Think back to November 4, 2008. Recall the exultant joy of the moment. Dancing, singing, weeping masses of humanity crammed into every public space. Cars honking the beat to the chants of marching celebrants. Retiring for the evening, emotionally exhausted but so happy.

A media narrative was born that night, since forgotten -- and ultimately, left unfulfilled.

Yes, that's right. As MSNBC.com informs us in their leading story in the Health section, the Obama baby boom turns out to be a bust.

"It's romantic idea," says Dr. S. Philip Morgan, a professor of sociology and demography at Duke University, "but don't bet on it."
...
In reality, "one night doesn't have much of an effect," says Morgan.

Harsh words, Dr. Morgan. How can we trust Obama to fix the economy or provide basic health care if he can't even get our women pregnant?

As Mitchell heads to the region to start work on Israeli-Palestinian tensions (good luck there, buddy) Obama sat for his first formal interview as President with Al-Aribya, a Dubai-based station with a reach of ~25 million in the region. It's worth noting that in the early days of the Iraq War, Rumsfeld declared Al-Aribya an enemy of America for showing videos of masked men threatening the troops.

A video clip and full transcript are available at Huffington Post, but I wanted to cut out some choice quotes here:

"...What I told [Mitchell] is start by listening, because all too often the United States starts by dictating -- in the past on some of these issues -- and we don't always know all the factors that are involved. So let's listen. He's going to be speaking to all the major parties involved. And he will then report back to me. From there we will formulate a specific response.

Ultimately, we cannot tell either the Israelis or the Palestinians what's best for them. They're going to have to make some decisions. But I do believe that the moment is ripe for both sides to realize that the path that they are on is one that is not going to result in prosperity and security for their people. And that instead, it's time to return to the negotiating table.

...

And so what we want to do is to listen, set aside some of the preconceptions that have existed and have built up over the last several years. And I think if we do that, then there's a possibility at least of achieving some breakthroughs."

"I think it is possible for us to see a Palestinian state -- I'm not going to put a time frame on it -- that is contiguous, that allows freedom of movement for its people, that allows for trade with other countries, that allows the creation of businesses and commerce so that people have a better life.

And, look, I think anybody who has studied the region recognizes that the situation for the ordinary Palestinian in many cases has not improved. And the bottom line in all these talks and all these conversations is, is a child in the Palestinian Territories going to be better off? Do they have a future for themselves?"

"I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries. ... And so what I want to communicate is the fact that in all my travels throughout the Muslim world, what I've come to understand is that regardless of your faith -- and America is a country of Muslims, Jews, Christians, non-believers -- regardless of your faith, people all have certain common hopes and common dreams.

And my job is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives. My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy. We sometimes make mistakes. We have not been perfect."

Quite a departure in tone from the prior administration, no? Obviously, actions speak louder than words -- but this, if you'll pardon the Obama cliche, gives me hope.

I was going to start this out with an appeal to our better nature and some hackneyed nostalgia for donating to the Obama campaign.  Then I realized how late it was.  Please forgive me my brevity.

I know a lot of us here are concerned about the situation in Gaza, and the effects on ordinary Palestinian civilians.  That said, there's a world of difference between writing angry blogs and actually getting involved.  Volunteering in Gaza is obviously not an option that many can take, but we can still support those who are willing and able -- and do it from the comfort and safety of our own homes.

Here are a few organizations that I hope you'll consider donating to.  All are highly rated in terms of efficiency and bang for buck.  None are linked to Hamas, and you should not fear getting watch- or no-fly-listed as a consequence of helping.

MAP - Medical Aid for Palestinians
MAP is a British charity that has working in the area since 1984.  MAP's priorities are in providing healthcare and improving nutrition and hygiene in Palestinian refugee camps.  They also work to better environmental health by providing proper sewage disposal and road paving.  Since it is a British charity, the online donation form is in pounds.  Online currency converters are a dime a dozen, but as a rough guide, £33 is about equal to $50.

Oxfam America's Gaza Fund
Oxfam is a confederation of organizations working in over 120 countries with a stated goal of "finding lasting solutions to poverty, hunger, and injustice."  They work on a wide array of issues, but the Gaza fund in particular has been set up to provide emergency medical care, food supply, shelter, and sanitation.  Once conditions improve, they will turn towards rebuilding.

