It was pointed out to me this morning that the GOP launched their new website this morning. GOP.com or RNC.org

They say it's in BETA, but WOW is it really bad in my opinion. This not as a critic of the GOP, this is criticism from a guy who manages 2 websites every day and has 2 personal side project websites.

They are clearly trying to put a younger face on the GOP, note the annoyingly large faces they are using in the top of the page. But the overall layout and UI is large and bombastic... not to mention oddly laid out. Instead of putting a lot of data in a small space, like say ESPN.com, they are putting very little data in a whole lot of space.

Perhaps the most ironic part is that their Future Leaders page... has no one on it! Kind of ironic really.

And they did one of the things I have MOST about some websites. After going to the home page, Michael Steels walks out onto the webpage and starts talking. I HATE those stupid flash video things. They annoy me to no end.

My opinion is that this should have been kept under wraps until it was done... and for the love of God... hire a real web designer. I'm a hack and I could have done better with a off the counter Drupal template.

I hate to sound like I am ripping on the GOP, but this is a really bad website for a major political party.

Where's the stuff about universal health care? Redistribution of Wealth? Communism? Socialism? Homosexuality? Gay Marriage? High Taxes? Social Liberalism? I was told Obama was going to turn America's youth into Socialists today....

Not sure if you saw this or not.

Representative Joe Barton (R-TX) looked like an idiot this morning. He asks "where does oil come from?" to the Sec of Energy, then gets shown up by someone who actually knows. Chu gives a short, to the point, accurate description of how oil is formed. Barton then gloats on Twitter: "I seemed to have baffled the Energy Sec with basic question - Where does oil come from? Check out the video."

He went so far as to post the video on YouTube himeself under the title: "Energy Secretary puzzled by simple question"

WOW! What a moron. He has no idea what plate tectonics and continental drift are, then say its Energy Secretary who doesnt know anything.

Via WhoRunGov.com-
GOP Rep. Patrick McHenry, a key player in helping craft the Republican message, has offered an unusually blunt description of the Republican strategy right now.

McHenry's description is buried in this new article from National Journal (sub. only):

"We will lose on legislation. But we will win the message war every day, and every week, until November 2010," said Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., an outspoken conservative who has participated on the GOP message teams. "Our goal is to bring down approval numbers for [Speaker Nancy] Pelosi and for House Democrats. That will take repetition. This is a marathon, not a sprint."McHenry's spokesperson, Brock McCleary, tells me his boss is standing by the quote.

McHenry's description of his party's goal -- to "bring down approval numbers" for Nancy Pelosi and House Dems -- is being much talked about today among Congressional Dems. It's likely that Dems will grab on to the quote today to bolster their charge that Congressional Republicans aren't interested in playing a constructive role in governing and see their hope for political revival in the eventual failure of the Democratic majority's policies.

My Editorial
Boy this is all setting up to be a great DNC ad...

• Limbaugh: "I hope he fails"
• McHenry: "Our goal is to bring down approval numbers"
• Announcer: "And who is working to make America better?"
• Obama: "if we come together and lift this nation from the depths of this crisis; if we put our people back to work and restart the engine of our prosperity; if we confront without fear the challenges of our time and summon that enduring spirit of an America that does not quit, then someday years from now our children can tell their children that this was the time when we performed, in the words that are carved into this very chamber, "something worthy to be remembered." Thank you, God Bless you, and may God Bless the United States of America."

Ezra Klein reports Obama's team is steering Congress toward including mandates in its health care plan -- a key front of Obama's primary battle against Hillary.

What I find interesting is they are giving congress an idea and saying... "you guys work on the details". What it strikes me as is something my junior high volleyball coach once taught me. My apologies if the analogy isn't quite right, but you'll get the idea... "if you aim for the stars, you'll reach the sun. if you aim for the sun, you'll reach the moon. If you aim for the moon, you'll reach the lamp post." The analogy isn't great, but you get the idea. It seems to me, Pres. Obama is telling congress "aim for the stars", in hopes that they reach the sun... or at least the moon. Both being better than a lamp post. If he sets his aim at the moon, he might not get there.

Obama campaigned on what he thought could get done, not what was the best option. Now that he is president, he is aiming for the best option, knowing full well it will fall short and get what he thinks it gettable.

Obama's set to lower the boom on the Keating 5 on Monday. That will be in the news Monday and Tuesday. The debate (which I am guessing will be very prickly with Keating 5 and Ayers references left and right) will be in the news Wednesday and Thursday, and the Trooper-gate report is scheduled for Friday.

This could be an ever WORSE week then the bailout / "suspended campaign" week.

The last 4 polls in Pennsylvania show Obama up between +7 and +15.
The question needs ot be asked... how long until McCain pulls out of PA lik ehe pulled out of MI? Right now, McCain needs to DEPERATLY defend VA, NC, and FL. Ohio aint lookign too good either. PA is a sink hole for McCain at this point.

Ok, so I just got to thinking. The Sarah Palin we will see tonight could possibly not be the real Sarah Palin. no no, this wont be Tina Fey. What I mean is, candidates do a LOT of practicing for debates. They spend a week prepping for every possible question. They have enormous cram sessions hours before the debate stars. So, the Sarah we see tonight will be the one who has been cramming for the math final... only to forget all you learned the second the exam is over.

