Knock me down with a feather: Time names Obama Person of the Year

In an announcement that surprises absolutely no-one, Time magazine names Barack Obama as its Person of the Year.

The main surprise is their given reasoning:

As Obama has moved with unprecedented speed to build an Administration that would bolster the confidence of a shaken world, his flash and dazzle have faded into the background. In the waning days of his extraordinary year and on the cusp of his presidency, what now seems most salient about Obama is the opposite of flashy, the antithesis of rhetoric: he gets things done. He is a man about his business — a Mr. Fix It going to Washington.

OTOH I'm pretty sure that his inspirational and transformational election didn't hurt either.

Congratulations Mr. President-Elect.

V is for Viral

Just about the only thing about the whole Prop 8 fiasco that's ever made me smile.

And it features Jack Black as Jesus!

See more Jack Black videos at Funny or Die

A funny thing

Sure, the world sucks.

But for some reason I really don't feel that bad.

I wonder why.

Rahm Emmanuel in a nutshell

Rahm Emmanuel is Barack Obama's Luca Brasi.

Without the mafia ties of course.

Though he does have his own awkward relation ship with fish.

Joe must go

Joe Lieberman must go, you know why. In this helpful video from last June Josh Marshall explains how:



My letter to Senator Boxer:

Dear Senator Boxer,

After his disgraceful behavior during this election cycle Senator Lieberman has no place in the Democratic caucus, and certainly has no place as a committee chair.

As my Senator, and as a member of the Democratic steering and outreach committee I am counting on you to do the right thing.

President-elect Obama has said that we need to reach out and listen to those who disagree with us, and I wholeheartedly agree.

That does not mean, however, that we need to reward them with committee chairmanships.

Sincerely,

Steven Kang
www.stevekangsblog.blogspot.com

If your Senator is on this committee please take a moment to write.

What's right about being wrong

Ok.

So I've given myself a day to just walk around smiling and reading as many newspapers I could get my hands on.

Time, I suppose, to ever so gently start looking forward.

One very preliminary thought inspired by TPM's David Kurtz is this, never have I ever been so glad to be so frequently wrong.

I'm not going through the full litany of lefty second guessings that Obama proved wrong, Kurtz does a fine job of that.

But, just to point out the obvious, in every case, Cool Hand Barack's choices were consistently superior to the lefty blogosphere's recommendations (including my own).

Turns out Barack Obama is smarter than the rest of us.

Go figure.

So does that mean that in the future I'll stop second-guessing the new administration?

Surely (Shirley) you jest.

It just means that I expect to find myself frequently, happily, wrong.

President Barack Hussein Obama

In 2004 I heard about a speech given at the Democratic National Convention. After watching it my first thought was: my God, this man has a future in this party.

My second thought was: why does he have to be named Barack Hussein Obama?

But after today's historic events I understand.

America has, for the past eight years, worked to destroy itself, its place in the world as a leader, not only militarily and finacially, but as a beacon of reason and sanity.

Perhaps we could be forgiven the first four years of a Bush administration transformed by the disaster of 9/11 from merely blandly incompetent to actively evil.

But then came 2004.

We re-elected him.

To the world, and to ourselves, that was a nearly unpardonable sin.

And make no mistake, the blame then lay not only on the shoulders of Bush's supporters and voters, but on those of us on the left as well who failed to defeat him.

Which is why it is so important that a black man named Barack Hussein Obama is now President-Elect.

Because we on the left had to work that much harder to get him there. Because it forced the saner of Bush's former supporters to realize that they had to choose between the reason and sanity Obama represents, and the madness represented by their rabid far-right wing.

Which is why I'm also (now) thankful for Sarah Palin who made the choice even more stark.

And (while I'm feeling magnanimous) let me express my thought that we have done John McCain a great service by rejecting his presidential bid.

The McCain I saw tonight reminded be of the McCain I admired not so many years ago, like his soul had been held prisoner to the worst elements of the GOP campaign machine, but had suddenly been released.

So now the beginning is ended. Tomorrow (after sleeping late) we begin to face the many challenges that confront us, individually and as a nation. But now, as I never have before, I truly believe that we are up to the task.

We can do it together.

Yes, we can.

VOTE FOR HISTORY!

[I]n no other country on earth, is my story even possible.

- Barack Obama, 2004 keynote speech to the Democratic National Convention.

Helpful time (and sanity) saving hint

Let's say your a left-leaning political junkie who likes to keep an eye on what the wingnuttiest wingnut right is up to. Like me, however, you find it difficult, nay painful to wade through that much garbage and still keep down your breakfast. And further, like me, you don't want to give those bastards any clicks.

Here's the solution: read Bill Kristol's comments.

You're not clicking on his main article so you won't get counted as a reader, plus you don't have to steel your nerve (or risk your blood pressure) by reading his inane drivel. But, through the good services of the NYT readership, you not only get a good feel for Kristol's garbage du jour, but you also get to enjoy his skewering by said readership.

It's a win/win.

Stevens (R-Alaska) Guilty of Corruption

Do get the feeling that, increasingly, the term "corrupt Republican" is a redundancy?

Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens was convicted today of lying on financial disclosure forms to hide tens of thousands of dollars in gifts and renovations to his Alaska home that were financed mostly by a powerful business executive and his oil services company.

Schadenfreude reigns as Mr. Bridge-to-Nowhere is found to be as venal in his personal life as he was in his public.

But, happy giggles by liberals aside, Stevens' conviction has important implications for the upcoming election.

The news that Ted Stevens has been found guilty on all charges in his federal corruption trial badly imperils any lingering chance that the long-time Alaska Republican Senator had at winning reelection in eight days time.

It's hard to imagine worse timing for the Stevens' conviction to be announced -- roughly one week before he faces Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich in a race long targeted by national Democrats as a takeover opportunity.