Médecins Sans Frontières
AKA Doctors Without Borders.  MSF has no fund specifically targeting Gaza, but they are active in the region and you can rest assured your money is being put to good use no matter where it ends up.  Wherever there are people in crisis, MSF is there to help.  Apart from emergency medical care, MSF provides services to impoverished hospitals (vaccines, medical equipment, and training), access to safe water, AIDS treatment and testing, and so on.

Palestinian Fair Trade Association/Canaan Fair Trade
Support Palestinians directly by buying fair trade goods from area farmers.  You can buy a variety of goods (many of them organically and sustainably manufactured), or donate cash for farmers to buy more olive trees.  CFT also funds scholarships for rural and refugee Palestinian students.

And just incase your sympathies are elsewhere, you can always buy pizza, ice cream, and Coke for IDF troops.  (Or more seriously, Oxfam also has an Israeli fund, but I feel it's pretty easy to distinguish who is in greater need at the moment).

Anything you're able to give is, I'm sure, greatly appreciated.

The only news source carrying the story so far seems to be MSNBC, but it looks legit:

Bill Richardson has withdrawn himself from the position of Commerce Secretary due to the ongoing investigation of his business deals.

"Let me say unequivocally that I and my Administration have acted properly in all matters and that this investigation will bear out that fact.  But I have concluded that the ongoing investigation also would have forced an untenable delay in the confirmation process.  I appreciate the confidence President-elect Obama has shown in me, and value our friendship and working partnership. I told him that I am eager to serve in the future in any way he deems useful. And like all Americans, I pray for his success and the success of our beloved country."

So, who's going to take his place?

I'm a huge fan of Halloween, so I am loving the website YesWeCarve.com. See more by clicking the link, but this youtube gives a good summary:

asdf

Another embarrassing clip from the Couric interview: Palin reads a LOT of newspapers, ok?!

She couldn't even make up an answer?  Name-drop the NY Times or Washington Post or even US News?  Or is she just waiting for FOX to come out with a print edition?

A funny story from the UK's Guardian

Money quote:

Due to a quirk of Brazilian law, candidates are allowed to run under the name of their choice. As a result, at least six Brazilian politicians have officially renamed themselves "Barack Obama" in a bid to get an edge over their rivals in October's municipal elections.

"In truth it was an accident," says Belford Roxo's Obama, an IT consultant who is bidding to become the city's first black mayor. "I'd been on the television wearing a suit and people thought I looked a bit like him so they started calling me Barack Obama. They'd see me in the street and shout: 'Hey! Barack!" So I decided to register it."

So!  What should Obama change his name to for an easy win?

The premise here is simple -- what are you currently reading, and what/how would you recommend the book to others?

For myself --

Right now, I'm midway through David McCullough's John Adams.  Next on my list is another book titled John Adams by a different author that I can't seem to track right now.  That John Adams book seems to deal more with Adams' young, pre-revolutionary life, which McCullough's book doesn't dwell on in any substantive fashion.

I'm enjoying McCullough's narrative, though.  Previously, I'd read his 1776 and, while I found it interesting, I thought it glossed over too much detail to be of real interest to me.  Honestly, it seemed like a Da Vinci Code for amateur historians.  John Adams is a much longer book in page length though, and seems to be much more substantive besides.

Next on my list, in no particular order (to be read in whichever order my libraries support) are:

William Blum's Killing Hope

Samantha Power's The Problem from Hell

Peter Watson's Ideas: A history of thought and invention

Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States: 1492-Present

Beyond that, I'd like to read some Melissa Rossi and Albert Hourani.

So, TPM, what's on your list?  (My list is admittedly solely nonfiction; the only fiction I'm reading now is for grade school children and young adults, so I can get more familiar with the library collection at the school I work in.  If you need a fiction recommendation for a child, let me know.  I can almost certainly find something enjoyable for any age or ability range!)

Today was not a good day for the McCain road show.

It would seem that the "Straight Talk Express" crashed into a van with Senator Lieberman on board.  Did they lose control due to faulty tire pressure?  Too many unexpected right turns?  Confuse other drivers by puttering well below the speed limit with the blinker on for 5 blocks while on their way to a lunch buffet?

