For national politics, and a few state and local issues if you live in Texas, Dallas in specific, I’ve started my own base-level "Intrade" at my blog. I'm covering Cornyn-Noriega, odds on the Texas House changing hands, and the top race in Dallas, as well as a couple of issues beyond electoral politics per se.
In today's Palin follies, I wonder if the Alaska Lege GOPers on the French committee are taking their orders from Schmuck Talk Express™  mission central, among other things.
And, Champagne Charlie Rangel shows once again that ethical issues are not just Republican issues.

For national politics, and a few state and local issues if you live in Texas, Dallas in specific, I’ve started my own base-level "Intrade" at my blog. I'm covering Cornyn-Noriega, odds on the Texas House changing hands, and the top race in Dallas, as well as a couple of issues beyond electoral politics per se.
In today's Palin follies, I wonder if the Alaska Lege GOPers on the French committee are taking their orders from Schmuck Talk Express™  mission central, among other things.
And, Champagne Charlie Rangel shows once again that ethical issues are not just Republican issues.

Will the Alaska GOP turn squishy on Palin subpoenas in Troopergate? We’ve seen Dems in DC roll over for non-sworn testimony by Bush and Cheney on 9-11, after all, while the Republicans pushed Clinton to the hilt. That and more in the Day 7 version of the Palin Follies. Oh, Heart wants "Barracuda" back, too.

Is the Palin affair claim real? Before the MSM sleepwalks into doing nothing, “remember John Edwards.”

 

If it’s true, is this an issue with political legs?

 

Well, do you think you’ll see John Edwards run for political office again? Did Gary Hart?

 

Would the Slickster have gotten a third term without the 22nd Amendment?

 

You know the answers to the first two and the surmise to the third.

 

As for the “legs,” Steve Schmidt has blustered on this, as on the Trig Palin parentage issue, but never denied either claim.

 

Before hand-wringing over “privacy” with the political party that’s made ANTI-privacy a campaign plank for decades, think about all that, and visit my blog for details and a roundup.

McCain is planning more “maverick” PR with town-hall style acceptance speech tonight. http://socraticgadfly.blogspot.com/2008/09/mccain-to-do-town-hall-style-acceptance.html It seems like he’s playing to avoid his weakness of not being the best stump speaker while playing up to some of his strengths of style. This will also let him play off Palin’s speech in a way Obama didn’t with Biden. She clearly is going to play bad cop/attack dog, while Schmuck Talk Express™ will set himself up as the “kinder, gentler” avuncular presidential candidate. See more details and analysis at my blog. http://socraticgadfly.blogspot.com/2008/09/mccain-to-do-town-hall-style-acceptance.html

Show me Trig Palin’s birth certificate, and no, I do NOT think that Steve Schmidt is only using this as a smokescreen to hide Sarah Palin’s other manifold incompetence. I somewhat disagree with Josh on that.

While Schmidt may have been using the issue in part as a smokescreen and ginning up some faux outrage, I don't think that's entirely true. I think it's getting to him. (Also, no, I still don't think it's "National Enquirer" politics to ask about this. Palin trotted out Bristol earlier this week, and Religious Righties like her have made ANTIPRIVACY a campaign issue for decades, to boot.)

So, it has political legs in spades, IMO. It also still has factual legs. This is 2008.

As I say on my blog, Mat-Su Regional (births webpage linked there) shows no Trig Palin entering the world there on April 18 -- or the day before or after. Beyond that, as for 2008 and technology, either the state of Alaska has birth certificates already available as PDFs or it would take somebody from Palin's staff 2 minutes to make one from a paper copy. Then, 30 secs to upload to a website.

So, if Sarah Palin can trot out the now-pregnant (again?) Bristol to counteract the "rumors," why can't she upload a birth certificate to KILL them? Why can't Steve Schmidt do that?

At my blog, I have a detailed roundup of Day 4 (not counting selection day) of the Palin follies, including more information on the still somewhat open, IMO, daughter/granddaughter issue.

That includes the link to births webpage of Mat-Su Regional Medical Center for April 18, 2008 at my blog, with no "Trig Palin" born that date, nor a day on either side. It is NOT "National Review tactics" to ask about a baby whose legal provenance is still not established, I will note.

Two other points to that:
1. Yes, Down's syndrome pregnancies increase with age, but they're not nonexistent among young mothers.
2. Re the possibility of the now (again?) pregnant Bristol, and the time frame involved, it's nowhere near impossible. I'm only 11 months older than my sister, for example.