This was one of the races Dems need in order to achieve that magic filibuster-proof 60 seats in the Senate. So far, so good.

Know Hope

From Obama's speech today in Richmond:

At a defining moment like this, we don't have the luxury of relying on the same political games, the same political tactics, that we've become accustomed to. This slash-and-burn politics that divides us from one another... which the challenges and crises we face right now, we can't afford to divide this country. By race, by class, by region, by who we are, by what policies we support. Let me tell you something, because I know you've been hearing a lot of stuff lately. There are no real parts of the country and fake parts of the country. There are no pro-America parts of the country and anti-America parts of the country. We all love this country. No matter where we live. Or where we come from.

Two things. Not only are these points self-evident (or at least they should be), but this is the sort of speech that, 8 years ago, John McCain might well have endorsed.

That he now could not is a tragedy for both McCain 2.0, as well as the country.

Watch the video:

Some endorsements matter more than others.

I understand, and frankly agree, that endorsements don't make all that much difference, especially this late in the game.

But still you have to believe the optics on the last round of endorsements might be telling.

Sure Barack Obama racks up endorsements from Colin Powell, and even neo-con Ken Adelman, but hey, McCain just got a high=profile endorsement of his own:

Al Qaeda.

"Al-Qaeda will have to support McCain in the coming election," said a commentary posted Monday on the extremist Web site al-Hesbah, which is closely linked to the terrorist group. It said the Arizona Republican would continue the "failing march of his predecessor," President Bush.

Maybe that's their reasoning. Personally I think bin Laden just has the hots for Sarah Palin.

So, how was your weekend?

weekend

(wēk'ĕnd') n. - A time period usually extending from Friday night through Sunday.

Once upon a time (last month) weekends were used to rest up from a busy week's activities and recharge yourself for the week ahead. A time when the most pressing news events happened on ESPN and the Golf Channel.

So much for that.

First, late Friday, Minnesota Representative and McCain supporter Michelle Bachmann got into a heated exchange with Chris Matthew's on Hardball were she not only questioned the patriotism of Barack Obama and the Democratic party, but also suggested the media should conduct a witch hunt on capitol hill to expose unpatriotic congressmen as well.

The effect of all this right-wing blather?: Nearly $500,000 was donated to her Democratic opponent in the next 24 hours and the DCCC has decided to put resources into this suddenly competitive district! (BTW, if you'd like to donate follow the links from the dkos article on the affair from Ms. Bachmann's Democratic rival, Elwyn Tinklenberg.)

Then came Sunday with two huge announcements, Obama's stupefying $150,000,000 haul in September donations, and his long-anticipated endorsement by General Colin Powell.

Oh, and also, Mrs. CaliBlogger and I saw W yesterday. Almost made me feel sorry for the guy.

Well, almost.

Obama v. McCain: the last (thank God) debate

Winner: Bob Scheiffer. Not only a good questioner, he actually got the candidates to engage in what, mostly, sounded like an actual debate.

Winner: Barack Obama. Given the fundamentals, Obama's challenge throughout these debates was much like Reagan's in 1980, to make people in whose interest it would be to vote for him comfortable enough to do so. I.e. to look and act presidential.

Mission accomplished!

Loser: McCain (what did you think I was going to say?). Faced with Mission Impossible: to revitalize his campaign without going negative (which has only hurt him with independents), McCain has shown he's no Tom Cruise, or even Peter Graves.

And he forgot that it's the message that's supposed to self-destruct.

Prescient Obama

Barack Obama said in the most recent debate (I paraphrase) that we need a president who can not only see what's right in front of him, but see around the corner.

He's both correct in that observation, and capable of such vision:



[H/t Andrew Sullivan]

No complacency: just a win is not enough

And since the O-man is high-minded enough for the both of us, I have no qualms about agreeing with what kos says about today's GOP:

Break their back, crush their spirits

Frankly, the only divide I want to see Obama bridge is between progressive and Bluedog Democrats. I just don't think Republicans in their current state are salvageable, with the ones surviving the coming firestorm being the hardest of the hard right.

Obama: the right leader for our time

According to the oft cited quote from Winston Churchill: “You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else.”

And certainly it seems that, by design, by luck, or by divine providence, whenever the US has been faced with a major crisis it has eventually brought forth a leader to deal with that crisis. FDR saw the country through both the great depression and World War II, Abraham Lincoln successfully defended the union and ended slavery during the civil war, and at the nation's most critical moment, its birth, George Washington set an unmatched example of how to lead, and transfer leadership for the new republic.

As the US stares down the worst economic crisis since the great depression, as it finds itself embroiled in two land wars, as it sees its military, political, and economic leadership at new lows, will we be again so fortunate as to choose a man who historians will rank with Washington, with FDR, with Lincoln?

Reformed religious right leader, author, and Obama supporter Frank Schaeffer certainly thinks so:

Great presidents are made great by horrible circumstances combined with character, temperament and intelligence. Like firemen, cops, doctors or soldiers, presidents need a crisis to shine.

Obama is one of the most intelligent presidential aspirants to ever step forward in American history. The likes of his intellectual capabilities have not been surpassed in public life since the Founding Fathers put pen to paper. His personal character is also solid gold. Take heart, America: we have the leader for our times.

As a skeptic and cynic by inclination, as well as training, I have a hard time buying into the totality of Schaeffer's paean.

And certainly such belief would be mocked incessantly by the right (despite, of course, some of the rather silly things they've said about W over the years).

The thing is though, I really want to believe.

And, even as an agnostic, even I might be inclined to say a word or two in prayer to whatever gods there may be, that Obama become the man we so desperately need him to be.

You can read Schaeffer's whole post over at Huffingtonpost.com.

Paris for prez

And why not? Her policies make more sense than McCain's, and she can talk in complete sentences unlike Sixpack Sarah. Plus she's getting the advise from one of the greatest fake president's of all time.

