Anyone?

Because it amuses me, An Election Prediction!

Obama - 367
McCain - 171

Freaks Me Out

Again, I spare you the full version of today's rant. I will be brief.

Stories like this freak me out for a lot of reasons.

"A civil war that is simmering will break out into the open if McCain loses, and the party will have to decide what they want to be in the post-Reagan world," said Gloria Borger, a senior political analyst for CNN.

Reagan's disastrous presidency ended twenty years ago. Anyone on the Right wondering if your party is really "out of touch"? Yes.

Republicans are already caught up in a heated debate about Sarah Palin's future role in the party should the GOP ticket fail to win the White House.

Let's do a little Sanity Math, shall we?

One lunatic nominee:

She doesn't think aloud. She just ... says things," conservative columnist Peggy Noonan wrote in a recent Wall Street Journal column.

It's an argument that has been echoed by a string of conservatives -- including David Brooks, George Will, Kathleen Parker, and David Frum -- who believe Palin exhibits a poisonous anti-intellectual instinct of the party that threatens to ultimately destroy its foundations.

Republicans have made a fetish of anti-intellectualism for the last twenty years or more. They screamed for years that smart, educated people are too dangerous to be given power and authority. It's not an "instinct" of any kind. Republican campaign tactics have revolved around convincing as many people as possible that knowledge, intelligence, and education are un-American. In this vindictive, ill-informed woman, they're reaping what they have sown.

If it's all the same to them, though, I'd rather that this country, and the rest of the world, not have to suffer the consequences with them.

Plus one, clear signal that you're on the wrong track:

[David] Frum also pointed to recent polling that suggests Palin's unfavorable ratings have sharply risen in the last two months [....]

Counting on fingers. Two months ago, no one outside of Alaska had ever heard of her. Basically, she's been getting less popular ever since the first time people saw her. Palin's nomination took McCain from almost even in the race, to the point where he's on the verge of an epic defeat.

Anyhow.

This should equal a Republican Party ready to take a clear-eyed look at the Real World and decide what being a "conservative" really needs to look like in the 21st century.

Pay Attention

I'm sure i'm not the only one to notice today that, contrary to recent reports, attempted (?) election fraud exists.

In a little blast-from-the-past moment--the Bush Administration! (Remember them? Tortured people? Illegally pressured federal judges to leave office? Killed a few thousand people in Iraq? Bankrupted the country? Yeah, those guys.*)

One of Raymond's alleged co-conspirators, James Tobin, was a top official with the National Republican Senatorial Committee that year. He went on to serve as George W. Bush's Northeastern regional re-election chairman in 2004. Tobin was initially convicted. But he succeeded in having that decision overturned by an appellate court. Just last week, Tobin was again indicted in the case on two counts of making false statements to a federal agent. His lawyer had no comment.

Sometimes I don't think I give Bush enough credit for how closely he actually is following in Reagan's footsteps. All those potential indictments, trials, and prison sentences from an inner circle of criminals, near-criminals, and didn't-catch-me-yet'sters.

And, you know. Cheney.

On the other hand:

Conservative author and Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund points out there are dirty tricksters in both parties.

"No party has a monopoly on virtue," said Fund.

Fund has also written a book about the problem, "Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens our Democracy." His book focuses on the allegations facing more liberal groups like ACORN.

I think it's important to state clearly that ACORN is the actual voter-registration group whose activities have been scrutinized and pronounced clean of intent to deliberately defraud. (Making this book a tawdry sop to the rightwingnut "base" who think the Constitution really needs a bottle of wite-out and that "liberty and justice for all" is unAmerican.)

________________

* This guy:

In all due respect, I'm not so sure it's credible to quote leading news organizations about... Oh, never mind.
--George W. Bush

On 10/13/2004, Tempe, AZ, in the 3rd presidential debate. I guess we're supposed to believe this guy got elected--twice--without dirty tricks.

________________

Update: I take it back. Here's another, although not exactly equal, case

Spend, baby, spend!

Do you think Republican donors wanted $150,000 of their money to go for Sarah Palin's makeover?

Probably, yes. At this point, most of them would be willing to pay for almost anything that helps their standing in the polls.

Sigh. I wish someone would give me $75,000 for a shopping spree. NPR, public television, and a few favored charities have been calling me and I don't have any money to spare this year.

She has billed her home state of Alaska, where she is governor, for more than $21,000 for taking her five children on official trips – even when they were not invited.

I dunno if I object to a mother taking a babe in arms along if she has to travel. (OTOH, there are a lot of germs and cooties out there--maybe the little one would have been better off at home?)

"With all of the important issues facing the country right now, it's remarkable that we're spending time talking about pantsuits and blouses," said the McCain campaign's spokeswoman, Tracey Schmitt.

Maybe because in an economic climate where thousands of people are facing the prospect of homelessness daily, where the unemployment rate is rising, and where so many people are losing faith in the government's ability to govern, the Republican Party looks just a little out of touch after paying $150,000 to makeover a woman who claims to be Just Plain Folks?

(Besides, didn't McCain say he didn't want to talk about the economy or other issues. Wasn't he the one who said this should be a campaign of personalities?)

Break time!

Looks like those of us making excuses for John McCain and the nastiness of his campaign should rethink our positions. I read this, I rethought--and I agree. McCain owns his campaign. If he's too impotent to control it, he's certainly not suited for the Presidency.

Truth Is Not Subjective. I read this speech, or at least excerpts from it, a few days ago, and it stuck with me. Worth blogging.

Democrats. Are better for the economy. So, Democrats are better for capitalism than Republicans. (Someone remind me again--why do we need Republicans at all?)

Go wash your hands.

I'm sitting here, working hard and keeping my head down. I barely managed to avoid a political conversation with a coworker today. I cannot have an discussion with someone who starts a sentence with, "I was listening to Rush Limbaugh, and he said...."

Once Around the 'Net

A quick whirl through the headlines before I buckle down to serious work today.

George Bush is the torture president.

And, speaking of Bush failures, more signing statements. We all saw one of them coming:

In the authorization bill, Mr. Bush challenged four sections. One forbid the money from being used “to exercise United States control of the oil resources of Iraq”

(And to think, he didn't think his "legacy" would be known until after he died!)

Is Iraq the "forgotten war? Is Afghanistan?

This Gerson column was an--interesting--take on the campaigns. McCain is a great man sabotaged by the financial meltdown. Obama isn't much and doesn't have much to offer, but he's riding a historical tide, so all he has to do is stay afloat. (I hate it when someone makes my head spin that hard this early in the morning.)

