinds of memes or turns of phrase are racist - "socialist?" "That One?" etc. - but what does it really mean to say that political groups are playing the race card or engaging in dog whistle politics?  Does it mean that the message is intentional?  That it is a secret call out to a cadre of hard-core racists?  If a message has racial implications in one instance, does it always?

 

These are hard questions to answer, and while it is encouraging that, twenty years after Willie Horton, the media is paying more careful attention to race in the elections, the discussion has often been less than illuminating - often a back and forth of accusations and denials of racist intention. 

Like the "Willie Horton" ad of twenty years ago, the most effective messages that play on racism do it in ways that we mostly do not notice.  It isn't a code to be heard only by unrepentant racists - it's a clever psychological trick to play on the unconscious racial attitudes that most of us hold, but few of us are conscious of. 

Want to know more about how it works?  Join us on Thursday, October 30, 2 p.m. EST (11 a.m. PST) for a free conference call on race in electoral politics. The call will give an overview of scientific research on implicit bias, a history of how political groups have used it to manipulate us, and some examples of how these tactics are being employed now, how they will continue to corrode our political life, and begin to talk about how to stop that corrosion.

Click here to RSVP for the call. 

In an interview with the Washington Times today, John McCain "lashed out at a litany of Bush policies and issues that he said he would have handled differently as president" over the last 8 years.  You can listen to the audio of the WT interview here.

Amazingly, McCain goes on to say that Obama's plans will be "doubling down" on the failed Republican policies. Only one problem - he voted for 90% of them.

Jeez... what's next?
In breaking news, John McCain announced today that the invasion of Iraq was a terrible mistake - he also blamed Barack Obama for failing to tell him not to vote for it. "How dare he keep this vital information from me. The blood of 4000 Americans is on his hands" McCain added.

I seem to remember reading somewhere that the last hail Mary play was to somehow steal Pennsylvania...

Is it purely coincidental that a Young Republican tries to convince folks that she was mugged and disfigured by a black man who was also an Obama supporter IN Pennsylvania?

The police DID NOT release photos of the "mutilation".  Who did?

The Pennsylvanian arm of the McCain campaign ran with this awfully hard and awfully fast.  Were they expecting it?

I'm betting that there's more to this story.  This has a familiar smell to it.  Some enterprising young journalist needs to "follow the money..."

Hilarious, right? That's what Matt Drudge is pushing on his website now. His claiming that IBD/TIPP poll was the most accurate in 2004 and they have the race between McCain and Obama essentially tied.

Naturally, this piqued my interest and I decided to check the poll out, and guess what? McCain leads Obama 74% - 22% among young voters (18 - 24 y.o.). Aww, come on, even FOX News said it's 76 - 24 to Obama (and confirmed by MSNBC and CNN). This is the only proof I need to dismiss this poll.

Also interesting to note that Drudge was pushing the McCain volunteer story yesterday, even before the facts were known. Now, it has been proven that she filed a false report.

Keep trying Matt....

After all that has been said and done--there is probably more to come--- for the past 18 months, how do we as a country and a nation end this campaign on a high note? I ask this question because we have two wars, a financial meltdown and energy crisis ready to greet Obama should he win.  If--if is the key word used in its largest and greatest sense--Obama wins this election what is the protocol or proper post-election etiquette so that we as a nation can hit the ground running toward solving our problems? I offer a couple and invite you to include your own.

1. No laughing at the McCain/Palin supporters 

2.. No high-fives - at least not unless the area is clear and there are no witnesses

Because the DoE reported that if the OilCos started last May, ANWR crude won't start supplementing US energy supplies until 2020. Meanwhile, down in Cali, these guys will be crankin out 177 megawatts of clean, safe and spill-proof electricity from solar energy a decade earlier.

Ausra switches on new solar power plant
Matt Nauman
SAN JOSE -- California's first new solar-thermal power plant in nearly 20 years went into operation Thursday morning near Bakersfield--a precursor to a much larger plant planned for San Luis Obispo County. Constructed by Ausra, based in Palo Alto, the Kimberlina plant in Kern County will generate five megawatts of electricity, enough for about 3,500 homes. While the amount of power is small, the plant's opening is significant, said Bob Fishman, Ausra's president, chairman and chief executive officer. Ausra's demonstration project is to be the foundation for a 177-megawatt plant near the Carrizo Plain National Monument in San Luis Obispo County's eastern extreme.

 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. has contracted to buy the electricity from that $550 million plant, which is scheduled to go online in 2011. "A lot of people in this energy space make a lot of claims," said Fishman, a 30-year power- industry veteran who joined the solar startup in 2007. "We built this facility to show everybody that we're not just talkers, we're doers." Most people think of photovoltaic panels on rooftops when they think of solar. Fishman said that's not what Ausra does with solar. They use large mirrors to reflect sunlight to heat water in tubes. The created steam turns a turbine and generates electricity.