See more Paris Hilton videos at Funny or Die

Obama v. McCain Part II

I'm a terrible judge of how these things are viewed through non-partisan eyes.

I thought Obama was his usual calm, certain self on economics.
On foreign policy I liked his "crush al qaeda" fire, Also I frankly think Obama's position towards going after them with or without Pakistan's help is very main street. McCain loses points every time he goes after Obama on this.

McCain was much better composed for this one than the first, though I wonder if the "that one" comment about Obama is going to be a sound bite that ends up biting McCain.

Those are my first thoughts, for an Obama rave from an experienced debater I suggest Andrew Sullivan.

McCain plans to cut Medicaid/Medicare

McCain plans to cut Medicaid/Medicare by 1.3 Trillion!
What's this?
Some left-wing scare tactic?
Is the Obama campaign getting desperate?
Um, no.
From that bastion of pinko sympathizers, the Wall Street Journal:

John McCain would pay for his health plan with major reductions to Medicare and Medicaid, a top aide said, in a move that independent analysts estimate could result in cuts of $1.3 trillion over 10 years to the government programs.

The Republican presidential nominee has said little about the proposed cuts, but they are needed to keep his health-care plan "budget neutral," as he has promised. The McCain campaign hasn't given a specific figure for the cuts, but didn't dispute the analysts' estimate.

Brilliant.

The only people the McCain camp hasn't entirely managed to scare off are seniors who largely depend on these medical insurance programs. And now he's trying to scare them off too?

As an Obama supporter all I can say is thank you.

Gloves officially off

For those of you out there who were afraid the O-man couldn't throw a punch, well, that's not much of a question anymore is it?



Devastating doesn't nearly say it.

Wow.

Sarah Palin and aversive racisim

Like he needs my help, but I'll anyway recommend Nicholas Kristof's NYT op-ed, Racism Without Racists.

You should read it yourself, but his main point is that overt racism is a minor problem for Obama. More important is what he refers to as "aversive racists":

“In the U.S., there’s a small percentage of people who in nationwide surveys say they won’t vote for a qualified black presidential candidate,” Professor Dovidio said. “But a bigger factor is the aversive racists, those who don’t think that they’re racist.”

Faced with a complex decision, he said, aversive racists feel doubts about a black person that they don’t feel about an identical white. “These doubts tend to be attributed not to the person’s race — because that would be racism — but deflected to other areas that can be talked about, such as lack of experience,” he added.

Keeping this in mind helps focus on two recent campaign developments, the "Obama as a terrorist sympathizer" being so repugnantly parroted by McCain's lipsticked bit-bull, and that pit-bull's recent debate performance.

The first is an easy call of course. Character assassination by association is a tried and true political tactic, most often used against people of sterling character for one simple reason: if the candidate is clearly of the highest charater, such as Obama clearly is, what other choice do you have?

Palin's debate performance is another matter. Many on the left have criticized it as being a verbal lapdance for rightwing fanboys (see Lowry, Rich). Let me, however posit a different take. Whatever else you think of Palin's winky, hokey, barely intelligible debate performance, one thing is crystal clear: she has got to be the whitest woman in the US.

And as such, to sub-concious racists across the land, much more qualified than the, um, darker-hued gentleman from Illinois.

Biden v. Palin, First Thoughts

1. Most authentic moment by either side: Biden's voice catch rcalling the death of his first wife in that terrible accident.
2. Promise fulfilled: Palin warned up front that she had no intention of answering any questions she didn't have note cards on.
3. Speaking of note cards: do you have any idea how that went over with the public. Given my opinions I, of course, think needing to use note cards in a debate about who should be a heartbeat from the presidency is a little, ah, Bush league.
4. Biden should always have a timer to look at when he's speaking (I thought this during the primary debates as well. When he's forced to be brief he's smart, concise, and much less likely to put his foot in his mouth.
5. Palin scaled the rather low bar set for her by putting nouns and verbs in proper order when she spoke.
6. Biden's best (like I said) with a time limit, very strong performance, and excellent self-control (I only noticed one peeved galnce at his opponent).
7. Outcome: slight edge for Biden for providing the only honest human emotion of the night.

Overall: Neither delf-destructed, which, given Obama's lead, means he (and the rest of us) are the winners.

McCain/Palin Ifillibuster

You may have heard that, in their continuing efforts to lower expectations for Sarah Palin's performance in tomorrow's debate, the new rightwing kerfuffle is about debate moderator Gwen Ifill's upcoming book on Obama.

This makes sense for GOPers because, with Palin's competence already at ground zero because of her incoherent* responses to Katie Couric's lob-ball questions, the only thing left is to work the ref.

Of course, the fact that Ifill's book deal was public knowledge before she was accepted by the McCain camp to moderate does make their last minute whining seem just a tad disingenuous.

But they claim they just didn't know about it.

And hey, I kinda believe them given that, like their candidate, they just don't hold with no book-larnin'.

*Random thought, Palin is incoherent, Wasilla is the meth capital of Alaska, co-incidence? Hmmmm.

Palin Interview Here!

You want to be just like Katie Couric don't you? Well don't you?

OK , maybe not Katie, but surely you think you're better than David Gregory. Who doesn't?

And now you can land the interview that any big-time journo not surnamed Gibson or Couric has failed to get (sorry, Hannity does NOT qualify as a journalist): Sarah Palin.

For some reason bailing out the rich is unpopular

The trend, since the onset of Reaganomics (aka Voodoo economics, trickle-down economics) has been an increasing disparity between the relative wealth of the rich and virtually everyone else.

This gap held its own during the Clinton administration, only to reach new levels of disparity during the reign of King George.

Is it all surprising that an emergency financial package which seems aimed primarily at bailing out the very beneficiaries of the Reagan revolution are universally reviled by the vast majority of the people?

So, the next time a conservative asks what the problem with the rich getting richer, you ow have an answer.