The REAL Sarah is the one we see in TV interviews. The one who has to talk of the top of her head. Have a quick recall. Not know what could be asked. You really get to know someone when they havent had a week to cram and practice staged lines.

So, even if she DOES perform well, this isnt the real Sarah. The Couric / Gibbson interview Palin is the real Palin.

It took me an hour to wrap my head around this, but this is a 100% political move, and here is way.

If this is TRULY all about the bailout, an honorable man would have done this:
He would have called Obama sometime between 2:25 and 2:45 and said "At 3PM, I am going to hold a press conference where I will suspend my campaigning, pull all my ads, call for a postponement of the debate, and head to Washington. I'd like you to join me. If you like, we'll issue a joint statement laying out that we are both putting our campaigns on hold and the debate will be postponed a few days. Neither of us will take credit for this. It's in the best interest of America that we do this. If you choose to not go along, then so be it."

Here's what John McCain did:
He told Obama he was thinking about suspending his campaign and asking for the debate to be pushed back. Hangs up the phone, a few hours later... Obama hears McCain's plan for the first time on TV in his hotel room.

Me = Obama... here's what I do:
Go to Washington. Work on the bailout. Work WITH McCain.
Cancel all public events Thursday and Friday. Keep running ads, but NO attack ads.
Debate Friday. Demand it be on the economy.
Back to campaigning on Saturday.
On CNN, Cafferty called out McCain - calling his "suspending of his campaign" as political posturing and asserting that this is the EXACT time we should HEAR a debate about the candidates ideas and solutions to the problem of our economy. While I know that this debate was SUPPOSED to be about Foreign Policy, NOW is the time to debate the economy. Scrap the planning. An "unprepared" debate will truly show who is the most ready to lead.  

Nielsen Media Research reported this afternoon that john McCain got 38.9 million views for his convention speech. That's .5 million more than Obama the previous week. but did he REALLY get that many? Probably not, and here is why.... Thursday Night Football statistical bleed over.

NBC got 13.6 million viewers for the football season opener. And it then got 8 million for the convention. However, the game ran over and ended a few minutes into the 10PM EDT time slot. Ratings are typically done in "chunks". Radio does their ratings in 3-4 hour frames, but TV obviously does it by hour or half hour. So, the "bleed" from football might have been a few minutes, but it technically fell into the 10PM EDT time slot. So, even if all of them turned off their TV, they factor in to the "convention" ratings. I dont know the specifics, but I bet a million or two were statistical anomalies rather than actual views.

How do I back this up? CBS went from 7.3 million for CSI to 5 million for the convention. Last week, CBS drew 4.6 million to hear Obama's speech. So, you would think that if CBS went up .4 million from last week, you'd see similar numbers across all the networks. But NBC is an anomaly.

Last week, Obama drew 6.1 million on CBS.. this week it was 8 million. a 1.9 million person increase. Yes, 4.75x more of an increase than CBS. That strikes me as a bit odd. I havent seen numbers for other networks, but I'd imagine we'd see similar numbers.

So, clearly NBC is an anomaly. Are they legitimate viewers? Or just a statistical blip? Honestly, you cant really know for sure. But, my money is that he got less viewers than Obama. But even so, 35-38 million is still darn impressive.

Nielsen Media Research reported this afternoon that john McCain got 38.9 million views for his convention speech. That's .5 million more than Obama the previous week. but did he REALLY get that many? Probably not, and here is why.... Thursday Night Football statistical bleed over.

NBC got 13.6 million viewers for the football season opener. And it then got 8 million for the convention. However, the game ran over and ended a few minutes into the 10PM EDT time slot. Ratings are typically done in "chunks". Radio does their ratings in 3-4 hour frames, but TV obviously does it by hour or half hour. So, the "bleed" from football might have been a few minutes, but it technically fell into the 10PM EDT time slot. So, even if all of them turned off their TV, they factor in to the "convention" ratings. I dont know the specifics, but I bet a million or two were statistical anomalies rather than actual views.

How do I back this up? CBS went from 7.3 million for CSI to 5 million for the convention. Last week, CBS drew 4.6 million to hear Obama's speech. So, you would think that if CBS went up .4 million from last week, you'd see similar numbers across all the networks. But NBC is an anomaly.

Last week, Obama drew 6.1 million on CBS.. this week it was 8 million. a 1.9 million person increase. Yes, 4.75x more of an increase than CBS. That strikes me as a bit odd. I havent seen numbers for other networks, but I'd imagine we'd see similar numbers.

So, clearly NBC is an anomaly. Are they legitimate viewers? Or just a statistical blip? Honestly, you cant really know for sure. But, my money is that he got less viewers than Obama. But even so, 35-38 million is still darn impressive.

Not sure if you saw this or not, during her speech last night, Sarah Palin was wearing a flag pin! Woo hoo! Look how patriotic she is. Oh wait... it's not a USA flag pin, it's a Israel flag pin. Israel? Country First? Israel's Country First? She's running for VP of the US... not Israel.
Picture