There is a bright side to the recent tax troubles of Giethner and Daschle. We now have a solution to our financial problems: nominate tax delinquents to cabinet positions.

Here's how it works. There are 15 cabinet positions. For each position, the administration nominates 10 tax cheats and tells them in private to pay all their back taxes because he or she is the "front runner."

After they pay their back taxes, someone leaks to the press about their tax troubles and slips Rush Limbaugh a deuce of Oxycotin. Boom-media firestorm. The administration holds a press conference: "We regret to have to withdraw the nomination of all people nominated for all positions." Then we start over...with more tax cheats!

Eventually, people will figure out that nomination=tax cheat and the administration won't even need to formally nominate someone. They can just threaten to make them Secretary of State if they don't pony up the dough.

Unfortunately, in Obama's quest to staff his cabinet and other high-level positions faster than any administration in history, he really screwed us over. The only cabinet position open and without a nominee is Secreatary of Commerce, and a Republican senator is rumored to be the pick.

At this critical juncture of America's history, we cannot have an unqualified Republican Senator on Obama's cabinet. We need an unqualified Republican billionaire. Two or three if possible. You know these guys have half-a-dozen tax shelters and as many mistresses willing to rat on them for as little as a Deputy Undersecretary position.

Take this NY Times article on the 400 richest Americans:

The top 400 paid just more than $18 billion in federal income taxes in 2006, or an average of $45 million, on a record $105 billion in total income -- the lowest effective tax rate in the 15 years since the agency began releasing such data. (link)

Sounds like we have some good candidates for Commerce Secretary.

(Source: www.1001words.com)

Sarah Palin is like someone running on a log in a lake. She’s constantly trying not to fall in and the spectacle is mesmerizing to watch. 
It was hard to pay attention to what she said in the debate last night because at every moment it looks like she was about to fall in. Watching clips of the debate again the day after with the suspense gone, like her response on education, it’s easier to pay attention to what she said and have a good laugh.
I for one appreciate all of the stunts and Palin's presence on the ticket. This has been the most entertaining election ever, and let's be frank: Obama has been very stingy with his contributions to our nation's comedy reserve this election. If it weren't for McCain, we'd be running a huge comedy deficit with Waziristan.
McCain/Palin 08: "More Plot Twists Than Lost, More Laughs Than Scrubs"

As you probably know, there are two more embarrassing responses made by Gov. Palin in her interview with Katie Couric that have yet to be released. The McCain campaign has revealed one of these responses in an effort to diminish its impact:

"Of concern to McCain's campaign, however, is a remaining and still-undisclosed clip from Palin's interview with Couric last week that has the political world buzzing.

The Palin aide, after first noting how "infuriating" it was for CBS to purportedly leak word about the gaffe, revealed that it came in response to a question about Supreme Court decisions.

After noting Roe vs. Wade, Palin was apparently unable to discuss any major court cases.

There was no verbal fumbling as in last week's Couric interview, the aide said, but rather silence. (link)

If there is a second embarrassing response out there, expect the McCain campaign to float it in the press before the interview comes up. Interest about the nature of the gaffes is already building, and this strategy is their best option to minimize the damage when the video is released on Wednesday and Thursday. 

The tactic is aimed at the media and blogosphere: if it's old news to them, they will spend less time covering it when it finally comes out.

In fact, we are playing in their hands by you reading this and me posting it. Hey, what can I say? I love spoilers.

Readers of TPM, 
In this moment of our country's need, I have decided to suspend all of my blog posts on TPM and my personal blog. You can read my official announcement here.
I ask all TPM bloggers to join me and stop posting anymore, except for posts responding to events in the world, posts by surrogates, posts you've already written last night, and posts about how you stopped posting.
We can't afford to be partisian in a moment like this.
Country First, Blog Last,Jason

Seriously. I wish to know if he and Cindy are sitting every night in a room lit by blood candles with a Ouiji board in front of them. “Q…U…I…honey, are you feeling something from the ‘t’?”

And why does Gov.Palin has to cancel her events too? I mean, I know why, but what excuse are they giving? Does McCain have an electronic monitoring bracelet on her ankle? Is that why she blinks oddly? “H-E-L-P…S-O-S”? 

It would suck if she did bcause who knows Morse code nowadays? The only person old enough to remember is John McCain, and she wouldn't want to tip him off. 