According to the state Energy Commission, eight solar-thermal plants that could potentially generate 3,869 megawatts of electricity are either under review by the state or are expected to be filed in the near future.

Solar-thermal technology is considered a key component for utilities to meet California's renewable energy standard of 20 percent by 2010.

There's more here:
San Luis Obispo Tribune| 10/24/2008

Did anyone capture her blogsite before it was disabled?

"But when asked by The Advocate if Palin is ready to be president from day one, Lieberman said 'thank God she's not going to have to be president from day one. McCain's going to be alive and well.'"

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/ci_10806832

William Henry Harrison:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Henry_Harrison

At least he had a cool slogan,

"Tippecanoe and Tyler Too"

Maybe she's a quick study?? I believe McBush's health is better than Harrison's was at the same age only because Harrison had been dead for four years.  LOL

If that doesn't sober you up, consider that, until Reagan, Harrison was our oldest President.

Cult of Mac reports that Apple has donated $100K to Defeat Prop. 8:

Citing the vote as an issue of "a person's fundamental rights," Apple today made a $100,000 contribution to the NO on 8 campaign, an effort to defeat a measure on next Tuesday's ballot in California that would overturn the state's laws permitting same-sex couples to marry.

Apple's contribution and public stance supporting the No on 8 campaign is noteworthy not only because it is rare for the company to take a public position on political matters, but also because it helps combat the effects of millions of dollars that have been spent by out-of-state religious groups on TV advertisements threatening dire consequences if gays are allowed the right to marry. . . The Apple announcement came on the heels of similar public support for defeating the Proposition from Google. Sergey Brin, CEO of the Mountain View-based company wrote in the company blog, "we respect the strongly-held beliefs that people have on both sides of this argument [but] we see this fundamentally as an issue of equality."

McCain/Palin campaign volunteer Ashley Todd of College Station, Texas, has admitted to police in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, that her report of a mutilation attack there by an Obama supporter was a hoax. In an apparent attempt at race-baiting to draw white voters away from Obama, Todd initially told police that she was robbed at an ATM the night of Oct. 22 by a tall black man who became enraged, beat her, and carved a "B" into her cheek after seeing a McCain-Palin bumper sticker on her car. Todd said the man told her he was going to teach her a lesson for supporting McCain, and that now she was going to be a "Barack supporter."

Police later said, however, that details of Todd's story kept changing, prompting them to give her a polygraph test. Other problem in Todd's story included the fact that the "B" scratched onto her cheek was reversed as though done in a mirror by Todd herself, and the absence of any video surveillance or bank records verifying her claim of having carried out an ATM transaction immediately prior to the alleged attack. Finally today (Oct. 24), Todd confessed to police that the attack never happened, indicating that her wounds were self-inflicted. Todd is now facing charges for filing a false report to police (see AP, KDKA, Huffington Post).

An incident such as this is exactly what I would have expected from the grotesque circus the McCain campaign has become particularly since the arrival of Sarah Palin. McCain/Palin rallies, and particularly Palin rallies, have turned into festivals of hate as attendees shout "Terrorist!" and "Kill Him!" at each mention of Obama's name and vent their rage at the media by attacking reporters. An obvious wingnut, willing to use racist tactics in a sick attempt to make white voters nervous about Obama, Ashley Todd is precisely the type of personality I would expect to be drawn to Palin. Indeed it isn't hard to imagine the 20-year-old Todd as a younger, less fortunate mirror image of Palin herself, and I wouldn't be surprised if Todd identified personally with Palin in ways a psychoanalyst would find fascinating. Her willingnes to mutilate herself suggests anything but good mental health, and the pathological feelings about African Americans her actions reveal put her in good company with the other crazies we have seen turning up at Palin events.

Fox News executive vice-president John Moody wrote hopefully in his blog earlier today that "if Ms. Todd's allegations are proven accurate, some voters may revisit their support for Senator Obama, not because they are racists..., but because they suddenly feel they do not know enough about the Democratic nominee." On the other hand, Moody observes not so hopefully, "if the incident turns out to be a hoax, Senator McCain's quest for the presidency is over, forever linked to race-baiting."

Unfortunately for Mr. Moody and Sen. McCain, the latter would seem to be the case.

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

I started to attack Ashley Todd, but decided against it. Rather, I'll attack the source of her action; absolute ignorance. Ignorance of her fellow human beings on this planet, ignorance of history, ignorance of her own racism, ignorance of her family and teachers. From time immemorial the perpetuating of the "other" has stopped a psychological evolvement of the human race. The McCain campaign perpetuated the ignorance by attacking Obama as the other, different candidate when faced with dire polling numbers. Instead of an honest debate, we were treated to a nineteenth century McCain campaign, based upon outdated tired tricks and tactics. Based on the action of Ms. Todd and some of the footage from the McCain/Palin rallies, we've been privy to witness thousands of Ashley Todds allowed to grow to maturity. It's been disgusting to watch, even more than the pygmalion spin-off of Sarah Palin. It's never been more important or should I say, there's never been more of an opportunity to change the course of hate in the world than in this election.  It will take a lot more than Barack Obama to bring about a world-wide change, but I honestly believe he's the best chance that we've seen in more than a century.