When I read Are We Rome? Tu Betchus! Mostly? I want to learn Latin.

Does overeating make you stupid? I don't know (although I feel sludgy, and stupid, when I overeat), but it's worth considering that you might avoid Alzheimer's disease by eating less.

I miss the occasionally fabulous photos from the Hubble telescope.

One of the coolest things about Twitter? The entities you get to chat with. The MarsPheonix is my favorite.

And, to end on a funny note? How about that campaign ad I saw on television last night? It said that "liberal deregulation in Washington" caused the financial mess.

I Should Read Before I Blog

Because it would be easier to just point you to someone else saying what I wanted to say, but better.

A country that refuses to properly educate its young people or to maintain its physical plant is one that has clearly lost its way. Add in the myriad problems associated with unnecessary warfare and a clueless central government that wastes taxpayer dollars by the trillions, and you’ve got a society in danger of becoming completely unhinged.

Otherwise

Some things may be legal, but that doesn't make them right. I think herding people into facilities meant to hold cattle is one of the Not Right things. (I might feel just a tad differently if any of the presumably legal UsofA residents sitting in the corporate penthouse offices had been herded into cattle pens alongside the workers they hired.) (But probably not. Wrong is wrong.)

And, speaking of "wrong" and "the Bush Administration", I've been thinking about this one since I first read it a week or two ago. The Bush Administration: Reaping the Whirlwind.

History rolls around more quickly these days, so George Bush got to see his "legacy." Ten trillion dollars of national debt, before the stock market bailout is completed. (Gottal love those "small government" conservatives!)

Okay. More than 10,000 people have signed an online petition urging the Army to let an Iraqi puppy come home with a Minnesota soldier, who fears that "Ratchet" could be killed if left behind. What about the human beings left behind? How many people have signed a petition urging the government to let them out of the war zone? (I'm not dissing people for signing a petition for a dog. I'm dissing them for not signing a petition for a human being.)

Via Ahistoricality, our Today In History moment, from 96 years ago. Do follow the link and read the entire speech. It's interesting on so many levels....

Voter suppression (or planned intimidation) in Ohio. I had to go look up, "voter caging".

I like satire but I felt that mocking McCain's POW experience (even though he's used it for currency so many times he essentially devalued it himself) was a bit low.

You can read Lies, Damn Lies, and (Conservative) Statistics, but I don't think manipulating stats is confined to one side of the political spectrum.

(Congratulations to Jeremy and Andrew.)

Jesus Wept

I pick on religion a lot. I should probably mention that I acknowledge that religion has been responsible for encouraging some of the best in people, as well as providing an excuse for them to indulge in their worst instincts.

Religion can bring out the very best in people. It can bring out a goodness in people that even they didn't know existed. It can inspire, uplift, and solace. I know this, and I don't say that often enough. For those who believe, their belief can support them in the face of unimaginable catastrophes.

And there are good people in those ranks. A whole lot of them.

It's just that it's mostly the worst of religion in the UsofA is that's on public view these days. The loudest voices are the crazy ones.

*Sigh.* Even when I'm trying to prove I'm not an anti-religious hatemonger, I start ranting and almost prove otherwise. But, I'm not.

I just think that, while it's all very well for the meek to inherit the earth, I think a few of them would like to wait out their inheritance without fear of being tied to a remote fencepost and beaten to death by ignorant, drunks. Or, you know, being tied to the bumper of a truck and dragged for a few miles until their body starts to come to pieces. I'm thinking, James and Matthew probably wanted that. I'm not making charges that Christianity killed them--but it has to be said that most of the hate-talk I've heard for the past ten years comes from the 'Christian Right.' They do, at least, encourage this kind of brutality by dehumanizing and demonizing the populations they select as targets.

So, you liberal, unbigoted, or at least tolerant Christians? You might just mention, the next time the occasion presents itself (god forbid), that Jesus Wouldn't Do That.

When Did We All Go Mad?

In his America's Political Capitalism, Chris Hedges warns us:

It is no longer our economy but our democracy that is in peril. It was the economic meltdown of Yugoslavia that gave us Slobodan Milosevic. It was the collapse of the Weimar Republic that vomited up Adolf Hitler. And it was the breakdown in czarist Russia that opened the door for Vladimir Lenin and the Bolsheviks. Financial collapses lead to political extremism. The rage bubbling up from our impoverished and disenfranchised working class, glimpsed at John McCain rallies, presages a looming and dangerous right-wing backlash.

This mystifies me. Why, when it's the meltdown of the Rightwing, Neocon policy structure (if that's what they call it) that's causing these problems, is there the threat of a "right-wing backlash"? (With "against the Left" being implied.) Are they nuts?

Well, no. They're not. Because history shows that a "right-wing" backlash is exactly what can happen.

I don't get it....

Hmmm.... Okay, now I have to delete the next 600 words of my rant. (I hate wasting a good rant. I'll save it for later.) Because I just put the pieces together.

Considering that most "adults" are actually just tall twelve year-olds, no, it's not surprising that when things start to fall apart, they get scared and they want a Big Daddy to come along and tell them how to fix it all.

Or that they'll pretty much do whatever Daddy Says until the memory of the catastrophe starts to fade in their minds. Except that by then, it can be far too late....

Meaning no particular offense, but I think this is the same instinct that leads so many people to profess faith in an all-powerful "god." They cling hopefully to the idea that there's a Real Grown-Up somewhere out there, keeping an eye on events and in charge of making sure it all turns out ok.

And there's no way to combat that. You can't argue someone into rational belief.

Not Quite Right (with caveats)

I don't agree with Melissa McEwan that McCain saying he was going to "whip [Obama's] you-know-what in this debate" was inappropriate.

While "owning the context is precisely the pity phrase I was struggling to find in my own post on the topic, I disagree with her that it's impossible to extricate a person's race and/or gender from any discussion.

Like with anything, there has to be a line. Certain words ("uppity" or "boy") are loaded with racist baggage. "Uppity" is also freighted with anti-feminist baggage. Other words, and we all know them when we see them are loaded with baggage.

A threat to whup someone's butt is not. It's a kind of quasi-folksy patois that's in common usage in a thousand ways in this country, essentially none of which (in my experience) have any particular or specific racial context. (If I'm wrong, please correct me.) Specifically, it's the kind of "just plain folks" colloquialism that many Republicans adopt when speaking to "the base."

It's the kind of language that makes like the auto mechanic with grease under his fingernails and a worrying balloon mortgage payment looming on the horizon think that the rich, old, white guy running for office is really, underneath it all, "just like me."