And as if that weren't enough -- well, the pictures speak for themselves (yes, they are safe for work): Pic 1, Pic 2

From today's Sun-Sentinel, the main daily out of Ft. Lauderdale, FL:

Voter registrations in Florida show 'huge swing' toward Democrats

Pertinent quotes:

An escalating number of voters registering as Democrats is providing evidence that the 2008 election could produce a wave of support ... trigger[ing] a decades-long shift of party allegiance that could effect elections for a generation.
...
Democrats have posted even greater gains statewide, up 106,508 voters from January through May, compared with 16,686 for the Republicans.

"I'm excited to vote for whoever is running for the Democrats," he said.  "I don't have much of a choice.  I don't really like the other party."

Michael Martinez, an associate professor of political science at the University of Florida, said there aren't many people shifting from the Republicans to the Democrats.  But the allegiance of first-time voters is significant.

"New voters tend to identify with the hot party at the time.  In the 1980s, a lot of new voters were identifying with Reagan, because he was sort of the hot commodity," Martinez said.

Just a heads up to those who might be interested.  Obama will be interviewed by Zakaria on his CNN show GPS.  It starts at 1:00pm ET.  The CNN episode summary:

An exclusive interview. Senator Barack Obama answers the tough questions on the world's greatest crises, from Iraq to Afghanistan, from Israel to Iran. Don’t miss what promises to be one of the best interviews of the year!

I haven't seen Zakaria's show before, but based on his writing I'm assuming it'll be a fairly substantive discussion.  Should be good watching.

The sales site has been replaced with this:

An Apology

We are very apologetic to all who were upset by our toy idea.

We will not be proceeding with the manufacturing of this toy.

Thank you.

Very respectable of them.

Please forgive the low-content post; it's more of a comment really, but putting it up in nearly every thread would get tiring.  Here goes:

The candidates are not running to be your friend, and posters on TPM aren't even running for anything at all.

Like 'em, dislike 'em, think they're arrogant or think they're pandering, whatever - It's the policy, stupid.  If you want to vote for McCain in November, it's your right as an American.  Just be certain that you know what you're voting for:  Pro-War, Pro-Life, Pro-Tax cuts for the rich, Pro-Business, Pro-Privatization, and Anti-You.

Because, doc, everyone's out to get me!

This campaign season has taught me three things:

a) Obama's supporters are a messianic mass of young people, ignorant of history and eager to slander whoever stands in their path toward a nebulous 'change'.

b) Clinton's supporters are of two stripes, both elderly and blind to reality. One sort is old women, bitter and clinging to their cats and genitalia. The other sort are old bluebloods, cynical and clinging to their power and kickbacks.

c) McCain's supporters are ancient and intolerant.  They seek nothing but the nuclear eradication of the Middle East, much of Europe, and godless heathens both foreign and domestic.  (Well, this one might be true. /snark)

Is America truly a land filled with nothing but people with ulterior motives?  When did we get so suspicious of those who disagree with us?

Here's an honest, and dare I say it, accurate summary of each candidates' supporters:

a) They want to improve America.
b) They want to improve America.
c) They want to improve America.

No matter whom we support, our goal is ultimately the same.  We might disagree (often vehemently) over the methods, but last I checked no candidate was running on a platform of destruction or vilification.  To assume or suggest otherwise is intellectually dishonest.

Couching your arguments in hostility and flaming strawmen is self-defeating.  Doing so is choosing to cheerlead instead of fostering discussion; no one's mind will be changed, but I can guarantee some who may have otherwise been open to your point are pushed away.

Can we attack policy without referring to the lack of scruples the Clintonistas show?  Can we dig into a gaffe without mentioning the Obamatons' sense of entitlement or sneering superiority complex?  Can we discuss issues responsibly, forgoing ad hominems?

Can we at least assume our opposition has good, if misguided, intentions?

Quite simply:  Yes.  And we must.

The 'blogosphere' (a grating term, but I have none better) has long since jumped the shark on this campaign season.  It hasn't been about the issues or the candidates for months now.  It's all about who called this supporter that name, and which guy managed to derail that thread with a zinger.  It's about sweeping generalizations, us vs. them, and hate, hate, hate.

It's all irrelevant and petty mental masturbation.

If you've just got to show those jerks on the internet a thing or two, here's a suggestion:  Victory is the best revenge.  Go phonebank.  Go fundraise.  Go wave a campaign sign on a streetcorner wearing nothing but a stars-and-stripes thong.

Shut off the computer and go be a productive ambassador for your candidate.