Michael Goldfarb, on the official McCain Campaign blog, in a post entitled Junk, writes:

Just after the New York Times ended months of intense speculation by announcing its endorsement of Barack Obama, the company's corporate credit rating was lowered to 'junk' status -- an appropriate reflection of the paper's editorial judgment as well as the quality of its reporting.

This little fellow’s Dad was just buried at Arlington, having died from injuries in a helicopter crash in Iraq. The juxtaposition of the three faces - uncomprehending baby, smiling monkey and grieving mom - is striking. After finding it on The Daily Dish, I sent it off to my wife this afternoon, then, as we do, moved on. I was feeling real good after getting some stuff done and listening to some tunes, then she emailed me back and told me they were from Altoona.

Meanwhile, back in Real America :

ST. LOUIS (AP) -- Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin met with an independent investigator Friday to testify about allegations she abused her powers during a long-running personnel controversy that has now distracted from her Republican vice presidential campaign.

Palin waved but did not speak to reporters when she arrived at a Missouri hotel for her deposition, scheduled to last two hours before a lawyer from the Alaska Personnel Board. The board is investigating whether Palin abused her powers by firing her public safety commissioner.

The commissioner claims he was dismissed because he refused to fire Palin's former brother-in-law, a state trooper involved in a messy divorce with Palin's sister. The scandal, known as "Troopergate," took on national significance after John McCain selected Palin as his running mate.

"She's been looking forward to this day," Palin's attorney, Thomas Van Flein, said Friday. "She would like to tell her story and she'd like people to know the truth."

Yeah. Right.

Political Hate Crime?

The disgusting political trick of the McCain campaign worker in Pittsburgh who pretended to be assaulted by an Obama Maniac--is not a unique instance of this form of grift.

It's a form of short con. A confidence game to be played to woo people who are not strong supporters, or are fence sitters to come on over. It's designed also to motivate the true believers to try harder to win converts, using the talking points that the other side is full of thugs and maniacs who hate you because of your political views.

But it's just another confidence game from a party that rose to power using the long con to sting the entire American population.

I . . . who took the money? 
Who took the money away? 
I . . . it's always showtime
Here at the edge of the stage
I, i, i, wake up and wonder
What was the place, what was the name? 
We wanna wait, but here we go again...--David Byrne

Just love this quote attributed to the father of Powell chief of staff Larry Wilkerson:

My father used to say, 'Larry beware of the left because they will bankrupt you; beware of the right because they will kill you.'

More here.

Last night, as the story of Ashley Todd was first breaking, a picture of the supposedly assaulted McCain volunteer -- in her post-mugging glory -- appeared on the internet.

Immediately I was struck by the backwards "B" on the girl's cheek, as were others. But then I heard that Todd had taken the picture herself and my mind turned to Photo Booth.

Photo Booth is an application for Macs that takes pictures using your laptops built in camera. In messing around with the app on my own Mac I remembered that it would mirror images -- which would explain Todd's backwards lettering.

So I ran a little test:

As you can see, it appears that Photo Booth would have in fact flipped the image. But then the AP reported that the "B" was on the Todd's right cheek, making my scenario impossible. Even in the mirrored Photo Booth, the right cheek couldn't become the left cheek.

And then of course all of my sleuthing became irrelevant when she admitted her whole story was a hoax to begin with.

But I thought it was important for TPM readers to see the real, hard-hitting journalism we're doing everyday here at Talking Points Memo.

The gift that keeps on giving:

The national committee of the College Republicans went into damage control mode Friday afternoon after a college-aged McCain volunteer confessed to fabricating her claim that a black assailant had carved a "B" into her face after mugging her.

"When Ms. Todd initially contacted us claiming to have been attacked, our first reaction was obviously to be concerned for her safety," said College Republicans communications director Ashley Barbera. "We are as upset as anyone to learn of her deceit. Ashley must take full responsibility for her actions."

On Thursday, the conservative website Hot Air described discussions with both Charlie Smith and Ethan Eilon, the National Chair and Executive Director of the group, in which both attested to the validity of the widely distributed photo of an injured Todd, and affirmed that the image came from her.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/24/ashley-todd-college-repub_n_137639.html

Favorite quote from the Hot Air website coverage:

Some people are already saying "hoax"; I think that's unlikely (but still possible).  Thanks to the local news report, we know the attack occurred.  Not too many young women would scar their faces just to create a political hoax.  As for the reversed/upside-down B, all I can tell you is that I got this from a source close to Ashley, who assured me that she wanted to go public (it was also on her Twitter page) and that the photo came directly from her.