Which is not to say some individuals somewhere in the boonies haven't used this specific expression as an insult, but by that criteria, none of us would ever be able to say anything. There is nothing that some lunatic somewhere hasn't used as an insult at one time or another.

Anyhow. I'm making this post mostly to say I'm green with envy that I wasn't able to distill my thoughts down to "owning the context." And stating, on the record, that I'm going to steal it and use it.

Linky Linky

If McCain were a Democrat ... Basically, if McCain were a Democrat, the Right would be tearing strips off of him for flipflopping, lying, and generally being a bad choice for the White House.

Congratulations, Paul Krugman. A Nobel! (P.S. Your books are fascinating.)

An amusing (although very shallow) little view of the traveling with a candidate. Air Apparent The differences between Air Obama and McCain Airways

More seriously, how is the economic crash affecting small populations like Iceland's?

The right to a timely and public hearing, and to be told the charges against you, might be reaffirmed--in the U.K.

Turing tests always fascinate me.

I agree with Warner. The Twitter Election 2008 feed is mesmerizing to watch.) He has interesting things to say about the value of an informed population questioning and fact-checking candidates. Although I think he's a bit hard on the candidates. It's simply not possible to answer all of the questions or participate in all of the discussions that happen online. Most of us regular bloggers have to create very narrow windows of focus to even try to keep up with everything. Even if these guys each hired a full-time Internet Responder, that person wouldn't be able to keep up with half of it.

Jam for cancer protection! (I prefer strawberry.) (*singing Mary Poppins style* A spoonful of sugar....)

Presumably, what McCain means is a "respectful" campaign along the lines of his "suspended" campaign a short while ago. Because, unless McCain has actually come up with plausible solutions to the problems we face? He has nothing but angry rhetoric to use to fight Obama's increasingly popular ideas.

How do you teach your country's history? Australia is thinking about it.

In the arena of, "hey, this is cool" I found a Google News feed of Biden Campaign Quotes and Moments.

And FOX keeps doing this part to misinform the world. The Man Behind the Whispers About Obama

Remembering Matthew Shepard. (What's up with this?)

Funny!

This video is the funniest thing I've seen in a while.

For those of you who, like me, find links to a video clip instead of a proper blog entry to be annoying? Let me tell you where the funny is, which is everywhere, but mostly in the opening music.

When Johnny comes marching home again,
Hurrah! Hurrah!
We'll give him a hearty welcome then
Hurrah! Hurrah!
The men will cheer and the boys will shout
The ladies they will all turn out
And we'll all feel gay,
When Johnny comes marching home.

I know I said McCain wasn't a poster child for diversity. I take it back. How much more inclusive can you get? Elect John McCain and we'll all be gay!

Other than that the clip is of a pro-McCain "march" of indeterminate size (I'm guessing 40-50 people) in Manhattan (?) running into a lot of patented New Yorker indifference, quite a few "thumbs-down" signs, and a handful of middle fingers raised. (The clip makes the f-you population look larger than it was by using multiple shots of the same people.)

The kicker? The essential message of the clip is that Liberals are supposed to support people who are being picked on and bullied. So we should vote for McCain, because Manhattan is picking on him. (And, by the way, if you believe liberals want to build a bridge of understanding? The Corner would like to sell you Palin's Bridge.)

Heh

Nostalgia for the good old days--of August, 2008.

Unforeseen Racism?

To be honest, I think the McCain campaign is using much of the same kind of inflammatory rhetoric that has worked for the Republican Party in the last two elections. They're just (and this is so often my complaint about the Right), not smart enough to understand what they're doing.

Their language, setting aside for the moment the context of this specific campaign and the response of their audience, is just political gasbagging. With a campaign that has tried and failed to find a "hook" McCain can run on and lacking, as they do, any actual reason people should vote for yet another Republican Administration, they're falling back on vague generalities and empty threats.

"We might not have a Plan to save the country, but Those Other Guys do and it's a bad one!" "It's a mess now but they're going to make it so much worse!" Or, the old standby, "Liberals! Dangerous!"

This would be fine, if eye-rollingly oh, so boringly political in any other Presidential campaign, but this is not just any Presidential campaign. McCain's opponent is a Black man. I'm honestly not sure if McCain understood that that changed the nature of the game. As a result, his campaign is being--not racist, but culturally, racially insensitive.

In the USofA, there are cultural stereotypes that many of us deplore, but we have to be adult enough to admit that they exist. I think one of the biggest mistakes McCain has made is not understanding that. I honestly do not think he set out to whip up racist hysteria.*

When you call your opponent "dangerous" and he's an upper-class white man, that's one thing. When it's a Black man, the word 'dangerous' suddenly picks up a lot of baggage.

McCain could have made exactly the same remarks about any white, male opponent (the Right has been calling the Left "dangerous" for years) and they would have passed unnoticed. Where he failed, was in being color-blind. He did not factor Obama's race into the equation.

Unfortunately, a loud-mouthed part of the Republican base is racist. They took Obama's race and McCain's political rhetoric and created an ugly marriage of anger and hate. And then another truckload of the Republican base jumped on the bandwagon. Because they're not only die-hard Republicans, they're ordinary people who see the economy faltering around them, and their way of life in serious danger. They don't understand what caused the mess and they don't want to. What they want, is someone to blame--someone to be angry at.

These people might have gone through their entire lives with their thin veneer of racial tolerance unscratched, but they feel threatened. And, as I said in an earlier post, finger-pointing is much easier and more emotionally satisfying than fixing the problem.

Understand that these are not people who want to be part of the process of governing. They want to cast a vote every four years and then leave the rest entirely up to someone else. They want to get fired up, elect "our guy" and go back to their lives where everything keeps going pretty much the same--except that he landscape is changing and now they don't know what tomorrow is going to bring. They're scared.

Things are different. There's this guy, and he looks different and he says different things and that's not what they're used to in a political campaign. Everything is changing and they don't like it. (This is why they're "conservatives" after all.) And, hey, he's Black and "everyone knows" that Black People are different--and dangerous--and "our guy" says he's a socialist and I'm not sure what that is, but I'm pretty sure it's dangerous too, and now I'm getting really scared.

And thus, what looks like a tidal wave of racism suddenly overtakes McCain's campaign.

McCain has made a few remarks over the last few days. Not many, not loudly, and not often, but enough to convince me that he's becoming aware of the situation and that he regrets it. I don't think he has the political courage to really stand up and say, "stop" though. And, even if he did, the Republican leadership would have a meltdown over him alienating this significant part of their "base."