Time to get to know our new masters

The other day Mrs. CaliBlogger, understandably concerned about the burgeoning financial brouhaha, asked me about the security of our primary bank, Union Bank of California.

I blithely told her that the main problems were with investment banks and that regardless, our minuscule deposits were FDIC insured.

She (darn her and her inconvenient facts) pointed out that WaMu and Wachovia were commercial banks. She also wasn't clear on what kind of rigmarole the FDIC would put us through if worse came to worse.

So, as always when faced with a troubled mind, I sought the wisdom of the Delphic Oracle known as the internets and soon found out something interesting indeed, my UBOC had just been bought out. Indeed the buyer (Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group) has been working on this for a while. And, if you think about it, such deals aren't particularly unusual.

Big companies buy out smaller companies all the time.

So that got me thinking, instead of holding auction where the US government buys out bad debt instruments, shouldn't we be working instead on selling off these badly run Wall Street behemoths to the highest bidder?

Central banks all over the world are sitting on mountains of dollars. If market liquidity is the problem why not encourage those governments to use those dollars to "buy American" if you will.

The way the market's crashing there have GOT to be some bargains out there.

And sure, it'll be a little weird that GM will be owned by the People's Republic of China, but I bet they'll give us great terms on that next Hummer.

Somebody call them a waaaambulance

The delicate flowers that make up today's GOP are saying they're willing the country's finances collapse because Nancy Pelosi said mean things about them.

[Republican House Minority Leader John] Boehner charged that the bill could have passed today "had it not been for the partisan speech that the speaker gave on the floor of the House."

Nice to see the "country first" party getting their priorities straight.

Eye Contact

I'll never hire someone who doesn't have a firm handshake and look me in the eye while s/he's speaking.

I don't have an explanation for this, but it's something I've learned in over two decades of hiring and firing salespeople. If you can't look me in the eye while you're talking I don't trust you, and more importantly my customers won't trust you.

Barack Obama had no problem looking John McCain in the eye, McCain could not. Not once.

That tells me one thing. McCain isn't as confidant of the product he's selling as he claims to be.

And, though I'm obviously an Obama supporter, such things are not lost, however subliminally on most people.

And, to be frank,I suppose it's to McCain's credit as a human being, that he's unable to fake a sincerity he certainly doesn't feel.

Fly in the ointment

I'm not thrilled by need for the proposed bailout, nor am I entirely convinced of the efficacy of the scant provisions that have been floated.

But I'm sure of one thing: the LAST thing the bailout negotiations needs right now is an injection of partisan campaign politicking into the mix.

John McCain, apparently disagrees:

But after the meeting broke up about an hour later, the top Republican on the Senate Banking Committee, Sen. Richard C. Shelby (Ala.), who strongly opposes the bailout, told reporters, "I don't believe we have an agreement." He said he voiced his concerns in the meeting, calling attention to a letter from leading economists that lays out objections to the plan. The bailout plan "will create more problems; we're rushing to judgment," he said in summarizing the economists' argument....

A visibly irritated Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, summarized the impasse in more pointed terms. He told CNN that the meeting was thrown off when Republicans brought up "some new core agreement" that supposedly had been floated by McCain and was being considered by the Treasury Department.

"What this looked like to me was a rescue plan for John McCain," Dodd fumed. "This is a sad day for the country." He said he still hopes that a deal can be struck but that the Republicans "need to get their act together and decide what they're for."

And so McCain's policy of government by gimmick continues.

Seriously, is this REALLY what you want for the next four years? To live in a state of constant anxiety about what the man with the red button (and I'm not talking about this clown's nose) will do?

John McCain: Crisis manager

As you no doubt have heard, Republican John McCain Is "suspending" his presidential campaign in order to "assist" in resolving the current financial crisis.

Why does this sound to much akin to the resignation of a disgraced bureaucrat who's going home "to spend more time with his family"?

Regardless this strikes me as a cagey political move from master stuntmeister McCain.

Given the ineptitude with which he's handled the crisis so far, campaign silence from McCain will probably work better for him than letting him speak.

Plus he should be good at this since the financial "meltdown" seems to following the classic Republican model: let a problem fester for years without addressing it, then arm-twist panicked Democrats into giving Republicans the extraordinary powers required to deal with the crisis the Republicans themselves created.

As the man in the Guinness ad says: "brilliant"!

Free Sarah Palin!

Well, it's about time. Even members of the dread MSM are sick and tired of the sexism being aimed at McCain veep selection Sarah Palin:

Frankly I have had it, and I know a lot of other women out there who are with me on this. I have had enough of the sexist treatment of Sarah Palin. It has to end.

She was in New York on Tuesday meeting with world leaders at the U.N. And what did the McCain campaign do?

They tried to ban reporters from covering those meetings. And they did ban reporters from asking Gov. Palin any questions.

I call upon the McCain campaign to stop treating Sarah Palin like she is a delicate flower who will wilt at any moment.

Like I said, it's about time.

McCain too risky?

Sure I believe that John McCain 2008 has shown himself to be unsuitable for the office of president.

But don't just ask me, ask conservative columnist George Will:

Conservatives who insist that electing McCain is crucial usually start, and increasingly end, by saying he would make excellent judicial selections. But the more one sees of his impulsive, intensely personal reactions to people and events, the less confidence one has that he would select judges by calm reflection and clear principles, having neither patience nor aptitude for either.

It is arguable that, because of his inexperience, Obama is not ready for the presidency. It is arguable that McCain, because of his boiling moralism and bottomless reservoir of certitudes, is not suited to the presidency. Unreadiness can be corrected, although perhaps at great cost, by experience. Can a dismaying temperament be fixed?

And sure, progressive that I am, I believe Sarah Palin's nomination to be nothing more than a clever campaign gimmick which reflects poorly on McCain's judgment. But don't take my word for it, ask conservative columnist David Brooks what he thinks of Palin:

Democracy is not average people selecting average leaders. It is average people with the wisdom to select the best prepared.