For the past week, many Americans have been debating and arguing all aspects of the financial bailout, from what form it should take to whether we need one or not.
Some of us have been reading blog posts, newspaper articles, and financial columnists in an effort to learn more about the policy decisions involved so we could have an informed opinion. There has been almost a uniform focus on this topic, to the benefit of the public and ourselves. Some conservatives and liberals have even found that they share common views and questions about the $700 billion bailout.
Yet what are we talking about now, at a time when we need to most continue the discussion? McCain's political stunt. He distracted us from the issues AGAIN. In what may be the most important issue this year, the most important decision Congress makes for the next few years.
The conservative commentators have praised the politics of McCain's stunt, but few have defended its substance. It's because they can't. At a time when we need to be most serious, McCain is acting at his most childish. He walked into a room of grownups talking and yelled to get them to pay attention to him.
The Washington Post had a A1 article on their web site this morning on alternative proposals to a big bailout. It's off the main page now. I had to do a search to find it.

The real news is being pushed off the front pages and newscasts of hundreds of media outlets across the country. All I can say is that I hope we collcetively roll our eyes this time at the obnoxious kid and go back to our conversations.

I don't know what TPM's policy on profanity is, so I'm just going to provide the link for this one.

This is one of those predictions that I hope is wrong but fear is right.
The desire for balance regardless of the facts or situation is one of the MSM's deepest driving force. It courses through their cells, their DNA. I can almost guarantee you that most reporters right now are starting to feel a littly guilty for piling on McCain. 
They feel like they are doing something wrong by attacking one candidate more than another. It makes them question their objectivity and intellectual integrity. The fact that McCain and Palin are lying almost every day doesn't nothing to lessen these feelings.
You can start to see the hints of this in some news reports covering the latest McCain/Palin lie. This CNN report for example goes out of its way to mention Obama misrepresenting McCain's 100 years in Iraq quote.
Think about that. In a news report about McCain's statements that are 100% false, they picked an example from a few months ago that is arguably misleading but contains a core truth: McCain is willing to stay in Iraq for as long as it takes to achieve what he defines as victory.
My point is that as much as I've enjoyed the media's little truth-hunting expedition against McCain, it's not going to last in its current form, regardless if McCain continues to lie. The storyline is going to slip into a familiar rut: he said/she said/oh forget it, all politicians are the same.
All I can say is try not to get frustrated when it happens. Use your energy towards something positive, like canvassing or phone banking. Forwarding emails to your undecided or weak-leaning Republicians is a great tactic too. We can still enjoy the media's newfound courage, but keep in the back of our minds that it won't last much longer.

A lot of people are knocking Sarah Palin for not knowing what the Bush Doctrine is.
Hello? Isn't that a good thing? The Bush Doctrine is a horrible idea with damaging, far-reaching consequences on our national security and economy. I'm glad she doesn't know what it is. Don't teach it to her! Or tell her it is something else, like a policy to pre-emptively give gumdrops and jelly beans to foe and friend alike.
Other things I hope Sarah Palin doesn't know:* Bush's justification for torture* Trickle-down economics* Nuclear codes* How to shut down an investiagation (too late, I know)
The more Sarah Palin doesn't know, the better off we are. Here's to hoping Gov. Palin stays ignorant about bad policies.

(cross-posted at DailyKos and specially formatted for TPM's crappy blogging software. Apologizes in advanced if the formatting is still messed up)
I have a suggestion for an attack ad that is based on my own The Incredible Hulk view of human character (note: only valid in elections against John McCain) .

In The Incredible Hulk TV show, Bruce Banner's catch phrase was “Don't make me angry. You wouldn't like me when I'm angry.”

The thing is, it was incredibly easy to make him angry. Some bar patron would poke him with a stick and he'd be like ARGGGH! HULK SMASH! And then destroy the entire bar. Or he'd lend a friend a record and it would come back with a scratch and he'd be like “ARGGH! HULK NO LIKE SCRATCH ON ABBA RECORD! HULK SMASK! And then lay waste to his friend's entire Doobie Brothers collection.

McCain is like this about his honor. From his autobiography:

"As a young man, I would respond aggressively and sometimes irresponsibly to anyone who I perceived to have questioned my sense of honor and self-respect. Those responses often got me in a fair amount of trouble earlier in life."

McCain: A Question of Temperament

But that was as a young man. He has cooled down by now, right? Nope. It was only two weeks ago that he got irritated when a Time reporter asked him to define what honor meant. He didn't question McCain's honor. He just asked for a definition of what honor means to McCain, and McCain got pissed.

I have a strong suspicion that if Obama went after McCain's honor, McCain would lose control and have an Incredible Hulk moment. Which makes for good TV, but it's not something people want to see in a President.

How do you attack McCain's honor? With the truth. As many of you know, the McCain campaign has flat-out lied about Obama's record. Not mere misrepresentations, or half-truths. Actual, deliberate lies. It has been documented in the press and by fact-checking organizations. They have lied many times, and they continue to do so.

Not only does the Obama campaign need to call them out on this, but they can attack McCain's honor at the same time with a tough but true argument.