P.S. Maybe it would be worth it for someone to compare how much naked racism is on display at McCain speaking events, and how much at Palin's events? (Entry also talks about McCain trying to calm his supporters.)

______________

* Let me be clear. I can't say the same for some of his advisors and certainly not his VP pick, but I don't think Senator McCain personally intended any racism. From what I've read, he always mentally "demonizes" his opponents in a campaign. It's how he fires himself up to run. He may not be a poster child for diversity, but I've never seen or read anything to suggest that he's a closet KKK member, either.

Count Me OUT

I don't have a story to tell, but count me as Out as a supporter of the "homosexual agenda" of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Wanted: Sanity In Society

I've been reading and listening to stories of the increasing levels of racial violence in this country and I'm more than concerned.

There is racism in the USofA. There are a few people who are not only unable to get past the lizard-brain reaction of "Different! Dangerous!" but who are entirely unwilling to even try.

Bigotry is so easy. No having to think about complex policies or accept any responsibility. And, look! Important People are saying it's true! Brown people are evil! (Don't tell me that the rightwing political speeches against "illegal immigrants" were anything other than thinly disguised racism.*)

Today, the racist voices are all over the country and the racist voices are getting louder. Not, I think, because there are more racists these days, but because people are scared. They don't understand why the "American Dream" failed. They're looking for scapegoats and it's easier to blame the brown face next to them on the bus than it is to understand the failure of the neocon policies.* *

And, more than that, those voices are getting louder because an opportunistic political campaign, devoid of strategy or solutions, is courting them.

A day or two ago, I didn't think McCain and most of his inner circle (not including Palin) were actually on board with running as the party of unfettered racism. I just think thought they started something without knowing where it would lead, and now they don't know what to do about it.

Now I have my doubts. There's been more than enough time for McCain to come out strongly against the hatemongering, but with his wife, his campaign advisors, and his VP pick all contributing to the problem, I'm starting to accept that he's not going to speak out against it--not really. Not until he sees if it's going to work, anyhow.

(I'm a bit worried. Every time I think a Republican campaign has scraped the bottom of the nastiest barrel in the pile, they come back out a couple of years later with an even skankier barrel they can dip from.)

____________________

* Most illegal immigrants working in this country are working at jobs that "Americans" are too good to do. The illegal immigrants are the faceless people picking our vegetables, cleaning our houses, and washing dishes in our restaurants. They're the maids who clean that budget-rate hotel room, the busboys who pile up the wreckage of your fine steak dinner, and those annoying lawn-care guys out mowing the neighbor's grass at 5:00 am. These are not people taking "our" jobs unless you're saying that you dreamed of your son or daughter growing up to be a migrant farm worker.

I lost my job, not because of corporate greed and fiscal mismanagement, but because those terrorist immigrants keep coming up here and washing our dishes and picking our fruit! They're destroying our way of life!

____________________

* * These are the soundbite citizens. They take in most of their opinions from the thirty-second news coverage on the 6:00 evening news (and god help us all if they are FOX viewers) or the headlines and first paragraphs of the daily paper (they always mean to read the articles more closely later, but there's never time) and they build these snippets into a world view.

Why Can't People Think?

"I'm mad. I'm really mad. And what's going to surprise you, it's not the economy. It's the socialists taking over our country," another man said.

That's not a rational political position. That's ignorance, inflated with fear. Socialism is just the label he was given by a desperate, and losing, candidate.

#1 - What's happening in this country, and around the world, isn't ideological, except as it's a political response to the failure of "small government conservative" deregulation and the markets' lust for profits. Obama is less of a socialist than I am. (And I am not a socialist, by any means. Current market problems aside, capitalism has worked just fine for me.)

#2 - How does that ignoramus think the problem is going to be fixed, short of another major Depression? I'll tell you--he doesn't know. He hasn't thought about it or, if he has, he doesn't understand what's happening. He wants a slogan - a buzzword for his poster and one key phrase to scream at rallies. He has no interest in any understanding that goes deeper than that.

The Capitalist American Dream has ended, and the more proof these frightened, little people see of that, they louder they scream and the harder they hate. Because it's easier to shout than it is to think. And it's a lot easier to hate than it is to roll up your sleeves and start cleaning up the mess. And creating something better.

Delusional Much?

It's almost a cry for help, with the GOP party faithful amazed McCain could possibly be losing.

Seriously? With their Party in shambles, the current Administration less popular than Richard "I Am Not A Crook" Nixon, and a candidate that hasn't managed to stand for anything except getting elected, they don't know how they lost?

Who Are These People?

"[McCain's campaign has gone] into the dark territory of race-baiting and xenophobia."

Desperation has never looked so ugly.

[A] woman, who teaches her own child, that the next president of the United States is so vile that "you need gloves to touch him"

Someone save the children from the legacy of blind hate!

Cindy McCain: Obama Has 'Waged the Dirtiest Campaign in American History'

Do they seriously not own a mirror? Do they not hear themselves? Do they not understand what they're inciting?

The McCain campaign has deliberately been whipping the angry, far-right Republican base into a frenzy.

Do they really think they can ride the whirlwind they're creating?

270 To Win

From the site 270towin, an Electoral Vote Tracker, the likely results of November 4th's vote:

Who still needs how many electoral votes, to win?

What chance does McCain have?

Of course, sites like this fail to take many things into account, not the least of which is the potential for another Ohio or Florida. Still, barring unforseen and catastropic events? McCain's goose is very cooked.

To be honest, I find myself very much afraid of what the McCain campaign might do between now and November 4.

Gap Culture

We're living in a world where the gap between Real People and the wealthy is becoming--almost inconceivable to me.

Ingrid Zaharris moved to a smaller home, her daughter had to give up after-school gymnastics, and Ingrid is trying to decide whether or not she can live without a car.

Richard Garriott, who made a mega-fortune designing computer games, is spending thirty million dollars on his next vacation. He'll take off from a Russian spaceport, orbit the planet, then dock with the space station.

Same planet. Different world.

Is He Enough?

I think I wrote something like this a while back, but I'm sure that Chernus says it better. No, Barack Obama is not the progressive candidate of my dreams, but I have faith that he understands the real problems and that, if we keep an eye on him, he'll work to help us solve them.

It's not liberalism, it's not even progressivism, but it could be a kind of participatory democracy.

Once we elect him, we have only to hope that we're smart enough to lead him.

Did You See This?

Crawford, Texas, usually only mentioned in conjunction with the current President--wossname. Today the press is speaking for Texans who think that a President Obama is just what we need.