Sarah Palin has many virtues. If you wanted someone to destroy a corrupt establishment, she’d be your woman. But the constructive act of governance is another matter. She has not been engaged in national issues, does not have a repertoire of historic patterns and, like President Bush, she seems to compensate for her lack of experience with brashness and excessive decisiveness.

Please read both columns (especially Will, who I always enjoy even when I'm grumbling at him through the computer screen).

John McCain's Healthcare Plans

John McCain writing in Contingencies, the magazine of the American Academy of Actuaries (pdf):

Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation. [Emphasis mine - CK]

You read it here. John McCain is promising to do for healthcare what he (and his fellow Republicans) have done for finance.

Obama's response:



Game. Set. Match.

[H/t Steve Benen]

Government by crisis

Where have we heard this before?

A national crisis occurs.

The costs of responding will be limited.

But we must act now, now, now or face impending doom, a figurative, if not literal mushroom cloud.

Now I'm not saying some drastic measures won't be needed to shore up an economy teetering on the brink of collapse, but still that doesn't mean we should allow ourselves to be railroaded into just any old deal because BushCorp™ says it's urgent.

Any benefit of the doubt was lost to this crew a looong time ago.

For a far better and more thorough analysis of the similarities on how the Bushies are selling their bailout like they did the invasion of Iraq I suggest Glen Greenwald.

My main point is this, because we need to do _something_ does not mean we should do just anything.

Meet the new lackies, same as the old lackies

Anyone reading this blog probably knows already that McCain = Bush's 3rd term, but it's still nice for the MSM to confirm it.

From the Washington Post:

The clutch of Bush veterans helping to coach Palin reflects a larger reality about Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign: Far from being a group of outsiders to the Republican Party power structure, it is now run largely by skilled operatives who learned their crafts in successive Bush campaigns and various jobs across the Bush government over the past eight years.

The team has been assembled and led by Steve Schmidt, a sharp-witted, low-key strategist who has emerged as the campaign's day-to-day operations chief after the ouster of a group of loyal but sometimes undisciplined McCain loyalists. Schmidt's operation is tightly run and hard-nosed -- made up of policy advisers, communications experts, advance people and lower-level aides, many of them old friends who have worked together for the last eight years, and whose presence lends a familiar vibe to the Palin operation.

Republicans have been heartened by the effectiveness of the new McCain organization, which has helped put McCain back in serious contention for the White House, causing restlessness among Democrats who believed the race was Sen. Barack Obama's to lose. Dana Perino, the White House spokeswoman, expressed pride at what her former colleagues have been able to accomplish.

"We had a great team -- they're the best in the business, and I'm sure the campaign feels fortunate to have them," Perino said.

I love that last quote, "the best in the business". Indeed.

Though if your business is stone-walling, spreading lies, innuendo, and irrelevant bamboozlement, I'm not sure pride is really appropriate.

4 more years!
4 more years!
4 more years!

The Conversation: Bartlett and Obama

The other day I killed an afternoon watching a West Wing marathon on one of those stations that does that sort of thing.

I, like, I suspect, many another progressive spent many a Thursday evening wishing that I would wake the next morning to find that my president was Jed Bartlett, and that the whole GWB thing was a black comedy out of Aaron Sorkin's wild imagination.

That being the case I was pleased that Maureen Dowd ceded some of her very valuable column inches to Mr. Sorkin for an imagined conversation between Barack Obama and Jed Bartlett.

The result was significantly more entertaining than anything Dowd usually writes (though to be fair, her mean-spritedness doesn't keep me from reading her so I guess she's doing something right).

The conversation should be read in full, especially by WW fans who always wished that Sorkin would've gone back into politics instead of wandering into TV land for his next series.

But here's a tiny taste:

OBAMA I’m interested in your advice.

BARTLET I can’t give it to you.

OBAMA Why not?

BARTLET I’m supporting McCain.

OBAMA Why?

BARTLET He’s promised to eradicate evil and that was always on my “to do” list.

Sigh.

Meyerson: "what good was Lehman Brothers, anyway?"

I've been an admirer of Harold Meyerson's writing for several years now, ever since he took the time to personally respond to an email inquiry I'd sent him.

I don't now recall the topic, but I do recall his graciousness in responding.

And, in addition to being a gentleman, he is also a reliably progressive and sane commenter on the national stage.

His column in today's Washington Post may, if read and understood by the right people, may be the most important he's ever written.

Someone needs to invest in the United States of America. For the past decade and, in a broader sense, for the entire duration of the Reagan era, both government and Wall Street have opted not to. Should Barack Obama win, the era of neglectful government will probably come to an end. No matter who wins, Wall Street is vanishing before our eyes. And by the measure of their contribution to America's economic strength and well being, both Reagan-age government and Wall Street's investment banks plainly deserve to die.

I give his conclusion here, but his arguments and historical analysis are important for a more thorough understanding of our problems as well as an understanding of why Barack Obama (barring a believable McCain renunciation of Reaganomics, yeah, right) must be elected if we are to overcome and avoid further exacerbating and repeating the mistakes leading to the recent financial let down.

READ THE WHOLE THING. (Please).

Aristocrats for McCain

You can't make up stuff like this.

"A prominent Hillary Clinton supporter who is a member of the Democratic National Committee's Platform Committee will endorse John McCain at a press conference at the Capitol Hill Club today, September 17," the advisory said.

As a headline, the announcement played great -- even landing a prominent spot on the Drudge Report. But McCain supporters who read further might not have found the payoff quite as satisfying.

Turns out, the prominent Clinton supporter who crossed the partisan aisle to support McCain was none other than Lady Lynn Forester de Rothschild, wife of British banking scion Sir Evelyn de Rothschild. And the Lady Forester, as she is sometimes known, may not be the ideal spokesperson for McCain in the present environment of economic uncertainty.