Emphasis mine. Well, now we know of at least one. After reading the postings at Hot Air, it is apparent that a lot of people out there desperately wanted this story to be true. A sad state of affairs. 

 

Hilarious, yet not.  And yes, it's the same guys:

My Friends, there has been much recent fuss made about the apparent race-baiting of my campaign go-getter Ashley Todd. Let me give you some straight talk here... the "B" for which she is now infamous was not, as reported by the elite liberal media, a reference to my opponent who's name happens to be Barack Hussein Obama.

Rather, she was simply making the point that with my health care tax credit, she will be able to get the cosmetic surgery (and mental help) she needs to remove the 'B'lemish. In fact, later this evening, I plan to have the letters "JB" engraved on my face to highlight how you will be 'Just Blown Away By How Much Oil We Will Save Under My Energy Plan'. I suppose the media will write my Mavericky move down to being an attack on Joe Biden!

The media attacks on Ashley Todd and JtP (that's Joe The Plumber) represent the kind of shameless gutter politics we have been seeing from Barack Obama all along, that force us to mutilate ourselves,
I was a POW,
McCain 1908.

Good to see that they've cancelled the votes of the New Yorkers that set up a temporary residence in Columbus, Ohio just so they could vote.  

If a President Obama takes office in January and congress increases its Democratic majority, one of the main progressive pieces of legislation that might get passed is the Employee Free Choice Act. This would, among other things, allow workers to join unions on the basis of what is called a card check sign up. In the case of card check, an employer agrees to the unionization of a workplace when the majority of workers there sign cards in favor of joining a union. Since this is an alternative to the administration of a (secret ballot) election administered by the National Labor Relations Board, union opponents deride card check as anti-democratic. It is not too early to begin pushing back against this argument.

 

At first glance, it might seem obvious that union opponents are right. Surely a secret ballot election run by the federal government (NLRB) is the gold standard of democracy. If workers want something else, doesn't that mean that they're afraid to fight it out in a 'free and fair' election?

 

The answer is no. This anti-union argument is based on a fundamental confusion. Although elections may be at the heart of our democratic system, they are not at the heart of democracy itself. The heart of democracy is free choice. For obvious reasons, secret ballots have proven themselves extremely useful as ways of allowing, promoting and preserving people's free choice. But they are a means and not an end in themselves. And like any means, there may be circumstances in which they fail to promote their intended end.

 

The point should be obvious. A secret ballot election in which one candidate is vastly more powerful than the other, and in which representatives of that stronger candidate stand outside the voting booth cracking their knuckles in a sinister way, for example, would not be conducive to freedom of choice. It would clearly be a case of intimidation, despite the fact that the election used secret ballots. Elections in which one candidate is given easy access to the electorate in order to present its case but in which the other candidate is prohibited from comparable access would not promote free choice, even if they involved secret ballots. In short, there is a lot more to an election than the mere act of casting a vote.

 

Sadly, NLRB-administered elections resemble my hypothetical scenarios all to closely. Employers but not unions have access to comprehensive lists of the voters (the workers). Employers but not unions can use the workplace to post materials and address the workers. Employers but not unions can pressure workers to vote a certain way by holding out promises of pay raises, continued employment, and preferential treatment; or by threatening to fire workers or close the company. Since NLRB elections often take years upon years to arrange, administer and litigate, 'troublesome' workers can easily be moved on or fired without obvious connection to the question of unionization.

 

For all these reasons and more, the elections against which card check is compared are deeply flawed and unfair. It is vital, therefore, that we pass the Employee Free Choice Act as soon as possible and, on that basis, work towards a comprehensive revision of labor law and labor relations in this country.

Cross-posted at Blogical Investigations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8ceYtl2j38

 

See more at http://parodyandson.blogspot.com

I hate to make light of a person with an obviously troubled pyschology, but it just struck me that the image of Ashley Todd, the young McCain volunteer who made up the story of her mugging, is the perfect image for the McCain campaign itself:

Battered and bruised by a bunch of self-inflicted wounds, and literally branded with a 'B', symbolizing how McCain just got owned by the better candidate.  All of McCain's negative ads and wacko attacks have boomeranged and given him a huge black eye, and he has only himself to thank.  Now, his onetime supporters and promoters have suddenly fled in the face of his perfidy, leaving him bewildered, lost in the headlights of the on-coming train.

In a recent poll two-thirds of first-time voters found polls that they see or read in the news to be unreliable.  That appears to be a high number.  It therefore begs the question: Should we trust this poll about polls? 

                No.  I took this poll myself this morning when I asked only a handful of my friends a couple of questions--did they follow the polls; did they trust the polls--tallied up the answers and threw together a percentage.  The questions were poorly constructed and given little thought, I was biased knowing the people who I was speaking with, and I talked to so few people that the margin of error would be astronomical. 