Other issues at the link:
1. Media -- the "Eagleton question" is getting a small bit of traction;
2. Palin herself is being kept on media ice;
3. The Corner appears to now be giving Schmuck Talk Express™ half a pass.

(Apologies for a partial post earlier; I accidentially hit the return button on my laptop.)

At my blog, I have a detailed roundup of Day 4 (not counting selection day) of the Palin follies, including more information on the still somewhat open, IMO, daughter/granddaughter issue.

That includes the link to births webpage of Mat-Su Regional Medical Center for April 18, 2008 at my blog, with no "Trig Palin" born that date, nor a day on either side. It is NOT "National Review tactics" to ask about a baby whose legal provenance is still not established, I will note.

Two other points to that:
1. Yes, Down's syndrome pregnancies increase with age, but they're not nonexistent among young mothers.
2. Re the possibility of the now (again?) pregnant Bristol, and the time frame involved, it's nowhere near impossible. I'm only 11 months older than my sister, for example.

Other issues at the link:
1. Media -- the "Eagleton question" is getting a small bit of traction;
2. Palin herself is being kept on media ice;
3. The Corner appears to now be giving Schmuck Talk Express™ half a pass.

(Apologies for a partial post earlier; I accidentially hit the return button on my laptop.)

I totally disagree with people who want to give Sarah Palin a pass on daughter Bristol's pregnancy.

 

First, to reverse Clauswitz and trump Kumbaya, in modern America, politics is war by other means. After you win an election you can think about changing that. And, it has been that way to some degree with both parties. The Slickster had the War Room, after all.

 

Second, Palin brought up her preggers daughter on her own, indicating she’s gun-shy on this issue.

 

Third, the GOP has made disrespect for privacy a cornerstone for decades.

 

A smart Democratic presidential candidate, or whomever, would say something like this:

We will agree that Bristol Palin’s pregnancy should be a matter of Palin family privacy as soon as Sarah Palin individually and the Republican Party collectively agree that one’s personal sexual choices, personal reproductive choices, and personal video viewing choices for 300 million Americans should be a matter of their privacy.

Don’t hold your breath, though.

That said, if MoveOn hadn't agreed with Obama's request to stand down on 527 activities in the campaign, we'd already have this being tackled.

In any case, read my blog post for more on this line of reasoning.

Josh has just put up a post on the main page, asking what questions, beyond Troopergate and the bridge to nowhere, she should get asked.

It's simple:
Ask her the baby question.

If you're not familiar with this part of the Sarah Palin saga, rumors are floating that her 4-month Down's syndrome baby is actually her grandbaby, via her daughter Bristol.

Why would the Gov. go through such  a charade?

Simple -- the Religious Right.

If the rumor is true, I'm guessing she'd rather try to sell the lie of being a late-life mom than be caught with a daughter she obviously, by RR standards, screwed up in raising, to the point that she had a kid out of wedlock.

As I explain in an in-depth news analysis at my blog, Poppy Bush could have chosen a mushroom for Veep in 1988 and it wouldn’t have been so serious. Ditto for Perot with Stockdale in 1992.

 

But, between the future of addressing the so-called Global War on Terror, controlling global warming, and finding energy alternatives in the face of Peak Oil (a two-word phrase that has yet, in exact form, to escape the lips of either major-party candidate) 2008 is different.

 

It’s like 1972, when the country was divided over Vietnam. Hence, as I point out, Palin is this year’s Tom Eagleton. If you don’t know much about him, click the link above and see the comparisons spun out.

 

To supplement and background it, here’s an initial post on the number of issues of concern with Palin.

Part 2 of the Palin-Eagleton comparison, including a link to discussion about whether or not her 4-month-old baby is actually her grandbaby, is here.

As I explain in an in-depth news analysis at my blog, Poppy Bush could have chosen a mushroom for Veep in 1988 and it wouldn’t have been so serious. Ditto for Perot with Stockdale in 1992.

 

But, between the future of addressing the so-called Global War on Terror, controlling global warming, and finding energy alternatives in the face of Peak Oil (a two-word phrase that has yet, in exact form, to escape the lips of either major-party candidate) 2008 is different.

 

It’s like 1972, when the country was divided over Vietnam. Hence, as I point out, Palin is this year’s Tom Eagleton. If you don’t know much about him, click the link above and see the comparisons spun out.

 

To supplement and background it, here’s an initial post on the number of issues of concern with Palin.

Part 2 of the Palin-Eagleton comparison, including a link to discussion about whether or not her 4-month-old baby is actually her grandbaby, is here.