When not engaged in politics, de Rothschild -- whom the Wall Street Journal dubbed a "New York socialite" and Portfolio has described as "the flashiest hostess in London" -- has the run of a sprawling estate in Buckinghamshire, north of London, known as Ascott House. In the U.S., she summers on Martha's Vineyard. And she has not been shy with her feelings about Obama prior to today, telling CNN weeks ago -- and without any hint of irony -- that, "frankly, I don't like him. I feel like he is an elitist." [Emphasis mine - CK]

I could kiss Matthew Mosk for that last line.

AIG Bailout

If you owe the bank $10,000 that's your problem (so goes the joke), but if you owe the bank $10,000,000 it's the bank's problem.

And if you ad a few more zeros it becomes the government's problem.

And make no mistake, this bailout was necessary, given the current circumstances.

And yet one wonders, need it have been?

Or, could it be, that the AIG bailout is yet another example of the GOP's favorite crisis management technique, management by crisis. I.e: ignore a problem until it reaches catastrophic levels, then scramble like mad to find enough duct tape to keep the thing from falling apart?

And, before I get into a round of Bush-bashing, let me make clear, I don't think this problem is Bush's per se, and I don't think Democrats are immune from procrastination, but the GOP's governing philosophy (if it can be called such) seems to lend itself to such disasters.

Best enunciated by St. Ronald Reagan: "Government is not the solution to our problem. Government is the problem."

And, since government is the problem, why not staff it with incompetent, corrupt cronies? (Katrina)

Why not use it to enrich your friends? (Iraq)

Why not ignore your rival's warnings about the world's dangers? (9/11)

Why not deregulate and let the free market's invisible hand rule and let the chips fall where they may?

But of course, when push comes to shove Republicans only want the chips to fall where they may when they fall on someone else.

I'd post more examples of the results of the GOP's "government is the problem" philosophy, but my head hurts.

[x-posted at Daily Kos]

Hope she likes gitmo

One day after admitting the obvious point that neither John McCain nor Sarah Palin would be fit ti fill her shoes as head of a major corporation, the McCain campaign has "disappeared" Carly Fiorina.

A more generous person would say she'll be missed.

A Bush Doctrine Palin Knows

She may be clueless about Bush's radical views on proactive war, but McCain's choice for second most powerful person in the world has clearly absorbed Bush's doctrine when dealing with investigations into its own malfeasance.

Not only is Palin refusing to co-operate in the investigation into troopergate that she had so recently promised to co-operate with, her agents are now blocking co-operation by her lackies.

Sheesh.

And recall she was John (country before party (TM) ) McCain's first "presidential" decision.

Note to BO, these guys really aren't as bad as Bush.

They're worse.

Dilbert, the economy, the election and you

For those of you not familiar, Scott Adams is the creator of Dilbert, the widely read comic strip about the absurdities of life inside and outside the cubicalized modern world.

He also blogs regularly.

Lately, in his largely fruitless attempts to make sense of the current political situation (I'm not implying blame her, I just recognize that finding a rational response to the absurd may well be a hopeless endeavor) Mr. Adams decided to finance a survey of economists. His goal: to see which presidential candidate's economic plans make the most sense (at least to economists).

Says Adams, “I found myself wishing someone would give voters useful and unbiased information about which candidate has the best plans for the economy. Then I realized that I am someone, which is both inconvenient and expensive.”

At considerable personal expense, Adams commissioned a survey of over 500 economists, drawn from a subset of the members of the American Economic Association, a non-political group, some of whose members had agreed in advance to be surveyed on economic questions.

Obama supporters will be pleased to find that their candidate gets the nod, though McCainiacs will protest that the results are skewed because, as it happens, most economists are Democrats.

Most important (if this can be called important) is that those all important independents also generally favor Obama's economics.

As to what this all means, Mr. Adams:

“If an economist uses a complicated model to predict just about anything, you can ignore it. By analogy, a doctor can’t tell you the exact date of your death in 50 years. But if a doctor tells you to eat less and exercise more, that’s good advice even if you later get hit by a bus. Along those same lines, economists can give useful general advice on the economy, even if you know there will be surprises. Still, be skeptical.”

Detailed survey data here.

CNN article here.

Today's McCain Lie

Another day, another lie.

In case you hadn't heard Senator John McCain, acknowledged computer illiterate, now claims to have invented the ubiquitous Blackberry PDA!

At a gathering in Washington today, McCain domestic policy adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin was asked about his candidate's grasp of high-tech matters. Holtz-Eakin held up his BlackBerry and, in a nod toward McCain's onetime tenure as head of the Senate Commerce Committee, said, "He did this."

And unlike Al Gore who a) never claimed that he invented the internet, and b) was none the less an early supporter, McCain's claim is just an out and out fabrication.

Ah yes, the narrative takes hold.

(BTW, for those playing along at home, the DNC has created a helpful wiki page to track the McCain/Palin lying bastards Express)

John McCain: Unserious or Delusional?

As a recovering sufferer of Palin addiction, I'd like to expand (a little bit) on the thoughts of my previous post.

In truth Sarah Palin is only symptomatic of the problems I have with the McCain candidacy.

Though a longtime liberal, I once admired John McCain's apparent honor and integrity, though never someone I'd vote for, certainly he seemed someone I could work with. But for reasons best known to himself he has decided to abandon the persona grown through years of public service and succumbed to the blandishments of the worst elements of the GOP attack machine.

By choosing Governor Palin as his Veep John McCain has demonstrated that he is either unserious about the job of being president, or, he is delusional.

A serious John McCain would have recognized that as a 72 year old man with a history of melanoma, his VP would need to be someone who, in cold-blooded fact, needs to be someone who is as ready to assume the presidency as anyone can be on "day 1".