                As of late, I've started to notice the media isn't giving me all of the information I feel is necessary to know about the polls they are reporting.  Even just yesterday on the main page of Talking Points Memo, David Kurtz reported that a new Quinnipiac poll gave Obama a clear lead in Florida (+5).  When I went on my own, however, to research that poll on the Real Clear Politics website, I noticed that the Quinnipiac poll Kurtz was citing had a margin of error of 2.6 percent.  This means that Obama could be as ahead as 7.6 percent, or only 2.4 percentage points ahead of McCain in Florida--which is not a clear lead as Kurtz said.  Furthermore, when Real Clear Politics took an average of all of the polling data for Florida, it read that Obama had a 2.2 percent lead--again not a clear lead over McCain in Florida. 

                Three days ago Cary Funk, an expert in polling and a political science professor at Virginia Commonwealth University, came to speak to my class at the University of Richmond on polls and on polls in the media.  She said one of her pet peeves with the media's coverage of polls is that they, "don't discern enough between differences in polls, or the margin of error for the spread."  Margin of error, she said, is the kind of error you can easily quantify and should be reported. 

                Margin of error is not the only element of the polls missing from the media, however.   In a recent Los Angeles Times article titled, "Sarah Palin talks about wardrobe flap, double standard for women and special education," the article discussed at one point how McCain and Palin are beginning to lose ground again Obama and Biden.  "But polls suggest that McCain is in trouble, partly because of Palin, who has been criticized as lacking the experience to become president. This week's NBC/Wall Street Journal poll suggested more people now think that Palin is hurting McCain's chances of becoming president than President George W. Bush, whose national approval ratings are in the 20s." Not only are we not given the margin of error on this NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, we're not even told what percentage of people think Palin is hurting McCain's chances of becoming president. 

                Not all media stories withhold information.  Another article in the Los Angeles Times titled, "Black Voters Feeling a Mix of, 'anticipation, hope, pride--and fear," reported a poll that one third of white democratic voters held some negative views towards blacks.  Though the article itself did not discuss all of the information behind the poll, the paragraph that discussed the statistic had a link that led to this information.  It was right there, easily accessible, and I'm sure easy to put up. 

                The thing about polls is that there is just so much to them that affect their outcomes.  There are questions, question order, method of contacting those who are polled and margin of error.  If this information isn't reported then how can we know that assertions being made by the media are reliable? 

                Funk said to our class, "The poll doesn't tell you why and it doesn't all come down to one why."  Polls provide the numbers; the statistics behind our nation--not the explanation.  With this large chunk of information obviously already absent from the polls that could already lead to misinterpretation, we don't need the media to leave out anything else. 

I generally try not to complain, but this time it sort of peripherally effects me, so I'm going to take a moment to toss out a post.

Yesterday, I linked to an AP story about a woman who was reportedly visited by a PI in the employ of the NM Republican Party. I clicked the little box for my post to appear in the Muckraker sidebar, where it went after the first recommendation and then I left it alone.

Apparently this morning, the main Muckraker column posted more information about the situation, including a lot more quotes than the AP initially reported and that's all well and good, there's nothing wrong with shining a brighter light on the subject because that's the reason, I originally submitted my post.

What "bothers" me is that the main Muckraker story cites reports of "minority voters in New Mexico" to TPMMuckraker as the impetus for their investigation and they credit a local freepaper for first reporting the story, while I cited a short wire service article which appeared several hours before the timestamp on the freepaper and my post had been in the Muckraker sidebar, since it went online.

Again, all well and good, a brighter light is definitely needed and my insinuation about "Swift Boat" funding was only based on a circumstantial tie, but this isn't the first time that I've seen something posted to the Cafe and then reported by one of the main TPM columns, hours or days later, without any attribution or acknowledgement going to the original poster. This time the main article includes a lot more information, but that's not always the case, especially when it's something as simple as a Cafe member linking to a straight-up video, then Josh or somebody linking to the same thing two or three days later because someone had reportedly tipped them via email.

I realize that there's a lot of "talking to ourslves" going on in the Cafe, plus quite a bit of repetition and some posters lack historiical context, but you'd think that the paid staffers could at least pretend to read our posts, especially when something appears in the "Most Recommended" list. Sure, they have a lot of irons in the fire and all that, so I can understand that not everyone can read every post, but I don't really think that it's good customer relations, when apparently everything we write is being ignored or when an unaltered video is posted to the main site, days after it first appeared in the Cafe

And, maybe my deal about the potential for voter suppression in New Mexico isn't the best example because the Muckraker column does include direct quotes and it puts it into context with the ACORN story, but something similar seems to happen several times a week and though there's better example from myself and others, I thought it was time to throw something into the air.

(End Rant)

Is there a criminal punishment for perpetrating a hate crime hoax?

I know this is late regarding the subject - but i just heard that phrase again - and for whatever reason, I wanted to through my full coffee cup at my co-worker for being an empty parrot. 