1. Honorable people don't lie.

2. McCain has lied repeatedly about Obama's record.

3. McCain used to be an honorable man. Then he gave up his honor and principles for a chance to win.

This is the script I would use for the attack ad:

***

FEMALE VO: “ Do honorable people lie? Mr. McCain's ads on taxes are just plain false. Washington Post.” (Aug 31, 2008)

FEMALE VO: “McCain ad wrongly claims Obama plans "painful tax increases" for working families. Factcheck.org.” (Sept 2, 2008)

FEMALE VO: “McCain ad...crosses a new line into dishonesty. ABC News, Jake Tapper.” (August 27, 2008)

FEMALE VO: “John McCain used to be an honorable man. Then he sold his principles for a chance to win. John, honorable people don't lie. And you lost your sense of honor.”

***

It's a tough attack, but it's completely true. Of course, Obama would have to stop calling McCain an honorable man. Wouldn't you like to hear Obama say something like this?

OBAMA: “In the past, I've called John McCain an honorable man. And I meant it then. But for the past few months, he has been deliberately lying about my record. And honorable people don't lie. John McCain, until you stop lying about my record, until you stop lying about my positions, until you stop lying to the American people, I'm not calling you honorable anymore. Because you're not. You've lost your sense of honor, and it's one of the saddest things I've seen in politics.”

McCain hates Obama. He thinks Obama is a phony who never accomplished anything in his life. If Obama were to lecture McCain on what it means to be honorable, I can almost guarantee you it would drive McCain insane. He would erupt in a rage and over-react. It would create press, put McCain on the defensive, and change the public perception of McCain's campaign.

Each lie after that moment would be amplified because people would be looking for them now. And I think Obama could get away with a tough ad like this because he's not just attacking, he is defending himself. And he has facts and most of the press to back him up.

Good idea or no? Let me know.

FEMALE VO: “<em>McCain ad...crosses a new line into dishonesty.</em> ABC News, <a href="http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/08/from-the-fact-c.html">Jake Tapper</a>.” (August 27, 2008)

Like many, I expect Charlie Gibson's interview to be a softball affair. There will be a few questions about Troopergate and foreign policy basics, but no tough follow-up questions or obscure "gotcha" policy questions that would expose holes in the depth of her knowledge.

If I were the Obama campaign, I would do two things. One, lower expectations drastically. Tell people that she is media savvy, has prepared well and do great. 
Two, take a few digs at Charlie Gibson in the backwater channels that only media types tune into. "Charlie's a great guy and all, but he's more of an interviewer than a journalist. He's not going to ask any tough questions or make any news."
Goad him a little. Try to anger or shame him into proving that he's a respectable journalist capable of asking tough questions. He's certaintly not going to do that on his own, or he wouldn't have accepted the interview with all the restrictions the McCain campaign asked. It's the Obama's campaign only real hope to getting a few hard questions asked.

I don't know how the intricacies of speech writing works. But like other skills it requires talent to do well, and there's only so much talent around. I wonder if McCain's speech was lackluster compared to Palin's in part because McCain's best speech writers spent most of their time working on her speech.

Her speech was certainly more high-stakes and prone to risk. Also, a lot of the thinking behind Palin's selection seems less to help McCain won than shoring up the Republican base so they don't lose as many seats in the House and Senate. I think McCain, whether he realizes it or not, is allowing his Presidential campaign to take a few hits in exchange for stemming a potential tidal wave in November. Palin's nomination brought in around $10 million, all of which I believe is for the RNC as his campaign is taking public financing and can't use the money in the general election. How much will the RNC use for McCain's campaign, and how much will they use to protect their own?

We've all focused on how picking Palin shakes up a race and is a “game changer”, but I suspect her pick was more about protecting Republican House and Senate members and propelling Palin's career 4-8 years from now than helping McCain. If so, do you think McCain realizes it?

...or are we just so used to Obama's amazing oratory skills that they appear sucktacular in the fiery glow of his brilliance?

I'm going with plain suck.

There have been some notable exceptions (Michelle Obama, Sen. Kennedy, and I suspect, Sen. Clinton) but most of the speakers have been wooden, painful to listen to, and repeating cliched one-liners like robots from a dystopian future.

What's going on here? There have been a few good attacks and ways of framing issues, but so many opportunities have been passed up so far. It's a little disheartening. I can't see many undecided voters changing their minds at this point, or Obama getting much of a bounce.

Granted, this is too mean for the Obama campaign to actually do. But it would be more effective, and accurate, to call McCain a diva.

I would love to see a third-party group make a jokey ad poking fun at him. "John McCain. Wears $500 imported shoes. Has six houses. Whines when his friends don't pay attention to him. [photo of press pool] Throws temper tantrums when things don't go his way. There's a word for this person:

OPRAH VO: "Diiiiiiiva!"

What's next, McCain, no red M&Ms? We need a commander-in-chief, not a complainer-in-chief."