Sarah Palin is a virtual antithesis of such a person.

The other possibility is that John McCain is delusional: he simply doesn't believe he's going to die.

Either way, he's unfit to serve and so, as I said, Sarah Palin is only a symptom, John McCain is the disease.

Happy Monday

Just a quick thought on McCain/Palin.

While I continue to astounded/offended by the nomination of someone so obviously unqualified to be Veep, little less, and God forbid POTUS, still I think it's important to keep in mind that Palin is merely a symptom of what's wrong with McCain's candidacy.

McCain is the underlying disease.

Energy expert Palin doesn't know how much energy her state produces

Sarah Palin's biggest claim to national security experience is her supposed knowledge of the energy industry.

I guess it would be problematic then if she, for example, couldn't get her figures straight on, say Alaskan oil production, wouldn't it?

In today's published report of Sarah Palin's interview with Charlie Gibson she is quoted as saying this:

Let me speak specifically about a credential that I do bring to this table, Charlie, and that's with the energy independence that I've been working on for these years as the governor of this state that produces nearly 20 percent of the U.S. domestic supply of energy, that I worked on as chairman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, overseeing the oil and gas development in our state to produce more for the United States.

Golly 20% of US domestic energy!? That's sure a lot.

It's also a lie.

According to US government statistics Alaska produces (in 2005) 3.5% of total US domestic energy production.

Alaska does produce nearly 20% of US domestic oil supply (actually it was 18.5% in 2006).

Oh, you say, so she just got them mixed up?

Perhaps, but strangely enough (or not) John McCain made the exact same mistake in his most recent interview:

She knows more about energy than probably anybody else in the Unites States. She is governor of a state [pause] that 20 percent of America's energy supply comes from there.

Now I realize that people's eyes glaze over regarding statistics, but still, the McPalin campaign is using her energy "expertise" as the main facet of her security resume.

That she doesn't know what her state produces, or (more likely to my mind, and consistent with the McPalin MO to date) is simply lying about it, is something that we should (helpfully) point out to anyone and every one we can.

One more talking point in the growing "McPalin is lying to you" narrative.

[x-posted at Daily Kos]

Mayberry was never like this

The common wisdom is that the Obama campaign should be focusing on issues and not letting the McPalin campaign distract them with sideshows like the great porcine lipstick controversy.

I agree.

However since your humble blogger doesn't work for Campaign Obama I feel free to reveal the latest bit of nastiness from the GOP's goddess.

The USA Today headline says it all:

"Palin's town used to bill victims for rape kits"

But the Anchorage Daily News (which I highly recommend for all things Palinesque) has the more complete story:

Eight years ago, complaints about charging rape victims for medical exams in Wasilla prompted the Alaska Legislature to pass a bill -- signed into law by Knowles -- that banned the practice statewide.

"There was one town in Alaska that was charging victims for this, and that was Wasilla," Knowles said

A May 23, 2000, article in Wasilla's newspaper, The Frontiersman, noted that Alaska State Troopers and most municipal police agencies regularly pay for such exams, which cost between $300 and $1,200 apiece.

"(But) the Wasilla police department does charge the victims of sexual assault for the tests," the newspaper reported.

Presumably they were trying to encourage competition between rape kit companies by encouraging rape victims to shop around.

As the O-man said, with Republicans, you're on your own.

And one rape, apparently, deserves another.

NEWSFLASH: McCain Seeks Pedophile Support

I assume that's his goal. Why else run an ad criticizing Barack Obama for supporting legislation designed to warn children away from such predators?

Sarah Palin and Petty Larceny

According to the Washington Post, McCain's choice to become a single 72 year old heartbeat from the presidency billed the state of Alaska for days she spent at home:

ANCHORAGE, Sept. 8 -- Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has billed taxpayers for 312 nights spent in her own home during her first 19 months in office, charging a "per diem" allowance intended to cover meals and incidental expenses while traveling on state business.

The governor also has charged the state for travel expenses to take her children on official out-of-town missions. And her husband, Todd, has billed the state for expenses and a daily allowance for trips he makes on official business for his wife.

She also billed for various expenses for the first dude as well as her kids.

And though the expense claims may or may not be technically legal, this is an excellent example of the petty larceny typical of politics as usual.

I hope my fellow citizens will not give her an opportunity to commit greater thefts on a vastly grander scale.

That would indeed be more of the same.

Newsflash: Republican Commits Truth

We know it's what a lot of GOPers think, it's just nice to hear them come right out and say it:

Georgia Republican Rep. Lynn Westmoreland used the racially-tinged term "uppity" to describe Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama Thursday.

Westmoreland was discussing vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin's speech with reporters outside the House chamber and was asked to compare her with Michelle Obama.

"Just from what little I’ve seen of her and Mr. Obama, Sen. Obama, they're a member of an elitist-class individual that thinks that they're uppity," Westmoreland said.

Asked to clarify that he used the word “uppity,” Westmoreland said, “Uppity, yeah.”

Wow, refreshing honesty from a Republican, I never thought I'd see the day. Though such honesty may not win Ms. Westmoreland a lot of admirers.

[H/t Andrew Sullivan]

No mere trophy Veep

If you, like me, are having trouble conceiving why Sarah Palin represents a potentially formidable obstacle (barring any truly ghastly skeletons in her as yet unexplored closets) I recommend Lance Mannion's always entertaing analysis here and here.

She's there to be average in order to appeal to "average" Americans.

I wonder whether average Americans understand that what we need as a leader is far beyond average.

I hope so.

More on McCain-Palin

OK.

Just had to give myself a few moments to let the thought of this sink in. Some random thoughts.