I want to know exactly what the phrase 'pal around' means.  I don't pal around with anyone per say and I have an extensive (well, i like to think so) social and professional network).

does it mean have coffee together?  go to the movies?  go shopping?  high five each other at sporting events?  plot against the government? 

I so sick of insinuation and the cowardice of the right.  - 

"No man thoroughly understands a truth until he has contended against it." - Emerson

best,

lonely in houston

PRE-CONDITIONS:   The Post-Election Life of a Male McCain Supporter©  by Burke Mudge

 

*     *     *

The following conversation portrays how staunch white Male McCain supporters will continue their fight in the suburbs well after the White House has already been lost to the Obama Administration.  This McCain supporter will roll his eyes at what he believes is naïveté everywhere he turns, he will grumble about all the young folk just not having experience, but he'll most likely just keep yelling at kids to get off his carefully manicured lawn.  You can be assured, after hearing the McCain camp spew out every cliché month after month; this will transfer into the Post-Election Male McCain supporter's everyday vernacular. Have a look at Jim (the Electrician)  and Joan as they discuss their son Johnny's Parent / Teacher Association issues......

 

Joan:

We're meeting up with the Binders on Tuesday night, keep it open.

 

Jim:

What? You can't just set up a meeting with the Binders on Tuesday!

 

Joan:

What's wrong with that?

 

Jim:

Look, I like your diplomatic approach to neighbourly relations, it's endearing and it's cute.

 

Joan:

Oh, is it now?

 

Jim:

Yes darling.  However, you know as well as I do, they run the PTA where Johnny goes to school, and they have some radical views.

Joan:

Radical? You are exaggerating as always, you are out of touch, you haven't even been to a PTA meeting since little Johnny's been going to this new school.

 

Jim:

I don't have to Joan!  I've already been there in theory! My friend, as you know I acted as the guardian for my brother's PTA meetings when we were growing up.....

 

Joan:

Oh boy, here we go again - look, Jim - it's admirable that when your parents left and joined the circus leaving you and Tim alone to fend for yourself. It's heartbreaking, what you did is even staggering genius and you are to be admired for that, becoming guardian for Timmy and going to his PTA meetings, but that was then, this is now.  No one is going to say you aren't a hero for doing that.

 

Jim:

Joan my friend, I've been to those meetings, I've been tested.  I have the experience this family needs. I believe our best days our ahead of us

Joan: 

Is this why you get to sit and watch baseball everytime I have a meeting to go to? And stop calling me "my friend".

 

Jim:

We need to focus on the issues here.  Like I said, I've already been to those meetings, I've looked the Binders in the eye, and you know what I saw?  H-O-T, as in SPICY HOT FOOD.  Woman, the dishes they ordered in for the rest of us that meeting made me sweat, but they wouldn't break me.  I kept eating the Tikka Masala, and the pickled mango.

 

Joan:

Listen, it's already established that I go to those meetings and you don't.  I understand that Barney shares your views anyway, and we vote the way he does 90% of the time, no matter how stupid or unpopular his take is - we seem to agree. Strange.

 

Jim:

Listen Joan. I'm glad we've cleared that up, but let's just get back to the matter at hand, I am announcing right now that I will suspend watching my baseball game tonight if I have to get this crisis resolved.

Joan:

So you mean you'll hit mute on the TV as you as watch it anyway?

 

Jim:

See, that's what I'm talking about, you're so clever, and so eloquent and you confuse things so easily.  You obfuscate and festoon. I'm just trying to talk directly to the Binder question, you know without having to go through the filter of the sound of a blender running distorting my positions on the issues here.

 

Joan:

Fine, out with it already.

 

Jim:

Out with it? I thought we said we'd have a respectful discussion, I pledged to make this a respectful and clean kitchen, don't make me sling this spoonful of sweet mashed potato at you...

 

Joan:

Jim, you have the floor, I'm not saying nor have I said anything denigrating to you. I just want to have the Binders over for dinner so we can review some of their plans for the PTA this year.

 

Jim:

Who wants to have the Binders over for dinner ALL the time, this one! (points to her)

 

Joan:

Jim!  I've only suggested this one other time!

 

Jim:

Listen (stifling mocking laughter) You CANNOT just sit down with the Binders without PRE-CONDITIONS!

 

Joan:

What??  Are you out of your mind?

 

Jim:

Now you're just being naïve. That's reckless. That's dangerous.

 

Joan:

Dangerous? How on earth is that being dangerous?

 

Jim:

I'll say it again, you cannot just sit down with the heads of the PTA, people who have explicitly stated they'd like to wipe recess off the face of the earth.

 

Joan:

They did NOT say that, they said it should be shortened or used for more library time or even lengthen gym class so the kids get more exercise.

 

Jim:

Let me repeat, you cannot sit down without pre-conditions, you just can't!

 

Joan:

What preconditions!   What??

 

Jim:

Well, what sort of spicy food are they going to bring by?

Joan:

Jim please. I'll make something, besides I've already told Mike and Cindy about Tuesday, they might drop by as well.