Equal time for the Right! Rolling Stone gives us The Real McCain. He is--not impressive.

And, from what I read, he essentially slipped and said, "good-bye" to his chances of winning the race last night?

Stop The Hate

Wandering around the world o'blog, I find one theme repeated many times. Leftish bloggers are staring across the aisle at McCain's campaign tactics--I can't call anything so ineffectual a "strategy"--and muttering, "Have they completely lost their minds?" For example, it's insane enough that the McCain campaign is going to try to turn the dialogue from the economy to personal attacks on Barack Obama; but telling the press that that was their plan? What is wrong with them?

And? For the record? I am willing to believe that neither that Palin nor McCain heard the racist remarks or the death threats at their recent speaking events, should their campaign care to say so.

However. I do hold them 100% responsible for inciting the racism and hatred we've all been reading about.

Republicans should not be ashamed of being Conservatives, but they should be ashamed of being narrow-minded, hatemongering bigots.

And those on the Right who are not narrow-minded, hatemongering bigots?* Should be ashamed of the way their Party panders to and services the intolerances of people who are. And ashamed of themselves for letting it happen.

(I just caught the taile-end of a fascinating NPR segment, comparing Reconstruction in the USofA after the Civil War, with our (few) plans for reconstructing Iraq. I learned much about how long our own Civil War went on--about continued guerilla fighting by white Southerners that kept hostilities, if not the technical "war" going for decades. The story goes far beyond the infamous KKK.)

_____________________________

* I choose to believe there are a significant number of these people. Because the alternative is that about 1/3 of this country consists of people who are narrow-minded, hatemongering bigots. And I just can't accept that.

That's What I'm Sayin'

Right after I posted this update, I found this article.

I'll spare you my usual rant on how poorly we teach our own history to our kids. And the corollary rant about we keep repeating the same mistakes over and over again.

Nostalgia

I remember when I thought Dennis Kucinich would change the face of Washington politics. When it looked like he was the one who would move into the White House and teach the "Washington Insiders" how to tell the truth and do the right thing.

Like many former candidates for high office, he's decided he has nothing left to lose by saying that should be said. Like this Billions For Banks Bailout. Dennis says, We Had Alternatives.

Compulsive Mapping

On June 11, I started checking CNN's ever-changing Electoral Map.

At that time, with not only the election, but both conventions still on the far horizon, McCain had 125 "safe" electoral votes and 69 "leaning." Obama was 153 and 37, respectively.

Today, the map shows McCain with 125 "safe" votes and 64 "leaning." He's lost a little ground in the "leaning" competition and doesn't seem to have picked up any really strong, "safe" votes.

Obama has 160 "safe" votes and 90 "leaning." He's gained a lot of strength.

(popup graphic.)

Update: In the 24 hours since I posted this, Obama's total jumped to 177 "safe" votes and 87 'leaning." McCain dropped to 125 "safe" and 49 "leaning." (I'd imagine that him bailing on Michigan has a lot to do with that.)*

Shrug. The Republicans have zero chance of winning this one. It's the Democratic Party's race to lose. That's been true since day one. The question is, can Obama win it by a large enough margin?

___________________

* I have a lot of polling sites other than CNN bookmarked, but not here at the office.

I Just Don't Get It

Talking to a random Republican passerby a few minutes ago, I mentioned the stock market's bad day and the connection to the defeat of the bailout plan. Before I even had a chance to add that I don't think it's a great plan, he burst into furious speech.

It's the Democrats' fault. They didn't vote for the bill and now they don't support the bill. It's all the Democrats' fault. The Republicans don't matter and don't count--they have no votes in Congress, the Democrats control everything and are responsible for the mess.

Before you run away with the idea that this was some backwoods hillbilly with no clue of how the country is run, I should mention that this man is an investment/mortgage banker.

Someone tell me how, on a vote where 140 Democrats and 65 Republicans voted "yes" and 133 Republicans and 95 Democrats voted "no," any sane person can believe that the Republicans had nothing to do with the plan failing?

Granted, on a pure, party-line vote, the bill would have passed, but this wasn't a party-line vote. Nothing about this proposed bailout is falling along party lines, nothing about the discussion has been along party lines up until now, and it was obvious that the vote would not be along strict party lines.

A couple of hours after the vote, the simple facts of which are in your face on every news outlet in the country, this man was furiously declaiming things that were a contradiction of the simple facts.

I just don't understand how seemingly sane people find it so easy to believe things that are demonstrably untrue. How they find it so easy to believe the opposite of the simple facts.

The Lighter Side

Of funnyman David Brooks, on Palin:

"If you wanted someone to destroy a corrupt establishment, she'd be your woman.

. . . .

Whew. I can't remember the last time I laughed that hard. Thanks, David!

Global Voting

I checked back on The Economist's Global Electoral College.

Lots more votes in (please, tell all of your international blog friends to vote!) and McCain remains unpopular. In fact, in an admittedly fast click-through on the list, I found only four places where he's doing well.

Israel - 33% of those voting so far favor McCain
Peru - 35% of those voting so far favor McCain
Colombia - 40% of those voting so far favor McCain
Venezuela - A whopping 44% of those voting so far favor McCain.

I did a random check of about 30-35 countries and found none with a majority favoring McCain. The four listed above gave McCain the highest approval ratings I saw.

Most of the countries seem to be running around 78% in favor of Obama.

____________________

P.S. Someone in the comments, made me realize that I should have mentioned that there are many, many countries with 0 votes registered. This includes Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan and probably other countries that the commenter seems to fear are harboring Terrorists For Obama.

Round 'em up

Random things I've bookmarked this week:

Yesterday, James Fallows posted about The prescience of Chuck Spinney. But really about how more than one person suspected that the McCain campaign was well on its way to imploding.

And I liked the title of Good Math, Bad Math so well that I hung around to read about Economic Disasters and Stupid Evil People

I have no idea who is behind The Power of Narrative, but there's some interesting material there. Pursuant (pursuant!) to the topic du jour, that being party politics, you should read his thoughts about the USofA's political party system and why it's an illusion. (I don't necessarily agree. But it was interesting.)

Best toy I've found this month? It's xtimeline. (Thanks to Cliopatria.)

Color me so embarrassed for Denver. And not a little angry.

I have to agree with Kevin Drum. Mocking Palin isn't funny any more. She's just too unprepared for any national office, much less being an aging and infirm heartbeat away from the Oval Office.

This Clusterfuck Nation post starts with dead carp and clog-dancing, and then it gets really interesting.

