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.

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.

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.

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.

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]

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.

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.

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.