 

Jim:

What? You can't do that, you can't just announce to the neighbourhood what you're going to do, you can't just announce to everyone what we're doing! Not too mention their pork barrel projects and earmarks!

 

Joan:

If by pork barrel you mean their request to remove pork rinds from the vending machines with a healthier snack and by earmarks you mean the mark on your ear you got from Johnny when you two were colouring with his felt tip markers. 

 

Besides, it was Barney who actually was the one who suggested we invite the Binders over for dinner when we spoke at the last PTA meeting anyway.

 

 

Jim:

(laughing, shaking his head) No, no. That is simply not true. No, I've known Barney Gamble for 25 years.  When he couldn't reach the pears in the produce section because he was too fat, I reached across the aisle and got things done.  We even had the same favourite movie, Top Gun.

 

Joan:

Yes I know, you've mentioned that about 10,000 times, he always called you 'maverick.'

 

Jim:

What does that mean anyway?

 

Joan:

It means you don't listen, not to reason, not to anyone.    So, Tuesday works despite your baseball watching schedule then?

(Husband, defeated, slinks out of the kitchen, moments later he begins yelling)

 

Jim:

Honey! We're out of toilet paper! Please babe, I need your help.

 

Joan:

You shouldn't have sat down without preconditions my dear.

 

~END SCENE~

Correction: This post was based, largely, on an inaccurate release from Gallup. I've added a correction and a reconsideration of these issues in a follow-up. Thanks to readers for pointing out my mistake.

The latest bit of hope bouncing around the conservative blogosphere this afternoon seizes upon a Gallup release to argue that, all indications to the contrary, the early voting hasn't actually been good news for Democrats. Through Wednesday's polling, Gallup found that 11% of "registered voters who plan to vote" had already cast their ballots, and that early voters as a whole are "about evenly split politically." Drudge and others on the right were quick to trumpet that headline; it offered a ray of hope, compared with other reports of Democrats dominating the early turnout. 

In fact, the Gallup data is a little more complicated than the headline suggests. Among the 11% who have actually voted early, Gallup found that "early voting generally reflects the same Obama lead evident in the overall sample." Since this is Gallup, it's worth asking which sample, but that would seem to indicate a lead consistent with the range of 4-6% on the dates provided. The headline about an 'even split' was generated by the larger sample of 30% of voters who have either already voted or plan to vote early; Gallup found them tilting just 31-29% to Obama. 

That's a puzzling result (30% of these folks are undecided?) particularly since the larger sample is far more demographically friendly to Obama than the 11% who have cast their ballots. Among that 11%, past voting data combine with Gallup's numbers to indicate that roughly 55% of those who have already voted are over the age of 55, and that just 14% of them are under 35 - proportions badly out of balance with the electorate as a whole. Gallup's own demographic breakdowns drive home the point that this should have produced a very tight result. The larger sample, on the other hand, which more accurately reflects the age breakdown of the electorate, should have reflected Obama's overall lead. It's possible that the relatively small sample sizes are producing whacky results. My own hunch is that Gallup isn't sharing enough numbers; it's looking at age, and should be reporting on race as well. This looks like an artifact of the surge among black voters, who tend to skew older, but still support Obama. 

The key fact to bear in mind, though, is that early voters in the last two cycles have voted for the GOP, 60-40%. There's a reason for that, and it's not mostly about the GOP's turnout operations or the enthusiasm of its base, although those factors certainly played some role. Half of voters in Western states and more than a third of those in Southern states plan to vote early this year - but just 9% of those in the Northeast and 20% of those in the Midwest. On the whole, early voting is more popular - and more widely available - in red states than in blue ones. So the Gallup numbers are shocking in their suggestion that Obama is currently enjoying a significant lead, and that even once the initial surge of black voters recedes he'll slip back only into a virtual tie. That's a 20-point swing from recent cycles. If Obama is actually running even or marginally ahead among the 30% of voters who will vote before November 4, he should win going away.

[ed. note: Gallup is the most favorable of the four surveys that have released information on early voting from the perspective of the GOP. Rasmussen reports numbers that suggest Obama is doing slightly better among early voters than among the electorate as a whole - perhaps a 9-10 point lead. Zogby has had Obama up 20-27% among these voters in recent days, a number that probably says more about Zogby's dubious methodology - a 120 voter sample? - than about the election. And the extremely reputable Pew poll puts the race among early voters at 58-34%. This is an unsettling range of numbers - from Obama up 2% to Obama up 24% - and hopefully as more results roll in over the coming days, we'll gain greater clarity. But the bottom line is that none of these numbers preserve any hope for John McCain - Gallup and the others are just arguing about the margin of his defeat.]