Turns out I had 10 things bookmarked on The Sideshow, so I'm just going to assume y'all have the sense to have the blog bookmarked for yourselves. (One my biggest yes moments of the week came on this post. That is how you handle hard-line negotiations with that bunch.)

I'm sure I had more, but Bloglines appears to be Having Issues today.

My $0.02

I find that I must suspend all blogging until such time as the crisis has passed and I've had the opportunity to offer my support (or otherwise) to the networks offering a slate of questionable new television entertainment.

Anticipation

Quite frankly, I'm not that excited about watching an Obama-McCain debate. McCain will sound lame and Obama will sound informed and intelligent. And then the righwingnutmachine will start screaming about how intelligence and education are elitist* and we should all vote for the Regular Guy.

What I want to see is the Biden-Palin debate. Even though they've had to rewrite the rules and the format to accommodate Palin's ignorance on matters of national and global significance, it should be interesting to see if they've been able to anticipate every question that comes up (Or do they get the questions in advance?) and program her with a response.

I'm working (really) at the moment, so I don't have time to go see if the "rules" of the debate are available online. (Although the likelihood of it actually taking place seems to be growing very remote.)

____________

* One of the things that drives me nuttiest about living in a "democracy" is the reaction to the fact that some people are smarter than other people.

Culturally, this country has a whole weird comparison/competition thing. No one is just themselves. They're only in relation to others. (I think we should address this national feeling of inadequacy.)

I mean, people think they're poor if they make $100,000 a year, if they hear of someone who makes $500,000 a year. They don't look at their own life and see that they have a roof over their head, food to eat, and money to clothe and educate their children while having enough left-over to plan for a comfortable retirement. They look at the guy who makes $500,000 and that makes their own $100,000 look inadequate.

Similarly, someone whose perfectly acceptable, above-average IQ of 120 is sufficient for their needs, can absolutely foam at the mouth upon hearing of someone else whose IQ is 150. You are not stupid because their IQ is higher than yours, okay?

Nor is intelligence something to fear. There are other factors that determine success. (Like being born into or marrying money, but that's a different topic.) Ambition, focus, and the determination to succeed are important. Belief in a cause or causes higher than personal gain is really helpful.

Funny and Fun

This is not funny. Hee.

The Economist would like to see everyone get a vote in the upcoming USofA presidential election. You should go look (it takes a second for the app to load). You can see, country-by-country, which candidate is most popular. It's fun--they've even assigned each country an "electoral" vote, based on the country's population. (At the moment, leaving the default in place? It shows Obama (7,898) over McCain (0). That made me giggle, but it's not a real reflection of the voting, which is light right now but I hope will increase. (BTW, right now they do show the USofA voting 77% for Obama.)

More generally, the idea that the population of the world should have a vote for other country's leaders is sort of interesting. Concepturally. I'd like to see someone consider the implications.

Wondering

Was McCain the first major politician to use the d-word in a public statement? I mean, when he said he had to stop campaigning and get back to DC to get a bailout bill passed this week because we'd be in a Depression by Monday if he didn't. Was he the first to use the word?

I do not believe this, but I did hear a news story this morning about how much trouble Spain's economy is in because of the bursting of their housing bubble. Also, France and Italy.

(Via Avedon Carol)

Answer me this

For anyone silly enough to not be reading Avedon Carol or who didn't see/doesn't remember Kevin Drum's post last December.

Is this what a pre-Depression Looks Like? 'Cause, as I understand it, gross inequity in the distribution of wealth was a big problem in '29.

_______________

(Pardon the poor quality of the graphic. I've resized it to make it more viewable, but I lost some quality. The original post is here and well worth reading.)

_______________

Thanks to Ahistoricality, here's another graph that's even more pertinent to my question.

Pardon me?

Mr. Obama tries to start putting together a bipartisan solution to the crisis on Wall Street. McCain is eager to ride on the coattails of the front-runner's better-qualified staff but is even more eager to be the first to claim public credit for what was supposed to be a semi-private (i.e., part of their jobs, not their campaigns) agreement.

McCain wants to suspend his campaign, pretending that he and his staff of Washington insiders and lobbyists need to get home, because the crisis can't be solved without them?

He wants to cancel Friday's debate (an event at which, I should mention, he has almost no chance of being declared "the winner").

And he wants Mr. Obama, whose numbers seem to be improving daily, to suspend his campaign, as well?

Pardon me, but has anyone else noticed that McCain is completely imploding?

It Was An Iceberg

It may be a gross oversimplication, but at least this talks about the current financial crisis in terms we can all understand. Basically, people wanted more safe places to invest their money than existed. So a complicated system of issuing, packaging, and "insuring" high-risk loans was created. These looked safe, but weren't. The pile reached critical mass and is starting to melt down. (Thanks to Ahistoricality for pointing me to the article.)

Those little bumps in the economy that George Bush, in his short-sighted ignorance, has been telling us to spend our way out of? That sloppy mess on the floor of Wall Street? This Administration's burning desire to spend every dollar it can beg, borrow, or steal on killing people overseas?

Turns out, we should have looked under the water. There was an iceberg, with the D-word attached to it, lurking just out of sight. Not many people have the courage to say it, but we've been "led" perilously close to the D-word, and we're not out of the woods yet. I guess we should all stop to pay tribute to The Good Life. It may be over.

Paranoia Running Deep

Maybe I'm imagining things? But I'm thinking that this is actually a sign that ol' Jeb hasn't entirely given up his dreams of a White House run.

(Seriously. This country has had all the Bush leadership it can really afford.)

Otherwise

Pausing in my attempt to comprehend our current financial woes, I see that the Republican vice-presidential nominee is becoming very unpopular. Anyone but me think it's an interesting coincidence that this seems to have happened a week or so after the national media abruptly decided to start fact-checking the candidates?

(So, you know, people who think Mr. Obama should lie more might want to reconsider.)

Quickly!

It's 20 minutes until autumn. I need to get outside and enjoy the last balmy minutes of summer! But we have a financial crisis on our hands and the government may (or may not) have offered a plan to get us out of it. Jim Kunstler isn't crazy about the plan but Andrew Tobias seems to approve. I'm so confused. Are we doing the right thing or not?

Ahistoricality shares a letter to Congress, and I'm thinking I agree. I don't understand everything I read when I tried to read about the plan, but it looks pretty vague to me.

Under the heading of whatthehell?, I'd have to put this information, and now I completely disapprove and I'm rolling my eyes over the Bush Administration's persistent insanity.

Obama doesn't like it. He wants a real plan.

Even McCain is against it, although probably for the wrong reasons. (You know how I feel about that.) Krugman, as usual, is able to lay the problem out in a fashion I can understand.