1. Once again the Republicans have shown they are are not serious about governing this country. Only about trying to win elections.
2. McCain has shown, not his Maverickness (that would have meant Joe Lieberman as veep), rather he has further demonstrated that candidate McCain has truly gained ascendancy over senator McCain.
3. Despite the closeness of current polls, McCain's Rovian advisers have recognized as well as Bill Clinton did in his speech, that the winds of history are against them. The flop sweat of their desperation is palpable.
4. Any extant Hillary dead-enders have just gotten exactly the candidate they deserve.
5. After watching Lindsay Graham try to defend Palin the best he could come up with: she's not as corrupt as Ted Stevens, she's not as gullible as George W. Bush.
6. Well, they certainly did change the cable conversation form Obama's acceptance speech: Mission Accomplished!

I, um, may, have more to say on this later.

McCain's Veep Pick

So, was Dan Quayle busy?

Obama's Acceptance Speech

Oh my.

But don't take my word for it, ask rightwing firebrand and former Nixon speechwriter Pat Buchanan:



Ask conservative (though definitely not Republican) columnist Andrew Sullivan:

Above all, he took on national security - face on, full-throttle, enraged, as we should all be, at how disastrously American power has been handled these past eight years. He owned this issue in a way that no Democrat has owned it since Kennedy. That's a transformative event. To my mind, it is vital that both parties get to own the war on Jihadist terror and that we escape this awful Rove-Morris trap that poisons the discourse into narrow and petty partisan abuse of patriotism. Obama did this tonight. We are in his debt.

As occasioanlly happens in history, though remarkably frequently in American history, a time of extraordinary demands has given rise to an extraordinary leader.

Andrew's response is to the point:

"I've said it before - months and months ago. I should say it again tonight. This is a remarkable man at a vital moment. America would be crazy to throw this opportunity away. America must not throw this opportunity away.

Know hope."

Hope.

Feels good, doesn't it?

Hillary's Speech: What she needs to say

When Hillary Clinton addresses the Democratic Nation Convention tonight she needs to say the following:

"I, of all people, understand the disappointment, and yes the hurt felt by my supporters. But if you support me, if you support the goals which I've spent my life pursuing, then you must support and vote for Barack Obama."

Anything less is unacceptable if either Clinton seeks to have a political life within the Democratic party.

My bet is that Hillary understands this as well.

[UPDATE: Mission accomplished, great job Hillary!]

Paris Attacks

See more funny videos at Funny or Die

How sad is it that in McCain v. Hilton, Paris Hilton comes off as the mature one?

Reprehensible

"I had the courage and judgment to say that I would rather lose a political campaign than lose a war. It seems to me that Sen. Obama would rather lose the war in order to win a political campaign." Emphasis mine-CK

So much for taking the high ground. Expect more and worse as the wheels continue to fly off the straight talk express.

No, Obama's not that funny, but then neither is Maureen

OK, I get it.

After 7 years of a buffoon-in-chief in the form of GW, preceded by 8 years of Bill Clinton's tastes for both cheeseburgers and cheesy interns, the press has gotten used to an easily mock-able President.

So I suppose Maureen Dowd's lament over the lack of humor emanating from the Obama campaign is understandable. (Not that it's impossible to find. As Andy Borowitz demonstrates, even a lack of humor can be funny.)

But I don't see that Obama needs to be anything other than who and how he is, even at the risk of the "regular guy"-ness that people like Dowd insist we plebes crave. I, for one, don't want anyone approaching "regular" sitting in the Oval office come January. Nope, the person I want, and the country clearly needs as President should be exceptional, intelligent and, horror of horrors, serious.

The pundits and comedians are just going to have to work for their laughs this time around.

The Anti-Dumb Candidate

To all my compatriots on the left who are shaking their heads about Obama's latest "sell-out" I highly recommend Gail Collins' NYT column.

Think back. Why, exactly, did you prefer Obama over Hillary Clinton in the first place? Their policies were almost identical — except his health care proposal was more conservative. You liked Barack because you thought he could get us past the old brain-dead politics, right? He talked — and talked and talked — about how there were going to be no more red states and blue states, how he was going to bring Americans together, including Republicans and Democrats.

Exactly where did everybody think this gathering was going to take place? Left field?

When an extremely intelligent politician tells you over and over and over that he is tired of the take-no-prisoners politics of the last several decades, that he is going to get things done and build a “new consensus,” he is trying to explain that he is all about compromise. Even if he says it in that great Baracky way.

I suggest you read the whole thing (if only for the penguin story).

A coupla thoughts on recent Obama news

On public financing: Obama would be a fool not to use every advantage he can legitimately muster to win this election, and he's never struck me as a fool. As for going back on his "promise", said "promise" was pretty finely parsed. After 7 years of finely wrought arguments about what TORTURE means, I'm not too shocked by a politician walking a fine line on a campaign promise.

On helping to retire Hillary's debt: Welcome to politics. By helping Hill, the O-Man will help soothe some of HRC's followers, and as importantly encourage HER donors to give to him.

Count me as among those Democrats who are tired of losing elections because we were too proud to muss our hair and (God help us) actually engage in politics.

Obama Endorsement News

I know, I know, endorsements don't matter, Teddy K. couldn't even win Mass. for Obama, etc.

Still, ya gotta believe that some endorsements matter more than others.

(H/t to Lance Mannion)

Can you tell the difference?

What's in a name?

Personally I'd be quite happy to have a president named Barack Hussein Obama.

But for those of you uncomfortable with multisyllabic monikers I highly recommend Juan Cole's rant on other great Americans with funny sounding names.

Feel better?

Land of the free?

Hardly.

On the importance of words

What Arianna says.

Happy Valentines Day

Both Mrs. C and my self are feeling much better thank you.

And by the way, after winning February so, apparently, is the Obama campaign.

But then why wouldn't they, I mean this guy is good.

(h/t Andrew Sullivan)

Congratulations

I'm sick (just a cold), and Mrs. C is very ill (all positive thoughts accepted gladly), but somehow I feel better than I have for months.