Update: Re-reading this post, I realized that I'd buried the lede. This race, as Nate Silver recently explained, has been marked by an epistemological debate among pollsters regarding likely voter screens. For the first time, we have meaningful data that can serve as a benchmark and help to resolve that debate. The ballot-request tallies from the states that release them clearly indicate a substantial Democratic edge - and that's in states that voted for Bush in 2004. We don't know whom these voters have chosen, but it's safe to assume that, on average, the early voting in these states is tilting strongly to Obama. If Gallup - and to a lesser extent, Rasmussen - are producing early voter numbers that don't reflect this, then that's a very good reason to question their overall demographic modeling, and in Gallup's case, their likely voter model. And though Pew's numbers are tough to swallow, they have the virtue of according with the external indicators. Again, it'll be interesting to see what else we can read from these tea leaves as more numbers come in. 

A college roommate turned me on to the jazz-rock group Chase. Bill Chase and three members of the band died in a plane crash way back in 1974, but their sound was sweet.

Bill Chase - Get It On

Bill Chase - Get It On (Live)

Bill Chase - Open Up Wide

Chez posted this on Deus Ex Malcontent. Somehow it reminds me of the TPM-aholics chats from about a week ago: Butthole Surfers- The Shame of Life

Ta-Nehisi Coates posted this on The Atlantic: Kool G Rap & DJ Polo - Streets of New York

A friend asked me about another Simon song, Don’t Want to Be Blonde Anymore, and I noticed this: Carly Simon - You Know What To Do

Update: Just ran across this, but she’s good: Diana Krall - The Look of Love

I’ve heard the name, but apparently don’t know enough about her: Tori Amos - Winter

Another Chez recommendation, a catchy tune, and a fun video for anyone that has built models: Guster - Satellite

We often have this discussion about whether to attend a sports event (like a WS game 7) or sell the ticket - and often times, those of us who really care about that stuff say we'd rather be there in person, witness the history, than get some short term satisfaction out of selling the ticket. The idea is we want to be there, we want to feel the atmosphere, and ultimately - we want to have taken a part in that history.   I want to use this notion and relate it to the election, because I think there is a profoundly more significant historical play here.  There's no doubt that the election is really not in the hands of partisans on either side of the debate - but really in the hands of the center:  the swing voters, the independents, the undecideds and the persuadables.  It's amazing to most that someone could still be undecided, but there are of course many plausible reasons ranging from those related to conflicting convictions, fears or downright apathy.  And campaigns spend a great deal of time trying to craft messages that will appeal and convert those voters.  Yet, they still remain.  I recently saw an interesting post on Ben Smith's Politico Blog that caught my eye as another potential argument to make to this group as part of the effort to convert them.  If the issues, the VP Pick, the Campaign tone, the current state of affairs, or other points won't do it - maybe this will.  Here is the idea - if you're still undecided, then you probably are unlikely to be swayed by some last minute issue. And you probably haven't bought into the ridiculously offensive and false GOP propaganda that sells Obama as an evil socialist pariah who pals around with terrorists.  So you probably will chose someone as "lesser of two evils", or decide to follow your party line, or your friends/parents, or some variation, or choose to sit it out altogether. 

This is the argument to this group (and the argument posited in the e-mail to Ben Smith):As most of the polls show, in all likelihood Obama is going to win this election.  Though you may not agree that he's going to be the great transformational president I do, you've already conceded that he'll in all likelihood be a fine president (or in the most negative light - no worse than McCain; otherwise you'd be decided).  So let's focus on the election itself.   Regardless of anything else, it is indisputable that an Obama presidency would be a watershed historic moment in US election history and a culmination and validation of the civil rights movement.  Obama's election is of huge symbolic importance, for us and for the rest of the world.  Don't take my word for it - every foreign country poll tell us that.  (http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/10/obamas-promise.html).So if you vote for no other reason, vote to be on the "Right Side of History".  Vote for Obama because you want to prove to the world, yourself and your kids that this is a country that believes in civil rights, a land of equal opportunity that will elect a black man with a funny name president.  Vote for Obama, because 40 years from now, when you're sitting with your grandkids and reflecting back to this historic time, you don't want to tell them that you voted for the other guy (even though you didn't care about the other guy's stance).  Vote for Obama to be a part of, and on the right side of, history.I just had this discussion with some friends, and a dear friend of mine said:

To put an even finer point on it (in particular for voters who are also parents), putting politics and policy and frankly substance aside, I want my children to grow up in the America that was promised and mythologized all our lives, an America that can elect a black man with a middle name of Hussein.  Stipulating for the sake of argument that this election's most important legacy will be largely symbolic, it seems like this is our last best chance to present to the rest of the world and to our progeny an America that is worthy of its ideals.  Obama is going to be a fine president, maybe not a great president, but the fact of his presidency is going to be unequivocally great for this country.  I agree with Farzin - in 40 years we are going to have to answer for the path this country chooses - this can be our generation's contribution to American history. 

The Ben Smith post was here:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1008/The_history_argument.html

 

If you like the argument - make it to your persuadable friends. 

POLICE CONFIRM the carved B Attack a Hoax