Okay, I've decided. (For the moment.) I'm agin' it. It's a badly constructed plan, thrown together in the middle of a panic. It won't just make things worse before they get better. It will simply make them worse.

I am SO in love

Bartlett advises Obama.

Mr. Obama, are you listening?

Talk Like A Crazy Man Day!

Okay, so McCain is saying Obama is an outsider without any national experience to qualify him to be president and, at the same time, Obama is a Washington insider who is responsible for the financial meltdown on Wall Street?

Do you ever wonder just how much (if any) mental dissonance the Right is experiencing, trying to believe all of McCain's ridiculous remarks?

(Do you ever wonder if the McCain campaign has just gone totally MAD?)

(Do you ever worry that even though his campaign has been exposed as a series of lies, half-truths, and ridiculous vagaries, an astonishing 50% of the voting population is still going to vote for him?)

How Stupid

What's the good in sending a president?

That helicopter should have carried food and water. Those people need help, not platitudes.

Browsing

Sometimes, as I go through the news, I bookmark stories and blog entries. Think About This, I tell myself. But, it's boring to think alone.

If you cast your mind 'way back to the Republican Convention--how long ago that seems now--you might remember reading about the police state of Minneapolis-St Paul.

I bitched about excessive police presence in Denver, but we had nothing compared to that. I mean, even the arrest of men threatening to kill Mr. Obama didn't get that kind of reaction. Even though they were armed and dangerously motivated by racism, they were dismissed as Mostly Harmless. Because meth is famous for producing a mellow high.

These would-be assassins won't be charged with planning first-degree murder.

I'm just saying. If four meth-heads had been found cradling an arsenal and threatening McCain? They'd never have seen the light of day again, except through bars.

Moving on, people who dismiss church and state apologies for past crimes? Are missing the point.

Why bother?" the scientist's great-great-grandson Andrew Darwin was quoted as saying by the Daily Mail newspaper. "When an apology is made after 200 years, it's not so much to right a wrong, but to make the person or organization making the apology feel better."

No, it's not. It's because people today are militant in defense of a 200 year-old incorrect position the church assumed. The church's announcement is a necessary step toward making people let go of outdated and incorrect beliefs. They aren't doing it for themselves. They aren't doing it for Darwin. They're doing it for his great-great-great grandchildren, and all the generations to come. (And, yes, a little bit for themselves. Because if churches and congregations refuse to admit to the truth of things demonstrably true, civilization will continue to polarize around these issues. (Removed: A short but heated rant around the idea of people who insist upon the existence of a 'god' but who also insist upon defining their deity with human limitations. You're welcome.)

Before we leave the neighborhood of good and evil, I see that McCain had no need of ParanoidPalin** as a running mate. He's got a firm grasp on morality. (For those disinclined to wade through the article, McCain thinks you create a "moral hazard" by bailing out major employers and players in the financial markets because doing so encourages risk-taking. To be honest, I couldn't decide which bit to rant about--McCain's assumption that a corporation has some kind of morality to hazard, or his blithe disregard of how the financial industry got to this point. So, I'm leaving it up to you.)

Moving on to money issues.

$407,000,000,000. Four hundred and seven billion makes a lot of digits. And a lot of deficit.

127,000,000,000. One hundred and twenty-seven billion. That was the projected budget surplus when Clinton left office.

$554,548,000,000. Five hundred fifty-four billion, five hundred forty eight million dollars. That's an estimate of what it's cost us, so far, to kill people in Iraq*.

The deficit plus Clinton's projected surplus--five hundred and thirty four billion. Which, not at all coincidentally, is just about what we've spent in Iraq so far. Give or take twenty billion.

And, speaking of record-breaking deficits:

Deficit up by $246 billion in a year. Federal agency cites 'substantial increase in spending' and 'halt' in tax revenue growth.

Those wacky Republicans. They've got the idea of "no tax revenue to support Big Government" down to a T, but they can't seem to get the hang of not spending money.

Poking around in bookmarks. That seems to be everything I had marked so far.

Oh! Last but certainly not least, this is why I had to wipe coffee off my monitor this morning.

Sarah Palin knows a little something about God’s will, knowing God quite well, from their work together on that natural-gas pipeline, and what God wills is: Country First. And not just any country! There was a slight error on our signage. Other countries, such as that one they have in France, reading our slogan, if they can even read real words, might be all, like, “Hey, bonjour, they are saying we can put our country, France, first!” Non, non, non, France! What we are saying is, you’d better put our country first, you merde-heads, or soon there will be so much lipstick on your pit bulls it will make your berets spin!

Put down your beverage and go read the entire thing.

_______________________

* Well, and enrich a lot of anonymous beneficiaries of the government's generosity in handing out large sums of cash with no receipt required. And enrich the people who sold their noisy neighbors, old girlfriend's new boyfriends, business rivals, and other "enemies" to the US government for cash payments.

** Note the photo of ShiftySarah (I love making up rude nicknames) on the article. If anyone was in doubt, this is proof positive that the media's love for her has waned. This is the first unflattering picture I've seen any media outlet publish of her--and it's an ugly one. Many publications and opinioneers*** are probably going to be following suit--exposing their shame and promising to reform.

(And, shouting the Obama campaign made me do it! isn't going to fool anyone. You fell for loud rhetoric over substance. You always do. Obama had nothing to do with it, beyond being a speaker who disappointed you by not needing to use volume to disguise lack of content.)

__________________

*** It's a good word, no? Yes, I got it from "Mousketeers"**** and it seems appropriate to me. Because much of the time, the professional opinioneers strike me as being just about that serious about what they do.

__________________

**** If you had to Google that? Never. Speak. To. Me. Again. I do not converse with infants.

More Electoral Fun

June 11, I snagged this from CNN and posted it:

September 6, just after both conventions.

And now, a heartbeat later, it's all of September 15--9 days after the last map was posted.

The only significant change is that 10 electoral votes that were "leaning" Left are now in the "toss-up" category, but McCain's post-convention "bounce" is gone (It must be true! I read it in the news!) so I'm waiting to see what another week or two will bring.

I'm not worried, in spite of the 2004 statistics. (No, it's probably not relevant. But it makes me laugh.)

You Gotta Wonder

Just precisely what kind of wildly dangerous criminal is locked up in the Galveston County Jail?

Risking the murder of +/-1000 people strikes me as a pretty extreme step to take for 'security' but this is Bush/Cheney's Amerika. If we can slaughter tens of thousands in Iraq, I guess we can whack a thousand or so UsofA citizens here at home.

(Even as I type this, I'm acutely aware of how unjustified this comparison might appear. The Galveston officials didn't take us to war in Iraq, and I have no reason to believe that Bush/Cheney are involved in the incarceration of any of the +/-1000 people in the Galveston jail.

Nevertheless, these strike me as the same kind of inhuman acts. Treating people as things--I read somewhere, and I'd give a lot to remember where, that most of the "evil" in the world starts with treating people as things.

So. My blog--my irrational prejudices. The fact that the jail was not destroyed doesn't lessen the criminality of this act.)

If You Get Bored?

Don't take the media's neglect sitting down. Biden has important things to say and he's saying them to audiences around the country, whether the national media chooses to report it or not. Find the text of his speeches and share it around.

Read The Economist on the financial crisis. And console yourself with the knowledge that this is a very Right-leaning publication, so no one can accuse you of learning the facts from a biased, anti-capitalist publication. (The DOW dropped 504 points today. I feel a little sick to my stomach, just thinking about it.)

Check out The Daily Muck for an insight into some dangers we face. I can't decide what worries me more--Big Brother surveillance with racist parameters, or the idea that nukes are degenerating all over the country.

Fairly UNbalanced

The national broadcast "news" media? Is not the place to find even-handed, unbiased coverage on politics. 'm pretty sure no one reading this blog is unaware that I believe that.

See MediaMatters for a good article and some snazzy graphics showing that there's almost no way you can measure broadcast media coverage of the Democrats and the Republicans that doesn't wind up with the Right getting the lion's share of the coverage.

In the good news department, the "national media" seems to slowly but surely be becoming aware that Something Funny's Goin' On.

[Julie] Mason responded: "It's true. I hate to say it. It might be a new low for the news media this late in the game for us to become so distracted with something as trivial as this. And we're not talking about the issues. I wish we were more high-minded."*

I even read that RepublicanRedFOX is starting to choke on the outpouring of lies they've been relentlessly disseminating.

I mean--seriously. How bad has it gotten for us to find FOX not championing the Right mindlessly?

__________________________________

P.S. Why are you sitting there, wishing you were a serious journalist (more "high-minded") instead of a bad Entertainment Tonight imitation\?

I wished I was thinner. I went on a diet. I wished I was a nonsmoker. I'm getting closer every day. I wished I was less of a procrastinator. With practice, I'm getting better at doing things now, instead of "whenever."

Just do it.

Still Going Strong....

We continue our policy of invading nonaggressive countries with our latest maneuver - repeatedly invading an ally.

It Boggle Ze Mind!

George Bush, a millionaire (thanks to a handful of his father's buddies who bailed him out of various disastrous financial experiments and let him in on money-making schemes instead), feels your pain as the country heads toward a total financial meltdown.

He'd like to help, but he needs all of the billions he can lay his hands on to protect Cheney & Friends' oil wars overseas.

"I know Americans are concerned about the adjustments that are taking place in our financial markets," said Bush, speaking at the White House Rose Garden. "We are working to reduce disruptions and minimize the impact on the [broader economy]."

For the record? Euphemisms like "adjustments" do not make you sound more like you actually understand what's going on.

And precisely how are you "working?" What is the government doing? Do you even know?

Bush didn't offer much detail

Nope.

___________________________

Okay, no, for George, it's not that stupid. It's just--I haven't made fun of him in such a long time!

You don't know this

With apologies to E. J. Dionne, whose opinions I usually enjoy reading, I have to say that you're full of crap.

Few voters know that Obama would cut the taxes of the vast majority of Americans by far more than McCain would. Few know Obama would guarantee everyone access to health care or that McCain's health plan might endanger coverage many already have. Few know that Obama has a coherent program to create new jobs through public investment in roads, bridges, transit, and green technologies.

In short, few Americans know what (or whom) Obama is fighting for, because he isn't really telling them.

He tells them. He tells them in every speech he makes. It's your colleagues and coworkers on the "news" side of the page who are failing to report on the issues.

I've seen ample coverage of lipstick when I was looking for coverage of the problems in our educational system, the sub-prime lending market's meltdown, the high cost of health care, what we're going to do about the messes we've created in Iraq and Afghanistan, preventing offshore drilling, developing alternative energy sources, saving social security, etc.

< Educational Interlude >

Dear Media People:

You do not have to report on idiocies. I know you're afraid that the Right will scream that you're not covering them fairly if you don't, but you don't have to cover stupidity. Screaming doesn't actually hurt (except maybe your eardrums a little.) If one campaign doesn't say anything "newsworthy" on a particular day, then they don't get any coverage. Simple?

Or, if you're really scared -- go ahead and report the stupidity. First, report the substance of a speech Mr. Obama makes on fixing this country's health care system. Then, by way of "fairness" announce that McCain's campaign released a press statement expressing outrage over Obama's use of a common metaphor.

Report Obama's position on rebuilding this country's infrastructure, then report that the McCain campaign has issues a press release expressing outrage because the media won't react to Obama's insulting use of a common metaphor.

Report Obama's tax plan, and then report that the McCain campaign has issued three more press releases and two online videos screaming themselves hoarse that the media is ignoring Metaphor-gate.

Without showing any bias at all, by just showing where each campaign has its attention each day, you'll be "reporting the news." And the voters who don't have four hours a day to spend online, finding the real news that your newspaper/news program is not telling them? Will be able to tell for themselves which campaign has substance and which campaign has--nothing but a man desperately determined to gain office.

Sincerely,
AreYouStupid?

< End Education >

If Mr. Obama spent every, single day campaigning, 24 hours a day, speaking in front of live audiences, he would not have time to reach everyone in the country. That's what the national news media is for--to disseminate the news to people who have no other way of receiving it. If you feel his message is not getting out, kindly point your accusing finger at the correct culprits. Tell your colleagues to leave the lipstick behind and do a little real reporting.

Saying that he has to use "crisp" language to "force" the media to cover his positions on the issues is just ridiculous. No one can "force" the media to do anything but their (right-leaning) corporate owners. And blaming Mr. Obama's language for being insufficiently "crisp" is the same as saying you're not interested in any policies that can't be delivered as a punch sound-bite or encapsulated in a headline.

I sweartogod, if the media doesn't stop acting like the voting population has an IQ of 50 and the attention span of a butterfly, I'm going to scream. You'd think that, at the very least, the appearance of 10,000+ political blogs online would have convinced someone that ordinary people are quite capable of understanding complex issues. And that they care.

Huh

Bush and Cheney - even crazier than I thought.